Abstract
The present study aims to investigate Korean EFL learners’ sensitivity to subject-verb agreement violation and to examine effects of local number attraction, plural markedness, and distance on their agreement computation. Sixty-six Korean adult learners of English at mid- and high proficiencies participated in an experiment which combined self-paced reading and timed acceptability judgement. They were asked to read sentences region by region and rate their acceptability. All sentences contained a local noun that disagreed with the subject noun in number. They varied in terms of (i) grammaticality (i.e., agreement-violating vs. non-violating) and (ii) noun number (i.e., singular subject N/plural local N vs. plural subject N/singular local N). Half of the items had a short-distance condition and half had a long-distance condition. Analyses of participants’ responses showed that learners were generally sensitive to agreement violation when judging acceptability. In addition, proficient learners exhibited biased sensitivity to noun plurality, resulting in mismatch asymmetry in both acceptability judgment and self-paced reading, showing native-like response patterns. Distance between the subject and the verb resulted in reduced sensitivity to agreement violation. These findings suggest that learners can gradually become more sensitive to agreement violation and process subject-verb agreement in a nativelike pattern even when relevant morpho-syntactic features are not instantiated in their L1.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.