| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣師範大學 === 英語學系 === 95 === ABSTRACT
The present study investigates the use of English relative clauses (henceforth RCs) by Taiwanese EFL learners. In view of the concentration by previous research on restrictive RCs (RRCs) and the structural dimensions of RCs, it concerns itself mainly with (1) the acquisition of non-restrictive RCs (NRRCs); (2) the use of RCs in different pragmatic/discourse contexts, including identifying, characterizing, presentative, and parenthetical; and (3) the use of RCs in writing as a useful backgrounding device. Analyses are based on the performance by 120 senior high school students, first- and third-graders, in an RC judgment test, a context translation test, and a passage-rewriting test. The results reveal some inadequacies in the acquisition of RCs by Taiwanese EFL learners. Firstly, it was found that the subjects did not completely acquire NRRCs. In the absence of a well-drawn distinction between RRCs and NRRCs in their mental grammar of English RCs, they exhibited a tendency to overuse RRCs in most contexts. Moreover, for lack of a full understanding of when to use NRRCs, they showed a propensity to limit the use of NRRCs to uniqueness-referring NP contexts (i.e. personal pronouns, proper NPs, and one-of-a-kind NPs) and disregard other referentially accessible NP contexts. Secondly, it was observed that the subjects did not fully acquire the pragmatic/discourse functions commonly served by RCs. Their use of RCs was associated more with identifying a known entity or characterizing a particular type, and less with presenting a topical referent or interpolating parenthetical assertions, for both of which they were inclined to use independent clauses instead. Besides, they to some degree tended to misuse the definite article the with RCs serving to describe or define NPs. Lastly, it was found that generally, the subjects performed rather satisfactorily in utilizing RCs in writing to background non-essential idea units, and that the extent of their RC use in written discourse hinged upon their tendency to package information with and- or because- clauses, as well as upon their years of learning. In the light of these deficiencies in the acquisition of RCs, the study concludes by proposing some pedagogical implications for language instructors to better assist L2 learners in mastering English RCs.
|
|---|
