This study investigated the second language acquisition of relative clauses in Korean by the learners of speaking English and Chinese as a mother tongue. English, Chinese and Korean are typologically different from one another: 1) English relative cla...
This study investigated the second language acquisition of relative clauses in Korean by the learners of speaking English and Chinese as a mother tongue. English, Chinese and Korean are typologically different from one another: 1) English relative clauses, unlike those of Korean, are head-initial whereas Chinese, like those of Korean, are head-final for a relative clause. 2) Unlike English and Chinese, there is no independent relative pronouns in Korean. The predicative of relative clauses marked with an adnominal morpheme '-un, -ul, -nun' indicates that it is not only modifying a noun but it is also representing the tense of the relative clause in Korean. As for the features encoded in the Complementizer, a functional category, they are similar between English and Korean having both [predicative] and [wh], whereas Chinese has only a [predicative] feature in it. In addition, unlike the difference in head-direction, the tense in English is represented by either a syntactic morpheme or adverb as Korean is. In contrast to Korean and English, the tense in Chinese is represented by lexical items such as adverbs but not by a syntactic morpheme. The prediction could be made: The similarity could facilitate English learners' acquisition of Korean relative clauses but hinder it for Chinese learners. |