A Narrative Perspective on The Development of The

SSLA,17,263-291.PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica.ANARRATIVEPERSPECTIVEONTHEDEVELOPMENTOFTHETENSE/ASPECTSYSTEMINSECONDLANGUAGEACQUISITIONKathleenBardovi-HarligIndianaUniversityAnumberofstudiesontheacquisitionoftenseandaspectbylearnersofasecondlanguagepointtothehypothesisthatnarrativestructureinfluencesthedistributionoftense/aspectformsininterlanguage.How-ever,thestudieshavereportedconflictingprofilesoftense/aspectuse.Thisstudysuggeststhatmuchofthevariationthathasbeenpreviouslyreportedstemsfromthelevelofproficiencyofthelearners.Thiscross-sectionalstudyexamines37writtenandoralnarrativepairsproducedinafilmretelltaskbyadultlearnersofEnglishasasecondlanguage.Theanalysisapproachesthetextsfromtwoperspectives,fromtheperspectiveofacquisition,takingnarrativestructure(specificallygrounding)asanenvironmentforacquisitionoftense/aspect,andfromtheperspectiveofthenarrativeitself,characterizingtheforegroundandbackgroundbythetense/aspectformsused.Thestudyfindsadevelopmentalpatterninthedistributionoftense/aspectmorphologywithrespecttonarrativestructure.Theseresultspermittheassimilationofearlierfindingsintoadevelopmentalsequenceintheacquisitionofthetense/aspectsystem.ThisstudyinvestigatesthedevelopmentoftenseandaspectinthenarrativesoflearnersofEnglishasasecondlanguage.Recentresearchhasdemonstratedtheimportanceofuniversalpropertiesofnarrativestructureinexplainingpatternsoftense/aspectuseamongnativeandnonnativespeakersalike.Secondlanguagestud-iesofthedevelopmentoftenseandaspecthave,however,reportedsomewhat1thankthemembersoftheDiscourseGroupatIndianaUniversityforvaluablecommentsonearlierversionsofthispaper.ThisresearchwasfundedbygrantsfromtheNationalScienceFoundation,GrantDBS-8919616,andIndianaUniversity,ResearchandtheUniversityGraduateSchool.c1995CambridgeUniversityPress0272-2631/95$7.50+.10263264KathleenBardovi-Harligcontradictoryresultswithregardtolearners'useoftense/aspectinrelationtotheforegroundandbackgroundelementsofnarrativestructure.Itistheaimofthepresentstudytoclarifytherelationshipbetweensecondlanguageproficiencyandtheinfluenceofnarrativestructureontense/aspectdistribution.Previousworkinsecondlanguageacquisitionthatlinkstense/aspecttonarrativestructuresuggeststhatarelationshipexistsbetweentheuseofverbalmorphologyandtheforeground(theactualstoryline)andthebackground(thesupportivematerial)ofthenarrative.However,thesestudieshavereportedsomewhatdifferentdistributionsoftenseacrossgrounding.Someofthevariationmaybeattributabletothefactthattheearlieststudieswerecasestudies.Kumpf(1984)foundthataJapaneselearnerofEnglishusedthebaseformoftheverbtoexpresscompletedactionintheforeground.Pastformsintheforegroundwerelimitedtoafewirregularverbswhichwereusedonlyrarely.Inthebackgroundmanymorphologicallymarkedverbsoccurred.Stativeverbsshowedtensewhileactiveverbsweremarkedforhabitualandcontinuousaspect,butweremarkedirregularlyfortense.Incon-trast,Flashner(1989)foundthatthreeRussianlearnersofEnglishmarkedfore-groundactionsandleftbackgroundportionsunmarked.Theforegroundverbsoccurredpredominantlyinsimplepastwiththebackgroundverbsbeinginpredomi-nantlybaseforms.Veronique(1987)andBardovi-Harlig(1992b)investigatedlargergroupsoflearn-ers.InastudyofsevenuntutoredlearnersofFrench,Veronique'sfindingssuggestthatthedistributionofverbalmorphology(andlackofit)acrossbackgroundandforegrounddiffersaccordingtolevel,butthesefindingsalsoshowvariationwithinlevelsacrossindividualsandwithinindividualsacrosstexts.Intermediatelearnersingeneralshowedapredominantuseofpastmarkersintheforegroundwitheithertheverbstem(amorphologicallyunmarkedform)orpast(orboth)inthebackground.Oneadvancedlearnershowedtheintermediatepatternofpastintheforegroundandtheverbsteminthebackground,buttheotheradvancedlearnershowedamuchmoretargetlikesystemusingthecompoundpastintheforegroundandtheimperfectinthebackgroundofonetext.Inastudyof16intermediatelearnersofEnglishasasecondlanguage,Bardovi-Harlig(1992b)foundthat12learnersshowedagreateruseofpastintheforegroundthaninthebackground.Ninelearnersshowedbotharobustlygreateruseofpastintheforegroundandgreateruseofnonpastinthebackground(over50%greater),andthreeadditionallearnersshowed50%greateruseofpastintheforegroundthaninthebackgroundwithnoappreciabledifferenceinnonpast.Levelofproficiencyclearlyemergesasalikelyfactorinthedistributionoftenserelativetogrounding,especiallywhenonetakesintoaccountthatverylowlevellearnersshownosystematicuseoftense(Schumann,1987)andthatadvancedlearnersmusteventuallyusepastinbothforegroundandbackgroundtoreachatargetlikeuseoftenseinEnglishnarratives.Theexactroleoflevelofproficiencyhasbeendifficulttoidentify,however,becauseoftherelativelysmallnumberoflearnerswhosenarrativeshavebeeninvestigatedandbecauseofthedifferentcrite-riathathavebeenusedtodeterminelevels.Veroniquegroupedhislearnersaccord-ingtotheconversationalcriteriaofturntaking,leadingtheconversation,holdingthefloor,andaveragelengthofresponse.Bardovi-Harlig'sintermediatelearnerswereANarrativePerspectiveonTense/AspectinSLA265identifiedbyinstructionallevelinanintensiveEnglishpr