日籍學習者的華語被字句偏誤研究

前人研究漢語被字句研究與日語被動式成果豐碩，但少有針對日籍學習者的被字句偏誤研究，本研究旨在分析日籍漢語學習者被字句的偏誤現象及其成因，並於最後提出教學建議。本研究先探討漢語被字句及日語被動式的差異，對比漢日被動式。對比分析的結果顯示，在意義方面，漢語被字句所描述的事情對於受事主語來說通常是不太愉快的，日語則不一定意味著被害或不愉快。結構方面，日語有「共感度」的功能，因此比起漢語，日語被動式的施事者有著更多的限制。除了漢日被動式對比以外，筆者參考前人的漢語被字句偏誤論文，輔以對比分析的結果，預測日籍學習者使用被字句時會犯的錯誤。筆者以TOCFL學習者語料庫與HSK動態作文語料庫為材料分析90筆日籍學習者的考試作文，探究日籍學習者的被字句偏誤種類和原因。研究結果顯示，90筆語料中總共有57筆語料受到日語負遷移的影響，最主要的原因是源自漢日動詞差異，其次則是漢語被字句和日語被動式語義的不同，研究結果符合預測。第三個偏誤成因是「共感度」，日籍學習者很容易把視角放在人類，難以想到以無生命物體為主語的句子，進而導致錯誤。此外，這次研究中也發現有「缺少動後補語」的錯誤和心理動詞的偏誤。除了母語干擾以外，一些日籍學習者混淆「讓」跟「被」的用法，或是忘了應該使用被字句。文末根據偏誤分析結果與現行教材的檢視，並綜合本研究結果，試編一份以日籍中高級漢語學習者為目標的被字句教材。

關鍵字

被字句；偏誤分析；漢語；日語

並列摘要

There have been many studies on the Chinese “Bei” construction and Japanese passive voice. However, little research has been undertaken on the acquisition of the Chinese “Bei” construction by Japanese learners. This study aims to analyze errors of L1 Japanese learners’ Chinese “Bei” construction errors and propose how to teach this construction. At first, this study analyzes the convergence and divergence between the “Bei” construction and Japanese passive voice. Comparative analyses show that, semantically, the “Bei” construction usually conveys negative connotation, but Japanese passive voice doesn’t always have negative meaning. Syntactically, Japanese has a phenomenon called “Linguistic empathy”, whereby sentences can provide information about the speaker’s point of view, from which they describe a state of affairs. Consequently, compared with Chinese, the agent in Japanese passive voice has more restrictions. Apart from a comparison of the passive voice between Chinese and Japanese, we refer to TOCFL learner corpus and HSK Dynamic Composition Corpus to analyze 90 compositions of L1 Japanese learners. Our result shows that 57 out of 90 compositions were affected by Japanese negative transfer. The majority of errors stems from the difference of verbs between Chinese and Japanese. The second cause of error is that “Bei” construction usually conveys negative connotation while it is not the case in Japanese passive voice. The third cause of error is “Empathy” phenomenon. Japanese learners tend to put human beings in the subject position while there is no such restriction in Mandarin. This syntactic difference also leads to Japanese learners’ errors in the “Bei” construction. Based on the results of the present study, pedagogical implications for Japanese learners and suggestions for future studies were provided at the end of the thesis.