Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse




Journal Article

Temporal adverbials, negation and finiteness in Dutch as a second language: A scope-based account


Verhagen,  Josje
Language Acquisition Group, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;
Information Structure in Language Acquisition, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available

Verhagen, J. (2009). Temporal adverbials, negation and finiteness in Dutch as a second language: A scope-based account. IRAL, 47(2), 209-237. doi:10.1515/iral.2009.009.

Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0013-3940-5
This study investigates the acquisition of post-verbal (temporal) adverbials and post-verbal negation in L2 Dutch. It is based on previous findings for L2 French that post-verbal negation poses less of a problem for L2 learners than post-verbal adverbial placement (Hawkins, Towell, Bazergui, Second Language Research 9: 189-233, 1993; Herschensohn, Minimally raising the verb issue: 325-336, Cascadilla Press, 1998). The current data show that, at first sight, Moroccan and Turkish learners of Dutch also have fewer problems with post-verbal negation than with post-verbal adverbials. However, when a distinction is made between different types of adverbials, it seems that this holds for adverbials of position such as 'today' but not for adverbials of contrast such as 'again'. To account for this difference, it is argued that different types of adverbial occupy different positions in the L2 data for reasons of scope marking. Moreover, the placement of adverbials such as 'again' interacts with the acquisition of finiteness marking (resulting in post-verbal placement), while there is no such interaction between adverbials such as 'today' and finiteness marking.