Foreign Literature About Subject Verb Agreement

If a person is bilingual in two languages that calculate the grammatical and conceptual figures in a similar way, bilingualism itself cannot be expected to interfere with the ability to obtain a correct match in each language. Only a small number of studies have studied the production of the verb-subject agreement in bilinguals. In all cases, these studies show that bilingual grammatical and conceptual information appears to be used in each of their languages (z.B. Nicol et al., 2001; Nicol and Greth, 2003; Van Hell and Mensies, 2004). One aspect of bilingual results, which is remarkable, is that sensitivity to grammatical and conceptual figures was observed for 2001 (Nicol and Greth, 2003), for the first bilinguals (Nicol et al., 2001) and for speech and writing (Van Hell and Mensies, 2004). The only exception to this general pattern was reported for bilinguals speaking mother tongues such as Chinese, in which there is no comparable calculation of the verb-subject agreement in number. A recent study on understanding the English verb-subject agreement for Chinese-English bilinguals also provides evidence of sensitivity to offline agreement, but not in online measurements (Jiang, 2004) and in event-related potential, but not in behavioral measures (Chen, Shu, Liu, Zhao, and Li, 2007). Nicol and Greth (2003) argued that bilinguals tend to transfer contractual strategies from the first language (L1) to L2. If the L1 does not easily allow the transfer, the acquisition of the agreement in L2 will probably be more difficult. In languages such as English and Spanish, the verb must be singular if the subject is singular; If the subject is plural, the verb must be plural. While the agreement between the subject and the verb of a sentence may seem to follow a very simple rule, even highly competent speakers who produce sentences in their native language more often make errors of agreement than expected. One factor that complicates the production of the verb-subject chord is that grammatical number and conceptual number do not always coincide.

Previous research has used a sentence completion task to study the consequences of grammatical and conceptual differences in the production of verb-subject chords (for example. B Bock and Miller, 1991; Vigliocco, Butterworth, and Garrett, 1996; Nicol, Teller, and Greth, 2001). In this task, the speakers receive a fragment of sentence and are asked to establish a possible completion. If z.B. the “The drawing on the posters” fragment is displayed, the participant can complete the sentence by adding “was colored.” It is interesting to note that the subject matter of the sentence may relate to either a single speaker or several speakers. Consider the following examples: Recorded responses have been transcribed for critical sentence essays. Reactions that the microphone did not recognize were eliminated as technical errors. The other responses were assessed on the basis of the following three categories for the purposes of this paper: (1) Responses were found to be correct when participants correctly repeated the presented preamble and reasonably concluded a sentence with a singular verb. Even though they used a different adjective than the one provided, it was considered correct if the finished sentence was semantically congruent; (2) Responses were considered to be errors of agreement when participants correctly repeated the preamble but used a form of verb that did not agree with the NP of the preamble leader (i.e., a verb was marked in the plural); (3) Responses were considered to be other errors when participants provided responses that did not meet the criteria described above.

In this paper, we focus on mismatches, as this was the main measure dependent in previous studies, but data are also provided for the other evaluation categories. In this study, we tested this hypothesis by examining the consequences of L2 knowledge for bilinguals who perform a sentence completion task, both in English and Spanish.