The aspectual entailments of telicity markers in German: evidence from non-native and native speakers

IF 2.5 1区 文学 Q1 LINGUISTICS
Duarte Oliveira
{"title":"The aspectual entailments of telicity markers in German: evidence from non-native and native speakers","authors":"Duarte Oliveira","doi":"10.1017/s1366728924000828","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In German, it has been shown that the semantic entailments associated with telicity markers are acquired early and that speakers will turn to semantic–pragmatic principles to determine whether an overt culmination is cancellable (e.g., van Hout, 1998, 2008; Richter &amp; van Hout, 2013; Schulz &amp; Penner, 2002; Schulz &amp; Ose, 2008). Here, we test the interpretation of three types of telicity markers by Portuguese L2 speakers of German, as well as Portuguese–German bilinguals and German monolinguals. A Bayesian analysis shows that Portuguese L2 speakers of German have difficulty processing telicity with resultative particles but show target-like performances with bounded DPs and adjectival markers. Our analysis also shows that bilingual and monolingual speakers display no substantial differences in their understanding of telicity entailments, albeit with some variability regarding particle markers. I argue that the existing variation may be due to effects of lexical knowledge and transparency.</p>","PeriodicalId":8758,"journal":{"name":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","volume":"79 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728924000828","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In German, it has been shown that the semantic entailments associated with telicity markers are acquired early and that speakers will turn to semantic–pragmatic principles to determine whether an overt culmination is cancellable (e.g., van Hout, 1998, 2008; Richter & van Hout, 2013; Schulz & Penner, 2002; Schulz & Ose, 2008). Here, we test the interpretation of three types of telicity markers by Portuguese L2 speakers of German, as well as Portuguese–German bilinguals and German monolinguals. A Bayesian analysis shows that Portuguese L2 speakers of German have difficulty processing telicity with resultative particles but show target-like performances with bounded DPs and adjectival markers. Our analysis also shows that bilingual and monolingual speakers display no substantial differences in their understanding of telicity entailments, albeit with some variability regarding particle markers. I argue that the existing variation may be due to effects of lexical knowledge and transparency.

德语中遥性标记的方面蕴涵:来自非母语和母语者的证据
在德语中,有研究表明,与远性标记相关的语义含义是很早就习得的,说话者会转向语义-语用原则来确定一个明显的高潮是否可以取消(例如,van Hout, 1998,2008;里希特,van Hout, 2013;舒尔茨和写作人,2002;舒尔茨和大阪证交所,2008)。在这里,我们测试了三种类型的远性标记的解释葡萄牙语第二语言的德国人,以及葡萄牙-德国双语者和德国单语者。贝叶斯分析表明,说德语的葡萄牙语第二语言的人在处理结果助词时存在困难,但在处理有界dp和形容词标记时却表现出类似目标的表现。我们的分析还表明,双语者和单语者对远性的理解没有实质性差异,尽管在粒子标记方面存在一些差异。笔者认为,存在的变异可能是由于词汇知识和透明度的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
16.70%
发文量
86
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信