[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-590004-105":59,"doc-detail-590004-en":124},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":117,"head_meta":119,"extra_data":121,"updated_unix":123},105,"en","advances-in-language-and-literary-studies-vol-11-article","Advances in Language and Literary Studies - Vol 11 - Article","","This preliminary study investigates whether an opaque polysemous grammatical unit can represent a learner’s overall grammatical knowledge. Two informant groups are compared: CEFR B1–B2 and A1–A2 learners. Participants translate an English text into Thai as faithfully as possible. B1–B2 learners consistently and correctly handle polysemous “that,” while A1–A2 responses vary, with partial success identifying advanced C2 function but frequent failure overall. Results suggest the construction cannot serve as a reliable predictor, and translation-based checking is recommended pedagogically.",{"@graph":69,"@context":116},[70,84,99],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/advances-in-language-and-literary-studies-vol-11-article/590004/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"author":86,"headline":65,"publisher":89,"fileFormat":92,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":93,"datePublished":93,"encodingFormat":92,"isAccessibleForFree":94,"interactionStatistic":95},"DigitalDocument",{"name":87,"@type":88},"Cart","Person",{"url":74,"name":90,"@type":91},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":96,"interactionType":97,"userInteractionCount":4},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":98},"ViewAction",{"@type":100,"mainEntity":101},"FAQPage",[102,108,112],{"name":103,"@type":104,"acceptedAnswer":105},"What grammatical unit does the study focus on, and why?","Question",{"text":106,"@type":107},"The study focuses on the opaque, polysemous grammatical unit “that” to examine whether it can represent a learner’s overall grammatical knowledge.","Answer",{"name":109,"@type":104,"acceptedAnswer":110},"How are the informant groups selected in the study?",{"text":111,"@type":107},"One group has a certified CEFR proficiency level of B1–B2, and another group is at A1–A2.",{"name":113,"@type":104,"acceptedAnswer":114},"What result does the study report about using the target construction as a predictor?",{"text":115,"@type":107},"The findings indicate that the grammatical construction cannot be used as a key predictor for learners’ syntactic representation, because the correspondence between CEFR level and translated texts is limited.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":118,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":90,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":120,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":122,"site_id":62},590004,1792068587,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":125},{"doc_id":122,"user_id":126,"nickname":87,"user_avatar":127,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":128,"file_id":129,"file_url":130,"file_type":131,"file_size":132,"view_count":4,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":29,"language":133,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":134,"faqs":135,"seo_title":136,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":123,"read_time":137},18829141979164,"https://eur-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","Advances in Language and Literary Studies  \nISSN: 2203-4714  \n[www.alls.aiac.org.au](www.alls.aiac.org.au)  \n| Exploring Potential Correlation Between CEFR Grammar Profile in English and Learners’Overall Grammar Knowledge: An Exploratory Study of“that”\u003Cbr>Kasin Janjaroongpak*\u003Cbr>College of General Education and Languages,Thai–Nichi Institiute of Technology, Thailand Corresponding Author: Kasin Janjaroongpak, E-mail: [kasin@tni.ac.th](kasin@tni.ac.th) |  |\n| --- | --- |\n| ARTICLE INFO | ABSTRACT\u003Cbr>This preliminary study explored the possibility of using an opaque polysemous grammatical unitas a representation for the whole grammatical knowledge of a learner. There were two groups of informants, a group with a certified language proficiency level at CEFR B1-B2 and a learner group at A1-A2 level. The informants were asked to provide a Thai translation of an English text as faithful as possible. The first group consistently and correctly answered the questions by supplying the right translation of polysemous “that” while the answers from the second group were divided in that some could correctly identify C2 function of the word, “that”, though their overall grammatical knowledge was considered to be atA1 but otherA2 students failed to identify C2 function of the word in question. The result indicated that the grammatical construction in question could not be used as a key predictor for learners’ syntactic representation as the lineage relation between CEFR level of the grammatical unit corresponded with the translated texts provided to a limited extent. On pedagogical implications, insights provided suggested that instructors should spend more time explaining challenging advanced grammatical functions as they were points that learners were struggling with and one possible way to check whether they did understand syntactic meaning of a function word was by asking students to supply a translation. |\n| Article history\u003Cbr>Received: January 24, 2020\u003Cbr>Accepted: March 11, 2020\u003Cbr>Published: April 30, 2020\u003Cbr>Volume: 11 Issue: 2\u003Cbr>Advance access: April 2020 |  |\n| Conflicts of interest: None\u003Cbr>Funding: None |  |\n| Key words:\u003Cbr>Syntactic Representation, CEFR,\u003Cbr>Opaqueness,\u003Cbr>Corpus Linguistics, Form-function Mapping, Translation,\u003Cbr>Opacity |  |\n\nINTRODUCTION  \nEnglish grammar has been a central piece of investigation for decades, linguistically and pedagogically. A large number of strenuous efforts were put to devise the best possible objective and operationalized explanations both of the grammar itself as well as classroom-oriented implications. Linguistically speaking, English grammar was considered one of the most complex grammatical system in Indo-Aryan language family because of its hybridity, being influenced by French-a Romance language-coupled with its Germanic heritage. One insightful observation (DeKeyser, 2005)contended that there were three pillars of confusion for second-language learners (L2), which were complexity of form, complexity of meaning, and complexity of the form-meaning relationship. These three concepts resided under an overarching term, an opacity. According to (Ellis, Language teaching research and language pedagogy, 2012), form-function was of paramount importance in pedagogical sense in that L2 were struggling with making sense of or mapping between incomprehensible signal, an L2 lexicon, and abstraction it pertained, which might or might not  \nexist in their L1. One case in point would be tense-aspect in English which was not transparent in Thai.  \nIn addition, not only was vagueness confined to syntactic deficiency but also multiple syntactic meaning of a given grammatical unit. According to (Cambridge University, 2005), a function word might have more than 1 meaning. For instance,“by” could be used to express a means of transport in “by bus” while it could convey an amount of something such as “increase by 10 units”. L2 were left to figure out which was which in the midst of a reading passage or li","cbCaihJ7Hfdyisp8","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaihJ7Hfdyisp8","pdf",271023,"English","# Abstract\n# Introduction\n# Literature Review","[{\"question\":\"What grammatical unit does the study focus on, and why?\",\"answer\":\"The study focuses on the opaque, polysemous grammatical unit “that” to examine whether it can represent a learner’s overall grammatical knowledge.\"},{\"question\":\"How are the informant groups selected in the study?\",\"answer\":\"One group has a certified CEFR proficiency level of B1–B2, and another group is at A1–A2.\"},{\"question\":\"What result does the study report about using the target construction as a predictor?\",\"answer\":\"The findings indicate that the grammatical construction cannot be used as a key predictor for learners’ syntactic representation, because the correspondence between CEFR level and translated texts is limited.\"}]","Advances in Language and Literary Studies - Vol 11 - Article | PDF",15]