Aspect in the L2 and L3 Acquisition of Greek

  • Sviatlana Karpava
  • Kleanthes K. Grohmann
  • Konstantinos Fokianos
Part of the Second Language Learning and Teaching book series (SLLT)


This paper investigates different facets of the second language acquisition of Modern Greek by native speakers of Russian and Georgian, both adults and children, in the domain of aspectual marking in embedded clauses. The study investigates experimentally the interaction of lexical and grammatical aspect in those embedded sentential environments which are a locus of difference between Modern Greek and Russian: The former permits only perfective aspect of the finite complement verb in the context under consideration, while the latter allows either perfective or imperfective aspect of the infinitival complement verb. The results of the experimental study reveal that L2 learners can reach native-like attainment, though there is L1 interference at the initial stage of L2 acquisition, thus providing evidence in support of the Full Transfer/Full Access Hypothesis. The large number of participants and the different groups investigated further allow us to distinguish other variables relevant for L2 acquisition, such as age of onset, length of residence, and so on, which were gathered through a detailed language history questionnaire. The results are interpreted statistically for all relevant facets of the languages and participants involved, shedding some light on a number of intertwined issues involved in (early vs. late) L2/L3 acquisition.


Incorrect Answer Embed Clause Imperfective Aspect Universal Grammar Perfective Aspect 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Andersen, R. 1986. El desarrollo de la morfología verbal en el español como segundo idioma. In Adquisición del lenguaje—Aquisição da linguagem, ed. J. Meisel. Frankfurt: Vervuert. Google Scholar
  2. Andersen, R. 1991. Developmental sequences: the emergence of aspect marking in second language acquisition. In Crosscurrents in Second Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theories, eds. T. Huebner and C.A. Ferguson, 305–324. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar
  3. Borik, O. 2002. Aspect and reference time. PhD thesis, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
  4. Cenoz, J. and F. Genesee. eds. 1998. Beyond Bilingualism: Multilingualism and Multilingual Education. Clevedon, OH: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  5. Cenoz, J., B. Hufeisen and U. Jessner. 2001. Introduction. In Cross-Linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition: Psychological Perspectives, eds. J. Cenoz, B. Hufeisen, and U. Jessner, 1–7. Clevedon, OH: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  6. Chomsky, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Chondrogianni, V. (2008) The acquisition of the D-domain in child L2 Greek. In Child L2 Acquisition: A Generative Perspective, eds. B. Haznedar and R. Slabakova, 97–145. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  8. Cinque, G. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-linguistic Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Comrie, B. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Dowty, D. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67: 547–619.Google Scholar
  11. Filin, F. 1979. Russkij jazyk: Enciklopedija. Moscow: Sovetskaja enciklopedija.Google Scholar
  12. Giorgi, A. and F. Pianesi. 1997. Tense and Aspect: From Semantics to Morphosyntax. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Guasti, M. 2002. Language Acquisition: The Growth of Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. Harris, A. 1981. Georgian Syntax: A Study in Relational Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Hillery, P. 2006. The Georgian Language: An Outline Grammatical Summary. Online manuscript [].
  16. Hyltenstam, K. and N. Abrahamsson. 2003. Maturational constraints in SLA. In The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, eds. C. Doughty and M. Long, 539–588. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  17. Joseph, B. and J. Smirniotopoulos. 1993. The morphosyntax of the Modern Greek verb as morphology and not syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 24: 388–398.Google Scholar
  18. Karpava, S. and K.K. Grohmann. (forthcoming) Embedded aspect in L2 acquisition: Evidence from L1 Russian learners of Greek. Revista de Estudos Linguísticos/Linguistic Studies.Google Scholar
  19. Krifka, M. 1998. The origins of telicity. In S. Rothstein (ed.) Events and Grammar (pp. 197–235). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  20. Lardiere, D. 1998. Case and tense in the fossilized steady state. Second Language Research 14: 1–26.Google Scholar
  21. Lardiere, D. 2000. Mapping syntactic features to forms in second language acquisition. In Second Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory, ed. J. Archibald, 102–129. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  22. Li, P. and Y. Shirai. 2000. The Acquisition of Lexical and Grammatical Aspect. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  23. Li, P., Sepanski, S. and Zhao, X. 2006. Language history questionnaire: A web-based interface for bilingual research. Behavior Research Methods 38: 202–210. Google Scholar
  24. MacDonald, J. 2008. The Syntactic Nature of Inner Aspect: A Minimalist Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  25. Malagardi, I. 1993. Problems of Greek aspect morphology and the identification of projection for tense and aspect. In Themes in Greek Linguistics, eds. I. Philippaki-Warburton, K. Nicolaidis, and M. Sifianou, 161–169. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  26. Meisel, J. 2007. On autonomous syntactic development in multiple first language acquisition. In Proceedings of the 31 st Boston University Conference on Language Development, eds. H. Caunt-Nulton, S. Kulatilake, and I.-H. Woo, 26–45. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
  27. Meisel, J. 2008. Child second language acquisition or successive first language acquisition? In Current Trends in Child Second Language Acquisition, eds. B. Haznedar and E. Gavruseva, 55–80. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  28. Melikishvili, I. 2008. Georgian as an active ergative split language. Bulletin of the Georgian National Academy of Sciences 2: 138–147.Google Scholar
  29. Montrul, S. and R. Salaberry. 2003. The development of tense-aspect morphology in L2 Spanish: the state of the science. In Studies in Spanish Second Language Acquisition: State of the Science, eds. B. Lafford and R. Salaberry, 47–73. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Google Scholar
  30. Moser, A. 1993. The interaction of lexical and grammatical aspect in Modern Greek. In Themes in Greek Linguistics, eds. I. Philippaki-Warburton, K. Nicolaidis, and M. Sifianou, 137–145. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  31. Philippaki-Warburton, I. 1992. On mood and complementizers in Modern Greek. Reading University Working Papers in Linguistics 1: 5–41.Google Scholar
  32. Prevost, P. and L. White. 2000. Missing surface inflection or impairment in second language acquisition? Evidence from tense and agreement. Second Language Research 16: 103–134.Google Scholar
  33. Ramchand, G. 2008. Verb Meaning and the Lexicon: A First Phase Syntax. Cambridge: University Press. Cambridge.Google Scholar
  34. Roussou, A. 2009. Selecting complementizers. Lingua 119: 1811–1836.Google Scholar
  35. Schwartz, B.D. and R. Sprouse. 1996. L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research 12: 40–72.Google Scholar
  36. Schwartz, B.D. 2003. Child L2 acquisition: Paving the way. In Proceedings of the 27 th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, eds. B. Beachley, A. Brown, and F. Conlin, 26–50. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
  37. Schwartz, B.D. 2004. Why child L2 acquisition? In Proceedings of GALA 2003, ed. J. van Kampen, 47–66. Utrecht: LOT Publications.Google Scholar
  38. Sharwood-Smith, M.A. 1994. The unruly world of language. In Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages, ed. N.C. Ellis, 33–43. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  39. Slabakova, R. 2001. Telicity in the Second Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  40. Slabakova, R. 2005. What is so difficult about telicity marking in L2 Russian? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 8: 63–77.Google Scholar
  41. Smith, C. 1983. A theory of aspectual choice. Language 59: 497–501.Google Scholar
  42. Smith, C. 1991. The Parameter of Aspect. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  43. Smith, C. 1997. The Parameter of Aspect, 2nd edn. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  44. Sorace, A. 2005. Selective optionality in language development. In Syntax and Variation: Reconciling the Biological and the Social, eds. L. Cornips and K. Corrigan, 55–80. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  45. Tenny, C. 1994. Aspectual Roles and the SyntaxSemantics Interface. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  46. Unsworth, S. 2005. Child L1, child L2 and adult L2: Differences and similarities—A study on the acquisition of direct object scrambling in Dutch. PhD thesis, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
  47. van Hout, A. 2008. Acquisition of perfective and imperfective aspect in Dutch, Italian and Polish. Lingua 118: 1740–1765.Google Scholar
  48. Veloudis, I. and I. Philippaki-Warburton. 1983. Η υποτακτική στα Νέα Ελληνικά [The Subjunctive Mood in Modern Greek]. Studies in Greek Linguistics 1983, 151–169.Google Scholar
  49. Vendler, Z. 1967. Verbs and times. In Linguistics in Philosophy, ed. Z. Vendler, 97–121. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Verkuyl, H. 1972. On the Compositional Nature of the Aspects. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  51. Warburton, I. 1970. On the Verb in Modern Greek. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  52. White, L. 1989. Universal Grammar and Second Language Acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sviatlana Karpava
    • 1
  • Kleanthes K. Grohmann
    • 1
  • Konstantinos Fokianos
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of English StudiesUniversity of CyprusNicosiaCyprus
  2. 2.Department of Mathematics and StatisticsUniversity of CyprusNicosiaCyprus

Personalised recommendations