Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T01:05:34.330Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Asymmetrical Knowledge of Ungrammaticality in SLA Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

David Birdsong
David Birdsong
Affiliation:
University of Texas
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present paper addresses the argument that access to UG in SLA implies an asymmetrical knowledge of ungrammaticality, which is evidenced in superior accuracy and uniformity in learners' judgments of ungrammatical structures versus grammatical structures (Felix, 1988; Zobl, 1992). I attempt to show that the asymmetry position is conceptually defective, that the evidence for it is inconclusive and inappropriate, and that the evidence adduced is contradicted by other data.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 16 , Issue 4 , December 1994 , pp. 463 - 473
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Barsalou, L. (1992). Cognitive psychology: An overview for cognitive scientists. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (1992). Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Language, 68, 706–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R., Felix, S., & Ioup, G. (1988). The accessibility of Universal Grammar in adult language learning. Second Language Research, 4, 1–32.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1986). Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Crain, S., & Fodor, J. D. (1987). Sentence matching and overgeneration. Cognition, 26, 123–169.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Felix, S. (1988). UG-generated knowledge in adult second language acquisition. In Flynn, S. & O'Neil, W. (Eds.), Linguistic theory in second language acquisition (pp. 277–294). Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1988). Island effects in second language acquisition. In Flynn, S. & O'Neil, W. (Eds.), Linguistic theory in second language acquisition (pp. 144–172). Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1989). Universal grammar and second language acquisition. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L., & Genesee, F. (in press). How native is near-native? The issue of ultimate attainment in adult second language acquisition. Cognition.Google Scholar
Zobl, H. (1989, 10). Grammatically intuitions of multilingual and unilingual nonprimary language learners. Paper presented at the 14th Annual Boston University Language Development Conference Boston.Google Scholar
Zobl, H. (1992). Sources of linguistic knowledge and the uniformity of non-native performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 387–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar