Misuse of “Besides” in Spoken English: Error Patterns in Chinese University Students’ Group Discussions

Hao Wu


Abstract


Conjunctions are essential for organizing discourse and signaling relationships between ideas, yet second language learners often struggle to use them accurately in spoken English. Among these, “besides” is particularly challenging due to its nuanced semantic and pragmatic functions. This qualitative study adopts Conversation Analysis (CA) to investigate the use of “besides” by Chinese university students in advanced English group discussions. Drawing on 15.9 hours of recorded interactional data from five Chinese undergraduates, the study identifies non-target-like uses of “besides” in naturally occurring talk. Five error types are found: misuse as a simple listing connector, misuse as an afterthought marker, overuse to connect aligned ideas, overuse as a redundant connector, and underuse as a clarifying connector. These errors stem from the complexity of “besides”, negative transfer from native-language conjunctions, instructional emphasis on surface-level coherence, and limited systematic training in spoken and written academic English. The study highlights the importance of understanding connectives in both semantic and pragmatic contexts and suggests pedagogical strategies to improve learners’ accurate and contextually appropriate use of “besides” in spoken English.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Appel, P., & Szeib, A. (2018). Linking adverbials in L2 English academic writing: L1-related differences. System, 78, 115–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.08.008

Chiang, S. (2003). The importance of cohesive conditions to perceptions of writing quality at the early stages of foreign language learning. System, 31(4), 471–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2003.02.002

Crewe, W. J. (1990). The illogic of logical connectives. ELT Journal, 44(4), 316–325. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/44.4.316

Crosson, A. C., & Lesaux, N. K. (2013). Does knowledge of connectives play a unique role in the reading comprehension of English learners and English-only students? Journal of Research in Reading, 36(3), 241–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2011.01501.x

Fraser, C., Pasquarella, A., Geva, E., Gottardo, A., & Biemiller, A. (2021). English language learners’ comprehension of logical relationships in expository texts: Evidence for the confluence of general vocabulary and text-connecting functions. Language Learning, 71(3), 872–906. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12453

Gao, N., Zhou, P., & Crain, S. (2025). Conjunction is polarity sensitive in Mandarin. Language Acquisition, 32(3), 245–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2025.2479511

Geva, E. (1992). The role of conjunctions in L2 text comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 26(4), 731–747. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586871

Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London, UK: Longman.

Hinkel, E. (2001). Matters of cohesion in L2 academic texts. Applied Language Learning, 12(2), 111–132.

Larsen-Walker, M. (2017). Can data-driven learning address L2 writers’ habitual errors with English linking adverbials? System, 69, 26–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.08.005

Leedham, M., & Cai, G. (2013). “Besides” … on the other hand: Using a corpus approach to explore the influence of teaching materials on Chinese students’ use of linking adverbials. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(4), 374–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2013.07.002

Lei, L. (2012). Linking adverbials in academic writing on applied linguistics by Chinese doctoral students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(3), 267–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2012.05.003

Lindström, E., & Lubinska, D. (2022). Target-like and non-target-like conjunctive relations in L2 Swedish beginner writing. Linguistics and Education, 71, Article 101073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2022.101073

Michel, M. C. (2013). The use of conjunctions in cognitively simple versus complex oral L2 tasks. The Modern Language Journal, 97(1), 178–195. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.01431.x

Millis, K. K., & Just, M. A. (1994). The influence of connectives on sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 33(1), 128–147. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1994.1007

Perrez, J. (2004). The use of connectives by French learners of Dutch: A first inquiry. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, 71(1), 81–92.

Spooren, W., & Sanders, T. (2008). The acquisition order of coherence relations: On cognitive complexity in discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 40(12), 2003–2026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.04.021

Torres Cacoullos, R., & LaCasse, D. (2025). Bilingual clause combining: A variable equivalence hypothesis for conjunction choice. International Journal of Bilingualism, 29(5), 1202–1218. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069241265587

Xu, Z., & Steinbach, M. (2024). Temporality and causality in asymmetric conjunction. Journal of Pragmatics, 233, 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2024.09.006

Yang, W., & Sun, Y. (2012). The use of cohesive devices in argumentative writing by Chinese EFL learners at different proficiency levels. Linguistics and Education, 23(1), 31–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2011.09.004

Yeung, L. (2009). Use and misuse of “besides”: A corpus study comparing native speakers’ and learners’ English. System, 37(2), 330–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.11.007




DOI: https://doi.org/10.30743/jol.v8i1.12897

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.