英语专业学生与母语学习者and用法的对比研究

论文摘要

并列连词and是一个最为常用的英语词汇。前人的研究基本上都是在理论层面进行探讨,很少涉及全面描述学习者实际运用并列连词and的情况。本研究采用语料库的研究方法,对中国英语专业学生和英语母语者使用并列连词and的情况进行了全面的对比分析,主要探讨以下问题:(1)中国英语专业学生和英语母语者相比,在议论文中使用并列连词and时,其使用频率与模式分布情况如何?(2)中国英语专业学生和英语母语者这两组并列连词and使用情况的分布模式有何异同?对英语教学有何启示?本研究首先建立了研究框架,包括并列连词and涵盖的七类语义关系与五种并列成分,然后经过逐一检索、筛选、人工编码与归类,将适合本项研究的并列句按照研究框架分组制成and使用频率分布表,进而生成各自的使用模式分布图,用于分析对比中国学生英语笔语语料库(WECCL)和英语母语者语料库(LOCNESS)议论文中使用并列连词and的异同情况。研究发现:(1)在使用并列连词and体现不同语义关系时,英语专业学生与母语学习者使用频率对比差异较小。但是英语专业学生过度使用并列连词and表达时间先后关系,同时比较忽视用并列连词and表示对比以及转折关系。(2)在使用并列连词and连接五大并列成分时,英语专业学生与英语母语者在频率分布方面有一定差异。但是在逐条对比各项并列成分细目构成时,并列连词and使用的差异情况趋于弱化。其中过度使用的类型有:并列的独立分句、并列的前置修饰语、并列形容词及形容词短语、并列副词及副词短语。使用不足的类别为:并列的介词补语、并列主语以及并列的后置修饰语。造成这些过度或过少使用的原因涉及母语迁移(例如:越来越……)、频繁地将并列连词and置于句首、不恰当的学习策略以及学习者的英语水平等因素。本研究建议英语教师要重视过度和过少使用的类型,指导学生在使用并列连词and时寻求平衡发展。同时建议英语教师学习运用语料库及各种语境共现检索软件,利用这些现代分析工具设计各种增强学生自我意识的练习并应用于英语课堂中。这些教学建议将有助于学生更积极地改进过度或过少使用的问题。

论文目录

• Acknowledgements
• Abstract
• 摘要
• List of Tables
• List of Figures
• Chapter 1 Introduction
• 1.1 Necessity of the Study
• 1.2 Aim of the Study
• 1.3 Significance of the Study
• 1.4 Layout of the study
• Chapter 2 Literature Review
• 2.1 The theory of analyzing learner language: the Interlanguage Hypothesis
• 2.2 Computer-based analysis of learner language
• 2.3 Previous studies at home and abroad
• 2.3.1 Corpus-based studies at home and abroad
• 2.3.2 Non-corpus-based studies at home and abroad
• Chapter 3 Research Framework
• 3.1 Research framework （Ⅰ）: Connotation types
• 3.1.1 Connotation types on Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners
• 3.1.2 Connotation types on Collins （COBUILD） English Dictionary
• 3.1.3 Connotation types on Webster’s New World College Dictionary （Fourth Edition）
• 3.1.4 Connotation types on The New Oxford Dictionary of English （Second Edition）
• 3.1.5 Connotation types on The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language
• 3.1.6 Connotation types on A Comprehensive Grammar of the English language
• 3.1.7 Connotation types adopted in the present study
• 3.2 Research framework （ Ⅱ）: Levels of coordination
• 3.2.1 Coordination of clauses
• 3.2.2 Coordination of predicates and predications
• 3.2.3 Coordination of noun phrases and their constituents
• 3.2.4 Coordination of parts of noun phrases
• 3.2.5 Coordination of other constituents
• 3.2.6 Levels of coordination adopted in the present study
• Chapter 4 Methodology
• 4.1 Research Questions
• 4.2 Corpora selection
• 4.2.1 Learner Corpus: the WECCL
• 4.2.2 Reference corpus: the LOCNESS
• 4.3 Research procedures
• 4.4 Samples of data coding and data analysis
• 4.5 Principles for data coding and analysis on connotation types
• 4.5.1 Data coding and analysis for Consequence or result
• 4.5.2 Data coding and analysis for Chronological sequence
• 4.5.3 Data coding and analysis for Comment or explanation
• 4.5.4 Data coding and analysis for Concession
• 4.5.5 Data coding and analysis for Addition
• 4.5.6 Data coding and analysis for Condition
• 4.5.7 Data coding and analysis for Contrast
• Chapter 5 Results and Discussion
• 5.1 Total coordinating conjunction and used in two corpora
• 5.2 The distributional patterns of the coordinating conjunction and in connotation types
• 5.3 The distributional patterns of the coordinating conjunction and in coordination types
• 5.3.1 The specific distributional patterns: Coordination of clauses
• 5.3.2 The specific distributional pattern: Coordination of noun phrases and their constituents
• 5.3.3 The specific distributional patterns: Coordination of predicates and predications
• 5.3.4 The specific distributional patterns: Coordination of other constituents
• 5.3.5 The specific distributional patterns: Coordination of parts of noun phrases
• 5.4 Discussion
• 5.4.1 Accounting for the overused types
• 5.4.2 Accounting for the underused types
• Chapter 6 Conclusions
• 6.1 Major findings
• 6.2 Pedagogical implications
• 6.3 Limitations and suggestions for further research
• References
• Academic papers published during postgraduate study
• Appendix Ⅰ
• Appendix Ⅱ