Applied Linguistics 27/4: 645670

doi:10.1093/applin/aml031

Oxford University Press 2006

The Emergence of Second Language

Syntax: A Case Study of the Acquisition
of Relative Clauses

Simon Fraser University

One of the great puzzles of language acquisition has been described as poverty
of the stimulus: how are complex aspects of language acquired when they
appear to be rare or even non-occurring in the input that a learner receives
and comprehends? This article presents an emergentist solution to one aspect
of this puzzle (involving relative clauses) by examining the longitudinal
development of meaningful discourse produced by Ana, a 12-year-old Spanish
learner of English. Relative clause constructions are considered in terms of
learnable, non-abstract linguistic analyses (lexicalist signs and constructions;
dependencies), informed by emergentist syntax (OGrady 2005), analyses within
Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar (Sag 1997), and a comprehensive
corpus grammar (Biber et al. 1999). The data show that complex aspects of
language gradually emerged from item-based and compositional learning
processes that interacted with the learners environment, including input
frequency and the functional purposes for which language is used. Item-based,
sign-based, and compositional analyses of constructions are valuable for syllabus
design (for synthetic syllabi) and for the evaluation of language proficiency
(i.e. testing and measurement).

One of the great puzzles of language acquisition has been described

as poverty of the stimulus or underdetermination by the input: how are
complex aspects of language acquired when they appear to be rare or
even non-occurring in the input that a learner receives and comprehends?
Although first language acquisition and second language acquisition
(SLA) are not identical processes, this puzzle applies to both types of
acquisition.
Solutions to this puzzle have mainly been explored by researchers
who have adopted the theories of Noam Chomsky (e.g. Chomsky 1965,
1995; White 1989; Cook and Newson 1996; Hawkins 2001). These
researchers have often described the puzzle as the logical problem of
language acquisition and have argued for an innatist solution that involves a
hypothetical set of abstract, language-specific principles and parameters,

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

J. DEAN MELLOW

646

THE EMERGENCE OF SECOND LANGUAGE SYNTAX

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

known as Universal Grammar (UG). These researchers have carefully

documented a wide range of complex syntactic properties and have
often uncovered previously unknown distributional patterns. However,
it is extremely difficult to prove the existence of specific, abstract,
innate linguistic principles (Pullum and Scholz 2002; Tomasello 2003;
MacWhinney 2004).
Solutions to the poverty of the stimulus puzzle have also been proposed
by researchers who have adopted the emergentist assumption that language
use and acquisition emerge from basic processes that are not specific to
language. OGrady (2005) argued that many complex syntactic properties of
language result from automatized computational routines that emerge after
the repeated processing of constructions by an efficiency-driven, linear
computational system. Using OGradys analyses, this paper proposes an
emergentist solution to the SLA of relative clause (RC) constructions.
Language patterns are considered in terms of concrete, learnable linguistic
analyses (lexicalist signs and constructions; dependencies). An examination
of the longitudinal development of meaningful discourse revealed that
complex aspects of language gradually emerged from simple learning
processes that interact with the learners environment, including input
frequency and the functional purposes for which language is used
(Larsen-Freeman 1976; MacWhinney 1997, 1998, 2002, 2004; Ellis 1998,
2002, 2003; Tomasello 2002). In particular, this analysis explored item-based
and compositional learning in relation to the processing difficulty of
constructions.
The linguistic analysis adopts sign-based, lexicalist representations
that are surface-oriented and monostratal (i.e. they do not include
phonetically-null, imperceptible elements or transformations) (Mellow
2004a). Signs (or formfunction mappings) specify connections between
structures and meanings in all linguistic units, from morphemes and words
to phrases and clauses. The linguistic concepts are based on OGrady (2005;
dependencies are explained below), the comprehensive corpus grammar of
Biber et al. (1999), and lexicalist, monostratal analyses within Head-driven
Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG) (Sag 1997; Sag et al. 2003). Language is
also considered in terms of its constructions, such as different types of RCs
(e.g. Sag 1997; Goldberg 2003). Tomasello (2003: 100) defined a construction
as a unit of language that comprises multiple linguistic elements used
together for a relatively coherent communicative function, with subfunctions being performed by the elements as well. The real-time processes
that correspond to constructions are computational routines (OGrady, 2005:
10, 193). The analyses in this paper assume that constructions are
fundamental units of language acquisition and that learners acquire
properties associated with constructions.
Within this approach, learning is hypothesized to initially be item-based.
Learners begin with a small number of tokens of particular constructions. After producing and processing a large number and range of

J. DEAN MELLOW

647

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

construction types, learners gradually develop linguistic abilities that can be

described as grammaticalized, generalized linguistic constructions (Ellis 2003;
Tomasello 2003; MacWhinney 2004). Ellis (2003) argued for an acquisition
sequence that begins with formulae (unanalyzed chunks of frequent
collocations) that gradually lead to low scope patterns (limited, lexically
specific combinatorial patterns) that may ultimately become constructions
(syntactic generalizations). Acquisition results from a top-down process of
decomposition in which the shared features of many exemplars of formulaic
constructions emerge in a cognitive representation.
However, the poverty of stimulus problem arises for constructions that
are so rare that learners may seldom hear them and that are so complex
that learners may not be able to comprehend them or even retain them in
short-term memory. Therefore, in addition to top-down decomposition of
chunks, emergentist learning is also hypothesized to be compositional
or cumulative (Brown 1973; OGrady 1997: 34854; Pullum and Scholz
2002: 3031; Diessel and Tomasello 2005). As Ellis (2003: 76) succinctly put
it: We chunk chunks. The acquisition of rare and complex constructions
is thus hypothesized to be facilitated by a moderate frequency, in input
and use, of their component parts. This aspect of learning has been
formulated as The Compositionist Principle of Acquisition Orders (Mellow
and Stanley 2002: 19): Networks of related signs and/or constructions
develop in a specific order according to the properties of which they are
composed, including: (i) the aggregate processability of their formal and
functional components; and (ii) the cumulative ordering that results from the
developmental interrelations of the component forms and functions within
each network. The processing difficulty of different components of RCs
is considered in the analyses in this paper. In addition, the ability to produce
an RC construction is expected to emerge after its component parts (forms,
functions, signs) have been acquired (subordinate conjunctions, antecedent
reference of pronouns, finite verb morphology, combinatorial properties of
verbs in independent clauses; e.g. Hadic Zabala and Mellow 2003; Mellow
2006a; see also Diessel and Tomasello 2005). As illustrated in this paper,
learners are also expected to first produce simple RCs and then gradually
produce RCs that have components or properties that are increasingly
complex.
MacWhinney (2002, 2004) and Tomasello (2003) have argued that
a number of other learning processes contribute to the emergent acquisition
of complex constructions. In particular, the learning process for SLA
is interlingual (i.e. affected by translation, code-switching, and transfer of
first language abilities, e.g. MacWhinney 1997, 2002; Ellis 2003). However,
interlingual factors are not considered in this case study because they are best
assessed by comparing data from learners with different first languages and
because the specification of the many different subtypes of RCs that are
present in each language is beyond the scope that is possible in this paper.

648

THE EMERGENCE OF SECOND LANGUAGE SYNTAX

SYNTACTIC PATTERNS: DEPENDENCIES AND DEPENDENT

VERB-HEADED CONSTITUENTS1

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

To investigate the development of RC constructions, the analyses consider

two aspects of syntactic co-occurrence and interpretation. First, specific types
of words (such as the verb catch) imply the existence of other elements
(such as an agent nominal and a theme nominal, i.e. the verbs arguments).
The lexical requirements associated with words are described as DEPENDENCIES
(OGrady 2005). This paper considers three types of resolution of the
dependencies associated with verbs, pronouns, wh-words, and modifiers,
as summarized in Table 1 (more detailed discussions are provided in OGrady
2005 and Mellow 2006b). Following traditional structural analyses that use
independent, declarative clauses as a point of reference, RCs are described
as subject, direct object, or adverbial, based on their dependencies
(cf. noncanonical subjects and complements: Borsley 1999). In the examples,
a dependency is represented by an affix in angle brackets that has a nominal
or verb with a subscript indicating a specific referential index (-5Ni4)
or situational index (-5Vs4). With respect to the requirements of verbs,
a prefix is used within subject RCs (e.g. who 5Ni4-is afraid) and a suffix
is used within direct object RCs (e.g. that the waiter was carrying-5Ni4).
The terminology and representations do not imply the existence of empty
structural positions, gaps, or phonetically null categories. Following OGrady
(2005: 6), I use the term nominal to describe (i) arguments of verbs and
(ii) constituents that are described as noun phrases in many structural
approaches to grammar. Sag (1997: 4659) provided a more precise analysis
of the phrase structure properties of nominals that combine with RCs.
As shown in (1a) in Table 1, some dependencies are resolved relatively
immediately within simple constructions that have canonical subjects and
complements. In an independent, declarative clause, the argument
requirements of a verb are resolved (or satisfied) by immediate combinations
with two elements of particular categories (i.e. two nominals). In (1a), the boy
combines with caught and then caught combines with the frog.
As shown in (1b), an argument dependency of a verb can also be
resolved in a relatively complex construction with a non-canonical subject
or complement and/or with a resolution that must extend across a number
of intervening words. The dependency can be resolved by specific nominals,
such as (i) the head nominal that is modified by a bare direct object RC or by
some non-finite post-nominal modifiers (see 1bi, 1bii), or (ii) the subject of
the preceding verb (see 1biii, 1biv). Sag et al. (2003) discussed different types
of verbs that take non-finite complements (e.g. control, raising, auxiliary).
As shown in (1c), some argument dependencies (although none in subtypes
of RCs) are resolved pragmatically rather than in constructions, similar to the
manner in which the referential dependencies of non-reflexive pronouns
are resolved (see 2c).

J. DEAN MELLOW

649

Table 1: Examples of types of dependencies and the nature of their

resolution, with relevant dependencies indicated by a co-indexed nominal
(5Ni4) or a co-indexed verb 5Vs4
Type of
dependency

Type of resolution
Simple construction Complex construction Pragmatic
(1a) independent, (1bi) bare direct
declarative clause: object RC: The
first thingi
the boyi 5Ni4caught-5Nk4
[they did-5Ni4]
the frogk

(1bii) non-finite
(-ing, -ed)
post-nominal
modifier: they
saw two kidsi
[5Ni4-waiting
for Santa]
(1biii) verbs that
have non-finite
complements: hei
wanted [to 5Ni4
-eat it]

(1ci) non-finite
adverbial
modifier: theyi
went to the
park [to 5Ni4
-look
for the frog]
(1cii) non-finite
post-nominal
modifier: Then
Carli realized
that it was
time [to 5Ni4
-feed the baby]
(1ciii) nominal
ellipsis: the little
mousei was
scared and
[5Ni4-covered
his face]

(1biv) auxiliary verb:

the cati was [5Ni4watching the sailor]
2. Referent of
pronoun

3. Argument of
wh-word

4. Modified situation
of wh-word
5. Modified nominal
of RC

(2a) reflexive
(2b) relativizer/
(2c) plain pronoun
pronoun (OGrady relative pronoun:
(OGrady 2005)
2005)
the little mousei
[5Ni4-who is
afraid]
(3a) subject RC:
(3b) direct object RC:
the little mouse
the plate [that-5Ni4
[who-5Ni4
the waiter was
carrying-5Ni4]
5Ni4-is afraid]
(4b) adverbial RC:
a place [where-5Vs4
a lady solds balloons]
(5b) RC: the little
mousei 5Ni4[who is afraid]

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

1. Argument of
verb

650

THE EMERGENCE OF SECOND LANGUAGE SYNTAX

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

Relativizers are a type of pronoun whose referent is identical to that of the

head nominal that the RC modifies (see 2b). Although this dependency is
resolved in a complex construction, the head nominal and relativizer are
adjacent and therefore this is a relatively simple computational process.
OGrady (2005) discussed the resolution of other types of referential
dependencies, including those associated with reflexive pronouns, which
have been roughly labeled as type 2a (the distinction between simple and
complex constructions requires further elaboration).
Table 1 also provides examples of the argument dependencies associated
with wh-words, including relativizers. In addition to the argument
requirements of the verb and the referent required by the pronoun, these
constructions have a third type of dependency: a wh argument must be
linked to an unresolved dependency of a matching type in a verbs argument grid (OGrady 2005: 113). This relationship is characterized as
a wh-dependency. Table 1 specifies two types of resolution of these
dependencies. First, subject RCs have dependencies that are satisfied by
immediate combination in a simple construction. In (3a), the relative
pronoun who is the subject in who is afraid (Sag 1997: 452). The argument
requirements of who and is are resolved together in this construction.
Second, as shown in (3b), direct object RCs with a relativizer have
dependencies that are resolved in a complex construction (cf. OGrady 2005:
112). Following Sag (1997: 4624), that is considered to be a relativizer
rather than a complementizer in this construction. The argument
requirements of that and carrying are resolved together.
In addition to the dependencies associated with verbs, the analyses in
this paper consider dependencies associated with modifiers. Modifiers
(or adjuncts) imply the existence of specific types of modified elements
(Sag et al. 2003: 109, 1458; OGrady 2005: 1223). For example, an adverb
implies the existence of a situation expressed by a verb. As shown in (4b),
an adverbial RC is considered to have a relative adverb (e.g. where) that has
a modifier dependency that is resolved in a construction with a subsequent
verb (e.g. sold). Some modifiers are constructions rather than words.
Thus, following Sag (1997: 444ff), all RC constructions have the syntactic
requirement that they modify a particular nominal (see 5b).
The processing difficulty of the resolution of these dependencies provides
a precise account of the complexity of different types of RC constructions.
A subject RC has the least complex type of dependency resolution because
the argument requirements of the wh-word and the verb are resolved
immediately through combination, making limited demands on working
memory resources (OGrady 2005: 199201). An adverbial RC is more
difficult because the required modified situation of the wh-word is resolved
in a computational routine that must extend across a number of intervening
words. This places substantial demands on working memory, at least
until the routine is automatized. Similarly, a direct object RC with a
relativizer is difficult because the argument requirements of the wh-word and

J. DEAN MELLOW

651

A COMPLEX AND RARE ESL CONSTRUCTION: RELATIVE

CLAUSES
An emergentist analysis of a bare direct object RC that
modifies a subject
This study investigated the acquisition of RC constructions (for overviews of
previous studies, see Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman 1999; Hadic Zabala
2004: 328). An English as a second language (ESL) learner produced the
complex and rare RC in (1) on the last day of the case study, while narrating
Day (1985).
1 So, the baby was very excited and jumped on Carls back. Then, they decided to
make a tour in the house. The first thingi [they did-5Ni4] was going to mom
and dads room.
This RC (they did-5Ni4) is complex because it is a finite dependent
clause (rather than, for example, a post-nominal preposition phrase) that
is composed of a number of components including the finite verb did and the
combinatorial properties (dependencies) of that verb. In addition, the RC
is not a grammatically obligatory constituent. RCs are considered to
be modifiers rather than complements. However, nominals with general
or semantically light meanings, including thing, time, and place, often co-occur

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

the verb are resolved in a computational routine that must extend across
a number of intervening words. In a language such as German, this
resolution requires less working memory because the relative pronoun
indicates the case of the argument dependency (e.g. accusative, dative;
Diessel and Tomasello 2005: 891). Finally, a bare direct object RC is very
difficult to process (especially in comprehension) because there is no
antecedent element, such as a relativizer, that signals that a subsequent
unresolved argument dependency will be resolved by a specific preceding
element. As a result, comprehension requires a computationally demanding
process that OGrady (2005: 24, 61) represented as upward feature passing.
The second aspect of syntactic co-occurrence is the important linguistic
property that some constructions are composed of complex dependent units.
Assuming a lexicalist, head-driven approach to understanding syntax, this
case study investigates complex units that are called DEPENDENT VERB-HEADED
CONSTITUENTS (DVCs). The use of the term verb-headed emphasizes the
centrality of the verb of the dependent clause (or phrase) within these
syntactic patterns. In particular, the semantic restrictions associated with
the dependent verb contribute compositionally to the meaning of the entire
construction. Some DVCs, such as complement clauses and non-finite
clauses, are complements selected by a head verb, adjective, adverb,
or preposition. Other DVCs, such as RCs, are modifiers that must combine
with a particular type of element, such as a nominal.

652

THE EMERGENCE OF SECOND LANGUAGE SYNTAX

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

with post-modifiers including RCs (Biber et al. 1999: 627, 633).

Thus, although the RC in (1) is not grammatically obligatory, it may be
lexically associated with the head nominal thing.
The RC in (1) is complex because it is a bare direct object RC that is very
difficult to resolve and process. In addition, RCs that modify subjects are
difficult to process because they intervene between the subject and verb
of the main clause (Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman 1999: 5778; Diessel
2004: 11819). This type of RC is also rare in input. Given the corpus-based
frequency estimates discussed in relation to hypothesis H4, only about 2 per
cent of RCs may have this pattern (0.18 (no relativizer)
0.9 (no relativizer
with object RC)
0.13 (modifies subject) .02.). In addition, RCs occur
about once every 100 words in English, across all registers, and about once
every 250 words in conversation (Biber et al. 1999: 606). Assuming that the
Longman 20 million-word corpus of authentic English use is representative
of the input that learners receive, learners might encounter this type of
construction once every 5,00012,500 words. Because interlocutors often
simplify the language that they direct toward learners, this type of RC
is probably even less frequent than this estimate. Although this type of
construction is rare, its component parts (or properties) are more common,
as examined in hypotheses H4, H5, H6, and H7 below.
In addition, when the string the first thing is produced by native speakers,
it is often (more than half of the tokens) followed by a relative clause
without a relativizer (Susan Hunston, personal communication, based on
an examination of the 20 million word Bank of English spoken corpus).
Thus, Anas first use of a bare direct object RC may be a low scope pattern
(a lexically associated modifier). My emergentist approach hypothesizes
that the initial use of this complex formulaic pattern was facilitated by
the acquisition of the components of the construction. This frequent
collocation also suggests a solution to the processing challenge noted above:
there is no antecedent element, such as a relativizer, to signal that
a subsequent unresolved argument dependency will be resolved by a
specific nominal. Before learners grammaticalize the bare direct object
RC construction, nominals such as thing may function as a probable
antecedent signal of the subsequent argument dependency. Just as specific
verbs (e.g. begin, decide) signal the subsequent presence of non-finite
complements, specific nouns, especially those with general or semantically
light meanings, may signal the subsequent presence of a bare direct
object RC. Lexicalized, limited scope patterns may then lead to the
acquisition of constructions (Ellis 2003).
An emergentist approach also considers the contextualized, functional
purposes for which language is used. The emergent cumulation of linguistic
elements is not random. Language learners acquire the functional units
(constructions) that are used in the target language. In addition, functional
purposes may explain the production and acquisition of complex, rare
constructions.

J. DEAN MELLOW

653

A UG analysis of a bare direct object RC

Rather than using concrete descriptions related to processing complexity,
a typical UG analysis describes this RC in a more abstract and unlearnable
manner (e.g. Sag 1997; Borsley 1999: 1989; Hawkins 2001: 156): The first
thingi [CP [RP]i [C] they did [tRP]i]. In order to adhere to fixed innate
principles, the UG description includes an imperceptible complementizer (C)
that is present in a position preceding they. In addition, an imperceptible
relative pronoun (RP; similar to whom) moves from an abstract object
position following did (leaving behind an imperceptible trace tRP) to the
specifier position of an abstract node described as a complementizer phrase
(CP). The imperceptible relative pronoun is co-referential with thing,
as indicated by the subscripts. This analysis has three imperceptible elements
and several abstract positions (and others not mentioned here). Because
phonetically-null and/or moving elements do not occur in input, this abstract
description of an RC circularly suggests a poverty of stimulus puzzle that can
only be solved by proposing that humans have innate linguistic principles.
White (1989: 7) made a parallel argument about the apparent impossibility
of the hypothetical synchronic contraction of want to into wanna when
a hypothetical imperceptible wh-trace is present between want and to: None
of this information is obviously present in the input, since traces are an
abstraction. The fact that wh-movement leaves a trace and that this trace
blocks the operation of certain rules is knowledge derived from UG, and not
from the input alone, or from any general non-linguistic cognitive
principles. However, as illustrated in this paper, other grammatical theories
describe linguistic abilities in ways that are less abstract and more learnable
than UG analyses. If poverty of stimulus puzzles can be expressed in terms of
concrete linguistic analyses, innatist solutions are less likely to be necessary
(Pullum and Scholz 2002; Tomasello 2003; MacWhinney 2004).

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

The RC in (1) is unusual because it modifies a subject (frequency

estimates are discussed in relation to hypothesis H4). Subject nominals
(or clause-initial elements) usually refer to entities that have already been
introduced in the discourse (Prince 1992; Biber et al. 1999: 622, 896; Mellow
2004a). However, thing is new to the discourse. In order to ground this new
referent (i.e. make it relevant), the RC anchors the new referent because
it includes a nominal (they) that has already been introduced in the discourse
(Fox and Thompson 1990: 300; Hadic Zabala 2004: 21, 76). Thus, the
RC modifying the subject is used because the subject is a new entity.
The RC in (1) is also somewhat unusual because it is a direct object RC.
As an entity that has already been introduced into the discourse, they is
the subject of the RC. Therefore, the new information about Carl and
the baby (the referent expressed by the head nominal) corresponds to the
direct object of the verb did. In sum, this unusual type of RC is used for
functional reasons.

654

THE EMERGENCE OF SECOND LANGUAGE SYNTAX

METHODOLOGY
To investigate the emergence of RCs, the data from a longitudinal case
study were analyzed. The learner was Ana (a pseudonym), a 12-year-old
Spanish-speaking ESL learner. While her mother was completing a graduate
degree, Ana lived in the USA for 9 months. Ana had received some EFL
instruction in her home country. Consequently, when the study began Ana
had moderate receptive abilities, but more limited productive abilities.
Data elicitation began one month after Ana arrived in the USA. Ana also
began attending a public school (with English language instruction) one
month after her arrival. The school did not have any special ESL instruction.
Ana attended school 6 hours per day for 5 months until the summer vacation
period, doing regular coursework and homework. The class size was quite
small (15 students), allowing Ana to interact with her teachers and receive
a reasonable amount of individual attention. In addition, at this time,
she was working at home on French language coursework through
an international distance education program. Although doing coursework
in English and French, Ana primarily spoke Spanish at home with her
parents.
Data samples were elicited every two weeks during the 7-month (201-day)
study. Data elicitation consisted of written narratives that summarized fifteen
different wordless picture books (e.g. Mayer 1973; Day 1985; for a complete
list, see Mellow 2006a). To increase reliability, the picture stories were similar
in terms of length, referents, actions, and story structure. These childrens
stories portrayed the adventures of very human-like animals (frogs, dogs,
mice, and a cat) who often interacted with human children. A few days
before each elicitation session, Ana looked through the picture book with her
mother. In these sessions, Ana became familiar with the story, and her
mother provided English words and phrasings to describe aspects of the
stories. These interactions between Ana and her mother were not recorded
because of concerns that the increased amount of observation would be
too intrusive. All but one of the elicitation sessions were conducted in

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

An anonymous reviewer emphasized that the UG account is not more

complex than the emergentist account, but rather that each accounts for
complexity in a different manner. The UG approach posits abstract
generalizations, whereas the emergentist construction-based account posits
a relatively large number of subtypes of RC constructions. The reviewer
argued that the absence of a phonological complement in the emergentist
analysis is no different from a null trace in the UG account. While I agree
that the emergentist approach is not simpler than the UG approach, I would
argue that the abstract, metaphorical UG generalizations are very different
from emergentist constructs because they are not learnable. The approaches
differ in their claims regarding the need for innate, language-specific
capacities.

J. DEAN MELLOW

655

H1: DVCs will gradually be used in a larger range of constructions.

H2: RCs will gradually be used in a larger range of increasingly
complex constructions, in relation to: (a) type of dependency
resolution; and (b) position of the head nominal.
H3: RCs will gradually become more native-like.
In order to examine whether developmental patterns of RCs corresponded to
probable patterns of input frequency, H4 was investigated.

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

Anas home. The elicitations were typically preceded and followed by 1530
minutes of informal conversation. Each elicitation began with a spoken
telling of the story to an interlocutor. This spoken narrative was
tape-recorded. After the spoken telling of the story, Ana went to the desk
in her room and wrote the story using pen and paper. Ana was told that
spelling was not important and thus she did not use a dictionary. Ana took
as much time as she wanted to write each story, about 15 minutes near the
beginning of the study and about 30 minutes by the end of the study.
Only the written data are analyzed in this paper. Increases and variability
in text length are indicated in Table 2. Table 2 shows the number of
post-modifiable nominals, which did not include, for example, the first
noun in a noun plus noun sequence (e.g. city in the city park). It is
important to note that the narratives did not involve the obligatory use of
any signs or constructions. Therefore, the absence of a construction
in production did not indicate that Ana was not able to produce it at
that time. The story that Ana produced on day 154 was quite short, but,
as illustrated in Table 4, still included a wide range of complex constructions.
The book that she described on day 154 was similar to the ones she described
on days 137 and 167. Ana may have been rushed, tired, or distracted on
day 154.
As indicated in Table 3, the data were coded with respect to different types
of DVCs, according to definitions in Biber et al. (1999), Sag (1997), and Sag
et al. (2003). Many of the DVCs involve dependencies. Even though the
initial element is a coordinating conjunction, nominal ellipsis is considered
to be a DVC because the conjoined verb has an argument dependency that
is not resolved by immediate combination.
Non-native uses of RCs were also coded. These uses included the verb form
in the RC (e.g. the boy running after the cat [who was entered to the port]),
the choice of relativizer (e.g. he didnt see a truck [who was after him]),
the presence of a resumptive pronoun (the boy felt something [that it was
pushing the fishing pole]), and the presence of an additional pronoun after
a RC that modifies a subject (the lady [who was in charge of the store] she was
very mad; cf. prefaces, Biber et al. 1999: 138). All of the coding was checked
by an additional rater, with all disagreements resolved by discussion.
Eight hypotheses (Hs) were investigated. In order to examine whether
developmental patterns of RCs corresponded to item-based learning, H1, H2,
and H3 were investigated.

656

THE EMERGENCE OF SECOND LANGUAGE SYNTAX

Table 2: Number (n) of words, finite clauses and post-modifiable (PM)

nominals in Anas written stories
No of words

No of finite clauses

No of PM nominals

1
14
29
40
57
69
83
99
113
127
137
154
167
181
201

222
229
193
203
225
281
313
220
304
302
401
235
454
427
399

34
34
24
32
28
42
48
33
43
42
59
37
64
59
64

63
52
45
32
56
60
66
44
62
61
90
45
106
98
90

Table 3: Examples of different types of dependent verb-headed constituents

(DVCs), with relevant dependencies indicated by a co-indexed nominal
(5Ni4) or a co-indexed verb 5Vs4
1.

Complement of a verb
1.1 Complement clause, finite verb: Martha said [that Carl was a very good dog]
1.2 to-DVC, to non-finite verb (1b): the orchestrai began [to 5Ni4-play]; hei
wanted [to 5Ni4-eat it]; Carl helped heri [to 5Ni4-zip the zipper](Note: This
sentence is ambiguous. Carl could be an agent who is zipping.)
1.3 ing-DVC, non-finite ing-verb (1b): theyi started [5Ni4-laughing]
1.4 Bare infinitival DVC, non-finite verb (1b): the captain let himi [5Ni4-stay
with the cat]
2. Complement of an adjective
2.1 Complement clause, finite verb: the frog was so excited [that he jumped into
the saxophone]
2.2 to-DVC, to non-finite verb (1c): Momi was getting ready [to 5Ni4-leave]
3. Complement of a preposition; Complement clause, finite verb: the cat jumped
over [where a man was selling apples]
4. Complement of an adverb; Complement clause, finite verb: the puppy was biting

so hard the hose [that the water came off into Carls face]
(Continued)

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

Day

J. DEAN MELLOW

657

Table 3: Continued
5.

Note: The types of resolution are indicated in parentheses, specifying categories from Table 1
(e.g. (1b)). Pronominal co-reference of relativizers (type 2b) is indicated only with subscripts.
Non-native-like uses related to the DVC are indicated with an asterisk.

H4: The first-acquired and most common types of RCs will

correspond to the most common types of RCs in nativespeaker use, in relation to: (a) type of dependency resolution;
and (b) position of the head nominal.
In order to examine whether developmental patterns of RCs corresponded to
compositional learning, H5, H6, H7, and H8 were investigated.

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

Complement of the auxiliary (Aux) be; DVC with a progressive participle,

non-finite ing-verb (1b): all micei are [5Ni4-drinking a lemonade]; the cati
was [5Ni4-watching the sailor]
6. Modifier of a nominal
6.1 Relative clause (RC), finite verb:
6.1.1 Subject RC (1a, 2b, 3a): the mani [whoi-5Ni4 5Ni4-was playing
the saxophone]
6.1.2 Adverbial RC (2b, 4b): a placei [wherei-5Vs4 a lady was sellings
balloons]
6.1.3 Direct object RC (2b, 3b): a platei of salad [thati-5Ni4 the waiter
was carrying-5Ni4]
6.1.4 Bare Direct object RC (1b): the first thingi [they did-5Ni4]
6.1.5 Head nominal positiondirect object: they call the little mousei
[whoi-5Ni4 5Ni4-is afraid]
6.1.6 Head nominal positionobject of preposition: They went to a placei
[thati-5Vs4 you could sees the parks view]
6.1.7 Head nominal positionpredicative: This is the first timei [wheni-5Vs4
the mices gos to play in the snow]
6.1.8 Head nominal positionsubject: The mani [whoi-5Ni4 5Ni4-was
playing the drums] was mad
6.2 to-DVC, to non-finite verb (1c): Then Carli realized that it was time
[to 5Ni4-feed the baby]
6.3 ing-DVC, non-finite ing-verb (1b): they saw two kidsi [5Ni4-waiting for
Santa]
6.4 ed-DVC, non-finite ed-verb (1b): it was a girli [5Ni4-dressed like a cat]
7. Modifier of a situation (adverbial)
7.1 to-DVC, to non-finite verb (1c): the little boyi go to the park [to 5Ni4-catch
a frog]
7.2 ing-DVC, non-finite ing-verb (1c): the girli was at the end of the slide
[5Ni4-waiting for him]; the babyi was very excited [5Ni4-looking at
all the toys]
8. Conjoined verb phrase; DVC with nominal ellipsis, finite verb (1c): the little
mousei was scared and [5Ni4-covered his face]

Table 4: The number of tokens of constructions with DVCs, including finite and non-finite DVCs

Verb CC
{1.1}

21

Nominal ellipsis
{8}

12

37

Nom RC
{6.1}

28

Adj nonf
{2.2}

Advnonf
{7.1, 7.2}

13

Nom nonf
{6.2, 6.3, 6.4}

13

Verb nonf
{1.2, 1.3, 1.4}

11

11

10

83

Aux ing-DVC
{5}

12

12

10

18

11

105

Day

14

29

40

57

69

83

99

113

127

137

154

167

181

201

Total

Note. The types of DVCs are indicated in curly brackets, specifying categories from Table 3 (e.g. {1.2}). Abbreviations are listed in note 1. A long
dash, , indicates that no tokens were found in the corpus.

THE EMERGENCE OF SECOND LANGUAGE SYNTAX

Nonfinite
DVCs

658

Finite
DVCs

Other CC
{2.1, 3, 4}

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

J. DEAN MELLOW

659

As pointed out by an anonymous reviewer, the UG approach does not

necessarily predict results that are different from these emergentist
predictions (i.e. that RCs are initially restricted to particular lexical items;
that RCs will gradually become more native like; that the first acquired and
more common types of RCs will correspond to the most common types of
RCs in the input). In relation to H1 and H2, a widespread UG assumption
is that parameter setting requires only a small number of triggering elements,
resulting in relatively discrete stages of acquisition rather than gradual
development (e.g., Cook and Newson 1996: 104; MacWhinney 1998: 201).
However, some UG approaches also incorporate the notion of gradual
parameter setting (e.g. Mellow 1988; Truscott and Sharwood Smith 2004).
Thus, this paper does not argue that UG will provide different predictions and
be proven incorrect. Instead, if these hypotheses are supported, then the
results would suggest that UG is unnecessary to solve this poverty of the
stimulus problem.

RESULTS
H1 predicted that DVCs would gradually be used in a larger range of
constructions. The findings are presented in Table 4. The hypothesis was
supported. In her first two narratives, Ana only produced two types of DVCs,
both non-finite. The number of types of DVCs increased over the next two
months, with eight different types of DVCs produced on day 69, including
four types of finite constituents. The first RCs were produced on day 40.
The first and most frequent types of DVCs were lexically selected. These
dependent non-finite constituents combined with the auxiliary be or with
a small set of verbs (17 different verbs in the 83 constructions throughout the
study, with begin, decide, go, help, need, try, and want each produced four
or more times). The emergence of Anas DVCs appears to have been
facilitated by the use of constructions in which specific verbs combined
with a DVC. These results support the emergentist position that SLA is
item-based.

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

H5: Before (or concurrent with) the onset of bare direct object
RCs, Ana will have produced other sentences in which
dependencies are resolved in complex constructions (in
addition to the argument dependencies in direct object RCs).
H6: Before (or concurrent with) the onset of RCs without
a relativizer, Ana will have produced other DVCs that do
not have an initial conjunction.
H7: Before (or concurrent with) the onset of RCs that modify
subject NPs, Ana will have produced post-modified subjects
with phrasal and non-finite modifiers.
H8: Before (or concurrent with) the onset of cumulatively
complex RCs such as (1), Ana will have produced RCs with
the component properties.

660

THE EMERGENCE OF SECOND LANGUAGE SYNTAX

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

H2 predicted that RCs would gradually be used in a larger range of

increasingly complex constructions. The findings are presented in Tables 5
and 6. H2 and its subhypotheses were supported. As shown in Table 5,
28 RCs were produced during the 201 days of the study. With respect to the
type of dependency resolution (H2a), the most frequent type of RC (n 18;
64 per cent) was a subject RC (type 6.1.1 in Table 3). Subject RCs were first
produced on day 40. The second most frequent type of RC (n 7;
25 per cent), also first produced on day 40 (but then not produced again
until day 137), was an adverbial RC (type 6.1.2). Three of these seven RCs,
including the one produced on day 40, were lexically associated with their
head nominals, time and place. On day 83, Ana first produced a direct object
RC with a wh-dependency (type 6.1.3). Ana only produced two RCs of this
type. Finally, Ana only produced one bare direct object RC (type 6.1.4). This
RC was produced on day 201.
As shown in Table 6, Anas texts exhibited a gradual increase in the range
of positions of head nominals modified by RCs (types 6.1.56.1.8), supporting
H2b. The most frequent position was direct object (n 12; 43 per cent). This
type was first produced on day 40. The second most frequent position was
object of preposition (n 10; 36 per cent), with these first appearing on
day 69. Ana only produced one predicative nominal that was modified by an
RC, but it was produced on day 40. The last position that Ana produced was
subject, on day 83. She produced five of these (18 per cent). Overall, the
results of H2a and H2b support the emergentist position that SLA is itembased, with a gradual increase in the range and complexity of constructions.
H3 predicted that RCs would gradually become more native-like.
The findings are presented in Table 5. The results provide limited support
for H3. Although the data set is small and variable, Anas RCs tended to
become more native-like.
In order to investigate the effects of probable patterns of input frequency,
H4 predicted that the first-acquired and most common types of RCs would
correspond to the most common types of RCs in native-speaker use.
Anas patterns of use and development were discussed in relation to H2. H4
and its subhypotheses were partially supported. With respect to the
dependency pattern, subject RCs were Anas first and most common type
of RC (64 per cent). According to the Longman 20 million word corpus
of authentic English use (Biber et al. 1999: 621), use of subject RCs by native
speakers is very similar (5575 per cent, varying by register). A similar
pattern of use (67 per cent) was discussed by Celce-Murcia and
Larsen-Freeman (1999: 578). However, Diessel (2004: 146) reported that
only 34 per cent of RCs were subject RCs in the child-directed speech of four
mothers (see also Diessel and Tomasello 2005: 8989).
Adverbial RCs also first occurred on day 40 and comprised 25 per cent
of Anas RCs. However, native speakers do not use adverbial RCs as
frequently (515 per cent; Biber et al. 1999: 606, 625). Anas direct object
RCs (with and without a relativizer) emerged relatively late (day 83) and

Table 5: Anas use of relative clauses

Bare direct object
relative clause
{6.1.4}
Direct object relative
clause
{6.1.3}
Adverbial RC
{6.1.2}
Subject RC
{6.1.1}
Overall native-like use
Day

1:0

 1:0

1:0

1:0

 2:0

0:1

2:0

1:1

2:0

 5:2

1:0

0:2

2:0

1:1

0:1

2:0

2:0

3:1

2:0

 13:5

14

29

.50
40

57

.00
69

1.00
83

99

.50
113

1.00
127

.67
137

1.00
154

.75
167

.83
181

1.00
201

M .75
Total
J. DEAN MELLOW

Note. The types of DVCs are indicated in curly brackets, specifying categories from Table 3 (e.g. {6.1.1}). A long dash, , indicates that no tokens were
found in the corpus. In addition to the abbreviations in note 1, the following conventions were used: x: y in each cell; x number of native-like uses,
y number of non-native-like uses.

661

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

662

Position of head
nominal in the
main clause

Subject

Predicative

Object of
Preposition
Direct Object

Day

RC
Nonf DVC
Phrase
RC
Nonf DVC
Phrase
RC
Nonf DVC
Phrase
RC
Nonf DVC
Phrase

1
1

1
14

1
2
29

40

3
57

1
69

2
83

1
99

1
113

1
1
2
127

1
1
2
1

1
137

154

Note: A long dash, , indicates that no tokens were found in the corpus.

1
2
1
3
2

3
167

4
2
4
181

3
201

5
0
2
1
5
3
10
2
8
12
7
25
Total

THE EMERGENCE OF SECOND LANGUAGE SYNTAX

Table 6: Anas use of nominals post-modified by phrases, non-finite (nonf) DVCs, and relative clauses (RC), in relation to
the position of the head nominal in the main clause

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

J. DEAN MELLOW

663

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

were infrequent (11 per cent; n 3). Object RCs (i.e. non-subject, nonadverbial) constitute 1037 per cent of native speaker RCs (Biber et al. 1999:
606, 621, 625). However, Diessel (2004) reported that, in child-directed
speech, 66 per cent of RCs were object RCs.
Ana only produced one RC without a relativizer (4 per cent of her RCs),
on the last day of the study. Biber et al. (1999: 606, 61011) showed that
1025 per cent of native speaker RCs do not have a relativizer. Most native
speaker RCs without relativizers (about 90 per cent) are object RCs, with the
remainder being adverbial RCs and a very small number of subject RCs
(Biber et al. 1999: 61921, 6258). Thus, this type of RC does not appear as
often in Anas stories as native speakers use it. Interestingly, as noted above,
this first and only token in Anas data is a frequent collocation for the string
the first thing.
Although the small number of Anas RCs allows only tentative
conclusions, Anas early acquisition and extensive use of subject RCs
corresponds closely to use by native speakers, providing some support for
H4a. However, Anas acquisition and use of adverbial RCs and bare RCs did
not correspond closely to native speaker use, suggesting that other factors,
such as complexity, have important effects on acquisition. Finally, although
the input directed to an ESL learner may be different from child-directed
speech, the results reported by Diessel (2004) indicate that corpus frequency
may not necessarily correspond to probable input frequency.
With respect to the position of the post-modified head nominal, Biber et al.
(1999: 623) reported that post-modified subjects comprise 1015 percent of
all native speaker RCs. A similar pattern of use (19 per cent) was discussed
by Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman (1999: 578). Diessel (2004) found that
subjects modified by RCs were rare (1 per cent) in child-directed speech.
In Anas stories, subjects modified by RCs appeared on day 83 and amounted
to 18 per cent of all of her RCs. This developmental pattern corresponds
closely to native speaker use, supporting H4b and the emergentist position
that acquisition patterns are affected by input frequency.
H5 predicted that, before (or concurrent with) the onset of bare direct
object RCs, Ana would have produced other sentences in which
dependencies are resolved in complex constructions (in addition to the
argument dependencies in direct object RCs). The findings regarding six
types of complex constructions are presented in Table 7. H5 was supported.
First, argument dependencies within the complements of auxiliary verbs
(type 5 in Table 3) were used on day 1 and were produced frequently
(105 times) during the study. Second, argument dependencies within the
non-finite complements of verbs (types 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4 in Table 3) were also
used on day 1 and were produced frequently (83 times). For these two types
of constructions, the subject dependency of the embedded verb is resolved by
the subject of the main verb. Third, argument dependences within non-finite
(-ing, -ed) post-nominal modifiers (types 6.3 and 6.4) were first used on day
29 and were produced 10 times during the study. In these constructions,

664

Bare direct object

Relative clause
{6.1.3}
Direct object relative clause
{6.1.2}
Relative pronouns
{6.1.1, 6.1.2, 6.1.3}
Nom ing-DVC;
Nom ed-DVC
{6.3, 6.4}
Verb non-finite
DVC
{1.2, 1.3, 1.4}
Auxiliary ing-DVC
{5}
Day

1:0

1:0

1:0

1:0

2:0

1:1

1:1

3:0

2:0

1:0

3:0

2:0

3:1

5:1

2:0

23:4

0:1

1:0

1:0

3:1

2:0

1:0

8:2

0:2

2:1

2:4

1:4

0:2

4:2

4:0

4:0

1:3

6:2

7:0

11:0

7:4

7:3

56:27

0:2

3:4

3:3

2:1

4:2

11:1

2:0

7:1

12:0

9:1

5:0

18:0

11:0

3:0

90:15

14

29

40

57

69

83

99

113

127

137

154

167

181

201

Total

Note. The types of DVCs are indicated in curly brackets, specifying categories from Table 3 (e.g. {1.2}). Abbreviations are listed in note 1. A long dash,
, indicates that no tokens were found in the corpus. In addition to the abbreviations in note 1, the following conventions were used: x:y in each cell;
x number of native-like uses, y number of non-native-like uses.

THE EMERGENCE OF SECOND LANGUAGE SYNTAX

Table 7: Anas use of sentences in which dependencies are resolved in complex constructions

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

J. DEAN MELLOW

665

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

the subject dependency of the embedded verb is resolved by the nominal that
is post-modified. Fourth, relative pronouns were first produced on day 40,
with Ana producing 27 of these during the study. In these constructions,
the referential dependency is resolved by the nominal that is post-modified
(2b in Table 1). Finally, as previously discussed, Ana only produced one
instance of a bare direct object RC construction, on day 201. In sum, before
producing the bare direct object RC, Ana had produced an extensive number
and range of sentences in which dependencies were resolved in complex
constructions, including argument dependencies of the embedded verb and
two types of constructions in which the dependency was resolved by
the nominal that was post-modified. Although these prior argument
dependencies were only subjects, Ana produced two prior instances of
direct object dependencies in RCs, as discussed in relation to H2 and H8.
These findings support the emergentist position that SLA is compositional.
H6 predicted that, before (or concurrent with) the onset of RCs without
a relativizer, Ana would have produced other DVCs without a conjunction
(cf. Diessel 2004: 136). The hypothesis was supported. Conjunctions include
subordinators (e.g. complementizers: that, to) and coordinators (e.g. and)
(Biber et al. 1999: 79, 85). In the case of nominal ellipsis, coordinators
can mark the subsequent presence of a DVC. In addition to requiring
a referent and indicating a wh- argument or modifier dependency involving
a subsequent verb, relativizers are also conjunctions because they
introduce dependent clauses. The majority (58 per cent) of Anas DVCs
were preceded by a conjunction. However, in addition to the one bare RC,
Ana produced three other types of constructions in which a DVC did not
have an initial conjunction: (i) non-finite DVCs without the complementizer
to (1.3, 1.4, 6.3, 6.4, and 7.2 in Table 3; 29 tokens, first produced on day 29),
(ii) -ing complements of the auxiliary be (105 tokens, first produced on
day 1), and (iii) nominal ellipsis not preceded by and because it is part of a
series of elliptical constituents (2 tokens on day 201). These constructions
show that Ana had the capacity to produce dependent DVCs without
conjunctions before she produced an RC without a relativizer on day 201.
Although relativizers are a special type of conjunction, the findings support
the emergentist position that SLA is compositional.
H7 predicted that, before (or concurrent with) the onset of RCs that modify
subject NPs, Ana would have produced post-modified subjects with simpler
post-modifiers (i.e. phrasal and non-finite constituents). The findings were
presented in Table 6. H7 was not supported. Ana produced subject NPs
modified by RCs as early as day 83 and they comprised 18 per cent of her
RCs. However, only two subject NPs were modified by phrases (both
appositives) and no subjects were modified by non-finite DVCs. This result
does not support compositionality because it was predicted that Ana would
have produced simpler forms of subject post-modification before using RCs.
An examination of the functions of the RCs modifying subjects
explains this finding. The two RCs of this type that Ana produced on

666

THE EMERGENCE OF SECOND LANGUAGE SYNTAX

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR APPLIED LINGUISTICS

This case study has illustrated an emergentist solution to the poverty of
stimulus puzzle. Language patterns were explicated with concrete, learnable
linguistic analyses that do not assume innate principles involving
imperceptible abstractions such as phonetically-null elements and movement.
The longitudinal results revealed that Anas acquisition was item-based.
With respect to all DVCs (H1) and to RCs (H2), Ana initially used a small
number of tokens of relatively simple constructions. Over time, she produced
a large number and range of constructions (and subtypes of constructions).
This suggests that she began with the ability to use individual items,
perhaps as limited scope patterns, and later developed abilities that may be
characterized as grammaticalized linguistic constructions.
Anas item-based development reflects the processing complexity of
different types of RCs. With respect to the position of the head nominal,
RCs that modify subjects are difficult to process because they intervene
between the subject and verb of the main clause. Anas acquisition pattern
reflected this, with RCs that modify subjects being both infrequent and
relatively late to emerge. With respect to the type of dependency resolution,
subject RCs are the easiest type of RC to process and were produced first

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

day 83 are: Then, the man [who was playing the saxophone] felt something wrong;
and The man [who was playing the drums] was mad. In this story, Ana used the
RCs to distinguish between two male musicians who were part of an
orchestra that had already been mentioned. For the other three instances of
this type of RC, the subject is a new referent and the RC provides
information about that referent. Two of those RCs (day 137 and day 201)
include a previously mentioned referent that anchors the new referent.
Overall, the expressive capacity of the finite clause appears to be the reason
why Ana used RCs to modify subjects (cf. Biber et al. 1999: 638, 757, 8268).
Although not supporting compositionality, this finding supports the
emergentist position that acquisition is affected by the functional purposes
for which language is used.
H8 predicted that, before (or concurrent with) the onset of cumulatively
complex RCs such as (1), Ana would have produced RCs with the
component properties. The findings have been presented in Tables 5 and 6.
The results support H8. A bare direct object RC that modified the subject
of the main clause was only produced once, on day 201. Ana produced
direct object RCs on days 83 and 127, although these had relativizers and
modified objects. Ana produced RCs that modified subjects on days 83, 137,
and 154, although these were subject RCs. In conjunction with findings
of H5 (especially the prior use of other complex constructions in which
the dependency was resolved by the nominal that was post-modified),
these results support the emergentist position that Anas development of the
complex RC was compositional.

J. DEAN MELLOW

667

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

and most frequently. Because of the computational routines involved,

adverbial and direct object RCs are difficult to process and were produced
somewhat later and less frequently. The bare direct object RC is especially
difficult to process, likely contributing to its late acquisition and rare use by
Ana. This learning challenge may be facilitated by probabilistic co-occurrence
patterns. As noted above, the string the first thing is often followed by a bare
direct object RC. As part of a limited scope pattern, this nominal expression
may function as the antecedent signal of the subsequent argument
dependency.
Anas acquisition was also compositional, exhibiting a gradual cumulation
of complex properties within and across constructions. Ana used a large
number of DVCs in which dependencies were resolved in complex
constructions before the onset of a bare direct object RC (H5). Ana also
produced many DVCs without conjunctions before producing an RC without
a relativizer (H6). Similarly, direct object RCs and RCs that modify
subjects were each produced before Ana produced this cumulatively complex
RC (H8).
The results also suggest that Anas learning processes interacted with her
environment, including input frequency. The early acquisition and extensive
use of subject RCs corresponded closely to native-speaker frequency of use
(H4). However, the acquisition of other types of RCs did not correspond
to native speaker use. In addition, patterns in child-directed speech suggest
that native speaker use may not correspond to probable input frequency for
L2 learners. The correlation between acquisition and input requires further
investigation. The acquisition of rare and complex constructions also
appears to be facilitated by a moderate frequency, in input and use, of
their component parts (H8). Although not investigated in this paper, the
acquisition of components of complex RCs (dependency patterns, position
of the head nominal) may be facilitated by the input frequency of these
components in constructions other than RCs.
Finally, the use and acquisition of complex, rare constructions are affected
by the functional purposes of language use. Frequent, semantically-light
general nouns such as thing, place, and time appear to necessitate the use of
post-modification. In addition, Anas use of RCs that modify subjects can be
explained by the need to clearly introduce and distinguish referents during
narration (H7). The demands of the communicative context appear to have
driven the interlanguage system forward.
These analyses have not distinguished the specific contributions of the
different factors. Processing complexity (H2), input frequency (H4), and
compositionality (H5H8) appear to have jointly affected the process of
acquisition, contributing to the same developmental patterns. In addition,
these analyses have not accounted for all aspects of the acquisition of
constructions such as relative clauses (e.g. non-native uses such as
resumptive pronouns: OGrady 1997: 180). A more comprehensive account
of acquisition will require an examination of other factors, including a more

668

THE EMERGENCE OF SECOND LANGUAGE SYNTAX

Final version received June 2006

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This is a revised version of a paper presented at AILA 2005 in Madison, Wisconsin (July 2005).
For valuable feedback and comments, I am grateful to Doug Biber, Nick Ellis, Loreley
Hadic-Zabala, Tom Hukari, Susan Hunston, Diane Larsen-Freeman, Elena Lieven, David
McKercher, Brian MacWhinney, William OGrady, Michael Tomasello, and two anonymous
reviewers.
Contributors to this research project:
Loreley Hadic Zabala, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
Michelle Akcar, University of Washington, WA, USA
Sun-Kwang Bae, Defense Language Institute, Monterey, CA, USA
Maria Clemencia Gonzalez, Universidad Tecnologica de Pereira, Colombia

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

extensive investigation of the effect of the decomposition of formulaic

chunks. These multiple factors result in tendencies within stages of
acquisition, but do not suggest that developmental sequences or acquisition
orders conform to strict universal patterns (Mellow 2004b; Larsen-Freeman,
this volume).
This emergentist approach to SLA has a number of practical implications
for applied linguistics. As explained in Mellow (2002, 2004b: esp. 356),
an understanding of the compositional and item-based nature of learning
would be valuable for syllabus design, especially for creating and evaluating
grammatical and synthetic syllabi. Concrete and learnable elements
within a syllabus might be sequenced according to cumulative complexity
relationships that are attested in longitudinal studies (i.e. simpler and
more frequent signs and constructions would be taught first). The sign-based
nature of SLA and HPSG analyses (Mellow 2004a) also suggests that
formal or functional elements should not be taught in isolation, but that
learning activities should encourage attention to formfunction mappings
(or signs). Although item-based learning suggests that extensive use of
a range of tokens may lead to the development of generalized constructions,
this emergentist approach would not expect instant acquisition. Instead,
elements should be recycled within a syllabus, especially in relation to
developmental sequences that involve overgeneralizations to and from
related, more complex signs and constructions (Mellow and Stanley 2002).
Compositional and item-based learning are also valuable for the evaluation
and testing of language proficiency, including measurement within
instructional experiments (Cumming and Mellow 1996; Mellow 2002).
Construct validity may be enhanced through the use of categories and
patterns that are attested in longitudinal studies and precisely specified using
emergentist constructs (see Mellow 2004a: esp. 144, 147; 2006b). In these
ways, emergentism provides very promising directions for both theory
development and practical application. Replications of this case study would
be valuable.

J. DEAN MELLOW

669

NOTE
1 The following abbreviations are used in
this paper, including the tables: : sum;
Adj: adjective; Advnonf: adverbial
non-finite DVC; Aux: auxiliary; CC:
complement clause; DVC: dependent

verb-headed constituent; M: mean;

5Ni4: nominal argument; n: number;
Nom:
nominal;
nonf:
non-finite
(constituent); PM: post-modifiable; RC:
relative clause; and V: verb.

Biber, D., S. Johansson, G. Leech, S. Conrad,

and E. Finegan. 1999. Longman Grammar of
Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
Borsley, R. 1999. Syntactic theory: A Unified
Approach 2nd edn. London: Arnold.
Brown, R. 1973. A First Language: The Early Stages.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Celce-Murcia, M. and D. Larsen-Freeman.
1999. The Grammar Book: An ESL/EFL Teachers
Course 2nd. edn. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, N. 1995. Bare phrase structure in
Webelhuth, G. (ed.): Government and Binding
Theory and the Minimalist Program: Principles and
Parameters in Syntactic Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
Cook, V. J. and M. Newson. 1996. Chomskys
Universal Grammar: An Introduction 2nd edn.
Oxford: Blackwell.
Cumming, A. and J. D. Mellow. 1996. An
investigation into the validity of written
indicators of second language proficiency in
A. Cumming and R. Berwick (eds): Validation in
Language Testing. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual
Matters.
Day, A. 1985: Good Dog, Carl. New York: Simon
and Schuster.
Diessel, H. 2004. The Acquisition of Complex
Sentences. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Diessel, H. and M. Tomasello. 2005. A new look
at the acquisition of relative clauses, Language
81: 882906.
Ellis, N. 1998. Emergentism: Connectionism
and language learning, Language Learning
48: 63164.
Ellis, N. 2002. Frequency effects in language
processing: a review with implications for
theories of implicit and explicit language
acquisition, Studies in Second Language Acquisition
24: 14388.

Ellis, N. 2003. Constructions, chunking, and

connectionism: The emergence of second
language structure in C. Doughty and M. Long
(eds): Handbook of Second Language Acquisition.
Oxford: Blackwell.
Fox, B. and S. Thompson. 1990. A discourse
explanation of the grammar of relative clauses in
English conversation, Language 66/2: 297316.
Gazdar, G., E. Klein, G. Pullum, and I. Sag.
1985. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar.
Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Goldberg, A. 2003. Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language, Trends in Cognitive
Science 7/5: 21924.
Hadic Zabala, L. 2004. Complex noun phrases
in ESL narratives: Structural and discourse
properties. Unpublished MA thesis. Simon
Fraser University.
Hadic Zabala, L. and J. D. Mellow. 2003.
Longitudinal ESL syntactic development:
The cumulation of NP constituent structure.
Paper presented at the Second Language
Research Forum, Tucson, AZ.
Hawkins, R. 2001. Second Language Syntax:
A Generative Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.
Larsen-Freeman, D. 1976. An explanation for
the morpheme acquisition order of second
language
learners,
Language
Learning
26/1: 12534.
Larsen-Freeman, D. 2006. The emergence of
complexity, fluency and accuracy in the oral
and written production of five Chinese learners
of English, Applied Linguistics 24: 590619.
MacWhinney, B. 1997. Second language
acquisition and the Competition Model in
A. de Groot and J. Kroll (eds): Bilingualism:
Psycholinguistic Perspectives. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
MacWhinney, B. 1998. Models of the emergence
of language, Annual Review of Psychology
49: 199227.

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

REFERENCES

670

THE EMERGENCE OF SECOND LANGUAGE SYNTAX

Mellow, J. D. and K. Stanley. 2002. Theory

development in applied linguistics: Toward a
connectionist framework for understanding
second language acquisition, Issues in Applied
Linguistics 13: 339.
OGrady, W. 1997. Syntactic Development. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
OGrady, W. 2005. Syntactic Carpentry: An
Emergentist Approach to Syntax. Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Prince, E. 1992. The ZPG letter: Subjects,
definiteness, and information status in
W. Mann, and S. Thompson (eds): Discourse
Description: Diverse Linguistic Analyses of a
Fund-raising Text, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Pullum, G. and B. Scholz. 2002. Empirical
assessment of stimulus poverty arguments,
The Linguistic Review 19: 950.
Sag, I. 1997. English relative clauses, Journal of
Linguistics 33: 43183.
Sag, I., T. Wasow, and E. Bender. 2003. Syntactic
Theory: A Formal Introduction 2nd edn.
Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and
Information.
Tomasello, M. 2002. The emergence of
grammar in early child language in T. Givon
and B. Malle (eds): The Evolution of Language
out of Pre-language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tomasello, M. 2003. Constructing a Language:
A Usage-based Theory of Language Acquisition.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Truscott, J. and M. Sharwood Smith. 2004.
Acquisition by processing: A modular
perspective
on
language
development,
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 7/1: 120.
White, L. 1989. Universal Grammar and
Second Language Acquisition. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.

Downloaded from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia on October 13, 2014

MacWhinney, B. 2002. Extending the

competition model in R. Heredia and
J. Altarriba (eds): Bilingual Sentence Processing.
Amsterdam: Elsevier.
MacWhinney, B. 2004. A multiple process
solution to the logical problem of language
acquisition, Journal of Child Language
31: 883914.
Mayer, M. 1973: Frog on His Own. New York:
Puffin Pied Piper.
Mellow, J. D. 1988. On triggers: A parametersetting approach to the acquisition of Cree, a free
word order language, McGill Working Papers in
Linguistics 5/2: 97127.
Mellow, J. D. 2002. Toward principled eclecticism
in language teaching: The Two-Dimensional
Model and the Centring Principle, TESL-EJ 5/4:
A-1,
119.
http://www.kyoto-su.ac.jp/
information/tesl-ej/ej20/a1.html.
Mellow, J. D. 2004a. Connectionism, HPSG
signs, and SLA representations: Specifying
principles of mapping between form and
function, Second Language Research 20: 13165.
Mellow, J. D. 2004b. The two-dimensional model
and principled eclecticism: Classroom discourse
and perspectives on grammatical syllabi in
A. Abd. Samad (ed.): Perspectives on Grammar in
Language
Education.
Serdang,
Malaysia:
Universiti Putra Malaysia Press.
Mellow, J. D. 2006a. The emergence of second
language grammar: Understanding acquisition
and teaching. Unpublished manuscript. Simon
Fraser University.
Mellow, J. D. 2006b. An emergentist approach
to L2 syntax: The longitudinal development of
dependency resolution. Paper presented at
CAAL/AAAL 2006, Montreal, Canada.