土耳其语学习者心理动词和非心理动词的习得:被动化和过度被动化的复制研究

Seray Tanyer, Samet Deniz
{"title":"土耳其语学习者心理动词和非心理动词的习得:被动化和过度被动化的复制研究","authors":"Seray Tanyer, Samet Deniz","doi":"10.31261/tapsla.10353","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The processability account anticipates that learners will make more underpassivization errors than overpassivization errors since passivization entails more processing. Although one study on psych-verbs and a few on unaccusatives examined Turkish L2 learners’ acquisition, no research compared a single set of learners’ acquisitions of these verbs together from a processing point of view. In this regard, the current study aims to investigate whether the processing complexity of passivization influences acquisition of psych and unaccusative verbs. It also questions whether general accuracy levels in Grammaticality Judgement Task (GJT) and degree of familiarity with target verbs are related to their level of accuracy with individual psych and unaccusative verbs. 33 undergraduate-level university students performed on the GJT and a Word Familiarity Rating Task (WFRT). The GJT included 38 items with 12 sentences for psych-verbs, 12 sentences for unaccusative-verbs, 12 sentences for distracters and 2 sentences for examples. The WFRT was a survey questioning familiarity with 6 psych and 6 unaccusative verbs. To analyse the data, a set of nonparametric tests and descriptive statistics were used. The results revealed that learners performed mor \nThe processability account anticipates that learners will make more underpassivization errors than overpassivization errors since passivization entails more processing. Although one study on psych-verbs and a few on unaccusatives examined Turkish L2 learners’ acquisition, no research compared a single set of learners’ acquisitions of these verbs together from a processing point of view. In this regard, the current study aims to investigate whether the processing complexity of passivization influences acquisition of psych and unaccusative verbs. It also questions whether general accuracy levels in Grammaticality Judgement Task (GJT) and degree of familiarity with target verbs are related to their level of accuracy with individual psych and unaccusative verbs. 33 undergraduate-level university students performed on the GJT and a Word Familiarity Rating Task (WFRT). The GJT included 38 items with 12 sentences for psych-verbs, 12 sentences for unaccusative-verbs, 12 sentences for distracters and 2 sentences for examples. The WFRT was a survey questioning familiarity with 6 psych and 6 unaccusative verbs. To analyse the data, a set of nonparametric tests and descriptive statistics were used. The results revealed that learners performed more accurately on unaccusatives than on psych-verbs. They did more underpassivization errors by accepting ungrammatical active constructions of psych verbs. Their performances on psych and unaccusative verbs went parallel with their general accuracy levels in GJT while their degree of familiarity with and accuracy level for two verbs do not correlate with each other.The results suggest that such factors as processability and L1 transfer seem to impact the acquisition. \nKeywords:Second language acquisition; psych verbs; unaccusative verbs; underpassivization; overpassivization. \ne accurately on unaccusatives than on psych-verbs. They did more underpassivization errors by accepting ungrammatical active constructions of psych verbs. Their performances on psych and unaccusative verbs went parallel with their general accuracy levels in GJT while their degree of familiarity with and accuracy level for two verbs do not correlate with each other.The results suggest that such factors as processability and L1 transfer seem to impact the acquisition. \nKeywords:Second language acquisition; psych verbs; unaccusative verbs; underpassivization; overpassivization.","PeriodicalId":37040,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Turkish EFL Learners’ Acquisition of Psych Verbs and Unaccusative Verbs: A Replication Study on Underpassivization and Overpassivization\",\"authors\":\"Seray Tanyer, Samet Deniz\",\"doi\":\"10.31261/tapsla.10353\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The processability account anticipates that learners will make more underpassivization errors than overpassivization errors since passivization entails more processing. Although one study on psych-verbs and a few on unaccusatives examined Turkish L2 learners’ acquisition, no research compared a single set of learners’ acquisitions of these verbs together from a processing point of view. In this regard, the current study aims to investigate whether the processing complexity of passivization influences acquisition of psych and unaccusative verbs. It also questions whether general accuracy levels in Grammaticality Judgement Task (GJT) and degree of familiarity with target verbs are related to their level of accuracy with individual psych and unaccusative verbs. 33 undergraduate-level university students performed on the GJT and a Word Familiarity Rating Task (WFRT). The GJT included 38 items with 12 sentences for psych-verbs, 12 sentences for unaccusative-verbs, 12 sentences for distracters and 2 sentences for examples. The WFRT was a survey questioning familiarity with 6 psych and 6 unaccusative verbs. To analyse the data, a set of nonparametric tests and descriptive statistics were used. The results revealed that learners performed mor \\nThe processability account anticipates that learners will make more underpassivization errors than overpassivization errors since passivization entails more processing. Although one study on psych-verbs and a few on unaccusatives examined Turkish L2 learners’ acquisition, no research compared a single set of learners’ acquisitions of these verbs together from a processing point of view. In this regard, the current study aims to investigate whether the processing complexity of passivization influences acquisition of psych and unaccusative verbs. It also questions whether general accuracy levels in Grammaticality Judgement Task (GJT) and degree of familiarity with target verbs are related to their level of accuracy with individual psych and unaccusative verbs. 33 undergraduate-level university students performed on the GJT and a Word Familiarity Rating Task (WFRT). The GJT included 38 items with 12 sentences for psych-verbs, 12 sentences for unaccusative-verbs, 12 sentences for distracters and 2 sentences for examples. The WFRT was a survey questioning familiarity with 6 psych and 6 unaccusative verbs. To analyse the data, a set of nonparametric tests and descriptive statistics were used. The results revealed that learners performed more accurately on unaccusatives than on psych-verbs. They did more underpassivization errors by accepting ungrammatical active constructions of psych verbs. Their performances on psych and unaccusative verbs went parallel with their general accuracy levels in GJT while their degree of familiarity with and accuracy level for two verbs do not correlate with each other.The results suggest that such factors as processability and L1 transfer seem to impact the acquisition. \\nKeywords:Second language acquisition; psych verbs; unaccusative verbs; underpassivization; overpassivization. \\ne accurately on unaccusatives than on psych-verbs. They did more underpassivization errors by accepting ungrammatical active constructions of psych verbs. Their performances on psych and unaccusative verbs went parallel with their general accuracy levels in GJT while their degree of familiarity with and accuracy level for two verbs do not correlate with each other.The results suggest that such factors as processability and L1 transfer seem to impact the acquisition. \\nKeywords:Second language acquisition; psych verbs; unaccusative verbs; underpassivization; overpassivization.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37040,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31261/tapsla.10353\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31261/tapsla.10353","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

可加工性账户预计,由于被动化需要更多的加工,学习者会犯更多的低传递错误,而不是过度传递错误。尽管一项关于心理动词的研究和一些关于非宾格的研究考察了土耳其二语学习者的习得,但没有研究从加工的角度将一组学习者对这些动词的习得进行比较。在这方面,本研究旨在探讨被动化的加工复杂性是否影响心理动词和非宾格动词的习得。它还质疑语法判断任务(GJT)的总体准确性水平和对目标动词的熟悉程度是否与它们对个别心理动词和非习惯动词的准确性水平有关。33名本科生参加了GJT和单词熟悉度评定任务(WFRT)。GJT包括38个项目,其中心理动词12句,非宾格动词12句、干扰物12句和例句2句。WFRT是一项对6个心理动词和6个非宾格动词的熟悉程度进行调查。为了分析数据,使用了一组非参数检验和描述性统计。结果表明,学习者表现得更好。可加工性账户预计,由于被动化需要更多的加工,学习者会犯更多的低传递错误,而不是过度传递错误。尽管一项关于心理动词的研究和一些关于非宾格的研究考察了土耳其二语学习者的习得,但没有研究从加工的角度将一组学习者对这些动词的习得进行比较。在这方面,本研究旨在探讨被动化的加工复杂性是否影响心理动词和非宾格动词的习得。它还质疑语法判断任务(GJT)的总体准确性水平和对目标动词的熟悉程度是否与它们对个别心理动词和非习惯动词的准确性水平有关。33名本科生参加了GJT和单词熟悉度评定任务(WFRT)。GJT包括38个项目,其中心理动词12句,非宾格动词12句、干扰物12句和例句2句。WFRT是一项对6个心理动词和6个非宾格动词的熟悉程度进行调查。为了分析数据,使用了一组非参数检验和描述性统计。结果表明,学习者在非宾格动词上的表现比在心理动词上的更准确。他们接受了心理动词的非语法主动结构,从而犯下了更多的低分类错误。他们在心理动词和非宾格动词上的表现与他们在GJT中的总体准确性水平平行,而他们对两个动词的熟悉程度和准确性水平并不相关。结果表明,可加工性和L1迁移等因素似乎会影响习得。关键词:第二语言习得;心理动词;非宾格动词;地下化;过度补贴。e在非宾格上比在心理动词上准确。他们接受了心理动词的非语法主动结构,从而犯下了更多的低分类错误。他们在心理动词和非宾格动词上的表现与他们在GJT中的总体准确性水平平行,而他们对两个动词的熟悉程度和准确性水平并不相关。结果表明,可加工性和L1迁移等因素似乎会影响习得。关键词:第二语言习得;心理动词;非宾格动词;地下化;过度补贴。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Turkish EFL Learners’ Acquisition of Psych Verbs and Unaccusative Verbs: A Replication Study on Underpassivization and Overpassivization
The processability account anticipates that learners will make more underpassivization errors than overpassivization errors since passivization entails more processing. Although one study on psych-verbs and a few on unaccusatives examined Turkish L2 learners’ acquisition, no research compared a single set of learners’ acquisitions of these verbs together from a processing point of view. In this regard, the current study aims to investigate whether the processing complexity of passivization influences acquisition of psych and unaccusative verbs. It also questions whether general accuracy levels in Grammaticality Judgement Task (GJT) and degree of familiarity with target verbs are related to their level of accuracy with individual psych and unaccusative verbs. 33 undergraduate-level university students performed on the GJT and a Word Familiarity Rating Task (WFRT). The GJT included 38 items with 12 sentences for psych-verbs, 12 sentences for unaccusative-verbs, 12 sentences for distracters and 2 sentences for examples. The WFRT was a survey questioning familiarity with 6 psych and 6 unaccusative verbs. To analyse the data, a set of nonparametric tests and descriptive statistics were used. The results revealed that learners performed mor The processability account anticipates that learners will make more underpassivization errors than overpassivization errors since passivization entails more processing. Although one study on psych-verbs and a few on unaccusatives examined Turkish L2 learners’ acquisition, no research compared a single set of learners’ acquisitions of these verbs together from a processing point of view. In this regard, the current study aims to investigate whether the processing complexity of passivization influences acquisition of psych and unaccusative verbs. It also questions whether general accuracy levels in Grammaticality Judgement Task (GJT) and degree of familiarity with target verbs are related to their level of accuracy with individual psych and unaccusative verbs. 33 undergraduate-level university students performed on the GJT and a Word Familiarity Rating Task (WFRT). The GJT included 38 items with 12 sentences for psych-verbs, 12 sentences for unaccusative-verbs, 12 sentences for distracters and 2 sentences for examples. The WFRT was a survey questioning familiarity with 6 psych and 6 unaccusative verbs. To analyse the data, a set of nonparametric tests and descriptive statistics were used. The results revealed that learners performed more accurately on unaccusatives than on psych-verbs. They did more underpassivization errors by accepting ungrammatical active constructions of psych verbs. Their performances on psych and unaccusative verbs went parallel with their general accuracy levels in GJT while their degree of familiarity with and accuracy level for two verbs do not correlate with each other.The results suggest that such factors as processability and L1 transfer seem to impact the acquisition. Keywords:Second language acquisition; psych verbs; unaccusative verbs; underpassivization; overpassivization. e accurately on unaccusatives than on psych-verbs. They did more underpassivization errors by accepting ungrammatical active constructions of psych verbs. Their performances on psych and unaccusative verbs went parallel with their general accuracy levels in GJT while their degree of familiarity with and accuracy level for two verbs do not correlate with each other.The results suggest that such factors as processability and L1 transfer seem to impact the acquisition. Keywords:Second language acquisition; psych verbs; unaccusative verbs; underpassivization; overpassivization.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition
Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition Social Sciences-Linguistics and Language
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊最新文献
Preface The Relationship between Students’ Motivation for Studying Business English and Their Knowledge of Business English and Its Terminology “Three months on, I still sound like an Anglophone”: Tales of Success and Failure told by English and French Tandem Partners Acquisition of Structures at Syntax-Discourse Interface: Post-Verbal Subjects in L2 English The Impact of Orthographic Transparency and Typology on L2 Learner Perceptions
×
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