This special issue assembles empirical work on second language teaching and learning from a generative linguistic perspective. The focus is on properties that constitute grammar–meaning interaction that differ in the native and target language grammars, and that have not been highlighted in the pedagogical literature so far. Common topics address whether and how learners acquire grammatical meanings in the second language, including difficult misalignments between native and target-language constructions and functional morphemes. We propose that teaching and learning a second language can be enhanced by focusing on the relationship between grammatical forms and their meanings, as elucidated by contemporary linguistic theory.
BellettiA.BennatiE.SoraceA. (2007). Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: evidence from near-native Italian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 25, 657–689.
2.
ChierchiaG. (1998). Reference to kinds across language. Natural Language Semantics, 6, 339–405.
3.
ChierchiaG. (2013). Logic in grammar: Polarity, free choice, and intervention. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4.
ChomskyN. (1959). A review of BF Skinner’s Verbal Behavior. Language, 35, 26–58.
5.
CinqueG. (2010). The syntax of adjectives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6.
EllisN.C. (2015). Implicit and explicit learning: Their dynamic interface and complexity. In RebuschatP. (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 3–23). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
7.
IoninT.KoH.WexlerK. (2004). Article semantics in L2 acquisition: The role of specificity. Language Acquisition, 12, 3–69.
8.
JackendoffR. (1992). Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9.
JooH.-R. (2003). Second language learnability and the acquisition of the argument structure of English locative verbs by Korean speakers. Second Language Research, 19, 305–328.
10.
KrifkaM.PelletierF.J.CarlsonG.N.ter MeulenA.LinkG.ChierchiaG. (1995). Genericity: An introduction. In CarlsonG.PelletierF. (Eds.), The generic book (pp. 1–125). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
11.
KurodaS.Y. (1988). Whether we agree or not: A comparative syntax of English and Japanese. Lingvisticae Investigationes, 12, 1–47.
12.
LaenzlingerC. (2005). French adjective ordering: Perspectives on DP-internal movement types. Lingua, 115, 645–689.
13.
LoewenS. (2009). Grammaticality judgment tests and the measurement of implicit and explicit L2 knowledge. In EllisR.LoewenS.ElderC.ErlamR.PhilpJ.ReindersH. (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing, and teaching (pp. 94–112). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
14.
MaiZ.YuanB. (2016). Uneven reassembly of tense, telicity and discourse features in L2 acquisition of the Chinese shì … de cleft construction by adult English speakers. Second Language Research, 32, 247–276.
15.
MarsdenH. (2008). Pair-list readings in Korean–Japanese, Chinese–Japanese and English–Japanese interlanguage. Second Language Research, 24, 189–226.
16.
MarsdenH. (2009). Distributive quantifier scope in English–Japanese and Korean–Japanese interlanguage. Language Acquisition, 16, 135–177.
17.
RothmanJ. (2008). Aspect selection in adult L2 Spanish and the Competing Systems Hypothesis: When pedagogical and linguistic rules conflict. Languages in Contrast, 8, 74–106.
18.
RothmanJ.SlabakovaR. (2018). The generative approach to SLA and its place in modern second language studies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40(2), 417–442.
19.
SchützeC.T.SprouseJ. (2014). Judgment data. In SharmaD.PodsevaR. (Eds.) Research methods in linguistics (pp. 27–50). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20.
SchwartzB.D.SprouseR. (2013). Generative approaches and the poverty of the stimulus. In HerschensohnJ.Young-ScholtenM. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 137–58). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21.
ShiraiY.JuffsA. (2017). Introduction: Convergence and divergence in functional and formal approaches to SLA. Second Language Research, 33, 3–12.
22.
SlabakovaR. (2003). Semantic evidence for functional categories in interlanguage grammars. Second Language Research, 19, 42–75.
23.
SlabakovaR. (2008) Meaning in the second language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
24.
SlabakovaR.García MayoM.D.P. (2015). The L3 syntax–discourse interface. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18, 208–226.
25.
SoraceA. (2011). Pinning down the concept of ‘interface’ in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1, 1–34.
26.
SoraceA.SerratriceL. (2009) Internal and external interfaces in bilingual language development: Beyond structural overlap. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13, 195–210.
27.
TomaselloM. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
28.
ValenzuelaE.McCormackB. (2013). The syntax–discourse interface and the interface between generative theory and pedagogical approaches to SLA. In WhongM.GilK.-H.MarsdenH. (Eds). Universal grammar and the second language classroom (pp. 101–114). Dordrecht: Springer.
29.
WhongM.GilK.-H.MarsdenH. (Eds.). (2013). Universal grammar and the second language classroom. Dordrecht: Springer.
30.
WhongM.GilK.-H.MarsdenH. (2014). Beyond paradigm: The ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of classroom research. Second Language Research, 30, 551–568.
