Same difference? L1 influence in the use of initial adverbials in English novice writing

Vuuren, S. van; Berns, Janine

doi:10.1515/iral-2016-0077

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, in the causative make construction with adjective supplement become is redundant, in that it is intrinsic to and semantically covered by the adjective. This redundancy may be in response to interlanguage phenomenon, including L1 transfer, preference for verbosity, linguistic inadequacies and/or misconceptions (Liu & Shaw, 2001;Selinker, 2014;Van Vuuren & Berns, 2018).…”

Section: Make By Learners Of Different Proficiency Levelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grammatical and Lexical Patterning of Make in Asian Learner Writing: A Corpus-Based Study of ICNALE

Lin

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates lexical and grammatical features of the high-frequency verb "make" in English written essays among Asian English as a foreign language (EFL) learners based on the ICNALE, the largest corpora focusing on various Asian learner groups. Examining how lexical and grammatical patterning of "make" differ between English native speakers (ENSs) and Asian learners from different countries, this study investigates overuse and misuse patterns of "make" and how they correlate to proficiency. Results show that all Asian learner groups shared similar tendency to use "make" substantially more than ENSs, with producing and causative uses most common and delexical use least common. However, Asian learners tend to produce fewer varieties of delexical uses compared with ENSs. The adjective and verb complements in the causative category by Asian learners also differ from that of ENSs. Rates and types of misuses by Taiwanese learners were independent of proficiency. It is also evident that the high-frequency verb "make" expresses a variety of meanings and there are differences in lexical as well as grammatical patterning between Taiwanese learners and ENSs. Pedagogical implications regarding the use of high-frequency verbs are included in the discussion.

show abstract

Section: Make By Learners Of Different Proficiency Levelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grammatical and Lexical Patterning of Make in Asian Learner Writing: A Corpus-Based Study of ICNALE

Lin

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Often they have a cohesive function by "using some information given in the previous discourse as the starting point for the next sentence" (Biber et al, 1999, p. 809), a function labelled 'local anchoring' by Los and Dreschler (2012). Van Vuuren and Berns (2017), however, found that native speakers of English only use 9% of initial place adverbials for this purpose, as opposed to 25% in Dutch learner English (p. 23). This high frequency is likely to result from information-structural transfer, since the multifunctional preverbal slot made available by V2 syntax facilitates local anchoring.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does it ‘feel’ non-native?

Hilten¹,

Vuuren²

2017

DuJAL

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies on information-structural transfer in texts produced by Dutch advanced learners of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) have found that one of the defining features in learners’ writing is a marked use of initial adverbials. The present study investigates the effect of this hypothesized L1 interference on native speakers’ perceptions. In line with Rosén (2006), it was hypothesized that the frequency and contextual use of clause-initial place adverbials in L1 Dutch EFL writing would lead native speakers of English to judge texts to be less coherent, continuous, and native-like than texts written by native speakers. Our qualitative and quantitative empirical study demonstrates that native speakers are not necessarily aware of initial adverbials and are more concerned with other elements of the text that influence cohesion and flow. This new perspective on information-structural transfer forms a starting point for further research into the communicative effect of interlanguage features.1

show abstract

L2 writing

Schoonen¹

2022

Bilingual Processing and Acquisition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter aims to identify sources of individual differences in writing proficiency, and ways to measure these differences. The construct of writing proficiency is delineated and embedded in cognitive approaches to writing research. It is considered to be a multi-faceted construct, which implies that various component skills contribute to the quality of the eventual writing performance. Writing in a second language often builds on L1 writing skills and procedures, but also raises its own questions, such as the role of transfer of (metacognitive) knowledge, and the writer’s strength and weaknesses in the target language. The best way to assess a language learner’s writing proficiency very much depends on the assessment purposes, and can range from a focused measurement of subskills with discrete-point tests, for diagnostic purposes, to a general performance assessment with holistic rating, for admission purposes. A number of characteristics of these measurements are discussed in the second part of this chapter.

show abstract

Same difference? L1 influence in the use of initial adverbials in English novice writing

Cited by 4 publications

References 10 publications

Grammatical and Lexical Patterning of Make in Asian Learner Writing: A Corpus-Based Study of ICNALE

Grammatical and Lexical Patterning of Make in Asian Learner Writing: A Corpus-Based Study of ICNALE

Does it ‘feel’ non-native?

L2 writing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About