The DOI matches its Crossref record.
L2 ACQUISITION AND OBLIGATORY HEAD MOVEMENT: English-Speaking Learners of German and the Local Impairment Hypothesis
Abstract
This paper presents results of a response-latency (RL) experiment with English-speaking learners of German that investigated to what extent—if any—two different groups of second language (L2) learners permit raising of the thematic verb. The framework under which the study was conducted involves varying theoretical predictions derived from the native-language (NL) transfer view of Schwartz and Sprouse (1994, 1996), the gradual-development view of Vainikka and Young-Scholten (1994, 1996), the underspecification view of Eubank (1993/1994), and a local-impairment view that presents a more parsimonious solution to the L2 developmental problem than standard “no access” views. The L2 results reported here show that learners respond in different ways to stimulus sentences with raised and unraised verbs depending on the subjects' level of development. Surprisingly, it is the less advanced learners who exhibit an RL preference for apparently raised-verb experimental stimuli; the more advanced learners do not differentiate between raised-verb and unraised-verb stimuli. Analysis of these findings reveals that the less advanced group may only project VPs, consistent with the gradual-development view of Vainikka and Young-Scholten. Crucially, however, the Local Impairment Hypothesis is the only view that is consistent with the results from the more advanced learners, especially when they are seen in developmental context.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Second Language Acquisition and Universal Grammar
White, L. (2003) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815065 · Cited by 1,303
Synthesizing Research on Language Learning and Teaching
(2006) · Language Learning & Language Teaching · doi:10.1075/lllt.13 · Cited by 608
The Interpretability Hypothesis: evidence from wh-interrogatives in second language acquisition
Tsimpli, I. M., & Dimitrakopoulou, M. (2007) · Second Language Research · doi:10.1177/0267658307076546 · Cited by 441
Morphological insensitivity in second language processing
JIANG, N. (2004) · Applied Psycholinguistics · doi:10.1017/s0142716404001298 · Cited by 344
THE EVOLVING CONTEXT OF THE FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE HYPOTHESIS
Bley-Vroman, R. (2009) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263109090275 · Cited by 335
Metadata
- Authors
- Beck, M.-L.
- Venue
- Studies in Second Language Acquisition
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1998-09
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 311-348
- ISSN
- 0272-2631 (ISSN-L)
- 1470-1545
- OpenAlex
- W2125420682
- Cited by
- 201
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 35.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: L2 ACQUISITION AND OBLIGATORY HEAD MOVEMENT: English-Speaking Learners of German and the Local Impairment Hypothesis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0272263198003027
- The paper
- Beck, M.-L. (1998). L2 ACQUISITION AND OBLIGATORY HEAD MOVEMENT: English-Speaking Learners of German and the Local Impairment Hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263198003027
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.