Abstract
AbstractThis study investigated whether L1-English Chinese learners show a subject preference in their oral production of Chinese relative clauses (RCs) and whether they show animacy effects. We conducted a picture-based elicited production experiment that compared subject and object RCs, varying the object animacy between animate and inanimate. The results from thirty learners showed more targetlike performance in subject RCs than in object RCs, both at group and individual levels, regardless of object animacy. Error analyses revealed that more object RCs were converted into subject RCs than vice versa. These results point toward a clear subject preference despite conflicted findings in previous research on RCs in Chinese as a foreign language. Animacy influenced subject and object RCs alike: both types were easier to produce when featuring an inanimate object. We suggested similarity-based interference or distribution-based effects to account for this finding.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Psychology,Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
Reference77 articles.
1. Ammar, A., & Lightbown, P. M. (2005). Teaching marked linguistic structures: More about the acquisition of relative clauses by Arab learners of English. In A. Housen & M. Pierrard (Eds.), Investigations in instructed second language learning (pp. 167–198). Mouton de Gruyter.
2. Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278.
3. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48.
4. Bever, T. G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In R. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and language development (pp. 279–362). Wiley.
5. Chan, A., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2009). Children’s understanding of the agent-patient relations in the transitive construction: Cross-linguistic comparisons between Cantonese, German, and English. Cognitive Linguistics, 20(2), 267–300.