Chapter 1 the study of collocations

SV to Inf collocations could be due to the cumulative grammatical complexity, 
introduced by Brown (1973).  The cumulative grammatical complexity assumes 
that a construction y is more complex than a construction x only if y involves all the 
transformations involved in x plus one or more others (Brown 1973:377).  In this 
respect, the cumulative grammatical complexity is different from the theory of 
derivational syntactic complexity which assumes that all transformations involve a 
constant increment of complexity (see Brown & Hanlon 1970).  Derivational 
syntactic complexity proved inadequate for providing an explanation of language 
acquisition (see Smith 1988), and Brown claims that the cumulative number of 
transformations is a better index of complexity (Brown 1973:377; for other 
approaches to assessing lexico-syntactic complexity see Frazier 1988; Crain & 
Shankweiler 1988; Cheung & Kemper 1992; Hulstijn & deGraaff 1994; Hulstijn 
1995).  In the present data, Type 13. SV Inf requires all the rules that constructions 
that contain infinitives do, plus one more, i.e. to-deletion.  Type 13. SV Inf 
collocations are thus more difficult and hence are acquired later.  Furthermore, 
Type 13. SV Inf represents collocations that contain modal auxiliaries, e.g. 'can, 
could, should, would, may + Inf'.  Modal auxiliaries constitute a closed class of 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
15 

---

verbs with limited distributions and have distinct features when compared to 
regular verbs, e.g. they require to-deletion before their combination with an 
infinitive, they take no third-person inflection, they have abnormal time reference, 
and they can only occur as the first element of the verb phrase (see Quirk, 
Greenbaum, Leech & Svartvik 1985; Steele 1981; on the learnability of English 
auxiliaries in L1 acquisition see Pinker 1984).  From a developmental point of view, 
the correct use of Type 13 collocations mainly by Group 3 subjects indicates that 
accurate use of modal auxiliaries develops later in L2 learners and thus Type 13 
collocations are developmentally 'difficult'.  From a learnability point of view, 
Type 13 collocations are different from their equivalent collocations in Greek 
which do not require to-deletion, e.g. ‘mporei;s na ywni;seis edw;’[you can to shop 
here] is SV[Modal Auxiliary] to Inf.  Due to the L1-L2 difference, Type 13 
collocations can be considered more difficult than Type 12 collocations.  Similar 
results regarding the use of modal auxiliaries are also reported by Anderson 
(1978).  In Ravem (1974) too, it was reported that the acquisition of a full range of 
auxiliary morphemes (which included Modals) and their distribution develops late 
(Ravem 1974:148). 
 
The implicational scales for the essay data by group have coefficients of 
scalability below the recommended level of statistical significance.  As with the 
implicational scale for the essay data (all groups), the large number of items on the 
scale could be responsible for the low scalability.  Despite the low coefficients of 
scalability, the three scales reveal orders of difficulty similar to the patterns of 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
16 

---

acquisition, as measured by the Friedman repeated measures analyses.  The scale 
for Group 1 has Types 26, 29 and 11 as the first three items on the scale.  The scale 
for Group 2 has Types 26, 29, 12, 11 and 36 as the first five items on the scale.  
Finally, the scale for Group 3 has Types 26, 13, 12, and 36 as the first four items on 
the scale.  The results from the implicational scaling analysis, although not 
reaching statistical significance, exhibit a pattern that supports the view that 
certain orders exist in the acquisition of collocations, as measured by the writing 
performance of L2 learners.  These orders appeared to be influenced by exposure, 
as the subjects' textbook analysis shows, and/or the complexity, arbitrariness, and 
predictability of specific collocation types (see above).  The correlation of the three 
implicational orders (see also Fathman 1977; Pica 1983) showed that the orders for 
subjects in Groups 1 and 2 were highly correlated (r
s
 = .832); the orders for Groups 
2 and 3 were also highly correlated (r
s
 = .766); and the orders for Groups 1 and 3 
revealed the lowest correlation (r
s
 = .552).  These results show a gradual 
development of collocational knowledge across the three Groups in the study.  
Since the subjects in each Group for this study were only one year apart, the 
development of collocational knowledge had progressed to a different stage after 
only two years of instruction (exposure to collocations via the TWE textbooks) and 
maturation (during the period between 12-15 years of age) had taken place.  Thus, 
even though the implicational scales for the essay data lack statistical significance, 
they can still be used as indicators of the development of English collocational 
knowledge in L2 learners. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17 

---