UNACCUSATIVE AND UNERGATIVE VERB VARIATION IN OVERPASSIVIZATION ERRORS: EXAMINING SPLIT INTRANSITIVITY HIERARCHY

One of the most well-known errors in second language acquisition is overpassivization of intransitive verbs. Even though many theories have been proposed to explain the nature of second language (L2) acquisition, very few can explain the huge verb variation found in these studies. Sorace's Spli...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inTaiwan Journal of Linguistics Vol. 21; no. 2; pp. 1 - 43
Main Author Lin, Yowyu
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Taipei 政治大學語言學研究所暨英國語文學系 01.01.2023
Crane Publishing Company
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1729-4649
1994-2559
DOI10.6519/TJL.202307_21(2).0001

Cover

More Information
Summary:One of the most well-known errors in second language acquisition is overpassivization of intransitive verbs. Even though many theories have been proposed to explain the nature of second language (L2) acquisition, very few can explain the huge verb variation found in these studies. Sorace's Split Intransitivity Hierarchy was originally proposed to explain native speakers' auxiliary selection across unaccusative and unergative verbs. Verbs in the hierarchy are classified into "Core," "Less Core" and "Periphery" groups. Recently, this theory has been extended to explain L2 learners' acquisition of intransitive verbs. The current study re-examined overpassivization errors among L2 Mandarin learners with three different proficiency levels by looking at whether the error numbers they produced conform to the predictions of Sorace's Split Intransitivity Hierarchy and Perlmutter's Unaccusative Hypothesis. Participants were asked to describe pictures using target intransitive verbs, including both unaccusative and unergative verbs. The results were in support of Sorace's hypothesis. Subjects produced significantly more errors in "Periphery" and "Less Core" categories than in the "Core" category. In addition, the results of the experiment also supported the Unaccusative Hypothesis.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:1729-4649
1994-2559
DOI:10.6519/TJL.202307_21(2).0001