4.1 Results of OT
4.1.2 Scores of OT (Translation of Chinese into Japanese)
Subsection 4.1.2 reported the results of OT from Chinese into Japanese. It includes the mean scores of the 3- to 6-word sentences and their descriptive statistics as was presented in Subsection 4.1.1. In scoring the utterances of Japanese sentences in the Korean word order and the Chinese word order, L3 learners’ production was scored as one point to the Korean word order if their utterance took SOV. If their production of Japanese took the Chinese word order, it was scored one point to the Chinese word order. In terms of the mean score of the 3-word sentences, both L1 Taiwanese and L1 Korean learners exhibited the same tendency as is shown in Figure 9. L1 Taiwanese learners reached 4.70 in Korean word order while the mean score of Chinese sentences was 0.15. Similarly, L1 Korean learners attained 3.20 in Korean sentences while they earned 1.77 in Chinese word order.
Note. Max = 5
Figure 9. The mean scores of OT (Chinese into Japanese): 3-word sentences
In terms of the between-subjects effects, no significant difference was found between Taiwanese learners and Korean learners as presented in Table 15 (F(1,61) = 1.476, p > .05), indicating that, regardless of L1 Chinese and L1 Korean, the pattern of the score did not differ significantly. In terms of the within-subjects effects, the between word order and participants (F(1,61) = 13.582, p < .05).
0
Table 15
Between-subjects effects of OT (Chinese into Japanese): 3-word sentences
Source
df
SS MS Fp
Intercept 1 756.935 756.935 12809.672 .000**
Group 1 .110 .110 1.857 .178
Error 61 3.605 .059
Note.* p<.05. **p<.01
Table 16
Within-subjects effects of OT (Chinese into Japanese): 3-word sentences
word order
df
SS MS Fp
word order 1 280.861 280.861 50.128 .000**
word order * group
1 76.099 76.099 13.582 .000**
Error(source) 61 341.774 5.603
Note.* p<.05. **p<.01
Regarding sentences the 4-word sentences, the identical tendency was found.
Figure10 demonstrated the mean score of the 4-word sentences. Its maximum score is ten due to the two criteria of scoring L3 learners’ performance: a position of a verb and (2) the order of IO and DO. Both L1 Taiwanese and L1 Korean learners have attained higher the mean scores of 7.61 and 5.83 respectively in the Korean word
order while the mean scores of the Chinese word order plummeted to 1.21 and 2.6 respectively.
Note. Max = 10
Figure 10. The mean scores of OT (Chinese into Japanese): 4-word sentences
In the between-subjects effects, no significant difference in scores was observed between L1 Taiwanese and L2 Korean learners as presented in Table 17 (F(1,61) = .533, p > .05). But the difference was statistically significant as presented in Table 18. Irrespective of L3 learners’ language background, scores of the Korean word order significantly higher than those of the Chinese word order (F(1,61) = 43.79,
p < .05) with the interaction effect being found (F(1,61) = 4.714, p < .05).
0
Table 17
Between-subjects effects of OT (Chinese into Japanese): 4-word sentences
Source
df
SS MS Fp
Intercept 1 2338.402 2338.402 1071.389 .000*
Group 1 1.164 1.164 .533 .468
Error 61 133.138 2.183
Note.* p<.05. **p<.01
Table 18
Within-subjects effects of OT (Chinese into Japanese): 4-word sentences
word order
df
SS MS Fp
word order 1 728.234 728.234 43.739 .000**
word order * group
1 78.488 78.488 4.714 .034*
Error(source) 61 1015.623 16.650
Note.* p<.05. **p<.01
When it comes to the results of complex sentences, the similar outcomes were found. In terms of sentences consisting of five words, the mean scores of the Korean word order were higher than those of the Chinese word order shown in Figure 11.
Maximum score of Figure 11 is ten because there were two criteria to score learners’
production: (1) a position of a verb in a main clause and (2) a positon of a verb in a subordinate clause. For the former scores, L1 Taiwanese and L1 Korean achieved
8.06 and 5.57 respectively whilst, in the latter scores, their mean scores dropped to 1.00 and 4.17.
Note. Max = 10
Figure 11. The mean scores of OT (Chinese into Japanese): 5-word sentences
The result of the between-subjects effects in the five-word sentences was different from the one in the rest three types of sentence complexity. Unlike the results of other sentence structures, significant difference was observed in between-subjects as shown in Table 19 (F(1,61) = 7.026, p < .05). However, statistical analysis showed that significant difference was found in the scores of OT in L1 Taiwanese
Table 19
Between-subjects effects of OT (Chinese into Japanese): 5-word sentences
Source
df
SS MS Fp
Intercept 1 2775.238 2775.238 5483.466 .000**
Group 1 3.556 3.556 7.026 .010*
Error 61 30.873 .506
Note.* p<.05. **p<.01
Table 20
Within-subjects effects of OT (Chinese into Japanese): 5-word sentences
word order
df
SS MS Fp
word order 1 562.429 562.429 25.254 .000**
word order * group
1 251.762 251.762 11.304 .001**
Error(source) 61 1358.539 22.271
Note.* p<.05. **p<.01
Finally, results of the 6-word sentences were reported. Figure 12 shows the mean scores of L1 Taiwanese and L1 Korean learners. Maximum score of the 6-word sentences is 15 because there are three criteria to observe (1) a position of a verb in a main clause, (2) a position of a verb in a subordinate clause, and (3) the order of IO and DO. The figure showed that L1 Taiwanese learners earned 10.848 in Korean word order while their mean score of Chinese order reached 2.36. In the same vein,
the mean score of L1 Korean learners in Korean word order was 7.40 whereas that of Chinese order was 4.93.
Note. Max = 15
Figure 12. The mean scores of OT (Chinese into Japanese): 6-word sentences
Regarding the between-subjects effect, the significant difference between L1 Taiwanese and L1 Korean learners in scores was not detected shown in Table 21 (F(1,61) = 1.823, p > .05). Also, statistical analysis also showed that there was a significant difference between the scores of the Korean word order and those of the Chinese word order both in L1 Taiwanese and L1 Korean learners as Table 22 shows (F(1,61) = 21.759, p < .05). Also, the interaction effect was detected (F(1,61) = 6.571,
p < .05).
0 3 6 9 12 15
Korean word order Chiense word order
mean score
Taiwanese learners Korean learners
Table 21
Between-subjects effects of OT (Chinese into Japanese): 6-word sentences
Source
df
SS MS Fp
Intercept 1 5127.338 5127.338 1540.037 .000**
Group 1 6.068 6.068 1.823 .182
Error 61 203.091 3.329
Note.* p<.05. **p<.01
Table 22
Within-subjects effects of OT (Chinese into Japanese): 6-word sentences
word order
df
SS MS Fp
word order 1 942.352 942.352 21.759 .000**
word order * group
1 284.574 284.574 6.571 .013*
Error(source) 61 2641.855 43.309
Note.* p<.05. **p<.01
In summary, 4.1.2 presented statistical analysis of OT from Chinese into Japanese. The result showed the obvious pattern that the L3 learners produced Japanese in the Korean word order more significantly than in the Chinese word order.
Moreover, no significant difference in scores was identified between L1 Taiwanese and L1 Korean learners in any complexity of sentence. However, in the 5-word sentences, the between-subjects effect was unexpectedly detected while the 3- to
6-word sentences did not show any significant difference between the two experimental groups. The results of OT from Korean into Japanese were summarized in Table 23.
Table 23
Summary of p values in OT (Chinese into Japanese)
Number of words Between-subjects Within-subjects
3 words
p = .178 p = .000**
4 words
p = .468 p = .000**
5 words
p = .010* p = .000**
6 words
p = .182 p = .000**
Note.* p<.05. **p<.01