國立臺灣師範大學博碩士論文全文系統

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	程昱瑋 Cheng, Yu-Wei
論文名稱：	日籍學生中文分裂句以及準分裂句之第二語言習得 Japanese Students' L2 Acquisition of Clefts and Pseudo-clefts in Mandarin Chinese
指導教授：	陳純音 Chen, Chun-Yin
學位類別：	碩士 Master
系所名稱：	英語學系 Department of English
論文出版年：	2016
畢業學年度：	105
語文別：	英文
論文頁數：	96
中文關鍵詞：	分裂句、準分裂句、中文合法性效應、句構效應、分裂句類型效應、語境效應、語言程度效應、第二語言習得
英文關鍵詞：	clefts, pseudo-clefts, grammticality effects, construction effects, cleft type effects, contextual effects, proficiency effects, second language acquisition
DOI URL：	https://doi.org/10.6345/NTNU202203331
論文種類：	學術論文
相關次數：	點閱：235 下載：37
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

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

本文旨在探討以日語為母語之學習者對於中文分裂句及準分裂句的學習情形，主要研究議題包含觀察學習者的分裂句及準分裂句的習得是否受到中文合法性效應、句構效應、分裂句類型效應、語境效應以及語言程度效應影響。本研究主要採用真假值測驗、接受度判斷測驗、以及問答選擇測驗。受試者分為實驗組以及控制組。前者為三十位以日語為母語且在國立台灣師範大學國語文中心學習中文的學生，並按其中文程度分為中低級及中高級兩組，每組十五名。後者則為十五位母語人士。
首先，研究發現句子的合法性並不影響學習者在分裂句以及準分裂句的表現。就五種分裂片語類型來看，不同分裂片語類型也不影響學習者對分裂句及準分裂句的接受度。此外，在五種分裂句類型當中，受試者最能接受的是名詞、動詞、及介繫詞組，最後是副詞及形容詞。在語境效應方面，受試者會依語境的不同來選擇分裂句或準分裂句。此現象顯示受試者的表現的確受到語境效應的影響。最後，在語言程度效應方面，受試者之中文程度越高，其分裂句及準分裂句的表現越趨向母語者的表現，顯示受試者對中文分裂句以及準分裂句的掌握度會隨者其中文能力的提升而有所增進。

The present study conducted an empirical study with an aim to investigate the Japanese students’ acquisition of Mandarin clefts and pseudo-clefts. The issues addressed in the present study included grammaticality effects, construction effects, cleft type effects, contextual effects, and proficiency effects. In addition, the study conducted three tasks: a Grammaticality Judgment Task, an Acceptability Judgment Task, and a Multiple Choice Question Task to examine the subjects’ interpretation of Mandarin clefts and pseudo-clefts. Thirty Japanese students were recruited and further divided into two groups, i.e., 15 low-intermediate and 15 high-intermediate subjects, based on their Mandarin language proficiency. Moreover, fifteen Mandarin native speakers participated in the study as the control group.
The overall results indicated that the subjects’ performances were affected by the grammaticality of clefts and pseudo-clefts and that no construction effects were found. As for cleft types, the subjects highly accepted the NP, VP and PP types, whereas their acceptance rates for the ADJP and ADVP clefts were the lowest of all, indicating that cleft effects were obvious, though construction effects were not. In addition, it was found that our subjects strongly associated certain cleft sentences with certain contexts. The contextual effects and construction effects were attested in this study. Finally, it was found that the Japanese learners’ cleft performances were affected by their L2 proficiency. The better their L2 proficiency was, the better they performed on clefts and pseudo-clefts.

CHINESE ABSTRACT....................................i
ENGLISH ABSTRACT....................................ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.....................................iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS...................................v
LIST OF TABLES......................................viii
LIST OF FIGURES.....................................x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS...............................xi
CHAPTER ONE  INTRODUCTION...........................1
1.1 Motivation......................................1
1.2 Theoretical Framework...........................4
1.2.1 Transfer Effects..............................4
1.2.2 Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis...............5
1.2.3 Error Analysis................................6
1.2.4 Markedness Differential Hypothesis............7
1.2.5 Contextual Effects............................8
1.2.6 Proficiency Effects...........................9
1.3 Research Questions..............................9
1.4 Significance of the Study.......................10
1.5 Organization of the Thesis......................11
CHAPTER TWO  LITERATURE REVIEW......................12
2.1 Syntactic Structures of Mandarin and Japanese Clefts and Pseudo-Clefts...................................12
2.1.1 Syntactic Structure of Mandarin and Japanese
Clefts..............................................13
2.1.2 Syntactic Structure of Mandarin and Japanese Pseudo-Clefts.......................................17
2.1.3 Comparisons between Mandarin Clefts and Pseudo-Clefts..............................................21
2.1.4 Summary.......................................23
2.2 Previous Empirical Studies of Mandarin Clefts and Pseudo-Clefts.......................................23
2.2.1 Xie (2008)....................................24
2.2.2 Irgin (2013)..................................27
2.2.3 Liao (2014)...................................28
2.2.4 Mai & Yuan (2016).............................30
2.2.5 Summary.......................................36
2.3 Summary.........................................38
CHAPTER THREE  RESEARCH DESIGN......................39
3.1 Subjects........................................39
3.2 Methods and Materials...........................40
3.2.1 Study I.......................................41
3.2.2 Study II......................................43
3.2.2.1 A New Analytical Framework..................44
3.2.2.2 The Acceptability Judgment Task.............49
3.2.3 Study III.....................................50
3.3 Procedures......................................53
CHAPTER FOUR  RESULTS AND DISCUSSION................55
4.1 Grammaticality Effects..........................55
4.1.1 Overall Results...............................56
4.1.2 Reexamination of the Grammaticality Judgment
Task................................................61
4.1.3 General Discussion............................63
4.2 Cleft Type Effects..............................65
4.2.1 Overall Results...............................66
4.2.2 General Discussion............................69
4.3 Contextual Effects..............................71
4.3.1 Overall Results...............................72
4.3.2 General Discussion............................75
4.4 Proficiency Effects.............................77
4.5 Summary.........................................79
CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS............................81
5.1 Summary of Major Findings.......................81
5.2 Pedagogical Implications........................83
5.3 Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research.84
Bibliography........................................86
Appendix A  The Grammaticality Judgment Task........90
Appendix B  The Accessibility Judgment Task.........91
Appendix C  The Multiple Choice Question Task.......93
Appendix D  The Consent Form........................95
Appendix E  The Background Information Sheet........96
                                

Arani, M. T. 1985. Error Analysis: The Types and the Causes of the Major Structural Errors Made by Iranian University Students when Writing Expository and Imaginative Prose. PHD Dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo, New York, NY.
Carrell, P. L. 1991. Second language reading: Reading ability or
language proficiency?. Applied Linguistics 12.2: 159-179.
Chan, Y. W. 2004. Syntactic transfer: Evidence from the interlanguage of Hong Kong Chinese ESL learners. The Modern Language Journal 60.3: 56-74.
Cheng, L. S. 2008. Deconstructing the shi… de construction. The Linguistic
Review 25.3-4:235-266.
Corder, S. P. 1967. The significance of learner’s errors. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 5.1-4:161-170.
Cook, T. D., and Reichardt, C. S. 1979 Qualitative and quantitative methods in evaluation research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage publications.
Creswell, J. W. 2013. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage publications.
Dansako, M., and Mizumoto, G. 2007. On the comprehension of cleft
constructions in child Japanese. Kyushu University Papers in Linguistics 28:107-
121.
Declerck, R. 1984. The pragmatics of it-clefts and wh-clefts. Lingua 64.4:251-289.
DeKeyser, R. 2008. The complexities of defining complexity. American Association for Applied Linguistics.
Eckman, F. R. 1977. Markedness and the contrastive analysis hypothesis. Language Learning 27.2:315-330.
Fukuda, K. 2010. Notes on the transitivity of copular sentences in Japanese. Universality and individuality in language 1:3-19.
Gass, S.M. 1988. Second language acquisition and linguistic theory: The role of language transfer. Linguistic Theory in Second Language Acquisition:384-403.
Greenberg, J. 1991. Typology/Universals and second language acquisition. In Hübner, Thom (Eds.), Cross-currents in Second Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theories. Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publication Company.
Gundel, J. K., and Tarone, E. 1983. Language transfer and the acquisition of
pronominal anaphora. In S. Gass, & L. Selinker (Eds.), Language Transfer and
Language Learning:281-296. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Han, Z. H. 2004. Fossilization in Adult Second Language Acquisition. Clevedon, UK:
Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Housen, A., Pierrard, M., and Vandaele, S. 2005. Structure complexity and the efficacy of explicit grammar instruction. Investigations in Instructed Second Language Acquisition:235-269.
Hsieh, C. L. 2002. Assertive shi and predictive-assertive hui in Mandarin Chinese. Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies 31.3:249-300.
Huang, C. T. 1982. Logical Relations in Chinese and The Theory of Grammar. PHD dissertation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Massachusetts, United States.
İrgin, P. 2013. A difficulty analysis of cleft sentences. International Online
Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET) 1.1:70-80.
Ishihara, Y. 2012. The structure and derivation of the VP focus pseudo-cleft sentences in Japanese. Linguistic research : working papers in English linguistics 28:55-73.
James, C. 1998. Errors in language learning and use: Exploring Error Analysis. London: Longman.
Kato, M. 2000. Functions of Japanese ga-clefts in discourse: A relevance-theoretic approach. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 12:97-122.
Komagata, N. 1996. Pseudoclefts in Japanese. Workshop in Syntax/Semantic.
Krifka, M. 2008. Basic notions of information structure. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55.3-4:243-276.
Kubota, R. 1998. An investigation of Ll-L2 transfer in writing among Japanese university students: Implications for contrastive rhetoric. Journal of Second Language Writing 7.1: 69-100.
Larsen-Freeman, D. E., and Long, M. H. 1991. An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research. New York: Longman.
Lambrecht, K. 1995. Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and
the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. New York: Press Syndicate of
the University of Cambridge.
Lee, J. W., and Schallert, D. L. 1997. The relative contribution of L2 language proficiency and L1 reading ability to L2 reading performance: A test of the threshold hypothesis in an EFL context. TESOL Quarterly 31.4: 713-739.
Lee, H. C. 2005. On Chinese Focus and Cleft Constructions. PHD dissertation,
National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan.
Li, Y. 1980. A Constrastive Study of English and Chinese Cleft and Pseudo-cleft
Constructions. MA thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan.
Liao, Y. H. 2014. Second Language Acquisition of English It-Clefts by Taiwanese Students. MA thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan.
Liu, Y. H. 1996. Modern Chinese Grammar. Hong Kong: The Commercial Press.
Lobo, M., Santos, A. L. and Soares-Jesel, C. 2015. Syntactic structure and
information structure: the acquisition of Portuguese clefts and Be-fragments.
Language Acquisition.
Lü, S. X. 2002. Xian Dai Han Yu BaBai Ci [Eight Hundred Words of the Contemporary Chinese]. Hong Kong: The Commercial Press.
Mai, Z. Y., and Yuan, B.P. 2016. Uneven reassembly of tense, telicity and discourse features in L2 acquisition of the Chinese shì… de cleft construction by adult English speakers. Second Language Research 32.2:247-276.
Mizumoto, G. 2011. On the relationship between children's working memory
capacity and their use of contextual information in sentence comprehension : A
case of cleft sentences. Kyushu University Papers in Linguistics 32:151-165.
Morikawa, M. 2011. Da in the Japanese Clefts. Journal of School of Foreign Languages, Nagoya University of Foreign Studies 41:35-61.
Paris, M. C. 1979. Nominalization in Mandarin Chinese: the Morpheme ‘De’ and the ‘Shi’ and ‘De’ Constructions. Département de Recherches linguistiques, Université Paris 7, Paris.
Paul, W., and Whitman, J. 2008. Shi… de focus clefts in Mandarin Chinese. The Linguistic Review 25.3-4:413-451.
Prince, E. F. 1978. A comparison of WH-clefts and IT-clefts in discourse. Language 54:883-906.
Richards, J. C. 1971. A Non- Contrastive Approach to Error Analysis. Journal of ELT 25, 204-219.
Sasaki,Y. 1991. English and Japanese interlanguage comprehension strategies: An analysis based on the competition model. Applied Psycholinguistics 12 : 47-73.
Schwartz, B. D. and Sprouse, R. A. 1996. L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access hypothesis. Second Language Research 12: 4-72.
Simpson, A., and Wu, Z. 2002. From D to T-Determiner incorporation and the creation of tense. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 11:169-209.
Soares, C. 2006. La syntaxe de la périphérie gauche en portugais européen et son
acquisition [The syntax of left periphery in European Portuguese and its
acquisition]. PHD dissertation, University of Paris 8, Paris.
Tang, T. C. 1980. Cleft and pseudo-cleft constructions in Chinese: Structure,
function and constraint. Journal of National Taiwan Normal University 25:249-296.
Teng, S. H. 1979. Remarks on cleft sentences in Chinese. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 7:101-113.
Tsao, F. F. 1994. Hanyu de fenlieju (Chinese cleft sentences): Zhuti yu jiaodian hexie gongchu de jiegou (The structure of topic and focus). Proceedings of the 3rd International Chinese and Language Teaching Conference:93-106.
Walliman, N. 2011. Research theory, Research methods: The basics. New York, United States of America: Routledge publications.
Weinreich, U. 1953. Languages in Contact: Findings and Problems. New York: Linguistic Circle of New York.
Williams, J., and Evans, J. 1998. What kind of focus and on which forms?. Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition:139-155.
Xie, F. 2008. A Study On The Acquisition of “shi……de” Sentence by Foreigner
Students. MA thesis, Shanghai Normal University, People's Republic of China.
Yang, S. Y. 2014. The Functions of the Nontarget Be in the Written Interlanguage of
Chinese Learners of English. Language Acquisition 21.3: 279-303.
Zobl, H.1983. Markedness and the projection problem. Language Learning 33.3:293–
313.

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文