Verb Movement, Agreement, and Tense in L2 Acquisition

  • Lynn Eubank
Part of the Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics book series (SITP, volume 16)


Second-language (L2) acquisition differs from first-language (LI) acquisition in any number of ways, not the least of which is that L2 learners, especially adults. rarely attain a steady state that matches that of native speakers. This general state of affairs has. as one might expect, led to a variety of specific studies of adult L2 representations, and a good number of these have considered the difficulties posed by head movement, specifically, the movement of the verb (V-movement) in the L2 acquisition of German.


Embed Clause Functional Projection Universal Grammar Thematic Verb Finite Verb 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Borer, H. and K. Wexler: 1987, ‘The maturation of syntax’, in T. Roeper and E. Williams (eds.), Parameter Setting, Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  2. Chomsky, N.: 1989, ’some notes on economy of derivation and representation’, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 10, 43–74.Google Scholar
  3. Clahsen, H.: 1984, ‘The acquisition of German word order’, in R. Andersen (ed.), Second Languages, Newbury House, Rowley.Google Scholar
  4. Clahsen, H.: 1987, ‘Kritische Phasen der Grammatikentwicklung: Eine Untersuchung zum Negationserwerb bei Kindern und Erwachsenen’, ms., University of Düsseldorf.Google Scholar
  5. Clahsen, H.: 1988 ‘Parameterized grammatical theory and language acquisition’, in S. Flynn and W. O’Neil (eds.), Linguistic Theory in Second Language Acquisition, Kluwer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  6. Clahsen, H.: 1990, ‘Constraints on parameter setting: A gramrnatical analysis of some acquisition stages in German child language’, Language Acquisition 1, 361–391.Google Scholar
  7. Clahsen, H., J. Meisel and M. Pienemann: 1983, Deutsch als Zweitsprache. Der Spracherwerb ausländischer Arbeiter, Narr, Tübingen.Google Scholar
  8. Clahsen, H. and P. Muysken: 1986, ‘The availability of Universal Grammar to adult and child learners-a study of the acquisition of German word order’, Second Language Research 2, 93–119.Google Scholar
  9. Clahsen, H. and P. Muysken: 1989, ‘The UG paradox in L2 acquisition’. Second Language Research 5, 1–29.Google Scholar
  10. duPlessis, J., D. Solin, L. Travis, and L. White: 1987, ‘UG or not VG, that is the question’, Second Language Research 3, 56–75.Google Scholar
  11. Eubank, L.: 1988, ‘Universal grammar, German grammar, and L2 development’, ms., University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
  12. Hyams, N. and K. Safir: 1991, ‘Evidence, analogy and passive knowledge’, in L. Eubank (ed.), Point Counterpoint, Benjamins, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  13. Iatridou, S.: 1990, ‘About AGR(P)’ Linguistic Inquiry 21, 551–557.Google Scholar
  14. Jaeggli, O. and K. Safir: 1989, ‘The null subject parameter and parametric theory’, in O. Jaeggli and K. Safir (eds.), The Null Subject Parameter, Kluwer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  15. Köpcke, K.-M.: 1987. ‘Der Erwerb morphologischer Ausdrucksmittel durch L2-Lerner am Beispiel der Personalflexion’, Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 6, 186–205.Google Scholar
  16. Meisel, J.M.: 1987, ‘Reference to past events and actions in the development of natural second language acquisition’, in C. Pfaff (ed.), First and Second Language Acquisition Processes, Newbury House, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  17. Meisel, J.M.: 1991. ‘Principles of Universal Grammar and strategies of language use: On some similarities and differences between first and second language acquisition’, in L. Eubank (ed.), Point Counter point, Benjamins, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  18. Platzack, C. and A. Holmberg: 1989, ‘The role of AGR and finiteness in Germanic VO languages’, Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 43, 51–76.Google Scholar
  19. Pollock, J.-Y.: 1989, ‘Verb movement, Universal Grammar, and the structure of IP’, Linguistic Inquiry 20, 365–424.Google Scholar
  20. Radford, A.: 1990, Syntactic Theory and the Acquisition of English Syntax, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  21. Schwartz, B.: 1991, ‘Conceptual and empirical evidence: A response to Meisel’, in L. Eubank (ed.), Point Counterpoint, John Benjamins, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  22. Schwartz, B. and A. Tomaselli: 1990, ’some implications from an analysis of German word order’, in W. Abraham, W. Kosmeijer, and E. Reuland (eds.), Issues in Germanic Syntax, Mouton, Den Haag.Google Scholar
  23. Steele, S.: 1981. An Encyclopedia of AUX, MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  24. Tomaselli, A. and B. Schwartz: 1990, ‘Analyzing the acquisition stages of negation in L2 German: Support for UG in adult SLA’, Second Language Research 6, 1–38.Google Scholar
  25. Verrips, M. and J. Weissenborn: 1991, ‘On the relation between the acquisition of verbal inflection and verb movement’, ms., Max-Planck-Institut für Psycholinguistik, Nijmegen.Google Scholar
  26. Vikner, S. and B. Schwartz: 1991, ‘The verb always leaves IP in V2 c1auses’, to appear in A. Belletti and L. Rizzi (eds.), Parameters and Functional Heads. Essays in Comparative Syntax, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  27. White, L.: 1989, Universal Grammar and Second Language Acquisition, Benjamins, Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lynn Eubank

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations