政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/111708
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 113451/144438 (79%)
造訪人次 : 51271759      線上人數 : 833
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧：
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料
    •  進階搜尋


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/111708


    題名: 英語母語及非母語者轉折連詞之篇章關係: 以語料庫為本的研究
    Discourse Relations of Adversative Connectives in the Writing of Native and Non-native Speakers of English: A Corpus-based Study
    作者: 王若曦
    Wang, Jo-Hsi
    貢獻者: 鍾曉芳
    Chung, Siaw-Fong
    王若曦
    Wang, Jo-Hsi
    關鍵詞: 轉折連詞
    篇章關係
    語料庫分析
    第二外語寫作研究
    Adversative connectives
    Discourse relations
    Corpus analysis
    EFL/ESL writing
    日期: 2016
    上傳時間: 2017-08-10 09:38:53 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 本研究旨於調查四個轉折連詞包括on the other hand、in/by contrast、 on the contrary 以及 nevertheless 在美國當代語料庫 (COCA) 以及學習者語料庫(ICNALE) 使用之不同情形及第二語學習者的使用錯誤分析。
    本研究從美國當代語料庫 (COCA) 蒐集了四百篇文本(每個轉折連詞各一百篇)以及從學習者語料庫料庫 (ICNALE) 蒐集了一千八百篇學生的寫作，學生的文章分別來自台灣、香港、新加坡、菲律賓的大學生以及母語人士。本研究假設為:雖然四個轉折連詞被歸類為同一類轉折連詞 (adversative type)，各個轉折連詞的語義及用法應有所不同。本研究語料分析主要分為兩部分，第一部分分析各個轉折連詞中的篇章關係 (discourse relation)，調查四個轉折連詞上下文的不同反義的語義情況。第二部分聚焦於轉折連詞上下文中的主題分布 (topic categorization)，旨於發現是否特定轉折連詞出現於特定主題之內。
    研究結果經由語料分析發現，四個轉折連詞有特定傾向的篇章關係和主題分布。在學習者語料庫中，本研究發現第二語言學習者比起母語人士，使用更多轉折連詞於寫作中，特別是on the other hand 以及nevertheless。台灣學生以及英語為第二外語學生在上下中，常將on the other hand的篇章關係使用為in addition 之用法。在連詞nevertheless方面，雖然學生使用頻率較高，但多為誤用情況，顯示出學生對於該轉折連詞的不熟悉情況。而in/by contrast 和on the contrary 皆不常出現於第二語言學習者和母語人士的寫作中。本研究最後提出在英語教學上的建議：在課堂上教導轉折連接詞時，應需加強語意以及上下文方面的探討，並訓練學生正確文句之間的邏輯關係。
    The present study adopts corpus analysis to investigate four adversative connectives (ACs), including on the other hand, in/by contrast, on the contrary, and nevertheless in the native corpus, the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA), and in the leaner corpus, the International Corpus Network of Asian Learners of English, (ICNALE). The comparison of the two corpora and the common misuse by L2 learners are also presented.
    The data comprise of 400 texts in COCA (100 texts for each AC) and 1800 essays written by students in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, the Philippines, and by native speakers in ICNALE. The research hypothesis is that although the four ACs are classified in the same ‘adversative’ type, their meanings and uses are different from one another. The adoption of corpus helps to find the patterns of each AC. The data are analyzed from two perspectives: one is the discourse relation while the other is topic categorization. The discourse relation refers to the relations of the preceding and following co-texts of the AC. The topic categorization, on the other hand, aims at finding if there are specific topics that are frequently occurred with certain ACs and if these topics are consistent before or after the occurrences of the Cs.
    The findings confirm the prediction that by analyzing the data in COCA, each AC exists in certain discourse relations and topics. The present study finds that different from native speakers, L2 learners often use on the other hand as ‘addition’ yet a great number of uses of nevertheless are viewed as misuse. As for on the contrary and in/by contrast, both native speakers and L2 learners seldom apply the ACs in their writing. The present study also provides the common misuse patterns in ESL/EFL students’ writing. It is hoped that the findings have implications for teachers and learners to be aware of the differences of ACs.
    參考文獻: Altenberg, B., & Tapper, M. (1998). The use of adverbial
    connectors in advanced Swedish learners` written
    English. In S. Granger (Ed.), Learner English on
    computer (pp.80-93). New York: Longman.
    Anthony, L. (2005, July). AntConc: design and development
    of a freeware corpus analysis toolkit for the technical
    writing classroom. In IPCC 2005. Proceedings.
    International Professional Communication Conference,
    2005. (pp. 729-737). IEEE.
    Bell, D. M. (2010). Nevertheless, still and yet: Concessive cancellative discourse markers. Journal of
    Pragmatics, 42(7), 1912-1927.
    Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., &
    Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and
    written English. London: Longman.
    Bose, M. N. K. (2005). A text book of English Language
    Teaching for Indian Students. New Century Book House,
    Ltd, Chennai.
    Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (2006). Cambridge grammar of
    English. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
    Celce-Murcia, M. & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The Grammar
    Book: An ESL/EFL Teacher`s Course (2nd ed). Boston:
    Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
    Chen, C. W. Y. (2006). The use of conjunctive adverbials
    in the academic papers of advanced Taiwanese EFL
    learners. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics,
    11(1), 113-130.
    Conrad, S. (2000). Will corpus linguistics revolutionize
    grammar teaching in the 21st century?. Tesol Quarterly,
    34(3), 548-560.
    Corder, S. P. (1971). Idiosyncratic dialects and error
    analysis (pp. 14-25). Groos.
    Cotos, E. (2014). Enhancing writing pedagogy with learner
    corpus data. ReCALL, 26(02), 202-224.
    Crewe, W. J. (1990). The illogic of logical connectives.
    ELT journal, 44(4), 316-325.
    Cruse, D. A. (1986). Lexical semantics. Cambridge
    University Press.
    Field, Y., & Oi, Y. L. M. (1992). A comparison of
    internal conjunctive cohesion in the English essay
    writing of Cantonese speakers and native speakers of
    English. RELC journal, 23(1), 15-28.
    Fisiak, J. (1981). Contrastive linguistics and the
    language teacher. Janus Book Pub/Alemany Pr.
    Gardezi, S. A., & Nesi, H. (2009). Variation in the
    writing of economics students in Britain and Pakistan:
    The ACse of conjunctive ties. In M. Charles, D. Pecorari, & S.Hunston (Eds.), Academic writing: At the
    interface of corpus and discourse (pp.236-250). London:
    Continuum.
    Gilquin, G., & Paquot, M. (2007). Spoken features in
    learner academic writing: Identification, explanation
    and solution. In Corpus linguistics conference CL2007.
    Granger, S., & Tyson, S. (1996). Connector usage in the
    English essay writing on native and non‐native EFL
    speakers of English. World Englishes, 15(1), 17-27.
    Halliday, M.A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in
    English. New York: Longman.implications. International
    Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 13(4), 491-518.
    Hasselgren, A. (1994). Lexical teddy bears and advanced
    learners: A study into the ways Norwegian students cope
    with English vocabulary. International Journal of
    Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 237-258.
    Hung, M.F. (2003) A Study on the Use of Conjunctions in
    Compositions by Taiwanese Senior-high-school Students.
    Master’s theses, National Chengchi University.
    Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary interactions:
    Metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing. Journal of
    second language writing, 13(2), 133-151.
    Johns, T. (1991). Should you be persuaded: Two samples of
    data-driven learning materials (pp. 1-13).
    Kachru, B. B. (2006). The English language in the outer
    circle. World Englishes, 3, 241-255.
    Keenan, E. O., Schieffelin, B. B., & Li, C. N. (1976).
    Topic as a Discourse Notion: A Study of Topic in the
    Conversations of Children and Adults in Subject and
    Topic.
    Kramsch, C. (1998). Language and culture. Oxford
    University Press.
    Lake, J. (2004). Using ‘on the contrary’: the conceptual
    problems for EAP students. ELT journal, 58(2), 137-144.
    Leedham, M., & Cai, G. (2013). Besides… on the other
    hand: Using a corpus approach to explore the influence
    of teaching materials on Chinese students’ use of
    linking adverbials. Journal of Second Language Writing,
    22(4), 374-389.
    Lei, L. (2012). Linking adverbials in academic writing on
    applied linguistics by Chinese doctoral students.
    Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(3), 267-
    275.
    Liu, D. (2008). Linking adverbials: An across-register
    corpus study and its implications. International Journal
    of Corpus Linguistics, 13(4), 491-518.
    Liu, M., & Braine, G. (2005). Cohesive features in
    argumentative writing produced by Chinese
    undergraduates. System, 33(4), 623-636.
    Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge University Press.
    Milton, J. C., & Tsang, E. S. C. (1993). A corpus-based
    study of logical connectors in EFL students` writing:
    directions for future research. In Studies in lexis.
    Proceedings of a seminar on lexis organized by the
    Language Centre of the HKUST, Hong Kong (Language
    Centre, HKUST, Hong Kong, 1993).
    Mudhhi, S. K., & Hussein, R. F. (2014). A Corpus–based
    Study of Conjunctive Adjuncts in the Writings of Native
    and Non-native Speakers of English. English Linguistics
    Research, 3(2), p18-32.
    Narita, M., Sato, C., & Sugiura, M. (2004). Connector
    Usage in the English Essay Writing of Japanese EFL
    Learners. In LREC.
    Nation, I. S. P., & Beglar, D. (2007). A vocabulary size
    test. The language teacher, 31(7), 9-13.
    Park, Y. Y. (2013a). How Korean EFL Students Use
    Conjunctive Adverbials in Argumentative Writing. English
    Teaching, 68(4).
    Park, Y. Y. (2013b). Korean College EFL Students` Use of
    Contrastive Conjunctions in Argumentative Writing.
    English Teaching, 68(2).
    Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, J., & Svartvik, J.
    (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language.
    London: Longman.
    Sanders, T., & Maat, H. P. (2006). Cohesion and
    coherence: Linguistic approaches. reading, 99, 440-466.
    Schachter, J. (1974). An error in error analysis.
    Language learning, 24(2), 205-214.
    Selinker, L., & Rutherford, W. E. (2013). Rediscovering
    interlanguage. Routledge.
    Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2004). Academic writing for
    graduate students: Essential tasks and skills (Vol. 1).
    Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
    Williams, H. (1996). An analysis of English conjunctive
    adverbial expressions in English. Unpublished doctoral
    dissertation. University of California, Los Angeles.
    Yang, W., & Sun, Y. (2012). The use of cohesive devices
    in argumentative writing by Chinese EFL learners at
    different proficiency levels. Linguistics and Education,
    23(1), 31-48.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    英國語文學系
    100551014
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1005510141
    資料類型: thesis
    顯示於類別:[英國語文學系] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 大小格式瀏覽次數
    014101.pdf1104KbAdobe PDF218檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋