In this term paper I will investigate whether the implementation of reflexive pronouns through seventh grade English-schoolbooks is sufficient to let students understand and eventually use this phenomenon correctly. In the first part of this paper, I will begin with introducing the phenomenon. Here, I will give a short overview of how reflexive pronouns developed. Furthermore, I will present two different acknowledged theories (Chomsky and Reinhart & Reuland) and their conditions on reflexive pronouns. I will then show the two different usages of this phenomenon and will give examples of cases which are somewhat different from the common way of using it. In the second part, I will present the explanations and rules as they are given in the three most commonly used schoolbooks here in Hesse to show how reflexive pronouns are implemented. In part three, I will investigate in how far these rules are sufficient to explain the examples given in those schoolbooks respectively. I will furthermore analyze examples given in Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein” and Oscar Wilde’s “The Canterville Ghost”, which are suggested for the use in seventh grade. Here, I will rather put my focus on somewhat more complex examples in order to find out whether those short rules apply for them as well. I will then conclude, whether my assumption that the explanations in these schoolbooks are not sufficient can be verified.
Introduction
1. The Phenomenon
1.1 The two different uses of reflexive pronouns
1.2 Different types/characteristics of reflexive pronouns
2. Implementation of reflexive pronouns in 7th grade schoolbooks (Gymnasium)
2.1 Cornelsen (p.131 et seqq.)
2.2 Diesterweg (p.144)
2.3 Klett (p. 105)
3. Empirical Investigation
3.1 Cornelsen
3.2 Diesterweg
3.3 Klett
3.4 Further Contexts
4. Conclusion
Objectives and Research Focus
This paper investigates the effectiveness of current seventh-grade English schoolbooks in teaching students how to properly understand and apply reflexive pronouns. The research analyzes whether the simplified rules presented in these textbooks are sufficient for students to navigate complex grammatical contexts, or if they lack the depth necessary for full linguistic competence.
- Analysis of the definition and theoretical background of reflexive pronouns.
- Evaluation of how reflexive pronouns are introduced in three common schoolbooks (Cornelsen, Diesterweg, Klett).
- Empirical testing of provided grammar rules against real-world usage examples.
- Investigation of advanced sentence structures and complex cases of reflexive pronouns.
- Assessment of the necessity for more comprehensive teaching materials beyond basic schoolbooks.
Excerpt from the Book
1. The Phenomenon
The term reflexive pronoun is derived from Latin reflexus and pronomen, and it is used for describing a pronoun which refers to the subject of a sentence, clause, or verbal phrase in which it stands; specifically: a personal pronoun compounded with –self (cf. Meriam Webster Online 2009).
Unlike in Modern English, Old English had no special reflexive forms, instead general pronouns were used reflexively. The reason lies in the development of the English language or rather in the transformation from a synthetic into an analytic language. Old English had only few auxiliaries but morphological case and agreement to express grammatical relations. Through the course of the history, they gradually disappeared; and therefore auxiliaries, determiners, (reflexive) pronouns and prepositions in fixed positions were used instead (cf. van Gelderen 2000: 1 et seq.).
Reflexive pronouns are an anaphoric phenomenon, since they refer to the antecedents used in the sentence. “The term ‘anaphor’ […] can be used for reference to a relation between two linguistic elements, in which the interpretation of one (called anaphor) is in some way determined by the interpretation of the other (called antecedent)” (Huang 2006: 231). Looking at this phenomenon from a syntactic perspective, there are certain principles which need to be followed in order to avoid ungrammatical sentences. One theory which formulates such principles or conditions is Avram Noam Chomsky’s binding theory.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Outlines the research problem regarding the limited coverage of reflexive pronouns in schoolbooks and defines the paper's scope.
1. The Phenomenon: Explores the linguistic definition, historical development, and syntactic binding theory regarding reflexive pronouns.
2. Implementation of reflexive pronouns in 7th grade schoolbooks (Gymnasium): Compares the specific grammatical explanations provided by Cornelsen, Diesterweg, and Klett textbooks.
3. Empirical Investigation: Tests the adequacy of the textbook rules by applying them to various examples from schoolbooks and literary texts.
4. Conclusion: Summarizes the findings, confirming that current textbook explanations are insufficient for a deeper understanding of the phenomenon.
Keywords
Reflexive pronouns, Schoolbooks, Anaphora, Binding theory, Grammar, English language learning, Seventh grade, Syntax, Antecedent, Linguistic phenomenon, Emphatic use, Complement use, Gymnasiuim, Language teaching, Morphology.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this paper?
The paper examines whether the way reflexive pronouns are taught in seventh-grade schoolbooks is sufficient for students to achieve a correct and nuanced understanding of their usage.
Which schoolbooks are analyzed in the study?
The study evaluates the three most commonly used English textbooks for seventh-grade students at Gymnasium level: Cornelsen, Diesterweg, and Klett.
What is the main research question?
The research asks if the limited and often simplified explanations of reflexive pronouns in schoolbooks provide enough information for students to understand and use this anaphoric phenomenon correctly in diverse contexts.
What methodology does the author use?
The author employs a comparative analysis of grammar rules provided in the textbooks, followed by an empirical investigation testing these rules against specific examples from both the textbooks and literature.
What is the main finding regarding the grammar explanations in the books?
The author concludes that while the explanations are helpful for basic understanding, they are insufficient for complex usage as they ignore advanced characteristics and theoretical foundations like the concept of anaphora.
How is the term "reflexive pronoun" defined in this context?
It is defined as a pronoun that refers back to the subject of a sentence, clause, or verbal phrase, typically formed by compounding a personal pronoun with -self.
Does the paper consider the use of literary examples?
Yes, the paper analyzes examples from Mary Shelley’s "Frankenstein" and Oscar Wilde’s "The Canterville Ghost" to see if schoolbook rules apply to more complex literary usage.
What is meant by the "emphatic" versus "complement" use of reflexives?
Emphatic use serves to highlight or stress a noun or pronoun, whereas complement use occurs when the reflexive functions as an object linked to an antecedent subject within the sentence structure.
Why is the lack of the term "anaphora" considered a significant issue?
The author argues that without mentioning the anaphoric nature of these pronouns, students fail to understand the underlying linguistic relationship between the pronoun and its antecedent.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Sarah McCarty (Autor:in), 2009, Reflexive Pronouns in Schoolbooks, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/162706
