Abstract
This study explores three potential factors that influence Chinese L2 learners’ classifier use in a classroom setting: L1 background, task, and classifier type. We developed a picture-prompted test, including composition, free cloze, and multiple-choice cloze questions to elicit the use of classifiers. Participants were 50 Chinese L2 learners from Arabic, English, and Japanese L1 backgrounds. Although Japanese L1 participants performed numerically better than their Arabic and English counterparts, statistical analysis suggests that L1 was not a significant predictor of test performance. The composition task was shown to be conducive to the use of test-taking strategies, and it revealed a higher classifier accuracy than the more constrained multiple-choice task. Meanwhile, there was an interaction between L1 and task, suggesting that L1 influence may be conditioned by task type. Moreover, our logistic model predicts different levels of accuracy for classifier use by type, which potentially suggests a developmental path of acquiring classifiers licensed by the most prominent noun feature they are associated with, with shape being the earliest, followed by animate, inanimate, and concept.
摘要
本研究探讨了影响汉语二语学习者在课堂上使用量词的三个潜在因素: 第一语言, 测试题型和量词类型。为进行该项研究, 我们设计了一套语言测试题来考察研究对象对量词的使用情况, 其中包括写作, 完形填空和选择题三种题型。共有50名中文为第二语言的学习者参与了该项研究, 他们的母语分别是阿拉伯语, 英语和日语。结果发现, 尽管日语母语者的综合测试得分高于阿拉伯语和英语母语者, 但第一语言并不是受试者使用量词的显著预测因子。对测试结果分析发现, 应试策略在写作题型中可以得到更充分的应用; 对比答题限制性更高的选择题而言, 受试者在写作题型上的量词使用方面得分更高。同时我们发现, 受试者的第一语言和测试题型之间存在交互作用, 这表明一语作用对研究结果的影响可能与测试题型本身有关。此外, 逻辑回归预测的结果提示受试者在不同量词类型的使用准确程度上有所差异。该结果可能揭示了量词类型的发展路径, 且此路径与该类型量词搭配的名词类别一致。具体来说, 与形状有关的量词类型很有可能是最早被习得的, 接着依次是动物性、非动物性以及概念相关的类型。
About the authors
Jiahuan Zhang is a PhD student in Education at the University of Hong Kong. She obtained her BA with first-class honors in Linguistics from the Australian National University, followed by an MPhil in Theoretical and Applied Linguistics (specialisation in Psycholinguistics) at the University of Cambridge. Her main research interests are language acquisition, psycholinguistics and cognitive linguistics. She is currently researching the effects of psychometric factors on reading and writing performance from a pedagogical perspective.
Ksenia Gnevsheva is a Senior Lecturer in Linguistics at the Australian National University. Her research lies at the intersection of sociolinguistics and second language acquisition. She is particularly interested in sociophonetics from the point of view of production, perception and pedagogy.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Dr. Jinping Zhang, Dr. Yanni Guo, and Miss Huaxing Zhou for their assistance with participant recruitment and data collection. A special note goes to Professor Henriette Hendriks, who offered insightful comments to our drafts. We also appreciate the anonymous reviewers for their suggestions on this manuscript.
Appendix A: Materials (test of classifiers)
Task 1: Short composition
Please describe what you see in the picture with as many details as possible (150–200 characters).
Task 2: Gap-filling
Please fill the blanks based on the picture (Note: only one character is acceptable for each blank).
照片里有两1. ___人, 他们应该是一2. ___夫妻。他们坐在一3. ___黄色的沙发上, 女生抱着一4. ___橘黄色的小猫, 男生手里举着一5. ___红酒。他们看起来很幸福。旁边有一6. ___白色的狗, 也笑得很开心。窗外的风景很好, 看得见蓝天, 白云和几栋大楼。窗台下面有一7. ___柜子, 上面摆了一些绿色的小盆栽。柜子的旁边还有一8.___树。 后面的墙壁上有一9. ___大大的倒过来的’福’ 字, 红红的, 很喜庆, 渲染着过年的气氛。靠着墙壁还放了一10. ___桌子, 上面有一11. ___金鱼缸和一12. ___花瓶。花瓶里插着几枝梅花, 十分优雅。金鱼缸里面有两13. ___可爱的小金鱼, 它们在水里快乐地游来游去。这应该是一14. ___很温暖的家, 这家人正在享受着一15. ___幸福的时刻。
Task 3: Multiple-choice
Please choose the correct answer for each blank based on the picture.
照片里有两1. ___人, 他们应该是一2. ___夫妻。他们坐在一3. ___黄色的沙发上, 女生抱着一4.___ 橘黄色的小猫, 男生手里举着一5. ___红酒。他们看起来很幸福。旁边有一6. ___白色的大狗, 也笑得很开心。窗外的风景很好, 看得见蓝天, 白云和几栋大楼。窗台下面有一7. ___柜子, 上面摆了一些绿色的小盆栽。柜子的旁边还有一8. ___树。 后面的墙壁上有一9. ___大大的倒过来的’ 福’ 字, 红红的, 很喜庆, 渲染着过年的气氛。靠着墙壁还放了一10. ___桌子, 上面有一11. ___金鱼缸和一12. ___花瓶。花瓶里插着几枝梅花, 十分优雅。金鱼缸里面有两13. ___可爱的小金鱼, 它们在水里快乐地游来游去。这应该是一14. ___很温暖的家, 这家人正在享受着一15. ___幸福的时刻。
1. A. 组 B. 只 C. 个 D. 位
2. A. 个 B. 位 C. 对 D. 双
3. A. 条 B. 张 C. 段 D. 面
4. A. 匹 B. 个 C. 头 D. 只
5. A. 壶 B. 杯 C. 个 D. 瓶
6. A. 个 B. 条 C. 匹 D. 头
7. A. 台 B. 面 C. 条 D. 个
8. A. 根 B. 棵 C. 行 D. 个
9. A. 页 B. 幅 C. 面 D. 本
10. A. 台 B. 面 C. 张 D. 条
11. A. 只 B. 个 C. 盆 D. 杯
12. A. 个 B. 盆 C. 支 D. 瓶
13. A. 个 B. 匹 C. 头 D. 条
14. A. 所 B. 间 C. 个 D. 座
15. A. 分 B. 点 C. 个 D. 门
Appendix B: Classifiers and matching items used by Chinese speakers
| Number | Classifier | Item |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | ge | jia ‘home’ |
| 2 | ge | fangjian ‘room’ |
| 3 | zhang | zhaopian ‘picture |
| 4 | dui | fuqi ‘couple’ |
| 5 | ge/kou | ren ‘people’/nanhai ‘guy’/nvhai ‘girl’ |
| 6 | jian | yifu ‘clothes’ |
| 7 | tiao | kuzi ‘trousers’ |
| 8 | ge | zhentou ‘pillows’ |
| 9 | bei | putaojiu ‘wine’ |
| 10 | zhi | mao ‘cat’ |
| 11 | tiao/zhi | gou ‘dog’ |
| 12 | zhang | shafa ‘sofa’ |
| 13 | zhang | zhuozi ‘table’ |
| 14 | ge | guizi ‘cupboard’ |
| 15 | pen/zhong | zhiwu ‘plants’ |
| 16 | ke | shu ‘tree’ |
| 17 | tiao | jinyu ‘goldfish’ |
| 18 | ge | jinyugang ‘goldfish bowl’ |
| 19 | ge | huaping ‘vase’ |
| 20 | zhi | meihua ‘prunus mume’ |
| 21 | ge/zhang/fu | fuzi ‘the character of fu’ |
| 22 | shan | chuanghu ‘window’ |
| 23 | mian | qiang ‘wall’ |
| 24 | dong | lou ‘building’ |
| 25 | zhi | niao ‘bird’ |
| 26 | duo | yun ‘cloud’ |
| 27 | ge | shike ‘moment’ |
| 28 | ge | wuhou ‘afternoon’ |
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra. 2003. Classifiers: A typology of noun categorization devices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Aleasa, Noor Sultan. 1997. Noun quantification in English and modern standard Arabic: A descriptive morphological comparison. Qatar: Qatar University.Search in Google Scholar
Allan, Keith. 1977. Classifiers. Language 53(2). 285–311. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1977.0043.Search in Google Scholar
Andersen, Roger (ed.). 1984. Second languages: A cross-linguistic perspective. Rowley/London/Tokyo: Newbury House Publishers.Search in Google Scholar
Badger, Richard & Xiaobao Yan. 2012. The use of tactics and strategies by Chinese students in the listening component of IELTS. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Chan, Ricky & Janny Hiu Chi Leung. 2020. Why are lexical tones difficult to learn? Studies in Second Language Acquisition 42(1). 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263119000482.Search in Google Scholar
Cheong, Choo Mui, Xinhua Zhu, Guan Ying Li & Hongbo Wen. 2019. Effects of intertextual processing on L2 integrated writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 44. 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.03.004.Search in Google Scholar
Craig, Colette G. (ed.). 1986. Noun classes and categorization. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Search in Google Scholar
De Vincenzi, Marica & Vincenzo Lombardo. 2000. Cross-linguistic perspectives on language processing. Boston: Kluwer Academic.10.1007/978-94-011-3949-6Search in Google Scholar
Douglas, Dan. 2014. Understanding language testing. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203776339Search in Google Scholar
Downing, Steven M. 2002. Threats to the validity of locally developed multiple-choice tests in medical education: Construct-irrelevant variance and construct underrepresentation. Advances in Health Sciences Education 7(3). 235–241. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1021112514626.10.1023/A:1021112514626Search in Google Scholar
Dyson, Bronwen. 2009. Processability theory and the role of morphology in English as a second language development: A longitudinal study. Second Language Research 25(3). 355–376. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658309104578.Search in Google Scholar
Ellis, Nick C. 2006. Selective attention and transfer phenomena in L2 acquisition: Contingency, cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking, and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics 27(2). 164–194. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml015.Search in Google Scholar
Ellis, Rod. 1994. The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Ellis, Rod & Gary Barkhuizen. 2005. Analysing learner language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Erbaugh, Mary S. 1986. Taking stock: The development of Chinese noun classifiers historically and in young children. In Colette Craig (ed.), Noun classes and categorization, 399–436. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/tsl.7.25erbSearch in Google Scholar
Frenck-Mestre, Cheryl & Joel Pynte. 2000. Resolving syntactic ambiguities: Cross-linguistic differences? In Marica De Vincenzi & Vincenzo Lombaro (eds.), Cross-linguistic perspectives on language processing: Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics, vol. 25, 119–148. Dordrecht/London: Kluwer Academic.10.1007/978-94-011-3949-6_5Search in Google Scholar
Gao, Ming Y. & Barbara C. Malt. 2009. Mental representation and cognitive consequences of Chinese individual classifiers. Language and Cognitive Processes 24(7–8). 1124–1179. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802018323.Search in Google Scholar
Gass, Susan & Alison Mackey (eds.). 2013. The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203808184Search in Google Scholar
Hansen, Lynne & Yung-Lin Chen. 2001. What counts in the acquisition and attrition of numeral classifiers? Jalt Journal 23(1). 83–100.10.37546/JALTJJ23.1-5Search in Google Scholar
Hu, Qian. 1994. Overextension of animacy in Chinese classifier acquisition. In Eve Clark (ed.), Proceedings of the twenty-fifth annual child language research forum, 127–136. Stanford, USA: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, Kenneth. 1977. Implicational patterns in interlanguage syntax variation. Language Learning 27(2). 383–410. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1977.tb00129.x.Search in Google Scholar
Ionin, Tania & Silvina Montrul. 2010. The role of L1 transfer in the interpretation of articles with definite plurals in L2 English. Language Learning 60(4). 877–925. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00577.x.Search in Google Scholar
Jarvis, Scott & Terence Odlin. 2000. Morphological type, spatial reference, and language transfer. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22(4). 535–556. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263100004034.Search in Google Scholar
Jarvis, Scott & Aneta Pavlenko. 2008. Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203935927Search in Google Scholar
Jiang, Song. 2017. The semantics of Chinese classifiers and linguistic relativity. Abingdon: Routledge.10.4324/9781315265483Search in Google Scholar
Johnstone, Barbara. 2000. Qualitative methods in sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Krashen, Stephen. 1983. Principles and practice in second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly 17(2). 300–305.10.2307/3586656Search in Google Scholar
Kuo, Jenny Yi-Chun & Maria D. Sera. 2009. Classifier effects on human categorization: The role of shape classifiers in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 18(1). 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-008-9036-6.Search in Google Scholar
Kuznetsova, Alexandra, Per B. Brockhoff & Rune H. B. Christensen. 2017. lmerTest package: tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software 82(13). 1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13.Search in Google Scholar
Leung, Janny Hiu Chi Leung & John N. Williams. 2014. Crosslinguistic differences in implicit language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 36(4). 733–755. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263114000333.Search in Google Scholar
Levshina, Natalia. 2015. How to do linguistics with R: Data exploration and statistical analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/z.195Search in Google Scholar
Lehrer, Adrienne. 1986. English classifier constructions. Lingua 68(2). 109–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(86)90001-X.Search in Google Scholar
Liang, Szu Yen. 2009. The acquisition of Chinese nominal classifier systems by L2 adult learners. USA: University of Texas Arlington dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Liu, Jie. 2018. The L2 acquisition of Chinese classifiers: Comprehension and production. USA: Michigan State University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Liu, Xun. 2011. New practical Chinese reader. Beijing: Beijing Language and Cultural University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Littlemore, Jeannette. 2009. Applying cognitive linguistics to second language learning and teaching. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230245259Search in Google Scholar
Loke, Kit Ken & Godfrey Harrison. 1986. Young children’s use of Chinese (Cantonese and Mandarin) sortal classifiers. In Henry S. R. Kao & Rumjahn Hoosain (eds.), Linguistics, psychology and the Chinese language, 125–147. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong.Search in Google Scholar
Marini, Andrea, Nadezda Eliseeva & Franco Fabbro. 2016. Impact of early second-language acquisition on the development of first language and verbal short-term and working memory. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 22(2). 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1238865.Search in Google Scholar
Meng, Michael & Marcus Bader. 2000. The role of case and number features in syntactic ambiguity resolution. In Marica De Vincenzi & Vincenzo Lombaro (eds.), Cross-linguistic perspectives on language processing: Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics, vol. 25, 175–204. Dordrecht; London: Kluwer Academic.10.1007/978-94-011-3949-6_7Search in Google Scholar
Murakami, Akira & Theodora Alexopoulou. 2016. L1 influence on the acquisition order of English grammatical morphemes: A learner corpus study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 38(3). 365–401. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263115000352.Search in Google Scholar
Odlin, Terence. 1989. Language transfer: Cross-linguistic influence in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524537Search in Google Scholar
Ortega, Lourdes. 2014. Understanding second language acquisition. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203777282Search in Google Scholar
Paul, Jing Z. & Theres Grüter. 2016. Blocking effects in the learning of Chinese classifiers. Language Learning 66(4). 972–999. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12197.Search in Google Scholar
Pienemann, Manfred. 1998. Language processing and second language development: Processability theory, vol. 15. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/sibil.15Search in Google Scholar
Pienemann, Manfred (ed.). 2005. Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory, vol. 30. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/sibil.30Search in Google Scholar
Polio, Charlene. 1994. Non‐native speakers’ use of nominal classifiers in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association 29(3). 51–66.Search in Google Scholar
Quesada, Teresa & Cristóbal Lozano. 2020. Which factors determine the choice of referential expressions in L2 discourse? Studies in Second Language Acquisition 42(3). 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263120000224.Search in Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2020. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Australia: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Search in Google Scholar
Révész, Andrea, Marije Michel & Minjin Lee. 2019. Exploring second language writers’ pausing and revision behaviors: A mixed methods study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 41(3). 605–631.10.1017/S027226311900024XSearch in Google Scholar
Ringbom, Håkan & Scott Jarvis. 2009. The importance of crosslinguistic similarity in foreign language learning. In Michael H. Long & Catherine J. Doughty (eds.), The handbook of language teaching, 106–118. Hoboken: Blackwell Publishing.10.1002/9781444315783.ch7Search in Google Scholar
Robinson, Peter. 2001. Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics 22(1). 27–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.27.Search in Google Scholar
Saalbach, Henrik & Mutsumi Imai. 2012. The relation between linguistic categories and cognition: The case of numeral classifiers. Language and Cognitive Processes 27(3). 381–428. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2010.546585.Search in Google Scholar
Schuetze, Ulf. 2015. Spacing techniques in second language vocabulary acquisition: Short-term gains vs. long-term memory. Language Teaching Research 19(1). 28–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168814541726.Search in Google Scholar
Senft, Gunter. 1996. Classificatory particles in Kilivila. New York: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Sharwood Smith, Michael & Eric Kellerman. 1986. Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition. New York: Pergamon Press.Search in Google Scholar
Shi, Yeli. 2014. Comparison of individual classifiers and collective classifiers between Chinese and English. Theory and Practice in Language Studies 4(9). 1961–1965. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.4.910.4304/tpls.4.9.1961-1965.Search in Google Scholar
Slabakova, Roumyana. 2014. The bottleneck of second language acquisition. Foreign Language Teaching and Research 46(4). 543–559.Search in Google Scholar
Suzuki, Yuichi & Midori Sunada. 2020. Dynamic interplay between practice type and practice schedule in a second language: The potential and limits of skill transfer and practice schedule. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 42(1). 169–197. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000470.Search in Google Scholar
Tang, Chih-Chen J. 2005. Nouns or classifiers: A non-movement analysis of classifiers in Chinese. Language and Linguistics (Taipei) 6(3). 431.Search in Google Scholar
Vandergrift, Larry. 2005. Relationships among motivation orientations, metacognitive awareness and proficiency in L2 listening. Applied Linguistics 26(1). 70–89. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amh039.Search in Google Scholar
Zhang, Hong. 2007. Numeral classifiers in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 16(1). 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-006-9006-9.Search in Google Scholar
Zhang, Jiahuan. 2019. Crosslinguistic influence on Chinese-L2 learners’ acquisition of classifiers. ANU Undergraduate Research Journal 9. 156–171.10.4324/9780203709740-8Search in Google Scholar
Zhang, Jie & Xiaofei Lu. 2013. Variability in Chinese as a foreign language learners’ development of the Chinese numeral classifier system. The Modern Language Journal 97(S1). 46–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01423.x.Search in Google Scholar
Zhang, Liulin & Song Jiang. 2016. A cognitive linguistics approach to Chinese classifier teaching: An experimental study. Journal of Language Teaching and Research 7(3). 467. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0703.05.Search in Google Scholar
© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
