An Analysis of Errors in English Relative Clauses Made by Taiwanese EFL Learners

[[abstract]]本研究分析台灣英語學習者在使用關係子句時所犯的文法錯誤，研究問題有四：（一）受試者在五類關係子句的犯錯比率各為多少？哪一類最為困難？（二）受試者在分辨限定和非限定關係子句上有無困難？（三）受試者常犯的關係子句錯誤類型為何？（四）哪些語言因素可以解釋這些錯誤類型？ 受試者為台灣南部一所科技大學的八十二位英語系大一學生。研究工具是研究者自行設計的試題，包含選擇、文法判斷、合併句子、中翻英等四大題，每一大題有十個題目。來自兩個班級的受試者在他們的個別教室進行考試。試卷收回之後，研究者檢視每一題受試者所犯的錯誤，計算每一類關係子句的錯誤比率，以及受試者在使用限定和非限定關係子句時，是否加上逗號或使用that。接著，研究者將所有錯誤歸納為十種錯誤類型，並將每一種錯誤類型對應到最能解釋此類錯誤的語言因素。 研究結果發現：介系詞關係子句在五類關係子句中最為困難，其次是副詞關係子句，這兩類的犯錯比率都超過當類所有錯誤的一半。另外，受試者在分辨限定及非限定關係子句上也有相當大的困難，大部分的錯誤出現於使用非限定關係子句時未加上逗號。在本研究發現的十種錯誤類型當中，限定以及非限定關係子句的混淆是錯誤比率最高的，其次是選錯關係代名詞、介系詞不當保留或省略，這三種錯誤類型加總起來超過所有錯誤的百分之七十五。本研究也歸納出四種解釋這些錯誤類型的語言因素，即：關係子句的不完全習得、過度類化、迴避策略、以及母語轉移。其中，關係子句的不完全習得解釋了最高比率的錯誤，其次是過度類化，其他兩項因素只解釋少部分的錯誤。 根據以上結果，本研究建議語言教師應強調關係子句的句型結構，清楚說明先行詞與關係代名詞的關係，並透過學習者的錯誤來教授關係子句的正確用法。本研究不僅幫助英語學習者更有效地學習英文關係子句，而且激發研究者繼續探討與關係子句習得之相關研究。[[abstract]]This study analyzed Taiwanese EFL learners’ erroneous production of English relative clauses Four research questions were posed: (a) What is the error rate of each of the five types of relative clauses (RS RO RP RA and RG)? Which type causes the greatest difficulty to English-major freshmen at a university of technology? (b) Do the participants make errors in distinguishing restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses? (c) What common error types of relative clauses are created by the participants? (d) What possible linguistic factors may account for these error types? The participants were 82 college freshmen from a university of science and technology in southern Taiwan The instrument was a self-designed test involving four sections: multiple-choice questions grammatical judgment sentence combination and Chinese-English translation Each section contained ten test items The participants from two intact classes took the test in their own classroom After collecting all the test sheets the researcher examined the participants’ errors in each section and calculated the error rate of each type of relative clauses The researcher also checked whether the participants added commas or used that in restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses Then all the errors were categorized into ten error types and each type was attributed to one linguistic factor that best accounted for the errors The findings showed that prepositional relative clauses were the most difficult type followed by adverbial relative clauses Each of these two types had an error rate over 50% The participants also had difficulties in distinguishing restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses Most errors occurred in the missing of commas when non-restrictive relative clauses should be used Among the ten error types generated in this study confusion of restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses was the most frequent followed by wrong choices of relative pronouns and wrong retention or omission of prepositions These three types accounted for over 75% of all errors Four linguistic factors were identified: incomplete understanding of relative clauses overgeneralization avoidance and L1 transfer Incomplete understanding of relative clauses was the most ubiquitous factor followed by overgeneralization whereas the other two factors only explicated a small proportion of errors Based on the above results it is suggested that language teachers should emphasize the sentence structures of relative clauses clarify the relationship between antecedents and relative pronouns and teach the rules of relative clauses through explaining the learners’ errors This thesis not only helps EFL learners learn English relative clauses effectively but also motivates researchers to explore different topics related to the acquisition of relative clause