Languages can differ with respect to the way in which transitive events are realized in transitive situations, resulting in different transitivity patterns. In particular, languages differ in the ways of linking the semantic notion `agent' with the grammatical notion `subject'. Based on a cognitive-functional approach, this study examines some differences between English and Korean with respect to the questions of how far and in what ways the linguistic realization of transitivity can be varied in terms of the semantic extension of transitivity from prototypes, variation in verb transitivity, and agency in transitive constructions. As for language-specific factors that characterize the difference in transitivity between English and Korean, it is proposed that English is more permissive than Korean in the way non-prototypical agents are realized as agentive subjects, resulting in a wider range of the semantic extension of agentivity from prototypical transitive constructions.Different linguistic preferences involving constructing some entities as a main causative factor (i.e., non-agentive subjects vs. agentive subjects) play a significant role in the conceptualization of transitive events, thereby leading to differences in the coding of causation in transitive clauses between the two languages. In English, the concept of agency can be more easily extended to include inanimate entities than it can be in Korean. Accordingly, English extends the notion of agent to a wider range of situations than Korean, hence allowing non-prototypical agents to be construed as agents. More specifically, the semantic features of prototypical agents in English (e.g., intention, result, responsibility, etc.) can be freely extended to inanimate causative situations in a greater degree than in Korean.A general typological difference between English and Korean in terms of competing notions of agentivity is that compared to Korean, English is freer in assigning a large number of different semantic roles to subjects without requiring concomitant morphosyntactic changes such as passivization (or intransitivization); English tends to overtly express agency, focusing on individual entities (both animate and inanimate) in transitive events, while Korean is reluctant to verbalize non-agentive elements, covering up their inanimacy by means of indirect expressions based on a result/effect clause and relying on different structural strategies (i.e., passive structures, lexical intransitive verbs, and inchoative forms).Finally, it is suggested that different linguistic manifestations in the notions of agency and causation between English and Korean lead to the varying degree of cognitive categories that structure the way in which the language speaker perceive and interpret transitive events, hence resulting in contrasting construals of agentivity (i.e., agent/cause/process-oriented expressions vs. result/effect-oriented expressions) in the expression of transitivity. / Department of English

Combining corpus contrastive interlanguage analysis and usage-based approaches to second language acquisition, the present study targeted the use of English alternating ditransitive constructions by Chinese EFL learners. English alternating ditransitive constructions refer to argument structures that can appear both in the double object construction (DOC) and the prepositional to-dative construction (DAT). / A contrastive analysis of the use of English ditransitive constructions was made between a native English corpus – The Louvain Corpus of Native English Essays (LOCNESS) and a learner corpus – The Chinese Learner English Corpus (CLEC). CLEC is further divided into two sub-corpora based on participants’ educational levels: ST2 (beginner corpus) and ST5&6 (advanced learner corpus). The corpus retrieval software WordSmith 5.0 was used for extracting ditransitive verbs. 16 target verbs were selected on the basis of strict criteria. Systematic analysis was then made in terms of three variables, i.e. pronominality, weight, and semantic classes. / The overall results showed no clear-cut differences in the proportions of DOC versus DAT between the native English corpus and the learner corpus, where DOC (69%) is used much more frequently than DAT (31%), in spite of between-verb variations. It was also found that although Chinese EFL learners have similar sensitivity to ditransitive verbs’ distinctiveness for DOC or DAT with native students, differences still exist regarding the performance of certain individual verbs. / With regard to the three variables under investigation, great differences were found between LOCNESS and CLEC, as well as within the two learner sub-corpora. In terms of pronominality, learners, beginning learners in particular, have a stronger tendency to use personal pronouns as indirect object in DOC, and also use pronouns as prepositional complement in DAT. With regard to weight, beginning learners use the shortest and least complex constituents in ditransitive constructions. In relation to semantic classes, Inherent Transfer is the most frequently used sense among all three groups, but learners are more likely to use the sense of Communication than native students. / A case study was conducted focusing on the prototypical ditransitive verb give. Regarding the variables of pronominality and weight, results were similar to those obtained from the 16 target verbs. As for semantic classes of give, generally speaking, Chinese learners prefer to use the senses of Transfer and Communication, while native students are particularly in favor of employing Enablement and Permission senses, which require the use of more abstract nouns. / In sum, beginning learners show an exemplar-based learning process, with frequent use of pronouns, short constituents, and less various semantic classes. An examination of English textbooks used by beginning learners provided much evidence for the priming effect of input in foreign language learning of ditransitive constructions. Non-target-like formulaic sequences were detected from both beginning and advanced learner corpora. Other impact factors like L1 influence and lack of genre awareness were also incorporated for discussion. / Based on findings from learner English, the study has contributed to usage-based approaches to second language learning, by showing an exemplar-based learning process of Chinese EFL learners, and proving the priming effect of input from English textbooks. It also has given specific pedagogical implications for compilation of teaching materials and classroom teaching practice. / 本研究結合了語料庫中介語對比分析和基於使用的二語習得研究方法，重點探討了中國英語學習者使用英語與格換位結構的情況。與格換位結構指的是能夠在雙賓結構（DOC）和介賓結構（DAT）之間轉換的論元結構。 / 研究選取了兩個語料庫進行與格換位結構的對比：LOCNESS（英語本族語者語料庫）和CLEC（中國英語學習者語料庫）。根據參與者的受教育水平，CLEC又分為兩個子語料庫——ST2（初級學習者）和ST5&6（高級學習者）。通過嚴格的挑選標準，研究確定了十六個目標動詞，分別從人稱代詞的使用、長度、以及語義分類三個變量方面進行全面系統的分析。 / 總的研究結果沒有顯示出本族語者語料庫和學習者語料庫在雙賓和介賓結構比例上的明顯差別，兩個語料庫都顯示，雖然存在動詞之間的差別，但總體來說雙賓比介賓使用的更加頻繁。研究還發現，中國學習者和本族語學生對動詞的結構偏好有相似的敏感度，但對個別動詞的處理方面仍然有差別。 / 對於研究的三個變量而言，LOCNESS和CLEC之間，以及CLEC兩個子語料庫之間都存在很大差異。學習者，尤其是初級學習者更加傾向於使用人稱代詞作為雙賓結構中的間接賓語，並且傾向於用代詞作介賓結構中的介詞補語。初級學習者使用的內部結構最短、最簡單。另外，就語義分類來講，“轉移”是三組語料庫用的最多的語義，但學習者比本族語者更多的使用“交流”這一語義。 / 作為最典型的與格換位動詞，give被挑選出做個案研究。結果表明，在人稱代詞使用和內部結構的長度方面，結果與十六個目標動詞的總結果相似。對於give的語義分類，總體來說，中國學習者更喜歡使用“轉移”和“交流”方面的語義，而本族語者尤其傾向使用“允許”、“許可”方面的語義。 / 總結來講，初級學習者的學習過程是基於範例一步一步的學習過程，體現在頻繁使用代詞，內部結構偏短，語義表達單一等。通過調查初級學習者使用的英語教材，研究發現了語言輸入對外語學習者學習與格換位結構的啟動效應。學習者語料庫中還出現了非目標語式的慣用表達。另外，討論中也涉及了其他的影響因素，例如母語影響、學習者缺乏寫作體裁意識等。 / 通過對學習者英語使用的研究，本研究發現了中國英語學習者基於範例的學習過程，以及英語教材在學習過程中的啟動效應，從而對基於使用的二語習得研究方法做出了一定的理論貢獻。研究還對教材和課堂教學實踐提出了具體可行的建議。 / Xu, Qi. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2014. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 194-207). / Abstracts also in Chinese. / Title from PDF title page (viewed on 05, October, 2016). / Xu, Qi. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only.

Mode of access: World Wide Web. / Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 278-284). / Electronic reproduction. / Also available by subscription via World Wide Web / xviii, 284 leaves, bound ill. 29 cm