The Acquisition of Non-SVC Constructions in English by Taiwanese College Students: An Error Analysis

Abstract

在英語為第二語言的產出當中，不合文法的多重動詞構式時常出現在第一語言允許連動構式但第二語言為非連動語言（如英語）的語言使用者之輸出，然而這些文法錯誤的本質仍未獲得完整的討論。有鑑於此，本研究立足於認知與形式的關聯，透過錯誤分析法探討受試者對於產出以及正確鑑別華語須以連動結構呈現時英語的非連動結構之能力。本研究有三十六位英語為二語的臺灣籍學習者，在實驗中，受試者首先以指定的行為事件之圖片及二至三個動詞造出非連動結構的句子，為了得到連動或非連動的產出，受試者被引導使用所有指定的動詞造句；另外，在文法判斷任務當中，受試者須針對語料標示其合文法性。研究結果顯示，目的性連動結構、使役連動結構以及「起始＋核心＋終結」連動結構對於學習者而言最為困難。這些文法錯誤指出，華語為第一語言人士無法從母語當中轉移目的和使役連動構式，而且錯誤地轉移「起始＋核心＋終結」連動結構。此外，相較於正確地產出話語，正確識別合文法性對於受試者而言較為容易。產出任務中的文法錯誤包含語際和語內錯誤，例如省略、過度泛化、公式化be-形式插入；至於受試者群體表現，數據上高階初學者在各方面之於初階學習者皆呈現較佳的表現。這些發現能夠幫助學習者進一步了解他們文法錯誤的本質，且示意著如同更緊密的形式和意義之間的連結之必要，更多、更長久的二語輸入是必須的。In English L2 production, the use of ungrammatical multi-verb constructions can occur in those whose L1 allows for serial verb constructions (SVC) but whose L2 is a non-SVC like English. There appears to be a gap in the research to better understand the nature of these errors. Adopting the assumption of a connection between cognition and form this study explores through an error analysis participants’ abilities to both produce and correctly identify non-SVC structures in English where an SVC is required in Mandarin. In a study of 36 Taiwanese L2 English learners, participants were first given pictures with an action event and two to three verbs to create non-SVC sentences. They were instructed to write out sentences using all the verbs in hopes of producing utterances with SVC where required or a non-SVC. They were also given grammaticality judgements and asked to mark an utterance as grammatical or not. It was found that purposive SVC’s, causative SVC’s, and the inception + core + termination SVC were the most difficult for learners. These errors indicate L1 Mandarin failed to transfer purposive and causative SVC’s from their L1 and incorrectly transferred the inception + core + termination event from the L1. Participants had an easier time correctly identifying grammaticality judgements than correctly producing utterances. The errors in the production task included both interlingual and intralingual errors, such as omission, overgeneralization, and formulaic be-form insertions. The high-beginner group scored statistically better in each of these areas compared to the beginner group. These findings may help learners better understand the nature of their errors and indicate more and longer periods of L2 input are needed as well as more connections between form and meaning.