Chapter 6:

An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish

Students Learning Chinese as a Second Language1

Shu-Fen Chen National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan

Abstract: Mistakes and errors are inevitable in learning a second language. Learners
of a second language make errors in the process of constructing a new system for the
second language. Errors may provide insights into the course of language develop-
ment. This study aims to investigate, classify, and analyze the different types of errors
made by Polish second language learners of Mandarin. I examine 269 errors made by
B1 Polish students collected from the TOCFL Learner Corpus and adopt the error tax-
onomy proposed by Dulay, Burt, and Krashen (1982) and James (2013) with minor
revisions. It is found that misselection errors have the highest percentage, 37.9%, fol-
lowed by omission errors, 35.7%. Redundancy (16.7%) is the third most frequent error
type, followed by misordering (7.5%) and mixture (2.2%). Almost three-quarters of
the errors are in the misselection and omission categories. Finally, some pedagogical
implications are offered.
Keywords: error analysis; pedagogical implications; Polish-speaking learners of Chi-
nese; teaching Chinese as a second language; TOCFL Learner Corpus

1. Introduction

Mistakes and errors are inevitable in learning a second language. Learners

of a second language make errors in the process of constructing a new sys-
tem for the second language. Therefore, many researchers in second lan-
guage acquisition have been interested in studying learners’ errors (Corder,
1981; Ellis, 2008; James, 2013; among others). Several researchers point out
that the errors of second language learners are not random mistakes but
are systematic deviations and rule-governed (Corder, 1967; Nemser, 1971;
Selinker, 1972; Adjemian, 1976). Thus, errors are no longer seen as desir-
able but as evidence of learners’ active contribution to second language
acquisition. The making of errors is a strategy employed by those learning

I am very grateful to the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive suggestions. They have
1

raised important issues, and their inputs are helpful for improving the manuscript.
 166 Shu-Fen Chen
a second language to test their hypotheses about the nature of the language
they are learning. In this way, students’ errors are valuable feedback, and
second language teachers can do some remedial teaching based on stu-
dents’ errors. Moreover, some errors need to be handled; otherwise, they
might become fossilized.
This study is based on Polish students’ written errors taken from the
TOCFL Learner Corpus,2 composed of essays written by non-Chinese native
speakers who took the Test of Chinese as Foreign Language (TOCFL). This
corpus collected 4,567 essays, about 1.5 million words written from 2006
to 2012. Among them, 2,837 essays, about 989,045 words were written by
learners from 46 different mother-tongue languages. These essays were
processed by hierarchical error tags, and 33,835 inappropriate grammati-
cal usages were identified (Lee, Tseng, and Chang, 2018). This study ana-
lyzes the 269 grammatical errors made by Polish learners at the intermedi-
ate level (B1-B2).
Section 2 reviews error analysis literature. Section 3 presents the theoret-
ical framework of this study and introduces the error data by Polish learners
of Mandarin collected from the TOCFL Learner Corpus. Section 4 shows the
results of my analysis and leads further discussion. Section 5 explores some
pedagogical implications based on the top three most frequent lexical error
types. Conclusions are finally drawn in Section 6.

2. Theoretical Background of Error Analysis

Error analysis in second/foreign language acquisition was launched in

the 1960s by Corder and colleagues. It is an approach to analyze a sec-
ond/foreign language learner’s language performance. Cor der (1967:
165) pointed out that people did not expect a child to learn his mother
tongue to produce only correct or non-deviant forms from the earliest
stages and interpret his ‘incorrect’ utterance as evidence that the child
is in the process of acquiring a  language. Thus, the systematic errors,
or transitional competence, should not be ignored because they provide
the researcher with evidence of how languages are learned or acquired
and therefore errors are essential to the study of second language acqui-
sition. As stated by Corder, “The study of errors is part of the investiga-
tion of the process of language learning. In this respect, it resembles the

The corpus can be accessed online: http://tocfl.itc.ntnu.edu.tw:8080/TOCFL/.

2
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 167
study of the acquisition of the mother tongue methodologically. It pro-
vides us with a  picture of the linguistic development of a  learner and
may give us indications as to the learning process” (1974: 125). Rich-
ards and Schmidt (2002: 184) stated that the study of errors is used to
(1) identify strategies that learners use in language teaching, (2) identify
the causes of learner errors, and (3) obtain information on common dif-
ficulties in language learning as an aid to teaching or in development of
teaching materials.
Before error analysis was undertaken to study second language learners’
performance, contrastive analysis was prevailing. Fries (1945) initiated con-
trastive linguistics, and Lado (1957) took up the theory and laid down the
theoretical foundation of contrastive analysis. Fries (1945: 9) argued that “the
most effective materials (for foreign language teaching) are those based on
a scientific expression of the language to be learned, carefully compared with
a parallel description of the native language of the learner.” Fisiak (1981: 1)
states that contrastive linguistics has been defined as “a sub-discipline of lin-
guistics concerned with the comparison of two or more languages or sub-
systems of language in order to determine both differences and similarities
between them.” By comparing and contrasting the learner’s first language and
second language, researchers can predict error occurrences based on the sur-
face differences between the linguistic systems of L1 and L2. Teachers can
then utilize their knowledge of the target and native languages to under-
stand sources of errors and design their instruction to prevent those errors.
However, in the 1960s, contrastive analysis became unpopular because it
overemphasized the learner’s first language interference. Besides, it was also
found that predictions were not always consistent with the learner’s actual
performance.
Another theory related to error analysis must be introduced, that is, inter-
language. Interlanguage is a term which Selinker (1972) adopted from Wein-
reich’s (1953/1963) term “interlingual,” and Brown (2007: 256) defined it
as “a  system that has a  structurally intermediate status between the native
and target language.” Interlanguage explores learning strategies based on the
learners’ errors and becomes the basis of error analysis. Corder (1971) called
it “idiosyncratic dialect,” and Nemser (1971) used the term “approximative
system.” Although the term emphasizes a particular notion, they share that
second language learners form their own self-contained, independent lin-
guistic systems. In this regard, interlanguage has its legitimate system where,
as in Brown’s (2007: 256) words, “learners were looked on not as producers of
malformed, imperfect language replete with mistakes, but as intelligent and
168 Shu-Fen Chen
creative beings proceeding through logical, systematic stages of acquisition,
creatively acting upon their linguistic environment as they encountered its
forms and functions in meaningful contexts.” Interlanguage thus is consid-
ered dynamic and can act as a bridge between L1 and L2 when students lack
knowledge of grammatical rules. Students progress as they learn more rules
and refine certain ones.
To analyze learners’ errors from a proper perspective, we need to distin-
guish between ‘mistake’ and ‘error.’ Corder (1967: 166-167) states that per-
formance errors are characteristically unsystematic, and competence errors
are systematic. The former are mistakes, while the latter are the systematic
errors or transitional competence of the learner. Likewise, Brown (2007:
257-258) indicates that a ‘mistake’ refers to a performance error in that it
is a failure to utilize a known system correctly, while an ‘error’ is a notice-
able deviation from the adult grammar of a  native speaker, reflecting the
interlanguage competence of the learner. According to James (2013: 78), an
error is “an instance of language that is unintentionally deviant and is not
self-corrigible,” while a  mistake is “either intentionally or unintentionally
deviant and self-corrigible.”

3. Theoretical Framework and Data Corpus

3.1. Theoretical framework

Regarding the theoretical framework of the present study of error analysis,

I collected data from the TOCFL Learner Corpus, which adopts the error
taxonomy proposed by Dulay, Burt, and Krashen (1982) and James (2013).
Dulay, Burt, and Krashen (1982: Chapter 7) reviewed the literature of error
analysis and presented the four most useful and commonly used bases for
the descriptive classification of errors: linguistic category, surface strategy,
comparative analysis, and communicative effect. Since comparative analy-
sis taxonomy and communicative effect taxonomy deal mostly with error
causes and error gravities, this study will not consider these two taxono-
mies. Instead, this study would use the taxonomy based on both linguis-
tic category and surface strategy. Linguistic categories can include errors
made in writing Chinese characters (typo), phonology (pronunciation),
morphology and syntax (grammar), semantics and lexicon (meaning and
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 169
vocabulary), and discourse (style). Since my data are written compositions,
I will focus on grammatical errors.
According to Dulay, Burt, and Krashen (1982: 150), surface strategy tax-
onomy studies how surface structures are altered:3 Learners may omit neces-
sary items or add unnecessary ones; they may also misform items or misor-
der them. As they found, “Analyzing errors from a surface strategy perspec-
tive holds much promise for researchers concerned with identifying cogni-
tive processes that underlie the learner’s reconstruction of the new language.
It also makes us aware that learner’s errors are based on some logic. They are
not the result of laziness or sloppy thinking, but of the learner’s use of interim
principles to produce a new language.” James (2013: 106) states that a more
acceptable descriptive label for surface strategy taxonomy would be the “tar-
get modification taxonomy” since it is based on how the learner’s erroneous
version is different from the presumed target version; that is, learners “mod-
ify” target forms. This study will use James’ (2013: 111) terminology of ‘over-
inclusion’ and ‘misselection’ instead of what Dulay, Burt, and Krashen call
‘addition’ and ‘misinformation.’ James also added a fifth category—blends, in
which two well-defined targets are found and “the learner is undecided about
which of these two targets he has in mind.” However, there are no cases of
blend errors found in my data. Instead, I  add a  fifth one named ‘mixture’
errors in which more than one of the other four kinds of errors are combined
in one clause.
In sum, there are five major types of errors analyzed in this study: Omis-
sion (tagged as ‘O’), Overinclusion (tagged as ‘R’ for ‘Redundancy’), Misse-
lection (tagged as ‘S’ for ‘Selection’), Misordering (tagged as ‘W’ for ‘Word
Order’) and Mixture (tagged as ‘M’). In addition, there are twenty-four sub-
types of errors based on lexical categories and Chinese sentence patterns.
An underscore is used between the major types and the subtypes; for exam-
ple, the tag O_n denotes that the error is caused by missing a noun, and S_
aux indicates a misselection of an auxiliary verb. For detailed abbreviations,
please refer to the abbreviation list in Appendix.

As James (1998/2013: 106) points out that it is misleading to say that learners ‘alter’ or ‘distort’
3

the correct forms to produce errors, it would imply that they already know the correct forms.
Thus, this is merely a vivid but loose metaphor.
 170 Shu-Fen Chen
3.2. The data

This study collects 301 ungrammatical usages made by Polish learners of

Mandarin from the TOCFL Learner Corpus. These errors were made by
CEFR (The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages)
B1 and B2 students.4 Among the 301 errors, only 32 were made by B2 learn-
ers. This study will ignore the errors made by B2 learners and fully con-
centrate on the other 269 errors made by B1 Polish learners of Mandarin.
Although the errors in the TOCFL Learner Corpus were tagged, I reexam-
ine all the errors and recategorize them a bit differently. First of all, I use
different terminology, for example, ‘adjective’ instead of ‘stative verb,’ sepa-
rable structure ‘v-sep’ instead of ‘vo.’ Second, some of the errors in the cor-
pus are classified inconsistently, for example, 東西 dōngxi ‘thing’ in (1) and
大家 dàjiā ‘every one, all’ in (2) are missing. However, they are tagged dif-
ferently, the former as a lexical level (noun) and the latter as sentence level
(object). In this study, I will label them all at the lexical level; in (1), a noun
is missing, while in (2), a pronoun is missing. The verb 學 xué ‘to learn’ in
可是要是他們不努力學 kěshì yàoshì tāmen bù nǔlì xué ‘but if they do not
work hard’ should be tagged as [S_v] (misselection of verbs, it should be
學習 xuéxí ‘to learn’); however, it is not identified in the corpus. In (3)
人 rén ‘people’ is tagged as [R_n] ‘redundancy of noun’ while in (4) 他們
tāmen ‘they’ is tagged as [R_sub] ‘redundancy of subject.’ In this study, both
of them are considered ‘redundancy of nouns.’

(1) *我希望我的學生會[S_aux]跟我學很多[O_n]，可是要是他們不努力學[S_v],
我[O_aux]只好[S_adv]失望。
Wǒ xīwàng wǒ de xuéshēng huì [S_aux] gēn wǒ xué hěn duō [O_n], kěshì
yàoshì tāmen bù nǔlì xué [S_v], wǒ [O_aux] zhǐhǎo [S_adv] shīwàng.
 我希望我的學生可以跟我學很多東西，可是要是他們不努力學習，
我 可能就會失望。5
Wǒ xīwàng wǒ de xuéshēng kěyǐ gēn wǒ xué hěn duō dōngxi, kěshì yàoshì
tāmen bù nǔlì xuéxí, wǒ kěnéng jiùhuì shīwàng.

4
TOCFL Learner Corpus includes written data of CEFR A2, B1, B2, and C1 students. However, it
was found that those Polish students who took the TOCFL exam belong to B1 and B2 levels.
5
The capital abbreviation shows one of the five major error types, and the small-letter abbrevia-
tion is the subtype. Thus, in (1) [S_aux] indicates the previous word 會 huì ‘can’ is a misselection
of auxiliaries type of error, and [O_n] means that there is one noun missing. The sentence after
the arrow sign  is the revised sentence, and the underlined parts are the corrected lexicon. The
* symbol indicates that the sentence is ungrammatical.
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 171
(2) *除了常常鼓勵他們，我為了鼓勵[O_pron]自動自發的態度會給他們很多
資料，然後上課的時候回答他們的問題。
Chúle chángcháng gǔlì tāmen, wǒ wèile gǔlì [O_pron] zìdòng zìfā de tàidù huì
gěi tāmen hěn duō zīliào, ránhòu shàngkè de shíhòu huídá tāmen de wèntí.
 除了常常鼓勵他們，我為了鼓勵大家自動自發的態度會給他們很多資
料，然後上課的時候回答他們的問題。
Chúle chángcháng gǔlì tāmen, wǒ wèile gǔlì dàjiā zìdòng zìfā de tàidù huì gěi
tāmen hěn duō zīliào, ránhòu shàngkè de shíhòu huídá tāmen de wèntí.
(3) *如果人[R_n]有興趣，[O_aux]讀[S_v]得比較快，也[W_adv]對他[O_form]
比較好玩。
Rúguǒ rén [R_n] yǒu xìngqù, [O_aux] dú [S_v] de bǐjiào kuài, yě [W_adv] duì
tā [O_form] bǐjiào hǎowán.
 如果有興趣，會學得比較快，對她來說也比較好玩。
Rúguǒ yǒu xìngqù, huì xué de bǐjiào kuài, duì tā lái shuō yě bǐjiào hǎowán.
(4) *我也希望畢業以後他們可以說英文，他們[R_n]不怕用英[S_n]。
Wǒ yě xīwàng bìyè yǐhòu tāmen kěyǐ shuō Yīngwén, tāmen [R_n] bú pà yòng
Yīng [S_n].
 我也希望畢業以後他們可以說英文，不怕用英文。
Wǒ yě xīwàng bìyè yǐhòu tāmen kěyǐ shuō Yīngwén, bú pà yòng Yīngwén.

Moreover, I also reclassify some errors. For example, in (5) 畢業 bìyè was
tagged [W_tran] (wrong word order—transitivity) which means 畢業 bìyè ‘to
graduate’ is an intransitive verb and cannot be followed by an object. How-
ever, 畢業 bìyè is also one of the separable words 離合詞 líhécí which belong
to a unique verb class in Mandarin and are always intransitive. In the TOCFL
Learner Corpus, there is a separable structure type, marked as ‘vo’; thus, 畢
業 bìyè in (5) should be tagged the same as 聊天 liáotiān ‘to chat’ in (6). In
this study, it is labeled as [W_v-sep] (word order type of errors — separable
words).

(5) *我二十六歲時，[O_p]畢業[W_v-sep]一個[S_cl]大學的教育系了[R_asp]。
Wǒ èrshíliù suì shí, [O_p] bìyè [W_v-sep] yí ge [S_cl] dàxué de jiàoyùxì le
[R_asp].
 我二十六歲時，從一所大學的教育系畢業。
Wǒ èrshíliù suì shí, cóng yì suǒ dàxué de jiàoyùxì bìyè.
(6) *我希望[O_aux]快要[S_adv]跟你見面，聊天一下[W_v-sep]，我現在沒有
時間寫下來所有要告訴你的東西[O_ba]。
Wǒ xīwàng [O_aux] kuàiyào [S_adv] gēn nǐ jiànmiàn, liáotiān yíxià [W_v-sep],
Wǒ xiànzài méiyǒu shíjiān xiě xiàlái suǒyǒu yào gàosù nǐ de dōngxi [O_ba].
172 Shu-Fen Chen
 我希望可以快點跟你見面，聊一下天，我現在沒有時間把所有要告
訴你的東西寫下來。
Wǒ xīwàng kěyǐ kuàidiǎn gēn nǐ jiànmiàn, liáo yíxià tiān, Wǒ xiànzài méiyǒu
shíjiān bǎ suǒyǒu yào gàosù nǐ de dōngxi xiě xiàlái.

As I reexamine the errors, the numbers of occurrences and percentage of

each error type are shown in Table 1:

Table 1. An overview of the errors made by B1 Polish CSL learners

Omission Redundancy Misselection Misordering Mixture Total
Number of
96 45 102 20 6 269
Occurrences
Percentage 35.7% 16.7% 37.9% 7.5% 2.2% 100%

It is found that misselection errors have the highest percentage, 37.9%,

followed by omission errors, 35.7%. Redundancy (16.7%) is the third most
frequent error type, followed by misordering (7.5%) and mixture (2.2%).
Thus, almost three-quarters of the errors are in the misselection and omis-
sion categories. In Section 4, a detailed discussion of the results is provided.

4. Result and Discussion

4.1. Omission

The first type of errors is omission—the absence of a  word, a  phrase, or

a sentence pattern that makes the sentences ungrammatical. In this study, it
is found that there are several kinds of missing words or sentence patterns
that should appear in well-formed sentences. The missing items include
nouns, verbs, adverbs, auxiliaries, conjunctions, prepositions, classifiers,
aspectual particles, structural particle 的/得/地 de, 有 yǒu, 把 bǎ, and 是
shì sentences. Some examples are given in (7)-(10).
In (7), two auxiliaries 能願動詞 néngyuàn dòngcí and one classifier are
omitted. Three sentence elements are omitted in (8) and (9), including nouns,
aspectual particles, adverbs, and sentential particles.

(7) *我真等不及[O_aux]跟你見面，你上[O_cl]的信讓我非常高興。我覺得這
是很好的計畫，[O_aux]討論一下。
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 173
Wǒ zhēn děngbují [O_aux] gēn nǐ jiànmiàn, nǐ shàng [O_cl] de xìn ràng wǒ
fēicháng gāoxìng. Wǒ juéde zhè shì hěn hǎo de jìhuà, [O_aux] tǎolùn yíxià.
 我真等不及想跟你見面，你上封的信讓我非常高興。我覺得這是很好
的計畫，要討論一下。
Wǒ zhēn děngbují xiǎng gēn nǐ jiànmiàn, nǐ shàng fēng de xìn ràng wǒ fēicháng
gāoxìng. Wǒ juéde zhè shì hěn hǎo de jìhuà, yào tǎolùn yíxià.
(8) *我只能告訴他們他們一定要重視他們的時間[O_n]，不要[O_conj]懶惰地
[R_de]浪費[O_asp]時間。
Wǒ zhǐ néng gàosù tāmen tāmen yídìng yào zhòngshì tāmen de shíjiān [O_n],
bú yào [O_conj] lǎnduòde [R_de] làngfèi [O_asp] shíjiān.
 我只能告訴他們，他們一定要重視他們的時間觀念，不要因為懶惰，
浪費了時間。
Wǒ zhǐ néng gàosù tāmen, tāmen yídìng yào zhòngshì tāmen de shíjiān guān-
niàn, bú yào yīnwèi lǎnduò, làngfèile shíjiān.
(9) *我不知道你聽說[O_asp]烏克蘭的車爾諾貝力[O_sp]？一九八六年那裡發
生了很可怕的核子事故，全歐洲[O_adv]受到那個事故的影響。
Wǒ bù zhīdào nǐ tīngshuō [O_asp] Wūkèlán de Chē’ěrnuòbèilì [O_sp]? Yījiǔbāliù
nián nàlǐ fāshēngle hěn kěpà de hézǐ shìgù, quán Oūzhōu [O_adv] shòudào nà ge
shìgù de yǐngxiǎng.
 我不知道你聽說過烏克蘭的車爾諾貝力嗎？一九八六年那裡發生了很
可怕的核子事故，全歐洲都受到那個事故的影響。
Wǒ bù zhīdào nǐ tīngshuōguò Wūkèlán de Chē’ěrnuòbèilì ma? Yījiǔbāliù nián
nàlǐ fāshēngle hěn kěpà de hézǐ shìgù, quán Oūzhōu dōu shòudào nà ge shìgù de
yǐngxiǎng.

In (10)-(12), 的/得/地 de is missing. Traditionally, the word 的 de is an

adjectival suffix; 地 de is added to a word to form an adverbial adjunct, and 得
de is used between a verb or an adjective and a resultative or degree comple-
ment. However, in recent days, the contrasts among these three words almost
disappear since their pronunciations are the same, and people simply use 的
de.

(10) *這個事故[O_de]結果造成百分之十烏克蘭的土地不能住人，而且三十五
萬以上個[R_cl][O_de]人都非離開他們的老家不可。
Zhè ge shìgù [O_de] jiéguǒ zàochéng bǎifēn zhī shí Wūkèlán de tǔdì bù néng
zhù rén, érqiě sānshíwǔwàn yǐshàng ge [R_cl] [O_de] rén dōu fēi líkāi tāmen
de lǎojiā bùkě.
 這個事故的結果造成百分之十烏克蘭的土地不能住人，而且三十五
萬以上的人都非離開他們的老家不可。
174 Shu-Fen Chen
Zhè ge shìgù de jiéguǒ zàochéng bǎifēn zhī shí Wūkèlán de tǔdì bù néng zhù rén,
érqiě sānshíwǔwàn yǐshàng de rén dōu fēi líkāi tāmen de lǎojiā bùkě.
(11) *我覺得教的時候老師得很清楚[O_de]說[S_v]的題目[R_np]，讓學生明
白。
Wǒ juéde jiāo de shíhòu lǎoshī děi hěn qīngchǔ [O_de] shuō [S_v] de tímù
[R_np], ràng xuéshēng míngbái.
 我覺得教的時候，老師得很清楚地說明，讓學生明白。
Wǒ juéde jiāo de shíhòu, lǎoshī děi hěn qīngchǔ de shuōmíng, ràng xuéshēng
míngbái.
(12) *要進步[O_de]很快[O_adv]應該每天自己找到五個新的字。
Yào jìnbù [O_de] hěn kuài [O_adv] yīnggāi měi tiān zìjǐ zhǎodào wǔ ge xīn
de zì.
 要進步得很快都應該每天自己找到五個新的字。
Yào jìnbù de hěn kuài dōu yīnggāi měi tiān zìjǐ zhǎodào wǔ ge xīn de zì.

In (13), the preposition 在 zài and the sentence pattern 是…的 shì...de are
left out, and in (14) the word 有 yǒu is missing. In (15), a part of the fixed
expression 對…來說 duì...lái shuō is omitted twice, and also the classifier 個
ge is left out.

(13) *我要幫我的學生進步。希望他們的語言能力越來越好。[O_p]未來
會說外語的能力[R_np]非常有用[O_pattern]。
Wǒ yào bāng wǒ de xuéshēng jìnbù. Xīwàng tāmen de yǔyán nénglì yuè lái
yuè hǎo. [O_p] wèilái huì shuō wàiyǔ de nénglì [R_np] fēicháng yǒuyòng
[O_pattern].
 我要幫我的學生進步，希望他們的語言能力越來越好。在未來會說
外語是非常有用的。
Wǒ yào bāng wǒ de xuéshēng jìnbù. Xīwàng tāmen de yǔyán nénglì yuè lái
yuè hǎo. Zài wèilái huì shuō wàiyǔ shì fēicháng yǒu yòng de.
(14) *本來，事故以前，大概[O_you]五萬個人住在那裡。
Běnlái, shìgù yǐqián, dàgài [O_you] wǔwàn ge rén zhù zài nàlǐ.
 本來，事故以前，大概有五萬個人住在那裡。
Běnlái, shìgù yǐqián, dàgài yǒu wǔwàn ge rén zhù zài nàlǐ.
(15) *請問，對你[O_form]下[O_cl]月一號，好不好？對我[O_form]，這是
最方便的日子，我希望那個時候不太忙，可以出去玩。
Qǐngwèn, duì nǐ [O_form] xià [O_cl] yuè yī hào, hǎo bù hǎo? Duì wǒ [O_
form], zhè shì zuì fāngbiàn de rìzi, wǒ xīwàng nà ge shíhòu bú tài máng, kěyǐ
chūqù wán.
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 175
 請問，對你來說，下個月一號，好不好？對我來說，這是最方便的
日子，我希望那個時候不太忙，可以出去玩。
Qǐngwèn, duì nǐ lái shuō, xià ge yuè yī hào, hǎo bù hǎo? Duì wǒ lái shuō, zhè
shì zuì fāngbiàn de rìzi, wǒ xīwàng nà ge shíhòu bú tài máng, kěyǐ chūqù wán.

This study finds that the top three easily omitted syntactic categories are
auxiliaries, aspectual particles, and adverbs, occupying 43.8% of the data. The
results of the total number of omissions can be seen in Table 2.

Table 2. Omission type of errors

No. Missing Elements Types of Missing Words Number of Occurrences Total
會 huì 6
要 yào 6
1. auxiliaries 可以 kěyǐ / 能 néng 3 18
想 xiǎng / 要 yào 2
可能 kěnéng 1
了 le 8
2. aspectual particles 過 guò 2 13
著 zhe 3
都 dōu 7
3. adverbs 就 jiù 3 11
也 yě 1
4. verbs 8
5. nouns 7
6. structural particle de 的 de 6 6
在 zài 4
7. prepositions 在於 zàiyú 1 6
從 cóng 1
我 wǒ 3
8. pronouns 你 nǐ 2 6
大家 dàjiā 1
個 ge 3
9. classifiers 4
次 cì 1
但是 dànshì 2
10. conjunctions 因為 yīnwèi 1 4
和 hàn 1
對…來說 duì...lái shuō 3
11. forms 4
不但…而且… bùdàn...érqiě... 1
12. place expressions 中/裡 zhōng /lǐ 2 2
176 Shu-Fen Chen
13. sentence patterns 是…的 shì...de 2 2
14. 是 shì sentences 1 1
15. sentential particles 嗎 ma 1 1
16. time expressions 時候 shíhòu 1 1
17. 有 yǒu sentences 1 1
18. 把 bǎ sentences 把 bǎ 1 1
Total Occurrences 96

Dulay, Burt, and Krashen (1982: 154-155) state that grammatical mor-
phemes, like articles (a, the, etc.), auxiliaries (is, will, can, etc.), preposi-
tions (in, on, under, etc.), noun inflections (-s, -’s), and verb inflections
(-ed, -ing, etc.) are more likely to be omitted than content morphemes,
like nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs. The former plays a minor role
in conveying the meaning of a sentence, while the latter carries the bulk
of the referential meaning of a sentence. Therefore, language learners are
inclined to leave out grammatical morphemes much more frequently than
content words. Likewise, Kasper and Kellerman (1997) also point out that
omission tends to affect function words rather than content words in the
early stages, and more advanced learners tend to be aware of their igno-
rance of content words and resort to compensatory strategies (cited from
James, 2013: 107). In my data, out of the 96 omissions, 57 (59.4%) are con-
tent words, 30 (31.3%), function words, and 9 (9.3%), certain sentence pat-
terns. The percentage of missing content words is much higher than that
of missing function words. This result seems contrary to Dulay, Burt, and
Krashen’s (1982) and Kasper and Kellerman’s (1997) studies. There might
be two reasons for this contradictory result. One reason is that Chinese
is a highly analytic language in which almost every word contains a sin-
gle morpheme, and the grammatical relationship can be conveyed by word
order or helper words (particles, prepositions, etc.) without inflections.
English, a language possessing both analytic and synthetic language prop-
erties, has eight inflectional suffixes and more than a hundred derivational
affixes. The inflectional suffixes are easily omitted for L2 learners. The
other reason for this contradictory result is the categorization of words.
In English, auxiliaries and pronouns are classified as function words; how-
ever, they are considered content words in Chinese. Due to these two rea-
sons, function words do not occupy a much higher percentage in omission
errors in Chinese.
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 177
4.2. Overinclusion (Redundancy)

Overinclusion, contrary to omission, indicates errors resulting from having

extra words which should otherwise not appear in well-formed sentences.
Unlike the omission type of errors which occupies 35.7% of the total errors,
the overinclusion type of errors only occupies 16.7%, less than a half of the
omission ones. Most errors are found from the aspectual particles, followed
by pronouns and the structural particle de. For example, the aspectual par-
ticle 了 le occurs eight times—some are shown in (16)-(18),6 and 過 guò is
found only once as given in (19). They are all redundant in the sentences.

(16) *我十六歲的時候開始了[R_asp]賺錢。
Wǒ shíliù suì de shíhòu kāishǐ le [R_asp] zhuànqián.
(17) *我決定了[R_asp]去波蘭。
Wǒ juédìng le [R_asp] qù Bōlán.
(18) *其實我剛剛回國了[R_asp]。現在要給你介紹我在波蘭的經驗。
Qíshí wǒ gānggāng huíguó le [R_asp]. Xiànzài yào gěi nǐ jièshào wǒ zài Bōlán
de jīngyàn.
(19) *你應該[S_aux]去過[R_asp]打聽我在不在。
Nǐ yīnggāi [S_aux] qù [S_v] guò [R_asp] dǎtīng wǒ zài bú zài.
 你可以去打聽我在不在。
Nǐ kěyǐ qù dǎtīng wǒ zài bú zài.

In (20)-(23), a few more examples of the overinclusion type of errors are

given.

(20) *我也希望畢業以後他們可以說英文，他們[R_sub]不怕用英[S_n]。
Wǒ yě xīwàng bìyè yǐhòu tāmen kěyǐ shuō Yīngwén, tāmen [R_sub] bú pà
yòng Yīng [S_n].
 我也希望畢業以後他們可以說英文，不怕用英文。
Wǒ yě xīwàng bìyè yǐhòu tāmen kěyǐ shuō Yīngwén, bú pà yòng Yīngwén.
(21) *我還覺得有[R_you]天氣好的話，把學生去[S_v]公園上課是很好的方
法，他們一定[O_aux]喜歡。
Wǒ hái juéde yǒu [R_you] tiānqì hǎo de huà, bǎ xuéshēng qù [S_v] gōngyuán
shàngkè shì hěn hǎo de fāngfǎ, tāmen yídìng xǐhuān.

The corrected sentences are not given for sentences (16)-(18) since they can be formed by simply
6

deleting the redundant aspectual particle了 le.

178 Shu-Fen Chen
 我還覺得天氣好的話，把學生帶到公園上課是很好的方法，他們一
定會喜歡。
Wǒ hái juéde tiānqì hǎo de huà, bǎ xuéshēng dàidào gōngyuán shàngkè shì
hěn hǎo de fāngfǎ, tāmen yídìng huì xǐhuān.
(22) *可是如果我非當大學老師不可，這下子[R_time]我想教英文課。
Kěshì rúguǒ wǒ fēi dāng dàxué lǎoshī bùkě, zhè xiàzi [R_time] wǒ xiǎng jiāo
Yīngwén kè.
 可是如果我非當大學老師不可，我想教英文課。
Kěshì rúguǒ wǒ fēi dāng dàxué lǎoshī bùkě, wǒ xiǎng jiāo Yīngwén kè.
(23) *如果他們不[S_adv]準備好，如果[R_conj]沒有問題問我，我[O_aux]
很失望。
Rúguǒ tāmen bù [S_adv] zhǔnbèi hǎo, rúguǒ [R_conj] méiyǒu wèntí wèn
wǒ, wǒ [O_aux] hěn shīwàng.
 如果他們沒準備好，沒有問題問我，我會很失望。
Rúguǒ tāmen méi zhǔnbèi hǎo, méiyǒu wèntí wèn wǒ, wǒ huì hěn shīwàng.

The results of the total number of overinclusion errors are given in Table 3.

Table 3. Overinclusion type of errors

No. Redundant Elements Types of Redundant Words Number of Occurrences Total
了 le 8
1. aspectual particles 9
過 guò 1
我 wǒ 2
2. pronouns 我們 wǒmen 1 6
他們 tāmen 3
的 de 3
3. structural particle de 4
地 de 1
會 huì 1
4. auxiliaries 4
要 yào 3
5. verbs 3
6. 是 shì sentences 3 3
7. 有 yǒu sentences 3 3
8. nouns 3 3
為了 wèile 1
9. prepositions 2
跟 gēn 1
就 jiù 1
10. adverbs 2
很 hěn 1
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 179
11. adjectives 2 2
12. classifiers 個 ge 1 1
13. conjunctions 如果 rúguǒ 1 1
14. time expressions 這下子 zhèxiàzi 1 1
15. 把 bǎ sentences 把 bǎ 1 1
Total Occurrences 45

4.3. Misselection

Misselection indicates an error resulting from improper use of a word that

could be replaced with another word to yield a  correct expression. Table
4 lists all types of misselection errors, among which misselection of verbs
has the highest percentage (28.4%), followed by adverbs (18.6%) and nouns
(12.7%). Chinese learners at the intermediate level have a problem selecting
correct content words. Sometimes they cannot distinguish words with their
near-synonyms, words with different collocations, or similar functions.

Table 4. Selection type of errors

Misselection Types of Misselection
No. Number of Occurrences Total
Elements Words
1. verbs 29
很 hěn 2
也 yě 2
2. adverbs 17
不 bù / 沒 méi 4
others 9
3. nouns 13
4. auxiliaries 9
5. adjectives 7
6. forms 7
7. classifiers 3
8. prepositions 3
了 le 1
9. aspectual particles 2
過 guò 1
10. conjunctions 2
得 de 1
11. structural particle de 2
的 de 1
180 Shu-Fen Chen
12. determiners 2
13. 有 yǒu sentences 2
14. time expressions 2
15. pronouns 1
16. complex noun phrases 1
Total Occurrences 102

Let’s see some examples of the misselection type of errors. First, students
use the wrong verbs in the sentences (24)-(27). In (24), 轉機 zhuǎnjī ‘to trans-
fer an airplane’ is a much more suitable verb than 上 shàng ‘to ride’. In (25),
the right collocation of the noun 麻煩 máfan ‘trouble’ is 省去 shěngqù ‘to
save’ or 避免 bìmiǎn ‘to avoid’. In (26), the appropriate collocation of 義大利
話 Yìdàlìhuà ‘Italian’ in this situation should be 學會 xuéhuì ‘to learn and be
able to speak’ instead of 念 niàn ‘to read’. In (27), the verb 解決 jiějué ‘to solve’
is the correct one to collocate with the noun 生活問題 shēnghuó wèntí ‘prob-
lems in life’. In the examples of misselection of verbs, students usually have
problems with choosing the correct verb-noun collocations.

(24) *我們坐飛機飛到香港，然後上[S_v]飛到[S_prep]巴黎的飛機進去[M]。
Wǒmen zuò fēijī fēidào Xiānggǎng, ránhòu shàng [S_v] fēidào [S_prep] Bālí
de fēijī jìnqù [M].
 我們坐飛機飛到香港，然後轉機飛往巴黎。
Wǒmen zuò fēijī fēidào Xiānggǎng, ránhòu zhuǎnjī fēi wǎng Bālí.
(25) *我們要免得[S_v]麻煩，所以我們告訴他們我們想吃一樣的菜，吃吃
看法國菜。
Wǒmen yào miǎnde [S_v] máfán, suǒyǐ wǒmen gàosù tāmen wǒmen xiǎng
chī yíyàng de cài, chīchī kàn fǎguócài.
 我們要省去/避免麻煩，所以我們告訴他們我們想吃一樣的菜，吃
吃看法國菜。
Wǒmen yào shěngqù / bìmiǎn máfán, suǒyǐ wǒmen gàosù tāmen wǒmen
xiǎng chī yíyàng de cài, chīchī kàn fǎguócài.
(26) *學生在義大利會比較好，也比較快念[S_v]義大利話。
Xuéshēng zài Yìdàlì huì bǐjiào hǎo, yě bǐjiào kuài niàn [S_v] Yìdàlìhuà.
 學生在義大利會比較好，也比較快學會義大利話。
Xuéshēng zài Yìdàlì huì bǐjiào hǎo, yě bǐjiào kuài xuéhuì Yìdàlìhuà.
(27) 有生活問題的時候，常常沒辦法自己通過[S_v]。
Yǒu shēnghuó wèntí de shíhòu, chángcháng méi bànfǎ zìjǐ tōngguò [S_v].
 有生活問題的時候，常常沒辦法自己解決。
Yǒu shēnghuó wèntí de shíhòu, chángcháng méi bànfǎ zìjǐ jiějué.
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 181

Second, students also make errors in selecting accurate nouns in writing

Chinese sentences. In (28), the student cannot distinguish 耐煩 nàifán ‘be
patient’ and 耐心 nàixīn ‘patience’, which are near-synonyms; however, the
former is an adjective while the latter is a noun. In (29), the student should
use 學科 xuékē ‘subject, course, a branch of learning’ instead of 科學 kēxué
‘science’. These two words are compound words with the same morphemes
but different morpheme orders (同素異序 tóngsù yìxù). In Chinese, there
are many pairs of 同素異序 tóngsù yìxù compounds with the same or simi-
lar meanings and parts of speech. For example, 歡喜 huānxǐ and 喜歡 xǐhuān
‘to like’, 講演 jiǎngyǎn and 演講 yǎnjiǎng ‘to give a speech’, 察覺 chájué and
覺察 juéchá ‘to perceive, to be aware’, 情感 qínggǎn and 感情 gǎnqíng ‘feel-
ings’, 容顏 róngyán and 顏容 yánróng ‘appearance’, 和平 hépíng and 平和
pínghé ‘peaceful’, 緩和 huǎnhé and 和緩 héhuǎn ‘mild’, 寂靜 jíjìng and 靜寂
jìngjí ‘quiet, silent’, 互相 hùxiāng and 相互 xiānghù ‘each other, mutually’, 久
遠 jiǔyuǎn and 遠久 yuǎnjiǔ ‘old, ancient, far away’. However, there are much
more pairs with the same morphemes but opposite orders, which have differ-
ent meanings, as we see in (29).
In (30), 城 chéng and 城市 chéngshì ‘city’ have the same meaning, namely,
‘city’. However, the former is a semi-free morpheme which cannot be used
as a  free word in modern Chinese and has to be compounded with other
morphemes; for example, 城鎮 chéngzhèn ‘cities and towns’, 城鄉 chéngxiāng
‘city and countryside’, 城牆 chéngqiáng ‘city wall’, or 京城 jīngchéng ‘capital of
a country’ etc. In Middle Chinese, 城 chéng can be used as a free word, while
in modern Chinese, most words are compound words with two morphemes.
In (31), both 東西 dōngxi ‘thing, stuff ’ and 事情 shìqing ‘matter, affair’ mean
‘thing’; however, the former is a more general term, and the latter, a specific
one.

(28) *我沒有這些東西，我不太有耐煩[S_n]。
Wǒ méiyǒu zhèxiē dōngxi, wǒ bú tài yǒu nàifán [S_n].
我沒有這些東西，我不太有耐心。
Wǒ méiyǒu zhèxiē dōngxi, wǒ bú tài yǒu nàixīn.
(29) *我對語言學有很大的興趣，對別的科學[S_n]我不太了解。
Wǒ duì yǔyánxué yǒu hěn dà de xìngqù, duì biéde kēxué [S_n] wǒ bú tài
liǎojiě.
 我對語言學有很大的興趣，對別的學科我不太了解。
Wǒ duì yǔyánxué yǒu hěn dà de xìngqù, duì biéde xuékē wǒ bú tài liǎojiě.
(30) *波士頓是一個很漂亮的城[S_n]。
182 Shu-Fen Chen
Bōshìdùn shì yí ge hěn piàoliàng de chéng [S_n].
 波士頓是一個很漂亮的城市。
Bōshìdùn shì yí ge hěn piàoliàng de chéngshì.
(31) *現在我的生活又安全又有意思，我做她希望我做的東西[S_n]，她大
概會是[R_shi]很高興。
Xiànzài wǒ de shēnghuó yòu ānquán yòu yǒu yìsi, wǒ zuò tā xīwàng wǒ zuò
de dōngxi [S_n], tā dàgài huì shì [R_shi] hěn gāoxìng.
 現在我的生活又安全又有意思，我做她希望我做的事情，她大概會
很高興。
Xiànzài wǒ de shēnghuó yòu ānquán yòu yǒu yìsi, wǒ zuò tā xīwàng wǒ zuò
de shìqing, tā dàgài huì hěn gāoxìng.

It is also found that students have not mastered the system of Chinese
classifiers and often use the general classifier 個 ge.

(32) *我二十六歲時，[O_p]畢業[W_v-sep]一個[S_cl]大學的教育系了[R_
asp]。
Wǒ èrshíliù suì shí, [O_p] bìyè [W_v-sep] yí ge [S_cl] dàxué de jiàoyùxì le
[R_asp].
 我二十六歲時，從一所大學的教育系畢業。
Wǒ èrshíliù suì shí, cóng yì suǒ dàxué de jiàoyùxì bìyè.
(33) *由於我理想的工作是在一個[S_cl]學校[O_loc]的[R_de][O_v]，所以
選了這個職業。
Yóuyú wǒ lǐxiǎng de gōngzuò shì zài yí ge [S_cl] xuéxiào [O_loc] de [R_de]
[O_v], suǒyǐ xuǎnle zhè ge zhíyè.
由於我理想的工作是在一間/所學校裡面教書，所以選了這個職業。
Yóuyú wǒ lǐxiǎng de gōngzuò shì zài yì jiān / suǒ xuéxiào lǐmiàn jiāoshū,
suǒyǐ xuǎn le zhè ge zhíyè.
(34) *如果一個星期有兩個[S_cl]課，每課給他們差不多二十個、三十個新
的字。
Rúguǒ yí ge xīngqí yǒu liǎng ge [S_cl] kè, měi kè gěi tāmen chàbùduō èrshí
ge, sānshí ge xīn de zì.
如果一個星期有兩堂課，每課給他們差不多二十個、三十個新的字。
Rúguǒ yí ge xīngqí yǒu liǎng táng kè, měi kè gěi tāmen chàbùduō èrshí ge,
sānshí ge xīn de zì.

Sentences (35)-(37) show the misselected forms of expressions. In (35),

the form should be 說不出話來 shuō bùchū huà lái ‘speechless, lit. not able
to speak a word’ instead of 沒話說 méi huà shuō ‘to have nothing to say’. In
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 183
(36) both ‘V 了 V’ and ‘V 一 V’ are reduplication of monosyllabic verb forms.
However, according to Teng (2019: 242-244), the former denotes “the com-
pletion of a repeated action in the past that was done briefly and tentatively.”
The correct form in (36) is 想了想 xiǎng le xiǎng ‘to think briefly’ instead
of 想一想 xiǎng yì xiǎng (the reduplicated verb form, same as 想 xiǎng) ‘to
think’. In (37), the reduplicated verb form of 聊天 liáotiān ‘to chat’ is AAB
type, that is, 聊聊天 liáoliáotiān, not ABAB type, 聊天聊天 liáotiān liáotiān.
The verb 聊天 liáotiān is a separable verb whose reduplicated verb form is
different from those of regular disyllabic verbs.

(35) *我從來沒看過這麼特別的地方，我感動了[S_de]沒話說[S_form]。
Wǒ cónglái méi kànguò zhème tèbié de dìfāng, wǒ gǎndòng le [S_de] méi
huà shuō [S_form].
 我從來沒看過這麼特別的地方，我感動得說不出話來。
Wǒ cónglái méi kànguò zhème tèbié de dìfāng, wǒ gǎndòng de shuō bù chū
huà lái.
(36) *說到玩，我想一想[S_form]，就決定我們應該去海邊。
Shuōdào wán, wǒ xiǎng yì xiǎng [S_form], jiù juédìng wǒmen yīnggāi qù
hǎibiān.
 說到玩，我想了想，就決定我們應該去海邊。
Shuōdào wán, wǒ xiǎng le xiǎng, jiù juédìng wǒmen yīnggāi qù hǎibiān.
(37) *天氣不好的話，我們可以去看電影，然後去咖啡店聊天聊天[S_
form]。
Tiānqì bù hǎo de huà, wǒmen kěyǐ qù kàn diànyǐng, ránhòu qù kāfēidiàn
liáotiān liáotiān [S_form].
 天氣不好的話，我們可以去看電影，然後去咖啡店聊聊天。
Tiānqì bù hǎo de huà, wǒmen kěyǐ qù kàn diànyǐng, ránhòu qù kāfēidiàn
liáoliaotiān.

4.4. Misordering

Misordering errors are caused by the incorrect placement of words in the

sentences. Most misordering errors are made due to the misplacement of
prepositional phrases (PPs), which occupy 40% of the data. In (38) and
(39), students misplace the prepositional phrase (PP) with 給 gěi ‘to’ plus
 184 Shu-Fen Chen
the recipient of the action 介紹 jièshào ‘to introduce’. The PP with 給 gěi can
be placed before or after the verb phrases.7

(38) *而且我要介紹給他們[W_pp]美國人，所以他們可以好好跟他們練習
說話。
Érqiě wǒ yào jièshào gěi tāmen [W_pp] Měiguórén, suǒyǐ tāmen kěyǐ hǎohǎo
gēn tāmen liànxí shuōhuà.
 而且我要介紹美國人給他們，所以他們可以好好跟他們練習說話。
Érqiě wǒ yào jièshào Měiguórén gěi tāmen, suǒyǐ tāmen kěyǐ hǎohǎo gēn
tāmen liànxí shuōhuà.
 而且我要給他們介紹美國人，所以他們可以好好跟他們練習說話。
Érqiě wǒ yào gěi tāmen jièshào Měiguórén, suǒyǐ tāmen kěyǐ hǎohǎo gēn
tāmen liànxí shuōhuà.
(39) *他們要介紹給我[W_pp]很多有趣的人，而且給[S_v]我看[S_v]波士
頓的附近。
Tāmen yào jièshào gěi wǒ [W_pp] hěn duō yǒuqù de rén, érqiě gěi [S_v] wǒ
kàn [S_v] Bōshìdùn de fùjìn.
 他們要介紹很多有趣的人給我，而且帶我熟悉波士頓的附近。
Tāmen yào jièshào hěn duō yǒuqù de rén gěi wǒ, érqiě dài wǒ shúxī Bōshìdùn
de fùjìn.
 他們要給我介紹很多有趣的人，而且帶我熟悉波士頓的附近。
Tāmen yào gěi wǒ jièshào hěn duō yǒuqù de rén, érqiě dài wǒ shúxī Bōshìdùn
de fùjìn.

In (40) and (41) the PPs with 從 cóng ‘from’ are misplaced before the
verbs 飛 fēi ‘to fly’ and 轉機 zhuǎnjī ‘to transfer’. In (40), the time word 兩次
liǎng cì ‘twice’ also has to be placed after the verb.

(40) *因為沒有飛機飛從台灣[W_pp]到波蘭，兩次[W_time]要轉飛[S_v]，
一次在香港，也[S_det]一次在倫敦。
Yīnwèi méiyǒu fēijī fēi cóng Táiwān [W_pp] dào Bōlán, liǎng cì [W_time]
yào zhuǎnfēi [S_v], yí cì zài Xiānggǎng, yě [S_det] yí cì zài Lúndūn.
 因為沒有飛機從台灣飛到波蘭，要轉機兩次，一次在香港，另一次
在倫敦。
Yīnwèi méiyǒu fēijī cóng Táiwān fēi dào Bōlán, yào zhuǎnjī liǎng cì, yí cì zài
Xiānggǎng, lìng yí cì zài Lúndūn.

According to Teng (2019: 124), the PP with 給 gěi ‘to give’ is placed after the main verb, especially
7

in Taiwan.
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 185
(41) *我坐飛機到法國，然後我[R_pron]轉飛機從巴黎[W_pp]到波士頓。
Wǒ zuò fēijī dào Fǎguó, ránhòu wǒ [R_pron] zhuǎn fēijī cóng Bālí [W_pp]
dào Bōshìdùn.
 我坐飛機到法國，然後從巴黎轉(飛）機到波士頓。
Wǒ zuò fēijī dào Fǎguó, ránhòu cóng Bālí zhuǎn (fēi) jī dào Bōshìdùn.

In (42) and (43) the PPs 在機場 zài jīchǎng ‘at the airport’ and 在紙上
zài zhǐ shàng ‘on the paper’ are misplaced before the subjects. Bielec (1998:
270) states that prepositional phrases usually follow the verb in Polish; how-
ever, if, for emphasis, the prepositional phrase begins the sentence, the verb
precedes the subject. For example, Na polu rośnie zboże. ‘In the field, grain is
growing.’ The reason for moving the PPs to the front of the subjects might be
due to L1 transfer.

(42) *在機場[W_pp]我的朋友接我們。
Zài jīchǎng [W_pp] wǒ de péngyǒu jiē wǒmen.
 我的朋友在機場接我們。
Wǒ de péngyǒu zài jīchǎng jiē women.
(43) *還沒看到[S_v][O_asp]我，所以我在火車站等你的時候會舉[O_asp]
一張紙，在紙上[W_pp]我[O_aux]寫[O_asp]你的名字。
Hái méi kàn dào [S_v] [O_asp] wǒ, suǒyǐ wǒ zài huǒchēzhàn děng nǐ de
shíhòu huì jǔ [O_asp] yì zhāng zhǐ, zài zhǐ shàng [W_pp] wǒ [O_aux] xiě
[O_asp] nǐ de míngzi.
還沒見過我，所以我在火車站等你的時候會舉著一張紙，我會在紙
上寫著你的名字。
Hái méi jiànguò wǒ, suǒyǐ wǒ zài huǒchēzhàn děng nǐ de shíhòu huì jǔzhe yì
zhāng zhǐ, wǒ huì zài zhǐ shàng xiězhe nǐ de míngzi.

In (44) and (45) the subjects 我 wǒ ‘I’ and 我的英文 wǒ de Yīngwén ‘my
English’ are misplaced after the adverbs 沒辦法 méi bànfǎ ‘there is nothing to
be done, lit. no way’.8 Swan (2003: 95) points out that “manner adverbs in Pol-
ish tend to be placed earlier in a sentence rather than later.” These two misor-
dering errors are again due to L1 negative transfer.

(44) *現在我要謝[S_v]她，因為如果她沒幫我，就沒辦法我[W_sub]上大
學了。

One reviewer indicates that 沒辦法 méi bànfǎ  is predicative in Polish, not an adverb. While
8

negation precedes verbs, adverbs are not necessarily.

186 Shu-Fen Chen
Xiànzài wǒ yào xiè [S_v] tā, yīnwèi rúguǒ tā méi bāng wǒ, jiù méi bànfǎ wǒ
[W_sub] shàng dàxué le.
 現在我要謝謝她，因為如果她沒幫我，我就沒辦法上大學了。
Xiànzài wǒ yào xièxie tā, yīnwèi rúguǒ tā méi bāng wǒ, wǒ jiù méi bànfǎ
shàng dàxué le.
(45) *如果沒有她，沒辦法我的英文[W_sub]那麼好。
Rúguǒ méiyǒu tā, méi bànfǎ wǒ de Yīngwén [W_sub] nàme hǎo.
 如果沒有她，我的英文沒辦法那麼好。
Rúguǒ méiyǒu tā, wǒ de Yīngwén méi bànfǎ nàme hǎo.
As Dulay, Burt, and Krashen (1982: 163) observe, students made written
misordering errors by relying on “word-for-word translations of native lan-
guage surface structures.” Errors like (42)-(45) are possibly made with the
word order in Polish, which is different from Chinese.
Another type of misordering errors is due to improper use of separable
words 離合詞 líhécí which are a unique type of verbs in Chinese. They are
verb-object compounds and can be separated and used like verb phrases.
Separable words have special syntax different from other compound verbs.
First, perfective aspect particle 了 le, experiential aspect 過 guò, and continu-
ous aspect particle 著 zhe should follow the verb, not the noun. We would say
吃了飯 chīlefàn ‘to have eaten’，結過婚 jiéguòhūn ‘to have married’，and 跳
著舞 tiàozhewǔ ‘be dancing’ instead of 吃飯了chīfànle，結婚過 jiéhūnguò,
and 跳舞著 tiàowǔzhe. Second, a complement of time duration, quantity, or
recipient of action can be interposed between the noun and the verb in sep-
arable words. For example, 洗了一小時的澡 xǐle yì xiǎoshí de zǎo ‘to take
a bath for an hour’, 離過兩次婚 líguò liǎng cì hūn ‘to divorce twice’, and 見他
一面 jiàn tā yí miàn ‘to meet up with him’. Thus, since 聊天 liáotiān ‘to chat’
is a separable word, and the time word 一下 yíxià ‘for a short while’ should
be interposed in between, as shown in (46). Moreover, the separable words
usually do not take objects, but use prepositional phrases with the objects.
For example, we cannot say 見面他 jiànmiàn tā ‘to meet him’, but 跟他見
面 gēn tā jiànmiàn ‘to meet with him’. Likewise, in (42) 畢業 bìyè ‘to gradu-
ate’ is a separable word. Thus it cannot take an object 一所大學的教育系 yì
suǒ dàxué de jiàoyùxì ‘the Department of Education at a university’, a prepo-
sition 從 cóng ‘from’ has to be inserted, and 畢業 bìyè has to be placed after
the object.

(46) *我希望[O_aux]快要[S_adv]跟你見面，聊天一下[W_v-sep]，我現在
沒有時間寫下來所有要告訴你的東西[O_ba]。
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 187
Wǒ xīwàng [O_aux] kuàiyào [S_adv] gēn nǐ jiànmiàn, liáotiān yíxià [W_v-
sep], wǒ xiànzài méiyǒu shíjiān xiě xiàlái suǒyǒu yào gàosù nǐ de dōngxi [O_
ba].
 我希望可以快點跟你見面，聊一下天，我現在沒有時間把所有要告
訴你的東西寫下來。
Wǒ xīwàng kěyǐ kuàidiǎn gēn nǐ jiànmiàn, liáo yíxià tiān, wǒ xiànzài méiyǒu
shíjiān bǎ suǒyǒu yào gàosù nǐ de dōngxi xiě xiàlái.
(47) *我二十六歲時，[O_p]畢業[W_v-sep]一個[S_cl]大學的教育系了
[R_asp]。
Wǒ èrshíliù suì shí, [O_p] bìyè [W_v-sep] yí ge [S_cl] dàxué de jiàoyùxì le
[R_asp].
 我二十六歲時，從一所大學的教育系畢業。
Wǒ èrshíliù suì shí, cóng yì suǒ dàxué de jiàoyùxì bìyè.

Table 5 shows the various subtypes of the misordering type of errors.

Table 5. Misordering type of errors

Types of
No. Misordering Elements Number of Occurrences Total
Misordered words
1. prepositional phrases 8
2. adverbs 4
transitive 1
3. verb phrases 3
v-sep 2
4. determiners 1
5. subjects 2
6. objects 1
7. time expressions 1
Total Occurrences 20

4.5. Mixture

Some errors cannot be included in the four types mentioned above. They
are a mixture of other varieties. For example, sentence (48) with the sen-
tence pattern 一…就 yì...jiù ‘as soon as’ in the first clause 我一聽過我的朋
友找到一趟旅行要去這麼有特色的地方 Wǒ yì tīngguò wǒ de péngyǒu
zhǎodào yí tàng lǚxíng yào qù zhème yǒu tèsè de dìfāng has lots of gram-
matical errors. First, 聽過 tīngguò ‘to have heard of ’ should be replaced
188 Shu-Fen Chen
by 聽到 tīngdào ‘to hear’, which is a selection error. Second, the verb 找
到 zhǎodào ‘find’, the number 一 yī ‘one’ and the classifier 趟 tàng ‘a mea-
sure word used for trips’ have to be deleted, which are overinclusion errors.
Finally, 旅行 lǚxíng ‘a trip, to travel’ is a noun which can be used as a verb
and moved to the end of the clause; here, a misordering error. There are six
cases of the mixture type of errors, and four are given in (48)-(51).

(48) *我一聽過我的朋友找到一趟旅行要去這麼有特色的地方[M]，我就
好奇得不能不參加[S_form]。
Wǒ yì tīngguò wǒ de péngyǒu zhǎodào yí tàng lǚxíng yào qù zhème yǒu tèsè
de dìfāng [M], wǒ jiù hàoqí de bù néng bù cānjiā [S_form].
 我一聽到我的朋友要去這麼有特色的地方旅行，我就好奇得想要參
加。
Wǒ yì tīngdào wǒ de péngyǒu yào qù zhème yǒu tèsè de dìfāng lǚxíng, wǒ jiù
hàoqí de xiǎng yào cānjiā.
(49) *最近怎麼樣？我最近很好，剛才旅行以後回家了[M]，我非常興奮
[O_aux]給你說一說這趟旅行。
Zuìjìn zěnmeyàng? Wǒ zuìjìn hěn hǎo, gāngcái lǚxíng yǐhòu huíjiā le [M], wǒ
fēicháng xīngfèn [O_aux] gěi nǐ shuōyìshuō zhètàng lǚxíng.
 最近怎麼樣？我最近很好，剛旅行回來，我非常興奮想給你說一說
這趟旅行。
Zuìjìn zěnmeyàng? Wǒ zuìjìn hěn hǎo, gāng lǚxíng huílái, wǒ fēicháng xīng-
fèn xiǎng gěi nǐ shuōyìshuō zhètàng lǚxíng.
(50) * [O_v]這個決定的原因很多，主要的是我最拿手的課[M]。
[O_v] Zhège juédìng de yuányīn hěn duō, zhǔyào de shì wǒ zuì náshǒu de kè
[M].
 造成這個決定的原因很多，主要是因為它是我最拿手的課。
Zàochéng zhège juédìng de yuányīn hěn duō, zhǔyào shì yīnwèi tā shì wǒ zuì
náshǒu de kè.
(51) *下一步是：我看學生的能力。他的寫法、說法。他用的語法對不
對。如果知道特怎麼好可以開始[M]。
Xiàyíbù shì: wǒ kàn xuéshēng de nénglì. Tā de xiěfǎ, shuōfǎ. Tā yòng de yǔfǎ
duìbúduì. Rúguǒ zhīdào tè zěnme hǎo kěyǐ kāishǐ [M].
 下一步是：我看學生的能力。他的寫法、說法和使用的語法對不
對。如果知道問題，比較好開始。
Xiàyíbù shì: wǒ kàn xuéshēng de nénglì. Tā de xiěfǎ, shuōfǎ hé shǐyòng de
yǔfǎ duìbúduì. Rúguǒ zhīdào wèntí, bǐjiào hǎo kāishǐ.
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 189
5. Pedagogical Implications

I will reclassify the errors based on lexical and syntactic properties from
the above analysis of error types and their subtypes for further pedagogi-
cal discussion. Lexical errors involve various syntactic categories, includ-
ing nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, conjunctions, prepositions, auxil-
iaries, determiners, and particles (aspectual particles and sentential par-
ticles). Syntactic errors include essential sentence units, like subjects or
objects, phrases, like PPs or VPs, various sentence patterns, like 把 bǎ sen-
tences, 的/得/地 de, 是…的 shì...de sentences, 有 yǒu sentences, 是 shì sen-
tences, paired conjunctions, like 不但…，而且… búdàn...érqiě... ‘not only,
but also’, etc. Table 6 reveals the lexical errors detected in my data of Pol-
ish learner’s written compositions. Among a  total of the 269 errors, 221
(82.2%) are lexical errors. Among the 12 categories of lexical errors, it is
found that Polish students have the greatest problem with verbs. They also
encounter significant problems in auxiliaries, adverbs, nouns, and aspec-
tual particles.

Table 6. Lexical errors based on syntactic categories

Word Word
No. Omission Redundancy Total
Selection Ordering
1. verbs 8 3 29 0 40
2. auxiliaries 18 9 9 0 36
3. adverbs 11 2 17 4 34
4. nouns 7 3 13 0 23
5. aspectual particles 13 3 2 0 18
6. pronouns 6 6 1 0 13
7. structural particle de 6 4 2 0 12
8. prepositions 6 2 3 0 11
9. adjectives 0 2 7 0 9
10. classifiers 4 1 3 0 8
11. conjunctions 4 1 2 0 7
12. determiners 0 0 2 1 3
total 83 36 90 5 214
190 Shu-Fen Chen

Figure 1. shows the cumulative frequency distribution of these lexical errors.

I am more concerned with dealing with these errors than finding the types
of errors that Polish students make. Error analysis can reveal the sources of
the errors and the causes of their frequent occurrences. Once the sources and
causes are revealed, it is possible to determine the remedy and the sequence
of future instructions. Corder (1981: 45) also states that error analysis has two
functions: theoretical and practical. The former is “part of the methodology
of investigating the language learning process.” The researchers try to find out
the nature of the psychological processes by describing the learner’s knowl-
edge of the target language to relate it to the teaching they have been receiv-
ing. The latter is to perform “its function in guiding the remedial action” to
“correct an unsatisfactory state of affairs for learner or teacher.” Due to the
limited length of the chapter, I will focus on only the top three most frequent
errors in the following sections.

5.1. Verb errors

Most of the errors in my data belong to the verb error type, and most verb
errors were found in the misselection category. In Section 4.3, sentences
(24)-(27) and Section 4.4, sentence (40) demonstrate some verb errors
of misselection. Those examples indicate that students have difficulty in
choosing correct verb-noun collocations. Verbs are often used with specific
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 191
nouns in a way that sound correct to native speakers. Verb-noun colloca-
tions are an essential part of learning a second/foreign language and a cru-
cial element of communicative competence. Thus, teachers must pay more
attention to verb-noun collocations in teaching and explicitly offer the
verb-noun collocational knowledge to students. Collocation knowledge
can assist students in enhancing their communicative competence.
Moreover, many misselection errors are caused by not using resultative
complements. Resultative complements usually appear as part of the verbs. In
(52), the complement 見 jiàn ‘the resulting perception of seeing’ and in (53),
the complement 到 dào ‘a complement indicating the attainment or fulfill-
ment of an action’ should be used in the verbs. In (54), the resultative comple-
ment 對 duì ‘a complement indicates that a choice associated with an action
made correctly’ has to come right after the verb.

(52) *我的朋友家人很高興看[S_v]我。
Wǒ de péngyǒu jiārén hěn gāoxìng kàn [S_v] wǒ.
 我的朋友家人很高興看見我。
Wǒ de péngyǒu jiārén hěn gāoxìng kànjiàn wǒ.
(53) *不過我們很幸運，兩個小時以後他們找[S_v]我們的機票，可以輕鬆地
回家。
Búguò wǒmen hěn xìngyùn, liǎng ge xiǎoshí yǐhòu tāmen zhǎo [S_v] wǒmen
de jīpiào, kěyǐ qīngsōngde huíjiā.
 不過我們很幸運，兩個小時以後他們找到我們的機票，可以輕鬆地
回家。
Búguò wǒmen hěn xìngyùn, liǎng ge xiǎoshí yǐhòu tāmen zhǎodào wǒmen de
jīpiào, kěyǐ qīngsōngde huíjiā.
(54) *然後誰說[S_v]那個字對[R_vs]，他[O_adv]贏了。
Ránhòu shéi shuō [S_v] nà ge zì duì [R_vs], tā [O_adv] yíng le.
 然後誰說對那個字，他就贏了。
Ránhòu shéi shuōduì nà ge zì, tā jiù yíng le.

In Chinese, there is a highly complex system of complements that includes

complements of quantity, complements of degree, resultative complements,
directional complements, and potential complements. Among them, resul-
tative complements are the most subtle ones. Therefore, I suggest that teach-
ers provide effective instruction to help students to distinguish between verbs
and verbs with resultative complements.
192 Shu-Fen Chen
5.2. Auxiliary errors

Verbs that help other verbs to indicate volition, obligation, necessity, pos-
sibility, ability, permission (Teng, 2017: 106) are called auxiliary verbs or
modal verbs 能願動詞 néngyuàn dòngcí. Teng (2017: 106) lists eight kinds
of auxiliaries, as shown in Table 7:

Table 7. The most common auxiliaries and their functions

Volition, intention 要 yào, 想 xiǎng
Willingness 願意 yuànyì, 肯 kěn
要 yào, 得 děi, 應該 yīnggāi, 應當 yīngdāng,
Obligation (social/moral), duty
應 yīng, 該 gāi
Assumption, estimation 應該 yīnggāi
要 yào, 必須 bìxū, 得 děi, 不必 búbì, 不
Necessity, requirement
用 búyòng
Ability 能 néng, 能夠 nénggòu, 會 huì, 可以 kěyǐ
Possibility 會 huì, 能 néng, 可能 kěnéng
Permission 能 néng, 可以 kěyǐ, 行 xíng

Auxiliaries are the second most frequent errors found in my data. There
are 18 cases of omission, nine of redundancy, and nine of misordering.
Among the 18 errors of omission, both 會 huì and 要 yào are omitted for
six times. From Table 7, we know that 要 yào has more than one meaning,
including volition/intention, obligation, and necessity. Likewise, 會 huì can
also indicate ability or possibility. For example, in (55), the missing 要 yào
denotes necessity, while in (56), it means volition/intention. In (57) and (58),
both missing 會 huì indicates possibility.

(55) *可是如果他們知道為什麼[O_aux]每年有這樣的節日，以前國家有什麼
問題就好[O_asp]。
Kěshì rúguǒ tāmen zhīdào wèishéme [O_aux] měi nián yǒu zhèyàng de jiérì,
yǐqián guójiā yǒu shénme wèntí jiù hǎo [O_asp].
可是如果他們知道為什麼要每年有這樣的節日，以前國家有什麼問題
就好了。
Kěshì rúguǒ tāmen zhīdào wèishéme yào měinián yǒu zhèyàng de jiérì, yǐqián
guójiā yǒu shénme wèntí jiù hǎo le.
(56) *我也覺得我[O_aux]多給他們功課，常常跟他們說他們自己要在家溫
習。
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 193
Wǒ yě juéde wǒ [O_aux] duō gěi tāmen gōngkè, chángcháng gēn tāmen shuō
tāmen zìjǐ yào zài jiā wēnxí.
我也覺得我要多給他們功課，常常跟他們說他們自己要在家溫習。
Wǒ yě juéde wǒ yào duō gěi tāmen gōngkè, chángcháng gēn tāmen shuō
tāmén zìjǐ yào zài jiā wēnxí.
(57) *我開始教語言[O_time][O_aux]先問學生她要我教他什麼。
Wǒ kāishǐ jiāo yǔyán [O_time] [O_aux] xiān wèn xuéshēng tā yào wǒ jiāo tā
shénme.
 我開始教語言的時候會先問學生她[他]要我教他什麼。
Wǒ kāishǐ jiāo yǔyán de shíhou huì xiān wèn xuéshēng tā [tā] yào wǒ jiāo tā
shénme.
(58) *歷史跟文化、社會的習慣有關，所以如果不認識國家的歷史，這樣可
以[S_aux]將來[O_aux]有問題。
Lìshǐ gēn wénhuà, shèhuì de xíguàn yǒuguān, suǒyǐ rúguǒ bú rènshì guójiā de
lìshǐ, zhèyàng kěyǐ [S_aux] jiānglái [O_aux] yǒu wèntí.
 歷史跟文化、社會的習慣有關，所以如果不認識國家的歷史，這樣
可能將來會有問題。
Lìshǐ gēn wénhuà, shèhuì de xíguàn yǒuguān, suǒyǐ rúguǒ bú rènshì guójiā de
lìshǐ, zhèyàng kěnéng jiānglái huì yǒu wèntí.

In (58) the student misselects 可以 kěyǐ for 可能 kěnéng. Both of them

can be translated into English as ‘can’. However, in Chinese 可能 kěnéng and
可以 kěyǐ are different. The former indicates possibility while the latter, abil-
ity. In (59) and (60) students also have a problem distinguishing 會 huì and
可以 kěyǐ or 能 néng. The auxiliaries可以 kěyǐ and 能 néng refer to ability,
and they are interchangeable, but there are nuanced differences in implica-
tion (Hu, 2018: 32). Although 會 huì can also denote ability, it “indicates the
mastery or acquisition of that skill or expertise after a period of learning or
practice” (Hu, 2018: 33).

(59) *話說回來，我的英文也算是很好，而且我自己學會了這個語言，所以
我會[S_aux]懂學生的問題，懂得更好。
Huà shuō huílái, wǒ de Yīngwén yě suàn shì hěn hǎo, érqiě wǒ zìjǐ xuéhuì le
zhège yǔyán, suǒyǐ wǒ huì [S_aux] dǒng xuéshēng de wèntí, dǒng de gèng hǎo.
 話說回來，我的英文也算是很好，而且我自己學會了這個語言，所以
我能懂學生的問題，懂得更好。
Huà shuō huílái, wǒ de Yīngwén yě suàn shì hěn hǎo, érqiě wǒ zìjǐ xuéhuì le
zhège yǔyán, suǒyǐ wǒ néng dǒng xuéshēng de wèntí, dǒng de gèng hǎo.
194 Shu-Fen Chen
(60) *我希望我的學生會[S_aux]跟我學很多[O_n]，可是要是他們不努力學
[S_v]，我[O_aux]只好[S_adv]失望。
Wǒ xīwàng wǒ de xuéshēng huì [S_aux] gēn wǒ xué hěn duō [O_n], kěshì yàoshì
tāmen bù nǔlì xué [S_v], wǒ [O_aux] zhǐhǎo [S_adv] shīwàng.
 我希望我的學生可以跟我學很多東西，可是要是他們不努力學習，我
會很失望。
Wǒ xīwàng wǒ de xuéshēng kěyǐ gēn wǒ xué hěn duō dōngxi, kěshì yàoshì
tāmen bù nǔlì xuéxí, wǒ huì hěn shīwàng.

Moreover, the negative forms of these auxiliary verbs can also cause diffi-
culty for students. For example, in (61) 能 néng can indicate both ability and
possibility; however, the negative form of the former is 不能 bù néng ‘not able’
while the negative form of the latter is 不可能 bù kěnéng ‘not possible’. Sentence
(61) indicates ‘impossible’, and thus 不可能 bù kěnéng should be used.

(61) *我認為學生應該自動自發，要不然連最好的老師也不能[S_adv]教他
們。
Wǒ rènwéi xuéshēng yīnggāi zìdòng zìfā, yàobùrán lián zuì hǎo de lǎoshī yě bù
néng [S_adv] jiāo tāmen.
 我認為學生應該自動自發，要不然連最好的老師也不可能教他們。
Wǒ rènwéi xuéshēng yīnggāi zìdòng zìfā, yàobùrán lián zuì hǎo de lǎoshī yě bù
kěnéng jiāo tāmen.

Many auxiliary verbs can have more than one meaning, and some of them
convey similar meanings. Many students have difficulty with properly using
or selecting correct auxiliaries. Thus, teachers need to explain the differences
between various auxiliary verbs and call attention to their negative forms.

5.3. Adverb errors

Adverbs generally are used in front of verbs or adjectives to express time,

scope, repetition, degree or negation, etc. Adverbs are the third most frequent
errors. Among the eleven errors of omission, seven of them are missing 都
dōu. The followings are some examples:

(62) *我知道學生大部分[O_adv]不喜歡歷史，他們覺得歷史很無聊。
Wǒ zhīdào xuéshēng dàbùfèn [O_adv] bù xǐhuān lìshǐ, tāmen juéde lìshǐ hěn
wúliáo.
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 195
 我知道學生大部分都不喜歡歷史，他們覺得歷史很無聊。
Wǒ zhīdào xuéshēng dàbùfèn dōu bù xǐhuān lìshǐ, tāmen juéde lìshǐ hěn
wúliáo.
(63) *一九八六年那裡發生了很可怕的核子事故，全歐洲[O_adv]受到那個事
故的影響。
Yījiǔbāliù nián nàlǐ fāshēngle hěn kěpà de hézǐ shìgù, quán Oūzhōu [O_adv]
shòudào nà ge shìgù de yǐngxiǎng.
 一九八六年那裡發生了很可怕的核子事故，全歐洲都受到那個事故的
影響。
Yījiǔbāliù nián nàlǐ fāshēngle hěn kěpà de hézǐ shìgù, quán Oūzhōu dōu shòudào
nà ge shìgù de yǐngxiǎng.
(64) *我每一課[O_adv]給學生新的字。
Wǒ měi yí kè [O_adv] gěi xuéshēng xīn de zì.
 我每一課都給學生新的字。
Wǒ měi yí kè dōu gěi xuéshēng xīn de zì.

The word 都 dōu ‘both, all’ is an adverb expressing scope. In (62)-(64)

there are words which indicate scope, for example, 大部分 dàbùfèn ‘the
majority, the large part’ in (62), 全歐洲 quán Oūzhōu ‘throughout Europe’
in (63) and 每一課 měi yí kè ‘every lesson’ in (64). The adverb 都 dōu is thus
required in the sentences.
In (65), there are two adverb errors. The first is a misselection, and the
second, misordering. The adverb modifying the verb 怕 pà ‘to fear’ should
be 很 hěn ‘very, quite’, not 太 tài ‘very, too’. Moreover, the scope adverb 只
有 zhǐyǒu ‘only’ has to be placed right before its scope, here the noun 五個人
wǔ ge rén ‘five persons’, not the verb 包括 bāokuò ‘to include’. In (66), the stu-
dent misselects 快要 kuàiyào ‘almost, nearly’ for 快點 kuàidiǎn ‘to do some-
thing more quickly’. These two adverbs are similar with the same morpheme
快 kuài ‘quickly’. In (67), there is also a pair of adverbs with similar meanings,
namely, 總是 zǒngshì ‘always’ and 一直 yìzhí ‘continuously, always, all the
way’ which incur difficulty for students.

(65) *我發現了[R_asp]人們還是太[S_adv]怕去那裡，甚至於我們的旅行團只
有[O_adv]包括導遊五個人而已。
Wǒ fāxiàn le [R_asp] rénmen háishì tài [S_adv] pà qù nàlǐ, shènzhìyú wǒmen de
lǚxíngtuán zhǐyǒu [O_adv] bāokuò dǎoyóu wǔ ge rén éryǐ.
我發現人們還是很怕去那裡，甚至於我們的旅行團包括導遊只有五個
人而已。
196 Shu-Fen Chen
Wǒ fāxiàn rénmen háishì hěn pà qù nàlǐ, shènzhìyú wǒmen de lǚxíngtuán
bāokuò dǎoyóu zhǐyǒu wǔ ge rén éryǐ.
(66) *我希望[O_aux]快要[S_adv]跟你見面。
Wǒ xīwàng [O_aux] kuàiyào [S_adv] gēn nǐ jiànmiàn.
 我希望可以快點跟你見面。
Wǒ xīwàng kěyǐ kuàidiǎn gēn nǐ jiànmiàn.
(67) *我總是[S_adv]對歷史有興趣, 在大學[O_np]這個課我學個不停[S_form],
所以[O_sub][O_aux]當一個歷史老師。
Wǒ zǒngshì [S_adv] duì lìshǐ yǒu xìngqù, zài dàxué [O_np] zhège kè wǒ xué ge
bùtíng [S_form], suǒyǐ [O_sub] [O_aux] dāng yí ge lìshǐ lǎoshī.
我一直對歷史有興趣，在大學期間這個課我不停地學習，所以我想當
一個歷史老師。
Wǒ yìzhí duì lìshǐ yǒu xìngqù, zài dàxué qíjiān zhège kè wǒ bùtíng de xuéxí,
suǒyǐ wǒ xiǎng dāng yí ge lìshǐ lǎoshī.

Finally, it is found that students make errors in negation. There are two
negative words in Chinese, 不 bù and 沒 méi. The former is usually used to
negate actions at the moment or in the future, while the latter, in the past (Li
and Chen, 2008: 108). However, it is just a general rule, and there are many
other minute differences between the two adverbs expressing negation. First,
to negate adjectives describing characteristic or state, for example, 辛苦 xīnkǔ
‘exhausting, arduous, tough’ in (68), 不 bù should be used. Second, to negate
verbs expressing occurrence or completion of an action, like 準備 zhǔnbèi ‘to
prepare, to get ready’ in (69) and 來 lái ‘to come’ in (70), 沒 méi is used.

(68) *這一點都沒[S_adv]辛苦，賺的錢不少。
Zhè yì diǎn dōu [S_adv] xīnkǔ, zhuàn de qián bùshǎo.
 這一點都不辛苦，賺的錢不少。
Zhè yì diǎn dōu bù xīnkǔ, zhuàn de qián bùshǎo.
(69) *如果他們不[S_adv]準備好，如果[R_conj]沒有問題問我，我[O_aux]很
失望。
Rúguǒ tāmen bù [S_adv] zhǔnbèi hǎo, rúguǒ [R_conj] méiyǒu wèntí wèn wǒ, wǒ
[O_aux] hěn shīwàng.
 如果他們沒準備好，沒有問題問我，我會很失望。
Rúguǒ tāmen méi zhǔnbèi hǎo, méiyǒu wèntí wèn wǒ, wǒ huì hěn shīwàng.
(70) *如果萬一我不[S_adv]來，就別擔心。
Rúguǒ wànyī wǒ bù [S_adv] lái, jiù bié dānxīn.
 如果萬一我沒來，就別擔心。
Rúguǒ wànyī wǒ méi lái, jiù bié dānxīn.
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 197
My first pedagogical suggestion for helping students to use adverbs cor-
rectly is to classify adverbs into various categories, including adverbs express-
ing time 才 cái, 就 jiù, 剛 gāng, 常 cháng, adverbs expressing scope 都 dōu,
只 zhǐ, 全 quán, adverbs expressing repetition 又 yòu, 在 zài, 還 hái, 也 yě,
adverbs expressing degree 很 hěn, 太 tài, 更 gèng, 非常 fēicháng, adverbs
expressing tone of speech 卻 què, 倒 dào, 究竟 jiùjìng and adverbs express-
ing negation 不 bù, 沒 méi. Teachers need to explain the use of various kinds
of adverbs and offer practical and interactive exercises. The second pedagogi-
cal suggestion is to help students to distinguish the two negators 不 bù and 沒
méi which often cause great difficulty.

6. Conclusion

Error analysis is criticized for misdiagnosing second language learners’

problems because of their ‘avoidance’ of certain challenging grammatical
usages. Many scholars (Gass and Selinker, 2008; James, 2013; among oth-
ers) have demonstrated that error analysis fails to account for avoidance
strategy. L2 learners might avoid using certain sounds, words, or struc-
tures with which they have a problem, and the researchers would assume
incorrectly that L2 learners have no difficulty using them. Therefore, the
absence of errors does not indicate they have competence. However, one
cannot deny that errors are an essential part of linguistic development and
are thus significant because they represent the discrepancy between the
grammar of the learner’s ‘transitional competence’ and that of the target
language. Error analysis does provide valuable insight into the understand-
ing of the process of second language learning. In line with this belief, this
paper explores the five major types of written errors made by Polish second
language learners of Mandarin and offers some pedagogical suggestions for
the successful learning of Mandarin.
Many teachers simply correct individual errors as they occur, without
examining patterns of errors or finding the causes of making errors. They
might think errors are made due to students’ lack of linguistic competence.
Error analysis would predict the difficulties that a learner would encounter in
second language learning, help teachers offer designed instruction by giving
feedback on the errors made by the learners, and make the students aware of
their own errors. There are still some limitations of this study. I hope to col-
lect more errors made by Polish students in the future and further explore the
causes of the errors.
198 Shu-Fen Chen
References

Adjemian, C. (1976) On the nature of interlanguage systems. Language Learning: A Jour-

nal of Research in Language Studies 26(2): 297-320.
Bielec, D. (1998) Polish: An Essential Grammar. London/New York, NY: Routledge.
Brown, H. D. (2007) Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (5 edn.). New York,
NY: Pearson Education.
Corder, S. P. (1967) The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied
Linguistics in Language Teaching 5(1-4): 161-170.
Corder, S. P. (1971) Idiosyncratic dialects and error analysis. International Review of
Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 9(2): 147-159.
Corder, S. P. (1974) Error analysis. In J. P. B. Allen and S. P. Corder (eds.) Techniques in
Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Corder, S. P. (1981) Error Analysis and Interlanguage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dulay, H., Burt, M., and Krashen, S. (1982) Language Two. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2008) The Study of Second Language Acquisition (2 edn.). Oxford: Oxford Uni-
versity Press.
Fisiak, J. (1981) Contrastive Linguistics and the Language Teacher. Oxford: Oxford Per-
gamon Press.
Fries, C. (1945) Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Language. Ann Arbor, MI:
University of Michigan Press.
Gass, S. M. and Selinker, L. (2008) Second Language Acquisition: An Introductory Course
(3 edn.). London/New York, NY: Routledge.
Hu, B. (2018) Manual for Teaching and Learning Chinese as a Foreign Language. London/
New York, NY: Routledge.
James, C. (2013) Errors in Language Learning and Use: Exploring Error Analysis. London/
New York, NY: Routledge.
Kasper, G. and Kellerman, E. (1997) Communication Strategies: Psycholinguistic and
Sociolinguistic Perspectives. London/New York, NY: Routledge.
Lado, R. (1957) Linguistics Across Cultures: Applied Linguistics for Language  Teachers.
Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Lee, L.-H., Tseng, Y.-H., and Chang, L.-P. (2018) Building a  TOCFL learner corpus
for Chinese grammatical error diagnosis. In N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, C. Cieri,
T. Declerck, S. Goggi, K. Hasida, H. Isahara, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, H. Mazo,
A. Moreno, J. Odijk, S. Piperidis, and T. Tokunaga (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th Inter-
national Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation 2298-2304. Miyazaki:
European Language Resources Association.
Li, D. and Chen, M. (2008) A Practical Chinese Grammar for Foreigners. Beijing: Beijing
Language and Culture University Press.
 Chapter 6: An Analysis of TOCFL Grammatical Errors Made by Polish Students Learning Chinese... 199
Nemser, W. (1971) Approximative systems of foreign language learners. International
Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 9(2): 115-123.
Richards, J. C. and Schmidt, R. W. (2002) Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and
Applied Linguistics (3 edn.). London: Pearson Education.
Selinker, L. (1972) Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language
Teaching 10(1-4): 209-231.
Swan, O. E. (2003) Polish Grammar in a  Nutshell. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pitts-
burgh.
Teng, W.-H. (2017) YUFA! A Practical Guide to Mandarin Chinese Grammar (2 edn.).
London/New York, NY: Routledge.
Teng, S.-H. (ed.) (2019) An A to Z Grammar for Chinese Language Learners. Taipei: Link-
ing Publishing.
Weinreich, U. (1953/1963) Languages in Contact: Findings and Problems. New York, NY:
Linguistics Circle of New York.

Appendix: Abbreviations (Error tags for grammatical error annotations)

Five Major Types of Errors:

O  omission errors
R redundancy, overinclusion errors
S selection, misselection errors
W word order, misordering errors
M mixture errors

Twenty-Four Subtypes:
adj adjective pp prepositional phrase
adv adverb prep preposition
asp aspectual particle pron pronoun
aux auxiliary rel complex noun clause
ba 把 bǎ sentence shi 是 shì sentence
bei 被 bèi sentence shi...de 是…的 shì...de sentence
cl classifier sp sentential particle
conj conjunction time time expression
de structural particle v verb
det demonstrative vp verb phrase
form fixed forms of expression v-sep separable verb
n noun you 有 yǒu sentence