漢泰動補結構之對比分析及華語教學建議

本研究旨在探討漢語及泰語補語結構上的異同。研究目標有三：一、透過對比分析探討漢語及泰語補語直述句的異同；二、利用自製量化評分表格提供補語教學排序之建議；三、提供針對泰籍學習者補語教學課程之建議。研究中，筆者採用對比分析歸納漢語及泰語的跨語言差距，再藉由教學語法排序評分表提出針對泰籍學習者學習補語的教學排序建議，最後於文末提供教案及補充教材範例供華語教師借鑒。筆者盼透過本文提高泰國地區對華語教學的重視程度，亦希望讓在泰任教的教師更了解漢語及泰語語法上的差異，以利減低教師教學困難及學習者的學習困擾。研究結果發現，趨向補語、介詞短語補語及數量補語皆屬複雜度較低且跨語言差距比較小的補語結構。換言之，泰語中可以找到較多與這三種結構相對應的句式結構。反之，結果補語、可能補語及程度補語則屬於複雜度較高且跨語言差距較大的補語結構。這樣的現象起因於漢語的「得」字結構、「過」字用法及形容詞表達都與泰語有所不同。再者，漢語及泰語不帶賓語的補語結構雖相同，皆為「S＋V＋C」，但帶賓語的補語結構則會有語序上的不同。漢語補語句式中的補語與謂語較為緊密，其結構為「S＋V＋C＋O」。反觀，泰語狀語結構中的狀語與賓語相對緊密，其結構為「S＋V＋O＋C」。針對結構複雜度、跨語言差距及偏誤率三個面向來考量，筆者認為泰籍學習者補語教學的先後順序應為：趨向補語>介詞短語補語>數量補語>結果補語>可能補語>程度補語。教師在課堂中可透過不同的情境讓學習者組織補語句式。再者，利用「談話法」幫助學習者歸納補語的句法結構及其規則，並且利用遊戲教學法的方式提供學習者更多使用補語的練習機會，以達自動化的成效。教師還應該在課堂及課餘時間製造不同機會讓學習者複習補語句型，以利減少學習者在生活中使用補語的偏誤。

關鍵字

補語；漢語語法；泰語語法；對比分析；教學排序；二語教學

並列摘要

The aim of the study is to analyze the syntactic differences between Mandarin Chinese and Thai and to provide teaching suggestions on complements. The three objectives of the study are: 1) to provide an understanding of complement structures by comparing the affirmative sentence structure in Mandarin Chinese and Thai; 2) to analyze teaching sequence for complements based on the designed rubric; 3) to offer a lesson plan and a self-developed teaching material as an example for teaching complements to the students learning Mandarin with Thai as mother tongue. According to the result of the contrastive analysis, directional complement (DC), prepositional phrase complement (PPC) and quantitative complement (QC) are considered as a less complex structure and they have no significant differences across two languages. On the contrary, resultative complement (RC), potential complement (PC) and complement of degree (CD) are considered as a complex structures. They also have significant differences across two languages. Thai learners are not aware of the connections between verbs and complements in Mandarin Chinese due to the lack of VR-compounds and VR-complements, de-construction and the lexical representations in Thai language. With the considerations of the structure complexity, the cross-linguistic dimensions and the error rate in language production, I suggest that the teaching sequence for the complements to the Thai learners should be: DC > PPC > QC > RC > PC > CD. By following situated learning theory and providing discussion session, gaming sessions and self-developed material, the instructors’ difficulty should be reduced and that native students of Thai would have a better understanding on the connections between verbs and complements while learning Mandarin Chinese. All these can help Thai learners to reduce errors and would have a better output performance.