Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
The Korean Association for the Study of English Language and Linguistics
[ Article ]
Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 24, No. 0, pp.15-34
ISSN: 1598-1398 (Print) 2586-7474 (Online)
Print publication date 31 Jan 2024
Received 04 Nov 2023 Revised 27 Dec 2023 Accepted 06 Jan 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15738/kjell.24..202401.15

The Role of Cause in the L2 Acquisition of English Psychological Verbs

Jihyun Kim ; Taegoo Chung
(First author) Lecturer, Department of English Language Education Korea University jihyunkim@korea.ac.kr
(Corresponding author) Professor, Department of English Language Education Korea University tchung@korea.ac.kr


© 2024 KASELL All rights reserved
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

This study investigates the influence of the semantic feature [Cause] on the L2 acquisition of English psychological verbs by L1 Korean speakers. In an English normal sentence an argument with either of the features, [Volition] and [Cause], can be mapped to subject. This study places particular emphasis on [Cause] due to its distinctive role in Korean; an argument with the feature is not generally mapped to subject. To explore the role of [Cause] in L2 English, it is compared with [Volition] in Experiencer-Subject (ES) and Experiencer-Object (EO) verbs. The study employs a naturalness judgment test with ninety-three L1-Korean speakers and fifty-four L1-English speakers. From the statistical analysis of the results, we have found three major findings. The first finding is that causative EO verbs are more difficult for L2 English learners than non-causative ES verbs. It corresponds with the findings of the previous studies and it also demonstrates a strong effect of [Cause]. The second finding is that non-volitional EO (causative) verbs are more challenging than volitional EO (causative) verbs. That is, the L2 English learners are reluctant to accept a causative but non-volitional subject. The third finding is that the strength of the feature [Cause] in L2 English speakers is stronger than the strength in L1 English speaker. Collectively, three findings underscore the pivotal role of [Cause] in the L2 acquisition of English psychological verbs, which is believed to be due to L1 influence; Korean doesn’t allow a [Cause] subject. The findings offer clarification on why EO verbs present greater difficulties than ES verbs, and why, within EO verbs, non-volitional EO verbs are particularly challenging for L2 English learners. This study also presents a pedagogical implication that teachers and English text books put special focus on psychological verbs, especially non-volitional causative verbs such as The news concerned me, which is often considered bad or not produced by L2 English learners.

Keywords:

second language (L2) acquisition, L1 influence, English psychological verbs, EO verbs, ES verbs, cause, volition, subject selection

References

  • Ackerman, F. and J. Moore. 2001. Proto-properties and Grammatical Encoding: A Correspondence Theory of Argument Selection, CSLI Publications, Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
  • Arad, M. 1998. Psych-notes. In UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 203-223. London: Department of Phonetics and Linguistics, University College of London.
  • Baker, M. 1988. Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Belletti, A. and L. Rizzi.1988. Psych verbs and theta theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6, 291-352. [https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00133902]
  • Chen, D. 1996. L2 Acquisition of Psych Predicates by Native Speakers of Chinese and French. Doctoral dissertation, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
  • Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Science. Second edition. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Comrie, B. 1989. Language Universals and Linguistic Typology: Syntax and Morphology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  • Davis, A. 2001. Linking by Types in the Hierarchical Lexicon, CSLI Publications, Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
  • Davis, A. and J. Koenig. 2000. Linking as constraints on word classes in a hierarchical lexicon, Language 76, 56-91. [https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2000.0068]
  • Dehghan, F. and A. Jabbari. 2011. Animacy in the acquisition of the argument structure: Psych Verbs. The Iranian EFL Journal 7(5), 89-97.
  • DeLancey, S. 1983. Agentivity and causation: Data from Newari. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual Meeting of the Berkely Linguistic Society, 54-63. [https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v9i0.1985]
  • DiDesidero, L. 1999. Psych Verbs: Acquisition, Lexical Semantics, and Event Structure. Doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA.
  • Dowty, D. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67(3), 547-619. [https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1991.0021]
  • Fausey, C., B. Long, A. Inamori and L. Boroditsky. 2010. Constructing agency: The role of language. Frontiers in Psychology 1, 1-11. [https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00162]
  • Grafmiller, J. 2013. The Semantics of Syntactic Choice: An Analysis of English Emotion Verbs. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
  • Grimshaw, J. 1990. Argument Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Guilfoyle, E. 2000. Tense and N-features in modern Irish. In A. Carnie and E. Guilfoyle, eds., The Syntax of Verb Initial Languages, 61-73. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195132229.003.0004]
  • Hawkins, J. 1985. A Comparative Typology of English and German: Unifying the Contrast. Austin: University of Texas Press.
  • Hwang, J. 2000. Competition model and Korean learners’ acquisition of English psych verbs. English Teaching 55(2), 37-57.
  • Jackendoff, R. 1990. Semantic Structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Juffs, A. 1996. Learnability and the Lexicon: Theories and Second Language Acquisition Research. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. [https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.12]
  • Kim, J. 2015. Animacy effect on L2 acquisition of English psychological verbs. Korean Journal of Linguistics 40(3), 307-332. [https://doi.org/10.18855/lisoko.2015.40.3.002]
  • Kim, J. 2018. Variation among E-S and E-O psych verbs in Korean L2 learners’ linking problems. Korean Journal of Applied Linguistics 34(4), 103-126. [https://doi.org/10.17154/kjal.2018.12.34.4.103]
  • Lee, J. 2013. A study on the interlanguage of Korean learners in the acquisition of English psych verbs. The New Korean Journal of English Language & Literature, 55(1), 273-299 [https://doi.org/10.25151/nkje.2013.55.1.013]
  • Levin, B. 1993. English Verb Classes and Alternations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Montrul, S. 2001. First-language-constrained variability in the second language acquisition of argument-structure-changing morphology with causative verbs. Second Language Research 17(2), 144-194 [https://doi.org/10.1177/026765830101700202]
  • Pesetsky, D. 1995. Zero Syntax: Experiences and Cascades. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Sato, Y. 2003. Japanese learners linking problems with English psych verbs. Reading Working Papers in Linguistics 7, 125-144.
  • Schlesinger, I. 1995. Cognitive Space and Linguistic Case: Semantic and Syntactic Categories in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551321]
  • Son, H., and H. Kim. 2011. A study on the acquisition of English causative psych verbs by Koreans. Journal of the Korea English Education Society 10(3), 139-162. [https://doi.org/10.18649/jkees.2011.10.3.139]
  • Talmy, L. 1985. Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen, ed., Language, Typology and Syntactic Description 3: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon, 57-149. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • White, L., C. Brown, J. Bruhn-Garavito, D. Chen, M. Hirakawa and S. Montrul. 1999. Psych verbs in second language acquisition. In G. Martohardijono and E. Klein, eds., The Development of Second Language Grammars: A Generative Approach, 173-199. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. [https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.18.10whi]
  • Wolff, P., G. Jeon and Y. Li. 2009. Causers in English, Korean, and Chinese and the individuation of events. Language and Cognition 1(2), 167-196. [https://doi.org/10.1515/LANGCOG.2009.009]