這個研究測試Yuan對關於日語人士學習中文的單一詞素“自己”和多重詞素“他／她自己”的參數重設理論的闡述。日文學習者在學習多重詞素“他／她自己”在語句中的位置表現得跟中文母語人士是一樣。儘管如此，根據學習者自身的研究結果指出；當母語人士的多重詞素“他／她自己”文法是可以被放置在本位子句中或是他位子句中時，中文學習者卻無法學會多重詞素“他／她自己”可以被放置在本位子句中。這樣的歧異性存在於從早期學習與定型期至稍後階段。Yuan和其他第二語言息得研究者們所支持的觀點，由於缺乏：“正面”證據無法平衡一面傾的論調而被受爭議。儘管中文的單一詞素自己”和多重詞素“他／她自己”曾被誤判為英文中的代名詞。取而代之的是，Hawkins和Chan在1997所提出的：部分功能性語言特徵的參數是無法重設並和母語設定一致的論點。 This study investigates the interpretation of monomorphemic ziji and polymorphemic taziji by Japanese speakers of L2 Chinese in relation to the issue of parameter resetting in SLA. It tests a proposal made by Yuan (1998) that successful acquisition of L2 binding properties could be explained in terms of similar properties that the Japanese and Chinese languages share. The results partially confirm to Yuan's prediction that kare-zisin instantiated in learners' native language facilitates their native-like interpretation of taziji. However, the results also raise a problematic issue in relation to the positive transfer hypothesis of Yuan. Learners do not consistently allow ziji to be locally and long-distantly bound as zibun is in their native language. Instead, the monomorphemic ziji can only be locally bound in their interlanguage grammar. This asymmetry exists at early stages of learning and persists through later stages. The observation that learners have a native-like interpretation of polymorphemic taziji but non-native interpretation of monomorphemic ziji would be difficult to account for using the lack of positive evidence hypothesis alone. Instead, it is tentatively argued that the divergence could be an effect of inaccessibility of some functional features (Tsimpli and Roussou 1991) and that what appears to be a parameter resetting could be in fact an adjustment of L2 setting to match with the L1 setting; monomorphemic ziji has been misanalysed as zibun-zisin in Japanese.
Relation:
Soochow Journal of Foreign Languages and Literatures, 28, 1-30 東吳外語學報，28，1-30
