句法迁移——一项关于汉语对中国学习者英语被动语态习得的影响实证的研究.pdfVIP

Based on the observation about what transfer is not——transfer is not simply a consequence of habit formation, not simply interference, not simply a falling back on the native language, and not always native language influence——Odlin defines broadly the concept of language transfer as: … the influence resulting from similarities and differences between the target language and any other language that has been previously (and perhaps imperfectly) acquired (1989:27). In this way, transfer is far removed from the original use of the term in behaviourist theories of language learning. This working definition provides a general concept for many researches into language transfer. 1.2 Objective of the present study Odlin’s definition of transfer is still vague, because, as Odlin (1989; 2003) admits, it says little about what constitutes influence. Moreover, Singleton (1992) points out that the psycholinguistic content of Odlin’s book Language Transfer is rather limited and thereby it is not surprising that the definition is not offered from the perspective of psycholinguistics. The working definition is only concerned with the issue of where the influence comes from. We, here, would like to take a further step and ask how language transfer takes place. It is one of the three central questions raised by Gass Selinker (1992) (Another two central questions are about transferability and transfer types). To a certain degree, it is about how language learners with cognitive and psychological models are involved in learning the target language. So we are trying to answer the question from cognitive and psychological perspective in the present study. Some researchers suggest that the notion of transfer should be approached from a cognitive and psychological perspective. Færch Kasper (19