语篇衔接及其对外语阅读教学的启示
|
摘要
在外语教学过程中，人们历来重视阅读能力的培养与提高。然而，学生的阅读能力还是不尽如人意。成功的外语阅读教学需要教师和学生清楚地认识阅读过程的本质。国外心理语言学家关于阅读的研究和图式理论阅读模式表明：有效的阅读涉及到作者与读者之间的互动，而这种互动是通过语篇得以实现的。因此，研究和掌握语篇特征是提高外语阅读能力和效率的重要手段之一。
语篇指任何不完全受句子语法约束的在一定语境下表示完整语义的自然语言(Halliday & Hasan,1976)。其根本特征是具有衔接性、连贯性、目的性、可接受性、信息性、情景性及互文性(De Beaugrande & Dressler,1981)。语篇衔接，作为语篇的重要语言特征之一，多年来在我国外语教学中并未得到足够的重视。本文旨在研究语篇衔接与语言理解认知过程之间的关系。基于格式塔理论和信息理论，作者提出这样一个假设：语篇衔接在很大程度上影响着语言使用者对语篇的解读。本文的第一个研究课题就是验证该假设。第二个研究课题是在验证该假设成立的基础上，对高校英语教师和学生的语篇衔接意识进行调查分析。
本文研究对象为高校英语教师和学生，研究过程分为两个阶段。
第一阶段是测试比较分析阶段。在这一阶段，60名英语水平相当的学生被随意分成两组，分别进行完形填空测试。一组采用标准式(every-nth format)完形填空，另一组采用的完形填空则基于语篇衔接分析。通过对完形填空测试数据的分析，结果证实上述假设成立，即：语篇衔接在很大程度上影响着语言使用者对语篇的解读。
第二阶段是高校英语教师和学生的语篇衔接意识调查分析阶段。在这一阶段，作者采用了两种方法检测外语学习者的语篇衔接意识：(1) 高校学生在写作中对衔接手段的运用：(2) 他们在阅读中对衔接手段的识别。作者从西安外国语学院，西安工业学院，长安大学及陕西师范大学收集80份学生作文，从语篇衔接角度对这些作文进行评析。分析表明：大多数学生在英语写作中能够有意识地使用语篇标记来向读者提示前后句内容之间的关联方式。然而，他们并不能灵活、准确地使用这些语篇标记。大部分学生只是机械套用某些语篇标记。他们在文章中反复使用同一关联词，而不知道可供选择的其它表达方式。有些学生误用一些语篇标记。另外，学生在语篇标记使用方面也存在着明显的个体差异。调查对象中出现了两种极端：一种是过度使用语篇标记；另一极端是几乎不使用语篇标记。
作者让6名学生对完形填空测试做回忆性口头自陈，然后再对这些学生进行访谈。
作者发现，学生在阅读过程中对衔接手段的重要性认识不足。此外，作者对来自
上述四所大学的英语教师进行了问卷调查。调查表明：一部分教师对语篇衔接的
重要性认识不足，很少将语篇衔接融于英语教学中。
作者认为，在外语教学中对语篇衔接的忽视是导致高校学生语篇衔接意识薄
弱的一个重要因素。为了培养和提高学生的语篇衔接意识，很有必要将语篇衔接
融于教学之中。围绕语篇衔接对英语阅读教学的启示，作者从词汇、语法、语篇
结构及阅读技巧等四方面进行了有益的探讨，并提出了一些个人见解。
本研究仍有不足之处，如：未能就语言水平程度与语篇衔接运用之间的关系
进行探讨；未能涉及更广范围的外语学习者；这些对本研究的信度和效度有一定
影响。作者就今后相关研究的研究方法及方向提出了几点建议。
In spite of the priority given to reading among the five basic skills, Chinese college students' reading ability is not satisfactory. Success in an EFL reading course requires both teachers and students to have a clear idea about the nature of reading process. The psycholinguistic model of reading and the schema theory model of reading show that the process of efficient reading involves the interaction between writers and readers and this interaction is made possible through the text. Therefore, to study textual features is of particular importance in promoting EFL learners' reading ability and efficiency.
The word "text" is used in linguistics to refer to any passage, spoken or written, of whatever length, that does form a unified whole(Halliday & Hasan, 1976). The seven defining characteristics of text are: cohesion, coherence, intentionality, acceptability, informativity, situationality and intertextuality(De Beaugrande & Dressier, 1981). Textual cohesion, one of the important linguistic features of text, has long been ignored in the teaching of EFL. This thesis is to study the relationship between this linguistic feature of text and the cognitive process of language comprehension. Based on Gestalt theory and information theory, the author sets up a hypothesis that textual cohesion could exert a strong influence on the meaning that language users derive from interacting with the text. The first research question is to test this hypothesis. The second one is that what are the Chinese college EFL teachers and students' awareness of textual cohesion if the answer to the first one is positive.
This study, which was conducted with college EFL teachers and students, was carried out in two phases corresponding to the two research questions.
In Phase I, 60 college students of similar language proficiency were randomly divided into two groups to take cloze testing, with one group taking every-nth format cloze, the other group taking cohesive format cloze. The data obtained in the cloze showed that the answer to the first question was positive. That is, textual cohesion did exert a strong influence on the meaning that language users derive from interacting
with the text.
In Phase II, two different measures of college teachers and students' textual cohesion awareness were included: (1) use of cohesive devices in college students' writing; (2) recognition of cohesive devices in their reading. 80 compositions written by the 80 students from Xi'an International Studies University, Xi'an Institution of Technology, Chang An University and Shaanxi Normal University were collected and analyzed in terms of textual cohesion. Results showed that students were not proficient in using cohesive devices in their writing. Researches on retrospective reports and interview also showed that students lacked a strong awareness of textual cohesion. In addition, questionnaires were distributed to 20 teachers of English from the four universities mentioned above. It was found that a few teachers did not have a deep understanding of textual cohesion.
The author finds that the ignorance of textual cohesion in the teaching of EFL to a large extent leads to college students' weak awareness of textual cohesion. In order to cultivate and improve students' awareness of textual cohesion, it's necessary to integrate textual cohesion into the teaching of EFL. The implications of textual cohesion for EFL teaching and learning are presented in terms of lexis, grammar, text structure and reading skills respectively.
The author points out the limitations of this study and makes suggestions for future study in the last part of this thesis.
语篇指任何不完全受句子语法约束的在一定语境下表示完整语义的自然语言(Halliday & Hasan,1976)。其根本特征是具有衔接性、连贯性、目的性、可接受性、信息性、情景性及互文性(De Beaugrande & Dressler,1981)。语篇衔接，作为语篇的重要语言特征之一，多年来在我国外语教学中并未得到足够的重视。本文旨在研究语篇衔接与语言理解认知过程之间的关系。基于格式塔理论和信息理论，作者提出这样一个假设：语篇衔接在很大程度上影响着语言使用者对语篇的解读。本文的第一个研究课题就是验证该假设。第二个研究课题是在验证该假设成立的基础上，对高校英语教师和学生的语篇衔接意识进行调查分析。
本文研究对象为高校英语教师和学生，研究过程分为两个阶段。
第一阶段是测试比较分析阶段。在这一阶段，60名英语水平相当的学生被随意分成两组，分别进行完形填空测试。一组采用标准式(every-nth format)完形填空，另一组采用的完形填空则基于语篇衔接分析。通过对完形填空测试数据的分析，结果证实上述假设成立，即：语篇衔接在很大程度上影响着语言使用者对语篇的解读。
第二阶段是高校英语教师和学生的语篇衔接意识调查分析阶段。在这一阶段，作者采用了两种方法检测外语学习者的语篇衔接意识：(1) 高校学生在写作中对衔接手段的运用：(2) 他们在阅读中对衔接手段的识别。作者从西安外国语学院，西安工业学院，长安大学及陕西师范大学收集80份学生作文，从语篇衔接角度对这些作文进行评析。分析表明：大多数学生在英语写作中能够有意识地使用语篇标记来向读者提示前后句内容之间的关联方式。然而，他们并不能灵活、准确地使用这些语篇标记。大部分学生只是机械套用某些语篇标记。他们在文章中反复使用同一关联词，而不知道可供选择的其它表达方式。有些学生误用一些语篇标记。另外，学生在语篇标记使用方面也存在着明显的个体差异。调查对象中出现了两种极端：一种是过度使用语篇标记；另一极端是几乎不使用语篇标记。
作者让6名学生对完形填空测试做回忆性口头自陈，然后再对这些学生进行访谈。
作者发现，学生在阅读过程中对衔接手段的重要性认识不足。此外，作者对来自
上述四所大学的英语教师进行了问卷调查。调查表明：一部分教师对语篇衔接的
重要性认识不足，很少将语篇衔接融于英语教学中。
作者认为，在外语教学中对语篇衔接的忽视是导致高校学生语篇衔接意识薄
弱的一个重要因素。为了培养和提高学生的语篇衔接意识，很有必要将语篇衔接
融于教学之中。围绕语篇衔接对英语阅读教学的启示，作者从词汇、语法、语篇
结构及阅读技巧等四方面进行了有益的探讨，并提出了一些个人见解。
本研究仍有不足之处，如：未能就语言水平程度与语篇衔接运用之间的关系
进行探讨；未能涉及更广范围的外语学习者；这些对本研究的信度和效度有一定
影响。作者就今后相关研究的研究方法及方向提出了几点建议。
In spite of the priority given to reading among the five basic skills, Chinese college students' reading ability is not satisfactory. Success in an EFL reading course requires both teachers and students to have a clear idea about the nature of reading process. The psycholinguistic model of reading and the schema theory model of reading show that the process of efficient reading involves the interaction between writers and readers and this interaction is made possible through the text. Therefore, to study textual features is of particular importance in promoting EFL learners' reading ability and efficiency.
The word "text" is used in linguistics to refer to any passage, spoken or written, of whatever length, that does form a unified whole(Halliday & Hasan, 1976). The seven defining characteristics of text are: cohesion, coherence, intentionality, acceptability, informativity, situationality and intertextuality(De Beaugrande & Dressier, 1981). Textual cohesion, one of the important linguistic features of text, has long been ignored in the teaching of EFL. This thesis is to study the relationship between this linguistic feature of text and the cognitive process of language comprehension. Based on Gestalt theory and information theory, the author sets up a hypothesis that textual cohesion could exert a strong influence on the meaning that language users derive from interacting with the text. The first research question is to test this hypothesis. The second one is that what are the Chinese college EFL teachers and students' awareness of textual cohesion if the answer to the first one is positive.
This study, which was conducted with college EFL teachers and students, was carried out in two phases corresponding to the two research questions.
In Phase I, 60 college students of similar language proficiency were randomly divided into two groups to take cloze testing, with one group taking every-nth format cloze, the other group taking cohesive format cloze. The data obtained in the cloze showed that the answer to the first question was positive. That is, textual cohesion did exert a strong influence on the meaning that language users derive from interacting
with the text.
In Phase II, two different measures of college teachers and students' textual cohesion awareness were included: (1) use of cohesive devices in college students' writing; (2) recognition of cohesive devices in their reading. 80 compositions written by the 80 students from Xi'an International Studies University, Xi'an Institution of Technology, Chang An University and Shaanxi Normal University were collected and analyzed in terms of textual cohesion. Results showed that students were not proficient in using cohesive devices in their writing. Researches on retrospective reports and interview also showed that students lacked a strong awareness of textual cohesion. In addition, questionnaires were distributed to 20 teachers of English from the four universities mentioned above. It was found that a few teachers did not have a deep understanding of textual cohesion.
The author finds that the ignorance of textual cohesion in the teaching of EFL to a large extent leads to college students' weak awareness of textual cohesion. In order to cultivate and improve students' awareness of textual cohesion, it's necessary to integrate textual cohesion into the teaching of EFL. The implications of textual cohesion for EFL teaching and learning are presented in terms of lexis, grammar, text structure and reading skills respectively.
The author points out the limitations of this study and makes suggestions for future study in the last part of this thesis.
引文
Anderson, R.C. et al., instantiation of general terms, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1976,15.
Anderson, R.C. and P.D. Pearson, A schematic-theoretic view of basic process in reading comprehension, in Pearson, P.D.(ed.) Handbook of Reading Research. New York: Longman, 1984.
Bander, RobertG, American English Rhetoric. New York:Holt, Rinehart&Winson Inc.,1978.
Bachman, L.F., Performance on cloze tests with fixed-ration and rational deletions, TESOL Quarterly, 1985,19.
Brown, G. & G. Yule, Discourse Analysis. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1983.
Carrell, P.L.& J.C. Eistrerhold, Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy, TESOL Quarterly, 1983,17.
Carrell,P.L., The effect of rhetorical organization on EFL readers, TESOL Quarterly, 1984, 18.
Carrell, P.L., Facilitating ESL reading by teaching text structure, TESOL Quarterly, 1985,19.
Cristal, D., English as a Global Language. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Danes, F., Functional sentence perspective and the organization of the text, in Danes,F.(ed), Papers in Functional Sentence Perspective, Prague:Academia, 1974.
De Beaugrande R.& Dressier, W, Introduction to Text Linguistics. London:Longman Group Ltd., 1981.
Ellisis, Rod, Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1985.
Gamer, W.R., The contribution of information theory to psychology, in W. Hirst(ed.) The Making of Cognitive Science:Essays in Honor of George,A. Miller. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1988.
Goodman,K.S., Reading, a psychological guessing game, Journal of the Reading Specialist, 1967,6.
Goodman,K.S., Psycholinguistic Universals in the reading process, in Smith,F(ed.) Psycholinguistics and Reading. New york:Holt,Rinehart&Winston Inc., 1973.
Gredler, Margaret E., Learning and Instruction:Theory into Practice. Prentice-Hall,Inc., 1997.
Hergenhahn,B.R., An Introduction to Theories of Learning. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1976.
Halliday, M.A.K., Language as Social Semiotic. London:Edward Arnold Ltd., 1978.
Halliday, M.A.K., An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London:Edward Arnold Ltd.,1985.
Halliday, M.A.K.& Hasan,R, Cohesion in English. London:Longman Group Ltd., 1976.
Halliday, M.A.K.& Hasan,R, Language,Context And Text:Aspects Of Language in a Social-semiotic Perspective. Deakin University, Victoria 3217,1985.
Hatim, Basil, Communications Across Cultures: Translation Theory and Contrastive Text Linguistics. Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2000.
Hoey, M., Patterns of Lexis in Text. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.
Martin Wedell, Language Teaching and Learning: From Theory to Practice. Beijing:Higher Education Press, 1996.
Meyer, B.J.F., The Organization of Prose and its effects on Memory. Amsterdam: North Holl and Publishing Company, 1975.
Nunan,D., English as a global language, TESOL Quarterly,2001,35.
Nuttall, Christine, Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language. London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd., 1982.
Preece,W.E., The New Encyclopaedia Britannica. 15th Edition, Micropaedia, Vol. 8. Chicago:Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1979.
Reed,S.K., Cognition :Theory and Applications. Belmont, Califomia 94002, Wardworth Inc., 1982.
Rumelhart, D.E., Schemata:The building blocks of cognition, in Spiro,R.J.(eds.)Theoretical Issues in Reading Comprehension. Hillsdale, N.J.:Lawrence Erbaum Associates, 1980.
Smith,F., Reading. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1978.
Steffenson,M., Register, cohesion and cross-cultural reading comprehension, Applied Linguistics, 1986,7.
Swales,J., Utilizing the literatures in teaching the research paper, TESOL Quarterly, 1987,21.
Wertheimer, M., Laws of organization in perceptual forms, in W. Ellis(ed.) A Source Book of Gestalt Psychology. New York:Hartcourt Brace, 1938.
Widdowson,H., Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1978.
Xu,G. China's Modernization and its English Language Needs, In Wang, Z.L.(ed). EFL in China. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press1990
陈贤纯，《外语阅读教学与心理学》，北京语言文化大学出版社，1998．
程琪龙，《认知语言学概论——语言的神经认识基础》，外语教学与研究出版社，2001．
桂诗春，《实验心理语言学纲要——语言的感知，理解与产生》，湖南教育出版社，1991．
桂诗春，词汇测试中猜测问题探索，陆国强编《现代英语研究》复旦大学出版社，1997．
黄衍，试论英语主位和述位，外国语，1985，第3期．
胡壮麟，《语篇的衔接与连贯》，上海外语教育出版社，1994．
胡春洞，王才仁，《英语阅读论》，广西教育出版社，1998．
刘润清，吴一安，黄建华等，高校英语本科教育抽样调查报告(二)，外语教学与研究，1989，第3期．
刘润清，《外语教学中的科研方法》，外语教学与研究出版社，2000．
陆丙华，《高级英语阅读技能》，上海外语教育出版社，1995．
彭望蘅，A thematic analysis of two Chinese essays，朱永生，《语言 语篇 语境》，清华大学出版社，1993．
彭望蘅，词汇模式理论及语篇信息处理，外国语，1996，第6期．
邱蔚，词汇衔接模式在阅读理解中的作用，福建外语，1997，第4期．
邵志洪，《英汉语研究与对比》，上海华东理工大学出版社，1997．
王姿，英语语篇中的信息戎余，外语教学与研究，1990，第1期．
王茂金，《中国英语教学理论研究》，陕西师范大学出版社，2001．
易庆辉，衔接 连贯 语篇 教学，湘潭师范学院学报，1999，第4期．
杨若东，语篇衔接关系的建立与跨文化语篇理解，外国语，1997，第6期．
张必隐，《阅读心理学》，北京师范大学出版社，1992．
张琦，语篇 连贯 衔接与阅读教学，湖州师专学报，1997，第2期．
钟贵荣，跨文化知识对语篇衔接的影响，湖南税务高等专科学校学报，2001，第6期．
Anderson, R.C. and P.D. Pearson, A schematic-theoretic view of basic process in reading comprehension, in Pearson, P.D.(ed.) Handbook of Reading Research. New York: Longman, 1984.
Bander, RobertG, American English Rhetoric. New York:Holt, Rinehart&Winson Inc.,1978.
Bachman, L.F., Performance on cloze tests with fixed-ration and rational deletions, TESOL Quarterly, 1985,19.
Brown, G. & G. Yule, Discourse Analysis. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1983.
Carrell, P.L.& J.C. Eistrerhold, Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy, TESOL Quarterly, 1983,17.
Carrell,P.L., The effect of rhetorical organization on EFL readers, TESOL Quarterly, 1984, 18.
Carrell, P.L., Facilitating ESL reading by teaching text structure, TESOL Quarterly, 1985,19.
Cristal, D., English as a Global Language. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Danes, F., Functional sentence perspective and the organization of the text, in Danes,F.(ed), Papers in Functional Sentence Perspective, Prague:Academia, 1974.
De Beaugrande R.& Dressier, W, Introduction to Text Linguistics. London:Longman Group Ltd., 1981.
Ellisis, Rod, Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1985.
Gamer, W.R., The contribution of information theory to psychology, in W. Hirst(ed.) The Making of Cognitive Science:Essays in Honor of George,A. Miller. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1988.
Goodman,K.S., Reading, a psychological guessing game, Journal of the Reading Specialist, 1967,6.
Goodman,K.S., Psycholinguistic Universals in the reading process, in Smith,F(ed.) Psycholinguistics and Reading. New york:Holt,Rinehart&Winston Inc., 1973.
Gredler, Margaret E., Learning and Instruction:Theory into Practice. Prentice-Hall,Inc., 1997.
Hergenhahn,B.R., An Introduction to Theories of Learning. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1976.
Halliday, M.A.K., Language as Social Semiotic. London:Edward Arnold Ltd., 1978.
Halliday, M.A.K., An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London:Edward Arnold Ltd.,1985.
Halliday, M.A.K.& Hasan,R, Cohesion in English. London:Longman Group Ltd., 1976.
Halliday, M.A.K.& Hasan,R, Language,Context And Text:Aspects Of Language in a Social-semiotic Perspective. Deakin University, Victoria 3217,1985.
Hatim, Basil, Communications Across Cultures: Translation Theory and Contrastive Text Linguistics. Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2000.
Hoey, M., Patterns of Lexis in Text. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.
Martin Wedell, Language Teaching and Learning: From Theory to Practice. Beijing:Higher Education Press, 1996.
Meyer, B.J.F., The Organization of Prose and its effects on Memory. Amsterdam: North Holl and Publishing Company, 1975.
Nunan,D., English as a global language, TESOL Quarterly,2001,35.
Nuttall, Christine, Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language. London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd., 1982.
Preece,W.E., The New Encyclopaedia Britannica. 15th Edition, Micropaedia, Vol. 8. Chicago:Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1979.
Reed,S.K., Cognition :Theory and Applications. Belmont, Califomia 94002, Wardworth Inc., 1982.
Rumelhart, D.E., Schemata:The building blocks of cognition, in Spiro,R.J.(eds.)Theoretical Issues in Reading Comprehension. Hillsdale, N.J.:Lawrence Erbaum Associates, 1980.
Smith,F., Reading. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1978.
Steffenson,M., Register, cohesion and cross-cultural reading comprehension, Applied Linguistics, 1986,7.
Swales,J., Utilizing the literatures in teaching the research paper, TESOL Quarterly, 1987,21.
Wertheimer, M., Laws of organization in perceptual forms, in W. Ellis(ed.) A Source Book of Gestalt Psychology. New York:Hartcourt Brace, 1938.
Widdowson,H., Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1978.
Xu,G. China's Modernization and its English Language Needs, In Wang, Z.L.(ed). EFL in China. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press1990
陈贤纯，《外语阅读教学与心理学》，北京语言文化大学出版社，1998．
程琪龙，《认知语言学概论——语言的神经认识基础》，外语教学与研究出版社，2001．
桂诗春，《实验心理语言学纲要——语言的感知，理解与产生》，湖南教育出版社，1991．
桂诗春，词汇测试中猜测问题探索，陆国强编《现代英语研究》复旦大学出版社，1997．
黄衍，试论英语主位和述位，外国语，1985，第3期．
胡壮麟，《语篇的衔接与连贯》，上海外语教育出版社，1994．
胡春洞，王才仁，《英语阅读论》，广西教育出版社，1998．
刘润清，吴一安，黄建华等，高校英语本科教育抽样调查报告(二)，外语教学与研究，1989，第3期．
刘润清，《外语教学中的科研方法》，外语教学与研究出版社，2000．
陆丙华，《高级英语阅读技能》，上海外语教育出版社，1995．
彭望蘅，A thematic analysis of two Chinese essays，朱永生，《语言 语篇 语境》，清华大学出版社，1993．
彭望蘅，词汇模式理论及语篇信息处理，外国语，1996，第6期．
邱蔚，词汇衔接模式在阅读理解中的作用，福建外语，1997，第4期．
邵志洪，《英汉语研究与对比》，上海华东理工大学出版社，1997．
王姿，英语语篇中的信息戎余，外语教学与研究，1990，第1期．
王茂金，《中国英语教学理论研究》，陕西师范大学出版社，2001．
易庆辉，衔接 连贯 语篇 教学，湘潭师范学院学报，1999，第4期．
杨若东，语篇衔接关系的建立与跨文化语篇理解，外国语，1997，第6期．
张必隐，《阅读心理学》，北京师范大学出版社，1992．
张琦，语篇 连贯 衔接与阅读教学，湖州师专学报，1997，第2期．
钟贵荣，跨文化知识对语篇衔接的影响，湖南税务高等专科学校学报，2001，第6期．