1

Developing Grammars

The Acquisition of Chinese Syntax by Japanese Learners

Shuzo Kubo

2

Contents Abbreviation 3 1 Preface 4

Part I 5 2 Corpus 5 3 Method 8 4 Hypothesis 11

Part II Analysis 16 5 Development of Verb Phrase 18

5.1 18 5.2 V, MV and VM 25 5.3 AdV 26 5.4 AV 27 5.5 V1V2 30 5.6 V(YI)V 32 5.7 VCom 34 5.8 VPc 39 5.9 VCb 41 5.10 VCsc 43 5.11 VM' 44

6 Development of Complex Structure 45 6.1 45 6.2 SVC2 48

6.3 VCl 50 6.4 ECl 51 6.5 NP－Cl 52 6.6 SVC1 54 6.7 SCF 56 6.8 SCB 58 6.9 VCN 61

7 Conjunctive, Additional and Preposition 64 7.1 CCA 64 7.2 VCA 67 7.3 PP 70

8 Conclusion 72

3

ABBREVIATION AdV Adverb + V 19 AI Acquisition Index 17 AV Auxiliary Verb + V 19 CA Conjunctive, Additional 64 CCA Clausal Conjunctive, Additional 64 ECl Enbedded Clause 43 MV Modifier + V 19 N Absolute number of occurrences 16 NP－Cl Clause as NP 52 P Probability 16 PP Preposition 70 SCB Subordinate Conjunctive at the Beginning Position 45 SCB' Revised SCB 58 SCF Subordinate Conjunctive at the Final Position 46 SVC1 Serial Verb Construction (1) 23 SVC2 Serial Verb Construction (2) 23 3VC3 Serial Verb Construction (3) 23 SVP Special Verb Phrase 24 VC Pre-verbal Conjunctive 46 VCA Pre-verbal Conjunctive, Additional 47 VCN Pre-verbal Conjunctive, non-additional 46 VCNE Semantic Pre-verbal Conjunctive, Non-additional 62 VCNY Syntactic Pre-verbal Conjunctive, Non-additional 62 VCb V + Co-verb 22 VCl V + Clause 22 VCom V + Complement 21 VCsc V + Complex Statative Construction 22 VM V + Modifier 21 VM' Revised VM 44 VPc V + Potential Complement 22 V1V2 Verb1+ Verb2 20 V(YI)V V + optional YI (一) + V 21

4

1 Preface Until the late ’7Os, almost three decades after World War II, Japanese learners of the Chinese language had had very rare chances to practice Chinese conversation for several reasons. Foreign language teaching in Japanese colleges puts the main emphasis on reading comprehension. Japan and China did not have diplomatic relations until 1972, and enrollments in Chinese schools, even a visit to the country, was under strict control. In the 70s, following the establishment of diplomatic relations and an increase in commercial activities between the two countries, learners' interest in oral proficiency became so strong that the number of learners going to Taiwan, Hong Kong, even Singapore, and lately to Mainland China, increased dramatically. In order to accommodate Japanese students' need to learn Chinese where the language is spoken, short term language programs, usually four to six weeks during summer and spring vacation, started to be held at several language institutes in Taiwan. In 1980, some colleges and language institutes in Mainland China began to offer similar short term programs for Japanese learners. Now hundreds of Japanese learners are crossing the sea to attend these special sessions every year, and because China is very close to Japan, the expense for joining these programs is relatively small, the number is expected to increase in the coming years.

Under these new circumstances, the emphasis has been turned onto oral communication, hearing and speaking in natural setting. For the purpose, the learning conditions are basically very good in these sessions, especially in those held in Taiwan, where learners usually have both individual and small classes. A small class consists of less than five students. They are also surrounded by plenty of friendly Chinese people. In addition, in the sessions held at Soochow University in Taipei, Chinese teachers share rooms with learners.

However, there are still a few problems to be solved. Teaching/learning materials is one of them. Some original textbooks have been written in both sides of the Taiwan Strait, besides some translations from American textbooks in Taiwan. However, compared to the new textbooks compiled lately in the U.S. for learning English, most of them are not very practical, and in any case, they are not for Japanese learners. New teaching/learning materials for Japanese learners, if compiled well, will resolve part of the problems and improve learning efficiency.

This research is a part of the plan of compiling new textbooks for Japanese learners. The purpose of it is to provide basic ideas on the acquisition process of Japanese learners, which are essential for all grammar related teaching/learning materials.

5

Part I 2 Corpus I had a native Chinese speaker interview 29 Japanese learners attending a four week summer program in Taiwan in 1982. The interviews were conducted in Chinese, once a week, four times altogether. Each session lasted ten to fifteen minutes. Two advanced learners, who would be grouped into G-IV, were interviewed only once at the end of the summer session.

28 informants were college or graduate students. One had dropped out of his school one year before. Some of the students were Chinese majors while the others had learning experience of Chinese as a second foreign language in their colleges. The least experienced had only three months training, and the two most advanced learners, grouped in G-IV, had had learned Chinese in Taiwan before for one year and three years respectively. The topics that they were asked to talk about varied depending on what we supposed they were interested in, for instance, their families, girl/boyfriends, learning of Chinese, their impressions of Taiwan and Chinese people, the activities they had participated in lately and so on.

The informants were divided into four groups, G-I, G-II, G-III and G-IV according to their proficiencies. G-I is the least experienced and G-IV the most advanced students. The grouping was based on their levels in the session. They were classified into three levels in the session, beginner, intermediate, and advanced. After listening to the tapes of the interviews, I decided not to change any of the classification. G-IV was created especially for the two learners who had long learning experiences in Taiwan. This grouping method may not sound very convincing, I must admit. But I was very comfortable with the result because there were obvious differences among each group. it is possible to make a syntactic index depending on the syntactic analysis that I propose in this paper. (Table 2.1 is an example.) However, I still prefer my intuition to this kind of index because proficiency may include vocabulary, fluency and accuracy as well as syntax. On the other hand, the index on Table 2.1 only deals with a part of syntax and was also made arbitrarily. Out of 29 informants, I dropped 7. One, in G-I, spoke too little to analyze, and two, also in G-I, were third and fourth year Chinese majors yet classified as G-I. Another two were in G-II, their English was much better than their Chinese, and their production reflected their strategy to transfer English syntax into Chinese, which meant a different acquisition process. The last two, in G-III, answered few sentences to each question while I expected

6

to get a long discourse instead. Excluding these 7, the 22 remaining informants were classified as follows: 6 in G-I, 7 in G-II, 7 in G-III and 2 in G-IV. The last two interviews of each informant were chosen for analysis except in the case of the two G-IV's, where only one interview was available for each. The reason I chose the Table2.1 Revised Acquisition Index for Selected Structure Rules and Syntactic Index Informant MV VM VCl SCB' VCN Syntactic

Index

Ｇ-I１ .217 - .021 - - .314

Ｇ-I２ .177 .076 .052 - - .319

Ｇ-I３ .277 .090 .018 - - .358

Ｇ-I４ .303 .097 .027 - - .427

Ｇ-I５ .478 - - - - .478

Ｇ-I６ .381 .117 - .097 - .595

Ｇ-II１ .513 .062 .035 .051 - .661

Ｇ-II２ .577 - .087 - - .740

Ｇ-II３ .592 .083 .072 - - .747

Ｇ-II４ .500 .166 .109 - - .775

Ｇ-II５ .427 .159 .087 - - .798

Ｇ-II６ .759 - .155 - - .914

Ｇ-II７ .646 .359 - - - 1.075

Ｇ-III１ .513 .221 .202 .136 .089 1.161

Ｇ-III２ .810 .090 .140 - - 1.165

Ｇ-III３ .617 .221 .151 .034 .072 1.220

Ｇ-III４ .602 .283 .105 .114 .198 1.302

Ｇ-III５ .854 .179 .250 - .039 1.322

Ｇ-III６ .774 .490 .083 .040 - 1.387

Ｇ-III７ .763 .324 .027 .040 .157 1.408

Ｇ-IV１ .808 .531 .149 .074 .033 1.720

Ｇ-IV２ .823 .697 .225 .131 .217 1.278

NＧ１ .956 .772 .248 .136 .089 2.326

NＧ２ .916 .766 .215 .227 .111 2.360

NＧ３ .889 1 .250 .193 .250 2.658

NＧ４ 1 1 .204 .250 .250 2.764

NＧ５ 1 1 .248 .250 .189 2.784

7

last two was because, as time went by, the more natural their speech became, and also because 100 to 150 verb phrases were thought to be an adequate number though the number was not enough to complete the research. By this method, the number of7 VPs (verb phrase) of some informants in G-I and G-II, failed to reach 100, while the VP's of some others exceeded 150. No other interviews were added to the smaller samples, but corpuses of the more verbose were reduced to below 160 VPs. As a result, the number of VP's in a sample varied from 58, least, to 156, the most. The total numbers of VPs for each group were G-I 526, G-II 727, G-III 1020 and G-IV 285.

In addition, we interviewed five native Mandarin speakers, four were college students and the other was a graduate student, and got from 87 to 148 VPs from each of them, and total VPs 574. They were grouped into NG ( native group ).

In total there are 27 informants; 22 Japanese and 5 native Chinese, with a total of 3131 VPs. They were divided into five groups, G-I, G-II, G-III, G-IV and NG according to their proficiencies, G-I the least proficient and G-IV the best among Japanese groups. Each informant is called as C-I1, G-I2 …… and NG5.

8

3 Method The basic method that I am going to use in this analysis is called Probablistic Grammar (PG), which was discussed by W. Klein and N. Dittmar. The steps are almost as follows.

1) The elements in speech production to be analyzed have to be decided. In this paper, VP and Complex Structure will be analyzed.

2) Categories for each element is set up, for instance, VP is divided into Ad + V, Aux. + V, V + Com, and so on. We may divide it into any categories as long as we think the categories are relevant to our purpose.

3) The tokens that belong to each categories are tallied by group. 4) Probabilities are calculated and compared. Let me show an example. Imagine that we are going to analyze the development of VP.

First we have to set up categories of it. Here is an example. VP Rule 1 VP ―― V V： single verb, adjective, or copula VP Rule 2 VP ―― MV MV：one or more modifiers before V VP Rule 3 VP ―― VM VM： one or more modifiers after V VP Rule 4 VP ―― REST REST：all VPs but the above three

We already divided the informants into five groups, G-I, G-II, G-III, G-IV and NG. Now we are going to sort out all VPs in their speech into these categories, Rule 1 to Rule 4, then tally and convert the tallies into probabilities. We get Table3.1 and Fig. 3.1.

I Klein, W. and Dittmar, N. (1979), Developing Grammar , the acquisition of German Syntax by Foreign Workers

The Springer- Verlag Berlin Heidelberg New York

Table 3.1 Absolute Number of Occur

Ｖ

Ｎ Ｐ

Ｐ

G-I 430 .817

G-II 473 .654

G-III 557 .547

G-IV 124 .435 105

NG 189 .334

The table and figure seem to indicate;1) The probability of structure V declines as competence2) MV structure is acquired earlier, Gand so on.

I had two problems with this method. One is that itcompletely. This method has structures and meanings that infwhat probabilities show is words as well as structures, and sometimes errors, too, will

9

Absolute Number of Occurrences and Probability

ＭＶ ＶＭ REST

Ｎ Ｐ Ｎ Ｐ Ｎ

74 .138 7 .013 19 .037

191 .259 20 .029 65 .086

328 .319 46 .045 123 .122

.435 105 .369 28 .100 41 .147

264 .452 88 .153 107 .187

The table and figure seem to indicate; structure V declines as competence advances.

2) MV structure is acquired earlier, G-I and G-II, and VM structure late,

I had two problems with this method. One is that it requires large corpus to do the job has another serious problem. Errors are ignored as long as

tructures and meanings that informants intended can be guessed. As a result, sometimes misleading. In order to supplement these two weak points,

res, and sometimes errors, too, will be often examined in this

REST

19 .037

65 .086

123 .122

41 .147

.187

, in G-IV.

requires large corpus to do the job another serious problem. Errors are ignored as long as the

guessed. As a result, sometimes supplement these two weak points,

be often examined in this

10

paper. Hypotheses on second language acquisition will also be used to check what the data show. If what data show agree with the hypotheses, they should be more reliable. If not, we may get deeper into the word level to find the source of' disturbance in the data.

11

4 Hypothesis The following hypotheses are useful to understand Japanese learner attitude or feeling for Chinese syntax. They will also be used to predict and explain the result of analyses.

The first one is so-called Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis. When two languages are compared on semantic basis, there can be the following relationships between structures or words of two languages which share an equivalent meaning.1

1. One-to-one correspondence C ------ J ( One Chinese structure or word and one Japanese counterpart share the same semantic field. )

2. Coalescence J 1 C J 2 ： Jｎ ( One Chinese structure or word and more than two Japanese counterparts share the same semantic field. )

3. Split C 1 C 2 J ： Cｎ (More than two Chinese structures or words and one Japanese counterpart share the same semantic field. ) 1. For more detail, see Tanaka, S (1981) Language Transfer and Second Language Acquisition ,unpublished manuscript, Teachers College, Columbia University.

12

4. Reinterpretation C J ( One Chinese structure or word and one Japanese structure or word share a part of their meanings. But the other parts of the meaning the two structures or words imply are not covered by each other. This part is called "gap" )

5. Over-differentiation C ――φ ( A Chinese structure or word does not have a Japanese counterpart to share the semantic field it implies. )

6. Under-differentiation φ―― J ( A Japanese structure or word does not have a Chinese counterpart to share the semantic field it implies. )

Not only structures but also vocabulary as well can be compared and classified into one of the five categories. At the same time, because it is rare for a structure to have a complete correspondence with a structure of a different language, ( it is so at least between Chinese and Japanese structures. ) the following situation could happen: Chinese structure X has an almost one-to-one correspondence with Japanese structure X', but a Chinese word used in the structure X and correspondent Japanese words are related in a kind of coalescence, while another word has no Japanese counterpart at all, over-differentiation.

Chinese structures or words and correspondent Japanese ones may also be compared in terms of word order. There are only three categories in this comparison, identical, different, and in the case of semantic over- and under- differentiation, incomparable.

Let me show a couple of examples. Chinese Ad + V structure has almost one-to-one correspondence with the Japanese counterpart, and the word orders are identical. The Japanese structure is also Ad + V. Chinese structure Aux. + V has semantic one-to-one correspondence with the Japanese counterpart. But a Chinese aux. verb hui (会), neng (能) and a part of keyi (可以) have a relationship of split with Japanese aux. verb dekiru.

C J hui (,会) neng (能) dekiru keyi (可以)

13

And another Chinese aux. verb gan ( 敢 ) is not expressed in Japanese, that is over-differentiation.

C J gan (敢) ―― φ

The word orders of the two structures are different, in Chinese it is Aux. + V, and in Japanese V + Aux.. Chinese structures or words which have one-to-one semantic correspondence with Japanese are supposed to be easy to acquire, and the gap of reinterpritation, over-differentiation difficult, other contrastive categories somewhere between.

As far as word order is concerned, those which are different must be harder than those that are identical.

The other hypothesis is the Inter-language Hypothesis.1 The emphasis here is on learners strategies. Basic strategies which learners tend to take in the early stage of learning are transfer, generalization and avoidance.2 Identical elements, both semantic and syntactic, between two languages are generally easier to acquire by the strategy of transfer. MV and VM are the two basic positional structures for modifying a verb in Chinese. At first, Japanese learners tend to generalize all the verb modifying expressions into the MV structure.

Avoidance consists of two different situations. Generalization is the avoidance of one structure and the use of another to express a similar meaning. Another type of avoidance is simply to give up expressing the meaning and adding nothing to

1 Brown, D. (1980) Principle of Language Learning and Teaching prentice-Hall New

Jersey. 2 For related discussion, see Schumann, j. (1982) Simplification, transfer. and

relexification as aspects of Pidginization and early second language acquisition. Language Learning 32: 337-366

14

substitute for it. In this paper, this is called deletion. The term, substitution, is used when generalization is done grammatically. Generalization is a term which covers both the grammatical and ungrammatical.

So far, we have five terms, transfer, generalization, avoidance, deletion and substitution.

Further, when the deletion of a structure or word does not cause a significant problem for transmitting a message, the structure or word is said to be "weak' in meaning. On the contrary, if deletion makes the meaning unclear or different, it is "strong" in meaning. For instance, In (1) ( 1 ) Wo juede zhongguocai hen haochi. ( 我觉得中国菜很好吃)

wo juede（我觉得) is usually weak in meaning because in most cases, deleting it does not make the message unclear nor different. Those that are weak in meaning tend to be deleted without substitution. In addition, when a language has two alternatives which imply very close meanings, usually one of them is "unmarked" , and the other is "marked". Unmarked structures are used more often and express more general meanings. On the other hand, marked ones are used less and generally carrying more specific meanings or used in more specific contexts. Learners tend to acquire unmarked structures first and before getting familiar with marked structures, they try to generalize the meanings of marked structures into unmarked structures. Let me use MV and VM structures in Chinese as an example again. Between the two ways of modifying the verb, MV structure is unmarked, used much more often, and VM is marked, used generally with more specific meanings or in specific contexts. Learners tend to acquire MV, the unmarked structure first, and before acquiring VM, the marked structure, they tend to try to generalize the meanings which should be expressed by VM structure into MV, unmarked structure.

Finally, based on the two hypotheses, three major stages of learners strategies can be hypothesized. Let me call them Stage I, Stage II and Stage III. In Stage I, learners try to express their messages by acquiring the fewest structures. The main characteristics are the transfer of one-to-one correspondence, the acquisition of unmarked structures, the generalization of marked structures to marked ones, and, the deletion of structures which are weak in meaning. In Stage II, learners try to figure out the differences between marked structures and unmarked ones. Then, they try to use them and structures which are weak in meaning to make their messages more accurate and clearer. However, they still feel it difficult to use the structures the meanings of which the Japanese semantic

15

system does not have. It is the task of Stage III. The gap of reinterpretation and the expressions categorized into over-differentiation belong to this stage.

Of course, we need more hypotheses or more refined hypotheses to explain all the phenomena in the analysis. But these are all available to me so far. What I am going to do with them is to check what data shows. If these hypotheses support them, they would be more reliable On the other hand, if the two sides conflict, it is a signal that we should stop and examine more carefully.

16

Part II Analysis In this paper, VP and Complex Structure will be mainly analyzed. I will not analyze noun phrase and word order. The reason the noun phrase will be excluded is that the word orders of the noun phrase are identical between the two languages, so that not much information can be expected to be found. However, Embedded Clause and NP→Cl structure will be analyzed in Chapter 6 Complex Structure. The word order of Chinese is very important for Japanese to learn. Frankly, the problem here is that I don't have a good grammar to analyze it effectively. After VP and Complex Structure, Conjunctive Additional and Prepositional Phrase (PP) will be discussed.

In this paper, besides the names of categories, three additional terms will be used. They are Absolute Number of Occurrence, Probability and Acquisition Index. Absolute Number of Occurrence (N) means the number found in corpus. For instance, In G-I are 526 VPs, so 526 is Absolute Number of Occurrence of VP in G-I. One more example, 74 MV structures were found in the corpus of G-I, the Absolute Number of Occurrence of MV structure in G-I is 74. Probability (P) is calculated by the following formulae.

.

17

Acquisition Index is supposed to indicate a learners or a group's performance compared to that of native speakers’. It is calculated by the formula below.

18

5.Development of Verb Phrase 5.1 I have to start with the definition of VP. First or all, please bear in mind that I do not intend to analyze the Chinese language from a purely linguistic point of view. What this analysis is based on are the Chinese structures in Japanese learner's mind.

The followings are the definitions of VP which are relevant to my analysis. 1) VP is a phrase composed of one verb, adjective, copula or predicative number with optional modifiers. 2) NPs denoting object place, prepositional phrases and place, time words are excluded. 3) VP-Pre-VP connectors, such as ye (也), dou (都) jiu (就) and so on are excluded. 4) Movable adverbs are included when they are placed between verbs and subjects. 5) Aspect markers are excluded, not because they are not in VP, but because there are so many errors that including them would confuse the analysis. 6) The copulas as emphatics are excluded.

VPs are divided into the following categories. Rule I V V； verb, adjective, copula and

number used as predicate Rule 2 MV MV；modifier and V Rule 3 MV → AdV AdV；adverb and V Rule 4 MV → AV AV；auxiliary verb and V Rule 5 MV → V1V2 V1V2；V1＋V2 Rule 6 VM VM；V and modifier Rule 7 VM → V(YI)V V(YI)V；verb and optional yi (一) and same verb Rule 8 VM → VCom VCom；V and complement Rule 9 VM → VPc VPc；V and potential complement Rule 10 VM → VCb VCb；V and co-verb Rule 11 VM → VCsc VCsc；V and complex statative construction Rule 12 VCl VCl；V and clause Rule 13 SVC1 SVC；serial verb construction Rule 14 SVC2 SVP；special verb phrase Rule 15 SVC3 Rule 16 SVP

19

VP has been divided into 16 categories. All the VPs in the corpus are sorted out into one or more of the categories.

Let me explain the categories briefly with examples. i) Rule 1 V

When a VP is composed of one verb, one adjective, one copula or one number without any modifier, and it does not belong to any other categories, it belong to the category V. unlike others, which represent various kinds of complexity, this category is the simplest VP. e g. (2) Wo xihuan zhongguo .（我喜欢中国。） (3) Zhongguocai haochi ma ? ( 中国菜好吃吗？) (4) Jingdu yiqian shi shoudu.（京都以前是首都。) (5) meimei xianzai shijiu sui. (妹妹现在 19 岁。) ii) Rule 2 MV (modifier + V)

This category consists of three subcategories, AdV,, AV and V1V2．MV represents VPs composed of a V and one or more modifiers before it. iii) Rule 3 AdV (adverb + V)

When a VP consists of a V and one or more adverbs before it, the VP is put into this category. e.g. (6) Ta yijing zou le. (他已经走了。) We have the following rules about adverbs. 1) Hen (很) is ignored, but henbu (很不) and buhen (不很) are included. 2) negative markers bu (不) and mei (没) are ignored. iv) Rule 4 AV (auxiliary verb + V)

Both adverbs and auxiliary verbs are modifying factors of Vs, and often they are not easy to distinguish. Here distinction is made as following. When the Japanese corresponding word of a Chinese verb modifier is placed before a verb in Japanese, which is the position of adverbs in Japanese, the Chinese modifier is regarded as a adverb. On the other hand, when one is placed at the post-verbal position in Japanese, which is for auxiliary verbs in Japanese, the corresponding Chinese word is an auxiliary verb. The

20

only exception is tai (太), which is treated as an adverb though its corresponding Japanese word, sugiru is placed after a verb.

As a result of the above definition, the set of auxiliary in the verbs includes suan(算) haoxiang (好像) and juede(觉得) in the following contexts (7) Tamen busuan hen teshu。(他们不算很特殊。) (8) Wo juede hen haoqi ya。(我觉得很好奇呀。) (9) Xianzai haoxiang yijing meiyou le。(现在好像已经没有了。) as well as words which are traditionally called auxiliary verbs, such as hui (会)，neng(能)，keyi(可以)，xiang(想)，yao(要)，xiangyao(想要) gan (敢) etc.

None of the auxiliary verbs, except yao (要), juede (觉得) and suan (算) are used as main verbs. Xiang (想) can be used as a main verb. However, when it is a main verb, it means "think' and no longer has the auxiliary meaning of “want to”. Yao (要) is included in the category only because some other words such as xiang (想) and xiangyao (想要) carrying a similar meaning, desire, are included in auxiliary verbs. Juede (觉得) and suan (算) are included in this category because their meanings are usually weak, a modifying factor of V. In this respect, they are different from the V1 V2 structure. Some juedes (觉得), however, are categorized into Rule 12 VCl instead. The difference is that in the case of auxiliary verbs, the subject of the main verb cannot be put between an auxiliary verb and a main verb. *(10) Wo juede wo hen haoqi。(我觉得我很好奇。) (11) Wo juede wo hen ben。(我觉得我很笨。)

(10) is ungrammatical if it is intended to mean (8). On the other hand, the deletion of wo (我) from (11) does not change the meaning as long as the meaning is recoverable in the context. v) Rule 5 V1V 2(verb1 + verb2) This is a type of VP composed of two different verbs combined. e.g.

21

(12) Wo xihuan xue zhongwen。(我喜欢学中文。) (13) Wo kaishi xue zhongwen。(我开始学中文。) In this analysis, xue zhongwen (学中文) is not the object of the verbs xihuan (喜欢) and kaishi (开始).Rather, zhongwen (中文) is the object of the combined verbs xihuan xue (喜欢

学) and kaishi xue (开始学). This structure seems close to Rule 12 VCl structure. The difference is again that in V1V2 structure, the subject of the second verb V2 cannot be put in. e.g. *(14) Wa xihuan wo xue zhongwen. (我喜欢我学中文) On the other hand, the same is grammatical for VCl． e.g. (15) Wo shuo mingtian lai。 (我说明天来。) (16) Wo shuo wo mingtian lai。(我说我明天来。) Both (15) and (16) are grammatical, and may mean the same if the recoverable subject of (15) is also wo(我)。

The structure is also close to AV structure. Auxiliary verbs are either modifying factors of verbs or special verbs which cannot be used as a main verb. On the other hand, V1 in V1V2 structure can be used as a main verb, and the meaning is strong. vi) Rule 6 VM ( V + modifier )

Most Chinese verb modifiers are placed before Vs, but there are some cases in which modifiers are placed after Vs. In this analysis there are five categories, from Rule 7 to Rule 11. vii) Rule 7 V(YI)V (verb1 + optional YI (一) + verb1 ) e.g. (17) Youshihou, kankan dianying. (有时候，看看电影。) viii) Rule 8 VCom ( V + complement )

There are three kinds of complements, direction inferred, extent inferred and result inferred. e.g.

22

(18) diaoxiaqu (掉下去) (19) haoyidian (好一点) (20) chiwan (吃完) (18) is direction inferred, (19) is extent inferred and (20) is result inferred. Rule 9 VPc ( V + potential complement )

De (得) for affirmative and bu(不) for negative are added between main verbs and complements. The structure implies potentiality. e.g. (21) zhaobudao (找不到) x) Rule 10 VCb ( V + coverb )

In this structure, a coverb is placed right after a main verb。 e.g. (22) Youyong dao hen yuan de difang。(游泳到很远的地方。). xi) Rule 11 VCsc ( V + complex statative construction )

De (得) is usually put between V and CSC, which implies manner, extent and result. There are no CSCs implying result in our corpus. e.g. (23) guo de yukuai(过得愉快) (24) xue de bugou (学得不够 )

Only these eleven categories will be analyzed in this chapter. Among the five categories below, Rule 12 to Rule 16, the first three will be analyzed in the next chapter。 xii) Rule 12 VCl (V + clause )

Usually the clause in this structure is regarded as the object of the verb as (25) Wo zhidao ta buhui lai。(我知道他不会来。)

S V 0 However, I would like to distinguish the structure from Rule 1 V because semantically S+V is weak as in (25), and also because syntactically V is attached to a clause.

The distinctions between VCl in the one hand and AV and V1V2 on the other were discussed in (iv) and (v). The points are that this structure includes a verb and a clause,

23

and that putting the subject of the clause is always grammatical. e.g. (26) Wo juede hen_pianyi。(我觉得很便宜。)

V Cl As long as the recoverable subject can be put back before hen pianyi（很便宜），it is regarded as a clause. If the recoverable subject of the clause in (26) is Taiwan wujia(台湾物

价)，the meaning of (26) may be expressed as (27) (27) Wo juede Taiwan wujia hen pianyi。(我觉得台湾物价很便宜。)

S V Cl

So both (26) and (27) are regarded as the same structure, VCl. xiii) Rule 13 SVC1 （serial verb construction）1

The pattern is NP1+VP1 +( NP2)+VP2，NP1 is the subject of both VP1 and VP2, and optional NP2 is the object of VP1. Semantically VP1 is a kind of precondition of VP2. e.g. (28) Wo qu zhongshanbeilu chi ribencai.(我去中山北路吃日本菜。)

NP1 VP1 NP2 VP2 As a matter of fact, this structure consists of two VPs, but here they are regarded as one. So doing they will not be put in Rule 1 V. The structure of Rule 13 represents a slightly more complex structure and the verbs used in this structure are usually single verbs. xiv) Rule 14 SVC2 ( serial verb construction)2

This is so called pivotal construction. The formulation is NP1 +VP1 +NP2 +VP2 ,NP1

is the subject of VP1, NP2 is the object of VP1 and at the same time the subject of VP2． e.g. (29) Wo qing ni chifan.（我请你吃饭。）

NP1 VP1 NP2 VP2 xv) Rule 15 SVC3 ( serial verb construction)3

This category includes two different structures. I) meiyou (没有) + NP + verb, and 2) meiyou (没有) + NP + adjective. e.g.

24

(30) Wo rneiyou qian mai.(我没有钱买。) (31) Women meiyou zhongguoren qinqie. (我们没有中国人亲切。) This category will not be analyzed because the occurrences are too few. xvi) Rule 16 SVP (special verb phrase )

Proverbs, classical usages and one expression “yibian (一边) VP1 yibian (一边) VP2 " which I failed to classify in any of the other 15 categories.

25

5.2 V，MV and VM Generally speaking, MV is unmarked, and most structures/words belonging to the MV structure have one-to-one correspondents in Japanese. On the other hand, VM is marked, used for more specific, narrower meanings and in restricted contexts. And in many cases, these specific usages do not have one-to-one-correspondent usages in Japanese. The semantic relationships between the two languages in the field VM patterns cover are complex.

The absolute numbers of occurrences and probabilities for V, MV and VM of five groups are on Table 3.1. and Fig. 3.1.

The followings can be interpreted from the Table and Fig.. I) The probability of V reduces constantly as learner' proficiency advances. 2) The probabilities of both MV and VM increase as the proficiency advances. 3) MV increases remarkably in the early stages, G-I and G-II. 4) On the other hand, VM increases slowly until G-III, and makes a rather remarkable advance in G-IV.

From the observations above, the following conclusions can be made. Generally, MV structure is much easier for Japanese learners (JL) to acquire. In the early stages, G-I and G-Il, learners concentrate on the MV structure, very little use is made of the VM structure. In G-III, the acquisition of MV slows down a little and relatively more attention is paid to the VM structure. In G-IV, the trend is much more obvious. Learners in this stage concentrate on the VM structure.

In other words, in the early stages, G-I and G-II, they tend to put almost all verb modifiers in the pre-verbal position which is generalization. Later, in G-IV, they sort out the two patterns of verb modification. One thing which is not very clear yet from Fig. 3.1 is G-III's strategy. Is their main strategy still generalization, putting all verb modifiers into MV structure? Or do they start to struggle to acquire the VM structure? If so, how strongly? These points will be discussed in the following subsections.

5.3 AdV (adverb + V) The structure has almost oneword orders of the two structures aresemantically and syntactically. The structure is alsothe typical position for verb modifiers.

The development of the AdV structure is shown in Table 5.1 Table 5.1 AdV

N P AIG‐Ⅰ 42 .082 .2G‐Ⅱ 131 .180

.5G‐Ⅲ 242 .235 .77G‐Ⅳ 67 .236 .7NG 176 .37 -

The figure shows the probability develops(AI) reaches about .600 at G

26

The structure has almost one-to-one correspondence with the Japanese counterpart. The the two structures are identical. So it can be transsyntactically. The structure is also unmarked, the pre-

or verb modifiers. The development of the AdV structure is shown in Table 5.1 and Fig. 5.1.

AI .272 .596 .778 .781 -

shows the probability develops swiftly in G-I, G-Ⅱ and G-Ⅲ．

.600 at G-Ⅱ，and still advances to .778 in G-Ⅲ.

Japanese counterpart. The identical. So it can be transferred directly,

-verbal position is

and Fig. 5.1.

Ⅲ．Acquisition Index

5.4 AV ( auxiliary verb + V )This structure has similar characters to the AdV structure.word orders of the two languagesaux.s don't have a one-to-one relationship with their Japanese counterparts.Fig. 5.2 show the five groups' Table 5.2 AV The table shows that AI is already very high at at G-I, however, may be misleading. Itwithout it, the average probability of the five in of G-Ⅱ is .507 and G-Ⅲ .560, that are

N P G‐Ⅰ 30 .052 G‐Ⅱ 52 .068 G‐Ⅲ 77 .075 G‐Ⅳ 30 .101 NG 76 .134

27

AV ( auxiliary verb + V ) characters to the AdV structure. The differences are that the

word orders of the two languages are different, it is V + Aux. in Japaneseone relationship with their Japanese counterparts.

Fig. 5.2 show the five groups' performance on the structure.

is already very high at G-I, then increases slowly. The probability I, however, may be misleading. It reflects an unusual high point of G

it, the average probability of the five in G-I is .031. Anyway, the per.560, that are a little lower than that of the AdV structure.

AI .388 .068 .560 .754

-

The differences are that the nt, it is V + Aux. in Japanese and that some

one relationship with their Japanese counterparts. Table 5.2 and

slowly. The probability G-I5, which is .155,

the performance, AⅠ, a little lower than that of the AdV structure.

28

Table5.3 is the list of aux. verbs used by each group Table5.3 aux. verbs used by group

Ｇ-I hui(会)×13, yao(要)×12, xiang(想)×5

Ｇ-Ⅱ hui(会)×2, yao(要)×7, yinggai(应该)×5, neng(能)×7, xiang(想)×17,

hoaxiang(好像)×2, keyi(可以)×5, juede(觉得)×6, keneng(可能)×1

Ｇ-Ⅲ hui(会)×8, yao(要)×15, yinggai(应该)×7, neng(能)×4, xiang(想)×8,

bubi(不必)×1, keyi(可以)×14, yuanyi(愿意)×2, biyao(必要)×1,

keneng(可能)×1

buyong(不用)×1, miande(免得)×1, dasuan(打算)×2, hoaxiang(好像)×1,

juede(觉得)×7, rongyi(容易)×4

Ｇ-Ⅳ hui(会)×3, yao(要)×8, yinggai(应该)×3, neng(能)×1, xiang(想)×4,

hoaxiang(好像)×2, keyi(可以)×3, rongyi(容易)×1, nenggou(能够)×1,

suan(算)×3, zhunbei(准备)×1

ＮＧ hui(会)×14, yao(要)×15, hoaxiang(好像)×6, neng(能)×5,

xiang(想)×5,

juede(觉得)×4, keyi(可以)×6, xiangyao(想要)×3, rongyi(容易)×1,

nenggou(能够)×2, xuyao(需要)×1, suan(算)×2, keneng(可能)×6,

gan(敢)×6

From Table 5.3, the following points are observed. 1) The vocabulary G-I can use is very limited, only three items are used. Potentiality, desire and obligation are expressed by these three words. Learners are trying to express the three basic meanings by acquiring the fewest words. Other meanings are deleted or expressed in other ways. 2) All of the basic aux. verbs appear in G-Ⅱ. But the three potential aux. verbs, which represent a case of split, are sometimes not used distinctively by G-Ⅱ and G-Ⅲ. e.g. (32) Women zai zher, hui jian beizi.(我们在这儿，会捡贝子。)

(G-Ⅲ4) The aux. verb here must be keyi (可以) instead of' hui（会）. 3) A word with weak meaning, juede (觉得) appears as early as G-Ⅱ, but another 'weak' word suan (算) does not appear until G-IV probably because the Japanese language seldom expresses the meaning. 4) Over-differentiation aux.verb, gan (敢) is not used by Japanese groups (JG) at all, while

29

NG used it 6 times.

C J gan (敢) ‐‐ φ

In short, like the AdV structure, the AV structure is not difficult for JLs to use. But the AI of AV is a little lower than that of the AdV. This may be due to the different word orders between the two languages and rather complex semantic relationship on word level.

5.5 V1V2 (verb1 + verb2) This category is set up to accommodatethe only structure of combinedstructures to compare with it. There are, however, several waysinstance;

(33) kaishi xue zhongguohua (→ (34) kaishi φ zhongguohua (or → (35) φ xue zhongguohua (

(36)kaishi lai zher (开始来这儿

→ (37) diyici lai zher (第一次来这儿

The word order of this category is different from Japanese

The absolute number of occurrences is not large as can be seen Table 5.4 V1V2

N P AIG- Ⅰ 2 .005 .2G‐Ⅱ 8 .011 .5G‐Ⅲ 9 .009 .4G‐Ⅳ 9 .032 1.52NG 11 .021 -

30

accommodate those that failed to be put into Adthe only structure of combined verbs. Therefore, while it is unmarked, there is no markedstructures to compare with it. There are, however, several ways to substitu

(33) kaishi xue zhongguohua (开始学中国话 ) zhongguohua (开始中国话)

xue zhongguohua (学中国话) 开始来这儿) 第一次来这儿)

The word order of this category is different from Japanese counterpart, which is V

ences is not large as can be seen from Table 5.4.

AI .238 .523 .429 52 -

put into AdV or AV. This is le it is unmarked, there is no marked

to substitute for it. For

counterpart, which is V2 + V1.

Table 5.4.

31

The line on Fig. 5.3 does not show very clear picture. G-Ⅱ’s performance is more than .500. G-III’s comes down a little and G-IV's is unusually high.

The next table is the list of the words used by each group. Table 5.5 word used as V1 Ｇ-I xihuan(喜欢)×2

Ｇ-Ⅱ xihuan(喜欢)×8

Ｇ-Ⅲ xihuan(喜欢)×7, kaishi(开始)×2

Ｇ-Ⅳ kaishi(开始)×8

ＮＧ xihuan(喜欢)×7, kaishi(开始)×1, dongde(懂得)×2, xue(学)×1

The main word for this structure is xihuan (喜欢), which starts to be used in G-I, and is used freely in G-II. Other words used as V1 increase one by one as proficiency develops. The high probability of G-IV reflects the fact that the two learners like to use kaishi (开始) very much. The reason is unknown. The structure itself does not seem difficult. Like AdV and AV, it starts to be used in G-I, and G-II can use it well.

5.6 V(YI)V (verb + optional YI ( Actually, this is a kind of VCom structure.

V + (YI)V complement

Semantically, this is a kind of reinterpretation,diagram below indicates. C

V(YI)V V+yidian(一点)

This is a marked structure as a V modifyingmodifying is MV structure. Meaningmuch.

Let's look at Table 5.6 and Table 5.6 V(YI)V

N P G- Ⅰ 0 0 G‐Ⅱ 1 .001 G‐Ⅲ 6 .006 G‐Ⅳ 3 .011 NG 11 .020

32

YI (一) + verb )

is a kind of VCom structure.

complement

this is a kind of reinterpretation, though probably more complex,

J φ

Chotto+V

as a V modifying structure. The unmarked major structure of V MV structure. Meaning is weak, deleting (YI)V does not change the

6 and Fig. 5.4.

AI 0

.050

.300

.600 -

more complex, as the

unmarked major structure of V I)V does not change the meaning

33

The number is very limited but the result is on the line with the expectation that the structure should be hard to acquire.

Before discussing the implication of the figure, there is one thing that should be mentioned. Japanese sometimes repeat a verb to mean an action is done intensively. e.g. (38) Ta meitian dui wo shuo nuli xuexi xuexi. (他每天对我说努力学习学习)（G-Ⅱ3) This is identical with the Chinese structure we are discussing now. This kind of samples are not counted because the meaning they intended is different, the identicality is a coincidence.

The table seems to suggest that the structure is difficult for G-I and G-II to use. Only one example was found in G-II's corpus. This was produced by G-II7, an individual who is supposed to be the best in G-II. Despite this, it sounds unnatural when she uses it. G-III seems to have started to acquire the structure. However, examples in the speech of G-III2 and G-III7 sound odd. Even G-IV can’t use the structure as free as NG. There could be several reasons for this as mentioned before; I) the semantic gap, 2) weakness of meaning and 3) generalization to MV structure. Here is one example, which demonstrates the semantic gap and a corresponding strategy of deletion.

When they were asked about their hobbies, NG3 said,

(39) Gen pengyou liaoliaotian, dada baolingqiu,…..（跟朋友聊聊天，打打保龄球….） On the other hand, G-Ⅲ3 answered, (40) Gen pengyou liaotian, da baolingqiu,（跟朋友聊天，打保龄球,） Of course both are good sentences. However, it might be that G-Ⅲ3 is unable to use the structure in this situation. The meaning at the structure in (39) is the gap which JLs are not aware of from the Japanese semantic system.

5 .7 VCom ( V + complement ) This is the typical VM structure, 60% of NG's VMs belong to thisdivided into three subcategories; manner,

For the expressions of this category, onestructure is marked, similar meaning isother lexical items. Some expressions are weak semantically, b Table 5.7 VCom

N P G‐Ⅰ 4 .009 G‐Ⅱ 7 .010 G‐Ⅲ 22 .022 G‐Ⅳ 18 .063 NG 53 .088

Table 5.7 shows that 1) the probability

they start to struggle with the structure and the probability advances atwhich is very close to NG.

The development of the complement yidianThe list of yidian（一点） used by

34

5 .7 VCom ( V + complement )

structure, 60% of NG's VMs belong to this category. They are divided into three subcategories; manner, direction and extent.

For the expressions of this category, one-to-one correspondence is not easily found. The ed, similar meaning is often carried by MV structure, and sometimes by

items. Some expressions are weak semantically, but others are

AI .102 .114 .250 .716

-

Table 5.7 shows that 1) the probability for G-I and G-II is very low, and that 2) in G

the structure and the probability advances at G

The development of the complement yidian（一点） may provide us with further insight. used by each group is shown in Table 5.8.

category. They are

is not easily found. The ften carried by MV structure, and sometimes by

others are not.

is very low, and that 2) in G-III

G-IV remarkably,

us with further insight.

35

Table 5.8 List of VMs including yidian（一点） G-I lei累一点×2, tanhua谈话一点×1, you有一点×1 G-Ⅱ chang长一点×1, zhidao 知道一点×1 G-Ⅲ zang脏一点×1, cha差一点×1, gao 高一点×1, duo多一点×1, hui 会一点×1,

ganxie感谢一点×1

G-Ⅳ xue学一点×2, lei累一点×1, duo多一点×1, keguan客观一点×1,

hao 好一点×1 ＮＧ 12

G-I used four post-verbal yidian（一点）. Among them, two are ungrammatical in the

contexts. They should be placed at pre-verbal position as ( you) yidian lei（(有)一点累）. The six learners used another six yidians（一点）at pre-verbal position, as yidian piaoliang（一

点漂亮）, yidian lei（一点累）, yidian jimo(一点寂寞)，yidian xuexi(一点学习)，yidian ting(一点听) and yidian jinbu（一点进步）. Among them, the last three are ungrammatical. The correct place is post-verbal, at least it is so for two of them, yidian ting (一点听) and yidian xuexi (一点学习)．Yidian piaoliang (一点漂亮) is also ungrammatical in the context, the meaning should be expressed by VM structure as (bijiao) piaoliang yidian((比较)漂亮一点). ( Of course the other yidians (一点) need you (有) before them as you yidian lei (有一点累) and you yidian jimo (有一点寂寞). In short, ten yidians (一点) are used by G-I, four in VM position and six in MV position. Among them two out of the four VMs and three or four of the six MVs were misplaced. Their positions should have been reversed. This seems to indicate that G-I learners did not know the semantic difference between the two positions for yidian (一点). In the corpus of G-II, only two are placed in post-verbal position ( P, .003 ). Both are in G-II7’s sample and are grammatical. On the other hand, twelve yidians (一点) are used in pre-verbal position as yidian xuexi (一点学习),yidian tingdedong (一点听得懂)2, yidian jinbu (一点进步)２，yidian qingchu(一点清楚) 2, yidian pin(一点贫) , yidian gao (一点

高) , yidian buxiang (一点不像), you yidian lei (有一点累), and you yidian da (有一点大). Among them, the first six are ungrammatical. They should be placed in post-verbal position. ( Yidian jinbu (一点进步) can be grammatical if jinbu (进步) is used as a noun and you (有) is added before yidian (一点).) And you (有) should be added before the other four yidians(一点). These facts about G-II can be interpretated that generalization of yidians (一点) to pre-verbal position, unmarked position for V modifiers, is dominant in this level. This is one of the reasons why the probability for G-II is relatively low.

36

In G-III, there are six post-verbal yidians (一点) ( P, .006 ) Among them, only one is ungrammatical. On the other hand, only two pre-verbal yidians (一点) were found, You yidian bu manyi (有一点不满意), and *yidian you (一点有). The later is ungrammatical. The number of yidian (一点) placed at pre-verval position is extremely low, compared to G-II. One of the reasons is probably that another word, bijiao (比较), covers a part of the meaning which yidian (一点) covers in G-II. 46 tokens of bijiao (比较) ( P, .045 ) were used by G-III, the number was 13 ( P, .025 ) in G-II. G-III's low occurrence of pre-verbal yidian (一点) agrees with G-IV (one) and NG (one). From the observation above, it is likely that G-III is acquiring the two different usages of yidian (一点) though they cannot use it very accurately yet.

In G-IV, six ( P, .021 ) post-verbal yidians (一点) were used. All are grammatical. The only one occurrence in pre-verbal position, you yidian bu dui (有一点不对), is also grammatical. Compared to twelve yidians (一点) in post-verbal position ( P, .021 )and one in pre-verbal by NG, the acquisition level of yidian (一点) in the VM position at G-IV seems very close to that of NG.

The other expressions used by each group are on Table 5.9. Among the five which were used by G-II, three are idiomatic, zhu zai yiqi (住在一起), qisi (气死) and haoji(好极)，which are supposed to have been produced as a memorized whole rather than by combination. True acquisition seems to start at G-III. Eleven tokens ( P, .011 ) of directional complements are found in G-III's corpus. They are usually not used as idioms but used in combinations of verbs and complements. The number of directional complements used by G-IV was 10 ( P, .035 ), and 23 ( P, .040 ) by NG.

37

Table 5.9 VComs except vidian(一点) manner direction extent exception G-I ― ― ― ―

G-Ⅱ 吃完 看到 气死 好极 住在一起 G-Ⅲ ―完 wan ―回来 huilai×2 ―挫 hao ―起来 qilai×4 ―到 dao×2 ―掉 diao

―出来 chulai

―下来 xialai

G-Ⅳ ―到 dao×4 ―死 si

―起来 qilai×4 ―出来 chulai×2

ＮＧ ―完 wan×3 ―到 dao×8 ―极 ji

―好 hao×2 ―起来 qilai×7 ―下来 xialai

―成 cheng ―出来 chulai×5 ―下去 xiaqu

―掉 diao

One more thing is worth noticing. There is one xialai (下来) in G-III, and one xialai (下

来) and one xiaqu (下去) in NG. But the meanings they carry are a little different. Xialai (下来) in G-III means "down" and is a spatial term. On the other hand, the two in NG are used to mean direction in time. (41) *.daizhe na muda diao-xia-lai de huaban ..(G-III4 )(带着那牡丹掉下来的花瓣) (42) Yi ge yue xia-lai, dajia ye chabuduo shou le, ( NG3 )(一个月下来，大家也差不多熟了)

(43) Bu neng zheyang pian-xia-qu le, ( NG5 )(不能这样骗下去了)

In Japanese are uses kuru (come) and iku (go) to mean directions in time. But they still need verbs to express time movement, such as sugiru (pass) and tsuzukeru (continue). Examples of this construction would be: sugite-iku (pass-go) and V-tsuzukete-kuru (V-continue-come). So in Japanese only verbs such as sugiru, tsuzukeru, are comparable to the Chinese complement xia (下) semantically. On the other hand, in Chinese verbs may be used for the same meanings as well. So this is a case of split.

38

C J

verb verb complement

The strong identification by JLs between the verbs in both languages might be the reason why JLs avoided the use of xia( 下 ) meaning movement in time. The most likely substitutions of (42) and (43) by JLs are (44) guo yi ge yue ….(过一个月….) (45)…..jixu pian (….继续骗.) From the data presented above, it seems safe to conclude: 1) As far as the usage of yidian (一点) is concerned, in G-I MV and VM positions are not

distinguished semantically. 2) Most of other expressions of VCom structure are hard for G-I to use. 3) In G-II, generalization into MV structure is observed in the case of yidian(一点)．The

usage of VM structure is mostly idiomatic and not the product of combinatory rule. 4) In G-III, VCom structure starts to appear broadly, but the probability is still not high

and some confusions remain. 5) And in G-IV, the acquisition of VCom structure advances remarkably, semantic

confusions with MV structure seem to be fully solved. 6) The usage of xia-lai (qu) (下来(去)) for the process of time extension is harder than others because of the strong tendency toward substitution.

5.8 VPc (V + potential complememt) The acquisition of VPc represents aone Japanese structure. Between the twounmarked structure for potentialimarkers ‘de' (得)for affirmative and 'bu' VCom structure;

zhao-dao(找到) zhaoban.hao(办好) ban

The word order is identical with its Japanese counterpart. But(得) or bu (不) in VCom structure issyntactically, VPc is more complex than VCom. However, the semantic fields VPcsare so specific that many of them are more like idiomsthree elements. Table 5.9 VPc

N P AIG‐Ⅰ 3 .005 .714G‐Ⅱ 8 .011 1.57G‐Ⅲ 8 .008 1.14G‐Ⅳ 3 .011 1.57NG 4 .007 -

39

5.8 VPc (V + potential complememt)

represents a case of split. It and another structureBetween the two Chinese structures, VPc is otentiality is Aux. + V. Many VPcs are made by

)for affirmative and 'bu' (不) for negative between the two

zhao-de-dao(找得到) ban-bu-.hao(办不好)

The word order is identical with its Japanese counterpart. But the structure, adding de ) in VCom structure is not familiar to the Japanese. Both semantically andVPc is more complex than VCom. However, the semantic fields VPcs

are so specific that many of them are more like idioms rather than the combinations

AI 714

1.57 1.14 1.57

-

structure correspond to ructures, VPc is marked. The

are made by adding the two elements of the

the structure, adding de Both semantically and

VPc is more complex than VCom. However, the semantic fields VPcs imply rather than the combinations of

40

The figure seems to show that the acquisition of the structure is easy. In fact, the acquisition Index of G-I is already 857. This, however, is a wrong signal. The following list will show us what caused this signal. Table 5.10 expressions of VPc G-I tingbudong听不懂, kanbudong看不懂×2 G-Ⅱ tingbudong听不懂×8

G-Ⅲ tongbudong听不懂, shuobuchulai说不出来×3, xiangbuchulai想不出来,

kaobushang考不上, zhaobudao找不到×2 G-Ⅳ tongbudong听不懂, yangbuqi养不起, chengbuliao成不了

ＮＧ tongbudong听不懂, qibulai起不来, pabuqilai爬不起来, zhaobudao找不到

Interestingly, G.-I and G~II use only ting(kan)-bu-.dong (听(看)不懂) which expresses their inability of understanding Chinese, only in G-III is shuo-bu-.chulai(说不出来), which expresses G-Ⅲ’s inability to produce Chinese freely. This reflects the biggest problem for each of the groups. Because of their strong interest they learn these expressions even when they have not understood the structure involved.

If these expressions, ting(kan)-bu-dong (听(看)不懂) , and shuo-bu-chulai (说不出来) are excluded, Table 5.11 will result. Table 5.11 VPc without ting(kan)-bu-dong and shuo-bu-chulai

The table shows VPc is hard for G-I and G-II to use. It seems to be acquired at G-III. However, all the expressions in G-III are idiomatic. This suggests that they be memorized as whole rather than analyzed structures. There is too little data for further discussion.

N P AI G-Ⅰ 0 0 0 G-Ⅱ 0 0 0 G-Ⅲ 4 .004 .800 G-Ⅳ 2 .007 1.4 NG 3 .005 -

5.9 VCb (V + coverb) VCb represents another case of split. Two Chinese structuresstructure. Between the two Chinesethe pre-verbal prepositional phrase. The wordcounterpart, which is pre-verbal. JLs have twospecific situation for the VCb from the general one for the prethey have to hold the meaning expressed by VCb untilGeneralization to pre-verbal PP andstrategies. (46) is an example of the generalization. *(46) dao shidian shuojiao. ( For the same meaning, one must use a VCb structure: (47) shuidao shidian. (睡到十点

Table 5.11 VCb

N P G-Ⅰ 0 0 G-Ⅱ 1 .001 G-Ⅲ 2 .002 G-Ⅳ 0 0 NG 8 .015

41

ase of split. Two Chinese structures correspond to one structure. Between the two Chinese structures, VCb is marked, the unmarked structure is

verbal prepositional phrase. The word order is different fromverbal. JLs have two problems, 1) they have to dif

for the VCb from the general one for the pre-verbal PP. 2)they have to hold the meaning expressed by VCb until after producing the verb.

verbal PP and separation into two clauses are possible alternative (46) is an example of the generalization.

(到十点睡觉) (G-III3 )

For the same meaning, one must use a VCb structure:

睡到十点)

AI 0

,067 .133 0 -

correspond to one Japanese structures, VCb is marked, the unmarked structure is

from its Japanese problems, 1) they have to differentiate the

verbal PP. 2) In production, after producing the verb.

ossible alternative

42

The probability of occurrence is very low. The following are some findings: 1) There is one example in G-II, whose usage is very natural. (48) youyong-dao hen yuan de difang.(游泳到很远的地方)(G-II4 )

It is a little surprising to see such an example at this level. 2) It is also a surprising that there is none to be found in G-IV. 3) Compared to eight tokens in NG, the single token in G-II and the two tokens in G-III

seem to indicate the structure is not easy for JLs to use.

5.10 VCsc (V + Complex Statative Construction) The semantic relationship between V and CSC combined with structure is like that of subject and predicate. Semantically speaking, it is not correct to put this structure into the VM structure. Both the meaning of the two components andthe whole meaning the structure implies are not hard to grasp. The problem is not the meaning but the specific situation in which it is used. The relationship between this Chinese structure and comparable Japanese structures is complex. I don't know how tocategorize it. The meaning is often weak. What is waak, however, is not CSC but V. The following strategies may occur.1) deletion

(49) guo-de-kuaile (过得快乐

2) generalization to MV structure(50) guo-de-kuaile (过得快乐

3) generalization to two clauses(51) guo-de-kuaile (过得快乐

Table 5. 12 VCsc

N P AIG-Ⅰ 0 0 G-Ⅱ 3 .005 .G-Ⅲ 8 .008 .381 G-Ⅳ 4 .015 .NG 12 .021

The followings are some interpretations.

I) The number in G-I is 0. This indicates that the structure is hard for G2) It starts to appear in G

expressions by G-II are very natural. This may imply that it isother VM structures.

43

5.10 VCsc (V + Complex Statative Construction)

The semantic relationship between V and CSC combined with de (structure is like that of subject and predicate. Semantically speaking, it is not correct to

structure into the VM structure. Both the meaning of the two components andthe whole meaning the structure implies are not hard to grasp. The problem is not the meaning but the specific situation in which it is used. The relationship between this

structure and comparable Japanese structures is complex. I don't know how tocategorize it. The meaning is often weak. What is waak, however, is not CSC but V. The following strategies may occur.

过得快乐) → kuaile (快乐) eralization to MV structure

过得快乐) → kuaile de guo (快乐地过) 3) generalization to two clauses

过得快乐) → guo shenghuo, (hen) kuaile (过生活

AI 0

.238

.381

.714 －

are some interpretations. I is 0. This indicates that the structure is hard for G

2) It starts to appear in G-II and increases steadily through G-III and GII are very natural. This may imply that it is not as difficult to use as

e (得) in the VCsc structure is like that of subject and predicate. Semantically speaking, it is not correct to

structure into the VM structure. Both the meaning of the two components and the whole meaning the structure implies are not hard to grasp. The problem is not the meaning but the specific situation in which it is used. The relationship between this

structure and comparable Japanese structures is complex. I don't know how to categorize it. The meaning is often weak. What is waak, however, is not CSC but V. The

过生活,(很)快乐)

I is 0. This indicates that the structure is hard for G-I to use. III and G-IV. The

not as difficult to use as

5.11 VM’ ( revised VM structure ) Since the figure of VPc structure is misleading, I would like to set up a new category for VM structure. The revised VM structure (VM’) consists of the four subcategories,VCom, VCb, and VCsc, excluding VPc. The table and figure for it are the following. Table 5. 13 VM'

N P AIG-Ⅰ 4 .009 G-Ⅱ 12 .017 G-Ⅲ 38 .037 G-Ⅳ 25 .089 NG 84 .145

44

5.11 VM’ ( revised VM structure )

Since the figure of VPc structure is misleading, I would like to set up a new category for VM structure. The revised VM structure (VM’) consists of the four subcategories,VCom, VCb, and VCsc, excluding VPc. The table and figure for it are the following.

AI .062 .118 .258 .614

-

Since the figure of VPc structure is misleading, I would like to set up a new category for VM structure. The revised VM structure (VM’) consists of the four subcategories, V(YI)V, VCom, VCb, and VCsc, excluding VPc. The table and figure for it are the following.

45

6. Development of Complex Structure 6.1

In this section, I would like to examine the learner’s control of complex structures. Complex structures are categorized into the following categories. 1) Interclausal In these structures, two VPs are included in a clause. Rule 14 SVC2 Rule 12 VCl Both were discussed in 5.1 Rule 17 ECl ECl; embedded clause Rule 18 NP →Cl NP → Cl; clause used as NP 2) Interclausal In these structures, two clauses are connected with or without conjunctives. Rule 13 SVC1 SVC1; discussed in 5.1 Rule 19 SCF SCF; subordinate clause conjunctive at the final position of

subordinate clause Rule 20 SCB SCB; subordinate clause conjunctive at the beginning of

subordinate clause Rule 21 VCN VCN; pre-verbal conjunctive , non- additional i) ECl ( embedded clause ) This is a clause which is used as a noun modifier. e.g.

(52) Tamen bei de shengzi ye hen duo.(他们背的生字也很多) Tarnen bei de (他们背的) is a noun modifier as well as a clause. ii) NP → Cl This means a clause which is used as a NP in another clause. Only the clauses used as subjects and the NPs in PPs are included. The clauses used as objects are excluded. They are a part of VCl structure. e.g.

(53) Bangzhu_ni shi yinggai de.(帮助你是应该的)

46

A clause bangzhu ni (帮助你) is used as the subject.

As far as conjunctives are concerned, I would like to divide them into two categories first, 1) non-additional and 2) additional. When two clauses are connected by a conjunctive, and the first clause is not completed either semantically or structurally, the conjunctive is non-additional. For instance, yinwei (因为) in(54) is non-additional.

(54) yinwei wo you bing, changchang juede hen lei.(因为我有病，常常觉得很累) On the other hand, when yinwei (因为) is used in the second clause, it is additional. e.g.

(55) Wo bu xiang qu, yinwei wo shenti bu shufu.(我不想去，因为我身体不舒服) This distinction is valuable because the base of the analysis in this chapter is the complexity of structures. When a learner uses a non-additional conjunctive, he/she has to be prepared for the second clause before the first clause is over. On the other hand, in the case of additional conjunctives, a speaker does not have to be aware of the second clause in advance. Only non-additional conjunctives will be analyzed in this chapter. Additional conjunctives will be discussed in the next chapter. iii) SCF (subordinate conjunctive at final position) SCF is different from SCB in terms of the position where the conjunctive is placed. SCF is placed at the final point of the first clause. e.g.

(56) Wo huiqu deshihou, ta yijing zou le.(我回去的时候，他已经走了。) iv) SCB (subordinate conjunctive at beginning position) SCB represents the conjunctives which are placed at the beginning of the first clause, such as(54) (57). The conjunctive which is placed in the pre-verbal position of the first clause is included in this category. e.g.

(57) Yi zuo-qi shi lai, jiu wan le.(一做起事来,就完了。) v) VCN (pre-verbal conjunctive non-additional) We will deal with another kind of conjunctives, pre-verbal conjunctive (VC), which are

47

conjunctives placed right before the VP in the second clause, it includes jiu (就), ye(也) dou (都) cai (才) and so on. VC is divided into additional and non-additional types. (58) and (59) are examples of non-additional.

(58) Yi zuo-qi shi lai, jiu wan le. (-一做起事来，就完了。) (59) Xiang dao shenme, jiu shuo shenme.(想到什么，就说什么。)

The first clause in (58) is not completed either semantically nor syntactically. The first clause of (59) is not completed only semantically. On the other hand, the first clause can be a complete sentence without the second clause, as in (60).

(60) zhe jitian tamen yao mai tuchan a,(这几天他们要买土产啊) wo jiu dai tamen qu guang a. (我就带他们去逛啊)

So in this case, the usage of the conjunctive jiu (就) is additional. In this chapter only non-additional type will be discussed．Additional type will be dealt in the next chapter.

I should define "clause" here. For Rule 17 ECl and Rule 19 SCF, a clause must be (Ad)V + Var., which means that AdV is not regarded as a clause but as a noun modifier, for Rule 18 NP →Cl and Rule 21 VCN, it must be V +Var. , in other words, a single V is not regarded as a clause but as a noun. And for Rule 13 CVS1 and Rule 20 SCB, it is V + (Var.), which means a single V is regarded as a clause. An explanation of these rules would be rather complex. Let me only point that the distinctions must be made this way to distinguish a simple noun modifier from a clause, and a noun from a verb.

48

6.2 SVC2 (serial verb construction)2

The structure of SVC2 is NP1V1NP2V2, NP1 is the subject of V1, NP2 is the object of V1 and the subject of V2 as well. The structure is very simple and the semantic function is very clear. But the correspondence with Japanese structures is not straight forward. More than one Japanese structures correspond to it, which represents coalescence. Moreover, there are gaps between the Japanese structures and the Chinese SVC2 structure. Not all Japanese expressions with these structures can be expressed with the Chinese SVC2. A kind of reinterpretation results. e.g

(61) Ta yao wo nian. (他要我念. ) is expressed in Japanese by the word order as Ta,wo, nian-aux., verb-yao. (他，我，念-aux., verb-要), and

(62) xuyao ren zuo ...(需要人做) is as zuo .. de ren, xuyao.(做….的人，需要。) Though the structure is not difficult to understand, complex relationship between it and corresponding Japanese structures puzzles JLs.

The following is the list of the tokens of the structure found in the corpus

49

Table 6.1 SVC2 G-I 0 G-II gei wo qu (给我去) G.-II I ling ren shufu (令人舒服)，zhiming wo huida (指名我回答) qing ta tian (请他填)， rang tamen tian (让他们填) G.-IV yao wo nian (要我念)， rang hen duo xuesheng lai Taiwan dushu (让很多学生来台湾读书) NG gausu wo liru (告诉我例如)，xuyao ren zuo (需要人做)， qing ta yan (请他演) jiao women duo ting (叫我们多听)，guli haizimen zizhu (鼓励孩子们自主)

The only example by G-Ⅱ is probably an error.

*(63) wo gen gufu, ta gei wo qu, ta quanbu fu fei gei wo (我跟姑父，他给我去，他全部付费给我) (G-Ⅱ7)

Gei here is supposed to mean "to pay” or "to give". Though the absolute number of

occurrences is very small, the result agrees with our prediction. The result shows that the structure is not easy for Ｇ-I and G-Ⅱ to use, and that the acquisition starts at the G-Ⅲ level.

6.3 VCl (verb + clause) Semantically the structure VCl has almost onestructure. However, the word orders are quite different in the two languages. In Japanese, the verb has final position, in Chinese the verb has initial position.

C J(S)VCl -- Cl(S)V S:subject

In addition, the meaning of V is usually weak, which means its deletion does not make the message different nor unclear. For JLs, the acquisition of the structure entails the will to express the weak meaninginitially ,as if adding a clausal adverb. The table shows how difficult this job is for them. Table6.2 VCl

N P G-Ⅰ 5 .010 G-Ⅱ 31 .040 G-Ⅲ 72 .071 G-Ⅳ 27 .097 NG 73 .129

The figure shows a very simple line, reflectingacquisition. The number of Gindicate positive activity with the structure. It is also meaning with Cl(S)V Japanese order. In

50

Semantically the structure VCl has almost one-to-one correspondence with a Japanese structure. However, the word orders are quite different in the two languages. In Japanese, the verb has final position, in Chinese the verb has initial position.

J Cl(S)V S:subject

In addition, the meaning of V is usually weak, which means its deletion does not make the message different nor unclear. For JLs, the acquisition of the structure entails the will to express the weak meanings. JLs must also train themselves to express verbs clause initially ,as if adding a clausal adverb. The table shows how difficult this job is for them.

AI .078 .310 .550 .752

-

The figure shows a very simple line, reflecting the correlation between the experience and acquisition. The number of G-I is very low. But at G-Ⅱ, Al reaches .310, which seems to indicate positive activity with the structure. It is also Ｇ-Ⅱ who often expresses the meaning with Cl(S)V Japanese order. In Ｇ-Ⅲ and G-Ⅳ，AI rises steadily

one correspondence with a Japanese structure. However, the word orders are quite different in the two languages. In Japanese,

In addition, the meaning of V is usually weak, which means its deletion does not make the message different nor unclear. For JLs, the acquisition of the structure entails the will to

s. JLs must also train themselves to express verbs clause initially ,as if adding a clausal adverb. The table shows how difficult this job is for them.

the correlation between the experience and , Al reaches .310, which seems to

who often expresses the AI rises steadily．

6.4 ECl (embedded clause) The structure ECl has almost complete onestructure, semantically. The word orders of both the Chinese and Japanese structures are identical: embedded clauses are placed before head nouns in both languages. However, embedding is complex, learners may feel it a little too long to manage in the early stage. There is one more small problem. The Japanese language seems to use more embedded clauses than Chinese. This is so at least in writing. Japanese allows many modifiers before a head noun, but Chinese tends to avoid a lot of modifiers strung together. Table 6.3 ECl

N P AIG-Ⅰ 9 .019 G-Ⅱ 11 .015 G-Ⅲ 63 .062 1G-Ⅳ 15 .051 1NG 21 .035

The figure show a very unusual pattern compared to those in previous sections. AI at Gis already .543, and those of

The following interpretations are possible. The learners in Guse the structure if they want to, but they tend to avoid it. The avoidance is especially obvious in G-II, probably because they prefer concentrating on simpler structures. and G-IV feel confident with the long structures Two reasons can bprobabilities of G-III and G-acquired the discourse strategies of a target language well tends to put too much information into one clause rather than dividing them into sevthem. The other possible reason is that they are transferring the Japanese ECl structure into Chinese. The first is more likely for G-IV．

51

has almost complete one-to-one correspondence with a Japanese structure, semantically. The word orders of both the Chinese and Japanese structures are identical: embedded clauses are placed before head nouns in both languages. However,

x, learners may feel it a little too long to manage in the early stage. There is one more small problem. The Japanese language seems to use more embedded clauses than Chinese. This is so at least in writing. Japanese allows many modifiers

n, but Chinese tends to avoid a lot of modifiers strung together.

AI .543 .429

1.77 1.46

-

The figure show a very unusual pattern compared to those in previous sections. AI at Gis already .543, and those of Ｇ-Ⅲ and G-Ⅳ are much higher than that of N

The following interpretations are possible. The learners in G-I and Guse the structure if they want to, but they tend to avoid it. The avoidance is especially

II, probably because they prefer concentrating on simpler structures. IV feel confident with the long structures Two reasons can be supposed for why the

-IV exceeded that of NC. One is that the learner who has not acquired the discourse strategies of a target language well tends to put too much information into one clause rather than dividing them into several clauses and connecting them. The other possible reason is that they are transferring the Japanese ECl structure into Chinese. The first is more likely for G-III and the second likely for both

one correspondence with a Japanese structure, semantically. The word orders of both the Chinese and Japanese structures are identical: embedded clauses are placed before head nouns in both languages. However,

x, learners may feel it a little too long to manage in the early stage. There is one more small problem. The Japanese language seems to use more embedded clauses than Chinese. This is so at least in writing. Japanese allows many modifiers

n, but Chinese tends to avoid a lot of modifiers strung together.

The figure show a very unusual pattern compared to those in previous sections. AI at G-Ⅰ uch higher than that of NＧ.

I and G-Ⅱ already can use the structure if they want to, but they tend to avoid it. The avoidance is especially

II, probably because they prefer concentrating on simpler structures. Ｇ-Ⅲ e supposed for why the

IV exceeded that of NC. One is that the learner who has not acquired the discourse strategies of a target language well tends to put too much

eral clauses and connecting them. The other possible reason is that they are transferring the Japanese ECl structure

III and the second likely for bothＧ-Ⅲ andＧ

6.5 NP → CI (clause used as NP) In Chinese a clause can be a NP without a nominalizer, and used as a subject or a NP in a prepositional phrase. This is very convenient, but puzzles JLs because their language always requires a nominalizer. The meaning of the Chinese structure has onecorrespondence with Japanese, but the lack of a nominalizer represents underdifferentiation.

Table 6.4 NP → Cl

N P G-Ⅰ 1 .002 G-Ⅱ 4 .006 G-Ⅲ 9 .009 G-Ⅳ 9 .032 1.NG 10 .018

The absolute number of occurrences is not large, but the AI is almost on theexpectation. The AI is very low at Gis surprising to see G-IV's AI is much higher than NG's. It is worth mentioning that in G-II, three out of four NP→Cl expressions are attached with coe.g.

(64) Wo xue zhongguohua (我学中国话是就好像学别的外国话

Shi (是) is often used by JLs to substitute for the Japanese topic marker 'wa'. At the same time, in these cases, they are trying to substitute for the nominalizer 'no' as well. Shi (in Chinese does not have such functions, but Japanese learners still try to ca

52

used as NP)

clause can be a NP without a nominalizer, and used as a subject or a NP in a prepositional phrase. This is very convenient, but puzzles JLs because their language always requires a nominalizer. The meaning of the Chinese structure has one

ence with Japanese, but the lack of a nominalizer represents

C J φ --- nominalizer

AI .111 .333 .500

1.78 -

The absolute number of occurrences is not large, but the AI is almost on theexpectation. The AI is very low at G-I and gradually increases through G

IV's AI is much higher than NG's. It is worth mentioning that in Cl expressions are attached with copulas, shi (

shi jiu haoxiang xue biede waiguohua. 就好像学别的外国话)

is often used by JLs to substitute for the Japanese topic marker 'wa'. At the same time, in these cases, they are trying to substitute for the nominalizer 'no' as well. Shi (in Chinese does not have such functions, but Japanese learners still try to ca

clause can be a NP without a nominalizer, and used as a subject or a NP in a prepositional phrase. This is very convenient, but puzzles JLs because their language always requires a nominalizer. The meaning of the Chinese structure has one-to-one

ence with Japanese, but the lack of a nominalizer represents

The absolute number of occurrences is not large, but the AI is almost on the line with the I and gradually increases through G-II and G-III. It

IV's AI is much higher than NG's. It is worth mentioning that in pulas, shi (是).

is often used by JLs to substitute for the Japanese topic marker 'wa'. At the same time, in these cases, they are trying to substitute for the nominalizer 'no' as well. Shi (是) in Chinese does not have such functions, but Japanese learners still try to carry over the

53

functions of a topic marker and a nominalizer. One more thing, it is very interesting that the only example used by G-I is found in the

speech of the learner who seems to have more trouble with controlling syntax than the others. This example and the fourth example in G-II seem to be the results of the lack of syntactical control rather than correct acquisition of the Chinese structure. The context of the example of G-II is;

(65) Wo, dui wode huan fangjian meiguanxi, suoyi bie de ren huan fangjian kelian,

keshi meiyou banfa. (G-II2) (我，对我的换房间没关系，所以别的人换房间可怜，可是没有办法)

In the first clause, she added de (的) to make a NP, on the contrary, she did not add another de (的) in the second clause, which happened to result a NP→Cl expression. In short, the structure is not easy for the G-I and G-II stages, although G-I and G-II do try to use it. G-III uses more and does so with greater facility.

54

6.6 SVC1(searial verb construction)1 The SVC 1 structure should be easy for JLs to acquire because it has almost a one-to-one correspondence with its Japanese counterpart. Word orders in the two languages are identical with the exception of few cases, such as qu + V (去 ) for which Japanese word order is V + qu ( 去).

In order to examine with a little more detail, let's divide into two subcategories, one with an object (V1NP, V2) and the other without it (V1,V2). e.g

(66) Wo qu chifan. (我去吃饭) (67) Wo qu zhongshanbeilu chifan.(我去中山北路吃饭)

(66) is an example of V1,V2, and (67) is one of V1NP, V2. The later is supposed to be a little more difficult because it has one more element in it and because a speaker has to pay attention to the word order, too. The Japanese word order for V1NP, V2 is NPV1, V2

Table 6.5 svc1 V V V NPV V (NP)V Group 1, 2 1 2 1 2 N P AI N P AI N P AI G－Ⅰ 8 .015 .714 6 .011 .688 14 .027 .730 G－Ⅱ 13 .018 .857 17 .023 1.44 30 .041 1.11 G－Ⅲ 20 .020 .952 16 .016 1.00 36 .035 .946 G－Ⅳ 0 0 0 12 .042 2.63 12 .042 1.14 NG 12 .021 - 9 .016 - 21 .037 -

Except G-IV, there is not much difference between each group's AIs of the two subcategories. (The reason why the AIs at G-Ⅳ are so different is unknown. ) This means adding a NP after V1 does not actually cause difficulty even to the G-II learners. The structure ( including both subcategories) is very easy for JLs. Even G-I performed .730 of AI .

55

6.7 SCF (subordinate conjunctive As far as word order is concerned, SCF words and their Japanese counterparts are identical, both are put at the end of the first clauses. Semantically, Chinese SCF words have one-to-one corresponding Japanese words. The only small problem is that the Chinese conjunctives tend to be deleted when the meaning is clear in the context, while Japanese cannot. Table 6.6 SCF Table6.6 shows the structure is very easy for JLsThe probabilities of G-II,G-III, G

Table6.7 is the list of SCF words used by each of the groups. Table 6.7 list of SCF conjunctives by each group yihou (以後)

Group N P G-Ⅰ 6 .011 G-Ⅱ 12 .017 G-Ⅲ 13 .013 G-Ⅳ 5 .018 NG 0 0

N P AIG-Ⅰ 9 .019 .G-Ⅱ 33 .049 2.33G-Ⅲ 65 .064 3,05G-Ⅳ 11 .037 1,76NG 11 .021

56

conjunctive at final position)

As far as word order is concerned, SCF words and their Japanese counterparts are identical, both are put at the end of the first clauses. Semantically, Chinese SCF words

one corresponding Japanese words. The only small problem is that the se conjunctives tend to be deleted when the meaning is clear in the context, while

Table6.6 shows the structure is very easy for JLs to use. even G-I performed .905 of AI. III, G-IV are too high compared to that of NG.

Table6.7 is the list of SCF words used by each of the groups.

conjunctives by each group deshihou（的時候） dehua（的話）

N P N P .011 3 .006 0 0

20 .028 1 .001 34 .033 15 .015

4 .014 2 .007 5 .009 6 .010

AI .905 2.33 3,05 1,76

-

As far as word order is concerned, SCF words and their Japanese counterparts are identical, both are put at the end of the first clauses. Semantically, Chinese SCF words

one corresponding Japanese words. The only small problem is that the se conjunctives tend to be deleted when the meaning is clear in the context, while

I performed .905 of AI. IV are too high compared to that of NG.

other N 0

0 1 0

0

57

Japanese learners use much more yihou (以后) and deshihou (的时候) than Chinese speakers, C-II and G-III used about five times as much as Chinese speakers. Two reasons can be suggested. One is the transfer of Japanese conjunctives, taato- yihou (以后) and toki- deshihou (的时候), while native speakers often delete them. The other reason is that learners are making these words resting points, where they make sure a clause is completed, and can prepare for the next clause.

Acquisition of dehua (的话) seems a little delayed. The fact that G-I used four examples of ruguo (如果) (see 6.8), which has identical meaning with dehua (的话) could be one of the reasons for the delay. This is another example of generalization. Dehua (的话) becomes another favorite as soon as it is acquired in G-III.

6.8. SCB ( subordinate conjunctive at beginning position ) Most SCB conjunctives have corresponding Japanese words. between the two languages except Japanese conjunctives are put at the end of the first clause, while the position for Chinese is the beginning of the first clause. It takes time for JLs to train to think at the beginning of a clause in Chinese of a meaning which comes to their minds at the end of a clause in Japanese. This is hard especially in an oral production. Only some conditionalconjunctives, such as ruguoplaced in the same position, preof the structure is that JLs have alternatives for some of these words, such as;

SCB yinwei (suiran (

These alternatives are placed at the beginning of the second clause, which is substantially identical with corresponding Japanese words. Table 6.8 SCB

N P AIG-Ⅰ 5 .011 .220G-Ⅱ 8 .009 .180G-Ⅲ 17 .017 .3G-Ⅳ 5 .018 .3NG 29 .050 -

58

B ( subordinate conjunctive at beginning position )

SCB conjunctives have corresponding Japanese words. The word orders differ between the two languages except for conditional conjunctives. Most corresponding Japanese conjunctives are put at the end of the first clause, while the position for Chinese

beginning of the first clause. It takes time for JLs to train to think at the beginning of a clause in Chinese of a meaning which comes to their minds at the end of a clause in Japanese. This is hard especially in an oral production. Only some conditionalconjunctives, such as ruguo(如果), yaoshi (要是) have corresponding Japanese words placed in the same position, pre-.clausal. Another factor which would delay the acquisition of the structure is that JLs have alternatives for some of these words, such as;

B alternative yinwei (因为) ---- suoyi(所以) suiran (虽然) ---- keshi(可是)

These alternatives are placed at the beginning of the second clause, which is substantially identical with corresponding Japanese words.

AI 220 180

.340

.360 -

word orders differ conditional conjunctives. Most corresponding

Japanese conjunctives are put at the end of the first clause, while the position for Chinese beginning of the first clause. It takes time for JLs to train to think at the beginning

of a clause in Chinese of a meaning which comes to their minds at the end of a clause in Japanese. This is hard especially in an oral production. Only some conditional

) have corresponding Japanese words .clausal. Another factor which would delay the acquisition

of the structure is that JLs have alternatives for some of these words, such as;

These alternatives are placed at the beginning of the second clause, which is substantially

59

Table 6.8 shows a relative high AI at G-I and a slow increase through G-IV. This is unusual compared to the previous sections. The next is the list of SCB conjunctives used by each group. Table 6.9 list of SCB conjunctive used by each group Ｇ１ ruguo(如果)4, yinwei(因为)1 Ｇ２ ruguo(如果)6, yinwei(因为)1, suiran(虽然)1 Ｇ３ ruguo(如果)8, yinwei(因为)2, suiran(虽然)1,

yi(一)4, bubishuo(不必说)1, weile(为了)1 Ｇ４ yi(一)1, yinwei(因为)3, buguan(不管)1 NG ruguo(如果)3, yinwei(因为)15, suiran(虽然)3,

yi(一)1, buguran(不管)2, you(又)1, dang(当)1, zhiyao(只要)1, yaobushi(要不是)1, jiran(既然)1 ruguo(如果) includes yaoshi(要是), From the Table 6.9, the following can be observed.

Conditional SCB conjunctives, ruguo (如果), is used more often than NG as soon as it is learned in G-I. But others, such as yinwei (因为), suiran (虽然) and buguan (不管) appear one by one gradually if they appear at all. The big difference in the case of N of yinwei (因为) between Js and NG seems to reflect the fact that it is generalized to the additional conjunctive suoyi (所以). Let me remind you that we set up two categories for yinwei (因为), non-additional, which is placed at the beginning of the first clause, and additional, which is placed at the beginning of the second clause. The yinwei (因为) we are discussing now is the former, and the later will be discussed later (see 7.1). The substitution by suoyi (所以) is perfectly grammatical though it may add some Japanese flavor to their Chinese. The implication of the acquisition process of yinwei (因为) is interesting. If Chinese structure Y can substitute for Chinese structure X, if it is highly grammatical, if it expresses the same meaning, and if its position is identical to its Japanese counterpart, while the position of Chinese structure X is different from the Japanese, the development of the usage of structure X will be delayed until very late. As we see on Table 6.9, only conditional conjunctives show a different acquisition pattern. If they are excluded, Table 6.10 and Fig. 6.7 can be made.

Table 6.10 SCB'

N P AIG-Ⅰ 1 .002 .04G-Ⅱ 2 .003 .06G-Ⅲ 8 .009 .20G-Ⅳ 5 .018 .40NG 26 .044 -

The curve now resembles that of VM structureslower than most of VM structures.

60

AI .045 .068 .205 .409 -

now resembles that of VM structures more closely. However, the AI at GVM structures.

ore closely. However, the AI at G-IV is

61

6.9 VCN (pre-verbal conjunctive non-additional) We have come to the last category of Complex Structure. Chinese has serial pre-verbal adverbs, such as jiu (就), dou (都), ye (也), cai (才) etc., which sometimes function as conjunctives. As far as this paper is concerned, they are divided into four categories. 1) Simple adverb;

e.g. (66) Duibuqi, wo hai mei zuohao. (对不起，我还没做好。)

They are put into the category AdV. 2) Predicate & preceding Phrase connector; they function to connect a predicate and a

preceding phrase. e.g.

(69) Women dou huijia. (我们都回家) This category is not analyzed in the paper. These words are also used to connect two clauses. e.g.

(70) xue le wunian, hai bu hui shuo. (学了五年，还不会说) (71) Nong le luanqibazao, dou bu hui qu zhengli. (弄了乱七八糟，都不会去整理)

These conjunctives are called pre-.verbal conjunctives (VC). VC is divided into two categories, (3) non-additional (VCN) and (4) additional (VCA). The distinction was discussed previously. Here in this section, only VCN will be discussed.

Semantically, Japanese has no corresponding word for jiu (就), which is the main VC conjunctive. For other VC conjunctives, in most cases, the relationship is a kind of reinterpretation.

C J

ye (也), dou (都) --- mo φ

hai (还) ---- momada φ

jiu (就) ---- φ

The positions where these words are located in the two languages Chinese VCN conjunctives are preJapanese counterparts are placed at the end of the first clause. Table 6.11 VCN

N P AIG-Ⅰ 0 0 G-Ⅱ 0 0 G-Ⅲ 14 .014 .317G-Ⅳ 6 .023 .511NG 24 .043 -

The conjunctives seem to be

them. G-IV uses them more often.Next let's divide VCN into two categories, semantic VCN,(VCNE) and syntactic VCN

(VCNY).When two clauses are connected by a subordinate conjunctive(SCF or SCB) as well as a VCN conjunctive. The VCN conjunctive is called syntactic VCN conjunctive. On the other hand, if the connection is done only by a VCN conjunctive, it is called semantic VCN conjunctive. e.g.

(72) Yi zuo qi shi lai, jiu wan le.((73) Xiangdao shenme, jiu shuo shenme.

Jiu (就) in (72) is syntactic VCN because the first clause is syntactically incomplete. On

the other hand, the first clause of (73) is semantically incomplete, and there is no other conjunctive connecting the tdistinction, we can derive Table 6.12.

62

The positions where these words are located in the two languages are slightly different. Chinese VCN conjunctives are pre-verbal in the second clause. On the other hand, Japanese counterparts are placed at the end of the first clause.

AI 0 0

317 511 -

The conjunctives seem to be very hard for G-I and G-II to use. G-III is struggling with IV uses them more often.

Next let's divide VCN into two categories, semantic VCN,(VCNE) and syntactic VCN (VCNY).When two clauses are connected by a subordinate conjunctive(SCF or SCB) as well as a VCN conjunctive. The VCN conjunctive is called syntactic VCN conjunctive. On the other hand, if the connection is done only by a VCN conjunctive, it is called semantic

(72) Yi zuo qi shi lai, jiu wan le.(一做起事来，就完了。) Xiangdao shenme, jiu shuo shenme.(想到什么，就说什么。)

) in (72) is syntactic VCN because the first clause is syntactically incomplete. On the other hand, the first clause of (73) is semantically incomplete, and there is no other conjunctive connecting the two clauses. Jiu in (73) is semantic VCN. Based on the above distinction, we can derive Table 6.12.

are slightly different. verbal in the second clause. On the other hand,

III is struggling with

Next let's divide VCN into two categories, semantic VCN,(VCNE) and syntactic VCN (VCNY).When two clauses are connected by a subordinate conjunctive(SCF or SCB) as well as a VCN conjunctive. The VCN conjunctive is called syntactic VCN conjunctive. On the other hand, if the connection is done only by a VCN conjunctive, it is called semantic

) in (72) is syntactic VCN because the first clause is syntactically incomplete. On the other hand, the first clause of (73) is semantically incomplete, and there is no other

wo clauses. Jiu in (73) is semantic VCN. Based on the above

Table 6.12 VCNE & VCNY Semantic VCN(VCNE)Group N P AI G－Ⅰ 0 0 G－Ⅱ 0 0 0 0G－Ⅲ 9 .009 G－Ⅳ 4 .015 .469NG 17 .030

The table may indicate that the syntactic VCN is a little easier to use. If so, the reason is probably because there is a pattern which is easy to use, Yi ....Two out of five tokens in G-Ⅲare this pattern.

Some VCN conjunctives have semantic counterparts in Japanese. JLs can transfer that much directly. In the corpus, there atransferable. If Yi .., jiu pattern and these transferable VCN conjunctives are excluded, we get Table 6.13. Table 6.13 VCN'

N P AIG-Ⅰ 0 0 G-Ⅱ 0 0 G-Ⅲ 8 .008 .2G-Ⅳ 5 .019 .514NG 21 .037 -

- There is not much difference among the four kindsrelies more on the pattern, YIWe will discuss on VC again in the next chapter.

63

Semantic VCN(VCNE) Syntactic VCN(VCNY)

Group N P AI N P AI 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 9 .009 .300 5 .005 .385 4 .015 .469 2 .008 .615

- 7 .013 -

The table may indicate that the syntactic VCN is a little easier to use. If so, the reason is probably because there is a pattern which is easy to use, Yi ...., jiu (ye) (一

Ⅲ, One out of two in G-IV and one out of seven tokens in NG

Some VCN conjunctives have semantic counterparts in Japanese. JLs can transfer that much directly. In the corpus, there are some yes (也) and one dou (transferable. If Yi .., jiu pattern and these transferable VCN conjunctives are excluded, we

AI 0 0

.216 514 -

There is not much difference among the four kinds of AIs. But it can be observed that Grelies more on the pattern, YI．．．，(一). . jiu,(就) and the directly transferable item, ye (We will discuss on VC again in the next chapter.

P AI

.385 .008 .615

The table may indicate that the syntactic VCN is a little easier to use. If so, the reason is 一．．．．．．．，就(也)).

IV and one out of seven tokens in NG

Some VCN conjunctives have semantic counterparts in Japanese. JLs can transfer that ) and one dou (都), which are

transferable. If Yi .., jiu pattern and these transferable VCN conjunctives are excluded, we

of AIs. But it can be observed that G-III ) and the directly transferable item, ye (也).

７.Conjunctive additional 7.1 Clausal CA(CCA) Semantically, most CCA conjunctives have onecounterparts, but some are interchangeable with SCF and SCB conjunctives. The position of CCA is the same as its Japanese counterparts, preceding the additional clause. T able 7.1 CCA

N P AIG-Ⅰ 80 .145 .571G-Ⅱ 173 .235 .925G-Ⅲ 283 .277 1.09G-Ⅳ 71 .245 .965NG 146 .254 -

The figure seems to indicate that the acquisition level of Gthan half that of NG. The probability little misleading Let's take a look at Table 7.

64

additional (CA) and Preposition(PP)

Semantically, most CCA conjunctives have one-to-one correspondence with Japanese counterparts, but some are interchangeable with SCF and SCB conjunctives. The position of CCA is the same as its Japanese counterparts, preceding the additional clause.

AI 571 925 09 965 -

The figure seems to indicate that the acquisition level of G-I is already very high, more t of NG. The probability at G-II reaches the level of NG. However, this is a

s take a look at Table 7.2

one correspondence with Japanese counterparts, but some are interchangeable with SCF and SCB conjunctives. The position of CCA is the same as its Japanese counterparts, preceding the additional clause.

I is already very high, more II reaches the level of NG. However, this is a

65

Table 7.2 list of CCA conjunctives used by each group Ｇ-Ⅰ keshi(可是)38, suoyi(所以)30, ranhou(然后)12 Ｇ-Ⅱ keshi(可是)78, suoyi(所以)55, ranhou(然后)13,

Na(那)12, haiyou(还有)10, birushuo(比如说)2, yinwei(因为)1, bingqie(并且)1, erqie(而且)1 Ｇ-Ⅲ keshi(可是)96, suoyi(所以)100, ranhou(然后)9,

Na(那)6, haiyou(还有)29, birushuo(比如说)6, yinwei(因为)18, erqie(而且)4, jiushi(就是)3, others 8

Ｇ-Ⅳ keshi(可是)9, suoyi(所以)17, ranhou(然后)7,

Na(那)18, haiyou(还有)3, erqie(而且)4,

Yinwei(因为)2, jiushishuo(就是说)2, others 3 ＮＧ keshi(可是)25, suoyi(所以)17, ranhou(然后)27,

Na(那)18, haiyou(还有)5, birushuo(比如说) 5, yinwei(因为)16, erqie(而且)7, jiushishuo(就是说)11,

yaoburan(要不然)2, jieguo(结果)3, others 7 #keshi(可是) includes buguo(不过) and danshi(但是)

The table shows that very strong generalization, mainly to keshi(可是)and suoyi (所以) , is operating through all JGs especially in G.-II and G-III. The generalization probably includes the substitution for SCB yinwei (因为) and other conjunctives. G-I uses only three items and G-II mainly adds three more, na (那) haiyou (还有) and birushuo (比如说). They are generalizing other expressions into these few words. Some more items appear in G-III, yinwei(因为) is used very often. and two jiushi(就是) are used. Between G-IV and NG are the following differences. Keshi(可是) and suoyi (所以) are still overused by G-IV. This corresponds with the fact that yinwei(因为) in SCB was still scarce in G-IV. Jiushishuo (就是说) is used very frequently by NG, but rarely by G-III and G-IV. Yaoburan (要不然) is used only by NG. The figure below shows the acquisition order of CCA conjunctives.

66

others

yinwei,birushuo(因为,比如说） na,haiyou (那，还有)

keshi,suoyi, ranhou(可是，

所以,然后)

7.2 VCA (pre-verbal conjunctiveWe have already discussed the basicVCN, (see page 76). The difference is that VCcomplex structure. Table 7.3 VCA

N P AIG-Ⅰ 2 .005 .102G-Ⅱ 0 0 G-Ⅲ 4 .004 .085G-Ⅳ 5 .019 .40NG 26 .047 -

As can be seen from Table 7.3, AIs for JGs are very low, much lower than that of VCN. All 6 examples found in G-I and Gyatto, which is usually realized as an adverb rather than a conjunctive. Only Gto realize the existence of this kind of conjunctive in Chinese.

If VCA and VCN are combined, Table 7.4 results. And if the idiomatic Yi (pattern and transferable ye ( Table 7.4 VC(VCN＆VCA)

Group N P AI

G-Ⅰ 2 .005 .005 G-Ⅱ 0 0 0 GG-Ⅲ 18 .018 .198 GG-Ⅳ 11 .042 .472 GNG 50 .091 -

67

unctive additional) We have already discussed the basic characters of pre-verbal conjunctives in the section of VCN, (see page 76). The difference is that VCN requires a little more

AI 102

0 085

.404 -

As can be seen from Table 7.3, AIs for JGs are very low, much lower than that of VCN. All I and G-III are cai (才), which are transferred from Japanese word,

ealized as an adverb rather than a conjunctive. Only Gto realize the existence of this kind of conjunctive in Chinese.

If VCA and VCN are combined, Table 7.4 results. And if the idiomatic Yi (pattern and transferable ye (也),dou (都) and cai (才) are excluded, Table 7.5 results.

Table7.5 VC’

N P AI Group N P AI

.005 G-Ⅰ 0 0 0 G-Ⅱ 0 0 0

18 .018 .198 G-Ⅲ 12 .012 11 .042 .472 G-Ⅳ 10 .035

NG 47 .082

verbal conjunctives in the section of more control on the

As can be seen from Table 7.3, AIs for JGs are very low, much lower than that of VCN. All ), which are transferred from Japanese word,

ealized as an adverb rather than a conjunctive. Only G-IV seems

If VCA and VCN are combined, Table 7.4 results. And if the idiomatic Yi (一).., jiu (就) ) are excluded, Table 7.5 results.

N P AI

0 0 0 0

.146 .427

.082 -

68

Table 7.5 shows that the part of overdifferentiation is harder than the other part in VC. JLs start to use the conjunctive from idiomatic and transferable items.

Finally, let's compare the four types of conjunctive. Table 7.6 four types of conjunctive SCF SCB CCA VC N P N P N P N P Ｇ-I 9 .019 5 .011 80 .145 2 .005 Ｇ-II 33 .049 8 .009 173 .235 0 0 Ｇ-III 65 .064 17 .017 283 .277 18 .018 Ｇ-IV 11 .037 5 .018 71 .245 11 .042 NG 11 .021 29 .050 146 .254 50 .091

CCA is used much more often by all groupNG. One thing worth noticing is that NG uses VC more than SCE and SCB

69

used much more often by all groups. VC is the next most frequently by GNG. One thing worth noticing is that NG uses VC more than SCE and SCB

. VC is the next most frequently by G-IV and NG. One thing worth noticing is that NG uses VC more than SCE and SCB combined.

7.3 PP (preposition) Most prepositions have a oneother hand, the word orders of the two languages are different. JLs have to be careful to put the preposition before the NP in Chinese, rather than toJapanese. Table 7.7 PP

N P AIG-Ⅰ 33 .063 .563G-Ⅱ 97 .146 1.30G-Ⅲ 151 .150 1.34G-Ⅳ 49 .171 1.53NG 65 .112 -

The figure shows a relatively similar pattern with CCA. Thehigh , and G-II's AI reaches NG's.

The next is the list of the prepositions used by each group.

70

Most prepositions have a one-to-one correspondence with particles in Jaother hand, the word orders of the two languages are different. JLs have to be careful to put the preposition before the NP in Chinese, rather than to put it after the NP as in

AI 563

1.30 1.34 1.53

-

figure shows a relatively similar pattern with CCA. The AI atII's AI reaches NG's.

next is the list of the prepositions used by each group.

spondence with particles in Japanese. On the other hand, the word orders of the two languages are different. JLs have to be careful to

put it after the NP as in

AI at G-I is relatively

71

Table 7.8 list of the prepositions used by each group G-Ⅰ locatives(Zai(在), dao(到), cong(従)etc,) 25 gen(跟)4, yong(用)2, bi(比)2 G-Ⅱ locatives64, gen(跟)9, dui(对)11, yong(用)7, bi(比)3, weile(为了)2, bei(被)1 G-Ⅲ locatives81, gen(跟)23, dui(对)13, yong(用)8, bi(比)11, weile(为了)1, chule(除了)4, ba(把)5, others6 G-Ⅳ locatives23, dui(对)18, gen(跟)5, chule(除了)3, NG locatives24, gen(跟)7, dui(对)7, ,chule(除了)1,

ba(把)3, ti(替)2, xiang(像)6, others3

In G-I, JLs use locatives, gen(跟), yong (用) and bi (比). In G-Ⅱ, they add two more, weile (为了) and bei (被). G-III learners use two more important prepositions, chule (除了) and ba (把). NG has two further important prepositions, ti (替) snd xiang(像), neither of which appear in JGs.

Ba (把) represents a case of split. C J Ba o(object marker) Object place

Between the two ways of expressions in Chinese, ba (把) phrase is marked. The semantic feature of ba phrase is not difficult to understand. The problem is that it takes time to distinguish the uses of ba (把) in the real speech situation. Xiang(像), which is semantically a little different from other prepositions, appears only in NG's speech. The reason is probably because it is weak semantically.

72

8 Conclusion Acquisition Index(AI) is an index reflecting the distance of the learner's performance from the native's. There are many factors influencing these numbers. It is arbitrary to decide a specific point or a specific stage. However, in order to simplify the task, let me posit two points to represent two degree of acquisition, I) the starting point of acquisition and 2) the point of primary acquisition. Let's arbitrarily assign them numerical values; .200 for the starting point and .500 for primary acquisition point. Using above method, we can construct the following table showing when a structure "has begun to be acquired" and when it reaches " the point of primary acquisition". Table 8.1 Acquisition Starting Point and Primary Acquisition Point

73

Analysis may be concluded from the viewpoint of the developing grammars. G-I learners' Chinese consists mainly of simple Vs. They are able to produce the MV

structure (AdV, AV and V1V2 ). But the vocabulary which is used for the structure is very limited. They seldom use the VM structure. All they can use are V+yidian (一点) and twin idioms, ting(kan)budong (听(看)不懂). In their speech are plenty of prepositions and SVC1 expressions. However, the prepositions consist only of locatives, gen (跟),yong (用) and bi (比). They are able to construct embedded clauses. As far as conjunctives are concerned, they usually connect two clauses with SCF or CCA conjunctives. Deshihou(的时候)，yihou(以后)，keshi (可是), suoyi (所以) and ranhou (然后) are the conjunctives which they find easy to use. A couple of SCB conjunctives are used, ruguo (如果) is used often, but others are very occasionally.

G-II learners use a lot of MV expressions. They concentrate on this structure and get so familiar with it that they use the structure to express almost all verb modifying meanings. They ignore VM structure. Almost all VM expressions used by them are idiomatic. The single exception is VCsc structure. Although they can use the VCsc structure, the instances when the structure comes to their minds are limited. They start to pay attention to VCl structure. They try to put an S+V before a clause. But they are not skilful at this process yet. They often add an S+V after a clause. As their message gets complex, they find that they need to use NP→Cl structure. They try it making errors by putting shi (是) after the clause. As for conjunctives, they don't pay much attention to them. They still use almost the same items as G-I learners: deshihou (的时候), keshi(可是), suoyi(所以) are their most favorites. A few others, such as na(那) and haiyou(还有) are added in G-II.

G-III learners are still developing MV structure. At the same time, most of them have a strong interest in VM structure. They try almost all VM patterns (V(YI)V and VCom) though there are still misunderstandings and confusions in their speech. As far as conjunctive are concerned, they still use deshihou(的时候), keshi(可是) and suoyi (所以) heavily. On the other hand, they find they can use a little more of the SC conjunctions, such as yi (一) and dehua(的话). They also feel they should struggle with VC (pre-verbal conjunctive) to make their Chinese closer to that of native speakers.

G-IV learners' Chinese is very close to the natives'. However, they still feel difficulty with VC conjunctives and VCb structure. Besides these two, there are some expressions which they are still avoiding to use.

74

75

76

*

77

78

79

* Table 8.2 (continue *

80

81

82

*

83

84

The revised AI and the Syntactic Index The revised AI is calculated by the rules below. 1) The AI numbers more than 1. are regarded as 1.. 2) The revised AI numbers for VCl, SCB' and VCN are cut to 1/4 of the original AI. 3) The revised AI numbers for NP→Cl are cut to 1/8 of the original AI.

The Syntactic Index is equal to the sum of the revised AI numbers for these six selected categories.