That’s hard

IF 1.1 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS International Journal of Learner Corpus Research Pub Date : 2019-03-13 DOI:10.1075/IJLCR.17013.LES
N. Lester
{"title":"That’s hard","authors":"N. Lester","doi":"10.1075/IJLCR.17013.LES","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Language learners are highly sensitive to statistical patterns in the input. When a target language provides the option to include or omit a grammatical form, learners have been shown to make decisions quite similar to native speakers. For example, learners opt to include or omit the complementizer that (as in I know (that) Steffi likes hot tea). This phenomenon has been explained in terms of a universal suite of cognitive mechanisms which support native and learner performance alike. Both learners and native speakers choose to include the complementizer when they are producing more complex or unexpected structures. The present study attempts to generalize these findings to another domain of “optional” grammatical markers, namely, relativizers (as in the hot tea (that) Steffi likes). I analyze all instances of optional relativizer use in a corpus of spontaneous learner speech produced by Spanish and German learners of English. Both of these languages have obligatory relativizers. A two-step generalized additive regression modeling technique (MuPDAR) that predicts learner choices based on native-speaker choices demonstrates that native speakers use greater shares of the relativizer in complex and disfluent environments, while learners show the exact opposite tendency: they prefer to drop the relativizer in complex and disfluent environments. These findings are discussed based on differences between complementizers and relativizers, and in terms of the limited universality of optional grammatical marking in learner speech.","PeriodicalId":29715,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Learner Corpus Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Learner Corpus Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/IJLCR.17013.LES","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Language learners are highly sensitive to statistical patterns in the input. When a target language provides the option to include or omit a grammatical form, learners have been shown to make decisions quite similar to native speakers. For example, learners opt to include or omit the complementizer that (as in I know (that) Steffi likes hot tea). This phenomenon has been explained in terms of a universal suite of cognitive mechanisms which support native and learner performance alike. Both learners and native speakers choose to include the complementizer when they are producing more complex or unexpected structures. The present study attempts to generalize these findings to another domain of “optional” grammatical markers, namely, relativizers (as in the hot tea (that) Steffi likes). I analyze all instances of optional relativizer use in a corpus of spontaneous learner speech produced by Spanish and German learners of English. Both of these languages have obligatory relativizers. A two-step generalized additive regression modeling technique (MuPDAR) that predicts learner choices based on native-speaker choices demonstrates that native speakers use greater shares of the relativizer in complex and disfluent environments, while learners show the exact opposite tendency: they prefer to drop the relativizer in complex and disfluent environments. These findings are discussed based on differences between complementizers and relativizers, and in terms of the limited universality of optional grammatical marking in learner speech.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
这是困难的
语言学习者对输入的统计模式非常敏感。当目标语言提供了包含或省略语法形式的选项时,学习者做出的决定与母语人士非常相似。例如,学习者选择包括或省略补语(如我知道Steffi喜欢热茶)。这种现象可以用一套普遍的认知机制来解释,这些机制支持母语和学习者的表现。学习者和母语人士在表达更复杂或意想不到的结构时都会选择使用补语。目前的研究试图将这些发现推广到另一个“可选的”语法标记领域,即相对标记(如Steffi喜欢的热茶)。我分析了西班牙语和德语英语学习者自发语言语料库中选择性使用相对器的所有实例。这两种语言都有强制相对性。两步广义加性回归建模技术(MuPDAR)基于母语人士的选择预测学习者的选择,表明母语人士在复杂和不流畅的环境中使用相对器的比例更高,而学习者则表现出完全相反的趋势:他们在复杂和不流畅的环境中倾向于放弃相对器。这些发现是基于补语和相对语之间的差异,以及选择性语法标记在学习者言语中的有限普遍性来讨论的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
27.30%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Comparing theory-based models of grammatical complexity in student writing Review of Leńko-Szymańska & Götz (2022): Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency in Learner Corpus Research Review of Granger (2021): Perspectives on the L2 Phrasicon: The view from learner corpora The effect of linguistic and extralinguistic features on EFL adverb placement On learner characteristics and why we should model them as latent variables
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1