Input Frequency and the Acquisition of the Progressive

ANDREAS ROHDE

Introduction

The progressive form has proved to be very salient in native English-speaking INPUT so that it is generally expected to figure very early in L2 learner data. However, the fact that the progressive form has a number of different functions may render the acquisition process rather complex and the mere fact that the progressive is correctly formed in L2 acquisition does not entail that its uses are in fact target-like. In the first part of this chapter, the development of the progressive form is sketched for four German children acquiring English during a six-month stay in California. Two main functions of the progressive are under scrutiny: as a marker of grammatical aspect with both present and past reference, and as a marker of future tense without marking grammatical aspect. The data are compared with input data from American children the German children were in contact with. The distribution of the functions over the six months varies considerably, suggesting that each function of the progressive is tackled separately. In the second part, the focus is on LEXICAL ASPECTor AKTIONSART and the ASPECT HYPOTHESIS. In relation to the results of the first part, it is investigated to what extent the PRODUCTION data reflect the distribution of –ing inflected verb types in the input data with regard to the verbs' inherent verbal aspect.

The Role of Input in Second Language Acquisition

In the days of behaviourism, both L1 and L2 language acquisition were mainly seen as a process of the learner's imitation (Lado, 1957; Skinner, 1957). This is why the input any language learner was exposed to was of primary importance. L2 learners' output was viewed as a more or less faithful mirror of the language which NATIVE SPEAKERS of the TARGET LANGUAGE provided (Gass & Selinker, 2001: 259ff). Once language acquisition was increasingly regarded as a creative construction process (Dulay & Burt, 1974b), researchers became more interested in the internal mechanisms of the learner and in the developmental sequences that could be identified for linguistic structures (for L1 acquisition see Bloom, 1970; Brown, 1973; for L2 acquisition see Bailey et al., 1974; Dulay & Burt, 1973, 1974a, 1974b; for L2 negation see Wode, 1976; for L2 questions see Wode, 1981). The input the learners received was only of marginal interest, all the more so because the POVERTY OF THE STIMULUS was and is regarded as a characteristic feature of the input, leading to the logical problem of language acquisition (White, 1989). But input (also known as PLD = PRIMARY LINGUISTIC DATA) has been considered essential by generative approaches for some time (see Carroll, 2001; Schwartz, 1993; Schwartz & Gubala-Ryzak, 1992). Non-generative approaches from the 1970s on have also considered input (and social exchange) as crucial (e.g. Krashen's INPUT HYPOTHESIS, Swain's OUTPUTHYPOTHESIS, Long's INTERACTION HYPOTHESIS, CONNECTIONISM – for an overview see Mitchell & Myles, 2004).

The present study's background is a functional non-generative approach to L2 acquisition, that is, it is not assumed that linguistic knowledge is available from the outset. Rather, this knowledge is determined by general learning mechanisms 'operating on the rich data provided by human interaction' (Ellis, 1994: 369). In this study, learner input proves to play a two-fold role. First, it will be shown that both input frequency and saliency trigger the use of the progressive form by German learners of English. Second, however, the polysemous nature of the progressive in the input makes it difficult for the learners to subconsciously attribute a clear-cut function to the progressive form, leading to a rather complex developmental sequence which does not lead to L2 mastery at the end of a six-month stay.

The Progressive Form in English

The progressive form in English has a number of different functions which range from marking grammatical aspect to marking future tense to expressing stylistic nuances. In the following, two main functions of the progressive form in English are briefly discussed as they play a major role for the data these learners produce. The first concerns the progressive as a grammatical aspectual category, the second is the progressive's function as a marker for future tense.

The progressive as a marker of grammatical aspect

The prototypical and most frequent function of the progressive is to mark grammatical aspect, that is, give information about the internal structure of the action or event expressed. According to Quirk et al., the main semantic features of the progressive are:

imperfectivity: the action or event are not complete.

duration: actions and events are not punctual.

boundedness: the duration of states expressed in the progressive is limited. (Compare 'We are living in London' in contrast to 'We live in London'). (Quirk et al., 1985)

As a grammatical aspectual category, the progressive can be used across all tenses. In the past tense, for example, the progressive is often used when the background of an event (1) or an implicit reference point is given (2):

(1) I was reading when the doorbell rang.

(2) She was writing her first novel at the time.

In connection with the present perfect, the progressive can be used to make subtle semantic differences which, however, are not important for the present study as this combination is not featured in the learner data used for the analysis.

The progressive as a marker of future tense

There are two uses of the progressive with future reference. The first one regards the periphrastic CONSTRUCTION going to + V, which expresses 'future fulfilment of present intention' (Quirk et al., 1985:...