The interpretation of reflexive pronouns in VP-ellipsis by L2 English learners with different proficiency levels
English reflexive anaphora in cases of VP-ellipsis may allow for strict and sloppy readings. A few L2 studies (Epoge, 2012; Park, 2016; Ying, 2005) have focused on determining the role that L2 proficiency may exert on learners' choices in bare, referential, and non-referential contexts. This pa...
| Autores: | , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2024 |
| País: | España |
| Recursos: | Universidad de Cantabria (UC) |
| Repositorio: | UCrea Repositorio Abierto de la Universidad de Cantabria |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.unican.es:10902/34195 |
| Acesso em linha: | https://hdl.handle.net/10902/34195 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palavra-chave: | VP-ellipsis Reflexive pronouns Strict reading Sloppy reading Proficiency level L2 English Elipsis del sintagma verbal Pronombres reflexivos Interpretación estricta Interpretación laxa Nivel de competencia lingüística Inglés como segunda lengua |
| Resumo: | English reflexive anaphora in cases of VP-ellipsis may allow for strict and sloppy readings. A few L2 studies (Epoge, 2012; Park, 2016; Ying, 2005) have focused on determining the role that L2 proficiency may exert on learners' choices in bare, referential, and non-referential contexts. This paper provides data from 104 Spanish learners of English (A2, B1, and B2 levels) and 32 native speakers of English. Results showed that participants tended to interpret reflexives sloppily in bare and non-referential contexts, whereas strict readings prevailed in referential ones. There existed significant differences in the interpretation of learners versus native speakers, whilst the differences among the three learner groups were not so marked. However, the least proficient group differed most from native speakers. Findings partially confirm previous research and discrepancies may be tentatively ascribed to extraneous variables (e.g., the learners' L1, the range of the proficiency levels, or the characteristics of the control groups). |
|---|