Korean EFL Learners’ Production of English Relative Clauses
1
조회
0
다운로드
10
인용
0
참고문헌
초록
Speakers constantly choose among alternative language structures that express the same meaning. The question of why speakers tend to prefer some structures over others raises issues involving language typology and processing. Relative clause (RC) structures are widely used to investigate these issues. Previous research on English RCs has reported that adults and children who speak English as a first language find it easier to produce subject RCs than object RCs. To expand this discussion, this study investigates L1-Korean English learners’ production of two types of RCs. The study tests the extent to which native speakers and non-native speakers of English choose passive subject RCs over active direct object RCs when describing animate entities. Data were collected from 10 native speakers and 18 EFL leaners using a picture-elicited production task. The results indicate two main findings: (i) L2 English learners’ production shows a strong preference for subject RCs and (ii) L2 English learners tend to employ an avoidance strategy in contexts that elicit direct object RCs, instead producing passive subject RCs. The patterns of response provide strong evidence for a subject-object asymmetry in L2 English learners’ production that is identical to that of L1 English speakers.
Abstract
Speakers constantly choose among alternative language structures that express the same meaning. The question of why speakers tend to prefer some structures over others raises issues involving language typology and processing. Relative clause (RC) structures are widely used to investigate these issues. Previous research on English RCs has reported that adults and children who speak English as a first language find it easier to produce subject RCs than object RCs. To expand this discussion, this study investigates L1-Korean English learners’ production of two types of RCs. The study tests the extent to which native speakers and non-native speakers of English choose passive subject RCs over active direct object RCs when describing animate entities. Data were collected from 10 native speakers and 18 EFL leaners using a picture-elicited production task. The results indicate two main findings: (i) L2 English learners’ production shows a strong preference for subject RCs and (ii) L2 English learners tend to employ an avoidance strategy in contexts that elicit direct object RCs, instead producing passive subject RCs. The patterns of response provide strong evidence for a subject-object asymmetry in L2 English learners’ production that is identical to that of L1 English speakers.
참고문헌 (39)
- Aissen, J., "Differential object marking : Iconicity vs. economy", Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 21(3), pp.435~483 (2003)
- Eckman, F. R., "On the generalization of relative clause instruction in the acquisition of English as a second language", Applied Linguistics, 9(1), pp.1~20 (1988)
- Ferreira, V. S., "Effect of ambiguity and lexical availability on syntactic and lexical production", Cognitive Psychology, 40(4), pp.296~340 (2000)
- Gass, S., "Language transfer and universal grammatical relations", Language Learning, 29(2), pp.327~344 (1979)
- Gennari, S. P., "Animacy and competition in relative clause production : A cross-linguistic investigation", Cognitive Psychology, 65(2), pp.141~176 (2012)
- Gibson, E., "Linguistic complexity : Locality of syntactic dependencies", Cognition, 68(1), pp.1~76 (1998)
- Gibson, E., "Image, Language, Brain", pp.95~126 (2000)
- Gibson, E., "Image, language, brain", pp.95~126 (2000), MIT Press
- Givón, T., "Iconicity in syntax", pp.187~219 (1985), John Benjamins Publishing Company
- Goodluck, H., "The structure and acquisition of relative clauses in Serbo-Croatian", Language Acquisition, 5(4), pp.285~315 (1996)
- Hamburger, H., "Language Development: Syntax and semantics", pp.245~274 (1982), Erlbaum
- Hamilton, R. L., "Is implicational generalization unidirectional and maximal? Evidence from relativization instruction in a second language", Language Learning, 44(1), pp.123~157 (1994)
- Hawkins, J. A., "Efficiency and complexity in grammars" (2004), Oxford University Press
- Hsu, C. C. N., "Young children’s production of head-final relative clauses : Elicited production data from Chinese children", Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 18(4), pp.323~360 (2009)
- 장종득, "Noun Phrase Accessibility Hierarchy Amongst Korean EFL Students", 언어과학연구, 34(1), pp.293~308 (2005), 언어과학회
- Keenan, E. L., "Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar", Linguistic Inquiry, 8(1), pp.63~99 (1977)
- Kemper, S., "Tracking talking: Dual task costs of planning and producing speech for young versus older adults", Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 18(3), pp.257~279 (2011)
- Kim, Chae-Eun., "Asymmetries in the production of relative clauses: First and second language acquisition", doctor, pp.2013
- 김채은, "Korean Children’s Acquisition of Relative Clauses", 어학연구, 51(2), pp.421~441 (2015), 언어교육원
- Kim, Young-Joo, "The acquisition of relative clauses in English and Korean:Development in spontaneous production" (1987), Hanshin Publishing Company
- King, J., "Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory", Journal of Memory and Language, 30(5), pp.580~602 (1991)
- 이온순, "The Frequency Effect on L2 English Learners’ Sentence Comprehension: The Case of Object Relative Clauses", 현대영어교육, 15(3), pp.124~139 (2014), 현대영어교육학회
- Levy, R., "Expectation-based syntactic comprehension", Cognition, 106(3), pp.1126~1177 (2008)
- MacDonald, M. C., "How language production shapes language form and comprehension", Frontiers in Psychology, 4, pp.226~ (2013)
- MacWhinney, B., "The emergence of linguistic form in time", Connection Science, 17(3-4), pp.191~211 (2005)
- Mak, W. M., "Animacy in processing relative clauses : The hikers that rocks crush", Journal of Memory and Language, 54(4), pp.466~490 (2006)
- McDaniel, D., "How children’s relatives solve a problem for minimalism", Language, 74(2), pp.308~334 (1998)
- McKee, C., "Resumptive pronouns in English relative clauses", Language Acquisition, 9(2), pp.113~156 (2001)
- McKee, C., "Relatives children say", Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27(5), pp.573~596 (1998)
- Montag, J. L., "Word order doesn’t matter: Relative clause production in English and Japanese", Proceedings of the 31th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp.2594~2599 (2009)
- O’Grady, W., "Processing determinism", Language Learning, 65(1), pp.6~32 (2015)
- O’Grady, W., "A subject-object asymmetry in the acquisition of relative clauses in Korean as a second language", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25(3), pp.433~448 (2003)
- Schulz, B., "Wh-scope marking in English interlanguage grammars: Transfer and processing effects on the second language acquisition of complex wh-questions", doctor, pp.2006
- Tanaka, N., "An asymmetry in the acquisition of Tagalog relative clauses", doctor, pp.2016
- Traxler, M. J., "Processing subject and object relative clauses : Evidence from eye movements", Journal of Memory and Language, 47(1), pp.69~90 (2002)
- Verhoeven, E., "Thematic prominence and animacy asymmetries. Evidence from a cross-linguistic production study", Lingua, 143, pp.129~161 (2014)
- Wells, J. B., "Experience and sentence processing : Statistical learning and relative clause comprehension", Cognitive Psychology, 58(2), pp.250~271 (2009)
- Wolfe-Quintero, K. W., "Learnability and the acquisition of extraction in relative clauses and wh-questions", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14(1), pp.39~70 (1992)
- Zukowski, A., "Elicited production of relative clauses in children with Williams syndrome", Language and Cognitive Processes, 24(1), pp.1~43 (2009)