Semantic and syntactic features of objects in English and Vietnamese (MS THAO NGUYEN)
Language, so far as we know, is something specific to humans, that is to say it is the basic capacity that distinguishes humans from all other living beings.
Language is learnt through the use, through practice. In this view, the more one is exposed to the use of language, the better one learns. It is due to the fact that each language has its own grammatical rules and each unit of grammar has its own semantic and syntactic features. Grasping these features well will be of great benefit for the learners to get success in communication.
For Vietnamese learners at all levels, mastering a foreign language, especially English encounters a lot of problems since English grammar shows many differences compared with Vietnamese. In reality, what make the English language difficult for the learners are not just words, but the ways words are combined to make sentences. The differences in the arrangement of words in sentences between the two languages usually cause mistakes made by learners when transferring from this language into another one.
As for the clause structure analysis, it is obvious that one of the most important facets of clausal structure is the internal structure of the clause - its participants, the semantic roles of the participants, and their syntactic expression in relation to the kinds of situations that clauses designate. There is a sense in which each verb in a language associates with a distinct set of participant roles.
Let us take the following sentences as examples:
[1.1] I wrote this book.
Tôi viết quyển sách này.
[1.2] I liked this book.
Tôi thích quyển sách này.
[1.3] Kim gave Pat the key.
Kim đưa Pat chìa khoá.
[1.4] Kim bought Pat the book.
Kim mua cho Pat quyển sách
Considering “the book” in [1.1] and [1.2] we see that they are both direct objects but in [1.1] it is an Effected object functioning as a Goal in material process, while in [1.2] its semantic role is Phenomenon – a participant of mental process.
It is quite interesting that in [1.3] and [1.4] “Pat” is indirect objects but in [1.3] it is Recipient because it is the one that goods are given to, so “to” is the preposition that goes with Recipient and [1.3] can be paraphrased as in:
“Kim gave the key to Pat.”
In [1.4] “Pat” is Beneficiary as it is the one for whom some service is done, therefore [1.4] can have prepositional paraphrase as follows:
“Kim bought the book for Pat.”
In Vietnamese, according to Lâm Quang Đông (2005) in his article “Về sự hiện diện/ không hiện diện của giới từ cho trong câu có vị từ có ý nghĩa cho/ tặng”, the preposition “cho” is the role marker of both semantic roles of object Recipient and Benificiary. That’s why we can say in Vietnamese.
“Kim đưa (cho) Pat chìa khoá” or “Kim đưa chìa khoá cho Pat”
“Kim mua cho Pat quyển sách” or “Kim mua quyển sách cho Pat”
Due to misunderstanding of the semantic roles as well as the syntactic features of objects, Vietnamese learners sometimes produce forms such as:
* “Kim gave for Pat the key” or * “Kim gave the key for Pat”
Another problematic matter for the learners is that very often in Vietnamese we come up with such sentences:
[1.5] Sách này đọc hay lắm.
[1.6] Nhà này xây cách đây mười năm rồi.
Clearly, in [1.5] “sách này” is the object/Affected of the verb “đọc” and in [1.6] “nhà này” is the object/Effected of the verb “xây”, however, when translating these authentic Vietnamese sentences into English, learners sometimes regard these objects as subjects/Actors of the English active sentences as in the following:
* This book reads interestingly.
* This house built ten years ago.
As a matter of fact, the objects with different semantic and syntactic features can be quite confusing for learners. Therefore, when mastering the English language and English grammar particularly, it is really important for Vietnamese learners to consider the differences between the two languages. The question, as a result, arises how an object with a certain semantic role is mapped into the syntax of both languages. It is worth looking in some detail at the different semantic and syntactic features of objects, the way they are realized and their relationships with the different processes.