TY - JOUR
T1 - How cognitive typology affects second language acquisition
T2 - A study of Japanese and Chinese learners of English
AU - Spring, Ryan
AU - Horie, Kaoru
N1 - Funding Information:
ACC: Accusative Case Marker, CONJ: Conjunction, NOM: Nominative Case Marker, PFV: Perfective Aspect, PST: Past Tense Marking Acknowledgments: The authors wish to thank Cat Runden and Franklin Kelly at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, as well as Toni Spring at Queens College in New York for their help in procuring test subjects for the experimentation discussed in this paper. Thanks are also due to those who participated in the study and others who helped in its distribution. Our special thanks also go to three CL anonymous reviewers, Laura Janda, and Ewa Dabrowska whose extensive constructive criticism helped enhance and enrich our argumentation. Finally, the authors wish to thank the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science for their financial support throughout part of this project.
PY - 2013/11/20
Y1 - 2013/11/20
N2 - This study looks at the effect of one's first language type, as proposed by Talmy (2000) and Slobin (2004), on their second language acquisition. Talmy (2000) gives an account of languages as being either verb-framed or satellite-framed based on how path and manner of motion are encoded in motion events. Meanwhile, Slobin (2004) argues for a third language type, which he calls equipollently-framed. This study compares and contrasts the learning curves of equipollently-framed language (Mandarin Chinese) native speakers and verb-framed language (Japanese) native speakers as they learn a satellite-framed language (English). It examines not only the learner's pattern preferences, but also their manner of motion encoding preferences and deictic verb usage to show that there is a clear difference in how the two groups of learners acquire a second language of a different type from their own native language.
AB - This study looks at the effect of one's first language type, as proposed by Talmy (2000) and Slobin (2004), on their second language acquisition. Talmy (2000) gives an account of languages as being either verb-framed or satellite-framed based on how path and manner of motion are encoded in motion events. Meanwhile, Slobin (2004) argues for a third language type, which he calls equipollently-framed. This study compares and contrasts the learning curves of equipollently-framed language (Mandarin Chinese) native speakers and verb-framed language (Japanese) native speakers as they learn a satellite-framed language (English). It examines not only the learner's pattern preferences, but also their manner of motion encoding preferences and deictic verb usage to show that there is a clear difference in how the two groups of learners acquire a second language of a different type from their own native language.
KW - cognitive typology
KW - event conflation
KW - motion events
KW - second language acquisition
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84890022920&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84890022920&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1515/cog-2013-0024
DO - 10.1515/cog-2013-0024
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84890022920
SN - 0936-5907
VL - 24
SP - 689
EP - 710
JO - Cognitive Linguistics
JF - Cognitive Linguistics
IS - 4
ER -