INTRODUCTION
Background to the study
Implicit knowledge of language, as defined by Han and Ellis (1998), refers to the natural understanding that learners acquire instinctively Unlike explicit knowledge, which can be broken down into analyzed rules and metalanguage, implicit second language (L2) knowledge manifests through spontaneous language use and is difficult to access independently of this behavior (Bialystok, 1990) Ellis (2009) describes implicit knowledge as intuitive and tacit, meaning learners often sense when a sentence is incorrect without being able to explain why Recognizing the importance of implicit knowledge in second language acquisition (SLA) research highlights that L2 learners develop both explicit and implicit knowledge during language learning.
Historically, second language (L2) acquisition research has examined whether the processes involved are analogous to first language (L1) learning, focusing on structural similarities and differences in learner utterances However, understanding the underlying cognitive processes is more crucial than surface structures, as these reveal how language is mentally acquired Chomsky’s Universal Grammar (UG) theory posits that humans possess an innate set of principles governing language, enabling children to generalize rules and acquire their mother tongue through interaction A key question in SLA is whether L2 learners engage the same cognitive mechanisms as L1 learners or have access to UG, making this a central focus of UG-based research in second language acquisition.
Selinker (1972) introduced the concept of interlanguage grammar, which is the unique linguistic system that L2 learners develop during the language learning process This interlanguage grammar is distinct from both the learners' native language and the target language, reflecting their ongoing language development Selinker also argued that L2 learners can never fully attain native-like grammatical competence A key focus of SLA research is to determine whether interlanguage grammar significantly differs from native speakers' grammar or a standard grammatical form.
In Vietnam, most EFL teachers agree that explicit grammar instruction with clear explanations benefits students the most, according to Barnard (2009) Over two-thirds of teachers disagree that learners can acquire grammar effectively through exposure to authentic materials or natural language use These findings indicate that the dominant approach to English grammar teaching in Vietnam relies on explicit instruction, which may hinder learners' ability to develop implicit knowledge Therefore, there is a significant need to explore methods that foster implicit understanding of English among Vietnamese L2 learners.
There is a limited number of studies in Vietnam that examine L2 learners' language acquisition from the Universal Grammar (UG) perspective This study aims to address this research gap by exploring the extent to which Vietnamese L2 learners develop implicit knowledge of linguistic features during their second language acquisition process By investigating this aspect, the research contributes valuable insights into SLA among L2 learners in Vietnam, enhancing understanding of how implicit grammatical understanding influences language learning outcomes.
Aims of the study
This study investigates the extent of implicit English knowledge among L2 learners at an English faculty, referred to as EF It specifically examines whether students can recognize ungrammatical wh-questions in English without explicit instruction, focusing on constraints on wh-movement—an area never directly taught to English majors The research aims to determine if students demonstrate subconscious understanding of these linguistic rules through written exercises and real-life interactions, providing insights into the depth of their implicit language acquisition.
This study examines the differences between L2 learners' interlanguage grammar and standard English grammar, highlighting that they are not identical despite learners studying the same language Understanding these discrepancies is crucial for gaining deeper insights into second language acquisition, as analyzing these variations helps educators and researchers improve teaching methods and support for L2 learners.
This research explores whether language proficiency influences the development of implicit knowledge of wh-movement constraints in English among L2 learners at the elementary level Identifying this relationship enables EFL teachers to optimize teaching strategies, enhancing students’ ability to acquire English both implicitly and explicitly Understanding the connection between proficiency and implicit knowledge is crucial for designing effective language instruction tailored to learners' developmental stages.
This study explores pedagogical implications for developing L2 learners' implicit language knowledge, particularly in Vietnam where L2 grammar is predominantly taught explicitly While acknowledging the importance of explicit instruction, the research highlights the potential benefits of incorporating implicit teaching methods It suggests that EFL teachers can adopt diverse instructional patterns, including both explicit and implicit approaches, to enhance L2 grammar acquisition This innovative perspective aims to broaden teaching strategies and optimize language learning outcomes for Vietnamese learners.
Research questions
- Research question 1: To what extent have L2 learners at the EF acquired the implicit knowledge of constraints on wh-movement in English?
- Research question 2: What are the differences between L2 learners’ interlanguage grammar and native speakers’ grammar?
- Research question 3: Is there a relationship between the acquisition of the implicit knowledge of constraints on wh-movement in English among L2 learners at the EF and their language proficiency?
Significance of the study
This study aims to introduce core theories of Universal Grammar (UG), which posits that innate, universal language properties govern language acquisition and remain hidden in the learner's mind Without these properties, individuals cannot identify language rules or fully acquire a language The research will assess whether L2 learners at EF possess abstract representations similar to standard English grammar by examining their perceptions of grammaticality Findings will support the idea that students can unconsciously synthesize grammatical rules through exposure, suggesting that English teachers should focus on implicit instruction rather than spoon-feeding grammatical rules Ultimately, the study provides evidence to encourage teachers to emphasize implicit grammar teaching at appropriate levels, aligning with prior research such as Barnard (2009).
Scope of the study
The study focuses on students’ implicit knowledge of constraints on wh- movement in English only, other aspects of grammar are not included To be specific, the study investigated 5 constraints:
1/ Complex Noun Phrase Constraint 2/ Wh-island Constraint
3/ Sentential Subject Constraint 4/ Adverbial Island Constraint 5/ That-trace effect
This study explored the role of language proficiency in shaping students' implicit understanding of constraints on wh-movement in English Participants included EF students across all academic years, from freshmen to seniors, with varying levels of English proficiency and foundational language knowledge The research highlights how different levels of language ability may influence learners' grasp of complex syntactic structures in English, providing valuable insights for language instruction and curriculum design.
Outline of the thesis
The thesis comprises 5 main chapters:
The first chapter, Introduction, provides background information on the study and purposes for conducting the research It also offers the significance and scope of the study
The Literature Review chapter offers a comprehensive overview of the theoretical framework underpinning this study, focusing on key concepts in Second Language Acquisition and Universal Grammar It discusses various linguistic theories related to how languages are learned and processed, providing foundational insights into the subject Additionally, the chapter examines previous research on constraints affecting wh-movement in English, highlighting important findings and gaps in the existing literature This review establishes the theoretical and empirical basis for analyzing language acquisition phenomena and guides the direction of the current study.
The Methodology chapter outlines the research methods used to conduct the study, including detailed explanations of the research questions, research design, and data collection and analysis procedures to ensure clarity and rigor.
The Results and Discussion chapter provides a comprehensive analysis of the collected data and highlights the major findings of the study It addresses the three key research questions, offering valuable insights into the research topic These findings lay the groundwork for discussing pedagogical implications, which are explored in the subsequent chapter.
The conclusion summarizes key research findings on effective English grammar instruction for L2 learners It highlights practical implications for EFL teachers, emphasizing strategies to motivate learners for both implicit and explicit learning of grammar The article underscores the importance of fostering intrinsic motivation to enhance implicit learning, alongside traditional explicit teaching methods, to improve overall language acquisition among L2 students.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Implicit knowledge
Implicit knowledge is evident in daily life, such as recognizing an out-of-tune note or detecting subtle taste differences without being able to explain them Fluent speakers can identify grammatical irregularities unconsciously, demonstrating how implicit knowledge influences cognition without awareness This knowledge is acquired naturally and ongoing, impacting our processing even without conscious realization (Cleeremans, Destrebecqz, & Boyer, 1998) In contrast, explicit knowledge involves conscious awareness and understanding of what we know and can verbalize (Dienes & Perner, 1999).
In addition, Ellis (2009, p.11-14) proposes certain features of implicit knowledge:
Implicit knowledge is intuitive and tacit, allowing learners to sense when a sentence is ungrammatical without explicitly knowing why For example, when encountering a sentence like "I an apple eat," learners instinctively recognize its incorrectness in standard English but often cannot articulate the specific grammatical errors This subconscious understanding highlights the role of implicit knowledge in language acquisition.
(2) Implicit knowledge is automatically processed: Implicit knowledge can be easily and rapidly accessed through unintentional language use
(3) Implicit knowledge is only evident in learners’ verbal behavior:
Implicit knowledge is characterized by its presence in the form of statistically weighted connections between memory nodes, making it difficult to verbalize This key feature clearly distinguishes implicit knowledge from explicit knowledge, which can be easily articulated and conveyed through language Understanding this distinction is essential for fields such as cognitive science and artificial intelligence, where recognizing the nature of different types of knowledge impacts the development of learning models and data interpretation.
While implicit knowledge is learnable, there are significant limits to its acquisition in second language learning Learners often face constraints that prevent them from fully mastering an L2 implicitly, making native-like proficiency challenging to attain Additionally, age can negatively impact the ability to acquire implicit knowledge, with older learners experiencing greater difficulties in developing fluency and accuracy in the target language (Birdsong, 2006).
The debate over whether implicit and explicit language systems are separate remains ongoing Krashen (1981) argues that these systems are entirely distinct, while Paradis (2004) suggests they are located in different parts of the brain However, it is widely accepted that implicit and explicit knowledge interact during second language (L2) learning Bialystok (1982) emphasizes that language use often involves relying on both systems to communicate effectively Furthermore, L2 learners are likely to develop both types of knowledge for the same linguistic features, allowing them to consult their implicit knowledge in language processing alongside explicit understanding.
Among L2 learners, both implicit and explicit knowledge play crucial roles in language processing, with implicit knowledge contributing alongside explicit knowledge This understanding forms the basis for Research Question 1, which investigates the extent of L2 learners' acquisition of implicit knowledge regarding constraints on wh-movement in English.
Implicit learning
Implicit learning was first used by Arthur Reber (1967, p.317) to describe “a stimulus environment without intending to and without becoming aware of the knowledge they have acquired”
Awareness is the most crucial factor to identify implicit learning Thus,
‘Awareness’ in language learning can be categorized into two types: noticing, which involves conscious attention to surface elements, and metalinguistic awareness, which pertains to understanding abstract linguistic rules (Schmidt, 2001) Schmidt contends that complete implicit learning is unlikely because noticing—a form of awareness—is necessary for learning to occur Therefore, implicit learning can be redefined as learning without metalinguistic awareness, emphasizing that learners can acquire language skills without conscious knowledge of rules Conversely, Williams (2005) supports the idea that learning without the level of awareness involved in noticing is possible, highlighting an ongoing debate within SLA research about the role of awareness in language acquisition.
Implicit learning, as defined by Ellis (2009), involves no central attentional resources and occurs unconsciously, making verbalization challenging Ellis (2008) suggested that generalizations originate from conspiracies of memorized utterances working together in productive schematic linguistic productions This type of learning results in subsymbolic knowledge that reflects statistical sensitivity to the structure of the learned material In EFL classrooms, teachers facilitate both explicit and implicit language acquisition, allowing L2 learners to develop English skills through conscious instruction and subconscious absorption.
L2 learners have the ability to acquire language skills through both explicit and implicit learning processes They can unconsciously apply grammatical rules gained through implicit learning, enhancing their overall language proficiency This dual capability highlights the importance of supporting both explicit instruction and immersive learning environments in language education.
Instruction in EFL classrooms
Ellis (2005) defines instruction as the process of supporting interlanguage development through both direct and indirect intervention, where direct instruction involves a structured syllabus specifying learning outcomes, and indirect instruction offers opportunities for communicative practice through task-based activities However, explicit and implicit instruction are not exactly equivalent to direct and indirect methods; according to Ellis (2009), explicit instruction involves developing learners' metalinguistic awareness of target structures, while implicit instruction encourages learners to infer rules subconsciously without explicit awareness.
Explicit instruction, as described by Housen and Pierrard (2006), involves direct focus on the target form, with frequent use of metalinguistic terminology, and intentional practice, often interrupting communication for explanation In contrast, implicit instruction requires no direct attention to the target form, emphasizing spontaneous, context-based presentation without metalanguage, and encouraging learners to use the form freely.
Ellis (2009) suggests that explicit instruction not only facilitates explicit learning but also promotes implicit learning, while implicit instruction can lead to both types of learning For example, when teachers explicitly explain English article rules, students may simultaneously acquire other lexical items or grammatical features implicitly and incidentally This highlights the interconnected nature of explicit and implicit learning processes in language acquisition.
Research by Norris and Ortega (2000) indicates that explicit instruction is generally more effective than implicit instruction, as highlighted in their meta-analysis Conversely, Krashen (1994) supports the No Interface Hypothesis, suggesting that simple grammatical rules are best taught explicitly, while complex rules are more effectively learned implicitly Tammenga-Helmantel et al (2014) also assert that complex language structures should be acquired implicitly Overall, the relationship between instructional approach and structural complexity remains inconclusive, but in classroom settings with limited interaction, combining explicit instruction with implicit methods is essential for maximizing language acquisition in EFL learners.
Interlanguage grammar
The concept of interlanguage grammar (IL) was proposed by Larry Selinker in
Interlanguage (IL), as defined by Selinker (1972), is the autonomous, patterned linguistic system that L2 learners develop when producing meaningful communication across phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics Unlike random errors or the native language (L1), IL functions as a distinct transitional system that operates independently of the learner’s first language It is typically unconscious, meaning learners are unaware of its rules and cannot verbalize them, highlighting IL as implicit knowledge within the learning process Despite being able to describe consciously learned classroom rules, L2 learners do not necessarily apply these rules in real communication Moreover, Selinker emphasizes that IL tends to fossilize, ceasing to evolve before reaching full native-like proficiency, which prevents learners from achieving full mastery comparable to native speakers.
Selinker highlights five key cognitive processes that influence the development of interlanguage: native language transfer, overgeneralization of target language rules, transfer of training, communication strategies, and learning strategies Understanding these processes is essential for language learners and educators to address common interlanguage errors and facilitate more effective language acquisition Native language transfer involves applying familiar linguistic patterns from one's first language, while overgeneralization occurs when learners extend rules beyond appropriate contexts Transfer of training refers to habits formed through previous language instruction, and communication strategies help learners navigate real-time interactions Lastly, learning strategies encompass the approaches learners use to acquire and internalize new language structures, all contributing to the dynamic evolution of interlanguage.
- Native language transfer involves in the process of shaping interlanguage rules Selinker (1972, 1992) and Weinreich (1968, p.7) suggests that the cognitive process underlying transfer is called interlingual identifications:
L2 learners often perceive units like the Dutch “cái bàn” and the Turkish “a table” as equivalent to their target language counterparts, leading to similar semantic interpretations across NL, IL, and TL This cross-linguistic perception influences how learners develop meaning in intercultural language learning, but it can also result in errors in the target language, especially when learners transfer structures or meanings from their interlanguage Understanding these perceptions is crucial for effective language instruction and error correction.
Vietnamese learners of English often produce sentences like “He eat an apple,” omitting the '-s' at the end of the verb “eat,” due to the influence of their native language In Vietnamese, verbs do not change form based on the subject, which leads to transfer errors when speaking English This linguistic transfer is a common challenge for Vietnamese speakers learning English grammar rules Understanding transfer errors can help educators develop targeted teaching strategies to improve language accuracy.
Overgeneralization of target language (TL) rules is a common cognitive process, especially among children, often referred to as a developmental stage in language learning L2 learners tend to apply learned rules broadly, such as overusing the past tense marker "-ed" in words like *drinked*, *goed*, and *hitted*, indicating they have grasped the general rule but have yet to learn the exceptions This overgeneralization error demonstrates that learners are progressing in their understanding but still need to master the irregular forms and exceptions to achieve fluency Recognizing this pattern is essential for effective language instruction and learning strategies.
Transfer of training occurs when learners apply rules learned from instructors or textbooks, but success is not always guaranteed For instance, if a teacher explains that the past perfect tense is like “past past,” L2 learners might mistakenly use it for distant past events instead of the correct usage to describe actions before another past event Therefore, EFL teachers should carefully design their lesson plans and explanations to ensure accurate understanding and effective language transfer.
Effective communication strategies are essential for L2 learners who struggle to convey meaning due to incomplete language systems compared to native speakers These strategies focus on prioritizing understanding over perfect linguistic form, enabling learners to communicate their ideas despite grammatical inaccuracies The primary goal is mutual understanding, which may sometimes extend the duration of interlanguage development Implementing these communication tactics helps L2 learners overcome language barriers and facilitates more effective language acquisition.
L2 learning strategies involve learners’ conscious efforts to master the target language (TL), but success is not always guaranteed When learners become confused during the learning process, they may develop incorrect linguistic rules that can persist in their interlanguage (IL) As a result, L2 learners might create an interlanguage grammar that is neither aligned with their first language (L1) nor fully accurate in the target language (L2), highlighting the complexities of language acquisition (Schwartz and Sprouse, 1994).
Since its introduction in 1972, the interlanguage hypothesis has significantly influenced the field of second language acquisition (SLA) and has evolved over time (Han & Tarone, 2014) This theory suggests that interlanguage is shaped by both innate universal grammar (UG) and individual cognitive processes Selinker (1972) initially argued that interlanguage is not a natural language, positing that natural languages are produced by UG, whereas interlanguages, which often fossilize and exhibit native language transfer, are created through different cognitive mechanisms Conversely, Adjemian (1976) proposed that interlanguages are indeed natural languages, despite their differences from other natural languages, highlighting ongoing debates about the nature of interlanguage within SLA research.
IL rule systems are permeable to invasion from NL and TL rules, indicating that ILs are UG-constrained like natural languages and are expected to follow language universals Unlike natural languages, ILs tend to fossilize once parameters are set for the L1, requiring L2 learners to acquire different parameter settings This ongoing debate highlights the complexity of IL acquisition and its relation to universal grammar principles (White, 1990).
Interlanguage grammar has been extensively studied and is widely believed to be intrinsically connected to Universal Grammar (UG) This relationship underscores the importance of UG in understanding language acquisition processes The focus now shifts to exploring how UG influences language development and the mechanisms behind language acquisition.
Universal Grammar (UG) and Language acquisition
According to White (2003), a key goal for L1 learners is to develop a linguistic system that effectively accounts for the input they receive This enables children to construct accurate linguistic representations, which are essential for both understanding and reproducing language Achieving this proficiency allows for successful language comprehension and production, forming the foundation for effective communication.
Universal Grammar (UG) functions as a computational system that determines which linguistic structures are possible or impossible, based on invariable principles that hold true across all languages It also incorporates a parametric system that explains language diversity, where features are structured in a binary “switch” format that can vary between two states For example, the “Null Subject” parameter is set to [+null subject] in Spanish, allowing the subject to be omitted without losing grammaticality, whereas English is set to [-null subject], requiring explicitly stated subjects.
In order to set the parameters, L1 learners need exposure to the target language
At the initial stage (S0), children are equipped with innate language knowledge provided by Universal Grammar (UG) As they are exposed to primary linguistic input (L1), they gradually absorb the language through environmental exposure, building a comprehensive, language-specific lexicon Over time, their grammar (G) undergoes multiple revisions before reaching a stable, steady state of native language mastery (Ss).
Figure 2.1 Model for L1 acquisition Source: White (2003, p.3)
Interlanguage grammar refers to the grammatical system used by non-native speakers or L2 learners This concept was introduced by researchers such as Adjémian (1976), Corder (1967), Nemser (1971), and Selinker (1972) These scholars proposed that errors made by L2 learners are not random but follow specific, rule-governed patterns, reflecting their developing interlanguage system.
White (2003) highlights a key challenge in L2 acquisition: learners often acquire complex and subtle language properties that cannot be solely derived from their input, mirroring the paradox seen in L1 acquisition This supports Plato’s paradox, suggesting that language learning involves factors beyond mere exposure, which has significant implications for understanding second language acquisition and its underlying cognitive processes.
“There is knowledge that we do not know that we know” Therefore, this strongly indicates that interlanguage grammars are constrained by the principles of UG
L1 input grammars might be drawn from L1 grammar, not UG Then, White (2003) suggests that in order to prove UG constrained interlanguage grammars, two conditions must be satisfied:
1/ The phenomenon investigated must be underdetermined by the L2 input, which means the feature cannot be acquired through L2 input
2/ The phenomenon cannot be derived from L1 grammar
This study focuses on "Constraints on wh-movement in English" to examine L2 Vietnamese learners' understanding of this area EF English students have not received explicit instruction on these constraints during their undergraduate studies, making them an ideal population for this investigation Additionally, as Vietnamese is a wh-in-situ language where wh-movement is not a prominent grammatical feature, learners' challenges in grasping English wh-movement constraints highlight cross-linguistic transfer issues.
Universal Grammar (UG) constrains early L1 acquisition, raising questions about whether UG evolves into a stable grammar or remains distinct from L1 grammar Bley-Vroman (1990) contends that UG cannot persist after initial L1 acquisition, suggesting that L2 development begins strictly from the mother tongue grammar However, Epstein et al (1996) and Flynn and Martohardjono (1994) argue that bilingualism challenges this view by demonstrating that bilingual children's acquiring systems often require different parametric settings, indicating that UG remains constant and distinct from L1.
The key issue in second language (L2) acquisition is whether adult learners have access to Universal Grammar (UG) and if first language (L1) grammar influences this process Several theories have been proposed to address this, with linguists developing three main hypotheses: the Full Access Hypothesis, which suggests complete access to UG for adult learners; the Partial Access Hypothesis, indicating limited access; and other models exploring the extent of L1 transfer in L2 development.
Access Hypothesis, and No Access Hypothesis
Schwartz and Sprouse (1996) propose the Full Transfer Full Access
Hypothesis In this theory, L2 learners start out completely with L1 grammar (Full Transfer), however, L1 grammar cannot accommodate the learning process of L2
UG serves as the final resort for learners, providing full access to core principles of language acquisition It continuously guides the development of new parametric settings, functional categories, and linguistic features via L2 input, especially during the critical period before interlanguage grammar (IL) reaches its stable state This process highlights the essential role of Universal Grammar in shaping second language acquisition and grammatical development.
Figure 2.2 Model for Full Transfer Full Access Hypothesis Source: White (2003, p.61)
The Full Transfer Full Access Hypothesis has faced criticism, particularly regarding its assumptions about L1 influence in L2 acquisition Research by Yuan (2001) indicates that at early stages, L2 learners with different L1s, such as French and English speakers learning Chinese, display similar behaviors—specifically in verb placement—regardless of their native language This suggests that L1 grammar may not serve as the primary foundation in the initial stages of L2 acquisition, challenging the traditional view of transfer.
Vainikka and Young-Scholten (1996a, b) propose another theory called
The Minimal Trees Hypothesis suggests that the initial interlanguage state is partially shaped by L1 grammar, primarily limited to lexical categories and inaccessible to functional features Exposure to L2 input allows learners to access Universal Grammar (UG), enabling them to modify and withdraw specific functional features of the L2 This process highlights the role of innate linguistic principles in the development of interlanguage, emphasizing how learners progressively refine their grammatical system through exposure and UG access.
The L2 input hypothesis suggests that learners have full access to their L1 grammar and Universal Grammar (UG) during the early stages of interlanguage It questions why, despite having this foundational linguistic knowledge, learners might struggle with acquiring a second language Since the L1 grammar and UG are crucial for language development, a lack of access to either at this stage is not logically explainable Understanding the influence of well-formed L1 structures and innate grammatical principles helps clarify the pathways of L2 acquisition and the role of input in shaping interlanguage.
The Valueless Features Hypothesis by Eubank (1996) suggests that both lexical and functional features of L1 are prominent during the early stages of interlanguage development, but their strength does not transfer, rendering these features valueless According to this theory, L2 feature strength is acquired through exposure to the target language However, this approach has faced criticism due to the ambiguity surrounding whether these features are truly valueless or inert, raising questions about their role in language learning processes.
Most theories agree that L2 learners initially rely on their L1 grammar and access Universal Grammar (UG) later in the learning process However, some perspectives, such as Platzack’s (1996) Initial Hypothesis of Syntax, propose that L2 acquisition also begins directly with UG, with all functional categories defaulting to a weak setting—separate from L1 This model suggests L2 learners must determine which features to activate strongly during learning Nonetheless, this approach struggles to account for observed transfer effects from L1 to interlanguage grammar, raising questions about whether L2 learners truly start with weak features.
The Full Access Hypothesis, proposed by Epstein et al (1998), Flynn and Martohardjono (1994), and Flynn (1996), suggests that second language (L2) learners have full access to Universal Grammar (UG) from the initial stage of language acquisition This theory implies that L2 learners can utilize innate grammatical knowledge from the beginning, which may diminish the influence of their first language (L1) grammar and complicate predictions about early L2 grammatical development.
Studies into the implicit knowledge of constraints on wh-movement in English
Bley-Vroman (1988) found that adult L2 learners, such as Korean speakers proficient in English, can judge wh-movement acceptability similarly to native speakers, suggesting that Universal Grammar (UG) remains accessible, though in a weakened form The study indicates that non-native responses may reflect problem-solving processes rather than UG constraints, challenging the view that UG is entirely inaccessible to adults Conversely, Çakir (2014) demonstrated that Turkish L2 learners in naturalistic environments can acquire complex features like Island Constraints in English, supporting the Full Transfer Full Access hypothesis These findings suggest that exposure to authentic language input facilitates the acquisition of innate grammatical features, even when L1 lacks certain syntactic properties, emphasizing the importance of immersive environments in adult language learning.
Esfahani (2015) investigated whether adult L2 learners still have access to Universal Grammar (UG) by testing Persian EFL learners’ understanding of wh-movement in English The study found a positive correlation between English proficiency and test performance, with advanced learners demonstrating better understanding The research concluded that UG influences SLA, but its role is less significant than in first language acquisition It also suggested that, although UG helps develop self-awareness in L2 learners, teachers should actively guide students rather than leaving them to learn independently Higher English proficiency increases the likelihood of mastering English wh-movement rules, but further research is needed to confirm these findings.
Recent studies highlight the crucial role of Universal Grammar (UG) in second language acquisition (SLA), demonstrating that L2 learners possess subconscious knowledge beyond their conscious awareness This suggests that language acquisition occurs beneath the surface, with learners at different proficiency levels exhibiting varying performance in acquiring new language skills Understanding the influence of UG can enhance teaching strategies and support more effective language learning.
This study addresses a significant research gap in Vietnam by exploring the implicit knowledge of constraints on wh-movement in English among L2 learners To date, no research has examined how Vietnamese learners acquire and process these constraints, making this investigation crucial for understanding the challenges they face By analyzing learners' language use and cognition, the study aims to contribute valuable insights into second language acquisition in an Vietnamese context This research will enhance linguistic understanding and inform more effective teaching strategies for English as a second language in Vietnam.
Conceptual framework of the study
The conceptual framework of the study is presented in Figure 2.3 with a view to providing visual information concerning the process of acquiring implicit
The Full Transfer Full Access Hypothesis, proposed by Schwartz and Sprouse (1996) and adapted from White (2003, p.61), suggests that L2 learners initially start with L1 grammar, referred to as full transfer (S0 = L1) As their L1 grammar cannot fully accommodate the L2 learning process, learners turn to Universal Grammar (UG) for guidance UG continuously shapes new parametric settings, functional categories, and features based on L2 input Additionally, the concept of interlanguage grammar, introduced by Selinker (1972), describes how learners' interlanguage develops through various stages (IL G1, IL G2) before reaching a stable state (IL Ss).
The study employs dotted arrows to illustrate key research questions, focusing on the extent to which L2 learners have acquired implicit knowledge of constraints on wh-movement in English Additionally, it investigates whether language proficiency influences the process of second language acquisition.
The Universal Grammar (UG) serves as the foundational source containing principles that govern the construction of wh-questions in English It functions as a linguistic filter, determining whether a specific structure is grammatical or ungrammatical (Chomsky, 1980/1981) This study examines five key constraints derived from UG that influence the formation of wh-questions in English.
Interlanguage Grammar (IL) refers to the evolving grammar of L2 learners, which is often deviant from native speaker norms and changes over time before stabilizing (Schwartz and Sprouse, 1996) Since L2 learners initially apply their L1 grammar, transfer effects significantly influence the acquisition process (Selinker, 1972), leading to the development of "wild" grammatical points that are neither characteristic of L1 nor L2 (Schwartz and Sprouse, 1994).
Lastly, the study investigates whether there is any link between L2 learners’ English proficiency and their implicit knowledge of constraints on wh-movement in English as confirmed in Esfahani’s (2015)
Figure 2.3 The conceptual framework of the study (Adapted from the Model for Full Transfer Full Access Hypothesis - White (2003, p.61))
L2 learners’ implicit knowledge of constraints on wh- movement in English
1/ Complex Noun Phrase Constraint 2/ Wh-island Constraint
3/ Sentential Subject Constraint 4/ Adverbial Island Constraint 5/ That-trace effect
METHODOLOGY
Research design
This study employs a quantitative case study approach to explore constraints on wh-movement in English among L2 learners According to Shareia (2016), a case study is an empirical inquiry into a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, making it highly contextualized Specifically, this research is an intrinsic case study, focusing on understanding the implicit knowledge of English-majored L2 learners at a Vietnamese university faculty The study's context is clearly defined, concentrating solely on this group of learners to obtain in-depth insights into their language processing.
Also, the study belongs to quantitative research According to Mackey & Gass
(2015), there are various research designs that fall into the category of quantitative research The current study utilizes a mixed approach of a one-shot design and a correlational design
A one-shot design is typically not considered part of a true experimental paradigm because it lacks a treatment component (Mackey & Gass, 2015, p.156) This research approach is commonly employed in UG studies to assess learners' knowledge at a specific point in time without pretest or posttest measures, focusing instead on questions like what learners know or how they interpret sentences in the L2 For example, White (1985) used a one-shot design to characterize L2 learners’ current understanding and behavior In our current study, the first and second research questions aim to evaluate L2 learners’ understanding of constraints on wh-movement in English, making a one-shot design an appropriate methodology for addressing these objectives.
This study aims to investigate whether language proficiency influences second-language (L2) learners’ acquisition of constraints on wh-movement in English A correlational research design is employed to examine the relationship between language proficiency and understanding of wh-movement rules, as this approach effectively identifies how variables are related and enables predictions about their interactions (Mackey & Gass, 2015, p 145).
Context of the study
The research was conducted at the English Faculty (EF) in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, one of the leading tertiary institutions for English language education in southern Vietnam Admission to the EF requires students to pass a highly competitive entrance exam, ensuring a high standard of entry The EF's environment actively promotes communication in English and maximizes students' exposure to the language, fostering strong language skills As a result, L2 learners at the EF demonstrate advanced proficiency in English, particularly in grammar.
For the EF’s students, besides all the foundational language skills namely listening, speaking, reading and writing, they are required to study three intensive courses of grammar, including:
The course syllabi of the three grammar courses are attached in Appendix 6
In English language learning, students are expected to progress from B2 to C1 level grammar within the first two years However, not all students achieve these targeted proficiency levels Notably, course syllabi often do not include instructions on the constraints of wh-movement in English Consequently, L2 learners at the EF program are typically not explicitly taught the rules governing these grammatical constraints, which may impact their overall language development.
Concerning beliefs and practices of the EFL teachers of the EF, according to
According to Ta (2020), grammar instruction remains a vital component of the EFL classroom, essential for developing productive skills such as writing and speaking Teachers have shifted from traditional form-focused teaching to more communication-based activities to foster practical language use In Vietnam, EF teachers favor implicit instruction over explicit methods, contrasting with conventional grammar teaching practices Teacher methodologies significantly influence L2 learners' progress in both language learning and acquisition Consequently, learners benefit from a motivating environment that enhances their English skills, particularly in mastering grammar.
Sampling
The study involved 103 participants, with approximately 75% female and 25% male Participants included students from all four academic years: freshmen (30.09%), sophomores (20.39%), juniors (28.16%), and seniors (21.36%) According to the English Proficiency Test results, the majority of EF students were at the B2 level (around 60%), followed by the C1 level (approximately 27%), and a smaller proportion at the B1 level (nearly 13%).
Table 3.1 Summary of the participants’ demographic characteristics
(Based on the results of the English Proficiency Test)
In this study, all participants were full-time students at EF, ensuring the sample represented a diverse range of academic years A random stratified sampling method was employed, which involves dividing the student population into homogeneous groups based on characteristics such as academic year, and then randomly selecting participants from each group (Cohen et al., 2017) The process was conducted in two stages: first, students were categorized into four strata—freshmen, sophomores, juniors, and seniors—and second, the researcher randomly sampled within each group to ensure balanced representation across all academic levels.
Research instruments
To address Research Question 3, all participants were required to assess their English proficiency through an online test, ensuring language skills were a prerequisite for the study They completed the proficiency test at https://dialangweb.lancaster.ac.uk/, which is an online diagnostic system funded and operated by Lancaster University DIALANG enables students to self-assess and benchmark their language proficiency levels efficiently.
14 European languages; competences tested include reading, writing, listening, grammar and vocabulary, while speaking is excluded due to technical issues
In this study, participants completed an online grammar test, focusing on assessing their current language proficiency The test results were automatically converted into the CEFR levels (A1 to C2), ensuring standardized measurement Participants submitted screenshot evidence of their CEFR scores online, providing reliable data on learners’ language skills This online testing method offers convenience for both students and researchers, facilitating efficient and accessible language assessment.
To collect data for the study, one questionnaire was utilized for the participants (See Appendix 1, p.93) The questionnaire had 2 sections:
+ Section 2: An acceptability judgment test
Section 2 was designed as an acceptability judgment test According to Mackey and Gass (2015, p.49), in an acceptability judgment test, L2 learners are asked whether a particular sentence is acceptable in the L2 This is a kind of forced elicitation because it may require a considerable amount of time for participants to encounter a certain structure in real life The purpose is to understand what someone includes or excludes in their grammar
For example: She walks to school every day
Accepting this sentence indicates that L2 learners possess knowledge of third-person singular rules in English Acceptability judgment tests are commonly used in UG-based second language research to assess the extent to which L2 learners share the same abstract linguistic representations as native speakers.
In second language research, questionnaires are among the most commonly used tools for data collection due to their numerous advantages They enable researchers to gather standardized and open-ended responses from large populations efficiently Additionally, questionnaires are cost-effective, reliable, valid, and allow for quick data collection across diverse application fields, making them essential instruments in linguistic studies (Cohen & Morrison, 2017).
The questionnaire employed in the current study was designed based on previous studies conducted by researchers in the field such as White (1985), Bley- Vroman (1988) and Esfahani (2015)
Table 3.2 Distribution of items in the questionnaire
Main themes Sub-sections Item no
Main themes Sub-sections Item no
Acceptability judgment test on constraints on wh- movement in English
Complex Noun Phrase Constraint: (4 items) + Sentential Complements (2 items)
• Modifier extraction + Relative Clauses (2 items)
Wh-island constraint: (3 items) + Subject extraction (1 item) + Object extraction (1 item) + Modifier extraction (1 item)
Sentential Subjects – Complement extraction (1 item)
Adverbial Islands– Complement extraction (1 item) 2.9 That-trace effect: (6 items)
+ Subject extraction with “that” (1 item) + Subject extraction without “that” (1 item) + Object extraction with “that” (1 item) + Object extraction without “that” (1 item)
Main themes Sub-sections Item no
+ Modifier extraction with “that” (1 item) + Modifier extraction without “that” (1 item)
The participant demographics included gender, year of study, and English proficiency levels, which were assessed using the English Proficiency Test available at https://dialangweb.lancaster.ac.uk/.
The second section comprised 18 items, including 15 tested structures and 3 distractors, designed as an acceptability judgment test to evaluate participants' grammaticality judgments of various English structures To ensure unbiased results, the items were randomized using Google Forms, preventing participants from anticipating or recognizing the specific structures being assessed.
Each item uses a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5:
A Likert scale is a commonly used psychometric tool in questionnaires to measure respondents' attitudes and opinions In this study, an odd-numbered Likert scale was employed to allow participants the option of a neutral response, which helps reduce bias toward extreme answers Each item on the scale offers five response options, with the middle option (3) designated as the neutral choice This approach enhances the accuracy of capturing respondents’ true feelings and opinions.
Besides, for each item, the participants were asked whether they could explain why they thought the item was acceptable or unacceptable There were two options for this question:
+ Option 2: No, it was just my guess or based on my instinct
Understanding whether L2 learners' knowledge of constraints on wh-movement in English is implicit or explicit is crucial If learners are unable to verbalize their explanations, it suggests that their understanding is implicit, highlighting the subconscious nature of their syntactic knowledge This insight has significant implications for language acquisition theories and teaching strategies, emphasizing the importance of assessing both implicit and explicit knowledge in L2 learning.
A pilot study was conducted two months prior to the official questionnaire to identify potential issues and ensure the effectiveness of the research process Involving 14 EF students, the pilot aimed to detect possible problems, anticipate difficulties, and implement suitable solutions to enhance the study's accuracy Additionally, this preliminary phase allowed for testing the questionnaire's validity and reliability, enabling timely revisions to improve overall quality before the official data collection.
To conduct the pilot study, the researcher contacted 14 students at EF and provided them with a Google Form link, along with detailed step-by-step instructions to complete the questionnaire No explicit explanations about the constraints on wh-movement in English were given, as the study aimed to assess participants' implicit knowledge After completing the questionnaire, participants were asked to provide feedback and suggestions regarding the instructions, wording, and overall structure to help improve the quality of the study.
To assess the reliability of the questionnaire, participant responses were analyzed using Minitab 19 to calculate Cronbach’s Alpha, a measure of internal consistency that ranges from 0 to 1 (with occasional negative values) and indicates inter-item correlation (Cohen et al., 2007) While some researchers consider a Cronbach’s Alpha between 0.6 and 0.69 acceptable, others recommend a minimum value of 0.7 for most research applications.
The study assessed the internal consistency of the questionnaire items by calculating Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient, which resulted in a score of 0.746—exceeding the acceptable threshold of 0.7—indicating good reliability and ensuring the overall reliability of the research instrument.
Table 3.3 Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient of the test items
Number of items Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient
Reliability pertains to the consistency and repeatability of a measurement, while validity assesses whether an instrument accurately measures what it is intended to To ensure the validity of the questionnaire items, a pilot study was conducted with 14 participants, allowing for necessary modifications based on their feedback The researcher also sought guidance from the instructor on administering the questionnaire to enhance its accuracy By combining participant feedback and expert advice, all items were carefully reviewed and revised to achieve maximum validity.
Data collection procedure
The researcher conducted data collection over a three-month period (May to July 2021) targeting L2 learners from Year 1 to Year 4 The COVID-19 pandemic influenced the data collection process, making it more challenging However, using online questionnaires proved to be an efficient and reliable tool, enabling swift distribution to students, ensuring convenience, and allowing randomization of items in Section 2 for enhanced data quality. -Streamline your L2 research with fast, reliable online questionnaires designed for COVID-impacted data collection—[Learn more](https://pollinations.ai/redirect/2699274)
+ Step 1: The researcher contacted students in the Faculty of English
Linguistics and Literature via emails
Students who agreed to participate in the study were required to assess their English proficiency using the Dialang test available at https://dialangweb.lancaster.ac.uk/ They needed to screenshot their test results and upload them as evidence of completing the language proficiency assessment.
In Step 3, students completed the acceptability judgment test online via Google Form, which required uploading evidence of their language proficiency Clear instructions were provided on the form, ensuring participants understood the test procedure Additionally, the test items were randomized for each participant to maintain test integrity and reduce bias.
Data analysis procedure
The researcher utilized Minitab 19 for data entry, coding, and analysis of participant responses Descriptive statistics were applied to summarize key variables, while reliability tests ensured the internal consistency of the measurement scales Additionally, inferential tests were conducted to examine and quantify the correlations among the study variables, providing comprehensive insights into the relationships within the data.
Parametric tests utilize means as the primary measure of central tendency, providing a clear understanding of data distribution To accurately interpret these means, the 5-point Likert scale was divided into five equal intervals of 0.8 each, ensuring precise categorization of responses Additionally, the inferred grammaticality judgments of L2 learners for each structure analyzed are detailed in Table [insert table number], offering valuable insights into learner perceptions and language proficiency.
3.4 This is of great importance for upcoming data analysis and conclusions on L2 learners’ acquisition of the constraints on wh-movement in English
Table 3.4 Intervals of means for data analysis
Intervals of mean Participants’ judgment interpretations
Participants’ inferred judgment on grammaticality of the structure investigated
Criteria must be established to determine whether L2 learners possess implicit knowledge of English wh-movement constraints The study employed parametric tests, using judgment means on various structures as primary measures Researchers compared these judgments with native speaker assessments detailed in Tables 3.5 and 3.6, which show the grammaticality of each structure and the correlation with judgment intervals If L2 learners’ inferred judgments align with native speaker grammar, it indicates they have acquired the structure; otherwise, they are considered not to have achieved this knowledge.
Table 3.5 Grammaticality of the items investigated in the study (based on native speakers’ grammar)
Structures Items Grammatical Marginal Ungrammatical
Structures Items Grammatical Marginal Ungrammatical
Table 3.6 Criteria in order to confirm the participants’ acquisition of each structure
2.61-3.40 Marginal Not have acquired 3.41-5.00 Grammatical Have acquired
As for Means, the researcher employed certain tests including Shapiro-Wilk Test for normality, Two-sample t-test, one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post-hoc to compare between structures.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Normal distribution
In the acceptability judgment test, each linguistic structure was evaluated using a 5-point Likert scale The researcher conducted the Shapiro-Wilk test to determine if the data for each structure was normally distributed The results of these normality assessments are presented in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1 Shapiro-Wilk test for normal distribution of the structures investigated
(Non-normal) Sentential Subjects – Complement extraction >0.1
(Normal) Adverbial Islands – Complement extraction 0.05, 95% CI for Difference (- 0.560, 0.268) The participants had the shared level of judging (=marginal) modifier extraction with and without “that”
Table 4.14 Two-sample t-test for judgments on wh-movement in modifier extraction with and without “that” t-value df p-Value 95% CI for Difference
Table 4.15 Summary of the participants’ implicit knowledge of constraints on wh- movement in English
Tended not to have acquired
Tended not to have acquired
Sentential Subject Constraint – Complement extraction ü
Adverbial Island Constraint – Complement extraction ü
Object extraction with “that” ü Object extraction without
As can be seen from Table 4.16, the participants have shown that they have acquired the implicit knowledge of constraints on wh-movement in English except for
L2 learners at EF have demonstrated evidence of acquiring implicit knowledge of English wh-movement constraints, relying on intuitive judgments rather than explicit explanations Their successful use of intuition in acceptability judgments suggests an innate mechanism involved in second language acquisition, supporting the idea that Universal Grammar (UG) underpins these rules This challenges the notion that L2 interlanguage grammars are simply derived from L1 grammar, as L1 typically does not contain these features, thereby invalidating arguments by Bley-Vroman (1990) and Schachter (1990).
The study should challenge the No Access Hypothesis (e.g., Clashen and Muysken, 1986, 1989; Clashen, 1988; Bley-Vroman, 1989), which dismisses the role of Universal Grammar (UG) and oversimplifies the cognitive processes involved in second language acquisition (SLA) This perspective suggests that L2 acquisition occurs through non-linguistic learning strategies such as distributional analysis, analogy, and hypothesis testing However, evidence shows that learners can identify grammatical structures they have never previously encountered, indicating that mechanical learning strategies are insufficient Instead, this supports the view that UG is the natural and essential force driving SLA, enabling learners to recognize grammaticality beyond mere past exposure.
The findings challenge the Partial Access and Interpretability Hypotheses, which suggest that adult L2 learners cannot acquire uninterpretable strong wh-features in English after crossing the critical period Instead, the study reveals that L2 learners at the EF stage have acquired constraints on wh-movement in English, demonstrating an inherent sensitivity to grammaticality despite their inability to explicitly articulate theoretical syntactic rules This indicates that their innate linguistic system can distinguish between possible and impossible structures, supporting the idea that Universal Grammar (UG) plays a core role in second language acquisition The evidence suggests that L2 learners have full access to UG during the learning process, rather than only partial access, highlighting the importance of innate mechanisms in acquiring complex grammatical features.
L2 learners in the study successfully acquired 10 out of 15 targeted language structures, indicating significant progress yet not reaching native speaker proficiency This supports Selinker’s (1972) concept of interlanguage fossilization, where learners' interlanguage grammar stabilizes before full mastery of the target language Despite not achieving complete native-like competence, the participants demonstrated a substantial grasp of two-thirds of the structures, highlighting notable language development The debate remains whether extended exposure and practice would enable L2 learners to fully develop their interlanguage grammar and attain native-level proficiency in English.
Research question 3
Table 4.20 Summary of the B1 level group’s implicit knowledge of constraints on wh- movement in English
Structures The B1 group The group tended to have acquired the structure
Structures The B1 group The group tended to have acquired the structure
Sentential Subject Constraint – Complement extraction
Adverbial Island Constraint – Complement extraction (M=2.54, SD=1.71)
Structures The B1 group The group tended to have acquired the structure
L2 learners at the B1 level demonstrated limited understanding of the constraints on wh-movement in English, with their judgments deviating significantly from standard grammar They primarily mastered only one of the 15 structures, specifically the Adverbial Island Constraint related to complement extraction The B1 group remained marginal in their judgments for most structures, likely due to a lack of implicit knowledge of wh-movement constraints in English.
Table 4.21 Summary of the B2 level group’s implicit knowledge of constraints on wh- movement in English
Structures The B2 group The group tended to have acquired the structure
Sentential Subject Constraint – Complement extraction
Structures The B2 group The group tended to have acquired the structure
Adverbial Island Constraint – Complement extraction (M=1.44, SD=0.88)
It can be observed in Table 4.21, the B2 group performed much better compared to the B1 group They were inclined to judge correctly 10 out of 15 structures investigated except for 5 structures:
The B2 group demonstrated a significant improvement in their performance compared to the B1 group, correctly assessing 10 out of 15 structures This indicates that advancing English proficiency levels enhances implicit knowledge of the constraints on wh-movement in English.
Table 4.22 Summary of the C1 level group’s implicit knowledge of constraints on wh- movement in English
Structures The C1 group The group tended to have acquired the structure
The C1 group performed the best as can be seen in their correct judgments of
12 out 15 structures investigated (as specified in Table 4.22), excluding 3 structures:
Structures The C1 group The group tended to have acquired the structure
The C1 group outperformed the other two groups, demonstrating superior judgment capabilities However, there was no significant difference between the C1 and B2 groups, with the C1 group only providing better judgments for two additional structures.
Table 4.23 Summary of structures that the 3 groups (B1, B2 and C1) have acquired
Group Number of structures that the group tended to have acquired
Table 4.23 shows that the C1 group achieved the highest performance with 12 correct structures, indicating advanced proficiency in wh-movement constraints in English Although the C1 group outperformed the B2 group, the difference was not statistically significant, with the B2 group providing 10 correct responses In contrast, the B1 group, with only 1 correct structure, appears to lack implicit knowledge of these constraints, highlighting proficiency gaps below B2 level Overall, L2 learners above B2 demonstrate a better understanding of the implicit rules governing wh-movement in English Additionally, three specific structures consistently pose challenges for all groups, suggesting areas where instruction can be improved.
Research indicates that language proficiency is a reliable predictor of L2 learners' acquisition of English wh-movement constraints, with higher proficiency levels correlating to better mastery of the structures Native language acquisition occurs naturally through exposure to authentic language environments, activating innate mechanisms for language learning While universal grammar (UG) influences both L1 and L2 acquisition, its accessibility for L2 learners depends on their language proficiency; only those with higher proficiency levels can fully access UG principles The study suggests that with continued improvement in language skills, L2 learners can develop a linguistic system comparable to that of native speakers, emphasizing the importance of ongoing language development efforts.
Research indicates a positive correlation between L2 learners' English proficiency and their implicit understanding of constraints on wh-movement in English The data shows that as learners' language levels increase, their acquisition of these grammatical constraints improves significantly Language proficiency thus serves as a reliable predictor of how well L2 learners grasp the rules governing wh-movement These findings align with previous studies by Çakir (2014) and Esfahani (2015), which demonstrated that more proficient learners are better equipped to implicitly acquire grammatical rules in English.
Summary of the major findings
Based on the data analysis as well as relevant discussion, the major findings can be summarized as follows:
(1) The results showed that L2 learners at the EF, to a certain extent, have acquired the implicit knowledge of the constraints on wh-movement in
Although participants in the study could accurately judge the grammaticality of various structures, their judgments were not perfect, revealing deviations between L2 learners’ interlanguage grammar and native speaker norms These deviations are primarily due to transfer effects, where remnants of the learners’ L1 grammar influence their L2 use Specifically, L2 learners tend to overlook the presence of the complementizer “that” and are less inclined to extract modifiers from within clauses, behaviors likely derived from their first language’s grammatical patterns This underscores the impact of L1 transfer on second language acquisition and highlights areas where interlanguage remains distinct from native-level grammar.
Full Transfer Full Access Hypothesis (Schwartz and Sprouse, 1996) that
L2 learners initially rely on their L1 grammar but gradually adjust and refine their interlanguage through parameter setting and resetting, as L1’s grammar alone is insufficient Ultimately, Universal Grammar (UG) plays a central role in shaping and perfecting L2 interlanguage, though this process requires significant time and effort from learners Transfer effects from L1 to L2 may persist and influence interlanguage development, often leading to residual errors Additionally, L2 learners can generate new rules within their interlanguage grammar that are neither derived from L1 nor L2, as demonstrated by their tendency to accept subject extraction, indicating innovative syntactic features.
Language proficiency significantly enhances L2 learners' ability to acquire implicit knowledge of English wh-movement constraints Research indicates that learners above the B2 level, particularly those at the C1 level, demonstrate better performance in understanding and applying these linguistic structures Conversely, B1-level learners show limited evidence of mastering the targeted grammatical constraints, highlighting the importance of advanced proficiency for implicit syntactic knowledge acquisition in English.
The key findings are summarized in Figure 4.1, which illustrates how L2 learners gradually acquire implicit knowledge of English wh-movement constraints through UG and L2 input, leading to changes in their interlanguage grammar over time As shown, the solid arrows and positive symbols indicate that L2 learners, with sufficient proficiency (above B2 level), can access Universal Grammar (UG) and develop an understanding that gradually approaches native-like grammar, though their interlanguage remains distinct from that of native speakers Language proficiency is a critical factor in facilitating this acquisition process and reaching a stable linguistic state.
Figure 4.1 Summary of major research findings
L2 learners’ implicit knowledge of constraints on wh-movement in English
1/ Complex Noun Phrase Constraint 2/ Wh-island Constraint
3/ Sentential Subject Constraint 4/ Adverbial Island Constraint 5/ That-trace effect