Semantic bias and morphological regularity in the acquisition of tense-aspect morphology: what is the relation?

Abstract

This article reviews research on English past-tense acquisition to test the validity of the single mechanism model and the dual mechanism model, focusing on regular-irregular dissociation and semantic bias. Based on the review, it is suggested that in L1 acquisition, both regular and irregular verbs are governed by semantics; that is, early use of past tense forms are largely restricted to achievement verbs — regular or irregular. In contrast, some L2 acquisition studies show stronger semantic bias for regular past tense forms (Housen, The development of tense-aspect in English as a second language and the variable influence of inherent aspect, John Benjamins, 2002). It is argued that L1 acquisition of the past-tense morphology can be accounted for adequately — without assuming dual mechanisms — by relying on connectionist-like input-based prototype formation as a mechanism for the development of tense-aspect morphology.