The acquisition of genitive -'sand ofby Japanese learners of English

我们对理论工作和实证研究进行了回顾，包括对学习者语料库的调查和进行实验。在回顾中，我们主要关注Nishiyama（2003）对日语格no的描述，Rappaport（2004）和Rozwadowska（2006）对英语名前格- s和名后格of的描述。在此基础上，我们分析了这三种语素的异同。在学习者语料库方面，我们使用了NICT JLE语料库（Izumi, Uchimoto, and Isahara, 2004），并说明了日本学习者产生英语属性-和of的一些特征。我们的研究结果表明：1)日语学习者倾向于更多地使用-'s；Ii)他们以与母语人士相似的方式区分这两个语素；Iii)他们产生的错误很可能是由于他们的母语语法造成的；(4)学习者的英语水平越高，往往会频繁地使用of的属格；但是，在名词前属格标记上没有观察到同样的趋势。我们对74名日本英语学习者和21名英语母语者进行了一项实验。本实验的目的是检查他们的知识约束涉及使用两个属格标记与非动词性名词的论点。我们根据Haegeman和Gueron（1999）建立了我们的材料，但母语人士的行为并不像我们预期的那样，因此我们未能获得相关的数据来回答我们的问题。这是因为母语人士对句子的解释和判断对语义和语用方面非常敏感，这是我们没有预料到的。我们打算在这个项目之后进行进一步的研究。

We carried out a review of theoretical works and empirical studies, including investigations into a learner corpus and conducting an experiment. In the review, we mainly focused on Nishiyama's (2003) description of Japanese genitive no and Rappaport's (2004) and Rozwadowska's (2006) works on the English pre-nominal genitive-'s and the post-nominal genitive of. Based on these studies, we described similarities and differences among these three morphemes. With regard to the learner corpus, we used the NICT JLE Corpus (Izumi, Uchimoto, and Isahara, 2004), and illustrated some characteristics in Japanese learners' production of English genitive-'s and of. Our findings showed that i) Japanese learners tend to use of more often than-'s; ii) they differentiate these two morphemes in a similar way as native speakers do; iii) they produce errors which are likely to be due to their first language grammar; iv)learners tend to frequently produce the genitive of when their general proficiency in English becomes higher; but v) the same tendency was not observed with regard to pre-nominal genitive marker-'s. We carried out an experiment with seventy-four Japanese learners of English and twenty-one native speakers of English. The purpose of this experiment was to examine their knowledge of constraints involving the use of the two genitive markers with the arguments of de-Verbal nouns. We set up our material based on Haegeman and Gueron (1999), but native speakers did not behave as we had expected, and hence we failed to obtain data relevant to answer our questions. This is because native speakers' interpretation and judgment of sentences were highly sensitive to semantic and pragmatic aspects which we did not anticipate. We intend to carry out further research after this project.