透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.236.145.110
  • 學位論文

台灣英語學習環境下學生語用及語法意識之相關性探討

A Study of the Interrelationship of Pragmatic and Grammatical Awareness in Taiwanese EFL Context

指導教授 : 張妙霞
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


由於中介語用學為第二外語習得之領域之一,其在溝通能力(Communicative competence)和語用知識習得上也扮演著日趨重要的角色。近來,在中介語用學的研究中,學者們不斷提及語用知識之習得與意識之提升。然而語用、語法意識之相關性探討卻是長期以來一直被忽略的議題。有鑒於此,本論文的研究目的有二: 一為探討第二外語學習者是否能有效辨別語法和語用在語言使用中之誤用,二為語言程度對於辨別能力之影響。 研究語料蒐集自八十位受試者,共分為四組。第一組為20位英語母語人士,第二組為20位高等英語的台灣英語學習者,第三組為20位英語程度中高等的台灣英語學習者,第四組為20位英語程度中等之台灣英語學習者。研究工具為影帶式問卷調查及訪談,問卷及影帶內容參考Bardovi-Harlig and Dornyei (1998)之研究方法,並重新設計及修正。影帶及手寫問卷皆包含15個情境題,其情境分為三大類,第一類為語用適當卻語法錯誤,第二類為語法正確卻語用不妥,第三類為語用、語法皆無誤用。受試者須觀賞各情境兩次,並判斷主要對話是否正確,若此題為錯誤或不妥之對話,需以量表判斷其嚴重性。影帶問卷填畢後,受試者須接受訪談,分享其作答之心得與個人背景之影響。本研究所蒐集之語料都進行量化及質化之分析。 研究結果顯示,和語法錯誤相較之下,中等程度學習者能夠判斷較多之語用錯誤。除此之外,筆者發現當學習者達到或高於中高等英語程度時,語法能力趨於穩定並且無顯著進步。至於兩種錯誤嚴重度的判斷,研究發現四組學習者認為語用不當比語法錯誤來得嚴重。值得注意的是,研究結果顯示第二外語學習者的語法能力受到英語程度的影響非常顯著,而語用上卻不見差異。再者,訪談資料顯示英語教師於課堂上提供之語用教學對於學生語用能力之增進有顯著的幫助,學生們也能擁有更多機會將其所學帶入真實情境。 本研究於後段提供研究發現的啟示及未來之建議研究方向,雖然仍有些缺點,但是本論文對於語用意識及中介語用學研究領域已有所貢獻及啟發,並為日後台灣的英語教學之路提供有利參考。

並列摘要


The role of interlanguage pragmatics has become increasingly important in communicative competence since it is a subfield of second language acquisition and focusing on how second/foreign language learners acquire pragmatic knowledge. Recent studies have been addressing the issue of pragmatic acquisition and pragmatic awareness. However, the interrelatedness of pragmatic and grammatical awareness has been neglected. Therefore, the present study aimed to bridge the gap and had two purposes. One was to investigate whether the EFL learners could recognize and rate the degree of infelicities in grammatical and pragmatic use of the target language. The other was to know if learners’ levels of proficiency influenced their error recognition abilities and the degree of severity ratings. A total of 80 participants took part in the present study. The participants included four groups of speakers: 20 native speakers of English, 20 High level EFL learners, 20 H-intermediate level learners, and 20 of Intermediate level. The data for the present study were elicited with the combined video-and-questionnaire instrument as well as interviews. The video-and-questionnaire instrument once developed by Bardovi-Harlig and Dornyei (1998) was partially adopted and modified. The 15 items in both the video scenarios and written questionnaire contained three categories: sentences that were pragmatically appropriate but ungrammatical, sentences that were grammatical but pragmatically inappropriate, and sentences that did not contain any errors and inappropriateness. The participants were required to watch each scene in the video twice and judge whether the targeted utterance was appropriate/correct by marking yes or no, then they were asked to judge the severity of the error/appropriateness by a six-part scale. After the subjects finished the task, they were given two interview questions related to their feelings toward the two error types and the influence of personal backgrounds. Therefore, both quantitative and qualitative analyses were conducted for gaining deeper insights. Both the quantitative and qualitative results showed that in error recognition, the Intermediate-level learners recognized more pragmatic errors than they did in grammatical items. Besides, I also found that learners’ grammatical competence became steady and had no significant progress after when they reached the H-intermediate level. As for the error ratings, the findings revealed that both NS and EFL learners considered pragmatic infelicities more serious than grammatical ones. The findings also implied that EFL learners’ levels of proficiency only had significant impact on learners’ grammatical awareness rather than pragmatic awareness. Furthermore, the interview data indicated that as more teachers provided students with more pragmatic knowledge in class, students tended to have better chances to apply it to authentic situations. This study provided implications and suggestions for future research. In spite of some limitations, the present study has shed light on the field of pragmatic awareness and interlanguage pragmatics. It could also serve as a reference in EFL teaching in Taiwan.

參考文獻


Pai, I. F. (2008). Speech Acts in Elementary School English Instruction: Textbook
Hardin, K. J. (2010). Trying to persuade: speech acts in the persuasive discourse of the Spanish intermediate learners. In Kenneth A. McElhanon and Ger Reesink, A mosaic of languages and cultures: studies celebrating the career of Karl J. Franklin, 155-179.
Edmonson, W. J. & House, J. (1991). Do learners talk too much? The waffle phenomenon in interlanguage pragmatics. In R. Phillipson, E. Kellerman, L.
Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

延伸閱讀