| Summary: | 碩士 === 東海大學 === 外國語文學系 === 104 === This study explores the acquisition of the second language (L2) English inflection morphemes –ing and –ed by adult first language (L1) Chinese speakers. Following the Principles and Parameters (PP) framework of Universal Grammar (UG), it seeks to test against two competing hypotheses, the Full Transfer Full Access (FT/TA) (Schwartz and Sprouse, 1996) and the Partial Access to Universal Grammar Hypothesis (Tsimpli & Smith, 1991), to determine which can better explain the non-native divergence in the acquisition of –ing and –ed.
The participants in this study consist of 60 adult L1 Chinese speakers of L2 English and a native English speaker control group. The 60 adult learners were divided into three proficiency groups (20 elementary, 20 intermediate, and 20 advanced) based on the results of the Online Oxford Placement Test. A grammatical judgment test consisting of sixty-seven sentences, including 31 items related to the morpheme –ing and 31 items related to the morpheme –ed and fifty distractors, was given to the participants.
The results of the study indicated that the performance of each group improved based on proficiency for both the morpheme -ing and the morpheme -ed. This proficiency-based performance could be attributed to Full Transfer/Full Access Hypothesis which holds the position that target language input results in the final state of the L2 similar to a native speaker. The results also highlighted the difference between native-like performance and native-like intuition. The difference between the advanced group and the control group’s performance was not significant; however, the use of the two morphemes by the advanced group was not the same as the control group’s. The FT/FA Hypothesis and the Partial Access to UG can both explain these results. The FT/FA Hypothesis explains the native-like performance of the advanced group because the final state of the L2 is similar to the control group. However, at the same time, the Partial Access to UG explains the differences in the use of the morpheme -ing and -ed.
|
|---|
