中国英语学习者对英语与格转换的习得研究被引量：14

Chinese EFL learners' acquisition of the English dative alternation

导出

摘要本研究考察中国英语学习者对英语与格转换狭域限制的习得情况,并分析和探讨了语义、频率和迁移三大因素。结果显示:习得与英语水平同步发展,对狭域语义和形态音位限制的敏感度会逐步提高,但始终存在介宾与格结构偏向和母语迁移。动词的典型性有益于语义限制习得,却有碍于形态音位限制习得。频率对非典型动词和低水平学习者的作用更明显,且对相对前摄的双边作用的方向和大小具有调节功能。 The present study investigates Chinese EFL learners' acquisition of the narrow-range constraints on English dative alternation focusing on the effects of semantics,frequency and transfer.The experimental results indicate that the acquisition parallels to the general target language proficiency,with constant PO(prepositional-object dative construction)bias and L1 transfer.The verbal semantic typicality promotes the acquisition of semantic constraints but blocks the acquisition of morphonological constraint.The raw frequency fosters the acquisition of the untypical verbs,favours the less proficient learners,and also regulates the effects of the relative preemption.

作者韩百敬薛芬

机构地区丽江师范高等专科学校外语系云南大学旅游文化学院外语系

出处《外语教学与研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2014年第5期759-770,801,共12页 Foreign Language Teaching and Research

基金云南省教育厅科学研究基金项目"外语情景下语言学习与多元文化认同的动态建构研究"(2014Y644)的资助

关键词与格转换狭域限制语义频率迁移

分类号 H319 [语言文字—英语]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献24

1Ambridge, B., J. Pine, C. Rowland & F. Chang. 2012. The roles of verb semantics, en- trenchment, and morphonology in the retreat from dative argtanent-structure overgen- eralization errors [J]. Language 88: 45-81.
2Ambridge, B., J. Pine, C. Rowland & C. Young. 2008. The effect of verb semantic class and verb frequency (entrenchment) on children's and adults' graded judgments of argument structure overgeneralization errors [J]. Cognition 106: 87-129.
3Ambridge, B., J. Pine, C. Rowland, F. Chang & A. Bidgood. 2013. The retreat from over- generalization in child language acquisition.. Word learning, morphology, and verb ar- gument structure [J]. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews .. Cognitive Science 4.. 47-62.
4Ambridge, B., J. Pine, C. Rowland, D. Freudenthal & F. Chang. 2014. Avoiding dative overgeneralisation errors: Semantics, statistics or both? [J]. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 29: 218-243.
5Bley-Vroman, R. & N. Yoshinaga. 1992. Broad and narrow constraints on the English dative alternation: Some fundamental differences between native speakers and foreign language learners [J]. University of Hawai'i Working Papers in ESL 11: 157-199.
6Bresnan, J., A. Cueni, T. Nikitina & H. Baayen. 2007. Predicting the dative alternation [A]. In G. Bourne, I. Krarner &J. Zwarts (eds.). Cognitive Foundations of Interpreta- tion [C]. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Science. 69-94.
7Campbell, A. & M. Tomasello. 2001. The acquisition of English dative constructions [J]. Applied Psycholinguistics 22.. 253-267.
8Goldberg, A. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Struc- ture [M]. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
9Gropen, J., S. Pinker, M. Hollander, R. Goldberg & R. Wilson. 1989. The learnability and acquisition of the dative alternation in English [J]. Language 65.. 203-257.
10Inagaki, S. 1997. Japanese and Chinese learners' acquisition of the narrow-range rules for the dative alternation in English [J]. Language Learning 47: 637-669.