Tsimpli and Dimitrakopoulou (2007) propose the Interpretability Hypothesis (IH), according to which uninterpretable features present an insurmountable difficulty in adult second language acquisition. The experimental study supporting the IH examines Greek native speakers’ knowledge of gaps versus resumptive pronouns in English wh-movement. A crucial assumption is that Greek allows resumptives optionally. Alexopoulou and Keller’s (2002, 2007) findings confirm that assumption. In our replication of Tsimpli and Dimitrakopoulou’s study, we divide Spanish native speakers into those who accept resumptives and those who do not; then we look at their acceptance of gaps and resumptives in English. The results indicate that both groups of advanced learners, those that do and those that don’t have resumptives in their individual grammars, have acquired the ungrammaticality of resumptives in English, although there may be lingering native language effects. The effects of d-linking, animacy, syntactic function of the resumptive/gap (subject vs. object), and presence of the complementizer that are also examined.
AldwayanS. N. (2009). The acquisition and processing of wh-movement by Najdi learners of English. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Kansas.
2.
AldwayanS.FiorentinoR.GabrieleA. (2010). Evidence of syntactic constraints in the processing of wh-movement: A study of Najdi Arabic learners of English. In VanPattenB.JegerskiJ. (Eds.), Research in Second Language Processing and Parsing (pp. 65-86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
3.
AlexiadouA.AnagnostopoulouE. (1995). SVO and EPP in null subject languages and Germanic. FAS Papers in Linguistics, 4, 1–21.
4.
AlexiadouA.AnagnostopoulouE. (1998). Parametrizing agr: word order, V-movement and EPP-checking. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 16, 491–539.
5.
AlexopoulouT.KellerF. (2002). Resumption and locality: A crosslinguistic experimental study. In Papers from the 38th Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, volume 1: The Main Session (pp. 1–14). Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.
6.
AlexopoulouT.KellerF. (2007). Locality, cyclicity and resumption: At the interface between the grammar and the human sentence processor. Language, 83(1), 110–160.
7.
BardE. G.RobertsonD.SoraceA. (1996). Magnitude estimation of linguistic acceptability. Language, 72(1), 32–68.
8.
Bley-VromanR. (1983). The comparative fallacy in interlanguage studies: The case of systematicity. Language Learning, 33, 1–17.
9.
Bley-VromanR. (1989). What is the logical problem of foreign language acquisition? In GassS.SchachterJ. (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 41–64). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.
Bley-VromanR. (1990). The logical problem of foreign language learning. Linguistic Analysis, 20, 3–49.
11.
Bley-VromanR. (2009). The evolving context of the Fundamental Difference Hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 175–198.
12.
BolotinN. (1996). Arabic speakers’ resetting of parameters. In EidM. (Ed.), Perspectives on Arabic linguistics, Vol. 8 (pp. 135–55). Amsterdam, the Netherlands & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
13.
Cerron-PalominoA. (2009). Variation on processing and pragmatics: Resumptive pronouns in Spanish relative clauses. Paper presented at the Workshop in General Linguistics (WiGL) 7, Madison, Wisconsin.
14.
ChomskyN. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15.
ContrerasH. (1992). On resumptive pronouns. In CamposH.Martinez-GilF. (Eds.), Current Studies in Spanish Linguistics (pp. 143–164). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
FerreiraF.SwetsB. (2005). The production and comprehension of resumptive pronouns in relative clause “island” contexts. In CutlerA. (Ed.), Twenty-first century psycholinguistics: Four cornerstones (pp. 263–278). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
18.
HawkinsR.ChanY. H. (1997). The partial availability of universal grammar in second language acquisition: The Failed Features Hypothesis. Second Language Research, 13, 218–226.
19.
HawkinsR.HattoriH. (2006). Interpretation of English multiple wh-questions by Japanese speakers: A missing uninterpretable feature account. Second Language Research, 22, 269–301.
20.
HyltenstamK. (1984). The use of typological markedness conditions as predictors in second language acquisition: The case of pronominal copies in relative clauses. In AndersenR. (Ed.), Second languages: A crosslinguistic perspective (pp. 39–60). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
21.
JohnsonJ.NewportE. (1991). Critical period effects on universal properties of language: The status of Subjacency in the acquisition of a second language. Cognition, 39, 215–258.
22.
LiX (1998). Adult L2 accessibility to UG: An issue revised. In FlynnS.MartohardjonoG.O’NeilW. A. (Eds.), The generative study of second language acquisition (pp. 89–110). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
23.
MartohardjonoG. (1993). Wh-movement in the acquisition of a second language: A crosslinguistic study of three languages with and without overt movement. PhD dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
24.
McCloskeyJ. (2006). Resumption. In EveraertM.van RiemsdijkH. (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax (pp. 94–117). Oxford, UK & Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
25.
PesetskyD. (1987). Wh-in situ: Movement and unselective binding. In ReulandE.ter MeulenA. (Eds.), The representation of (in)definiteness (pp. 98–129). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
26.
RossJ. R. (1967). Constraints on variables in syntax. Dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA. (Published as Infinite syntax! Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1986.)
27.
RouveretA. (2011a). Some issues in the theory of resumption: A perspective on early and recent research. In RouveretA. (Ed.), Resumptive pronouns at the interfaces (pp. 1–64). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
28.
RouveretA. (Ed.). (2011b). Resumptive pronouns at the intefaces. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
29.
SlabakovaR. (2003). Semantic evidence for functional categories in interlanguage grammars. Second Language Research, 19, 42–75.
TsimpliI. M. (1997). Resumptive features and minimalism: Evidence from second language acquisition. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 21, 639–655). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
32.
TsimpliI. M. (1999). Null operators, clitics and identification: A comparison between Greek and English. In AlexiadouA.HorrocksG.StavrouM. (Eds.), Studies in Greek syntax, (pp. 241–262). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
33.
TsimpliI. M. (2003). Interrogatives in the Greek/English interlanguage: A minimalist account. In Mela-AthanasopoulouE. (Ed.), Selected papers on theoretical and applied linguistics (pp. 214–225). Thessaloniki: Aristotle University.
34.
TsimpliI. M.DimitrakopoulouM. (2007). The Interpretability Hypothesis: Evidence from wh-interrogatives in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 23, 215–242.
35.
TsimpliI. M.RoussouA. (1991). Parameter-resetting in L2?UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 3, 149–170.
36.
YuanB.ZhaoY. (2005). Resumptive pronouns in English-Chinese and Arabic-Chinese interlanguages. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 43, 219–137.
