It has long been widely known that L2-learners make errors in article choice. In particular, L2-English learners sometimes misuse the definite article the with an indefinite DP, and sometimes misuse the indefinite article a with a definite DP. They also omit articles in obligatory contexts (see Huebner 1983, Master 1987, Parrish 1987, Thomas 1989, Kaneko 1996, Leung 2001, Ionin 2003, Ionin, Ko, and Wexler 2004, Ko, Ionin, and Wexler 2006, inter alia). Importantly, previous studies have shown that article misuse in L2-acquisition is not random, but tied to semantic universals which contribute to semantic interpretation of the target DP. In particular, it has been observed that the semantic features of definiteness, specificity, and partitivity play a significant role in determining L2-article choice (Ionin 2003, Ionin et al. 2004, Ko et al. 2006).

In this paper, we investigate how these semantic universals affect L2-English article choice with L2-English learners who come from two typologically different, article-less L1s: L1-Serbo-Croatian and L1-Korean learners of L2-English. While the effects of definiteness and specificity have been investigated with different L1-groups (Ionin et al. 2004), our previous investigations of partitivity (Ko et al. 2006) were limited to L1-Korean learners of English. One of the goals of the present paper, therefore, is to check whether partitivity effects hold across learners’ L1s (as long as the L1 lacks articles). We also examine whether different semantic factors contribute to L2-article choice equally. Based on our experimental data, we argue that semantic universals are accessible to L2-learners regardless of their L1, but that some semantic factors may be more persistent than others in causing L2-article errors. The effects of each semantic factor may vary depending on learners’ overall L2-proficiency. Specifically, it is argued that partitivity effects are more persistent than specificity effects; consequently, more advanced L2-learners are more sensitive to partitivity effects than specificity effects. We speculate that this difference results from the entailment relationships between different semantic factors.