Comparisons of L2 Learners’ Written Performance by Two Types of Error Analysis
1
조회
0
다운로드
7
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study compares the results of linguistic errors of Korean EFL college learners’ corpus with two types of error analysis. 86 female college students participated in the study, and wrote a narrative essay through the Criterion®. After their essays were rated by e-rater®, they were divided into three proficiency groups according to writing scores and then linguistic errors were classified, based on Ferris’ (2002) error classification. All linguistic errors were analyzed by two different frames such as conventional analysis (i.e., the number of each error type and its percentage) and T-unit analysis (i.e., the number of each error type was divided by T-unit). Through the comparison of two error analysis, morphological errors were the most frequent, followed by lexical errors across writing proficiency levels. Syntactic errors were the least frequent among these three main types of errors. The same results arose from two different error ratio measures, but error distribution across writing proficiency levels differed. In particular, error ratio measures with T-units yielded more accurate results when analyzing error distribution across writing proficiency levels. The findings suggest that error analysis through this new ratio measure presents more verifiable results than through conventional analysis.
Abstract
This study compares the results of linguistic errors of Korean EFL college learners’ corpus with two types of error analysis. 86 female college students participated in the study, and wrote a narrative essay through the Criterion®. After their essays were rated by e-rater®, they were divided into three proficiency groups according to writing scores and then linguistic errors were classified, based on Ferris’ (2002) error classification. All linguistic errors were analyzed by two different frames such as conventional analysis (i.e., the number of each error type and its percentage) and T-unit analysis (i.e., the number of each error type was divided by T-unit). Through the comparison of two error analysis, morphological errors were the most frequent, followed by lexical errors across writing proficiency levels. Syntactic errors were the least frequent among these three main types of errors. The same results arose from two different error ratio measures, but error distribution across writing proficiency levels differed. In particular, error ratio measures with T-units yielded more accurate results when analyzing error distribution across writing proficiency levels. The findings suggest that error analysis through this new ratio measure presents more verifiable results than through conventional analysis.
참고문헌 (22)
- Bardovi-Harlig, K, "Attainment of syntactic and morphological accuracy by advanced language learners", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11(1), pp.17~34 (1989)
- 차경애, "An Error Analysis of Korean University Students’ Writing", Foreign Languages Education, 11(2), pp.149~169 (2004), 한국외국어교육학회
- Corder, S. P, "The significance of learners’ errors", International Review of Applied Linguistics, 5(4), pp.162~170 (1967)
- Dulay, H, "Language two" (1982), Oxford University Press
- Ellis, R, "Are classroom and naturalistic acquisition the same?", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11, pp.305~328 (1989)
- Ellis, R, "The study of second language acquisition" (1994), Oxford University Press
- Ellis, R, "Second language acquisition" (1997), Oxford University Press
- Ferris, D. R, "Treatment of error in second language student writing" (2002), The University of Michigan Press
- Foster, P, "The influence of planning and task type on second language performance", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, pp.299~323 (1996)
- Gass, S. M, "Second language acquisition: An introductory course" (2008), Routledge
- Hirano, K, "The effect of audience on the efficacy of objective measures of EFL proficiency in Japanese university students", Annual Review of English Language Education in Japan, 2, pp.21~30 (1991)
- Hunt, K. W, "Syntactic maturity in school children and adults", Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 35(1), pp.1~67 (1970)
- 황은경, "Korean EFL Learners’ Language Development across Proficiency Levels in Written Productions", 영어교육, 67(3), pp.27~50 (2012), 한국영어교육학회
- Kim, J. Y, "Error analysis: A study of written errors of Korean EFL learners", Journal of the Applied Linguistics Association of Korea, 14(2), pp.21~58 (1998)
- Larsen-Freeman, D, "The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English", Applied Linguistics, 27(4), pp.590~619 (2006)
- 이준용, "영작문의 오류 분석 및 처리", 새한영어영문학, 51(2), pp.241~261 (2009), 새한영어영문학회
- Norris, J. M, "Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA: The case of complexity", Applied Linguistics, 30(4), pp.555~578 (2009)
- Ortega, L, "Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college-level L2 writing", Applied Linguistics, 24(4), pp.492~518 (2003)
- Park, Chongwon, "Revisiting error analysis in English composition.", 영어교육연구, 19(1), pp.57~3 (2007), 팬코리아영어교육학회
- Perkins, K, "Using objective methods of attained writing proficiency to discriminate among holistic evaluations", TESOL Quarterly, 14, pp.61~67 (1980)
- Selinker, L, "Interlanguage", International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10(3), pp.201~231 (1972)
- Wolfe-Quintero, K, "Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy & complexity" (1998), University of Hawaii Press