英语论文网

1.1 General Research Background
谁相信那些句法引导程序（Gleitman，1990; Naigles，1990）认为，收购那些语法语义对应语法信息是必要的，而平克（1989）声称，语义起着更重要的作用。多年的论证结构吸引了研究者的关注。近年来，第二语言习得的论证结构正在得到越来越多的关注。一些参数结构容易学习者学习。然而，对于狭窄的范围达表3-6的采集过程，它变得更加复杂。在英语中，人们可以“扔球玛丽”或“扔球马利亚”。然而，不像扔，推不列入允许双宾语结构。 “推球玛丽”，一个不能“推玛丽球”。显然，无论是动词可以交替或受一定的规则或约束。讲英语怎么来知道哪些动词交替不？关于这个问题，贝克（1979）认为，学习者在一个保守的方式研究了这些话。他们了解到他们一个接一个，仅仅依靠输入。Those who believe in syntactic bootstrapping(Gleitman, 1990; Naigles, 1990) argue that syntactic information is necessary for theacquisition of those syntax–semantics correspondences; whereas Pinker (1989) claimsthat semantics plays a more important role.Argument structure has attracted researchers’ attention for years. In recent years,second language acquisition of argument structure is getting more and more attention.Some argument structures are easy for learners to learn. However, regarding theacquisition process of narrow range datives, it becomes more complex. In English, onecan “throw a ball to Mary” or “throw Mary a ball”. However, unlike throw, push doesnot allow the double object construction. One can “push a ball to Mary”; one can not“push Mary a ball”. Obviously, whether verbs can alternate or not is restricted bycertain rules or constraints. How do English speakers come to know which verbalternates and which does not? Regarding this issue, Baker (1979) held that learnersstudied these words in a conservative way. They learnt them one by one, solely relyingon the input. 然而，研究人员发现，L1儿童过量这些动词，而不是在一个保守的方式学习他们。他们允许不呈现开放交替输入的动词。他们以偏概全这些与格动词，这会导致在alearn能力问题。然而，他们终于来知道哪些动词允许交替不收购的动词。虽然是有限的输入和反面证据不存在，他们收购这些动词，知道动词可以交替，哪些不能。Juffs（1996）争辩说，这个易学问题发生学习者，也。儿童的L2学习者必须依赖于内部机制，使他们最终学会知道哪些动词可以交替，哪些不能。它长足内部的机制，使学习者发现的规则和约束从有限的输入。矛盾的研究结果迫使我们进一步研究收购的论证结构。However, researchers found that L1 children overproduce these verbsrather than learn them in a conservative way. They allow the verbs that do not appearin their input to alternate. They overgeneralize these dative verbs, which results in alearnability problem. However, they finally come to acquire the verbs knowing whichverb allows alternation and which does not. Although there is limited input and nopresence of negative evidence, they acquire these verbs, knowing which verbs canalternate and which cannot. Juffs (1996) contended that this learnability problemhappened to L2 learners, too. Child learners of L2 must depend on internal mechanismso that they eventually learn to know which verbs can alternate and which cannot. It isthe internal mechanism that enables learners to discover the rules and constraints fromlimited input. The contradictory findings force us to study the acquisition of argumentstructure further.

1.2 Purpose of the Study
This study aims to study the acquisition of English narrow range dative verbs byChinese learners with different language proficiency levels. Mandarin Chinese doesnot allow the Throw-class and the Push-class as well as the Whisper-class verbs toalternate; but it allows the Tell-class verbs. English allows the Throw-class verbs butdoes not allow the Push-class verbs to alternate. English Tell-class and theWhisper-class verbs are like their Chinese counterparts which allow the former anddisallow the latter.
Previous research has extensively focused on the acquisition of argumentstructure in first language (e.g., Green, 1974; Baker, 1979; Bowerman, 1982; Gropen,1989; Pinker, 1989; Gropen et al., 1991). Recently本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。