Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-26T04:15:13.075Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Structural Conformity Hypothesis and the Acquisition of Consonant Clusters in the Interlanguage of ESL Learners

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

Fred R. Eckman
Fred R. Eckman
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The validity of two implicational universals regarding consonant clusters was tested in an analysis of the interlanguage of 11 subjects who were native speakers of Chinese, Japanese, or Korean. The results were strongly supportive of the two universals, suggesting the possibility that primary language universals hold also for nonprimary languages.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , March 1991 , pp. 23 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

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

Adjemian, C. (1976). On the nature of interlanguage systems. Language Learning, 26, 297–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altenberg, E., & Vago, R. (1983). Theoretical implications of an error analysis of second language phonology production. Language Learning, 33, 427–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, R. (1978). An implicational model for second language research. Language Learning, 28, 221–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. I. (1987). The Markedness Differential Hypothesis and syllable structure difficulty. In Ioup, G. & Weinberger, S. H. (Eds.), Interlanguage phonology: The acquisition of a second language sound system (pp. 279–291). New York: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R. (1983). The comparative fallacy in interlanguage studies: The case of systematicity. Language Learning, 33, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broselow, E. (1987). Non-obvious transfer: On predicting epenthesis errors. In loup, G. & Weinberger, S. H. (Eds.), Interlanguage phonology: The acquisition of a second language sound system (pp. 292–304). New York: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Cancino, H., Rosansky, E., & Schumann, J. (1975). The acquisition of the English auxiliary by native Spanish speakers. TESOL Quarterly, 4, 421–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1974). Natural sequences in child second language acquisition. Language Learning, 24, 37–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, F. (1977). Markedness and the contrastive analysis hypothesis. Language Learning, 27, 315–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, F. (1984). Universals, typologies and interlanguage. In Rutherford, William (Ed.), Language universals and second language acquisition (pp. 79–105). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, F. (1985). Some theoretical and pedagogical implications of the Markedness Differential Hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 289–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, F. (1987). The reduction of word-final consonant clusters in interlanguage. In James, A. & Leather, J. (Eds), Sound patterns in second language acquisition (pp. 143–162). Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Eckman, F, Moravcsik, E., & Wirth, J. (1989). Implicational universals and interrogative structures in the interlanguage of ESL learners. Language Learning, 39, 173–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flynn, S. (1987). A Parameter-Setting Model of L2 acquisition. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. (1979). Language transfer and universal grammatical relations. Language Learning, 29, 327–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, J. (1978). Some generalizations concerning initial and final consonant clusters. In Greenberg, J., Ferguson, C. A., & Moravcsik, Edith (Eds.), Universals of human language (Vol. 2, pp. 243–279). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, J. (1988). On generative and typological approaches to universal grammar. Lingua, 74, 85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. (1984). The use of typological markedness conditions as predictors in second language acquisition: The case of pronomial copies in relative clauses. In Andersen, R. (Ed.), Second languages (pp. 39–73). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Karimi, S. (1987). Farsi speakers and the initial consonant cluster in English. In Ioup, G. & Weinberger, S. H. (Eds.), Interlanguage phonology: The acquisition of a second language sound system (pp. 305–318). New York: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Sato, C. (1987). Phonological processes in second language acquisition. In Ioup, G. & Weinberger, S. H. (Eds.), Interlanguage phonology: The acquisition of a second language sound system (pp. 248–260). New York: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Tarone, E. (1987). Some influences on the syllable structure of interlanguage phonology. In loup, G. & Weinberger, S. H. (Eds.), Interlanguage phonology: The acquisition of a second language sound system (pp. 232–247). New York: Newbury House.Google Scholar
White, L. (1985a). The “Pro-drop” parameter in adult second language acquisition. Language Learning, 35, 47–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1985b). The acquisition of parameterized grammars: Subjacency in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 1, 1–17.Google Scholar
White, L. (1987). Markedness and second language acquisition: The question of transfer. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9, 261–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1989a). Universal grammar and second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1989b). Linguistic universals, markedness and learnability: Reconciling different approaches. Second Language Research, 5, 127–140.Google Scholar