透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.129.23.30
  • 學位論文

學術英文片語動詞使用分析

An analysis of the use of phrasal verbs in English academic writing

指導教授 : 陳浩然
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


片語動詞(phrasal verbs)在英文中,被視為是較不正式的語言結構,因此學術英文寫作教材中常建議寫作者避免使用片語動詞,然而近來有學者認為,大部分的片語動詞在語域上(register)皆屬中性,僅有少數片語動詞較不正式,因而主張在英文學術論文中,不需刻意避免使用片語動詞。針對片語動詞於學術英語寫作中的使用情形,在過去少有學者從事相關實證研究,因而引發研究者對於這項議題進行進一步的探討。 本研究探討母語人士與非母語人士在學術英文寫作中片語動詞的使用情形。研究主要目的為:(1)探討母語人士是否在學術英文寫作中使用片語動詞;(2)分析母語人士是否偏好在學術英文寫作中使用單字動詞(one-word verbs);(3)比較母語人士與非母語人士在片語動詞使用上的差異。 研究者蒐集二百篇由母語人士撰寫且發表於應用語言學期刊的文章,以及一百篇由台灣應用語言學領域碩士生所撰寫的論文,運用這些語料建立約一百三十萬字的母語人士學術英文語料庫與約一百八十萬字的非母語人士語料庫。透過語料庫的分析,找出學術英文寫作中常用的片語動詞,並且從語料中分析母語人士與非母語人士在片語動詞使用上的差異。 研究結果顯示,母語人士不常於學術英文寫作中使用片語動詞,在每一百萬字中,片語動詞僅出現約一千一百次,其頻率與其他母語人士的語料庫相比,低了四倍多。而本研究中的非母語人士亦不常於學術英文中使用片語動詞,在每百萬字中,出現約一千六百次,其頻率約為其他語料庫片語動詞頻率的三分之一。比較本研究中兩個語料庫的片語動詞出現頻率,發現其頻率在統計上呈現顯著性的差異,亦即應用語言學領域的台灣碩士生比母語人士更常使用片語動詞。 本研究也整理出母語人士與非母語人士語料庫中,常見的二十五個片語動詞,研究者發現這些片語動詞在母語人士語料庫中,佔了所有片語動詞出現頻率的七成,在非母語人士的語料庫中,這些動詞更佔了所有片語動詞出現頻率的八成,顯示只有少數的片語動詞經常運用於學術論文中。在片語動詞及同義單字動詞的使用頻率方面,母語人士與非母語人士皆偏好於學術英文寫作中使用單字動詞。然而與母語人士相較,非母語人士使用片語動詞的頻率較高。 除使用頻率分析外,本研究進一步透過語料分析,找出母語人士與非母語人士在片語動詞使用上的差異。在四十九個片語動詞中,經由統計結果發現非母語人士過度使用了十三個動詞,其可能原因為:(1) 未注意某些動詞在語域方面,比較常出現於口說語言中;(2) 未注意某些動詞在搭配詞(collocation)方面的限制;(3) 因母語的影響而誤用某些動詞。研究中也發現非母語人士較少使用四個母語人士常使用的片語動詞,其可能原因為:(1)非母語人士較少於語言學習資料中看到這些動詞;(2) 非母語人士為減低犯錯機會,避免使用這些動詞。 本研究結果顯示,母語人士與非母語人士於片語動詞的使用上,在使用頻率以及在用法上皆有差異,研究者建議於學術英語教學者能建立常用片語動詞表,並且提供學生真實語料,增進台灣學生對片語動詞的認識。

並列摘要


Phrasal verbs are usually considered as an informal feature in English. Textbook writers of English academic writing often suggest learners to avoid using phrasal verbs and to replace them with one-word verbs. Recently some researchers hold different views on the issue. They suggest that most phrasal verbs are neutral in tone and the use of the structure should not be discouraged. Such inconsistent opinions arouse the researcher’s interest to empirically examine the issue. The study set out to investigate the use of phrasal verbs by native speakers and by non-native speakers in English academic writing in the field of applied linguistics. The purposes of the study are: (1) to determine whether native speakers frequently used phrasal verbs in academic writing, (2) to explore whether native speakers preferred to use one-word verbs rather than synonymous phrasal verbs, and (3) to examine whether Taiwanese learners used phrasal verbs in ways different from native speakers.   The researcher built two corpora by collecting 200 research articles written by native speakers and 100 theses by Taiwanese graduate students majoring in applied linguistics or English language teaching. After the compilation of the corpora, the researchers further conducted quantitative analysis to examine the use of phrasal verbs in the two corpora.   The analysis yielded several interesting findings. First, phrasal verbs were not frequently used in the two corpora of the study. The native speakers and the non-native speakers used the structure around 1100 and 1600 times per million words respectively. The frequencies were all lower than those of the other written corpora. Second, although both native speakers and non-native speakers did not use the structure frequently, the non-native speakers used it significantly more than native speakers. Third, both native speaker and non-native speakers only used a few phrasal verbs in academic writing. The 25 most frequent phrasal verbs in the NS corpus accounted for 70% of the occurrence of all phrasal verbs in the corpus. In the NNS corpus, the 25 most frequent phrasal verbs even accounted for 80% of the occurrence of all phrasal verbs. Third, both native speakers and non-native speakers preferred to use one-word verbs rather than their two-word counterparts. However, the non-native speakers used phrasal verbs more than the native speakers.   The comparison of the use of phrasal verbs in the two corpora showed that out of 49 phrasal verbs occurring more than five times in either the NS or the NNS corpus, non-native speakers overused 13 and underused four phrasal verbs. The overuse suggested that the non-native speakers were not aware of the register and the collocational restrictions of some phrasal verbs. In addition, the overuse could also be attributed to the influence of the speakers’ first language. The underuse, on the other hand, may result from the insufficient language input or the avoidance strategy adopted by the learners to avoid making mistakes. Based on the findings in the present study, the researcher proposed some pedagogical implications and offered some possible directions for future studies.

參考文獻


Johns, T. (1991). Should you be persuaded: Two samples of data-driven learning materials. In T. Johns, & P. King (Eds.), Classrooom concordancing (pp. 1–16). Birmingham: ELR University of Birmingham.
Granger, S. (1998). The computer learner corpus: a versatile new source of data for SLA research. In S. Granger (Ed.), Learner English on computer (pp. 3–18). New York; London: Longman.
Granger, S. & Rayson, P. (1998). Automatic lexical profiling of learner texts. In S. Granger (Ed.), Learner English on computer (pp.119–131). New York; London: Longman.
Ädel, A. (2008). Metadiscourse across three Englishes: American, British, and advanced-learner English. In U. Connor, E. Nagelhout & W. Rozycki (Eds.), Contrastive rhetoric: reaching to intercultural rhetoric (pp. 45–62). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Armstrong, K. (2004). Sexing up the dossier: A semantic analysis of phrasal verbs for language teachers. Language Awareness, 13 (4), 213–224.

延伸閱讀