期刊文献+

语法知识对语用知识预测力的实证研究 被引量:13

Predictability of grammatical knowledge on pragmatic knowledge
原文传递
导出
摘要 在二语语用习得研究中,语法知识历来被认为是影响语用知识的一个重要因素。以往对语法与语用知识关系的研究中,多把通用语法知识与具体语言结构的语用知识作相关分析,造成二者研究层面不对等的现象。本文以学习者对英语情态动词的习得情况为例,分别探讨通用语法知识和具体语法知识对语用知识的预测力。两组回归分析的结果发现,具体语法知识对与之相关的语用知识的预测力更强,从而在一定程度上支持了Bardovi-Harlig所提建议的正确性:对具体语用能力的研究最好通过考察相应的具体语法能力来进行。本研究还发现语用知识的习得是一个相对独立的过程,因此应该把语用能力的培养放到和语法教学同样重要的地位。 Studies of SLA pragmatics have always taken grammar as one of the most important factors that influence pragmatic development. They usually correlate general grammatical knowledge with the particular pragmatic features of some specific linguistic structures,which seems to be illogical. The present study addresses the issue of the respective predictability of general and specific grammatical knowledge on pragmatic knowledge. Specific grammatical knowledge and pragmatic knowledge are examined through the learners' performance on the English modal verbs. Two regression analyses suggest that specific grammatical knowledge has a stronger predictive effect on pragmatic knowledge of English modal verbs. This result in a sense supports Bardovi-Harlig's recommendation that studies on the relationship between grammatical knowledge and pragmatic knowledge should be conducted at the same specific linguistic level. The present study also finds that pragmatic development is a relatively autonomous process. Therefore,teaching pragmatic knowledge is as important as that of grammatical knowledge.
作者 赵福利
出处 《外语教学与研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2009年第4期284-290,共7页 Foreign Language Teaching and Research
  • 相关文献

参考文献34

  • 1Aijmer, K. 1985. The semantic development of will [A]. In J. Fisiak (ed.). Historical Semantics and Historical Word-formation[C]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 11-21.
  • 2Bachman, L. 1990. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing[M]. Oxford: OUP.
  • 3Bachman, L. &A. Palmer. 1996. Language Testing in Practice [M]. New York: OUP.
  • 4Bardovi-Harlig, K. 1999. Exploring the interlanguage of interlanguage pragmatics: A research agenda for acquisitional pragmatics [J]. Language Learning 49: 677-713.
  • 5Biber, D. & E. Finegan. 1989. Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect[J]. Text 11: 93-124.
  • 6Canale, M. 1983a. From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy [A]. In J. Richards & R. Schmidt (eds.). Language and Communication [C]. London: Longman. 2-27.
  • 7Canale, M. 1983b. On some dimensions of language proficiency [A]. In J. Oiler (ed.). Issues in Language Testing Research [C].Rowley, MA. : Newbury House. 333-342.
  • 8Canale, M. &M. Swain. 1980. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing [J]. Applied Linguistics 1: 1-47.
  • 9Coates, J. 1983. The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries[M]. London: Croom Helm.
  • 10Dittmar, N. 1992. Grammaticalization in second language acquisition: An introduction [J].Studies in Second Language Acquisition 14: 249-257.

同被引文献305

引证文献13

二级引证文献78

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部