現在位置首頁 > 博碩士論文 > 詳目
論文中文名稱:臺灣英語為外語研究生使用英語建議策略之研究 [以論文名稱查詢館藏系統]
論文英文名稱:A Study of Suggestion Strategies Used by EFL Graduate Students in Taiwan [以論文名稱查詢館藏系統]
院校名稱:臺北科技大學
學院名稱:人文與社會科學學院
系所名稱:應用英文系碩士班
畢業學年度:101
出版年度:102
中文姓名:廖期勳
英文姓名:Charlze Chi-Hsun Liao
研究生學號:98548002
學位類別:碩士
語文別:英文
口試日期:2013-07-31
論文頁數:99
指導教授中文名:洪媽益
指導教授英文名:Michael Tanangkingsing
口試委員中文名:賀一平;林進瑛
口試委員英文名:I-Ping Ho;Chin-Ying Lin
中文關鍵詞:語言行為建議英語為外語研究生言談情境填充問卷性別
英文關鍵詞:speech actsuggestionEFL graduate studentsDCTgender
論文中文摘要:本研究主要目的在探討臺灣英語為外語研究生使用英語建議策略之情形,以期對有效的溝通方式提出建議。主要探討問題包括:(1)以英語為外語的研究生建議策略為何?(2)以英語為外語的研究生建議策略的形式為何?(3)男性和女性研究生在建議策略的使用上是否有差異?(4)社會距離和社會地位如何影響建議策略(5)以英語為外語的研究生對建議策略之使用上其觀感為何? 本研究受測對象30位就讀於臺灣某大學的研究生。此研究採用兩種工具,主要的工具是言談情境填充問卷,共有12題情境,求受試者需根據實際情形,回答中他們在真實情境中會回應的句子。另一研究工具為訪談,訪談中包括7個問題。研究結果顯示,以英語為外語的研究生,最常使用的建議策略為間接策略,其次是緩和策略。此外,針對男性和女性研究生,男性最常使用的建議策略為間接策略女性則為緩合策略。再者,藉由訪談發現本研究中的研究生,最難建議的對象是在上位者,如師長。最容易建議的對象是平輩者,如朋友或同事。另外,對以英語為外語的研究生而言,用中文建議比用英文建議還要容易,因為他們可以更清楚的傳達意思,不用擔心文化上的差距。最後,希望透過本研究,能對目前臺灣以英語為外語的研究生所使用的建議策略有更深入了解,並能進一步將建議策略的使用融入教材中,以期能提升臺灣研究生的英語溝通策略使用之成效。
論文英文摘要:The present study aims to investigate suggestion strategies used by EFL graduate students in Taiwan and help provide some suggestions for effective communication. The research questions in the study are:(1)What are the suggestion strategies of EFL graduate students?(2)What are the forms of suggestion strategies of EFL graduate students?(3)Are there any differences between male and female EFL graduate students in using suggestion strategies?(4)How social distance and social status have an effect on their making suggestions?(5)What are EFL graduate students’ perceptions toward the use of suggestion strategies? The participants of the study were 30 graduate students selected from the graduate students in a university in Taiwan. The present study adopted two instruments. The main instrument was a discourse completion task(DCT)questionnaire with a total of 12 situations. The other instrument was an interview guide with a total of 7 questions used to obtain more qualitative data. The result of the present study showed that the most frequent strategy used by participants is the indirect suggestion strategy. The other strategy used more often is hedged suggestion strategy. Furthermore, results also indicated that most of the participants feel that suggesting suggestions aimed at people of higher status, like teachers, are the most difficult and that those made toward people of equal status, like friends, are much easier. Finally, the results of the study are expected to enhance the understanding of EFL suggestion strategies used by graduate students in Taiwan and further facilitate the effectiveness of EFL communication strategies employed by students.
論文目次:ABSTRACT (Chinese) i
ABSTRACT (English) iii
ACKNOLEDGEMENTS v
Table of Contents ix
List of Tables xii
List of Figures xiv
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background & Motivations 1
1.2 Purpose of the Study 4
1.3 Research Questions 4
1.4 Significance of the Study 5
1.5 Definition of Terms 5
1.6 Organization of the Thesis 7
Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 8
2.1 Introduction 8
2.2 Overview of Communication Strategies 8
2.3 Theories of Suggestion Strategies 10
2.3.1 Speech Act Theory 10
2.3.2 Politeness and Face Theory 12
2.3.2.1 Politeness in English 13
2.3.2.2 Politeness in Chinese 14
2.3.3 Grice’s Conversational Maxims 15
2.3.4 Leech’s Politeness Principle 16
2.3.5 Interlanguage Pragmatics 17
2.3.6 Pragmatic Transfer 18
2.3.7 Research on Suggestion 20
2.4 Previous Studies on the Speech Act of Suggestion 21
2.5 Summary 25
Chapter 3 METHODOLOGY 27
3.1 Overview 27
3.2 Participants 27
3.3 Instruments 28
3.4 Procedures 33
3.5 Data Analysis 33
3.5.1 Coding Scheme 33
3.5.1.1 Alerter 34
3.5.1.2 Head Act Strategy 35
3.5.1.3 Supportive Moves 37
3.5.2 Analysis Procedures 39
Chapter 4 RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS 40
4.1 Overview 40
4.2 Alerter 40
4.3 Head Act Strategy 42
4.3.1 Overall Head Act Strategy Use 42
4.3.2 Social Factors 46
4.3.2.1 Social Distance 46
4.3.2.2 Social Status 51
4.4 Hedging Devices 56
4.4.1 Probability Modals 57
4.4.2 Downtoners 59
4.4.3 Question Forms 60
4.5 Supportive Moves 61
4.6 Perceptions Toward Suggestion Behavior 68
4.7 Summary of Findings 83
Chapter 5 CONCLUSIONS 85
5.1 Overview 85
5.2 Answers to Research Questions 85
5.3 Implications 86
5.4 Suggestions for Further Research 88
REFERENCES 89
APPENDIX A DCT English Version/Chinese Version 95
APPENDIX B Interview Questions 99
論文參考文獻:Alcon, E. (2001). Developing pragmatic competence in the academic setting: The case of suggestions in NS/NNS advising sessions. In S. Posteguillo, I. Fortanet and J. C. Palmer, eds., Methodology and new technologies in language for specific purposes. Castello: Servei de Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I, 79-86.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Austin, J. L. (1975). How to do things with words. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Banerjee, J., & Carrell, P. L. (1988). Tuck in your shirt, you squid: Suggestions in ESL. Language Learning. 38, 313-364.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Hartford, B. S. (1990). Congruence in native and nonnative conversations: Status balance in the academic advising session. Language Learning, 40(4), 467-501.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Hartford, B. S. (1993). Learning the rules of academic talk: A longitudinal study of pragmatic change. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15 (3), 279-304.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Hartford, B. S. (1996). Input in an Institutional Setting. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18 (2), 171-88.
Bataineh, Ruba F. and Bataineh, Rula F. (2006). Apology Strategies of Jordanian EFL University Students. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(11), 1901-1927
Beebe, L. M., & Cummings, M. C. (1996). Natural speech data versus written questionnaire data: How data collection method affects speech act performance. In S. M. Gass, & J. Neu (Eds.), Speech acts across cultures: Challenges to Communication in a Second Language (pp. 65-86). Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Beebe, L. M., Takahashi, T, & Uliss-Weltz, R. (1990). Pragmatic transfer in ESL refusals. In R. Scarcella, E. Andersen, & S. D. Krashen (Eds.), Developing communicative competence in a second language (pp. 55-73). New York: Newbury House.
Billmyer, K., & Varghese, M. (2000). Investigating instrument-based pragmatic variability: Effects of enhancing discourse completion tests. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), 517-552.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). The CCSARP coding manual. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 273-294). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Bongaerts, T. et al.(1987). Perspective and proficiency in L2 referential communication. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9(2), 171-199.
Bonikowska, M. P. (1988). The choice of opting out. Applied Linguistics, 9(2), 169-181.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S.C. (1978/1987). Politeness: Some universals in language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chen, T. (2002). Suggestion in Chinese: Its use in group counseling. Unpublished master thesis, Department of English, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu.
Dornyei, Z., & Thurrell, S. (1992). Conversation and dialogues in action. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hallt.
Edmondson, W. (1981). Spoken discourse: A Model for analysis. London: Longman.
Ellis, R. (1992). Second Language Acquisition and Language Pedagogy. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.
Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1983). Plans and strategies in foreign language communication. In C. Faerch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in interlanguage communication (pp. 20-60). London: Longman.
Farghal, M. & Al-Khatib, M.A. (2001). Jordanian college students’ responses to compliments: A pilot study. Journal of Pragmatics 33, 1485-1502.
Goffman, E. (1967). Interactional ritual: Essays of face-to-face behavior. New York: Anchor Books.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole, P. and Morgan, J. (eds) Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, 41–58. New York: Academic Press; reprinted in Grice, H. P. 1989b, 22–40.
Gu, Y. (1990). Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 237-257.
Hinkel, E. (1994). Appropriateness of advice as L2 solidarity strategy. RELC Journal, 25(2), 71-93.
Hinkel, E. (1997). Appropriateness of advice: DCT and multiple choice data. Applied Linguistics, 18, 1-26.
Ho, David Y. (1976). On the concept of face. American Journal of Sociology, 81(4), 867-884.
House, J. & Kasper, G. (1981). Politeness markers in English and German. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Conversational routine (pp. 157-185). The Hague: Mouton.
Jiang, X. (2006). Suggestions: What should ESL students know? System, 34, 36-54.
Kasper, G. (1992). Pragmatic transfer. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 8, 3, 203~231.
Kasper. G. (1997). “A” stands for acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 81, 307-312.
Kasper, G. & Dahl, M. (1991). Research methods in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 213-247.
Koike, D. A. (1996). Transfer of pragmatic competence and suggestions in Spanish foreign language learning. In S. M. Gass & J. Neu (Eds.), Speech acts across cultures: Challenges to communication in a second language (pp. 257-281). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
Li, C. N. & Thompson, S. A. (1981). Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar, Berkeley: University of California Press. Translated into Chinese as Hanyu Yufa. 1983. Huang Shuan-fan, trans., Taipei: Crane Publishing Co.
Lii-Shih, Y. E. (1994). What do “yes” and “no” really mean in Chinese? In J. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown University round table on languages and linguistics. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Lin, R. Y. (2009). Taiwanese EFL learners’ suggestion behaviors: The cross-cultural perspective. Unpublished master thesis, Department of English, National Chengchi University, Taipei.
Lin, W. T. (2011). Compliment responses by EFL graduate students: A case study of EFL graduate students in northern Taiwan. Unpublished master thesis, Department of Applied Foreign Languages, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei.
Mao, L. R. (1994). Beyond politeness theory: Face revisited and renewed. Journal of Pragmatics, 21(5), 451-486.
Martinez-Flor, A. (2004). The effect of instruction on the development of pragmatic competence in the English as a foreign language context: A study based on suggestions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universitat Jaume I, Castellon, Spain.
Martinez-Flor, A., & Fukuya, Y. J. (2005). The effects of instruction on learners’ production of appropriate and accurate suggestions. System, 33, 463-480.
Matsumura, S. (2001). Learning the rules for offering advice: A quantitative approach to second language socialization. Language Learning, 51(4), 635-679.
Morisaki, S., & Gudykunst, W. B. (1994). Face in Japan and the United States. In S. Ting-Toomey (Ed.), The challenge of facework (pp. 47-93).
Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Pishghadam, R., & Sharafaddini, M. (2011). Delving into speech act of suggestion: A case of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2, 152-160.
Rintell, E. (1979). Getting your speech act together: the pragmatic ability of second language learners. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 17, 97-106.
Rintell, E. (1981). Sociolinguistic Variation and Pragmatic Ability: A Look at Learners. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 27, 11-34.
Schmidt, R. (1983). Interaction, acculturation and the acquisition of communicative competence. In N. Wolfson & E. Judd (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition (pp. 137-174). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Searle, J. R. (1965). What is a speech act? In Davis, S. (ed.), Pragmatics: A reader (pp. 254-264). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1975). Indirect speech acts. In Davis, S (ed.), Pragmatics: A reader (pp. 265-277). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University.
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10(3), 209-231.
Tarone, E. (1981). Some thoughts on the notion of communication strategy. TESOL Quarterly, 15(3), 285-295.
Thomas, J. (1983) Cross-Cultural Pragmatic Failure, Applied Linguistics 4, 2, 91-112.
Thonus, T. (1999). Dominance in academic writing tutorials: Gender, language proficiency, and the offering of suggestions. Discourse and Society, 10, 225-248.
Tsai, M. W. (2010). A study of refusal strategies used by EFL graduate students. Unpublished master thesis, Department of Applied Foreign Languages, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei.
Wardhaugh, R. (1985). How conversation works. Oxford ; New York : B. Blackwell in association with Andre Deutsch.
Wierzbicka, A. (1991). Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Wolfson, N. (1983). An empirically based analysis of complimenting in American-English.In Sociolinguistics and Language Acquisition, (Eds). Nessa Wolfson and Elliot Judd, 82‐95.Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.
Yu, M. (2004). Interlinguistic variation and similarity in second language speech act behavior. The Modern Language Journal, 88, 102-119.
Yuan, Y. (2001). An inquiry into empirical pragmatics data gathering methods: Written DCTs, oral DCTs, field notes, and natural conversations. Journal of Pragmatics, 33 (2), 271-292.
Žegarac, V. & Pennington, M. C. (2000). Pragmatic transfer in intercultural communication. In: Spencer-Oatey, H. (Ed.). Culturally speaking-managing rapport through talk across cultures. London: Continuum, 165-190.
Zuskin, R. D. (1993). Assessing L2 sociolinguistic competence: In search of support from pragmatic theories. Pragmatics and Language Learning, 4, 166-182.
論文全文使用權限:不同意授權