What Do We Know about the Syntactic Features of Hong Kong Learners’ English?

The study of learner language is an important aspect of second language acquisition (SLA) research because it provides a useful means for researchers to understand the acquisition process (Ellis, 2008, p. 41). For example, morpheme studies in the 1970s revealed an acquisition order of English inflectional morphemes, showing how the analysis of learners’ output might shed light on the developmental aspects of SLA (Ortega, 2009, p. 124). Descriptions of the language output characteristics of learners from different linguistic backgrounds (e.g., Hinkel, 2002) can also promote understanding of factors affecting the acquisition process such as crosslinguistic influences. The purpose of this paper is to review existing research on the learner language of a specific group of Asian learners: English language learners in Hong Kong. The discussion is limited to research findings on the syntactic aspect of the learners’ language output.

This paper reviews the literature on syntactic features of Hong Kong learners’ English. Using error analysis, the dominant research method in this area, various studies have found that the learners appear to be confused about certain grammatical concepts (e.g., transitivity and voice of verbs) and that they tend to make mistakes when constructing certain structures (e.g., relative clauses). However, because the error analyses in some of the early studies were not conducted in a systematic manner, their findings are not conclusive. More recently, a number of researchers have adopted a corpus-based approach to examine the frequency patterns of syntactic features. This research method offers an alternative means of describing the characteristics of learners’ language output. By continuing to focus on the frequency of occurrence of syntactic features, future research will further our understanding of Hong Kong learners’ English acquisition.

Studies on Errors

The majority of studies on the syntactic features of Hong Kong learners’ English have investigated their error patterns. This focus on erroneous usage is not surprising, given the popularity of error analysis as a research method in SLA (Ellis, 2008, p. 62). Moreover, it is generally believed that developing a knowledge of learner errors can facilitate language teaching (Ellis & Barkhuizen, 2005, p. 52).

Table 1 summarizes the findings from studies on Hong Kong students’ syntactic errors. The information in this short summary cannot be exhaustive. Nevertheless, it is a useful starting point for researchers interested in this field.

It should be noted that while different studies are grouped together under specific errors in Table 1, the studies may in fact describe the errors in different terms. Consider these examples:

Verbs—Direct/Indirect Objects: *They discussed about the problem.

(Bunton, 1991, p. 20)

The Intrusive Preposition: *We need to discuss about our future plans.

(Webster & Lam, 1991, p. 41)

Transitivity Pattern Confusion: *We will not listen him.

(A. Y. W. Chan, 2010, pp. 307–308)

In these cases, the more generic label is adopted in the table to avoid confusion.

Table 1.

Summary of Findings on the Syntactic Errors of Hong Kong Learners’ English

As evident in Table 1, verbs and relative clauses are popular topics of investigation. Different scholars have focused on errors in transitivity, voice, and relative pronouns. Regarding research data, the studies have mainly used written language as the basis for analysis. Their data sources include sentence translation tasks (e.g., A. Y. W. Chan, 2004a), free compositions (e.g., B. Chan, 1991) and academic essays (e.g., Yip & Matthews, 1991). In addition to these primary data sources, a number of studies (e.g., Bunton, 1991; Webster, Ward, & Craig, 1987) have also consulted secondary sources such as teacher questionnaires and reference books on common writing errors. The target groups for investigation range from junior and senior secondary school students (e.g., A. Y. W. Chan, 2004b) to tertiary students (e.g., Yip & Matthews, 1991). Mother-tongue interference is often cited as an explanation for learner errors. A few studies (e.g., Bunton, 1991; A. Y. W. Chan, 2004b) have placed particular focus on this factor in their discussions.

The findings of some of the early studies...