• 検索結果がありません。

日本人英語学習者による'on'の習得のプロトタイプ的分析とプロトタイプ的対照分析の可能性(1)

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

シェア "日本人英語学習者による'on'の習得のプロトタイプ的分析とプロトタイプ的対照分析の可能性(1)"

Copied!
9
0
0

読み込み中.... (全文を見る)

全文

(1)51. Hyogo University of Teacher Education Journal Vo1. 15, Ser. 2, (1995). A Prototype Analysis of the Learning of Oli by Japanese Learners of English and the Potentiality of Prototype Contrastive Analysis (Partl) Toshihiko YAMAOKA* (Received September 20, 1994) 1. Introduction. cal organization of some kind, and the learning. The usage of English prepositions is a difficult area for Japanese learners of English. Each preposition has a variety of uses and learners are often. difficulty of its various uses is determined inherently according to this hierarchy. For the case of overextension of oli, as in the. perplexed in their attempts to acquire a definite. third example, it appears to be necessary to investi-. and coherent perspective on these uses, which may. gate the semantic relations between Japanese ue. seem almost chaotic to many of them. Although. and some other English prepositions including on.. some uses of a given preposition may be quite easy. In order to examine the first possibility of a. to learn, other uses of the same preposition can. hierarchical organization of on, the author. turn out to be very difficult.. (Yamaoka, 1991) conducted an experimental study. The preposition on is typical of such a case. For. with Japanese learners of English. A hierarchical. example, almost all Japanese learners acquire its. organization of various uses of on was worked out. use in an expression such as `a book on the desk,'. by adopting a prototype theory. Fundamentally, the. but they often fail to learn the use in `a dog on a. theory states that our perceptual categories are. leash. Moreover, overextension of on is often. characterized by internal structures which are. observed in cases where other English prepositions. composed of a `core meaning'consisting of the. are. `clearest cases'(best examples or prototypes) of the. required,. e.gつ`a. plane. on. the. cloud.'. At first sight, the situation may seem to be. category, `surrounded by other category members. simply due to the influence of ue in Japanese which. of decreasing similarity to that core meaning. is generally conceived of as the Japanese lexical. (Rosch, 1973, p. 112).. item corresponding to on by Japanese learners of English. Learning the first example above may be. A kind of semantic feature analysis was carried out covering the following uses of on.. accelerated by the fact that its Japanese equivalent expression includes ue, while th占failure in the. 1 There is a book on the desk.. second example m the form of underextension of on. 2 There is a spider on the ceiling.. can be explained by the lack of ue in the equivalent. 3 The frost made patterns on the window.. Japanese expression. Conversely, overextension of. 4 The coat is on the peg.. on in the third example may be accredited to the. 5 Look at the laundry on the line.. fact that its Japanese equivalent requires ue.. 6 The dog is on the leash.. It seems insufficient, however, to explain the. 7 There is an inn on the lake.. learning of the usage of on, including the first and second examples, by the simple correspondence of. The analysis revealed several semantic features. oJi and ue in English and Japanese. For example,. which each of these uses of on could or could not. even in several uses of on whose Japanese equiva-. possess. Moreover, it was found that these uses. lents do not equally require ue, there seem to be. could be arranged in a hierarchical order according. different degrees of difficulty in their learning. It. to how many of the features each use could possess. may be possible, therefore, to suppose that the. as is shown in Table 1.. usage of the English preposition on has a hierarchi-. "Department of Language Studies, Hyogo University of Teacher Education.

(2) 52. (Yamaoka, 1988) in the `be easy to V structure. Table 1. and Hartford (1989) in object-coding in verbs of. Sentence No.. saying in second language learning of English. In the case of on in second language learning, it is 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. り1. 日. Feature. also expected that its various uses will be learned. +. +. ?. +. +. 一. Japanese university students learning English using. +. 25 sentences, including the experimental sentences. O'-7') shown above. Subjects were required to write 一. 一. +. Honzontality. The previous study (Yamaoka, 1991) was conducted to confirm the order hypothesis with 102. +. +. Surface. +. +. Support. + + + +. +. Physicality. + + + +. +. Contact. in the hierarchical order shown in Table 1.. Higherness. what they considered to be the best preposition in a blank in each sentence. Every sentence was accompanied by a picture which depicted the meaning of the sentence. The results in terms of accuracy of. +(possession of the feature) ? (potential possession of the feature). suppliance for each experimental sentence are presented in Table 2.. -(lack of the feature) Table 2. Table 1 Original Semantic Feature Analysis of. Sentence No. Various Uses of On In Table 1, `Contact means that the two items. 1'2'3'4'5'6'7'. concerned are generally interpreted to be in contact, while `Physicahty indicates that their contact is. Accuracy 100 82 72 63 30 12 1. physical and clearly observable or conceivable. `Support'designates a relationship in which one of the two items supports the other, while Surface indicates that the item which supports the other has a surface. `Honzontality shows that the. Table 2 Accuracy Rates {%) of Responses to Each Sentences by Japanese Subjects. supporting relationship exists on a horizontal plane, while `Higherness indicates a positional relation-. A McNemar test showed statistical significance. ship on a vertical axis and that the item receiving. between the scores of any of the adjacent pairs. information focus is in a higher position than the. except for 3'-4 , generally confirming the order. other item.. hypothesis. Examination of the response pattern of. Table 1 also indicates that the various uses of. each subject for these experimental sentences also. ol have a prototype hierarchical organization: (l'J. revealed a general tendency of an implicational. occupies the prototype and the others are arranged. hierarchy: a correct response in a lower position of. according to the degree of similarity to the proto-. the hierarchy implies a correct response in any of. type.. the higher positions.. An interesting corollary of the prototype theory. These results indicate both the validity of- the. predicts that category membership of central in-. prototype organization of various uses of on pro-. stances (prototype) is learned before membership of. posed in Table 1 and the effectiveness of the order. peripheral instances in the hierarchy. This is what. hypothesis of learning.. has been attested to by Bowerman (1977) in vo-. It must be pointed out here that the uses of on. cabulary development and de Villiers (1980) in. in (l')-(7') occupy only a part of all uses of the. English passive and cleft sentences in first language. preposition. Other uses include, for example, `on. acquisition of English, as well as by the author. that night'(time), `on fire'(state), `on the.

(3) APrototypeAnalysiso: andtheP。tential吾t;h昌fL鎧rningofOn 。t。typeC。n盈JapaneseLearnersofEnglish average'(ground), `writestiveAnalysis(Part1) on politics'(reference), explore. 53. the mechanism of native-language interfer-. etc. It should be noted that these uses are figura-. ence which might result in the overproduction of. tive extensions of the physical and prototype use of. on.. the preposition, and thus, they fall in the most. With. respect. to. the. first. aim,. the. earlier. experi一. peripheral part of the hierarchical organization of. mental study was found to suffer from the follow-. this preposition. In the earlier study by the author. ing weaknesses:. (Yamaoka, 1991), several of these figurative uses were also included in the experiment along with the physical uses shown in (l')-(7'). The results indicated that subjects'knowledge of these figurative uses was random: those subjects with fair know!edge of the physical uses did not necessary show good knowledge of the figurative uses, and some with poor knowledge of the former showed fair knowledge of the latter. The implicational relation-. (1) It lacked a control group of native speakers of English. (2) The Japanese subjects were limited to university students. (3) Only one experimental sentence was employed for each sentence type. (4) The prototype analysis (Table 1) may have been partially flawed.. ship of learning did not hold in these figurative uses. This led the author to conclude that the. Point (1) is critical in that since each sentence in. subjects learned these figurative uses of on in a. the experiment was accompanied by a picture. rather mechanical manner without applying seman-. intended to depict the meaning of the sentence,. tic analysis or figuring out any coherent correspon-. native speakers should have been included to con-. dence to the physical uses. As far as these subjects. firm that the pictures really did depict the intended. are concerned, knowledge of the figurative uses is. semantic relationships. Point (2) is related to the. independent of the physical uses.. subjects'proficiency level. High-school students,. Seen from a learning perspective, it might be. who are likely to be less proficient in English than. possible for the learner to find in the fugurative. university students, could be expected to reveal. uses a potential semantic feature which is common. more about the learning process. Point (3) is also a. to. the. physical蝣uses. after. familiarizing. him-. or. serious weakness. As Clark (1973) warns, in an. herself with the latter uses, but it would be almost. experimental study involving language, it must be. impossible for them to come to grasp the essential. safely warranted that stimulus items selected really. semantic feature of on in the figurative uses with-. represent the population in which they are included.. out reference to the physical uses. This is in accord. The earlier study cannot be said to have met this. with the prediction of the prototype theory of. condition since only one sentence was used to. leaning: from the prototype to the peripheral. In. represent each type. It is quite rare in language. spite of this peripheral nature of these figurative. that one sentence properly represents all possible. uses, however, some of them are frequent in use. It. sentences of a given type; at least two sentences. is quite plausible, therefore, that they are learned. should therefore be utilized for each sentence type.. individually and mechanically without undergoing. Point (4) is an experiential judgment: it is against. semantic analysis, resulting in violation of the. our teaching experience, for example, that sentence. learning expectation of the prototype organization.. (2') is easier than (3') for Japanese learners of. Thus, these figurative uses were not included in the. English. In fact, in a similar experiment conducted. present study.. with Japanese high-school subjects, type (3') showed a higher accuracy than type (2') did. 2. Aims of the Study The present study was conducted to attain two. (Inatsugu, 1991). This indicates that the analysis shown in Table 1 must be refined.. aims. The first was to verify the results of an. As for the second aim concerning mother-tongue. earlier study (Yamaoka, 1991) by replicating the. influence, a different kind of analysis is needed.. experiment under improved experimental conditions. Most importantly, the prototype use of on happens. devised to improve its validity. The second was to. to coincide with the prototype use of ue in.

(4) 54. Japanese, and, thus, subjects can be expected to. presupposed for subjects in the JA group since they. overextend the use of on in English sentences whose. were required to pass university entrance examma-. Japanese equivalents require ue. In order to explore. tion in which English occupied a central part, such. this expectancy, several sentences in this category. a level was not assumed for subjects in the JB. were prepared and included in the distractor sen-. group since English was not a major part of their. tences in the present experiment. Responses to these. university entrance examination. Subject in the JC. sentences were examined in terms of error analysis. group could be expected to have the lowest level of. in order to investigate the influence from Japanese.. English proficiency since they had learned English for only three years at the time when they took. 3. Present Study. part in the experiment.. Giving due considerations to the weaknesses of the earlier experiment and the requirements of the second aim, the present study was devised and conducted as follows:. Test Material Seven types of target sentences with two sentences for each type were prepared (the figure in parentheses at the end of each sentence corresponds to the sentence number in the test material shown. Subjects Subjects consisted of the following four groups:. in Appendix 2, which will oppear in part 2 0f this article) :. NS: 17 adult native speakers of English taking a course in applied linguistics at. la. There is a book ( on ) the desk. (8) b. Flora sits ( on ) the sofa. (32). university in Canada. Their ages ranged from 18 to 36 with a median of 23.. 2a. Look at the picture ( on ) the wall. (ll) b. The frost made patterns ( on ) the glass. JA: 36 Japanese university students majoring in Russian at a university in Japan.. surface. (46). Their ages were all around 19. They started. 3a. He put his hat ( on ) thepeg. (30) b. The coat is ( on ) the hook. (54). learning the language after entering the university, and English was a second foreign. 4a. There are several bats ( on ) the roof of. language for them there. But, they had. the cave. (20). learned English for six years in Junior and. b. There is a spider ( on ) the ceiling. (40). senior high school before entering university.. 5a. There are three apples ( on ) the branch.. JB: 34 Japanese university students majoring in elementary school education at a university in Japan. They were all aged around 20. English was the only foreign. n b. Look at the laundry ( on ) the line. (22) 6a. The dog is ( on ) the leash. (27) b. A bunch of balloons is ( on ) a string.. language for most of them. They also had. (36). learned English for six years in junior and. 7a. There was a small town ( on ) the. senior high school before entering university.. Mississippi River. (16). JC: 38 Japanese senior high school stu-. b. They found an inn ( on ) the lake. (45). dents taking a commercial course at a high school in Japan. They were all aged around. Forty distractor sentences were also prepared. In. 16. English was the only foreign language for. order to explore the possibility of native-language. ihem.. influence, the following eight sentences were ineluded among the distractors. Note that Japanese. Note that each of these three Japanese groups. equivalents of all these eight sentences require we. was expected to represent a different proficiency. and thus they invite overextension of on in their. level of English. Although no subjective measure-. responses from Japanese subjects.. ment was made, this seems to be a reasonable speculation: while a higher level of proficiency was. 8 Raise your hands ( ) your head. (5).

(5) 55. APrototypeAnalysisofth andtheP。tentiality呂f怒号ingofOn 。typec。n盈JapaneseLearnersofEnglish (atama-no ue-nistiveAnalysis(Part1) te-wo age-nasai) Hypo theses head-attributive ue-locatwe hand-objective ra.ise-impera.t we 9 The plane is flying 1,000 meters ( ) sea level. (10) (hikooki-ga umi-no 1,000 meetoru ue-wo tonde-iru) plane-subjective sea-attnbut. 1,000 meter ue-locat. fly-progresswe. Two hypotheses were formulated for the two aims of the study. Before presenting each hypothesis, it will be helpful to follow the theoretical considerations lying behind them. For the first aim, a reanalysis was made of the earlier prototype organization on the seven types of the use of on, which yielded the modified hierarchical organization presented in Table 3.. 10 The sheep jumped ( ) the fence. (21) (hituji-ga kakine-no ue-wo tobi-koe-ta). Table 3. sheep-agentwe ience-attrwut. ue-locat. Sentence Type. j ump-over--past ll She pulled her blanket ( ) her head. (37) (kanoio-wa moofu-wo atama-no ue-ni. Feature. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. hippaしta) +. +. +. +. +. +. +. サ. +. + ・. + 一. I. 一. +. t I. Surface-Contact 一. l 一. Higherness. i. l. l. Horizontality. 一. (ude-wo atama-no ue-ni kakage-nasai). Surface. +. 13 Hold your arms ( ) yourhead. (50). +. locat. exist. Support. +. picture-subject, m&ntelpiece-attnbut. ue-. +. (e-ga rodana-no ue-ni aru). Physicality. +. 12 The picture is ( ) the mantelpiece. (39). Contact. +. ue-locat. pull-past. +. she-subject. blanket-object, head-attnbut.. axm-object. head-attnbut. ue-locat. holdimperat. 14 The plane is flying ( ) the clouds. (51) (hikooki-ga kumo-no ue-wo tonde-iru). Table 3 Revised Semantic Feature Analysis of Various Uses of On. plane-subject, cloud-attribut. ue-locat. flyp rogress.. Here a new feature. `Surface-contact'is added to. 15 A lamp is hanging ( ) the table. (52). the list of features made in the earlier experiment. (ranpu-ga teeburu-no ue-ni kakatte-iru). (Table 1), by which it is meant that the item that. lamp-suo/ect. tab¥e-attnbut. ue-locat.. is supported by another has a surface which is in. hang-statwe. contact with the surface of the supporting item. According to Table 3, the first hypothesis can. Every target and distractor sentence, as in the. thus be formulated as follows:. previous study, was accompanied by a picture intended to depict the meaning of the sentence (See Appendix 1).. (1) The accuracy of the responses by Japanese subjects for each target sentence type will increase along the hierarchical arrangement, with the proto-. Pro cedure. type showing the highest accuracy. This will be. Subjects were required to fill in the blank in. reflected both in a general response pattern of all. each sentence with what they considered to be the. the subjects and in the implicational response. most appopriate preposition. They were encouraged. pattern of each individual subject.. not to leave any blank un filled. Each group of subjects took the test during an ordinary class.. The second hypothesis is constructed on a proto-. Although the test was not paced, all the subjects. type contrastive analysis of ue and on as well as. finished it within fifteen minutes.. some other English preposistions. While the core.

(6) Preposition. Core Meaning. Contact Coverage Disconnected. Prototype. a book on the desk branch over the fence above sea level. higherness Upward. climb up a tree. movement. Table 4 Four English Prepositiolis with Their Core Meanings and Prototypes. meaning of on is `contact,'in the case of ue it is. a prototypical part of the semantic field that each. `higherness.'Importantly, `higherness of ue in. of these four prepositions respectively covers. The. Japanese simply indicates a higher positional rela-. semantic relations between ue and these four. tionship one item keeps to the other irrespective of. English prepositions can be represented as in Fig. 1.. any other samantic relations which can c0-occur with this feature; e.g., contact, coverage, discon-. Fig.1. nected higherness, etc. In contrast, these semantic relations are encoded by different prepositions in English. Table 4 shows these prepositions with their core meanings and prototypes of use. To reiterate the important point here - each prototype of these prepositions involves a common feature of `higherness.'Thus, Japanese equivalents of these prototypes all require ue. In other words, Japanese ue covers a semantic field which is divided among different prepositions in English. It is a mistake, however, to assume that every use of each of these English prepositions can be expressed with ue as its Japanese equivalent. There are cases where ue cannot apply. For example, the following expressions cannot be rendered with ue in their Japanese equivalents.. 16 a dog on the leash. Figure 1 Relation of Ue to Four English Prepositions in Their Sematic Fields. This leads to the following predictions concern-. 17 travel all over Europe. ing the learning processes of these prepositions by. 18 above suspicion. Japanese learners :. 19 walk up the slope. (a) Learners have to recognize that English has Interestingly, these expressions exhibit uses. different prepositions that divide semantic field. which are peripheral in their respective prototype. covered by Japanese ue, and they have to possess. organizations. Thus, we can say that ue covers only. these prepositions as different lexical items for.

(7) APro慧peAnalysisoftheLea thePotentiality。fPr芸ingofOnbyJapaneseLearnersofEnglish 。typeC。ntrastiveAnalysis(Part1) describing different relations.. 57. Inatsugu, M. (1991). A Contrastiue analysis of. (b) They have to correctly divide the semantic. prototypicality in Japanese and English with. field of ue mainly according to the core meaning of. special reference to "cut 'and `'kiru", and the. each of these prepositions.. prepositional usage "on. Unpublished master s. (c) They have to recognize that ue covers only a prototypical part of the semantic field that each of these prepositions covers.. thesis, Hyogo University of Education, Japan. Rosch, E. (1973). On the internal structure of perceptual categories. In T.M. Moor (Ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of. From the discussion above, the second hypothesis can now be formulated as follows:. language (pp. 111-144). New York: Academic. Yamaoka, T. (1988). A semantic and prototype discussion of the `be easy to V structure: A. (2) In their response patterns to the intended distractor sentences, Japanese subjects will show. possible explanation of its acquisition process. Applied Linguistics, 9, 385-401.. evidence of overextension errors of on where other. Yamaoka, T. (1991). A prototype discussion of the. English prepositions are required, which can be said. acquisition of English prepositions: The case of. to arise from interference of ue in Japanese.. the acquisition of `on'by Japanese learners of English (in Japanese). Annals of Educational. Note. Research, 36, 193-198.. This article is based on an oral report read at. Yamaoka, T. (1992). Second language acquisition. the 18th Convention of the Federation of English. research from a prototype theory : the potenti-. Language Education Societies in Japan, held at. ality of prototype contrastive analysis (in. Fukuoka, Japan on August 7, 1992. The study was. Japanese). Report, 36, 4-9.. partly supported by a fund provided by the. de Villiers, J.G. (1980). The process of rule learning. Academic and Cultural Foundation of the Sanyo. in English: A new look. In K.E. Nelson (Ed.),. Broadcasting Company. A partial and preliminary. Children's language (pp.1-44). New York:. report of the study was made in Report No. 36. Wiley.. published by the Foundation (Yamaoka, 1992). I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Professor Hector Hammerly of Simon Fraser University who kindly conducted the part of the experiment with native speakers of English, and to Professor Albert John Chick of Hyogo University of Education who helped me refine the earlier version of this article.. References. Bowerman, M.L. (1977). The acquisition of word meaning: An investigation of some current conflicts. In N. Waterson and C. Snow (Eds.), The Development of communication (pp. 263287). New York: Wiley. Clark, H.H. (1973). The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 335-359. Hartford, B.Y. (1989). Prototype effects in nonnative English: Object coding in verbs of saying. World Englishes, 8, 97-117..

(8) 58. Appendix 1. (.12;. (10) There is a church ( ) the farm. (ll) She is standing ) the center of the circle. (12) The dog is ( ) the leash.. (13) She sat ( ) the fire. (14) There is a path ( ) the wood. (15) There is a spider ( ) the ceiling.. (16) There is a little water ( ) the vase. (17) The cat ia ( ) the table. (18) There is an inn ( ) the lake..

(9) APrototypeAnalysisof andtheP。tentialit吉heLearning"ofOn 。fPrototypeC。n盈JapaneseLearnersofEnglish 日本人英語学習者によるonの習得のプロトタイプ的分析と stiveAnalysis(Part1). 59. プロトタイプ的対照分析の可能性(1). 山岡俊比古. 英語前置詞onのE]本人英語学習者による習得を、 この前置詞のさまざまな用法のプロトタイプ論的分析に よって得られる階層構造によって説明できることを実験 的に明らかにし、プロトタイプ的対照分析手法の有効性 を提示する。第1部としての本論では、このうちの実験. に至る理論的整備と、実験の実施までを扱う。実験結果 とその分析および結論、さらにこの結論に基づいたプロ トタイプ的対照分析手法への示唆については、第2部で 扱う。なお、本論は拙著(1992)における予備的考察を 補完するものである。.

(10)

参照

関連したドキュメント

名の下に、アプリオリとアポステリオリの対を分析性と綜合性の対に解消しようとする論理実証主義の  

Standard domino tableaux have already been considered by many authors [33], [6], [34], [8], [1], but, to the best of our knowledge, the expression of the

In particular, we consider a reverse Lee decomposition for the deformation gra- dient and we choose an appropriate state space in which one of the variables, characterizing the

In order to be able to apply the Cartan–K¨ ahler theorem to prove existence of solutions in the real-analytic category, one needs a stronger result than Proposition 2.3; one needs

This paper presents an investigation into the mechanics of this specific problem and develops an analytical approach that accounts for the effects of geometrical and material data on

While conducting an experiment regarding fetal move- ments as a result of Pulsed Wave Doppler (PWD) ultrasound, [8] we encountered the severe artifacts in the acquired image2.

The explicit treatment of the metaplectic representa- tion requires various methods from analysis and geometry, in addition to the algebraic methods; and it is our aim in a series

We have avoided most of the references to the theory of semisimple Lie groups and representation theory, and instead given direct constructions of the key objects, such as for