Transcript The Acquisition of English Dative Alternation

The Acquisition of English
Dative Alternation
報告者: N95C0015 吳冠瑩
N95C0024 陳重諺
Abstract
This experimental study investigates L1 transfer and
overgeneralization of Chinese L2 Interlanguage
development by focusing on the acquisition of
English dative alternation by Taiwanese adult
learners.
In Chinese, the semantic constraints are less an issue,
and most verbs become susceptible to dative
alternation on adding the morpheme gei.
Questions
• In L2 acquisition of the dative alternation,
would Chinese EFL learners be affected by
the L1 structure [V+gei DP DP]?
• Would they acquire English dative
alternation on a verb-by-verb basis or would
they internalize a rule from the input and
overgeneralize it to non-alternating verb?
Finding
• Even within the same L1, differences in the
morphological and syntactic structure for
Chinese to-dative and for-dative verbs will
somehow alter their paths of interlanguage
development in acquiring English dative
construction.
Introduction
• Bley-Vroman (1990): adult learners lost
their ability to access Universal Grammar
(UG), and have available only the properties
of UG that exist in their first language (L1).
• L2 adults rely largely on the input of L2 or
refer to L1 in their Interlanguage(IL)
development.
The main issues of this study
• Is the frequency of the input essential to
acquisition?
• Which developmental errors arise in adult
L2 acquisition?
• After adult learners have internalized their
own specific rules in the target language,
would they overgeneralize the rules?
Another Issues
• We conduct three experiments based on
factors of frequency, L1 structure, and the
degree of overgeneralization.
• How differences between to-datives and
for-datives in L1 result in changes in
Interlanguage development paths, and the
complex nature of factors in language
acquisition.
Theoretical Background
• Dative verb: allows alternation between two
forms – one with both objects parallel and another
with the indirect object within a prepositional
phrase.
Ex:a. John gave an apple to Mary.
DP(DO) PP(IO)
b. John gave Mary an apple.
DP(IO) DP(DO)
• Not all verbs take two objects alternate.
• Not all dative verbs that allow alternation in
all circumstances
• Is there a principle that regulates the
alternation?
• Is it possible for a L2 learner to acquire
such a principle?
Principles that guide English
dative alternation
• Semantic constraints are considered to be
responsible for the alternation of the two
forms.
• Pinker’s Broad Range Rule: alternation is
allowed only when the goal or beneficiary
argument is the potential possessor of the
theme argument.
• The prepositional form has thus a thematic
core – “X causes Y to go to Z”
• The double-object form has the thematic
core “X causes Z have Y”
• Ex: John sent Mary a letter.
*John sent Spain a letter.
(the goal argument Spain can be no
potential possessor of the theme a letter)
Chinese dative verbs and the gei
morpheme
• Chinese dative construction is made
productive by the morpheme gei.
• The morpheme gei alone can either function
as a verb or as a preposition marking the
goal argument after verbs.
Ex: 小玉給小明一本書 (v)
小花寄給小強一封信 (prep.)
Nevertheless, when gei functions as a verb,
it allows only the double-object form.
Ex:
老師給小明一支筆 (double-object)
*老師給一支筆(給)小明
Three categories of Chinese dative verbs
The syntactic framework of dative
• Chinese dative verbs pattern syntactically
with English dative verbs in that they allow
both the prepositional dative form and the
double-object construction, but differ from
English dative verbs in that gei is conflated
with the main verb in the double-object
dative construction.
L1 Acquisition of the English Dative
Alternation
• (Bowerman,1988) During development
children tend to overgeneralize the doubleobject form of non-dative verbs.
• (Mazurkewich and White): Children’s
awareness of the possession constraint.
• L1 children rely on internal mechanisms to
form rules for determining dative
alternation.
L2 Acquisition of the English Dative
Alternation
• (Inagaki, 1997): adult L2 learners lose their ability
to access UG and those who start to learn a L2 as
adults have available only the properties of UG
that are instantiated in their L1.
• Ex: *志明丟春嬌一顆球
志明丟給春嬌一顆球
gei is not a preposition but a lexicalized morpheme
to conflate with the main verb.
Summary of L2 acquisition of English
dative alternation
• Children: with a positive input continues to
appear, an internal restructuring shapes L2
development of Children.
• Adults: L2 acquisition is restrained by both
the properties of UG instantiated in L1 and
frequency of the input.
Questions
1. Whether Chinese-speaking adult learners would
first accept the L1 【V+gei DP DP】structure
(equivalent to 【V+to DP DP】in English )
instead of the double-object dative form.
2. Whether, as their level of proficiency improves,
Chinese adult learners would accept the doubleobject form and overgeneralize the form to all
dative verbs, even the ones without dative
alternation.
3. Whether the Fundamental Difference
Hypothesis and the frequency of the input
are important factors in acquisition of
English dative alternation by Chinesespeaking adults
Interlanguage Development of Chinese Adult Learners’ Dative Acquisition
Experiment One
• Whether the beginning L2 learners would
transfer their L1 grammar in acquiring the
English dative structure.
• Whether participants can recognize the
incorrect double-object dative form as they
progress in their interlanguage development.
Hypothesis 1
• The English incorrect DOD dative form
【V+to DP DP】will have quite high
acceptability in the group of low English
proficiency due to L1 transfer. As the levels
of proficiency of participants improve, they
should be able to recognize the incorrect L1
structure 【V+gei DP DP】in L2 syntax.
Results
• To-dative
Chinese learners do have interlanguage development and
their to-dative structure improves from junior to senior, and
then to undergraduate and finally to graduate years
1.2
1
0.8
gei
0.6
DOD
0.4
PPD
0.2
0
junior
senior
undergraduate
graduate
Figure: Accuracy rate of to-datives among 4 subject groups
• To-dative form pretty clearly at the very
beginning and there was not much
difference among the four groups.