【学术助力】中国学习者语料库中的动品组合研究·认知语言学视角

管博  著

上海交通大学出版社  出版

1. Background

   Although it is widely acknowledged that word combinations constitute a significant part of native speakers’ linguistic competence and that they are problematic for EFL learners, learners’ difficulties with them, especially those L1-induced ones, have not been investigated in much detail so far.

    With verb-particle combinations as the focus, the study attempts to analyze L1-L2 differences in the way words combine from a cognitive linguistic perspective and shed light on L1-induced difficulties of learners with word combinations through analyzing their written production. It reports on an exploratory study that analyzes Chinese-English differences in representation of macro-events and investigates the influence of the differences on Chinese EFL learners’ written production of verb-particle combinations (VPCs). Developmental features in learners’ production are also observed. 

2. Aims of the study

   The present study aims to achieve the following objectives in four aspects:

(1) Theoretical:

• Build a framework of L1-L2 difference in representation of macro-events

• Study the influence of cross-linguistic differences on learners’ use of verb-particle combinations (VPCs) deductively

(2) Empirical:

• Describe both learners’ uses of VPCs that are consistent with the NS(native speaker) norm and those that are deviant from the NS norm

• Discover developmental features of learners in the use of VPCs

(3) Methodological:

• Compare automatic computer analysis with early human intervention (EHI) corpus approach based on large corpus data

(4) Applied:

•  Provide illuminative research findings which can be integrated in teaching practice (improving teaching methods, material development, etc.)

3. Research Questions

(1) How specifically do Chinese and English differ from each other in representation of macro-events?

(2) Are there any differences between Chinese EFL learners and native speakers of English in the use of VPCs?

(3) How do Chinese-English differences in representation of macro-events influence Chinese learners’ use of VPCs?

(4) How does the influence change with the increase of proficiency? 

4. Major Findings

1

  The statistical results show that in comparison with native speakers (NSs), Chinese learners at different proficiency levels all underused VPCs. They used more VPCs representing motion events and fewer VPCs representing events of state change. In comparison with NSs, Chinese learners underused non-congruent VPCs in terms of lexicalization pattern, image schema and sense. The greatest learner-NS differences were found in VPC data related to lexicalization pattern, showing that Chinese-English congruence in lexicalization pattern proves to have the greatest influence on the learners’ use of VPCs. As far as VPCs with specific particles are concerned, the influence of event types and Chinese-English congruence in lexicalization pattern, image schema and sense was the most significant on the use of VPCs with out and down, less so on the use of VPCs with up and away and not significant on the use of VPCs with off.

2

  The major developmental features were only found between learners at the lower proficiency levels and advanced learners. The former used significantly more VPCs representing motion events and much fewer non-congruent VPCs in terms of lexicalization pattern and senses than advanced learners, indicating that the influence of Chinese-English congruence in lexicalization pattern and sense on Chinese learners

decreases greatly when they become proficient. Among VPCs with the five particles, VPCs with up were where the greatest developmental features found within the learner corpus. The influence of Chinese-English differences in senses gets significantly smaller there with the increase of proficiency level.

3

   Error analysis show that on the whole, the error rate of Chinese EFL learners’ use of VPCs was quite high. Erroneous verb-out combinations ranked the first in relative quantity. Erroneous verb-up combinations and verb-down combinations ranked the second in quantity. Developmentally speaking, the error rate was the highest with intermediate learners. VPCs where learners at different proficiency levels make the most errors were different. For elementary, intermediate and advanced learners, erroneous verb-down combinations, erroneous verb-out combinations, and erroneous verb-off combinations ranked first in quantity respectively.

4

   Detailed analysis of VPC errors shows that many errors were related to five Chinese-English differences: Chinese as a stronger Satellite-Language, peculiarity of Chinese counterparts of the five particles, mismatches between the five pairs of Chinese and English satellites in image schema and senses represented, differences between Path satellites in Chinese and English, and mismatch between Chinese and English verbs. Manual analysis also reveals that some Chinese learners used the five particles erroneously as verbs due to the overlapping of Chinese satellites with verbs.

5. Implications

1. Pedagogical:

  The findings of the study have great implications for teaching practice and material design. The research shows that Chinese-English congruence in lexicalization patterns and image schemas has great influence on learners’ use of VPCs and that this is even true with advanced learners. This justifies a contrastive+cognitive approach to teaching of VPCs and word combinations in general. Chinese-English differences in lexicalization patterns and image schema representation should be taught explicitly and systematically in teaching of VPCs and word combinations in general. Corpus and concordance are encouraged to be used by students for deducing the differences between VPCs/particles and their seeming counterparts. In Textbooks, image-schemas and senses of particles should be emphasized, contrasted with their Chinese counterparts and illustrated to students and teaching of VPCs should be organized around particles. Selecting and ordering VPCs in syllabus design should be made according to the degree of difficulty they cause for learners. Developmental features found in learners’ use of VPCs can be employed as reference for selection and arrangement of VPCs in textbook compilation.  

2. Theoretical:

     The present study proves that studying cross-linguistic differences from a cognitive linguistic perspective is quite fruitful and helpful for us to understand how word combinations present difficulties for learners and therefore, contrastive studies of word combinations and related SLA research are encouraged not to stop at description of phenomenon but to look deeper into cognitive drives behind the phenomenon.

3.  Methodological:

    EHI approach based on large corpus data has produced for the present study many significant findings that DHI (delayed human intervention) data-driven research can not uncover. Statistical analysis based on large corpus data made the findings more convincing. Thus, the present study proves the EHI large corpus approach worthwhile.

6、作者简介

管博，甘肃酒泉人，华东理工大学外国语学院副教授，硕士生导师。上海市外文学会会员。博士毕业于上海交通大学外国语言学及应用语言学专业，师从郑树棠教授。2013年于英国兰卡斯特大学做访问学者，师从肖中华教授。主要研究方向为语料库语言学、认知语言学、社会语言学、语篇分析, 在《现代外语》、《解放军外国语学院学报》等期刊发表论文数篇。

目录

Part Ⅰ Introduction

Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Rationale for the study

1.2 Aims of the study

1.3 Organization of the book

Part Ⅱ Literature Review

Chapter 2 Word Combinations

2.1 Dimensions to word combinations

   2.1.1 Form-meaning composites

   2.1.2 Lexico-grammatical units

   2.1.3 Form-function composites

   2.1.4 Prefabs

2.2 SLA research on word combinations

   2.2.1 Studies on learners' knowledge and use of idioms and collocations

 2.2.2 Studies on learner-language prefabs

2.3 The need for the present study

  2.3.1 Lack of research on Ll-related dimensions to word combinations

 2.3.2 Motivations for a cognitive linguistic perspective on analysis of L1-L2 differences in word combinations

   2.3.3 Why VPCs

Chapter 3 Verb-Particle Combinations

3.1 VPCs—A theoretical review

3.2 Delineating verb-particle combinations

3.3 Previous SLA research on VPCs

3.4 The present study

Part Ⅲ Theoretical Exploration—Chinese-English Differences in Representation of Macro-events

Chapter 4 VPCs and Cross-linguistic Differences in Representation of Macro-events—A Cognitive Linguistic Perspective

4.1 The fundamentals of cognitive linguistics

   4.1.1 Embodied mind

   4.1.2 Conceptual metaphor

4.2 Influence of conceptualization on language and language use

 4.2.1 Experience, conceptualization of  the world and language

 4.2.2 The influence of conceptualization on language use

 4.2.3 Cross-linguistic differences as manifestation of conceptualization disparity

4.3 Conceptualization and word combinations

4.4 Conceptualization, cross-linguistic differences in representation of macro-events and VPCs

     4.4.1 Macro-events

 4.4.2 Salience difference in conceptualization, lexicalization patterns of framing events and VPCs

  4.4.3 Linguistic representation of image schemas underlying macro-events and particle polysemy

   4.4.4 A framework for cross-linguistic comparison in representation of macro-events

Chapter 5 Chinese-English Differences in Representation of Macro-events

5.1 Overall typological patterns of English and Chinese

5.2 Chinese-English differences in lexicalization patterns of specific types of events

    5.2.1 Motion

    5.2.2 Temporal contouring

    5.2.3 Change of state

    5.2.4 Realization

5.3 Contrasting corresponding satellites in English and Chinese: Differences in elaborations and mappings of image schemas

    5.3.1 Rationale for selection of the 5 particles for the present study

   5.3.2 Cognitive semantic analysis of 5 English particles in VPCs: Image schemas and senses

  5.3.3 English particles and their Chinese counterparts

5.4 Summary

Part Ⅳ Empirical Exploration— The Influence of Chinese-English Differences in Representation of Macro-events on Chinese EFL Learners' Use of VPCs

Chapter 6 Research Design

6.1 Research questions

6.2 Research methodology

   6.2.1 Methodologies taken by previous studies

   6.2.2 Methodologies taken by the present study

6.3 Corpora employed in the present study

     6.3.1 Learner corpus

   6.3.2 English corpora of native speakers

   6.3.3 Comparability, limitation of the chosen corpora and the solution

6.4 Procedure

    6.4.1 VPC identification

    6.4.2 Coding

    6.4.3 Statistics

    6.4.4 Error analysis

Chapter 7 Results and Analysis

7.1 Counts of VPCs

7.2 Chinese learners' use of VPCs and Chinese-English congruence in conceptualization

  7.2.1 Results of between-group comparisons for the use of VPCs as a whole

  7.2.2 Results of between-group comparisons for the use of VPCs with each particle

7.3 Analysis of the statistical results

 7.3.1 Influence of Chinese-English differences on learners' use of VPCs

  7.3.2 Chinese learners' developmental features in the use of VPCs

7.4 Error analysis

     7.4.1 VPC errors

    7.4.2 Mother tongue influence and VPC errors

   7.4.3 Erroneous uses of the particles as verbs

Part Ⅴ Conclusion

Chapter 8 Conclusions and Implications

8.1 Summary of the findings

8.2 Implications

    8.2.1 Pedagogical implications

    8.2.2 Theoretical implications

    8.2.3 Methodological implications

8.3 Limitations and directions for future research

Appendices

References 

《“语言学通讯”博士文库》与《当代外语研究论丛》作为交大出版社外语学术出版重要阵地，是开放性创新性的学术平台，旨在探索当代外语研究的最新领域，多角度展示研究成果。论丛在为当代语言学、外国文学、外语教学法、翻译学以及跨文化比较研究和发展提供学者间交流机会的同时，继续学科通融、兼收并蓄的编辑理念，崇尚原创作品，力推新人新作，并一直致力于将国内优秀研究成果推向国际学术舞台。

 

长按关注一个有温度的公众号

点

点击阅读原文带走这本专著