概念迁移研究的根本性问题（英文）

Fundamental Questions for Conceptual Transfer Research

概念迁移指的是涉及概念意义表达和诠释方面的跨语言影响的实例。本论文试图澄清概念迁移的构想。本文首先从讨论概念意义的本质着手,进而阐明那些容许操不同语言的人把相同的经验形成不相同的大脑表征条件,最后概要指出恰合研究概念迁移的问题和研究方法的范围。本文把这一系列属于概念迁移范畴的问题和研究方法描述为一个连续体,它把处于鸿沟两侧的传统的跨语言影响研究和语言相对论研究联在一起。处于概念迁移连续体的一端的问题涉及不同语言背景的人们在相同条件下对概念意义表达是否不同。这些问题可以通过与"讲话思维"理论框架有关的各类数据和分析来进行探讨。概念迁移研究连续体的另一端的问题则是有关来自不同语言背景的学习者在目标语使用上的不同定式是否由不同思维模式造成,这些不同的思维模式可以通过非语言任务或者准语言数据(比如对眼睛变化的追踪)来捕捉到。除了讨论切合概念迁移研究的问题和方法外,本文还警示读者避免过分阐释概念迁移,不要把缺乏足够证据或者使用传统的语义和结构分析能够说得通的跨语言影响案例说成是概念迁移。

Conceptual transfer refers to cases of crossling- uistic influence involving the expression and interpretation of conceptual meaning. This paper attempts to clarify the construct of conceptual transfer,first by discussing the na- ture of conceptual meaning, then by explicating the condi- tions that allow speakers of different languages to form differing mental representations of similar experiences, and finally by outlining the range of questions and re- search methods that are appropriate for investigating con- ceptual transfer. The range of questions and research methods that fall within the scope of conceptual transfer are described as forming a continuum that bridges the gap between traditional research on crosslinguistic influence and the research pursuits related to linguistic relativity. On one end of the conceptual transfer continuum are ques- tions dealing with whether language learners from differ- ent language backgrounds differ in relation to the concep- tual meanings they express under the same conditions. These questions can be explored through types of data and analysis that have come to be associated with the thinking for speaking framework. On the other end of the concep- tual transfer continuum are questions about whether diffe- ring patterns of target-language use by learners from dif- ferent language backgrounds are caused by differing pat- terns of thought that can be captured through nonverbal tasks and paralinguistic （ e. g. , eye-tracking） data. In ad- dition to discussing the types of questions and methods that are appropriate for investigating conceptual transfer, the paper also warns readers to avoid the temptation to o- ver-interpret as conceptual transfer cases of crosslinguistic influence that lack sufficient evidence or which can al- ready be accounted for adequately via a more traditional semantic or structural analysis.