A Multifactorial Analysis of Can and May in Korean EFL Learners Writings
1
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
It is well known that can and may have similar meanings and that the choice of the modal auxiliary in the English sentences is not arbitrary in native speakers' writings. This paper compares the distributions of these two modal auxiliaries in the EFL learners' writings with those of native speakers and examines which factor made the Korean EFL learners' writings non-native. For this purpose, this study took the Competition Model (CM; Bates and MacWhitney, 1982, 1989) as a theoretical framework. We used two corpora (the Korean component of TOEFL11 corpus and the ICE-USA) and extracted all the sentences with can and may. Then, twenty factors were encoded in the extracted sentences, which were subsequently analyzed with R. The encoded data were statistically analyzed with (binary) logistic regression and Behavioral Profile. Through the analysis, the following facts were observed: (i) the uses and distributions of can and may in the Korean EFL learners' writings are similar to those of (American) native speakers' counterpart, (ii) three factors (SubjMorph, SubjPers, and Mood) make the Korean EFL learners' English non-native, and (iii) the L1 effects were also observed in spite of similarities in the use of the modal auxiliaries between Korean learners of English and native speakers of American English.
Abstract
It is well known that can and may have similar meanings and that the choice of the modal auxiliary in the English sentences is not arbitrary in native speakers' writings. This paper compares the distributions of these two modal auxiliaries in the EFL learners' writings with those of native speakers and examines which factor made the Korean EFL learners' writings non-native. For this purpose, this study took the Competition Model (CM; Bates and MacWhitney, 1982, 1989) as a theoretical framework. We used two corpora (the Korean component of TOEFL11 corpus and the ICE-USA) and extracted all the sentences with can and may. Then, twenty factors were encoded in the extracted sentences, which were subsequently analyzed with R. The encoded data were statistically analyzed with (binary) logistic regression and Behavioral Profile. Through the analysis, the following facts were observed: (i) the uses and distributions of can and may in the Korean EFL learners' writings are similar to those of (American) native speakers' counterpart, (ii) three factors (SubjMorph, SubjPers, and Mood) make the Korean EFL learners' English non-native, and (iii) the L1 effects were also observed in spite of similarities in the use of the modal auxiliaries between Korean learners of English and native speakers of American English.
참고문헌 (25)
- Adjemian, C., "On the nature of Interlanguage systems", Language Learning, 26(2), pp.297~320 (1976)
- Atkins, B, "Semantic ID tags: Corpus evidence for dictionary senses", Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference of the UW Centre for the New Oxford English Dictionary, pp.17~36 (1987)
- Bates, E., "Language Acquisition: The State of the Art", pp.73~218 (1982), Cambridge University Press
- Bates, E., "The Cross-linguistic Study of Sentence Processing", pp.3~73 (1989), Cambridge University Press
- Bialystok, E., "Interlanguage is not a state of mind : An evaluation of the construct for second language acquisition", Applied Linguistics, 6, pp.101~117 (1985)
- Blanchard, D., "TOEFL11: A Corpus of Non-native English", Educational Testing Service, ~ (2013)
- Coates, J., "The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries" (1983), Croom Helm
- Collins, P., "Modals and Quasi-modals in English" (2009), Rodopi
- Deshors, S., "Multifactorial Study of the Uses of May and Can in French-English Interlanguage", Ph.D., pp.2010
- Deshors, S., "Corpus Methods for Semantics: Quantitative Studies in Polysemy and Synonymy", pp.179~204 (2014), John Bejamins
- Deshors, S., "Subjectivity and Epistenicity: Stance Strategies in Discourse and Narration", pp.329~348 (2014), Lund University Press
- Granger, S., "Computer Learner Corpora, Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Teaching", pp.3~33 (2002), John Benjamins
- Gries, St., "Multifactorial Analysis in Corpus Linguistics: A Study of Particle Placement" (2003), Continuum Press
- Gries, St., "Behavioral Profiles: A fine-grained and quantitative approach in Corpus-based lexical semantics", The Mental Lexicon, 5(3), pp.323~346 (2010)
- Gries, St., "Behavioral Profiles 1. 01 : A Program for R 2. 7. 1 and Higher", ~ (2010)
- Gries, St., "Behavioral Profiles : A corpus-based perspective on synonymy and antonymy", ICAME Journal, 34, pp.121~150 (2010)
- Hanks, P., "Do word meanings exist?", Computers and the Humanities, 34(1, pp.2) (2000), 205~215
- Jarvis, S., "Methodological rigor in the study of transfer: Identifying L1 influence in the Interlanguage lexicon", Language Learning, 50(2), pp.245~309 (2000)
- 전기석, "A Statistical Analysis of Can and May in British and Indian English", 영어학연구, 21(3), pp.63~84 (2015), 한국영어학학회[DOI]
- Langacker, R., "Grammar and Conceputalization" (2000), Mouton
- Leech, G., "Towards a Semantic Description of English" (1969), Indiana University Press
- Odlin, T., "Language Transfer" (1989), Cambridge University Press
- Odlin, T., "The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition", pp.436~386 (2003), Blackwell
- R Core Team., "R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing" (2016), R Foundation for Statistical Computing
- Selinker, Larry., "Language transfer", General Linguistics, 9(2), pp.67~92 (1969)