【作者】 高瑛；

【导师】 张绍杰；

【作者基本信息】 东北师范大学 ， 英语语言文学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 课堂协商是二语习得领域一个重要的研究课题。从二语习得社会文化视域出发，本文在文献回顾的基础上对协商的概念作了重新界定。在本研究中，协商主要指意义协商和形式协商。其中，意义协商不仅包括由交际失误引发的协商，同时还包括以成功交际为目的的协商；同样，形式协商不仅包括由语言错误引发的对语言使用的协商，同时包括任何针对语言形式和显性语言规则的互动式对话。不同于以往局限于‘问题驱动’协商的研究，本研究的协商定义更为宽泛，相对于课堂也更加具有针对性。本研究的理论依据来源于社会文化理论、二语习得生态观（van Lier2000,2004）、情境学习观（Lave&Wenger1991）、参与隐喻（Sfard1998）、以及隐性、显性语言知识理论。尽管这些理论各有差异和侧重，它们共同构成了本研究从社会文化视域对课堂协商话语进行研究的理论基础。二语习得两大主流派系认知与社会文化视域在理论来源和研究方法上都存在很多分歧，但二者都认同课堂互动在语言学习中的作用。二者的区别是：认知派认为，互动对学习有辅助作用；而社会文化派认为，互动不仅仅是对学习有益，互动即是学习本身。在社会文化视域中，二语习得是‘参与’而不是‘习得’（Donato2000），学习不仅是学习者个体大脑对知识的建构过程，同时也是意义建构和同化到社会生活实践的过程。因此，协商是语言发展过程的载体，协商过程本身就是学习的过程。在研究方法上，课堂录音观察、学习者问卷、学习者显性与隐性语言知识测试卷、及教师访谈共同构成了本文的研究工具。本研究的语料转写全部在转写软件中完成，最大限度地保障了转写的规范性和统一性。语料分析工具采用的是重新建构的社会文化话语分析法。该研究方法以Mercer（1995，2004）提出的社会文化话语分析法为基础，通过融合维果斯基的历史方法、Wells（1999）的对话方法、以及Kumpulainen&Wray（2002）的功能分析法，针对‘外语型’中国英语教学的现状、存在的问题及中国英语课堂互动话语的特点，采用会话分析与话语分析相结合的方式，在建立语料库的基础上，对语料进行细致质化分析和对预设分类的量化分析。定量分析中，在数字统计的基础上，采用SPSS17.0对学生隐性与显性语言知识测试结果进行了相关性分析。总体上，本文对语料的分析以定性分析为主、定量分析为辅。定性与定量研究方法的有机融合是当前学术界的一种普遍共识，两者的有机融合有效地保障了社会科学研究中对“科学性”与“人文性”的兼顾。本文的研究对象是两所师范大学英语教育专业的师生。之所以把本研究落脚于英语教育专业一是为了深入了解和解决教育教学中遇到的问题，同时也是为突出英语教育专业特色找到突破口。近年来，尤其是自2007年教育部推出高等教育‘质量工程’和试行免费师范教育以来，教育教学中遇到的问题及国家对高等教育的关注，极大地促进了中国英语教学界对提高英语专业教学质量和英语教育专业教学改革的重视。在英语教育专业，如何在基础课教材编写中突出师范特点，如何在基础课教学中融入‘教师’因素，从专业基础课程入手培养学生的教师素养和能力成为热点议题。从‘未来教师’的职业需求来看，在英语教育专业，专业基础课程的任务不仅要培养学生的语言使用能力和交际能力（隐性语言知识），同时还要突出培养学生的‘教学’能力--即，讲解和示范语言的能力（显性语言知识），使‘师范’概念贯穿到师范英语专业教学的全过程。为了深入了解英语教育专业基础课教学的现状与存在的问题，本研究以课堂师生互动中的话语协商为研究内容，探究英语教育专业课堂师生协商的特点及其所反映出来的教学性质和教学理念，并在此基础上展开对英语教育专业教学及课堂互动模式的反思。结合研究问题与假设，本文的研究发现主要体现在以下四个方面：（1）在语言分析层面，语料中的师生间意义协商明显多于形式协商。在意义协商中，只有少量是由交际失误引发的协商，大多数是为保持成功交际而展开的协商；在形式协商中，多数协商并非由语言错误引发而是师生针对语言使用展开的协商，但是语料中对语言规则及显性语言知识的协商与讲解数量非常少。这个结果证明，本文对协商概念的重新界定是有道理的，以往研究对协商概念的界定过于狭窄、过于侧重协商的对话性质。（2）在认知分析层面，协商的加工过程体现在三种类型的协商当中：同意式、探究式、及争论式。其中，探究式协商，尽管数量有限，对调动学习者对学习的积极投入与探究式学习非常有益，但是，学习者的学习被动性是阻碍此类协商发展成为有效协商话语的重要因素。（3）在社会分析层面，协商过程主要采纳的交互模式是合作式和专家/新手模式，较少使用主导/被动模式。这一发现与中国社会文化中尊重权势，提倡合作精神的传统相吻合。值得注意的是，教师动允支架，一旦被学习者接纳，即可有效发挥其引导共建协商过程和知识共建的功能。（4）以上研究发现引发我们对中国英语教育专业的反思。师生协商意义领先的性质反映了交际法教学对中国高校英语教学的影响。对学生交际能力的重视导致了对课堂教学中语言技能学习的过分强调及对语言形式的忽视。学生隐性与显性语言知识间的落差表明，学生对显性语言知识的掌握需要特殊的专门学习。在英语教育专业中突出‘教师’因素意味着要强调语言知识的科学性。此外，外语学习不是认知派所倡导的学习者个体头脑中知识累积的过程，而是学习者以探索、批评的方式在与他人的交往中共同建构知识的过程。因此，在学习过程中，培养学生思维能力和逻辑推理能力也是课堂教学中不可或缺的组成部分。综上所述，本研究很好地证实了二语习得社会文化视域在课堂互动话语领域研究的优势，同时证明，以往研究中对协商概念的界定过于强调自然会话的特点，范围过窄，不适用于外语课堂协商话语研究。此外，本文使用的社会文化话语分析法对语料的分析不仅兼顾了定性定量分析的优点，而且可操作性强，是一个可以广为应用的课堂话语分析方法。本研究结果显示，在中国等亚洲文化中，有必要重新思考外语教学以学习者为中心、提倡小组及同伴互动、夸大学习者作用而淡化教师作用的教学理念。在教学实践上，本研究的发现有利于语言教师及教育研究者更好地了解课堂师生协商的复杂性与偶然性，发现决定学习者课堂活动参与程度的协商互动在语言、认知及社会层面的现状与存在的问题。同时，本研究所反映出的英语教育专业重视技能型教学、师范特色不突出，及忽视思维能力培养等方面的问题将为后续的英语师范专业改革提供有力的证据。在实证研究的基础上，本文提出反思中国英语教育专业教学，并尝试性地提出了协商式互动模式。尽管该模式的理论与应用价值还有待进一步验证，其提出为中国英语教育专业突出‘师范’特色提供了一条可探索的路径。本研究的不足之处有必要在后续研究中进一步完善。在技术路线上，尽管考虑到了研究的持续性，本研究还不是理想的跟踪性研究；转写软件的使用很好地保障了转写的统一性与规范性，但转写与标注的准确性还有待提高。本文提出的对协商概念的界定以及本文所使用的语料分析工具社会文化话语分析法还需在今后针对不同对象在各种社会文化和学习环境中的研究来加以验证。二语习得社会文化视域，作为对主流认知传统的挑战派，其理论与实践价值已经得到一些研究的证实，但针对涉及诸多社会文化变量的协商互动方面的研究还有待进一步深入开展。最后，在本研究的基础上，后续的干预性研究可以更加深化协商话语研究，同时验证本文提出的英语教育专业课堂协商互动模式及其有效性。更多还原

【Abstract】 This study explores the nature of teacher-learner negotiations in EFL classrooms in Englishteacher education programs in China. Participants in this study are teachers and learners fromtwo teachers’ universities in northeast China. Perceiving learners in these programs as pre-service teachers, this research aims at revealing the concept of EFL teaching in the interactiveactivities of negotiation, and reconceptualizing the interaction model in teacher educationprograms in terms of both the co-construction of knowledge and the necessity of emphasizingthe ‘teacher’ element in this special program. As a problem-driven research, this study is atimely answer to EFL teaching reform in higher education in China, especially to the QualityProject launched in2007and the Non-tuition Teacher Education Program initiated since2007in the six ‘211Project’ teachers’ universities nationwide.Theoretically, this study is mainly informed by the sociocultural line of thinking in SLAresearch. Sociocultural theory, an ecological view of SLA (van Lier2000,2004), a situatedview of learning (Lave&Wenger1991), a participation metaphor (Sfard1998) and theoriesof implicit and explicit linguistic knowledge together form the theoretical sources of thisresearch. In justifying this theoretical standing, the cognitive-sociocultural debate in SLAinitiated by Firth&Wagner (1997), the cognitive and sociocultural perspectives of interactionare critically reviewed. As the literature shows, in spite of the fact that both the cognitive andsociocultural school recognize the significance of classroom interaction in learning,interaction is perceived as facilitative to learning in the cognitive tradition, whereas toscholars from the sociocultural school, interaction does more than just facilitating learning,rather, interaction is perceived as learning itself. From the sociocultural perspective, learningis conceptualized as participation rather than acquisition (Donato2000). It is taken not only asa constructive process that takes place in the mind of the learner but also as a process ofmeaning-making and enculturation into social practices.Adopting the sociocultural perspective, negotiation is taken as the embodiment of languagedevelopment in process, it is the very site where learning happens. In criticizing the earlierdefinitions of NOM and NOF in the literature as too narrow in confining negotiation to onlyproblem-driven instances of negotiation, this research proposes to redefine NOM and NOF. Inthe new definitions, NOM includes not only instances of negotiation initiated bycommunicative failures, but also instances of negotiation sustained for communicativesuccess; while NOF refers to the interactive moves in which interlocutors discuss issuesrelating to the linguistic form of the target language either in language use or linguistic rules,with or without the occurrence of learner errors.Methodologically, classroom recording and observation, a learner questionnaire, a learner implicit and explicit linguistic test, and a teacher interview protocol are used as researchinstruments. In transcribing the recorded data, a Transcriber software is adopted so that theprecision of the transcription is maximally achieved. An adapted sociocultural discourseanalysis (SDA) is applied as the analytical tool in the qualitative analysis of the transcribeddata, while in quantitative analysis, not only quantification of numbers is used, but also thestatistics software SPSS17.0is used for correlation studies. The application of both qualitativeand quantitative means in the interpretation and explanation of data together well maintainsthe balance between the humanistic and scientific aspect of research in this study.In accordance with the research questions and hypotheses in this dissertation, the findings ofthis study can be summarized into four aspects:(1) Linguistically, instances of NOM are found to overwhelm those of NOF in the corpus,suggesting that the focus of teacher-learner negotiation is on meaning not on form. Withininstances of NOM, few are initiated by communicative failure, rather, many are sustained forcommunicative success. Within instances of NOF, more are conducted on language use, veryfew contains explanations to explicit linguistic knowledge. This finding well justifies theredefinition of NOM and NOF in this study since the earlier definitions are too narrow andconversational.(2) Cognitively, processing of negotiation is revealed in all three types of negotiations:cumulative, exploratory, and disputational in a descending order. Exploratory negotiation,though not many in number, is found most facilitating in engaging learners actively andexploratorily. However, in spite of teacher effort, passive learner agency often obstructs thedevelopment of such activities into well-sustained instances of exploratory negotiation.(3) Socially, processing of negotiation mostly follows the collaborative and the expert/novicepattern, and only rarely does it follow the dominant/passive pattern. This finding is inconsistency with the sociocultural tradition in China where teacher power is respected andcooperativeness is expected. Prominently, it is found that, in the expert/novice pattern, teacheraffordances, once picked up by learners, function effectively in guiding joint contribution tothe negotiating process and the co-construction of knowledge.(4) In reconceptualizing classroom interaction in English teacher education programs, it isbelieved that the meaning-oriented nature of teacher-learner negotiated interactions reflectsthe heavy impact of CLT on EFL teaching in university English programs in China. Theemphasis on promoting communicative competence in learners has resulted in the over-emphasis on learning English as a skill, rather than a subject knowledge, as well as the neglectof linguistic form in classroom teaching. The gap between learner implicit linguisticknowledge and explicit linguistic knowledge further reveals that, for explicit linguisticknowledge, a kind of conscious, systematic knowledge, to go into learner knowledgerepertoire, special attention from both the teachers and the learners is needed. In strengthening the ‘teacher’ element in English teacher education programs, an adjusted emphasis on thescientific aspect of linguistic knowledge seems to be primary. Abandoning the concept oflanguage learning as the accumulation of knowledge in the mind of the individual from thecognitive perspective, this research is in support of the sociocultural view of co-constructionof knowledge in critical and exploratory ways. Therefore, the cultivation of critical thinkingand logical reasoning through interactive work should be a necessary component of classroomteaching.In conclusion, the significance of this research lies in the following aspects. Firstly, resultsfrom this study well justifies the strengths of the sociocultural perspective of SLA. Theparticipation metaphor, SCT, the ecological view of SLA, and the situated view of learningwhich together form this line of thinking are found to be effective and applicable theories innegotiation research. Secondly, the proved redefinitions of NOM and NOF in this studycontributes to a broader understanding of negotiation in SLA literature. Thirdly, theeffectiveness of SDA as an analytically tool is well verified and can become a useful tool infuture research. Fourthly, this research highlights the necessity of rethinking learner-centeredness in EFL classroom teaching and learning, particularly in Asian cultures like China.The CLT concept in minimizing teacher roles and maximizing learner roles through group orpair work among peers in classroom interaction is challenged. Fifthly, this study provideslanguage teachers and educational researchers with a better understanding of the complexitiesand contingencies of teacher-learner negotiation in the classroom, as well as a betterunderstanding of the linguistic, cognitive and social dimensions of negotiated interaction thatdetermine the extent to which learners are engaged in classroom activities. Lastly, theproposed tentative negotiating interaction model in classroom teaching highlights a means togive prominence to the ‘teacher’ element in English teacher education programs in China.Despite of the effort made, the limitations of this study are self-evident and are to beconquered in future research. Technically, though time-line has been considered, this researchis not an ideal longitudinal study. In addition, the precision in data transcription and coding isin need of improvement. To further prove the validity of the redefinition of NOM&NOF asproposed in this study, and the applicability of SDA as an effective analytical tool fordiscourse studies, more research with different participants in various sociocultural andlearning contexts are needed. Arising as a challenger to the dominant cognitive tradition in thefield of SLA, the strengths of sociocultural line of thinking has been proved by many studies,but it is still necessary for more studies to be conducted, especially in studies concerningsociocultural variables such as negotiated interaction. Lastly, the findings of this observationalstudy suggest that interventional research on classroom negotiation can be conducted tofurther testify the effectiveness of the proposed negotiating interaction model for teachereducation programs in China.更多还原