簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表
研究生： 廖于涵
Yu-han Carol Liao
論文名稱： 台灣學生英文分裂句之第二語言習得
Second Language Acquisition of English It-Clefts by Taiwanese Students
指導教授： 陳純音
Chen, Chun-Yin
學位類別： 碩士
Master
系所名稱： 英語學系
Department of English
論文出版年： 2014
畢業學年度： 102
語文別： 英文
論文頁數： 111
中文關鍵詞： 分裂句 、焦點結構 、第一語言轉移 、難度次序 、語法功能效應 、對比效應 、語言程度效應 、第二語言習得
英文關鍵詞： cleft sentence, focus construction, L1 transfer, difficulty order, grammatical function effects, contrast effects, proficiency effects, second language acquisition
論文種類： 學術論文
相關次數： 點閱：259  下載：45 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報

    • 本研究旨在探討以中文為母語的英語學習者對英文分裂句之第二語言習得情形，主要研究的議題包括第一語言轉移現象、對不同類型的分裂句之難易次序、分裂句之習得是否受對比效應之影響及英語程度是否影響分裂句之習得。本研究採用接受度判斷測驗。受試者分為實驗組及控制組。前者為六十位以中文為母語的大一學生，並按其英文程度分為初、中、高級三組。後者則為二十位英語母語人士。
    首先，研究發現，受試者對英文分裂句的理解受到第一語言轉移的影響。在七種不同詞性的分裂句中，受試者最能接受的是名詞、無詞組、介系詞，其次是非限定性子句及副詞，再者是限定性子句，最後是形容詞。此外，針對不同的語法功能，受試者最能接受的是具修飾性的語法功能，其中又以具修飾性的名詞詞組接受度最高。在對比效應方面，受試者較能接受在對比情況下的分裂句，顯示對比效應對英語分裂句的難度有所影響。最後，在語言程度效應方面，受試者之英語程度越高對英文分裂句的接受度也越高，顯示學習者對英文分裂句的接受度會隨著其英語能力的提升而有所增進。

    The present study aims to conduct an empirical study to explore Taiwanese students’ second language acquisition of English it-clefts. The issues the study probed into include L1 transfer, the difficulty order of English it-clefts with different types of clefted elements, grammatical function effects, contrast effects, and proficiency effects. Besides, an Acceptability Judgment Task was designed to examine the subjects’ preference. Sixty college freshmen were recruited and further divided into three experimental groups, i.e., low, intermediate, and high, based on their English proficiency levels. In addition, twenty English native speakers participated in the study as our control group.
    The overall results indicated that L1 transfer had an influence on the acquisition of English it-clefts. As for the seven types of English it-clefts with different syntactic categories, our subjects accepted the types of NP, Zero, and PP, followed by N-F CL and ADV P better, and their acceptance rates for FIN CL, and ADJ P were the worst of all. Besides, it was found that different grammatical functions exhibited different degrees of learning difficulties for our subjects. English it-clefts with Adjunct cleftd elements were found to obtain the highest acceptance, the NP Adjunct in particular. With regard to contrast effects, English it-clefts with contrast were found to be better accepted than those without contrast. Finally, our L2 learners’ acceptance rates were found to be influenced by their L2 proficiency. The better the subjects’ L2 abilities were, the better their acceptance of English it-clefts was.

    CHINESE ABSTRACT i ENGLISH ABSTRACT ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii TABLE OF CONTENTS vi LIST OF TABLES ix LIST OF FIGURES xi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xii CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Motivation 1 1.2 Theoretical Framework 3 1.3 Research Questions 5 1.4 Significance of the Study 6 1.5 Organization of the Thesis 7 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 9 2.1 Theoretical Studies of It-Clefts in English 9 2.1.1 Collins (1991) 9 2.1.2 Reeve (2011) 13 2.1.3 Velleman (2012) 17 2.1.4 Summary 20 2.2 Previous Empirical Studies of It-Clefts in English 20 2.2.1 Carrell (1977) 21 2.2.2 Callies & Keller (2008) 23 2.2.3 Callies (2009) 26 2.2.4 Summary 29 2.3 A New Classification of It-Clefts in English 31 2.3.1 Type 1: It + be + cleaved NP + that + cleft clause. 32 2.3.2 Type 2: It + be + cleaved PP + that + cleft clause. 35 2.3.3 Type 3: It + be + Zero + that + cleft clause. 36 2.3.4 Type 4: It + be + cleaved Finite Clause + that + cleft clause. 37 2.3.5 Type 5: It + be + cleaved Non-finite Clause + that + cleft clause. 38 2.3.6 Type 6: It + be + cleaved ADV P + that + cleft clause. 40 2.3.7 Type 7: It + be + cleaved ADJ P + that + cleft clause. 40 2.3.8 Summary 41 2.4 Summary of Chapter Two 42 CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH DESIGN 45 3.1 Subjects 45 3.2 Methods and Materials 46 3.3 Procedures 49 3.3.1 Pilot Study 50 3.3.2 Present Study 53 3.3.3 Scoring and Statistical Analysis 54 3.4 Summary of Chapter Three 55 CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 57 4.1 Transfer Effects 57 4.1.1 Overall Results 57 4.1.2 General Discussion 62 4.2 Difficulty Hierarchy of the Types of English It-clefts 64 4.2.1 Overall Results 64 4.2.2 General Discussion 69 4.3 Grammatical Function Effects 72 4.3.1 Overall Results: A First Look at Three Functions 73 4.3.2 Overall Results: A Second Look at Three Functions 76 4.3.3 General Discussion 80 4.4 Contrast Effects 82 4.4.1 Overall Results 83 4.4.2 General Discussion 85 4.5 Proficiency Effects 87 4.6 Summary of Chapter Four 89 CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION 91 5.1 Summary of the Major Findings 91 5.2 Pedagogical Implications 92 5.3 Limitations of the Present Study and Suggestions for Future Research 94 Bibliography 95 Appendix A The Acceptability Judgment Task of the Formal Study 101 Appendix B The Grammaticality Judgment Task of the Pilot Study 105 Appendix C The Discourse Completion Task of the Pilot Study 106 Appendix D Results of the Pilot Study 108 Appendix E The Consent Form 110 Appendix F A Distribution of Participants’ Ratings on the Negative 1 Category and the Negative 2 Category in the Acceptability Judgment Task 111

    Akmajian, A. 1970. On deriving cleft sentences from pseudo-cleft sentences. Linguistic Inquiry 1.2:149-168.
    Atlas, J. D., and Levinson, S. C. 1981. It-clefts, informativeness, and logical form. Radical Pragmatics 1-61.
    Austin, J. L. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Bardovi-Harlig, K. 1987. Markedness and Salience in Second-Language Acquisition*. Language Learning 37.3:385-407.
    Beaver, D., and Clark, B. 2003. Always and only: Why not all focus-sensitive operators are alike. Natural Language Semantics 11.4:323-362.
    Beaver, D., and Clark, B., 2008. Sense and Sensitivity: How Focus Determines Meaning. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
    Bolinger, D. 1972. A look at equations and cleft sentences. Studies for Einar Haugen 96-114.
    Callies, M. 2006. Information Highlighting and the Use of Focusing Devices in Advanced German Learner English. A Study in the Syntax-Pragmatics Interface in Second Language Acquisition. Ph.D Dissertation, Philipps-Universität Marburg.
    Callies, M. 2009. Information Highlighting in Advanced Learner English: The Syntax Pragmatics Interface in Second Language Acquisition. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.
    Callies, M., and Keller, W. R. 2008. The teaching and acquisition of focus constructions: An integrated approach to language awareness across the curriculum. Language Awareness 17.3:249-266.
    Carrell, P. L. 1977. Empirical investigations of indirectly conveyed meaning: assertion versus presupposition in first and second language acquisition. Language Learning 27.2:353-366.
    Carroll, M., Murcia-Serra, J., Watorek, M., and Bendiscioli, A. 2000. The relevance of information organization to second language acquisition studies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22.3:441-466.
    Carter, R. 2003. Language awareness. ELT Journal 57.1:64-65.
    Chafe, W. 1976. Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. Subject and Topic 25-56.
    Collins, P. C. 1991. Cleft and Pseudo-cleft Constructions in English. London: Routledge.
    Coppock, E., and Beaver, D. 2011. Sole sisters. Proceedings of SALT 21:197-217.
    Davidse, K. 2000. A constructional approach to clefts. Linguistics 38:1101-1132.
    Declerck, R. 1983. Predicational clefts. Lingua 61:9-45.
    Eckman, F. R. 1977. Markedness and the contrastive analysis hypothesis. Language Learning 27.2:315-330.
    Eckman, F. R. 1985. Some theoretical and pedagogical implications of the markedness differential hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 7.3:289-307.
    Ellis, R. 2004. The definition and measurement of L2 explicit knowledge. Language Learning 54.2:227-275.
    Faerch, C., and Kasper, G. 1987. Perspectives on language transfer. Applied Linguistics 8.2:111-36.
    Fries, C. C. 1945. Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Language. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
    Gabriele, A. 2009. Transfer and transition in the SLA of aspect: a bidirectional study of learners of English and Japanese. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 31:371-402.
    Gass, S. M. 1988. Second language acquisition and linguistic theory: The role of language transfer. Linguistic Theory in Second Language Acquisition 384-403.
    Halliday, M. A. K. 1967. Notes on transitivity and theme in English, Part 2. Journal of Linguistics 3:199-244.
    Halvorse, P. K. 1978. The Syntax and Semantics of Cleft Sentences. Ph.D Dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.
    Hasselgård, H. 2004. Adverbials in IT-cleft constructions. Language and Computers 49.1:195-211.
    Hedberg, N. 2000. On the referential status of clefts. Language 76:891-920.
    Hendriks, P., and Koster, C. 2010. Production/comprehension asymmetries in language acquisition. Lingua 120.8:1887-1897.
    Hinkel, E. 2002. Second Language Writers' Text: Linguistic and Rhetorical Features. London: Routledge.
    Ho, Harvey Hsin-chang. 2008. Second Language Acquisition of English Telicity-Related Constructions. MA Thesis: National Taiwan Normal University.
    Horn, L. 1981. Exhaustiveness and the semantics of clefts. Proceedings of NELS 11:125-142.
    Hutchinson, L. G. 1971. Presupposition and belief-inferences. Seventh Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society 134-141.
    Jackendoff, R. 1972. Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    Jespersen, O. 1937. Analytic Syntax. Copenhagen: Levin & Munksgaard.

    Kasper, G. 1998. Interlanguage pragmatics. Learning Foreign and Second Languages 183-208.
    Kellerman, E. 1983. Now you see it, now you don’t. Language Transfer in Language Learning 54.12:112-134.
    Kiss, T. 2005. Semantic constraints on relative clause extraposition. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 23.2:281-334.
    Lado, R. 1957. Linguistics across Culture. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
    Lambrecht, K. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence form: Topic, Focus and the Mental Representation of Discourse Referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Larsen‐Freeman, D. E. 1976. An explanation for the morpheme acquisition order of second language learners. Language Learning 26.1:125-134.
    Li, C. N., and Thompson, S. A. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. University of California Press.
    Li, Cherry. 1980. A Constrastive Study of English and Chinese Cleft and Pseudo-cleft Construction. MA Thesis: National Taiwan Normal University.
    Liu, Stella Hsi-hui. 2011. Second Language Acquisition of If-Conditionals in English. MA Thesis: National Taiwan Normal University.
    Lorenz, G. R. 1999. Adjective Intensification: Learners versus Native Speakers: a Corpus Study of Argumentative Writing. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
    Munnich, E., Flynn, S., and Martohardjono, G. 1994. Elicited imitation and grammaticality judgment tasks: What they measure and how they relate to each other. Research Methodology in Second Language Acquisition 227-243.
    Muraki, M. 1970. Presupposition and pseudo-clefting. Sixth Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society 390-399.
    Odlin, T. 1989. Language Transfer: Cross-Linguistic Influence in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Plag, I. 1994. Avoidance in oral L2 production. The encoding of new referents in English interlanguage narratives. The Dynamics of Language Processing. Essays in Honor of Hans W. Dechert 33-44.
    Prince, E. F. 1978. A comparison of WH-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. Language 54:883-906.
    Pritchett, B. 1988. Garden path phenomena and the grammatical basis of language Processing. Language 64:539-576.
    Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., and Svartvik, J. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London; New York: Longman.
    Radford, A. 1988. Transformational Grammar: A First Course. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Reeve, M. 2011. The syntactic structure of English clefts. Lingua 121:142-171.
    Rothman, J. 2007. Sometimes they use it, sometimes they don’t: an epistemological discussion of L2 morphological production and its use as a competence measurement. Applied Linguistics 25:609-614.
    Rutherford, W. 1983. Language typology and language transfer. Language Transfer in Language Learning 358-370.
    Sasaki, M., and Hirose, K. 1996. Explanatory variables for EFL students’ expository writing. Language Learning 46:137-174.
    Sawetaiyaram, T. 2012. Effects of verb categories, language proficiency level, and textbook roles on the acquisition of Japanese imperfective aspect marker –te i ru. Japanese Studies Journal 29:102-109.
    Schachter, J., and Rutherford, W. 1979. Discourse funciton and language transfer. Working Papers in Bilingualism 19:1-12.
    Schmidt, R. 1992. Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 13:206-226.
    Shi, D. 2000. Topic and topic-comment constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Language 383-408.
    Stallings, L. M., MacDonald, M. C., and O'Seaghdha, P. G. 1998. Phrasal ordering constraints in sentence production: Phrase length and verb disposition in heavy-NP shift. Journal of Memory and Language 39.3:392-417.
    Stockwell, R. P., Bowen, J., and John, W. 1965. The Grammatical Structure of English and Spanish. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Strawson, P. F. 1952. Introduction to Logical Theory. New York : Wiley and Sons.
    Sugaya, N., and Shirai, Y. 2007. The acquisition of progressive and resultative meanings of the imperfective aspect markers by L2 learners of Japanese. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 29:1-38.
    Tarallo, F., and Myhill, J. 1983. Interference and natural language insecond language acquisition. Language Learning 33:55-76.
    Tarone, E., and Parrish B. 1988. Task-related variation in interlanguage: the case of articles. Language Learning 38:21-44.
    Tarone, E. 1985. Variability in interlanguage use: a study of style-shifting in morphology and syntax. Language Learning 35:373-403.
    Tasseva-Kurktchieva, M. 2007. What about grammar? Comprehension and production in the initial stages of L2 acquisition. Proceedings of the 9th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference 242-250.
    Van Dijk, T. A. (ed.). 2011. Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction. Sage Publications.

    Velleman, D., Beaver, D., Destruel, E., Bumford, D., Onea, E., and Coppock, L. 2013. It-clefts are IT (inquiry terminating) constructions. Proceedings of SALT 22:441-460.
    Weinreich, U. 1953. Languages in Contacts. New York: Linguistic Circle of New York.
    White, L. 1986. Markedness and parameter setting: some implications for a theory of adult second language acquisition. Markedness 309-327.
    Zhang, Heyou. 2012. “是”字結構的句法語義研究︰漢語語義性特點的一個視角. Peking: Peking University Press.

    下載圖示
    QR CODE