What looks native-like may not necessarily be native-like

Abstract

Abstract A substantial body of research has investigated null arguments in L2 Chinese, showing that they can be native-like. However, recent linguistic research has demonstrated convincingly that some ‘missing’ arguments in Chinese should be viewed not as ‘null’ arguments but as a result of movement and ellipsis. These advances necessitate a revaluation of the issue of ‘null’ arguments in previous L2 studies which largely overlooked the role of ellipsis in accounting for missing arguments in L2 Chinese. To fill the lacuna, this study recognises the above recent advances and examines whether missing objects in English speakers’ L2 Chinese parallel sentences are a result of verb raising and VP ellipsis and are genuinely native-like. Results of a picture-description task and an acceptability judgement task suggest that although L2ers, like native Chinese speakers, can accept and produce missing objects in Chinese, their native-like performance is driven by mechanisms different from those of native Chinese speakers (i.e., the missing objects are erroneously used as null objects in L2 Chinese). The findings advance our understanding of L1 vs. L2 different mechanisms for phonetically unrealised objects in Chinese, suggesting that what looks native-like in L2 may not necessarily be native-like.