汉泰疑问句的异同及汉语疑问句的教学策略

发布时间：2018-04-20 12:50

本文选题：汉泰语疑问句 + 疑问句　；参考：《华中师范大学》2017年博士论文

【摘要】：由于各种语言的句法结构以及交际功能存在差异,学习者在习得第二语言的过程中常会遇到诸多问题,并因此影响其第二语言交际能力。疑问句是泰国学生使用频率较高而偏误较多的句型,学生在日常生活中使用汉语进行口语交际时并没有很大的问题,听话者能结合日常经验,猜出他们想要表达的意思,但是如果要求学生正确使用较为复杂的疑问句,对他们来说则十分困难。本文采用比较研究法研究汉泰语疑问句的异同之处,通过调查分析法研究了学生使用汉语疑问句的情况并对调查结果进行统计,同时分析了学生在使用汉语疑问句时产生偏误的原因并归纳出各种偏误类,全文共分以下九个部分:第一章介绍了本文的研究目的、研究范围、研究方法以及语料来源。第二章阐述了汉泰语疑问句的研究现状以及近年来汉泰语对比研究的研究现状,同时介绍了汉泰语疑问句的分类,汉语疑问句有四种类型:是非问、特指问、选择问和正反问;泰语疑问句有三种类型:是非问、特指问和选择问。第三章研究汉泰语的是非疑问句并进行对比分析,归纳总结了汉泰语是非疑问句的提问方式、句子结构以及回答方式的异同点。关于疑问语气词,我们主要讨论分析了汉语是非问句中的语气词“吗”、泰语的语气词“(?)[maj14]”、“(?)[(?):14]”以及它们的附加问形式。第四章按照九种疑问方式:问人、问物或事、问具体对象、问处所、问时间、问性质和状态、问数量、问程度、问原因和目的,将汉泰语特指疑问句中的疑问代词进行对比分析,并讨论分析了有语气词和无语气词的汉泰语特指疑问句之间的异同。第五章是关于汉泰语选择疑问句的对比分析,主要内容有三部分:一是介绍汉语关联词“还是”与泰语关联词“(?)[(?):14]”,二是汉泰语选择问句的句式比较,三是汉泰语选择问句中相同项的省略情况比较。第六章分析解释了汉语正反问句“X不X”结构和泰语特殊选择问句“X(?)[maj41](不)X”,同时,将汉泰语中相同的疑问句式进行了比较分析。第七章是关于汉泰语疑问句疑问程度和交际功能的研究,由于学界已对汉语疑问句的疑问程度有了定性,而我们并未发现针对泰语疑问句疑问程度的研究成果,因此笔者依据邵敬敏(1996)《现代汉语疑问句研究》的研究成果,分析了泰语疑问句的疑问程度,并对汉语和泰语疑问句的疑问程度做了比较。此外,本章还解释了汉泰语疑问句中“询问”与“间接言语行为”的交际功能。第八章是针对泰国学生使用汉语疑问句的调查统计,我们将学生的偏误情况归纳为四种类型:错序、误代、误加和遗漏,借此分析汉语疑问句的教学难点以及产生偏误的原因,并提出关于汉语疑问句教学的教学策略。第九章总结了全文各章的主要观点,指出本文的不足之处,并提出对后续研究工作的建议,希望在汉语疑问句教学方面对教师和学生有所帮助。
[Abstract]:Due to the differences in syntactic structures and communicative functions of different languages, learners often encounter many problems in the process of acquiring a second language, and thus affect their second language communicative competence. The interrogative sentence is a sentence pattern that Thai students use more frequently and have more errors. Students do not have great problems in using Chinese for oral communication in their daily life. Hearers can guess what they want to express by combining their daily experience. But it is difficult for students to use complex questions correctly. This paper studies the similarities and differences of Chinese and Thai interrogative sentences by means of comparative research, and studies the students' use of Chinese interrogative sentences by means of investigation and analysis, and makes statistics on the results of the survey. At the same time, this paper analyzes the causes of students' errors in the use of Chinese interrogative sentences and induces various types of errors. The thesis is divided into nine parts: chapter one introduces the purpose, scope, methods and sources of the study. The second chapter expounds the present situation of the research of Chinese and Thai interrogative sentences and the present research situation of Chinese and Thai comparative studies in recent years. At the same time, it introduces the classification of Chinese and Thai interrogative sentences. There are four types of Chinese interrogative sentences: right and wrong, specific question, selective question and positive and negative question; There are three types of interrogative sentences in Thai: right-right question, specific question and selective question. The third chapter studies the Chinese and Thai non-interrogative sentences and makes a comparative analysis, and summarizes the similarities and differences of the Chinese and Thai non-interrogative sentences, sentence structure and answer methods. As for interrogative motifs, we mainly discuss and analyze the motifs "do" in Chinese non-question sentences, "maj14" in Thai, "maj14" and their forms of additional questions. Chapter IV according to nine ways of questioning: ask people, ask things or things, ask specific objects, ask places, ask time, ask nature and state, ask quantity, ask degree, ask reason and purpose, This paper makes a contrastive analysis of the interrogative pronouns in the Chinese and Thai special reference interrogative sentences, and discusses the similarities and differences between the Chinese and Thai special reference interrogative sentences with and without moods. The fifth chapter is a contrastive analysis of Chinese and Thai selected interrogative sentences. The main contents are as follows: first, it introduces the Chinese relative word "or" or "the Chinese relative word" [Yu Yu: 14], and the second part is the comparison of the sentence structure of the Chinese-Thai choice question sentence, and the second part is the comparison of the sentence structure of the Chinese-Thai choice question sentence. Third, the comparison of omissions of the same items in Chinese and Thai choice questions. Chapter six analyzes and explains the structure of "X not X" in Chinese positive and rhetorical question and the special choice question in Thai ("maj41"). At the same time, it makes a comparative analysis of the same interrogative sentences in Chinese and Thai. The seventh chapter is about the Chinese and Thai interrogative sentence interrogative degree and the communicative function, because the academic circles already had the qualitative to the Chinese interrogative sentence question degree, but we have not found the research result regarding the Thai interrogative sentence interrogative degree. Therefore, according to the research results of Shao Jingmin (1996), the author analyzes the interrogative degree of Thai interrogative sentence, and compares the interrogative degree of Chinese and Thai interrogative sentence. In addition, this chapter also explains the communicative functions of "inquiry" and "indirect speech act" in Chinese and Thai interrogative sentences. In the eighth chapter, aiming at the investigation and statistics of Thai students' use of Chinese interrogative sentences, we summarize the students' errors into four types: wrong order, wrong generation, false addition and omission, so as to analyze the teaching difficulties of Chinese interrogative sentences and the causes of errors. And put forward the teaching strategy about Chinese interrogative sentence teaching. The ninth chapter summarizes the main points of the full text, points out the shortcomings of this paper, and puts forward some suggestions for further research, hoping to be helpful to teachers and students in the teaching of Chinese interrogative sentences.
【学位授予单位】：华中师范大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：H195.3

【参考文献】