國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
This section reviews the literature on studies of English and Chinese verbs as a part of vocabulary learning and teaching. The whole section can be divided into four parts. The first part introduces the Chinese and English verb types and their argument structures. The second part discusses the source of errors for language learners, particularly in the use of verbs. The third part reviews studies on vocabulary
knowledge in learning a language, and the knowledge that people should possess in order to say they truly know a word. It also introduces how vocabulary should be taught, including the principles, guidelines, and classroom practices. Specifically, the use of lexical chunks for vocabulary learning and instruction is reviewed. In the last part, studies on vocabulary instruction in Taiwan is discussed. In particular,
vocabulary research and teaching approaches in Taiwan are reviewed in this part.
Verb Types in English and Chinese
This part reviews the verb types in English and Chinese, including the semantic and syntactic features of verbs in the two languages. The similarities and differences between the use of English and Chinese verbs are also included.
English Verbs
Generally speaking, English is categorized as an SVO (subject–verb–object)
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
(V) and then the object (O). An example of SVO order is in Example (2-1).
(2-1) John ate an apple subject verb article object
In the sentence, John acts as the subject of the sentence, which is the noun that the following elements of the sentence are predicated of. The verb eat describes the action of the subject. The noun phrase an apple is the object that is governed by the action of the verb.
Among all the elements in an English sentence, verbs perform the most crucial role in forming a sentence (Housen, 2002). According to Merriam-Webster
Dictionary, a verb is defined as a part of speech that conveys physical actions, states of being, or occurrence in a proposition. These semantic characteristics are
demonstrated in the classification of verbs in English. Vendler (1967) presents the semantic categorization of English verbs into four categories: activity, state,
accomplishment, and achievement. Vendler’s classification is based on the aspectual properties of the verbs, which is characterized by the duration of time, the end point, or any changes. The classification is supported by Verkuyl (1989), Olsen (1994), Smith (1997), and Kearns (2000). The activity verbs denote actions or events.
According to Biber (2003), an activity verb (or action verb) simply expresses physical actions of the subject. The activity verbs are basically related with our bodies, such as kick, eat, and write, which are opposed to state verbs. A typical example of an activity verb is “John kicked the ball.” In the example, the activity of kicking is passed from the subject John to the object the ball. On the other hand, a state verb (or stative verb) is related to the state of being, that is, our minds. A state verb regards our emotion (e.g., think, feel, and love), senses (e.g., see, hear, and taste), possession (e.g., have,
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
own, and possess), and states (e.g., am, seem, and exist). A typical example can be seen in “I feel happy,” in which the verb feel is followed by the emotion to describe the state of the subject. An accomplishment verb also describes activities but it leads to a terminal point, such as build, paint, and write. For example, the sentence “The man built a house” includes an accomplishment verb build. The verb build indicates constructing something by putting materials together over a period of time. Thus, it requires an interval of time and results in an accomplishment of the construction.
Finally, an achievement verb describes activities that occur instantaneously, such as find, solve, and faint (Cowan, 2008). For instance, the achievement verb find in the sentence “He found a job” indicates the instant change of state from “jobless”
to ”employed.”
The characteristics of verbs also determine the semantic properties of the core arguments in a sentence (Fromkin et al., 2003). In specific, a verb assigns thematic roles to its subject and other core arguments in a sentence. These components are semantically related to the verb. For example, the activity verb kick requires a subject which does the action of kicking and an object which takes the action. The thematic role of the subject of the verb kick is the “agent,” while the object is the “theme.”
Typical thematic roles include agent, theme, patient, instrument, experiencer, location, goal, source, possessor (Brinton, 2000). Their semantic properties are in Table 2.1.
‧
Thematic Role Description Example
agent the “doer” of the action Jean cried.
theme the person or thing that receives an action
Jean kicked the ball.
patient the thing that is affected by an action and changes its state
Jean broke the window.
instrument the means that is used to carry out an action
Jean opened the door with a key.
experiencer the one who experiences or perceives something
Jean feels lonely.
location the place in which an action occurs Jean put the key in the drawer.
goal the place which an action is directed to Jean sent her grandmother a card.
possessor the one who owns a thing Jean owns a big dog.
Note. This table is adapted from Fromkin, Rodman, and Hyams (2003).
Furthermore, the semantic characteristics of verbs also decide the number of arguments associated with the verbs (Fromkin et al., 2003; Arslan, 2018). According to Hopper and Thompson (1980), English verbs can be classified into five major categories, including transitive, complex transitive, ditransitive, intransitive, and complex intransitive verbs. These verbs are categorized according to the core argument they require (Quirk, et al., 1972 & 1985; Huddleston & Pullum, 2002 &
2005). The core arguments controlled by a verbal predicate are related to verb valency, which determines the transitivity features of verbs (Dixon & Aikhenvald, 2000).1
_____________________
1 Valency refers to the number of core arguments that is required by a verb (Dixon & Aikhenvald, 2000).
Valency is related to verb types. For example, a transitive verb requires two core arguments, including a subject and a direct object, while an intransitive verb requires only the subject as its argument.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
A transitive verb is a verb type that requires one direct object (O). For example, in the sentence “John kicked the ball,” the activity verb kick takes the noun phrase the ball as its O. Semantically speaking, the action of kicking is transferred from the agent John to the theme the ball. A complex transitive verb is a verb type that requires a direct object (O) and an object complement (OC). For example, the dynamic stative verb consider in the sentence “Jean considered herself very lucky” is a complex transitive verb, followed by the O herself and an adjective lucky as the OC. The function of the OC lucky is to complete the role of the O herself. In the example, the object herself is the experiencer that undergoes the perception of lucky expressed by the agent Jean. A ditransitive verb takes two objects—a direct object (O1) and an indirect object (O2), such as “John gave Mary a flower.” In the sentence, the noun phrase a flower acts as the O1 that receives the action of the activity verb give, while the O2 Mary acts as a recipient of the O1 a flower. The theme a flower is given to the goal Mary by the agent John. An intransitive verb is a verb type that does not need a direct object, such as the activity verb sleep in “John slept.” The verb sleep simply shows the action of resting of the agent John. The complex intransitive verb is a verb type that links the subject complement (SC) to the subject in a sentence. Take the sentence “Jean is upset” as an example. The copular verb is links the emotion of upset to the subject Jean. The subject Jean acts as the experiencer of the negative emotion.
The combination of English verbs and their arguments forms the verb construction in a sentence. The five types of verbs are manifested in the five basic verb constructions in English (Stebbins, 2008). The combination of a transitive verb
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
with a direct object and an object complement to form the V-O-OC construction. A ditransitive verb and its direct and indirect objects form the V-O1-O2 construction. An intransitive verb does not require a direct object and solely forms the V construction.
Lastly, a complex intransitive verb links the subject complement and forms the V-SC construction.
Chinese Verbs
Chinese, as English, is also classified as an SVO (subject–verb–object)
language. The subject (S) comes first in a sentence, followed by the verb (V) and then the object (O) (Li & Thompson, 2008). A typical example can be seen in Example (2-2).
(2-2) 約翰 喜歡 瑪麗
yuēhàn xǐhuān mǎlì John like Mary
“John likes Mary.”
In the sentence, the noun yuēhàn (約翰) ‘John’ acts as the subject, followed by the verb xǐhuān (喜歡) ‘to like’ and the object mǎlì (瑪麗) ‘Mary.’ Besides the syntactic structure, the semantic properties of the arguments are similar to that of English. In the example, the subject yuēhàn (約翰) acts as the “agent” that does the action of liking, while mǎlì (瑪麗) is the “theme” that receives the action. The function of verbs in a sentence has been studied extensively by researchers. Firstly, Teng (1974)
classifies Chinese verbs into three major categories according to their semantic meaning, including action, state and process verbs. Action verbs in Chinese denote physical actions of the subject, such as tī (踢) ‘to kick,’ dǎ (打) ‘to hit,’ zhìzuò (製作)
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
‘to make.’ State verbs express a state of being that is in our mind, rather than actions.
Examples of state verbs in Chinese include shì (是) ‘to be,’ zhīdào (知道) ‘to know,’
and ài (愛) ‘to love.’ Process verbs refer to the change of state of the subject, such as sǐ (死) ‘to die,’ pò (破) ‘to break,’ and chéngwéi (成為) ‘to become.’ Secondly, Tai (1984), based on Vendler’s (1967) categorization scheme, classifies Chinese verbs into three categories, including activity, state, and result. According to Tai, Chinese has basically the same types of verbs as English. The major difference lies in the result verbs. The result verbs state a clear result or a change of state. For example, the verb chīwán (吃完) ‘to finish eating’ shows the result of having a meal, and the verb xuéhuì (學會) ‘to learn’ indicates the change of state from ignorance to the acquisition of knowledge. Thirdly, Chu (1999) classifies Chinese verbs into two major classes:
activity verbs and state verbs. The classification is based on both the semantic meaning and the syntactic features of a verb. The semantic meaning is similar to previous literature, in which activity verbs describe actions, while state verbs express the mental conditions. The syntactic features of a verb are the other key factor for Chu’s classification, which deals with the components required by the verb (Baker, 1989). For example, a state verb, such as zhīdào (知道) ‘to know,’ does not take the imperative form of qǐng (請) ‘to please’ as in “*qǐng zhīdào (*please know).” Another feature is that the degree adverb hěn (很) ‘very’ modifies only state verbs but not activity verbs. For example, hěn (很) modifies the state verb gāoxìng (高興) ‘happy’
as in “hěn gāoxìng (very happy),” but it does not modify the activity verb gàosù (告 訴) ‘to tell’ as in “hěn gàosù (*very tell).”
‧
The categorization of Chinese and English verbs shares a lot of similarities.
Both languages possess action verbs denoting physical actions, and state verbs describing the static status of our mind. Furthermore, Teng’s classification of process verbs in Chinese basically corresponds to accomplishment and achievement verbs in English (Meisterernst, 2015). Tai’s result verbs are often used to describe events that are specified with accomplishment and achievement verbs (Li & Shirai, 2000).
In terms of syntactic categorization, Chinese and English verbs have the same categories of verb classifications: transitive, complex transitive, ditransitive,
intransitive, and complex intransitive verbs. These verb types are similar in Chinese and English in that they require the same number of core arguments in a sentence.
The first type is the V-O construction, in which the transitive verb requires one direct objects (O). In Example (2-3), the Chinese verb chī (吃) ‘to eat’ takes pínguǒ (蘋果)
‘apple’ as its direct object.
The Chinese verb has corresponding construction as that of English. As in the corresponding semantic proposition “Mary ate an apple,” the English verb eat requires one O and forms the V-O construction. These two sentences express similar meaning and show similar syntactic behavior.
The second type of sentence structures is the V-O-OC construction, in which the complex transitive verb requires both an O and an object complement (OC). In Example (2-4), the verb rènwéi (認為) ‘to consider’ is a complex transitive verb that
‧
takes the OC cōngmíng (聰明) ‘smart’ as the complement for its O qiáozhì (喬治)
‘George.’
(2-4) 瑪麗 認為 喬治 很 聰明
mǎlì rènwéi qiáozhì hěn cōngmíng Mary consider George very smart
“Mary considers George very smart.”
In English, the sentence “Mary considers George very smart” also includes a complex transitive verb consider that takes an O George and an OC very smart to complete the meaning of the O.
The third type is the V-O1-O2 construction, in which the ditransitive verb
requires two objects, a direct object (O1) and an indirect object (O2). In Example (2-5), The verb gěi (給) ‘to give’ is a ditransitive verb that takes two objects, in which shū (書) ‘book’ acts as the O1 and dàibǐ (黛比) ‘Debbie’ the O2.
(2-5) 瑪麗 給 黛比 一本 書
mǎlì gěi dàibǐ yìběn shū
Mary give Debbie a book
“Mary gave Debbie a book.”
English has the same expression as in “Mary gave Debbie a book,” in which the ditransitive verb give takes two objects, that is, a book as the O1 that receives the action and Debbie as the O2 that is presented with the O1.
The fourth type is the V construction, in which the intransitive verb does not allow a direct object. In Example (2-6), the Chinese sentence and its corresponding English proposition include an intransitive Chinese verb dǎpèntìle (打噴嚏) ‘to sneeze’ and an English intransitive verb sneeze without an O. They simply show the action of sneezing of the subjects.
‧
Mary sneeze past-tense marker
“Mary sneezed.”
The fifth type is the V-SC construction, which includes a complex intransitive verb that connects a subject complement (SC) to the subject. In Example (2-7), the Chinese verb kànqǐlái (看起來) ‘to look’ connects the SC hěnhǎo (很好) ‘nice” to its subject. The verb kànqǐlái (看起來) does not describe actions transmitted from the subject to the object, rather it connects the SC hěnhǎo (很好) to the subject mǎlì (瑪麗).
(2-7) 瑪麗 看起來 很好
mǎlì kànqǐlái hěnhǎo
Mary look nice
“Mary looks nice.”
English also has the same expression with the same verb construction. In the corresponding proposition “Mary looks nice” of Example (2-7), the complex intransitive verb look connects the SC nice to the subject Mary.
The above examples of the five verb constructions show that some of Chinese verbs have corresponding English verbs with the same verb constructions. They require the same core arguments in a sentence. However, verbs that share similar meaning in Chinese and English may not be associated with the same verb construction. Take the verb die as an example. The verb is categorized as an achievement verb according to Vendler’s classification (Botne, 2003), but its equivalent verb sǐ (死) ‘to die’ is viewed as a process verb in Teng (1974)’s
classification. In terms of the verb construction, the English verb die is an intransitive
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
verb that takes the V construction as in “His parents died.” The verb does not require additional arguments to complete the meaning of the predicate. However, the Chinese verb sǐ (死) can take an object and form the V-O construction as in Example (2-8).
(2-8) 他 死 了 父母
tā sǐ le fùmǔ
he die past-tense marker
parents
“His parents died.”
In the example, the verb sǐ (死) takes the object fùmǔ (父母) “parents” to complete its meaning. The example shows that the two language users perceive verbs in different ways. This phenomenon can be a major reason for Chinese EFL learners in making errors in English sentences. In learners’ data, the errors are commonly observed, such as “*arrive school on time,” and “*chat these things.” The verb arrive and chat are used transitively in the sentences. Chapter 4 will include detailed examples and discussion on this issue.
Differences Between the Constructions of English and Chinese Verbs
The differences between English and Chinese verbs are classified into three aspects in the present study. The first difference is the syntactic classification of sentences or basic unit structure of the two languages. The second difference is the serial verb construction (SVC), which is often found in the Chinese language but not in English. The third difference is at morphology level. Chinese has a particular verb compound structure, in which a verb is combined with other verbs or parts of speech to form a single Chinese verb.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
In terms of syntactic classification, Mandarin Chinese and English share a lot of similarities. They are both classified as a subject–verb–object (SVO) language.
However, English is generally considered as a subject-oriented language (Shibatani, 1991). It requires the overt subject in each sentence, and strictly follows the ordering of subjects, verbs, and objects. When a sentence is formed, the topic that is predicated of needs to be in the subject position of the sentence. Following the subject, the verb and other arguments form a predicate that gives further information about the topic.
According to Li and Thompson (2008), on the other hand, Chinese can be categorized as the topic-oriented language (or topic-prominent language), given the emphasis of the topic-comment structure in the Chinese language. The topic indicates the part of sentence that is being talked about, while the comment is what is being said about the topic. In the topic-comment structure, the topic is usually the subject and the comment is taken as the predicate in Chinese. According to Chao (1968, p.69),
“the grammatical meaning of subject and predicate in a Chinese sentence is topic and comment, rather than actor and action.” The idea of topic and comment in Chinese is syntactically more important than that of subjects and objects in English (Xie, 1992).
When expressing an idea in Chinese, the topic is typically in the sentence-initial position and followed by the comments. As in Example (2-9), sòngxiǎojiě (宋小姐)
‘Miss Sung’ is the topic that is talked about in the Chinese sentence.
(2-9) 宋小姐 我 認識
songxiǎojiě wǒ rènshi Miss Sung I know
“I know Miss Sung.”
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
The comment that follows the topic is wǒ (我) ‘I’ and the verb rènshi (認識) ‘to know,’ but their syntactic roles in English are actually the subject and the verb. On the other hand, the topic sòngxiǎojiě (宋小姐) at the sentence-initial position is the
syntactic object of the verb. From the example, we can see that the Chinese word order is not strictly determined by syntactic rules as does English. In Example (2-9), the topic sòngxiǎojiě (宋小姐) and the comment wǒrènshi (我認識) are connected semantically. With this feature, Mandarin is generally regarded as a semantically driven language (Han, 2019). Li and Thompson states that the concept of the subject is not clearly defined by Chinese syntactic structures. The word order is dominated mainly by semantic factors rather than grammatical functions. In this kind of situation, the object does not always come after the verb in the syntactic structure. This is
probably one of the reasons that Chinese EFL learners are less aware of verb
transitivity. Li and Luk (2017) also stress that the transitivity of Chinese verbs is less obvious than that of English verbs, due to the absence of fixed order of arguments for transitive and intransitive verbs in Chinese.
The second distinctive feature of Chinese verbs is the serial verb construction (SVC). According to Li and Thompson (1981, p.594), SVC refers to a syntactic structure "that contains two or more verb phrases or clauses juxtaposed without any marker indicating what the relationship is between them." Tsao (1989) further
emphasizes that the verbs in that are strung together in SVC need to be understood as
emphasizes that the verbs in that are strung together in SVC need to be understood as