4.2 Results from the full dataset and Discussion
4.2.3 Fillers
4.2.3.1 Sub-condition 1 – Adverb position in the sentence
Pair 2
Tom ne nosi nikoga shapka.
Tom not wear never a hat. ungrammatical. This is the opposite of my predictions. Norwegians do not seem to transfer the adverb placement from their L1. Bulgarian students have a higher acceptance rate for the ungrammatical sentence than Norwegians. This can be attributed to L1 transfer or proficiency differences, although we see that the preference goes for the preverbal position of never in the grammatical, as I expected.
There is a big difference between L1NOR6 and L1NOR7 in the acceptance rate of the ungrammatical sentence. A quick look at the answer distribution across proficiency levels (Table 48) shows that Norwegian 6 graders at almost all levels (except for Advanced) tend to transfer the postverbal position of the adverb (highlighted in orange), although the more advanced levels, as Intermediate and Upper-Intermediate, have just one or two cases of L1 transfer. 7 graders at more advanced levels do not have even one case of L1 transfer (highlighted in blue). Proficiency level has some influence, although not to such a great extent.
Page 120 of 183
Table 48. Answers of L1NOR6 (N=34) and L1NOR7 (N=35) for sentence ‘Tom wears never a hat’ distributed across proficiency levels
Answers Beginner Elementary
Pre-Intermediate
BG: Nie ryadko vizhdame nashite susedi.
We rarely see our neighbours.
But also: On average, 74% of L1NOR accept the grammatical sentence, which has an unusual word order for them. Only 20% of L1NOR transfer from their L1 and accept the postverbal position of the adverb. L1BG show a higher acceptance rate for the ungrammatical sentence – (45%) than L1NOR, although I expected that both language groups will accept the ungrammatical sentence.
The performance difference between L1BG6 and L1BG7 is quite large. Table 49 below shows that percentagewise 6 graders at more advanced levels (highlighted in blue) transfer less than 7 graders at the same levels.
Page 121 of 183
Table 49. Answers of L1BG6 (N=59) and L1BG7 (N=71) for sentence ‘We see rarely our neighbours’ distributed across proficiency levels
Answers Beginner Elementary
Pre-Intermediate
Intermediate Upper-Intermediate
Advanced L1BG6
OK 5 (25%) 8 (38%) 4 (80%) 2 (33%) 0 (0%) 1 (33%)
NO 15 (75%) 13 (62%) 1 (20%) 4 (67%) 4 (100%) 2 (67%) L1BG7
OK 6 (50%) 11 (61%) 7 (64%) 7 (64%) 6 (50%) 2 (29%)
NO 6 (50%) 7 (39%) 4 (36%) 4 (36%) 6 (50%) 5 (71%)
Therefore, the difference is not so much an effect of proficiency level but it is more as a result of the way students perceive the structure. Some native Bulgarian speakers might have a preference for the postverbal position of the adverb. Bulgarian is a pro-drop language, and if students transfer this sentence starting without the subject, they will highly likely come with something like:
(73) Vizhdame ryadko nashite susedi.
*See1st.PER.PL. rarely our neighbours.
We rarely see our neighbours.
If they choose to start with an over subject, they will highly likely built a bit different word order, as in:
(74) Nie ryadko vizhdame nashite susedi.
We rarely see our neighbours.
However, the other opportunity is also there, as in:
(75) Nie vizhdame ryadko nashite susedi.
*We see rarely our neighbours.
We rarely see our neighbours.
For Bulgarian native speakers both structures are possible and it is more a matter of preference whether they choose to start the sentence with an overt subject, or drop the subject.
Pair 16
a) *I eat hardly ever ice cream.
b) I hardly ever eat ice cream.
ENG: I hardly ever eat ice cream.
NOR: Jeg spiser nesten aldri iskrem.
BG: Az pochti nikoga ne yam sladoled.
*I hardly ever not eat ice cream.
Page 122 of 183 But also:
Ne yam pochti nikoga sladoled.
Not eat1st.PER.SG. hardly ever ice cream.
Grammaticality – OK L1BG students have a higher acceptance rate for the grammatical sentence – on average, 56%
as compared to 45% for L1NOR group. This result is expected because the structure is ungrammatical in Norwegian. However, very few L1NOR students (16% on average) accepted the ungrammatical sentence which corresponds to a grammatical structure in Norwegian, which reduces the L1 transfer rate to a very low degree. My expectations for how Norwegians will behave do not hold true for this sentence either.
L1BG have a higher rate of acceptance for the preverbal adverb pochti nikoga (hardly ever), which is expected if we consider the preferences of native speakers discussed earlier.
Pair 25
a) I am a vegetarian and I never eat meat.
b) *I am a vegetarian and I eat never meat.
ENG: I am a vegetarian and I never eat meat.
NOR: Jeg er vegetarianer, og jeg spiser aldri kjøtt.
BG: Az sum vegetarianetz i pochti nikoga ne yam meso.
I am a vegetarian and almost never not eat1st.PER.SG. meat.
But also:
Vegetarianetz sum i ne yam meso pochti nikoga.
Vegetarian am and not eat1st.PER.SG. meat almost never.
Grammaticality – OK
Page 123 of 183 L1NOR do not follow my predictions in this sentence either – they have a high acceptance rate (83%) for the novel structure, as well as low acceptance rate for the one corresponding to their L1 (23%), which is ungrammatical in English.
L1BG have a higher transfer rate (36%) than L1NOR for the ungrammatical sentence, although my expectations were for similar results for both language groups.
Pair 27
a) *He plays often video games.
b) He often plays video games.
ENG: He often plays video games.
NOR: Han spiller ofte dataspill.
BG: Toi chesto igrae videoigri.
He often plays video games.
But also:
Toi igrae chesto video igri.
*He plays often video games.
Grammaticality – OK Both language groups have almost equally high acceptance rate for the grammatical sentence – 76% for L1BG ad 75% for L1NOR. This result is expected for L1BG but not for L1NOR who have to explicitly learn the preverbal position of the adverb.
This sentence is interesting in that both language groups have a higher acceptance rate for the ungrammatical sentence – 53% for L1BG and 56% for L1NOR – than for the previous ungrammatical examples so far. The only common pattern in the earlier examples is that the adverbs are in the spectrum of negation – never, rarely, hardly ever, whereas often is at the
Page 124 of 183
other end of the spectrum and is positively charged. This could be a tendence for preference of the positive (yes) in front of the negative (no). The same tendence is seen in the last example which also contains a positively charged adverb.
Pair 36
a) My sister always studies after dinner.
b) *My sister studies always after dinner.
ENG: My sister always studies after dinner.
NOR: Min søster studerer alltid etter middag.
BG: Sestra mi vinagi uchi sled vecherya.
Sister my always study3rd.PER.SG. after dinner.
But also:
Sestra mi uchi vinagi sled vecherya.
Sister my study3rd.PER.SG. always after dinner.
Grammaticality – OK grammatical sentence is even higher – on average, 78% for L1BG and 88% for L1NOR. The ungrammatical sentence has almost the same degree of approval as the previous – on average, 50% of L1BG and 45% of L1NOR accepted it. L1NOR showed a little lower L1 transfer rate, yet higher than in the sentences with negative adverbs.
In sum, on the sub-condition 1 (adverb position in the sentence):
a) On average, 68% of L1BG speakers accepted the grammatical sentences. The acceptance rate is a bit higher for the sentences containing positive adverbs (often, always) than for those with negatively charged ones (never, rarely, hardly ever).
b) On average, 42% of L1BG speakers accepted the ungrammatical sentence. They show a higher L1 transfer degree than L1NOR students, which does not match my expectations.
Bulgarian speakers showed a preference for preverbal position of never, almost never.
Page 125 of 183
c) On average, 72% of L1NOR accepted the grammatical sentence, which contains a novel category for them. My expectation that they will reject it, does not hold true.
d) On average, 29% of L1NOR accepted the ungrammatical sentence, which corresponds to a correct structure in their native language. I expected a higher acceptance rate for these sentences due to facilitation from Norwegian.
The results from the statistical analysis (Figure 3) show that the difference between the two language groups is largest in Condition 1, decreases but still remains large in Condition 2, and it disappears in Condition 3. The post-hoc pairwise comparison (Figure 4) shows that both language groups perform similarly for both sub-conditions of the Fillers. I went in detail through each pair in this sub-condition which targets adverb placement in the sentence. The analysis of the whole dataset, not matched for proficiency level (Table 47), produced a difference of 13% (in favour of L1NOR) in the number of correct answers between the groups.
The statistical analysis shows that when the groups are matched by proficiency the difference disappears. However, the fine-grained picture gave me some insights about the learners’
behaviour. Word order seems easier to be acquired than articles for both Norwegian and Bulgarian learners. Bulgarian students show L1 transfer, as well as preference for a particular word order. Norwegian learners show a very low degree of L1 transfer, which may correspond to the fact that they have already learned the relevant structure.
Overall, the prediction that L1 Bulgarian will outperform L1 Norwegian students does not hold true. The pattern clearly shows that L1NOR have acquired the novel category.