簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表
研究生： 林明芳
Ming-Fang Lin
論文名稱： 中介語用學研究：以台灣英語學習者之糾正語為例
Interlanguage Pragmatics: The Speech Act of Correction by Chinese EFL Learners in Taiwan
指導教授： 張妙霞
Chang, Miao-Hsia
學位類別： 碩士
Master
系所名稱： 英語學系
Department of English
論文出版年： 2008
畢業學年度： 96
語文別： 英文
論文頁數： 163
中文關鍵詞： 中介語用學 、語言行為 、糾正語 、中英文比較 、跨文化 、語用轉移 、策略使用 、言談情境填充問卷 、尺度量表
英文關鍵詞： interlanguage pragmatics, speech act, correction, Mandarin Chinese - American English comparison, cross-cultural, pragmatic transfer, strategy use, Discourse Completion Task, Scaled Response Questionnaire
論文種類： 學術論文
相關次數： 點閱：227  下載：19 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報

    • 中介語用學在外語教學研究中是近來日趨重要的一個領域。在中介語用學研究中，語言行為(speech acts)常為廣泛討論。然而，糾正語(correction)則是一個長期以來一直被忽略但卻極為重要的語言行為。有鑒於此，本論文的研究目的主要有二: 一為比較中文和美語的糾正語之異同，二為探討台灣英語學習者如何表達糾正語。
    研究語料蒐集自四組受試者，第一組為30位中文母語人士，第二組為30位英語程度較低的台灣英語學習者，第三組為30位英語程度較高的台灣英語學習者，第四組為30位美語母語人士。研究工具為問卷調查，包含三個主要的部份：尺度量表(Scaled Response Questionnaire)、言談情境填充問卷(Discourse Completion Task)及不糾正的理由(reasons of opting out)。問卷中的情境包含12個糾正語情境題及3個拒絕語情境題，共15個情境題。全部的情境題皆依社會地位高低(social status)與社會距離遠近(social distance)此兩個情境變數(contextual factor)來設計。所蒐集之語料都進行量化與質化之研究分析。
    研究結果顯示，中文和美語的糾正語表達方式有相同之處亦有跨文化的差異之處。此外，質化與量化的分析結果顯示，台灣英語學習者在糾正語中表現出趨近於外語(approximation to L2)、語用轉移(pragmatic transfer)及中介語發展(interlanguage development)。值得注意的是，學生的語用轉移與中介語發展常常突顯出學生不正確使用外語的情形，這常導致語用失敗(pragmatic failure)。為了讓學生能夠使用更道地的美語，近一步的語用教學是有其必要性。本研究最後點出研究發現的啟示及未來的研究方向。雖然本研究仍存有一些缺點，但本研究已使得跨文化及中介語用學研究領域更往前邁進一大步，也對英語教學領域有所貢獻及啟發。

    Interlanguage pragmatics (ILP) has become an increasingly important field in foreign language teaching and learning. Among ILP studies, speech acts are the most widely discussed areas for they can be easily observed in daily life. However, the speech act of correction has been long ignored by previous studies. Thus, the present study aimed to bridge this gap and had two major purposes. One was to examine the cross-cultural differences between Mandarin Chinese and American English correction. The other was to investigate how Chinese EFL learners’ perceived and performed the speech act of correction.
    Our data were recruited from four participant groups: 30 native speakers of Mandarin Chinese in Taiwan (NSC), 30 Chinese EFL learners of lower proficiency level in Taiwan (EFL-L), 30 Chinese EFL learners of higher proficiency level in Taiwan (EFL-H), 30 native speakers of American English in the United States (NSE). The research instrument was a questionnaire consisting of three major parts: Scaled Response Questionnaire (SRQ), Discourse Completion Task (DCT), and reasons of opting out. The questionnaire included 12 scenarios of correction and 3 scenarios of refusals. All the scenarios varied according to two contextual factors, social status and social distance. Elicited data were coded on the basis of a data-driven coding scheme, consisting of 13 head act strategies, softening devices, and reasons of opting out. Twenty percent of the data were randomly selected to be coded by a second researcher, and the interrater reliability was 87 %. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses were conducted to examine participants’ correction.
    The results showed that there were similarities and differences between Chinese and Americans’ correction. Furthermore, the quantitative and qualitative analyses revealed that our EFL learners’ correction exhibited pragmatic transfer of L1, approximation to L2, and their interlanguage development. Learners’ L1 transfer and interlanguage development demonstrated their aberrant use of L2, which would frequently result in pragmatic failure and communication breakdown. In order to help learners use L2 in a more native way, further instructions are necessary. This study ended up with implications and suggestions for future studies. Despite some limitations, this study has advanced the field of cross-cultural and interlanguage pragmatics, and has shed light on English teaching.

    LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………………………………………… viii LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………………………………………… x CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background and Motivation…………………………………………………………………… 1 1.2 Purpose of the Study………………………………………………………………………………… 2 1.3 Organization of this Thesis……………………………………………………………… 3 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Speech Act Theory………………………………………………………………………………………… 4 2.2 Western and Chinese Politeness Theories…………………………… 6 2.2.1 Brown and Levinson’s Politeness Theory………………… 6 2.2.2 Chinese Face and Politeness………………………………………………… 8 2.2.2.1 Chinese Face……………………………………………………………………… 8 2.2.2.2 Chinese Politeness…………………………………………………… 8 2.2.3 Cross-Cultural Differences in Politeness……………… 9 2.3 Communicative Competence……………………………………………………………………… 10 2.4 Interlanguage Pragmatics……………………………………………………………………… 11 2.4.1 Pragmatic Transfer………………………………………………………………………… 12 2.4.1.1 Types of Pragmatic Transfer……………………………… 13 2.4.1.2 Pragmatic Transferability…………………………………… 14 2.4.2 Interlanguage Pragmatic Studies on the Speech Act of Correction……………………………………………………………………………………… 16 2.5 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 21 CHAPTER THREE METHOD 3.1 Participants……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 23 3.2 Instruments………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 26 3.2.1 Discourse Completion Task (DCT)……………………………………… 27 3.2.2 Reasons of Opting Out..…………………………………………………………… 30 3.2.3 Scaled Response Questionnaire (SRQ)…………………………… 31 3.3 Procedure……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 32 3.4 Coding……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 32 3.4.1 Head Acts: Correction Strategies…………………………………… 36 3.4.1.1 Direct Strategies………………………………………………………… 38 3.4.1.2 Indirect Strategies…………………………………………………… 39 3.4.1.3 Opting Out…………………………………………………………………………… 42 3.4.2 Softening Devices…………………………………………………………………………… 45 3.4.2.1 External Modifications…………………………………………… 45 3.4.2.2 Internal Modifications…………………………………………… 46 3.4.2.2.1 Syntactic Downgraders………………………… 46 3.4.2.2.2 Lexical/Phrasal Downgraders………… 46 3.5 Data Analyses…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 48 3.5.1 Identifying Pragmatic Transfer………………………………………… 48 3.5.2 Quantitative Analysis ……………………………………………………………… 49 3.5.3 Qualitative Analysis…………………………………………………………………… 51 3.6 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 51 CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Overall Results of Scaled Response Questionnaire (SRQ)52 4.1.1 SRQ and Social Status………………………………………………………………………… 53 4.1.2 SRQ and Social Distance…………………………………………………………………… 55 4.1.3 Summary……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 56 4.2 Overall Head Acts………………………………………………………………………………………… 57 4.2.1 Direct Strategies…………………………………………………………………………… 59 4.2.1.1 Overall Use………………………………………………………………………… 59 4.2.1.2 Social Factors………………………………………………………………… 60 4.2.1.2.1 Social Status……………………………………………… 61 4.2.1.2.2 Social Distance………………………………………… 61 4.2.1.3 Individual Strategy Use………………………………………… 62 4.2.1.3.1 Penalty……………………………………………………………… 63 4.2.1.3.2 Threat………………………………………………………………… 63 4.2.1.3.3 Criticism………………………………………………………… 65 4.2.1.3.4 Direct Correction…………………………………… 67 4.2.1.3.5 Indirect Accusation……………………………… 69 4.2.1.4 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………… 72 4.2.2 Indirect Strategies……………………………………………………………………… 73 4.2.2.1 Overall Use………………………………………………………………………… 73 4.2.2.2 Social Factors………………………………………………………………… 74 4.2.2.2.1 Social Status……………………………………………… 74 4.2.2.2.2 Social Distance………………………………………… 75 4.2.2.3 Individual Strategy Use………………………………………… 77 4.2.2.3.1 Suggested Repair……………………………………… 77 4.2.2.3.2 Mocking……………………………………………………………… 84 4.2.2.3.3 Modified Correction……………………………… 85 4.2.2.3.4 Indirect Correction……………………………… 87 4.2.2.3.5 Irony…………………………………………………………………… 89 4.2.2.3.6 No Explicit Reproach…………………………… 89 4.2.2.3.7 Self Reproach……………………………………………… 91 4.2.2.4 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………… 92 4.2.3 Opting Out……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 92 4.2.3.1 Overall Use………………………………………………………………………………… 92 4.2.3.2 Social Factors………………………………………………………………………… 93 4.2.3.2.1 Social Status……………………………………………………… 93 4.2.3.2.2 Social Distance………………………………………………… 94 4.3 Two-Strategy Patterns……………………………………………………………………………… 95 4.4 External Modifications…………………………………………………………………………… 99 4.4.1 Apology……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 101 4.4.2 Concern……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 102 4.4.3 Gratitude………………………………………………………………………………………………… 105 4.4.4 Summary of External Modifications………………………………… 105 4.5 General Discussion……………………………………………………………………………………… 108 CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION 5.1 Summary of the Findings……………………………………………………………………… 113 5.2 Significance and Implications……………………………………………………… 122 5.2.1 Theoretical Implication…………………………………………………………… 123 5.2.2 Pedagogical Implication…………………………………………………………… 124 5.3 Limitations and Suggestions for Future Studies…………… 126 REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 128 APPENDIXES Appendix A: Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (CEF)…………………141 Appendix B: CEF and Other Tests……………………………………………………………143 Appendix C: Questionnaire of English Version…………………………144 Appendix D: Questionnaire of Chinese Version…………………………154

    REFERENCES

    Al-Issa, A. (2003). Sociocultural transfer in L2 speech behaviors: Evidence and motivating factors. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27, 581-601.
    Andrew, D. (1999). Sociocultural perspectives on language change in diaspora: Soviet immigrants in the United States. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Griffin, R. (2005). L2 pragmatic awareness: Evidence from the ESL classroom. System, 33, 401-415.
    Baxter, L. A. (1984). An investigation of compliance gaining as politeness. Human Communication Research, 10, 427-456.
    Beebe, L., & Cummings, M. C. (1996). Natural speech act data versus written questionnaire data: How data collection method affects speech performance. In S. Gass & J. Neu (Eds.), Speech act across cultures (pp. 65-86). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    Beebe, L. M., & Cummings, M. C. (1985). Speech act performance: A function of the data collection procedure? Paper presented at the TESOL Convention, New York.
    Beebe, L., & Takahashi, T. (1989a). Do you have a bag?: Social status and patterned variation in second language acquisition. In S. Gass, C. Madden, D. Preston, & L. Selinker (Eds.), Variation in second language acquisition: Discourse and pragmatics (pp.103-125). Clevedon and Philadelphia: Multicultural Matters.
    Beebe, L. M., & Takahashi, T. (1989b). Sociolinguistic variation in face-threatening speech acts: Chastisement and disagreement. In M. R. Eisenstein (Ed.), The dynamic interlanguage: Empirical studies in second language variation (pp. 199-218). NY: Plenum.
    Beebe, L. M., Takahashi, T., & Uliss-Weltz, R. (1990). Pragmatic transfer in ESL refusals. In R. Scarcella, E. Andersen, & S. D. Krashen (Eds.), On the development of communicative competence in a second language (pp. 55-73). New York: Newbury House.
    Billmyer, K., & Varghese, M. (2000). Investigating instrument-based pragmatic validity: Effects of enhancing discourse completion tests. Applied Linguistics, 21, 517-552.
    Biq, Y. (1984). Indirect speech acts in Chinese polite expressions. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers’ Association, 19 (3), 1-10.
    Blum-Kulka, S. (1983). Interpreting and performing speech acts in a second language: A cross-cultural study of Hebrew and English. In N. Wolfson & E. Judd (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition (pp. 36-55). New York: Newbury House.
    Blum-Kulka, S. (1991). Interlanguage pragmatics: The case of requests. In R. Phillipson, E. Kellerman, L. Selinker, M. Sharwood Smith, & M. Swain (Eds.), Foreign/second language pedagogy research (pp. 255-272). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
    Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex Publishing Co.
    Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1986). Too many words: Length of utterance and pragmatic failure. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 8, 165-180.
    Bodman, J., & Eisenstein, M. (1988). May God increase your bounty: The expression of gratitude in English by native and non-native speakers. Cross Current, 15, 1-21.
    Bonikowska, M. P. (1988). The choice of opting out. Applied Linguistics, 9(2), 169-181.
    Bou-Franch, P. (1998). On pragmatic transfer. Studies in English Language and Linguistics, 0, 5-20.
    Bouton, L. F. (1994). Conversational implicature in a second language: Learned slowly when not deliberately taught. Journal of Pragmatics, 22, 157-167.
    Bouton, L. F. (1999). Developing nonnative speaker skills in interpreting conversational implicatures in English: Explicit teaching can ease the process. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Culture in second language teaching and learning (pp. 47-70). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    Brown, P., & Levinson, S. D. (1978). Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In E. N. Goody (Ed.), Questions and politeness (pp. 56-289). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
    Brown, P., & Levinson, S. D. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
    Byon, A. S. (2004). Sociopragmatic analysis of Korean requests: Pedagogical settings. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1673-1704.
    Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to language pedagogy. In J. Richards & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 2-27). London: Longman.
    Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
    Cenoz, J. (2003). The intercultural style hypothesis: L1 and L2 interaction in requesting behaviour. In V. Cook (Ed.), Effect of the second language on the first (pp. 62-80). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
    Chang, S. (張紹勳), Chang, S. (張紹評), & Lin, S. (林秀娟). (2000). SPSS for Windows [統計分析-初等統計與高等統計]. Taipei, Taiwan: Song-Gang.
    Chang, Y. F. (2001). Socialcultural competence and language transfer: Cases involving refusals. English Teaching & Learning, 26(2), 1-12.
    Chao, Y.-R. (1968). A grammar of spoken Chinese. California: University of California Press.
    Chen, F. J. (2006). Interplay between forward and backward transfer in L1 and L2 writing: The case of Chinese ESL learners in the US. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 32 (1), 1-50.
    Chen, H. (2006). A study of Chinese EFL interlanguage requests. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Sun Yat-sen University, Taiwan.
    Chen, M. (2006). An interlanguage study of the speech act of disagreement made by Chinese EFL speakers in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Sun Yat-sen University, Taiwan.
    Chen, Y. (2007). EFL learners’ strategy use and instructional effects in interlanguage pragmatics: The case of complaints. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, National Taiwan University, Taiwan.
    Chung, A. S. (2005). Pragmatic transfer: Chinese learners of English in request-making. Journal of Ching-Yun University, 25 (1), 321-344.
    Clyne, M. G. (1977). Intercultural communication breakdown and communication conflict: Towards a linguistic model and its exemplification. In C. Molony, H. Zobl, & W. Stölting (Eds.), Deutsch im Kontakt mit anderen Sprachen /German in Contact with Other Languages (pp. 129-146). Kronberg: Scriptor-Verlag.
    Cohen, A. D. (1996). Speech acts. In S. L. McKay, & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language teaching (pp. 383-420). New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational Psychological Measurement, 20, 37-46.
    Cook, V. (2003). Introduction: The changing L1 in the L2 user’s mind. In V. Cook (Ed.), Effect of the second language on the first (pp. 1-18). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
    DuFon, M. (2001). Triangulation in qualitative SLA research on interlanguage pragmatics. In X. Bonch-Bruevich, W. J. Crawford, J. Hellermann, C. Higgins, & H. Nguyen (Eds.), The past, present, and future of second language research (pp. 251-270). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.
    Dogancay-Aktuna, S., & Kamisli, S. (1997). Pragmatic transfer in interlanguage development: A case study of advanced EFL learners. Paper presented at the 11th National Linguistics Conference, Ankara, Turkey. (ERIC Document No. ED408818)
    Edmondson, W. J. (1981). Spoken discourse: A model for analysis. Harlow: Longman.
    Edmondson, W., & House, A. J. (1991). Do learners talk too much? The waffle phenomenon in interlanguage pragmatics. In R. Phillipson, E. Kellerman, L. Selinker, M. Sharwood, & M. Swain (Eds.), Foreign/Second language pedagogy research: A communicative volume for Claus Faerch (pp. 273-287). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
    Edstrom, A. (2004). Expressions of disagreement by Venezuelans in conversation: Reconsidering the influence of culture. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1499-1518
    Eisenstein, M., & Bodman, J. W. (1993). Expressing gratitude in American English. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 64-81). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1989). Internal and external modification in interlanguage request realization. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 221-247). Norwood, N.J.: Ablex Publishing Co.
    Félix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2003). Declining an invitation: A cross-cultural study of pragmatic strategies in American English and Latin American Spanish. Multilingua, 22, 225-255.
    Félix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2004) Interlanguage refusals: Linguistic politeness and length of residence in the target community. Language Learning, 54, 587-653.
    Ford, C. E., & Thompson, S. A. (1986). Conditionals in discourse: A text-based study from English. In E. C. Traugott, A. ter Meulen, J. S. Reilly, & C. A. Ferguson (Eds.), On conditionals (pp. 353-372). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
    Fraser, B. (1990). Perspectives on politeness. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 219-236.
    Fukushima, S. (1990). Offers and requests: Performance by Japanese learners of English. World Englishes, 9, 317-325.
    Fukushima, S. (2000). Request and culture: Politeness in British English and Japanese. Berlin: Peter Lang.
    Gass, S., & Selinker, L. (Eds.) (1992). Language transfer in language learning. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face to face behavior. New York: Anchor Books.
    Gu, Y. (1990). Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 237-257.
    Gudykunt, W. B. (2000). Methodological issues in conducting theory-based cross-cultural research. In H. Spencer-Oatey (Ed.), Culturally speaking: Managing rapport through talk across cultures (pp.293-315). London and New York: Continuum.
    Haiman, J. (1978). Conditionals are topics. Language, 54, 564-589.
    Han, W.-Y. (2006). The English strategic realization of requests by Chinese-speaking English teachers in Taiwan. In Selected papers from the fifteenth international symposium and book fair on English teaching (pp. 192-202). Taipei, Taiwan: Crane Publishing Co.
    Hassall, T. (2001). Modifying requests in a second language. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 39 (4), 259-283.
    Hassall, T. (2003). Requests by Australian learners of Indonesian. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1903-1928.
    Heinz, B. (2003). Backchannel responses as strategic responses in bilingual speakers’ conversations. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1113-1142.
    Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
    Hofsted, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill.
    Holtgraves, T., & Yang, J. (1992). The interpersonal underpinnings of request strategies: General principles and differences due to culture and gender. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 246-256.
    Hou, Y. (2006). A cross-cultural study of the perception of apology: Effect of contextual factors, exposure to the target language, interlocutor ethnicity and task language. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Sun Yat-sen University, Taiwan.
    House, J. (1989a). Politeness in English and German: The function of please and bitte. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 96-119). Norwood, N.J.: Ablex Publishing Co.
    House, J. (1989b). Excuse me please: Apologizing in a foreign language. In B. Kettemann, P. Bierbaumer, A. Fill, & A. Karpf (Eds.), Englisch als Zweitsprache (pp. 303-328). Tübingen: Narr.
    House, J. (1996). Developing pragmatic fluency as a foreign language: Routines and metapragmatic awareness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 225-252.
    House, J., & Kasper, G. (1987). Interlanguage pragmatics: Requesting in a foreign language. In W. Löerscher & R. Schulze (Eds.), Perspectives on language in performance. Festschrift for Werner Hüllen on the occasion of his 60th birthday (pp. 1250-1288). Tubingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
    Hu, C. (2002). Question tags in Taiwan Mandarin: Discourse functions and grammaticalization. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.
    Hu, H. C. (1944). The Chinese concept of ‘face’. American Anthropologist, 46, 45-46.
    Hymes, D. H. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics: Selected readings (pp.269-293). Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books.
    Ishida, K. (2006). How can you be so certain? The use of hearsay evidentials by English-speaking learners of Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 1281-1304.
    Itakura, H. (2002). Gender and pragmatic transfer in topic development. Language, Culture, and Curriculum, 15(2), 161-183.
    Janney, R. W., & Arndt, H. (1993). Universality and relativity in cross-cultural politeness research: A historical perspective. Multilingua, 12, 13-50.
    Johnston, B., Kasper, G., & Ross, S. (1998). Effects of rejoinders in production questionnaires. Applied Linguistics, 19 (2), 157-182.
    Jung, J. (2002). Issues in acquisitional pragmatics. Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 2 (3). Retrieved February 1, 2007, from http://journals.tc-
    library.org/index.php/tesol/article/viewPDFInterstitial/21/26
    Kasper, G. (1992). Pragmatic transfer. Second Language Research, 8, 203-231.
    Kasper, G., & Dahl, M. (1991). Research methods in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 215-247.
    Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R. (2002). Pragmatic development in a second language. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
    Kasper, G., & Schmidt, R. (1996). Developmental issues in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 149-169.
    Koike, D. A. (1989). Pragmatic competence and adult L2 acquisition: Speech acts in interlanguage. Modern Language Journal, 73, 79-89.
    Koike, D. A., & Pearson, L. (2005). The effect of instruction and feedback in the development of pragmatic competence. System, 33, 481-501.
    Kwon, J. (2004). Expressing refusals in Korean and in American English. Multilingua, 23, 339-364.
    Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and woman’s place. New York: Harper & Row.
    Lee, Y.-L. (2006). Apology realization of advanced EFL learners in Taiwan: What remains unlearned? In Selected papers from the fifteenth international symposium and book fair on English teaching (pp. 448-458). Taipei, Taiwan: Crane Publishing Co.
    Lee-Wong, S. M. (1994). Imperatives in requests: Direct or impolite- observations from Chinese. Pragmatics, 4, 491-515.
    Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.
    Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
    Liao, C. (1995). Differences between Chinese culture and American culture from a perspective of refusal strategies. English Teaching & Learning, 19, 79-87.
    Liao, C. (1996). A contrastive study of culture and sex in the use of post-refusal maxims. Journal of Feng-jia University, 30, 29-61.
    Liao, C., & Bresnahan, M. J. (1996). A contrastive pragmatic study on American English and Mandarin refusal strategies. Language Sciences, 18, 703-727.
    Liddicoat, A. J., & Crozet, C. (2001). Acquiring French interactional norms through instruction. In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 125-144). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
    Lii-Shih, Y. E. (1994). What do “Yes” and “No” really mean in Chinese? In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown University round table on language and linguistics: Educational linguistics, crosscultural communication, and global interdependence (pp. 128-149). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
    Lii-Shih, Y. E. (1999). Conversational politeness and foreign language teaching. Taipei, Taiwan: Crane Publishing Co.
    Limmaneeprasert, O. (1993). The acquisition of pragmatic and metapragmatic knowledge by L2 learners of Thai. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Hawai'i at Manoa.
    Lin, C. (1992). Psychology and educational statistics [心理與教育統計學]. Taipei, Taiwan: Dong-Hwa Publishing Co.
    Lin, H.-O. (1998). Reported speech in Mandarin conversational discourse. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, National Taiwan Normal University.
    Lin, H. H. (2005). Contextualizing linguistic politeness in Chinese: A sociopragmatic approach with examples from persuasive sales talk in Taiwan Mandarin. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University.
    Lin, M. (2006a). EFL learners’ pragmatic transfer: Evidence from interlanguage refusals. TELL Journal: Teaching of Languages, Linguistics, and Literature, 3, 23-50.
    Lin, M. (2006b). Pragmatic transfer in EFL learners’ refusals in Taiwan. Paper presented in the 3rd International Conference on Teaching of Languages, Linguistics, and Literature. National Kaohsiung Normal University.
    Lin, Y., & Chen, X. (2006). The interlanguage of Chinese EFL requests: The direct strategies. In The Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 892-909). Taipei, Taiwan: Crane Publishing Co.
    Liu, S. (2001). Studies on transfer in second language acquisition. Guangxi Normal University Journal. Retrieved September 14, 2006, from http://www.gxnu.edu.
    cn/Personal/szliu/Transfer%20in%20SLA%20Research.doc
    Liu, S. (2002). Studies on negative pragmatic transfer in interlanguage pragmatics. Guangxi Normal University Journal. Retrieved September 14, 2006, from http://www.gxnu.edu.cn/Personal/szliu/negative%20pragmatic%20transfer.doc
    Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). New York: Academic Press.
    Lyuh, I (1992). The art of refusal: Comparison of Korean and American cultures. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University.
    Maeshiba, N., Yoshinaga, N., Kasper, G., & Ross, S. (1996). Transfer and proficiency in interlanguage apologizing. In S. Gass & J. Neu (Eds.), Speech acts across cultures (pp.155-187). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    Mao, L. R. (1994). Beyond politeness theory: “Face” revisited and renewed. Journal of Pragmatics, 21, 451-486.
    Marti, L. (2006). Indirectness and politeness in Turkish-German bilingual and Turkish monolingual requests. Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 1836-1869.
    Martínez-Flor, A., & Fukuya, Y. J. (2005). The effects of instruction on learners’ production of appropriate and accurate suggestions. System, 33, 463-480.
    Matsumura, S. (2001). Learning the rules for offering advice: A quantitative approach to second language socialization. Language Learning, 51, 635-679.
    Matsumura, S. (2003). Modelling the relationships among interlanguage pragmatic development, L2 proficiency, and exposure to L2. Applied Linguistics, 24, 465-491.
    Muntigl, P., & Turnbull, W. (1998). Conversational structure and facework in arguing. Journal of Pragmatics, 29, 225-256.
    Niki, H., & Tajika, H. (1994). Asking for permission vs. making requests: Strategies chosen by Japanese speakers of English. In L. F. Bouton & Y. Kachru (Eds.), Pragmatics and language learning (Monograph Series, Volume 5, pp. 110-124). Urbana: Division of English as an International Language, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
    Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer: Cross-linguistic influence in language learning. MA: Cambridge University Press.
    Olshtain, E., & Blum-Kulka, S. (1985). Degree of approximation: Nonnative reactions to native speech act behavior. In S. M. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 303-325). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
    Olshtain, E., & Cohen, A. D. (1983). Apology: A speech-act set. In N. Wolfson & E. Judd (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition (pp. 18-35). Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.
    Owen, M. (1983). Apologies and remedial interchanges. Berlin: Mouton.
    Piller, I. (2002). Passing for a native speaker: Identity and success in second language learning. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 6, 179-206.
    Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson, & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp.57-101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Qu, J., & Wang, L. (2005). Pragmatic transfer in compliment response by Chinese Learners of English. Sino-US English Teaching, 2, 66-75.
    Rees-Miller, J. (2000). Power, severity, and context in disagreement. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 1087-1111.
    Rintell, E. M., & Mitchell, C. J. (1989). Studying requests and apologies: An inquiry into method. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 248-272). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    Rose, K. R. (1994). On the validity of discourse completion tests in nonwestern contexts. Applied Linguistics, 15, 1-14.
    Rose, K. R. (2005). On the effects of instruction in second language pragmatics. System, 33, 385-399.
    Rose, K. R., & Ng, K. C. (2001). Inductive and deductive teaching of compliments and compliment response. In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 145-170). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
    Ruhil, A. (1998). “I lost the bus: Can you give me a ride home?” Native and nonnative English speakers’ speech act production and metapragmatic judgments: A study on apology, complaints, and requests. Dissertation Abstract International, 59 (08), DAI-A. (University Microfilms No. 9901766)
    Saito, H., & Beecken, M. (1997). An approach to instruction of pragmatic aspects: Implications of pragmatic transfer by American learners of Japanese. The Modern Language Journal, 81, 363-377.
    Sasaki, M. (1998). Investigating EFL students’ production of speech acts: A comparison of production questionnaires and role plays. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 457-484.
    Scollon, R., & Scollon, B. (1981). Narrative, literacy and face in interethnic communication. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.
    Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
    Searle, J. R. (1975). Indirect speech acts. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts (pp. 59-82). New York: Academic Press.
    Shih, H. Y. (2006). An interlanguage study of the speech act of apology made by EFL learners in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Sun Yat-sen University, Taiwan.
    Soler, E. A. (2005). Does instruction work for learning pragmatics in the EFL context? System, 33, 417-435.
    Sornig, K. (1977). Disagreement and contradiction as communicative acts. Journal of Pragmatics, 1, 347-374.
    Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition (2nd Ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
    Su, I. (2003). Studies on pragmatic transfer: A bi-directional perspective (Report No. NSC 90-2411-H-259-006). Taipei, Taiwan: National Science Council. Retrieved March 4, 2007, from https://nscnt12.nsc.gov.tw/PRQUERY/ShowFile.asp?pa=pd
    f&PLAN_YRNO=90&PLAN_NSCU=H&Srno1=902411H007037
    Su, I. (2004a). Bi-directional transfer in EFL users’ requesting behavior. English Teaching & Learning, 29 (2), 79-98.
    Su, I. (2004b). L1 and L2 interaction in requesting behavior. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on English Teaching & Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 545-557). Taipei, Taiwan: Crane.
    Su, I. (2004c). Pragmatic transfer: A bi-directional perspective. Paper presented at the 23rd Second Language Research Forum. Penn State University, USA.
    Su, I. (2004d). Pragmatic transfer: A cross-linguistic perspective (Report No. NSC 92-2411-H-007-031). Taipei, Taiwan: National Science Council. Retrieved March 4, 2007, from https://nscnt12.nsc.gov.tw/PRQUERY/ShowFile.asp?pa=pd
    f&PLAN_YRNO=92&PLAN_NSCU=H&Srno1=922411H007031
    Su, I (2005). Language transfer: A bi-directional perspective (Report No. NSC 93-2411-H-007-031). Taipei, Taiwan: National Science Council. Retrieved March 4, 2007, from https://nscnt12.nsc.gov.tw/PRQUERY/ShowFile.asp?pa=pd
    f&PLAN_YRNO=93&PLAN_NSCU=H&Srno1=932411H007033
    Su, I. (2006). Influence of L2 on L1 in foreign language learning (Report No. NSC 94-2411-H-007-017). Taipei, Taiwan: National Science Council. Retrieved March 4, 2007, from https://nscnt12.nsc.gov.tw/PRQUERY/ShowFile.asp?pa=pd
    f&PLAN_YRNO=94&PLAN_NSCU=H&Srno1=942411H007017
    Takahashi, S. (1992). Transferability of indirect request strategies. University of Hawaii Working Papers in ESL, 11 (1), 69-124. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED367128)
    Takahashi, S. (1993). Transferability of L1 indirect request strategies to L2 contexts. In L. F. Bouton & Y. Kachru (Eds.), Pragmatics and language learning (Monograph Series, Volume 4, pp. 50-84). Urbana: Division of English as an International Language, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
    Takahashi, S. (1996). Pragmatic transferability. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 189-223.
    Takahashi, S. (2001). The role of input enhancement in the developing pragmatic competence. In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 171-199). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
    Takahashi, S. (2005). Noticing in task performance and learning outcomes: A qualitative analysis of instructional effects in interlanguage pragmatics. System, 33, 437-461.
    Takahashi, T., & Beebe, L. M. (1987). The development of pragmatic competence by Japanese learners of English. JALT Journal, 8, 131-155.
    Takahashi, T., & Beebe, L. M. (1993). Cross-linguistic influence in the speech act of correction. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (p.138-157). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Takahashi, S., & Dufon, M. A. (1989). Cross-linguistic influence in indirectness: The case of English directives performed by native Japanese speakers. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED370439)
    Taleghani-Nikazm, C. (2006). A conversation analytical study of telephone conversation openings between native and nonnative speakers. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1807-1832.
    Tanaka, S. (1988). Politeness: Some problems for Japanese speakers of English. JALT Journal, 9, 81-102.
    Tao, H., & Thompson, S. (1991). English backchannels in Mandarin conversations: A case study of superstratum pragmatic ‘interference.’ Journal of Pragmatics, 16, 209-223.
    Tateyama, Y. (2001). Explicit and implicit teaching of pragmatic routines: Japanese sumimasen. In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 200-222). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
    Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4, 91-112.
    Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. London, U.K.: Longman.
    Trosborg, A. (1995). Interlanguage pragmatics: Requests, complaints and apologies. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    Tuan, H. (2005a). Expressions of disagreement in arguing by different language speakers: An examination of the influence of culture and power. Tzu Hui Academic Journal, 1, 151-166.
    Tuan, H. (2005b). Sociolinguistic variation of power and severity in interlanguage behavior of disagreement. K.U.A.S. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2, 169-195.
    Tuan, H. (2006a). Analysis of responses to face-threatening speech acts: American and Taiwanese English. Journal of SHU-TE University, 8, 55-74.
    Tuan, H. (2006b). An analysis of disagreement speech act in Taiwanese EFL speakers’ arguing talk. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Taiwan.
    Van Hell, J., & Dijkstra, T. (2002). Foreign language knowledge can influence native language performance in exclusively native contexts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 780-789.
    Valdes, G., & Pino, C. (1981). Muy a tus ordenes: Compliment responses among Mexican-American bilinguals. Language in Society, 10, 53-72.
    Wang, Y.-F. (1996). The information sequences of adverbial clauses in Chinese spoken. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, National Taiwan Normal University.
    Wang, Y.-F. (1999). The information sequences of adverbial clauses in Mandarin Chinese conversation. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 27 (2), 45-89.
    Wang, Y.-F. (2002). The preferred information sequences of adverbial lining in Mandarin Chinese discourse. Text, 22, 141-172.
    Wang, Y.-F. (2006). The information structure of adverbial clauses in Chinese discourse. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics, 4 (1), 49-88.
    Wardhaugh, R. (2002). An introduction to sociolinguistics (4th Ed.). USA: Blackwell Publishing.
    Watts, R. J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Watts, R. J., Ide, S., & Ehlich, K. (Eds.) (1992). Politeness in language: Studies in its history, theory and practice. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    Weinreich, U. (1953). Languages in contact. The Hague: Mouton.
    Wierzbicka, A. (1991). Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    Wolfson, N., Marmor, T., & Jones, S. (1989). Problems in the comparison of speech acts across cultures. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 174-196). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    Xu, X., & Xia, W. (2003). Contrastive studies of pragmatic strategies in English refusals. Journal of Southwest University for Nationalities, 24, 250-255.
    Yoshimi, D. R. (2001). Explicit instruction and JFL learners’ use of interactional discourse markers. In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 223-244). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
    Yu, M. (1999). Universalistic and cultural-specific perspectives on variation in the acquisition of pragmatic competence in a second language. Pragmatics, 9 (2), 281-312.
    Yu, M. (2003). On the universality of face: Evidence from Chinese compliment response behavior. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1679-1710.
    Yu, M. (2004). Interlinguistic variation and similarity in second language speech act behavior. The Modern Language Journal, 88, 102-119.
    Yu, M. (2005a). Sociolinguistic competence: An often neglected and de-emphasized aspect of foreign language teaching. Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10, 71-76.
    Yu, M. (2005b). Sociolinguistic competence in the complimenting act of native Chinese and American English speakers: A mirror of cultural value. Language and Speech, 48, 91-119.
    Yu, M. (2006). On the teaching and learning of L2 sociolinguistic competence in classroom settings. Asian EFL Journal, 8 (2), 111-131.
    Yuan, Y. (2001). An inquiry into empirical pragmatics data-gathering methods: Written DCTs, oral DCTs, field notes, and natural conversations. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 271-292.
    Zhang, Y. (1995). Strategies in Chinese requesting. In G. Kasper (Ed.), Pragmatics of Chinese as native and target language (pp. 25-68). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

    下載圖示
    QR CODE