A Comparative Study Of Chinese Resultative Complement And Its Thai Equivalents

This research aims to ifnd the effective reference for the teaching of Chineseresultative complement to Thai learners. For this purpose, there are three stepsemployed in this study:1) finding the resultative component in Thai grammar system;2) compairng the resultative component between Chinese and Thai in threeperspectives—property，structure, and collocation;3) suggesting the solution for thecurrent usage problem of Chinese resultative complement to Thai learners. The studyhas been divided into three major tasks. Task1: reviewing and analyzing academicmaterials about Thai grammar such as monographs, theses, and articles (Chapter4).Task2: comparing the sentence patterns in Chinese and Thai based on Chang (2001)’sifve types of resultative verb construction (RVC)(Chapter5), and comparing the wordcollocation in Chinese and Thai in the scope of resultative verbs and adjectives in ZhouFang (2006)’s research. The compared results are shown in three ways—similar type,near-similar type, and different type. Task3: concluding all the ifndings of this study toanalyze the usage error of resultative complement existing today, and suggesting thesolution in the teaching of Chinese resultative complement to Thai learners (Chapter7).There are three ifndings of this study, which are in the property, structure, andcollocation of Chinese resultative complement and its Thai equivalents. These findingsare:1)The Thai equivalents of Chinese resultative complement are nonmarker formof serial verb construction and marker form of compound sentence;2)The Chinese resultative complement “"can use the radical construction, aconstruction based on event structure and was proposed by this thesis, as the Thaiequivalent sentence of all Chinese resultative complement sentences;3)As the scope of28high-rfequency complement words that were proposed inZhou Fang (2006)’s research, we can categorize them into2-level words: first-levelword (9words) and second-level word (19words). This study compared the collocation of these28complement words between Chinese and Thai, and found that there are6complement words that represent the same meaning in Chinese and Thai (similar type),and14complement words placed in near-similar type. This type of Chinesecomplement word cannot use only one Thai word to correspond to all their meanings,but there is a specific pattern to correspond to the complement words. There are4subcategories of the different type of collocation in Chinese and Thai:1) there is not theexactly Thai corresponding word to Chinese complement word;2) there is the "word-type collocati"on, which uses one Thai word (word-type translation) and two-wordsclause (construction-type translation) to correspond;3) there are situations in which theverb-complement collocation did not exist in the Thai collocation; and4) there is alsoonly one Thai word corresponding to many Chinese complement words.The highest possibility of the usage problem that can occur to Thai learners is"one-to-many" corresponding problem. Thai learners may find dififculty in a selectionwhere a Thai word can be the most proper one for many Chinese words. Although itmay be easy to understand in a perceptive way, Thai learners might avoid using theproper Chinese word in the context but rely on the one Chinese word to express all the’contexts (overgeneralized)“. The many-to-，onecorresponding problem is only acomprehension problem, but is not so big in productive skill.All the results rfom in this study can be summarized and used in the suggestionsof teaching Chinese resultative complement to Thai learners. This study proposes to use"th"e radical structure model of the event as a tool for teaching. Three steps in thisteaching are:1) establishing the radical structure model of the event;2) omitting thereduplication component;3) making up the Chinese sentence.