Animate or Inanimate: How Does Animacy Affect Relative Clauses Production for Indonesian and Foreign Learners

Abstract views: 249 , PDF downloads: 174
Keywords: Animacy, Foreign learners, Indonesian learners, Language production, Relative clause

Abstract

In second language learning, relative clauses are widely studied. However, research comparing Indonesian and foreign learners’ clauses based on animacy has not been widely done. Besides, animacy affects the difficulty of producing relative clauses. Therefore, this study investigates the role of animacy in the production of relative clauses, the relationship between movement distance and the production of relative clauses, and the role of animacy in conformity with the rules of relative clauses. This research employs a descriptive case study. Data was collected from documents on popular article texts of Indonesian and foreign learners of the University of Muhammadiyah Malang. The data were analyzed based on the generative transformation theory developed by Noam Chomsky. The study results show that animacy plays a significant role in producing relative clauses. Indonesian and foreign learners compose more relative clauses on inanimate nouns, which function as subjects, objects, and complements. Foreign learners create more relative objects than subjects. Based on distance, short-movement relative clauses are very productive for Indonesian and foreign learners. Most Indonesian (97%) and foreign (85%) learners have produced relative clauses that conform to the rules. However, relative clauses with inanimate head nouns often break the rules.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Arti Prihatini, Department of Indonesian Language Education, Faculty of Education and Teacher Training, Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang, Malang 65144

ARTI PRIHATINI is a lecturer in the Department of Indonesian Language Education, Faculty of Teacher and Training Education at Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang, Malang, Indonesia. She is specialized in Indonesian language education. Her research interest includes psycholinguistics, Indonesian as second language learning, teaching and learning, and discourse analysis.

Fida Pangesti, Department of Indonesian Language Education, Faculty of Education and Teacher Training, Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang, Malang 65144

FIDA PANGESTI is a lecturer in the Department of Indonesian Language Education, Faculty of Teacher and Training Education at Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang, Malang, Indonesia. She is specialized in Indonesian language education. Her research interest includes teaching Indonesian to speakers of other languages (TISOL) and psycholinguistics.

Petrus Ari Santoso, Faculty of Policy Management, Keio University, Kanagawa, Tokyo 252-0882

PETRUS ARI SANTOSO is a visiting assistant professor (full-time) in the Faculty of Policy Management at Keio University. He is specialized in Indonesian as a foreign language and intercultural communication. His research interest includes teaching Indonesian to speakers of other languages (TISOL).

Ho Ngoc Hieu, University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh 700000

HO NGOC HIEU is a lecturer at the University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vietnam National University, Hanoi, Vietnam. His research interest includes teaching and learning and linguistics.

References

Alamry, A., & Sabourin, L. (2017). L1 and Animacy Effects in the Acquisition of Gender Agreement in Arabic. Proceedings of the 2017 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association, 1–15. Ryerson University.

Aldosari, S., Covey, L., & Gabriele, A. (2022). Examining the Source of Island Effects in Native Speakers and Second Language Learners of English. Second Language Research, 38(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/02676583221099243

Arka, I. W. (2013). On the Typology and Syntax of TAM in Indonesian. In J. Bowden (Ed.), Tense, Aspect, Mood and Evidentiality in Languages of Indonesia (Vol. 55, pp. 23–40). NUSA. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10108/74324

Atkinson, E., Apple, A., & Omaki, A. (2016). Similarity of wh-Phrases and Acceptability Variation in wh-Islands. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 2048. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.02048

Belletti, Adriana, & Chesi, C. (2010). Relative Clauses from the Input: Syntactic Considerations on a Corpus-based Analysis of Italian. Studies in Linguistics, 4, 4–24.

Chen, M. Y. C. (2005). English Prototyped Small Clauses in the Interlanguage of Chinese/Taiwanese Adult Learners. Second Language Research, 21(1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658305sr243oa

Chomsky, N. (1988). Lectures on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures. Dordrecht: Foris Publication.

Chomsky, N. (2000). New Horizons in the Study of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). Continuity and Shallow Structures in Language Processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(1), 107–126. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716406060206

Cook, V. J., & Newson, M. (2014). Chomsky’s Universal Grammar: An Introduction (3rd edition). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Coon, J., Pedro, P. M., & Preminger, O. (2014). The Role of Sase in A-bar Extraction Asymmetries. Linguistic Variation, 14(2), 179–242. https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.14.2.01coo

DeDe, G. (2015). Effects of Animacy on Processing Relative Clauses in Older and Younger Adults. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(3), 487–498. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.956766

Ekaristianto, F. B. H., Purnanto, D., & Sumarlam, S. (2019). KLAUSA RELATIF BAHASA INDONESIA: Sebuah Pendekatan Tipologi Sintaksis. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Linguistik dan Sastra (SEMANTIKS), 1, 216–226. Universitas Sebelas Maret. Retrieved from https://jurnal.uns.ac.id/prosidingsemantiks/article/view/39017

Fanselow, G., Schlesewsky, M., Vogel, R., & Weskott, T. (2011). Animacy Effects on Crossing Wh-Movement in German. Linguistics, 49(4), 657–683. https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2011.021

Fernández, E. (2003). Bilingual Sentence Processing: Relative Clause Attachment in English and Spanish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Fortin, C. (2018). On the Left Periphery in Indonesian. In S. Chung, D. Finer, I. Paul, & E. Potsdam (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixteenth Meeting of the Austronesian Formal Linguistics Association (AFLA 16) (Vol. 35, pp. 275–297).

Friedmann, N., & Lavi, H. (2006). On The Order of Acquisition of A-Movement, Wh-Movement, and V-C Movement. In A. Belletti, E. Bennati, C. Chesi, E. D. Domenico, & I. Ferrari (Eds.), Language Acquisition and Development (pp. 211–217). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Press.

Fromont, L. A., Soto-Faraco, S., & Biau, E. (2017). Searching High and Low: Prosodic Breaks Disambiguate Relative Clauses. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 96. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00096

Gennari, S. P., & MacDonald, M. C. (2008). Semantic Indeterminacy in Object Relative Clauses. Journal of Memory and Language, 58(2), 161–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.07.004

Gennari, S. P., & MacDonald, M. C. (2009). Linking Production and Comprehension Processes: The Case of Relative Clauses. Cognition, 111(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.12.006

Gennari, S. P., Mirković, J., & MacDonald, M. C. (2012). Animacy and Competition in Relative Clause Production: A Cross-linguistic Investigation. Cognitive Psychology, 65(2), 141–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.03.002

Gibson, E., Pearlmutter, N., Canseco-Gonzalez, E., & Hickok, G. (1996). Recency Preference in The Human Sentence Processing Mechanism. Cognition, 59(1), 23–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(95)00687-7

Grillo, N., & Costa, J. (2014). A Novel Argument for the Universality of Parsing Principles. Cognition, 133(1), 156–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.05.019

Haegeman, L. (1994). Introduction to Government and Binding Theory. Oxford & Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.

Hemforth, B., Fernandez, S., Clifton, C., Frazier, L., Konieczny, L., & Walter, M. (2015). Relative Clause Attachment in German, English, Spanish, and French: Effects of Position and Length. Lingua, 166, 43–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.010

Hsiao, Y., & MacDonald, M. C. (2016). Production Predicts Comprehension: Animacy Effects in Mandarin Relative Clause Processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 89, 87–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.11.006

Irmawati, B., Shindo, H., & Matsumoto, Y. (2017). A Dependency Annotation Scheme to Extract Syntactic Features in Indonesian Sentences. International Journal of Technology, 8(5), 740–743. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v8i5.878

Krause, E., & Von Heusinger, K. (2019). Gradient Effects of Animacy on Differential Object Marking in Turkish. Open Linguistics, 5(1), 171–190. https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2019-0011

Kwon, N., Ong, D., Chen, H., & Zhang, A. (2019). The Role of Animacy and Structural Information in Relative Clause Attachment: Evidence from Chinese. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01576

Lowder, M. W., & Gordon, P. C. (2014). Effects of Animacy and Noun-phrase Relatedness on The Processing of Complex Sentences. Memory and Cognition, 42(5), 794–805. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-013-0393-7

Maia, M., Fernández, E. M., Costa, A., & Lourenço Gomes, M. do C. (2007). Early and Late Preferences in Relative Clause Attachment in Portuguese and Spanish. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics, 6(1), 227. https://doi.org/10.5334/jpl.151

Mak, W. M., Vonk, W., & Schriefers, H. (2002). The Influence of Animacy on Relative Clause Processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 47(1), 50–68. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2001.2837

Müller, G. (2012). A-bar Syntax: A Study in Movement Types. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Ozeki, H., & Shirai, Y. (2007). Does the Noun Phrase Accessibility Hierarchy Predict the Difficulty Order in the Acquisition of Japanese Relative Clauses? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(2), 169–196. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263107070106

Perera, C. K., & Srivastava, A. K. (2016). Animacy-Based Accessibility and Competition in Relative Clause Production in Hindi and Malayalam. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 45(4), 915–930. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-015-9384-0

Prihatini, A. (2019a). Perpindahan Frasa Nomina Benefactive Ke Argument-position dalam Kalimat Pasif Bitransitif pada Ragam Bahasa Lisan Anak Usia Prasekolah. KEMBARA Journal of Scientific Language Literature and Teaching, 4(2), 128–140.

Prihatini, A. (2019b). Semantic Network of the Word Association in the Field of Law. LITERA, 18(3), 430–446. https://doi.org/10.21831/ltr.v18i3.26513

Prihatini, A. (2021). Struktur Kalimat Perspektif Pragma-Gramatikal dalam Konteks Internasionalisasi Bahasa Indonesia. In Internasionalisasi Bahasa Indonesia Perspektif Lintas Negara (pp. 87–97).

Prihatini, A., Fauzan, F., & Pangesti, F. (2022). Argument Bar Movement in Relative Clauses Produced by Bipa Students: An Analysis of Noam Chomsky’S Generative Transformation. LiNGUA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa dan Sastra, 16(2), 199–214. https://doi.org/10.18860/ling.v16i2.11393

Prihatini, A., & Pangesti, F. (2021). Peran Kebernyawaan Nomina dalam Head Nomina Klausa Relatif pada Pemerolehan Argument Bar Movement Tuturan Pemelajar BIPA. Konferensi Linguistik Tahunan Atma Jaya 19, 59–65.

Rodrigo, L., Igoa, J. M., & Sakai, H. (2018). The Interplay of Relational and Non-Relational Processes in Sentence Production: The Case of Relative Clause Planning in Japanese and Spanish. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(SEP), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01573

Sagarra, N., & Herschensohn, J. (2013). Processing of Gender and Number Agreement in Late Spanish Bilinguals. International Journal of Bilingualism, 17(5), 607–627. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006912453810

Sari, A. M., Andayani, A., & Sumarlam, S. (2017). Penggunaan Klausa Relatif pada Pembelajar BIPA di Unit Pelaksana Teknis (UPT) Bahasa Universitas Sebelas Maret Surakarta. Diglossia: Jurnal Kajian Ilmiah Kebahasaan dan Kesusastraan, 9(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.26594/diglossia.v9i1.957

Suharsono. (2016). Pemerolehan Klausa Relatif pada Pemelajar Bahasa Indonesia bagi Penutur Asing (BIPA): Kajian Bahasa-Antara. Litera, 14(1), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.21831/ltr.v14i1.4407

Tsimpli, I. M., & Dimitrakopoulou, M. (2007). The Interpretability Hypothesis: Evidence from Wh-interrogatives in Second Language Acquisition. Second Language Research, 23(2), 215–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658307076546

Tsukida, N. (2018). Preposed NPs in Seediq. In S. Riesberg, A. Shiohara, & A. Utsumi (Eds.), Perspectives on information structure in Austronesian languages (pp. 313–344). Berlin: Language Science Press. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1402553

Uzunca, A. (2021). Animacy Effect on Turkish Object Relative Clause Production among Young Adult Native Speakers of Turkish (Master Thesis). Hacettepe University, Angkara.

Vicente, L. (2013). On The Causes of Superiority Effects in Spanish: Preliminary Results and Prospects. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 12, 283–300. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/catjl.89

Wagers, M., & Pendleton, E. (2015). Structuring Expectation: Licensing Animacy in Relative Clause Comprehension. Proceedings of WCCFL33, 33, 29–46. Vancouver.

Published
2023-05-29
How to Cite
Prihatini, A., Pangesti, F., Santoso, P. A., & Hieu, H. N. (2023). Animate or Inanimate: How Does Animacy Affect Relative Clauses Production for Indonesian and Foreign Learners. OKARA: Jurnal Bahasa Dan Sastra, 17(1), 85-101. https://doi.org/10.19105/ojbs.v17i1.8508