1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 文學院
  3. 華語文教學博／碩士學位學程
  4. 學位論文
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/69456
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisor張郇慧zh_TW
dc.contributor.author沈姿均zh_TW
dc.creator沈姿均zh_TW
dc.date2013en_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-09-01T05:48:19Z-
dc.date.available2014-09-01T05:48:19Z-
dc.date.issued2014-09-01T05:48:19Z-
dc.identifierG0097161008en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/69456-
dc.description碩士zh_TW
dc.description國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description華語文教學碩士學位學程zh_TW
dc.description97161008zh_TW
dc.description102zh_TW
dc.description.abstract在交談中在人們的交談中，順暢不間斷的話語是很少存在的。說話者對話語的修復 (repair)才是口語會話中普遍存在的現象。而修復的使用會因為可執行的語用功能有所不同，同時也可能受到學習者的語言程度而有所影響。過去國內外已有許多關於自我修復的研究，但是針對以華語為第二外語學習者的自我修復現象，則尚未見到較為深入的研究。本研究主要為了瞭解華語學習者使用的修復方式 (repair) 以及語用功能 (Pragmatic Function) 和他們的華語程度之間的關係。\n 為達研究目的，本研究採用實地錄製而來的語料分析。 一共使用九份語料， 受試者來自不同的國家學習華語者，年齡層約介於19-30歲之間。依他們的華語程度分成中級、中高級、高級三個等級。 在每個等級中，皆採用三份會話語料，而這三份會話語料之受試者性別分別是男女、女女、男男，總共採用18名受試者的語料，他們彼此的關係都是好朋友或為同班同學。每筆語料約擷取三十分鐘的長度，對話的形式則是面對面的、未經事先計畫的真實、自然的互動。 \n 語料蒐集後，依照不同的修復方式分為：重複、補全、詳述、替代、重啟、重組六種；說話者的語用功能為：保留話輪、補充說明、更正、確認。所有語料經過分類統計過後，結果發現：1.程度較高的學習者修復次數比程度低的多；2.說話者做的詞彙方面的修復頻率高於句法方面的修復；3.說話者使用的修復方式受到語用功能與句法的影響，其偏好順序為：重複、詳述、替代、補全、重啟、重組；4.說話者為保留話輪使用重複多於補全與重啟；為補充說明說話者使用詳述多於替代與重組；為確認使用重複多於替代與補全；5.說話者的程度不影響為保留話輪與確認所做的修復方式，只有在補充說明此功能中的替代這種方式有顯著差異。zh_TW
dc.description.abstractMany linguists have found that perfect utterances do not actually exist all the time during a conversation. In fact, an unclear message is usually sent and need to be Repaired. This study aims to investigate self-Repairs made by Chinese learners, in particular with respect to inter-relationships among repair types, the pragmatic functions of repairs, and the speaker’s language proficiency.\n\nData analyzed in this study are collected from nine dyadic, face-to-face daily conversations, each lasting at least 30 minutes. There are 18 participants from different countries aged between 19 and 30. They are divided into three different groups according to their language level. \n\nIn order to see whether the different interactions between Repair types, pragmatic functions and speaker’s proficiency is significant or not, this study will use ANOVA to analyze those data. The findings are as follows:\n\nFor the pragmatic function of Floor-holding, speakers use Repeat more than Complete and Restart. For the pragmatic function of Clarification, Elaboration is the type most frequently used, and then follows the types Replace and Reorder. For the pragmatic function of Confirmation, Repeat is also the most favored type.\n\nWith the speaker’s language level taken into consideration, this study finds that interlocutors’ proficiency does not influence the choice of Repair types to serve the pragmatic function of Floor-holding and Confirmation. The only significant difference found in the pragmatic function of clarification is found in intermediate level and high level.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents第一章 引言 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------1\n1.1 研究背景 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------1\n1.2 研究動機與目的 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------2\n1.3 研究架構 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 3\n第二章 文獻探討 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------5\n2.1 修復的定義-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5\n2.2 自我修復---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6\n2.3 修復的結構-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------8\n2.4修復的分類-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------10\n2.4.1 Schegloff (1979)-----------------------------------------------------------------------10\n2.4.2 Levelt (1983)---------------------------------------------------------------------------11\n2.4.3 Fox and Jasperson (1995) ------------------------------------------------------------13\n2.4.4 Chui (1996) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------14\n2.4.5 Chang (1998) --------------------------------------------------------------------------15\n2.4.6 Wei (2003) -----------------------------------------------------------------------------16\n2.4.7小結--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------18\n2.5 修復的語用功能相關研究-----------------------------------------------------------21\n2.5.1 相關之語用學理論------------------------------------------------------------------ 21\n2.5.2 Chang (1998)----------------------------------------------------------------------------23\n2.5.3 Wei (2003) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------25\n2.6 各種修復方式所表現之語用功能---------------------------------------------------26\n2.7 其他關於二語學習者的自我修復研究---------------------------------------------30\n2.8 小結 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------34 \n第三章 研究方法 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------35 \n3.1 受試者 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------36\n3.1.1 受試者的來源 -----------------------------------------------------------------------36\n3.1.2 受試者的數量與語言程度----------------------------------------------------------36\n3.2 研究程序---------------------------------------------------------------------------------38\n3.3 修復方式之計算方式------------------------------------------------------------------38\n3.4 修復方式的分類及判定---------------------------------------------------------------40\n3.5 小結---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------47\n第四章 結果分析 --------------------------------------------------------------------------49\n4.1 各組學生之修復結果------------------------------------------------------------------49\n4.1.1 各組學生之修復話輪數多寡-------------------------------------------------------49\n4.1.2 各組學生之不同語言形式修復結果----------------------------------------------54\n4.2 各組學生之修復方式的偏好順序-------------------------------------------------56\n4.2.1 所有學生的修復方式偏好順序----------------------------------------------------57\n4.2.2 中級學生的修復方式偏好順序----------------------------------------------------59\n4.2.3 中高級學生的修復方式偏好順序-------------------------------------------------60\n4.2.4 高級學生的修復方式偏好順序----------------------------------------------------62\n4. 3 修復的語用功能的分類------------------------------------------------------------ 66\n4.3.1 保留話輪-------------------------------------------------------------------------------67\n4.3.2 補充說明-------------------------------------------------------------------------------69\n4.3.3 更正-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------71 \n4.3.4 確認-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------73\n4.4 因應各種語用功能之修復方式的擇用順序---------------------------------------74\n4.4.1 與保留話輪對應的修復方式與擇用順序----------------------------------------88\n4.4.2 與補充說明對應的修復方式與擇用順序----------------------------------------102\n4.4.3 與確認對應的修復方式與擇用順序----------------------------------------------112\n4.4.4 語言形式與互動的選擇-------------------------------------------------------------123\n4.5 說話者語言程度與其選用修復方式之結果---------------------------------------124\n4.5.1 為了保留話輪而使用的修復方式之選擇----------------------------------------124\n4.5.2 為了補充說明而使用的修復方式之選擇----------------------------------------127\n4.5.3 為了確認而使用的修復方式之選擇----------------------------------------------130\n4.6 小結-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------132\n第五章 結論----------------------------------------------------------------------------------135\n5.1 總結 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------135 \n5.2 研究限制和後續研究建議 -----------------------------------------------------------138\n參考文獻 (按姓氏筆畫排序)------------------------------------------------------------140\n\n 表目錄\n\n表二-1：Levelt、Chui、Chang對修復的分類 -------------------------------------- 16\n表二-2：語用功能與相對應的修復方式------------------------------------------------ 24\n表二-3：語用原則與對應的語用功能----------------------------------------------------26\n表三-1：受試者的年齡、性別、語言程度、國籍、與彼此關係-------------------37\n表四-1：各組學習者所產生的話輪總數與修復的話輪數量--------------------------51表四-2：各組學生所產生的話輪總數與修復總數--------------------------------------52表四-3：兩種不同語言形式的修復分佈----------------------------------------------------55\n表四-4：各組學生之兩種不同語言形式的修復分佈------------------------------------55\n表四-5：所有學生的修復次數-------------------------------------------------------------57\n表四-6：中級學生的修復次數統計--------------------------------------------------------- -59\n表四-7：中高級學生的修復次數統計--------------------------------------------------------61\n表四-8：高級學生修復方式分佈--------------------------------------------------------------62\n表四-9：學生語言程度對修復方式的差異--------------------------------------------------64\n表四-10：學生語言程度影響修復方式之使用的成對比較-----------------------------64\n表四-11：三組學生所使用的所有修復方式整體之差異性-----------------------------65\n表四-12：本研究選擇的修復方式與語用功能---------------------------------------------87\n表四-13：各種語用功能跟修復方式分布情形---------------------------------------------88\n表四-14：為保留話輪所使用的修復方式之分佈情況-----------------------------------94\n表四-15：為保留話輪所使用的修復方式之差異------------------------------------------95\n表四-16：說話者為保留話輪所使用的修復方式之成對比較--------------------------95\n表四-17：為補充說明所使用的修復方式之分佈情況----------------------------------104\n表四-18：為補充說明所使用的修復方式之差異----------------------------------------106\n表四-19：說話者為補充說明所使用的修復方式之成對比較------------------------106\n表四-20：為確認所使用的修復方式之分佈情況-----------------------------------------117\n表四-21：為確認所使用的修復方式之差異-----------------------------------------------118\n表四-22：說話者為確認所使用的修復方式之成對比較------------------------------118\n表四-23：各組學生為保留話輪所做的三種修復方式之數量與比例--------------125\n表四-24：各組學生為保留話輪所做的三種修復方式之差異------------------------125\n表四-25：各組學生為補充說明所做的三種修復方式之數量與比例--------------127\n表四-26：各組學生為補充說明所做的三種修復方式之差異------------------------128\n表四-27：各組學生為補充說明所做的替代修復之成對比較------------------------128\n表四-28：各組學生為確認所做的三種修復方式之數量與比例----------------------131\n表四-29：各組學生為確認所做的三種修復方式之差異--------------------------------131\n\n \n\n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n圖目錄\n\n圖四-1：所有學生的修復比例-------------------------------------------------------------58\n圖四-2：中級學生修復方式分佈---------------------------------------------------------60\n圖四-3：中高級學生修復方式分佈------------------------------------------------------61\n圖四-4：高級學生修復方式分佈---------------------------------------------------------62\n圖四-5：各語用功能與其對應之修復方式數量分布圖----------------------------88zh_TW
dc.format.extent2818317 bytes-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.language.isoen_US-
dc.source.urihttp://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0097161008en_US
dc.subject自我修復zh_TW
dc.subject華語學習zh_TW
dc.subject語用功能zh_TW
dc.subject交談分析zh_TW
dc.subjectSelf-Repairsen_US
dc.subjectPragmaticsen_US
dc.subjectConversation Analysisen_US
dc.title華語學習者會話中的自我修復研究zh_TW
dc.titleA Study of Self-Repair in Conversation by Chinese Learnersen_US
dc.typethesisen
dc.relation.reference何兆熊主編 ，《新編語用學概要》，2000，上海外語教育出版社。\n李悅娥，〈話語中的重複結構探析〉《外語與外語教學》，2000 ，年第1期。\n沈蔚，〈會話修正研究在國外〉，《外語學刊》，2005年第四期。\n姚劍鵬，〈對會話自我修補的研究〉，《當代語言學》，2008年，第2期。\n姚劍鵬，〈會話修補的認知研究〉，《外語教學》。2005年第26卷第3期。\n姚劍鵬，〈對會話自我修補的研究〉，《當代語言學》，2008年，第2期。\n孫啟耀、伊英利，〈國外對英語會話中修正現象的研究縱評〉，《西安外國語學院學報》。2001。\n馬文，〈會話照應修正的語用原則〉，《山東外語教學》，2003年第2期\n陸鏡光，張惟，〈會話修補與句法結構的關係〉，《語言學問題》。2001\n黃宣範譯，Li, Charles N.,& Sandra A. Thompson著，《漢語語法》，2005， 台北：文鶴出版有限公司。\n楊惠麗，〈會話修補的模式與手段〉，《山西農業大學學報社會科學版》，2009年，第3期。\n劉虹，《會話結構分析》，2004，北京大學出版社。\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n英文部分\n\nBrown, P. & Levinson, S. C. (1978). Politeness. Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge：Cambridge University Press. \nChang, K. P. (1998). Choosing repair types in conversation: Semantic and pragmatic determinants. M. A. Thesis, National Chengchi University\nChui, K. (1996). Organization of repair in Chinese conversation. Text, 16(3): 343-372. \nEllis, R. (1985). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford University Press. \nFathman, A. K. (1980). Repetition and correction as an indication of speech planning and execution processes among second language learners. In H.W. Dechert & M.Raupach (Eds.), Towards a crosslinguistic assessment of speech production.Frankfurt, Germany: peter D. Lang. 77-85\nFox, B. A. & Jasperson, R. (1995). A syntactic exploration of repair in English conversation. In P. W. Davis (Ed.), Alternative linguistics: Descriptive and theoretical modes. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 77–134.\nFox, B. A. & M. Hayashi, Jasperson, R. (1996). Resources and repair: a cross-linguistic study of syntax and repair. In E. Ochs, E. Schegloff, & S. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar. Cambridge University press. 185-237.\nGass & Madden (1985). Input in second language acquisition. Newbury House Publishers. \nGaskell, W. (1980). Corretion in native speaker-non-native speaker conversations【A】In D.Larsen-Freemen (ed.) Discourse Analysis in Second Language Research.【C】Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.\nGeluykens, R. (1987). Tails as a repair mechanism in English conversation. In J. Nuyts and G. de Schutter (Eds.), Getting One’s Words into Line : On Word Order and Functional Grammer, Dordrecht: Foris. 119-129.\nGeluykens, R. (1994). The Pragmatics of Discourse Anaphora in English. Evidence from conversational repair. M. Berlin：Mouton de Gruyter.\nGrice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan, (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, 3: Speech acts. New York：Academic Press: 41-58.\nGoodwin, C. (1981). Conversation Organization. New York：Academic press.\nHieke, A.E. (1981). Audio-lectal practice and fluency acquisition. Foreign Language Annals. 14 (3) : 189-194. \nHeeman, P. (1994) Detecting and correctting speech repairs. Procedding of the Association of Computation Linguistics: 295-302.\nKasper, G. (1985). Repair in Foreign Language teaching. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, vol. 7, 200-215\nKeating, E. (1994). Correction/repair as a resource for co-construction of group competence. Pragmatics 3, 411-423\nKe, P. H. (2006). Communicative Repair of Young Children. M. A. Thesis, National ChengKung University.\nKormos, J. (1999a). The timing of self-repairs in second language speech production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 145-167.\nKormos, J. (1999). Monitoring and Self-Repair in L2. Language Learning, 49, 303-342\nLeech, G. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.\nLevelt, W. J. M. (1983). Monitoring and self-repair in speech Cognition, 14, 41 -104\nLennon, P. (1984). Retelling a story in English as a second language. In H. W. Dechert ,D. Möhle, & M. Raupach (Eds.), Second language productions. Tübingen, Germany: Günter Narr, 50-68.\nMoerman, M. (1977). The preference for self-correction in a Tai conversational corpus. Language, vol.53, 872-882.\nMilroy, L. (1984). Comprehension and context: successful communication and communicative breakdown In P. Trudgill (ed.) Applied Sociolinguistic. London: Academic Press.\nNooteboom, S. G. (1980). Speaking and unspeaking: Detection and correction of phonological and lexical errors in spontaneous speech. In V. A. Fromkin (Ed.), Errors in linguistic performance. New York: Academic Press. 87-95\nO’Connor, N. (1998). Repair as indicative of interlanguage variation and change. Washington: Georgetown University Press. 251-259.\nOchs, E. (1979). Planned and unplanned discourse. In T. Givon (Ed.), Discourse and syntax, 51-80. New York: Academic Press.\nPostma, A. (2000). Detection of errors during speech production: A review of speech monitoring models. Cognition, 77, 97-131\nPica, T. (1988). Interlanguage adjustments as outcome of NS-NNS negotiated interaction. Language Learning, 38, 45-73.\nPica, T., Holliday, L., Lewis, N., & Morgenthaler, L. (1989). Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in Second Language Acquistion, 11, 63-90.\nRieger, C. L. (2003). Repetitions as self-repair strategies in English and German conversations. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 47-69.\nSchegloff, Jefferson and Sacks, (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in Conversation. Language, 53, 361-382.\nSchegloff, E. A. (1979a). The relevance for self-correction in the orgnazation of repair in conversation. 【C】 Discourse and Syntax New York Academic Press, 332-336\nSchegloff, E. A. (1979). The relevance of repair of syntax-for-conversation. In Syntax and Semantics, T. Givon (ed.), New York: Academic Press, 261-286.\nSchwartz, J. (1980). The negotiation for meaning: repair in conversation between second language learners of English. In D.Larsen-Freemen (ed.) Discourse Analysis in Second Language Research.【C】Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.\nSlobin, D. I. (1975). The more it changes…..on understanding language by watching it move through time. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development University of California, Berkley, 1-30.\nSwain, M. L. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371-391. \nTannen, D. (1987). Repetition in conversation: Toward a poetics of talk. Language, 63 (3), 574-610. \nVan Hest, E. (1996a). Self-repair as Measure of Language proficiency. Paper presented at the 18th Annual Language Testing Colloquium in Tampere, Finland. \nVan Hest, E. ( 1996). Self-repair in L1 and L2 production. Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press. \nVerhoeven, L. T. (1989). Monitoring in children’s second language speech. Second Language Research, 5, 141-155\nWei, S. T. (2003). Socio-pragmatic Analysis of Repair in Mandarin Conversation. M. A. Thesis, National Chengchi University.\nY. Hosoda (2006). Repair and Relevance of Differential Language Expertise in Second Language Conversations. Applied Linguistics, vol 27, 25-50. \nZhang, W. (1998). Repair in Chinese conversation. Phd Thesis, The University of Hong Kong.zh_TW
item.openairetypethesis-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_46ec-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.languageiso639-1en_US-
Appears in Collections:學位論文
Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat
100801.pdf2.75 MBAdobe PDF2View/Open
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.