基于语料库的中国大学英语学习者与英语本族语者书面语中话语标记语使用情况的对比研究

发布时间：2018-07-04 18:03

本文选题：话语标记语 + 因果类话语标记语　；参考：《东北师范大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：话语标记语是一种在日常交际和写作中常见的语言现象。作为一种有助于促进话语理解的重要衔接手段,它不仅可以唤起听话者注意、表明说话人的情感和态度,还能够参与语篇的组织、使话语变得连贯。因此,自20世纪70年代以来,话语标记语受到了语言学家们的广泛关注,并成为语言学界的研究热点之一。另外,在当今中国大学英语学习者的平时写作以及考试作文中议论文是最常见的文体,而议论文本身是一种表达论点与论据之间因果关系的说理性文体,那么,能否恰当地使用表达因果关系的这类话语标记语在一定程度上将决定一篇议论文的成败。鉴于此,本文在研究整体话语标记语的同时,在沿用同一个分类框架的情况下又对因果类话语标记语做了深入细致的分析。目前,对于中国大学英语学习者书面语中话语标记语的实证性对比研究尚未形成完整的体系,因此,本研究具有重要的理论和实践意义。本文基于王立非和祝卫华的话语标记语分类框架,采用中介语对比分析法,调查了中国大学英语学习者与英语本族语者在书面语中对话语标记语尤其是因果类话语标记语的用法的不同。用于研究的两个语料库为:中国学生英语口笔语语料库(2.0版)以及鲁汶英语本族语者作文语料库。本研究借助于免费的研究工具AntConc3.2.1,在两个语料库中对分类框架里的75个话语标记语分别进行了频率检索,并提取了用于研究的相关索引行。对所得数据进行分析后,得出如下研究结果:(1)中国学习者使用整体话语标记语的密度远高于本族语者,但丰富度却低。(2)中国学习者与本族语者对15类话语标记语的使用:在频率排名上较为相似,但在大多数类话语标记语的使用频率上差别很大。其中,中国学习者使用有含义的填充语的频率远远高于本族语者,这表明中国学习者在英语书面语中有明显的口语化倾向。(3)中国学习者使用因果类话语标记语的密度比本族语者高。(4)中国学习者习惯将属于副词连接词的因果类话语标记语用于句首位置,而本族语者常将其用在句中位置。(5)中国学习者在对话语标记语的使用上存在一些明显过多或过少的情况,同时,对因果类话语标记语的使用还存在一些典型的错误情况。以上种种研究结果表明中国大学英语学习者在话语标记语的熟练程度上与英语本族语者存在较大差距。通过对以上研究结果的产生原因进行分析,本研究得出了一些针对中国英语教学的启示:英语教师应注意避免过分强调话语标记语在加强话语衔接连贯中的作用;在平时的教学中,教师应重视那些学生们陌生的、掌握不好的话语标记语的教学,尤其对因果类话语标记语的相关语法知识要做重点讲授;同时,教师还要有意识地加强学生的语体意识,引导学生避免母语负迁移及过度概括的错误,注意培养学生中西文化差异的敏感度;另外,英语教师应尝试采用基于语料库的教学方法,这不仅有助于话语标记语的教学,也对学生输出更加地道的中介语大有裨益。在本文的最后部分,笔者指出了一些本研究的不足之处,同时也为今后有关话语标记语的研究提供了可行的研究方向。
[Abstract]:Discourse markers are a common language phenomenon in daily communication and writing. As an important cohesive device that helps to promote the understanding of discourse, it can not only arouse the attention of the listener, show the speaker's emotion and attitude, but also participate in the organization of the discourse and make the discourse coherent. Therefore, since 1970s, the discourse has been used. Markings are widely concerned by linguists and become one of the hot topics in the field of linguistics. In addition, the most common stylistic writing in today's Chinese College English learners' ordinary writing and examination composition is the most common style, and the argumentative paper itself is a rational style expressing the causal relationship between arguments and arguments, then, The use of such discourse markers that express causality will determine the success or failure of a paper to a certain extent. In view of this, this paper makes a detailed analysis of the causality discourse markers in the case of the same classification framework while studying the overall discourse markers. The empirical contrastive study of discourse markers in the written language of the learners has not yet formed a complete system. Therefore, this study has important theoretical and practical significance. This paper, based on the classification framework of Wang Lifei and Zhu Weihua's discourse markers, uses the method of interlanguage comparative analysis to investigate the Chinese College English learners and English native speakers in the book. The two corpus used in the study are: Chinese students' English oral English Corpus (2 edition) and Leuven native English native speaker composition corpus. This study is based on the free research tool AntConc3.2.1 and 75 in the two corpus. In the analysis of the data, the results are as follows: (1) Chinese learners use the overall discourse markers far higher than the native speakers, but the richness is low. (2) Chinese learners and native speakers to the 15 types of discourse markers. Use: the frequency ranking is similar, but the frequency of the use of most class discourse markers is very different. Among them, Chinese learners use meaningful fillers far higher than native speakers, which indicates that Chinese learners have an obvious tendency to speak in English written language. (3) Chinese learners use causality discourse. The density of markings is higher than that of the native speakers. (4) Chinese learners tend to use the causality discourse markers that belong to the adverb connectives in the sentence head position, while the native speakers often use it in the sentence position. (5) Chinese learners have some obvious or too little cases in the use of the discourse markers, and at the same time, the causal discourse markers are marked. There are some typical errors in the use of language. The results of these studies show that there is a big gap between Chinese College English learners' proficiency in discourse markers and those of English native speakers. Teachers should pay more attention to avoid overemphasizing the role of discourse markers in strengthening the cohesion and coherence of discourse; in ordinary teaching, teachers should attach importance to the teaching of the unfamiliar and unfamiliar discourse markers, especially on the related grammatical knowledge of the causality discourse markers; meanwhile, teachers should be conscious. In addition, English teachers should try to adopt a corpus based teaching method, which is not only helpful to the teaching of discourse markers, but also for the students to export more authentic interlanguage. In the last part of the paper, the author points out some shortcomings of this research, and provides a feasible direction for future research on discourse markers.
【学位授予单位】：东北师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：H319.3

【相似文献】