臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

在台灣，以英文為外國語學習者於七年級時學習第三人稱單數詞尾，在八年級時學習過去時態詞尾，也同時學習第三人稱單數和過去式詞素變體的規則。翁(2017)研究台灣八年級學生在第三人稱單數詞素變體的口語產出，但未研究台灣八年級學生對過去式詞素變體的口語產出。因此，本研究旨在探討台灣八年級學生對過去式詞素變體的口語產出，以延伸翁(2017)的研究。
來自台灣中部的226位八年級學生參與本研究。受試者接受文法知能測驗及故事朗讀口說測驗，並根據文法知能測驗結果，受試者被分為較高成就組(149人)與較低成就組(77人)。另外，60位英語系大學生為控制組，他們也接受文法知能測驗及故事朗讀口說測驗，以比較八年級生在過去式詞素變體中的口語表現。
研究者首先探討三種過去式詞素變體的口語產出整體表現，接著研究他們在文法知能測驗中與過去式詞素變體的口語產出之間的關係。研究中也探討較高與較低成就者對過去式詞素變體的替代策略。最後邀請較高與較低成就組各12名學生參加訪談，目的是調查受試者對過去式詞素變體之替換的偏好以及影響八年級學生過去式詞素變體口語產出的主要因素。
研究結果顯示台灣八年級學生在過去式三種詞素變體的口語產出的排序為：[ɪd]最佳，[d]次之，[t]最差。學習者的詞素覺識能力與過去式詞素變體的口語表現的關聯性顯示受試者在過去式詞素變體的口語表現會隨者他們的詞素覺識能力而提高。關於較高與較低成就學生在三種過去式詞素變體的口語表現，較高成就者在[ɪd]和[t]詞素變體的口語表現顯著優於較低成就者。但在[d]詞素變體中則沒有顯著差異，且表現得一樣好(51.7%比59.7%)。
錯誤分析和訪談的結果中，較高成就學生為了產出[d]和[t]的過去式詞素變體，插音為最喜愛的替代策略。為了產出[ɪd]過去式詞素變體，錯誤分析結果顯示省略[ɪd]詞尾則是主要的替代策略，而訪談結果顯示較高成就者認為沒有適合的音能夠替代[ɪd]過去式詞素變體。就較低成就學生而言，為了產出[d]過去式詞素變體，插音也為他們最喜愛的替代策略。除此之外，為了產出[t]和[ɪd]過去式詞素變體，較低成就學生傾向過度發出[d]的音當作替代策略。對於三種過去式詞素變體，[t]替代策略是八年級學生最少採用的。以上結果可以透過下列因素來解釋：母語轉移，過去式詞尾-ed的拼寫，以及本研究中使用的測驗工具形式。受試者也指出他們傾向採用插音當作替代策略是因爲易於發音。一些較低成就者則認為他們產出[d]是因為過去式的詞尾拼寫的影響，他們甚至不知道在過去式的詞素中有發音上的變化。
鑑於這些發現，本研究建議英語教學方面，過去式詞尾口語規則應在教學時被重視，並且教師需提供台灣英語學習者更多練習及示範，並且可以向他們提供過去式詞尾的發音預測練習(Celce-Murcia, Briton, & Goodwin, 1996)。因本研究只著重在過去式詞素變體的口語產出，未來的研究可同時探討台灣八年級學習者對過去式詞素變體的覺知與產出的關聯性。

In the current Taiwan context, EFL seventh graders learn the third person singular morpheme and eighth graders learn past tense morpheme. Meanwhile, the morphophonological rules of the third person singular and the past tense allomorphs are also taught to the students. Weng (2017) investigated the Taiwanese eighth graders’ speech production of third person singular allomorphs but did not cover the learners’ oral production of past tense allomorphs. Therefore, the present study intends to extend Weng’s (2017) study by examining eighth graders’ speech production of past tense allomorphs.
The participants in the present study included 226 Taiwanese EFL eighth graders from central Taiwan. They were given a morphological awareness (MA) test and a story-reading test. The eighth graders were then divided into a higher-proficiency group (N =149) and a lower-proficiency group (N = 77) based on the results of the MA test. To further compare the learners’ oral performance in past tense allomorphs, 60 EFL English majors were recruited as the control group.
The oral production of the past tense allomorphs was first investigated, followed by examination of the relationship between learners’ MA proficiency and their oral performance in the past tense allomorphs. Additionally, substitution errors for the past tense allomorphs were examined. Finally, 24 eighth graders, 12 participants in each proficiency group, were interviewed to explore their preferences for substitutions of the past tense allomorphs and the major factors affecting their substitutions strategies.
The results of the investigation showed that the ranking of the Taiwanese eighth graders’ oral production of the past tense allomorphs from best to worst, was [ɪd] > [d] > [t]. Furthermore, the participants’ oral production of the past tense allomorphs improves with their MA proficiency level. Regarding the higher- and lower-proficiency groups’ oral production of the past tense allomorphs, the higher achievers performed significantly better than the lower achievers at the [ɪd] and [t] allomorphs. However, both proficiency groups performed similarly well (51.7% vs. 59.7%) in the oral production of the [d] allomorph.
The results of the error analysis and the interview showed that to produce the [d] and [t] allomorphs, epenthesis was the most favored substitution strategy for the higher achievers. Omission was their primary strategy for the past tense [ɪd] allomorph in the error analysis. However, the result of the interview showed that there was no appropriate substitution for the past tense [ɪd] allomorph. Moreover, epenthesis was the lower achievers’ most preferred substitution strategy for the [d] allomorph. In addition, to produce the [t] and [ɪd] allomorphs, they tended to overproduce the [d] as their most preferred substitution strategy. For all three allomorphs, [t] substitution strategy was the least adopted by the eighth graders. Some factors have been identified to contribute to the results, including L1 transfer, the spelling of the past tense -ed as visual stimulus to the learners, and the format of the instrument used in the present study.
In view of these findings, the present study offers implications for English teaching that the morphophonological rules of the past tense need to be more emphasized. Teachers can model the past tense allomorphs and provide a prediction exercise for the pronunciation of the past tense -ed endings to the students (Celce-Murcia, Briton, & Goodwin, 1996). More practices and demonstrations of the past tense allomorphs should also be provided for Taiwanese EFL learners. Since the present study only focuses on the oral production of the past tense allomorphs, future studies are suggested to investigate the relationship between Taiwanese EFL learners’ perception and production of the past tense allomorphs.

中文摘要 .............................................................................................................................. I
ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... III
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... VI
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. VII
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ IX
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background and Motivation of the Study ................................................................... 1
1.2 Purposes of the Study ................................................................................................. 6
1.3 Research Questions ..................................................................................................... 7
1.4 Significance of the Study ............................................................................................ 8
1.5 Definitions of Terms ................................................................................................... 8
1.6 Organization of the Thesis ........................................................................................ 11
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................... 13
2.1 Age-related Differences in L1 and L2 Oral Acquisition Order of Inflectional
Morphemes ..................................................................................................................... 13
2.1.1 The inflectional morphemes acquisition order of first language learners ......... 14
2.1.2 The inflectional morphemes acquisition order of the second language learners
.................................................................................................................................... 15
2.2 The Connection between Written Production and Oral Production of Inflectional
Morphemes ..................................................................................................................... 19
2.3 Learners’ Learning Difficulties in the Oral Production of the Past Tense Inflectional
Morpheme ....................................................................................................................... 21
2.3.1 L1 learners’ difficulties in oral production of the past tense inflectional
morpheme ................................................................................................................... 21
2.3.2 L2 learners’ difficulties in oral production of the past tense inflectional
morpheme ................................................................................................................... 22
2.4 Factors Affecting Oral Production of the Past Tense Inflectional Morpheme ......... 24
2.4.1 First language (L1) transfer ............................................................................... 25
2.4.2 Markedness ........................................................................................................ 28
2.4.3 MA Proficiency Level ....................................................................................... 30
2.4.4 Orthography ....................................................................................................... 31
2.4.5 Processing load .................................................................................................. 32
2.4.6 Sentence position ............................................................................................... 33
2.5 Instruments Used in Previous Studies for Measuring Learners’ Oral Production of
Inflectional Morphemes .................................................................................................. 34
2.5.1 Summary of the instruments used in previous studies ...................................... 39
CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY ............................................................................ 42
3.1 Participants ............................................................................................................... 42
3.2 The Pilot Study ......................................................................................................... 43
3.3 Instruments ............................................................................................................... 45
3.3.1 Morphological Awareness Test ......................................................................... 46
3.3.2 Story-reading test ............................................................................................... 47
3.3.3 Interview Protocol ............................................................................................. 50
3.4 Data Collection ......................................................................................................... 51
3.5 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................ 53
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .......................................................... 55
4.1 Results of the Eighth-Graders’ MA Test Mean Scores and Story-Reading Test Oral
Production Results .......................................................................................................... 55
4.2 Relationship of Learners’ MA Proficiency and Past Tense Allomorph Oral
Production ....................................................................................................................... 61
4.3 Substitution Errors Distribution for Learners’ Past Tense Allomorphs Oral
Production ....................................................................................................................... 69
4.3.1 Substitution Errors for the [d] Allomorph ......................................................... 70
4.3.2 Substitution Errors for the [t] Allomorph .......................................................... 76
4.3.3 Substitution Errors for the [ɪd] Allomorph ........................................................ 81
4.3.4 Summary of the Factors Affecting Past Tense Allomorphs .............................. 87
4.3.5 Substitution Strategies Developmental Trend for the Past Tense Allomorphs . 90
4.4 Interview Results Regarding Oral Production of the Past Tense Allomorphs ......... 92
4.4.1 Preferred Substitution Results Used to Replace Correct Past Tense Allomorphs
.................................................................................................................................... 92
4.4.2 Factors Affecting Eighth Graders’ Substitutions of the Past Tense Allomorphs
.................................................................................................................................... 97
CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION ................................................................................... 103
5.1 Summary of the Major Findings ............................................................................. 103
5.2 Pedagogical Implications ........................................................................................ 106
5.3 Limitations of the Study and Suggestions for Future Studies ................................ 107
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 110
APPENDIX A MORPHOLOGICAL AWARENESS TEST ........................................... 122
APPENDIX B MORPHOLOGICAL AWARENESS TEST (ANSWER KEY) ............. 124
APPENDIX C STORY-READING TEST ....................................................................... 126
APPENDIX D INTERVIEW PROTOCOL ..................................................................... 128

Anderson, J. (1987). Structural analogy and dependency phonology. In J, Anderson & J, Durand (Eds.), Explorations in dependency phonology (pp. 15-48). Dordrecht, Holland:
Foris.
Apel, K. (2014). A comprehensive definition of morphological awareness: Implications for
assessment. Topics in Language Disorders, 34(3), 197-209.
Bailey, N., Madden, C., & Krashen, S. D. (1974). Is there a “natural sequence” in adult second
language learning? Language Learning, 24(2), 235-243.
Bayley, R. (1994). Interlanguage variation and the quantitative paradigm: Past tense marking
in Chinese-English. In E. Tarone, S. Gass, & A. Cohen (Eds.), Research methodology in
second-language acquisition (pp. 157-181). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bean, R. (2016). Acquisition of inflectional morphemes -ed and -ing by adult L1 Chinese
speakers of L2 English (Unpublished master’s thesis). Tunghai University, Taichung,
Taiwan.
Bedore, L. M., & Leonard, L. B. (1998). Specific language impairment and grammatical
morphology: A discriminant function analysis. Journal of Speech, Language, and
Hearing Research, 41, 1185-1192.
Beers, J. W., & Beers, C. S. (1992). Children's spelling of English inflectional morphology. In
S. Templeton & D. R. Bear (Eds), The development of orthographic knowledge and the
foundations of literacy (pp. 231-251). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bell, A. (1971). Some patterns of occurrence and formation of syllable structures. Working
Papers on Language Universals, 6, 23-238.
Bonner, T. E. (2013). Systematic asymmetries in perception and production of L2 inflections
in Mandarin L2 learners of English: The effects of phonotactics, salience, and processing
pressure on inflectional variability. Retrieved from ProQuest Digital Dissertations.
Broselow, E., Chen, S., & Wang, C. (1998). The emergence of the unmarked in second
language phonology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 20(2), 261-280.
Brown, R. (1973). A first language: The early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Carlisle, R. S. (1991). The influence of environment on vowel epenthesis in Spanish/English
interphonology. Applied linguistics, 12(1), 76-95.
Carlisle, J. F. (1995). Morphological awareness and early reading achievement. In: L.
Feldman (Ed), Morphological aspects of language processing (pp. 189-209). Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Carlisle, J. F. (1996). An exploratory study of morphological errors in children’s written.
stories. Reading and Writing, 8(1), 61-72.
Cazden, C. B. (1968). The acquisition of noun and verb inflections. Children Development,
39(2), 433-448.
Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M., & Goodwin, J. M. (1996). Teaching pronunciation:
A reference for teachers of English to speakers of other languages. New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press.
Chen, Y, C. (2005). Chinese speakers’ use of tense and aspect in an English past-time context.
English Teaching and Learning, 29(4), 87-105.
Chih, P. S. (2015). The effectiveness of implementing textual enhancement with color coding
on fifth graders' 3sg -s learning (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Taipei University
of Education, Taipei, Taiwan.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Cottrell, G. W., & Plunkett, K. (1994). Acquiring the mapping from meanings to sounds.
Connection Science, 6(4), 379-412.
Dalal, R. H., & Loeb, D. F. (2005). Imitative production of regular past tense -ed by Englishspeaking
children with specific language impairment. International Journal of Language
& Communication Disorders, 40(1), 67-82.
Davila, A. M. (2018). Pronunciation acquisition of the inflectional morpheme -ed in English
by Nicaraguan Spanish speakers. Open Science Journal, 3(1), 1-22.
De Villiers, J. G., & De Villiers, P. A. (1973). A cross-sectional study of the acquisition of
grammatical morphemes in child speech. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2(3), 267-
278.
Demuth, K., Culbertson, J., & Alter, J. (2006). Word-minimality, epenthesis and coda licensing
in the early acquisition of English. Language and Speech, 49(2), 137-173.
Dickerson, W. B. (1990). Morphology via orthography: A visual approach to oral
decisions. Applied Linguistics, 11(3), 238-252.
Dulay, H. C., & Burt, M. K. (1973). Should we teach children syntax? Language Learning,
23(2), 245-258.
Dulay, H. C., & Burt, M. K. (1974). Natural sequences in child second language acquisition.
Language Learning, 24(1), 37-53.
Dulay, H. C., & Burt, M. K. (1975). A new approach to discovering universal strategies
of child second language acquisition. In D. D. Dato (Ed.), Georgetown University round
table on languages and linguistics (pp. 209-233). Washington, DC: Georgetown
University Press.
Eckman, F. R. (1977). Markedness and the contrastive analysis hypothesis. Language Learning,
27, 315-330.
Eckman, F. R. (1981). On the naturalness of interlanguage phonological rules. Language
learning, 31(1), 195-216.
Edwards, J. G. H. (2011). Deletion of /t ,d/ and the acquisition of linguistic variation by second
language learners of English. Language Learning, 61(4), 1256-1301.
Ellis, N. C. (2006). Selective attention and transfer phenomena in L2 acquisition: Contingency,
cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking, and perceptual
learning. Applied Linguistics, 27(2), 164-194.
Epstein, S. D., Flynn, S., & Martohardjono, G. (1996). Second language acquisition:
Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Behavioral and Brain
Sciences, 19(4), 677-714. doi:10.1017/s0140525x00043521
Fabricius-Hansen, C. (2006). Tense. In E. K. Brown & A. Anderson (Eds.), Encyclopeida of
language and linguistics (2nd ed.) (pp. 566-573). Oslo, Norway: Elsevier.
Flege, J. E. (1989). Chinese participants’ perception of the word‐final English/t/–/d/ contrast:
Performance before and after training. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of
America, 86(5), 1684-1697.
Freeman, D. E. L. (1975). The acquisition of grammatical morphemes by adult ESL
students. Tesol Quarterly, 9(4) 409-419.
Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., & Hyams, N. (2007). An introduction to language (10th ed.). Boston,
MA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Global Learning and Assessment Development (2016). Vocabulary Quotient Credential.
Retrieved from: http:// www2. Gladworld.net/gladworld/CHT. VQC. php
Goad, H., White, L., & Steele, J. (2003). Missing inflection in L2 acquisition: Defective syntax
or LI-constrained prosodic representations?. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 48(3-4),
243-263.
Good, R. H., & Kaminski, R. A. , & Dill, S. (2007). DIBELS oral reading fluency. In R. H.
Good & R. A. Kaminski (Eds.), Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills (6th ed.).
Eugene, OR: Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement. Retrieved from:
http://dibels.uoregon.edu/
Harris, T., & Wexler, K. (1996). The optional-infinitive stage in child English: Evidence from
negation. In H. Clahsen (Ed.), Generative perspectives on language acquisition:
Empirical findings (pp. 1-42). Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Hashimoto, O. Y. (1972). Phonology of Cantonese. Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
Haznedar, B. (2001). The acquisition of the IP system in child L2 English. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 23(1), 1-39.
Hinkel, E. (1997). The past tense and temporal verb meanings in a contextual frame. Tesol
Quarterly, 31(2), 289-313.
Hoff, E. (2005). Language development. California, USA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Hopp, H. (2015). Semantics and morphosyntax in predictive L2 sentence processing.
International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 53(3), 277-306.
Hsieh, F. T. (2009). The acquisition of English agreement/tense morphology and copula be by
L1-Chinese-speaking learners. In S., Disney, B., Forchtner, W., Ibrahim & N., Millar
(Eds.), Papers from the Lancaster University Conference in Linguistics and Language
Teaching (pp. 46-59). Lancaster, UK: Lancaster University.
Hsieh, L., Leonard, L. B., & Swanson, L. (1999). Some differences between English plural
noun inflections and third singular verb inflections in the input: The contributions of
frequency, sentence position, and duration. Journal of Child Language, 26(3), 531-543.
Ionin, T., & Wexler, K. (2002). Why is “is” easier than “s”? Acquisition of tense/ agreement
morphology by child L2 English learners. Second Language Research, 18(2), 95-136.
Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an international language. New York, USA:
Oxford University Press.
Jia, G., & Fuse, A. (2007). Acquisition of English grammatical morphology by native
Mandarin-speaking children and adolescents: Age-related differences. Journal of Speech,
Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 1280-1299.
Kager, R. (1999). Optimality theory. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Koehlinger, K., Van Horne, A. O., Oleson, J., McCreery, R., & Moeller, M. P. (2015). The role
of sentence position, allomorph, and morpheme type on accurate use of tense-related
morphemes by children who are hard of hearing. Journal of Speech, Language, and
Hearing Research, 58(2), 396-409.
Krashen, S. D. (1977). Some issues relating to the monitor model. On Tesol, 77, 144-158.
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford:
Pergamon.
Kuo, L. J., & Anderson, R. C. (2006). Morphological awareness and learning to read: A crosslanguage
perspective. Educational Psychologist, 41, 161-180.
Lahiri, S., Mitra, P., & Lu, X. (2011). Informality judgment at sentence level and experiments
with formality score. Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Text
Processing and Computational Linguistics, Berlin, 446-457. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-
19437-5_37
Lardiere, D. (1998). Case and tense in the ‘fossilized’ steady state. Second Language Research,
14(1), 1-26.
Lardiere, D. (2003). Second language knowledge of [±past] and [±finite]. In J. Liceras, H. Zobl,
& H. Goodluck (Eds), Proceedings of the 6th Generative Approaches to Second Language
Acquisition Conference (pp. 176-189). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Lardiere, D., & Schwartz, B. D. (1997). Feature-marking in the L2 development of deverbal
compounds. Journal of Linguistics, 33(2), 327-353.
Lotfie, M. M., Kadir, M. A., & Pilus, Z. (2017). -Ed allomorphs and linguistic knowledge of
Malay speakers of English: A descriptive and correlational study. Indonesian Journal of
Applied Linguistics, 7(2), 445-454. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v7i2.8353
MacWhinney, B. (2008). Enriching CHILDES for morphosyntactic analysis. Corpora In
Language Acquisition Research: History, Methods, Perspectives, 6, 165-198.
Marchman, V. A., Wulfeck, B., & Weismer, S. E. (1999). Morphological productivity
in children with normal language and SLI. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing
Research, 42(1), 206-219. doi:10.1044/jslhr.4201.206.
Matthews, D. E., & Theakston, A. L. (2006). Errors of omission in English‐speaking
children's production of plurals and the past tense: The effects of frequency, phonology,
and competition. Cognitive Science, 30(6), 1027-1052.
McHugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica, 22(3),
276-282.
Mitchell, R., & Myles, F. (2004). Second language learning theories (2nd ed.). London, UK:
Hodder Aronld.
Nunes, T., Bryant, P., & Bindman, M. (1997). Morphological spelling strategies:
developmental stages and processes. Developmental Psychology, 33(4), 537-649.
Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer: Cross-linguistic influence in language learning.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Paradis, J. (2005). Grammatical morphology in children learning English as a second language.
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 36(3), 176-187.
Paradis, J., Rice, M., Cargo, M., & Marquis, J. (2008). The acquisition of tense in English:
Distinguishing child second language from first language and specific language
impairment. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29, 689-722.
Pickett, J. M. (1999). The acoustics of speech communication: Fundamentals, speech
perception theory, and technology. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,
108(4), 1-39.
Pienemann, M. (1989). Is language teachable? Psycholinguistic experiments and
hypotheses. Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 52-79.
Pine, J. M., Conti-Ramsden, Joseph, Lieven, & Serratrice (2008). Tense over time:
Testing the agreement/tense omission model as an account of the pattern of tense-marking
provision in early child English. Journal of Child Language, 35(1), 55-75.
Power, M. J. (1986). A technique for measuring processing load during speech production.
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 15(5), 371-382.
Rau, D. V., Chang, H. H. A., & Tarone, E. E. (2009). Think or sink: Chinese learners'.
acquisition of the English voiceless interdental fricative. Language Learning, 59(3), 581-621.
Rice, M. L., & Wexler, K. (1996). Toward tense as a clinical marker of specific language
impairment in English-speaking Children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 39,1239-1257.
Rice, M. L., & Wexler, K. (2001). Test of Early Grammatical Impairment. New York, NY:
The Psychological Corporation.
Rubin, H., & Laboratories, H. (1988). Morphological knowledge and early writing
ability. Language and Speech, 31(4), 337-355.
Savignon, S. J., & Wang, C. (2003). Communicative language teaching in EFL contexts:
Learner attitudes and perceptions. IRAL, 41(3), 223-250.
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access
model. Second Language Research, 12(1), 40-72.
Sundara, M., Demuth, K., & Kuhl, P. K. (2011). Sentence-position effects on children’s
perception and production of English third person singular -s. Journal of Speech,
Language, and Hearing Research, 54(1), 55-71.
Syed, M., & Nelson, S. C. (2015). Guidelines for establishing reliability when coding narrative
data. Emerging Adulthood, 3(6), 375-387.
Tarone, E. (1979). Interlanguage as chameleon. Language Learning, 29(2), 181-191.
Tarone, E. (1983). On the variability of interlanguage systems. Applied Linguistics, 4,
142-163.
Turnbull, K., Deacon, S. H., & Bird, E. K. R. (2010). Mastering inflectional suffixes:
A longitudinal study of beginning writers’ spellings. Journal of Child Language, 38(3),
533-553.
Wang, J., & Smith, N. (1997). In T. Hoekstra, & H. V. D. Hulst (Eds.), Studies in Chinese
phonology. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
Wang, P. L. (2012). Teaching and learning English verb tenses in a Taiwanese university.
English Linguistics Research, 1(1), 18-34.
Weinberger, S. H. (1987). The influence of linguistic context on syllable simplification. In G.
Ioup and S. H. Weinberger (Eds)., Interlanguage phonology: The acquisition of a second
language sound system. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.
Weng (2017). An investigation of the speech production of the third person singular allomorphs
among Taiwanese English graders (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Changhua University of Education, Changhua, Taiwan.
Wolfram, W. (1985). Variability in tense marking: A case for the obvious. Language Learning, 35(2), 229-253.
Young, R. (1989). Approaches to variation in interlanguage morphology: Plural marking in the speech of Chinese learners of English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.