非宾格陷阱假说与There-Do结构的习得  

UTH and Acquisition of There-Do Construction

作　　者：张达球[1] 

机构地区：[1]上海财经大学外国语学院,上海200433

出　　处：《外语教学》2015年第6期67-70,103,共5页Foreign Language Education

基　　金：教育部人文社科基金项目"中国英语学习者非宾格结构习得研究"(项目编号:11YJA740116);国家社科基金项目"汉英非宾格性题元关系与句法实现对比研究"(项目编号:14BYY002)的资助

摘　　要：本文通过英语中可转换类非宾格动词(AU)、不可转换类非宾格动词(NAU)和非作格动词(UE)三类动词在There-Do结构中的句法表征,结合其对应的汉语"有"字存现句,合并存现句和移位非宾格句三类汉语结构,进行英汉匹配优先选择问卷调查,试图检验非宾格陷阱假说以及中国英语学习者在非宾格结构习得中母语迁移的影响。结果发现中国英语学习者在AU类非宾格动词和UE类非作格动词及对应的汉语结构匹配选择上有明显差异,这为母语迁移影响提供了有力支持,同时英语这两类动词在There-Do结构上的语法判断高错误率基本支持非宾格陷阱第三阶段的预测。This paper has conducted a survey on the English unaccusative There-Do construction with the corresponding Chinese counterparts by Chinese L2 learners at college level to check the reliability of the UTH, and on the L1 shift in the acquisition of the three different types of verbs, AU, NAU and UE, in the construction. There-Do construction and three equivalent translations in Chinese are given for each sentence in English in the questionnaire. The subjects are required to make their choices of priority to the English There-Do sentence from the three equivalents in Chinese. It is found that AU and UE verbs display a quite high priority to the ＂you＂ -existential patterns to match their English counterparts, meanwhile a high rate of er- roneous grammatical judgment is found. We argue this is due to the negative impact of L1 on L2 in L2 acquisition. Too high a rate of errors in GJ may imply great difficulties in learnability and act as a signal to support the UTH.

关 键 词：二语习得 非宾格陷阱 存现结构 母语迁移 

分 类 号：H319[语言文字—英语]