Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: 網路論壇中請求行為華俄策略對比─以旅美主題為例
Contrastive Analysis of Request Speech Acts Made on Chinese and Russian Internet Forums: A Case Study on the Subject of USA Travel Inquiry
Authors: 謝佳玲
Hsieh, Chia-Ling
Chang, Hsiu-Cheng
Keywords: 請求言語行為
speech act of request
pragmatic strategies
Chinese-Russian contrastive analysis
online communication
teaching Chinese as second language
Issue Date: 2018
Abstract: 本研究分析華語《背包客棧》與俄語《Форум Винского》兩論壇中的請求行為策略,探析華語與俄語人士在網路論壇中,請求策略的特色與跨語言溝通的異同。研究方法與策略分析的架構,主要參照Blum-Kulka et al.(1989)與謝佳玲(2015)請求行為的研究成果,並根據實際語料進行修訂。 研究結果顯示,華語與俄語請求策略的選擇呈現相似的趨勢,以單一策略獨用「提問策略」為主,以兩種策略「釋因策略+提問策略」並用的結構為輔。華俄請求皆偏好自我取向的主體策略,以「提問策略」為主,且俄語請求的使用頻率遠高於華語。然華語請求中「表願策略」的使用頻率高於「指示策略」,俄語則相反。同時,華俄請求皆大量採用輔助策略,以「釋因策略」為主。但華語偏好「稱呼策略」在前,「問候策略」在後,俄語則相反。此外,從請求序列的結構分析可知,華語與俄語請求皆傾向「後置模式」的言談方式,即在話語的起始位置使用輔助策略,主體策略則安排在後。 是故,本研究推論:不同於前人研究,華語與俄語請求受到網路語域中講求效率與速度,以及社會變遷的影響,兩語言請求策略的選用顯露出個體主義文化的溝通特色。而華俄請求中其他策略的些許差異與直接程度的落差,主因則在於兩者對於禮貌認知的不同與語言本體的差異。然而,請求的結構安排卻受到文化因素與語料主題的影響,仍保持集體主義文化的溝通特色。 最後,本研究根據研究結果中請求行為的策略特性與結構,結合語用教學的相關理論,如二語語用能力發展、顯性與隱性語用教學的細則等,提出教學建議。並且進一步以Google Classroom作為實際操作網路論壇的平台,希冀能提供華語教師請求言語行為之語用教學的參考;另一方面能提供中高級(B2)以上的華語學習者,在培養語言與語用能力之餘,亦學習透過資訊科技與網際網路的輔助,獲得實際應用華語的機會與環境,成為自學的助力。
The following research analyzes Chinese and Russian-language request strategies employed on the internet forums and, respectively. The research notes distinguishing features of request strategies, as well as explores the differences and similarities in interlingual communication for Chinese and Russian-speaking users of the two forums. Research methodology, along with frameworks for strategy analysis, are sourced primarily from results presented in the studies Blum-Kulka et. al (1989) and Hsieh (2015), with additional revisions based on the actual language material studied. Research results reveal similarities in request strategy selection for the two language user groups. Both Chinese and Russian-speaking users primarily chose single, independently deployed “questioning strategies,” with a secondary preference for a combination of “explaining strategies” and “questioning strategies.” Additionally, Chinese and Russian-language users both tended to select self-oriented main strategies, with “questioning strategies” as the most common, though the usage frequency is higher for Russian than Chinese. Furthermore, the usage of “strategies of expressing desire” is higher than “imperative strategies” for Chinese-language users, while the opposite is true for Russian. At the same time, requests in both Chinese and Russian utilized a substantial number of supportive moves, with “explaining strategies” as the most common form. Once again however, Chinese-language users display a preference for “addressing strategies” over “greeting strategies”, and vice versa for Russian. Furthermore, an analysis of the construction of request sequences for Chinese and Russian-language users reveal that communication in both languages tend towards a “postpositive discourse pattern”, or the placement of supportive moves at the front, with main strategies further on. Thus, this research inferences the following: unlike in the work of previous authors, Chinese and Russian language request-making is found to be influenced by the high-efficiency, high-speed linguistic realm provided by the internet. This, along with the influence of social change, results in the selection of request strategies that can be traced back to the distinctive communicative features found in a culture of individualism. As for the numerous differences in the deployment of other types of strategies, as well as level of directness, these can be related to differences in perception of etiquette and between the two languages themselves. Likewise, arrangements of request constructions are also influenced by cultural factors and corpus themes, displaying communicative features typical of collectivist cultures. Finally, research results concerning special strategy features and constructions of request behavior are combined with theory related to pragmatic-based pedagogy, for example offering teaching suggestions based on developing pragmatic competency in the second language, along with detailed rules for explicit and implicit instruction. Furthermore, Google Classroom is used as a platform for modeling an online forum, creating a pragmatic-based request behavior pedagogy reference model for Chinese as a Second Language educators. The platform presents itself an excellent resource for self-learning, offering an opportunity and environment for practical usage of Chinese language, where intermediate-advanced Chinese language learners may train their linguistic and pragmatic ability with the assistance of information technology and the internet.
Other Identifiers: G060384002I
Appears in Collections:學位論文

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.