【作者】 邓耀臣；

【导师】 王同顺；

【作者基本信息】 上海交通大学 ， 外国语言学及应用语言学， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 尽管众多研究一致表明多词单位(multi-word unit)是本族语者语言能力的重要组成部分(Hymes, 1992; Jesperson, 1904; Nattinger & DeCarrico, 1992),在语言的发展过程中起着不可忽视的作用(Brown, 1973; Clark, 1974; Peters, 1977, 1983; Tomasello, 2003; Wray, 1999)。但是,他们在二语或外语学习中起着什么作用?二语或外语学习者在掌握这些语言单位时呈现何种模式?到目前为止,尚未对此进行深入、系统的研究。本研究以一类特殊的多词单位-程式化序列(formulaic sequences)为研究对象,重点探讨了中国英语学习者如何掌握目标语中的多词单位。具体的研究问题包括:(1)与英语本族语者常用的程式化序列相比,中国学习者英语口语中的高频程式化序列存在何种变异特征?(2)在课堂教学环境下,程式化序列的学习呈现何种发展途径?(3)中国学习者在英语口语生成过程中,调控分析体系和套语体系的机制是什么?(4)影响中国英语学习者掌握程式化序列的主要因素有哪些?本研究首先综述了程式化序列研究的相关文献,进而提出了程式化序列的可操作定义并建立了对程式化序列进行实证研究的概念框架。在此框架的基础上,本研究采用数据驱动-语料库多重比较的方法对中国学习者英语口语中的程式化序列进行了定性、定量分析。本研究所依据的学习者语料取自《英语口试语料库》。该语料库包含初级、中级和高级三种水平学习者的英语口头表达材料,分别构成三个子语料库。所采用的本族语参照语料库是《密执安学术英语口语语料库》抽样,含约250,000词次。该抽样语料无论是在库容、话语模式还是在语料提供者的年龄和受教育程度方面皆与《英语口试语料库》中高水平学习者子库相匹配。为了方便语料处理,研究者开发了一套专门适用于程式化序列研究的语料分析工具。在数据处理过程中,本研究使用了对数似然比检验、T-检验、Z-检验和对应分析等统计分析方法。针对提出的四个问题,本研究的主要发现归纳如下:(1)通过对比高水平学习者和英语本族语者所使用的程式化序列,本研究结果表明中国学习者英语口语具有少用、超用和误用目标语程式化序列等特征。对过少使用的程式化序列在形式、意义和功能方面的进一步分析表明,少用特征主要源于以下几种程式化序列的使用不足:惯用型式(formulaic patterns)、表达虚化意义(delexicalized meaning)或隐喻意义的词语序列和具有语用功能的词语序列。研究还发现,中国英语学习者同时表现出过分依赖个别程式化序列的倾向;并且他们还大量使用一些本族语者少用或根本不用的词语序列(learners’idiosyncratic sequences)。尽管在口语交际中学习者也使用一些具有语用功能的词语序列,但是和英语本族语者相比,在使用方式和实现功能方面存在明显差异。(2)通过对比不同英语水平学习者所使用的程式化序列,本研究结果表明中国学习者英语口语中少用程式化序列这一现象属于语言发展性特征。学习者英语水平越高,使用的程式化序列的数量和种类就越多。对三个子语料库中的程式化序列在形式和意义两方面做进一步的对比分析,我们发现随着英语水平的提高,学习者越来越多地使用惯用型式和表达虚化意义或隐喻意义的词语序列,而越来越少地依赖固定套语(formulaic routines)和表达字面意义的词语序列。随着语言学习的发展,这两种趋势逐渐接近英语本族语者的使用特征。与形式和意义相比,在功能方面,程式化序列呈现出较为复杂的发展模式。首先,不同英语水平的学习者倾向使用不同功能类型的程式化序列。另外,不同功能类型的程式化序列呈现出不同的发展模式。随着学习者英语水平的提高,实现语篇组织功能的词语序列的使用量呈逐渐上升的趋势,而实现人际功能和指称功能的词语序列的使用皆呈U-型发展模式,但二者的发展途径却截然不同。(3)在策略使用方面,我们发现在英语口语生成过程中,学习者明显依赖以规则为基础的分析体系(rule-based analytic system)。但同时大量证据表明,学习者,特别是高水平学习者也尽力依靠以记忆为基础的套语体系(memory-based holistic system)以便于完成交际任务。和英语本族语者一样,他们也把使用程式化序列当作一种语言产出策略,只是在使用量上尚未达到本族语者的程度。在心理词库方面,本研究结果表明,程式化序列同样是中国英语学习者语言材料的重要组成部分。但在高频单词(formulaic words)和程式化序列二者比重方面,和英语本族语者相比有明显不同。并且,两类使用者所掌握的程式化序列在形式、意义和功能方面也存在显著差异。(4)本研究结果表明母语迁移、语言输入量和学习者英语水平是影响中国学习者掌握目标语程式化序列的三种主要因素。母语和目标语之间的差异是造成学习者少用、超用和误用程式化序列的重要因素。学习者词典收录不全、教材输入不足是导致学习者少用具有语用功能的词语序列的主要原因。从程式化序列的发展特征即可看出学习者英语水平对其的影响。文章最后讨论了本研究对于同类研究和外语教学和学习q的启示意义;指出了其局限性以及今后同类研究的方向。更多还原

【Abstract】 While it is widely acknowledged that multi-word units constitute a significant part of native speakers’linguistic competence (Hymes, 1992; Jesperson, 1904; Nattinger & DeCarrico, 1992) and that they are of great importance in first language development (Brown, 1973; Clark, 1974; Peters, 1977, 1983; Tomasello, 2003; Wray, 1999), their roles in second/foreign language learning have not been given adequate attention so far.With formulaic sequences (FSs)—a special type of multi-word units, as a focus, this study aims to investigate how Chinese learners of English master these complex expressions in the target language. Specifically, this study addresses four questions: (1) What are the distinctive features of FS use in Chinese EFL learners’spoken English? (2) What are the patterns of FS development in EFL learning in classroom instruction settings? (3) What is the mechanism responsible for manipulating the dual mode system in Chinese EFL learners’oral production? (4) What are the main factors influencing the learning of FSs by Chinese EFL learners?On the basis of literature review, this study first proposed an operational definition of FS and developed a conceptual framework for FS studies. Then, with a corpus-driven multiple-comparison approach, this study analyzed quantitatively as well as qualitatively the FSs in Chinese EFL learners’spoken English.The learner data analyzed in this study are mainly from the Corpus of Oral English Test (COET), which contains the transcripts of the oral production of Chinese EFL learners at three different English proficiency levels: elementary, intermediate and advanced. The native reference corpus is a sample of Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English (MICASE), which contains around 250,000 running words. The materials in the sample of MICASE are comparable to the data of Chinese advanced learners of English in COET, whether in corpus size, discourse mode, speakers’age or in speakers’educational level. For corpus processing, a suit of computer tools were specifically developed. During data analysis, a series of statistical tests were applied, including Log-likelihood test, T-test, Z-test, and Correspondence Analysis.In response to the research questions, this study has obtained the following findings:(1) By comparing the FSs produced by Chinese advanced learners of English and those favored by native English speakers, this study has shown that Chinese EFL learners’use of FSs displays a complex picture of underuse, overuse and misuse of the target FSs. Further investigations into the underused FSs in terms of form, meaning and function have indicated that the underuse pattern is largely due to the less frequent use of the following types of FSs: formulaic patterns (FPs), i.e. phrases which follow a set pattern but have one or two open slots to be filled; the FSs that convey the delexicalized or metaphorical meanings and the FSs that perform pragmatic functions in oral interactions. But Chinese EFL learners tend to depend heavily on some specific FSs and use massively some learners’idiosyncratic sequences, which are never used by or not acceptable to native English speakers. Even if they use some pragmatic sequences, they do not use these sequences in the same way as native English speakers do.(2) By comparing the FSs produced by Chinese EFL learners at three different English proficiency levels in terms of amount of use, this study has revealed that the general pattern of underuse of FSs in Chinese EFL learners’spoken English is developmental in nature. With the increase of their English proficiency level, Chinese EFL learners make use of more and more FSs in their oral production. A finer-grained analysis of the FSs in COET in terms of form and meaning has shown that with the advancement of EFL learning, Chinese EFL learners become more and more dependent on FPs and the FSs with delexicalized or metaphorical meanings but less and less on formulaic routines (FRs) and the FSs with literal meanings. Both trends gradually approximate to the native speaker level. The development of functional use of FSs displays a more complex picture. Firstly, Chinese EFL learners at different English proficiency levels favor different functional categories of FSs. Secondly, different functional categories of FSs display different developmental trends. With the progression of EFL learning, the discourse-organizing sequences display a continuously rising trend but two U-shaped courses of development with opposite trends are found in the cases of the referential and the interpersonal sequences.(3) Concerning the strategic preference, this study has indicated that Chinese EFL learners have a tendency to use the rule-based system for language production. But ample evidence has shown that they attempt to behave like native English speakers in employing FSs as a strategy for language production. As for the mental storage of FSs, it is found that FSs also constitute a large part of Chinese EFL learners’building materials. But the relative balance of formulaic words to FSs in Chinese EFL learners’mental lexicon is significantly different from that of native English speakers. In addition, the difference is also identified in quality, especially in terms of form, meaning and function.(4) The present study has provided evidence for three key factors that influence FS learning by EFL learners: L1 transfer, language input and EFL learners’English proficiency. Firstly, L1-L2 difference is an important factor accounting for the underuse, the overuse and the misuse of the target FSs. Secondly, the underuse of the pragmatic sequences is closely related to the low coverage of these FSs in learners’dictionaries and their lower frequencies in the textbooks. The effect of EFL learners’English proficiency is evident in the patterns of FS development.Based on these findings, the research discusses some theoretical and pedagogical implications that the present study has for English teaching and learning in the Chinese context. In addition, it offers its limitations and suggestions for future research.更多还原