English and German modality in advanced learner interlanguage

English and German modality in advanced learner interlanguage Anita Pavic Pintaric, Leonarda Lovrovic, Nadia Mifka-Profozic TAML 2, York King’s Manor, June 20 -21 2016

Outline • Modality: classification of modal verbs • Three languages in focus: English, German, Croatian (differences and similarities) • The study: design and participants • Tests: AJT, SPR • AJT results for German L 2 • AJT results for English L 2 • Results for SPR (English L 2) • Discussion • Questions, comments

Modality can, may/ können, dürfen mögen • Epistemic possibility She may come later. / Sie mag spätter kommen. • Deontic meaning Can/May I pour your tea? /Darf ich dir Tee einschenken? • Dynamic meaning She can drive a car. / Sie kann Auto fahren. RQ To what extent do Croatian learners of English and Croatian learners of German acquire modal verbs can and may/können, dürfen mögen ?

German . Modals have full form, can have object English Lexical preferences NICE properties Croatian modality doesn’t exist as a verb category Lexical preferences

Differences & similarities • Learning to use modal verbs presents a difficult mapping problem involving matching the lexeme to complex syntax and semantics. • Modal lexemes typically map to multiple meanings, and in turn multiple lexemes may cover a single meaning. • In Croatian, modal verbs are used in deontic and dynamic meaning, but epistemic possibility is not associated with the use of modal verbs.

English and German • NICE and other properties Negation Interrogation Code Emphatic form • German modals do not have NICE properties but they do have their characteristics that clearly distinguish them from other verbs. • Can be used as full verbs with a direct object • In German, co-occurrence of modals is possible although there are rigid constraints

Modal verbs in German • Particularly in spoken language lexical devices (modal particles, modal adverbs) are preferred to the use of modal verbs. • Epistemic background is often signaled with particles wohl, sicher, nur, also. • Epistemicity in German can refer either to judgments or evidentiality (subjectivity or objectivity) whereas in English epistemicity refers only to judgments.

The study Design Participants Grammaticality judgment task (explicit knowledge) Self-paced reading task (processing, tapping into implicit knowledge) Discourse completion task • Four groups of participants (N=55) • 20 Croatian L 1 learners of L 2 English (CEFR C 1) • 20 Croatian L 1 learners of L 2 German (CEFR C 1) • 9 native English speakers • 5 native German speakers

Tests • Acceptability Judgment Test: 62 sentences (32 target sentences including the same number of appropriate and inappropriate use of modal verbs can and may/ können, dürfen, mögen. • Classified according to the epistemic, deontic and dynamic meaning of modal verbs. • Self-paced reading task: 24 target sentences, imbedded in the context that gives orientation to the use of a particular modal verb. The sentences used in both tests – slightly adapted examples from either the Lancaster corpus (Coates, 1983) or British National Corpus.

AJT Results: German L 2 Semantically acceptable usage Semantically unacceptable usage 100 80 80 60 Learners 40 Native speakers 20 ic na m Dy tic on De em ic ist Ep ic na m Dy De on tic 0 em ic 0 ist Learners 40 20 Ep 60

AJT Results: German L 2 • For learners of German L 2 there was a significant main effect of group which means that the two groups (learners and native speakers) perform differently) F (1, 23) = 13. 3, p=. 001 There was significant interaction between type (acceptable vs. unacceptable) and modal category: F(2, 23) = 3. 96, p=. 026 • Significant differences between the two groups on both semantically acceptable and unacceptable usage of modals where epistemic meaning is expected, and on unacceptable usage where the dynamic meaning of a modal is expected.

AJT Results: English L 2 Semantically acceptable usage Semantically unacceptable usage 100 80 80 60 Learners 40 Native speakers 20 ic na m Dy tic on De em ic ist Ep ic na m Dy De on tic 0 em ic 0 ist Learners 40 20 Ep 60

AJT Results: English L 2 • There was a main effect of group F (1, 27)= 5. 9 , p=. 000 but no significant differences between the two groups on sentences that used modal verbs appropriately (semantically acceptable usage). A significant difference was found between the two groups only in those sentences where the use of the modal verb with deontic meaning was semantically unacceptable.

Self-paced reading • Psychopy software was used for self–paced reading word by word. • Twenty-four sets of sentences, involving 12 semantically acceptable and 12 semantically unacceptable sentences, plus 12 fillers. • Example: Ø Angela has recently spent a lot of time travelling and photographing. She may be looking for a new career. Angela is a talented photographer. (semantically acceptable) Ø Angela has recently spent a lot of time travelling and photographing. She can be looking for a new career. Angela is a talented photographer. (semantically unacceptable)

Results SPR EPIST NNS DEONT SEG 1 SEG 2 SEG 3 SEG 4 SEG 5 SEG 6 Accept 472 462 492 549 482 463 Unaccept 468 552 583 533 606 451 Accept 531 612 485 519 562 376 ungram 414 547 597 578 519 440 496 521 560 683 486 ungram 598 671 547 724 735 493 Accept 435 437 435 537 573 465 Unaccept 490 504 544 819 738 516 Accept 487 460 534 529 467 379 Unaccept 412 441 633 518 481 347 568 509 571 672 591 448 593 572 469 685 749 516 DYNAM Unaccept EPIST NS DEONT DYNAM Accept Unaccept

Epistemic modals 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200 -250 -300 Seg 1 Seg 2 Seg 3 Seg 4 Seg 5 Seg 6 Learners Native speakers

Discussion • Results for self–paced reading task suggest that these learners are not sensitive to semantic violations in the use of epistemic modals although their AJT showed the results that were no different from native speakers’ results. However, they are sensitive to semantic violations where dynamic meaning of a modal is expected. • Interestingly, native speakers didn’t show sensitivity to semantic violations where modals with deontic meaning were used in formal situations (e. g. Visitors may not enter this way/ *Visitors cannot enter this way.

Questions? Comments? Thank you!