臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

隨著社交網路使用頻率增加，對我們日常生活影響與日漸增，利用社交網路學習語言同時也成為當前十分重要的課題。本研究利用國外熱門的社交網路─ 推特（Twitter）為主要研究工具探討：（１）大學生如何在推特上進行書面的言語行為；（２）使用書面言語行為的類型與頻率；以及（３）大學生對於使用書面溝通的感知。

本研究採用溝通民族誌與個案研究，研究對象為六位來自東部的英語學系大學生，參與為期五周的推特線上書面溝通活動，每次討論一至兩主題。研究者在過程中分別收集線上書面溝通記錄、調查學習者的回饋，以及個別訪談。研究分析主要以Searle（1979）的言語行為分類：斷言、指令、承諾、宣告、及表情，進行言語行為類型的質性分析及頻率的量化分析；學習者的感知以回饋及訪談的內容進行分析。

研究結果指出主題式的書面溝通，使學習者能連結自身經驗及興趣，以致在書面言語行為類型中，斷言與指令的出現頻率最高，斷言占52.2%、指令占27.9%，其他各種言語行為類型的頻率為：承諾9.5%、表情9.5%，宣告0.7%。學習者感知的研究結果指出其在活動中，有積極正面的感知經驗。在推特上以有趣的主題進行生活化的溝通，使學習者有自然且活潑的互動呈現，更能引起學習者的討論與共鳴。

As the technology of social network has a great influence on people daily life, learning language from the social networking websites has been increasingly important. Twitter, as a popular socializing application in the world, is the main instrument in the study. The purpose of this study is to investigate (1) how Taiwanese undergraduate students utilize speech act through written communication in Twitter, (2) how often they utilize speech act, and (3) how they perceive Twitter.

Participants were six English major undergraduates from eastern Taiwan. They voluntarily participated in the five-week online written communication program in Twitter. During the program, the participants engaged in discussing various topics, communicating with one another, and reflecting on their feelings toward activities. Frame by an ethnographic case study design, the researcher collected data from learners’ Tweets, reflection surveys and semi-structured interview. Tweets were analyzed by qualitative data analysis according to Searle’s (1979) speech act taxonomy: representatives, directives, commissives, declarations, and expressives.

The results focused on the utilization of speech act of directives and representatives. The frequency of usage speech acts was 52.2% (representatives), 27.9% (directives), 9.5% (commissives and expressives), and the least 0.7% (declaration). Moreover, positive perceptions were revealed about the vivid interaction among the participants. The written communication about the diversity of interesting topics inspired learners to express their experiences and insight.

Acknowledgements i
摘要 ii
ABSTRACT iii
Table of contents iv
List of Tables vi
List of Figures vii
Chapter One Introduction 1
1.1 Background and Motivation 1
1.2 Purpose of the Study 3
1.3 Research Questions 4
1.4 Significance of the Study 4
1.5 Limitations and delimitations of the study 6
1.6 Definition of terms 7
Speech Acts 7
Written Speech Acts 7
Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) 7
Twitter as a Web 2.0 tool 8
Chapter Two Literature Review 9
2.1 Speech Acts 9
2.2 Computer-Mediated-Communication (CMC) 19
2.3 Twitter as a Web 2.0 tool 23
2.4 Written Speech Acts and Twitter 26
Chapter Three Methodology 31
3.1 Nature of the Study 31
3.2 Participants 33
3.3 Context 39
3.4 Instructional design and procedure 39
3.5 Data collection and instrumentation 48
3.5.1 Tweets 49
3.5.2 Survey and Interview 50
3.6 Data analysis 51
3.6.1. Tweets 52
3.6.2 Learners’ Perceptions 56
3.7 Trustworthiness 57
Chapter Four Results and Discussion 61
4.1 Written Speech Acts 61
4.1.1 Directives 62
4.1.2 Representatives 65
4.1.3 Commissives 66
4.1.4 Declarations 67
4.1.5 Expressives 67
4.1.6 Frequency of the utilization of written speech acts 69
4.2 Learner perception 79
4.2.1 Basil 79
4.2.2 Carol 86
4.2.3 Daria 94
4.2.4 Laila 101
4.2.5 Jaron 107
4.2.6 Mabel 113
4.3 Discussion 120
4.3.1 Written speech acts 120
4.3.2 Perception toward Twitter 125
Chapter Five Conclusion, Implications, and Suggestions 131
5.1 Conclusion 131
5.2 Implications and suggestions 132
References 137
Appendix A: Discussion Topics in Twitter program-1 143
Appendix B: Ongoing Reflection Survey I (Chinese) 148
Appendix C: Learners’ Perception Interview (Chinese) 152
Appendix D: Authorization Letter and Background Survey 154
 

Austin, J.L. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Barnes, S.B. (2003). Computer-Mediated Communication: Human to Human Communication across the Internet. US: Pearson Education, Inc

Borau, K., Ullrich, C., Feng, J., & Shen, R. (2009). Microblogging for language learning: Using twitter to train communicative and cultural competence. Proceedings of the Advances in Web Based Learning–ICWL 2009, p. 78-87. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Carbaugh, D. (2007). Ethnography of Communication” International Encyclopedia of Communication. Retrieved from http://works.bepress.com/donal_carbaugh/12.

Carr, C. T., Schrok. D. B., & Dauterman.P. (2012). Speech Acts Within Facebook Status Messages. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 31(2), 176-196. DOI: 10.1177/0261927X12438535

Cheng, H. Y. (2012). Applying twitter to EFL reading and writing in a taiwanese college setting. (Order No. 3539349, Indiana State University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 111.

Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Cohen A. D. & Tarone E. (1994). The effect of Training on Written Speech Act Behavior: Stating and Changing Opinion. MinneTESOL Journal, 12, p. 39-62.

Conversation Questions for the ESL/EFL Classroom: A Project of The Internet TESL Journa. (n.d.). Retrieved March 11, 2013, from http://iteslj.org/questions/index.html

Costa, C., Beham, G., Reinhardt, W., & Sillaots, M. (2008, December). Microblogging in technology enhanced learning: A use-case inspection of PPE summer school 2008. Proceedings of the 2nd SIRTEL’08 Workshop on Social Information Retrieval for Technology Enhanced Learning Maastricht, Netherlands.

Curtis, P., & Nichols, D. A. (1994). MUDS Grow Up: Social Virtual Reality in the Real World. Compcon Spring 94, Digest of Papers, pp 193-200. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=282924&isnumber=7003

Eckardt. (2005). VL Pragmatics. Retrieved from http://wwwuser.gwdg.de/~reckard/lehre/Archiv/WS0506/Pragmatics7.pdf

Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. The Qualitative Report, v8n 4: pp 597-607. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR8-4/golafshani.pdf

Gonzales, L., & Vodicka, D. (2010). Top Ten Internet resources for educators. Retrieved from http://www.acsa.org/FunctionalMenuCategories/Media/LeadershipMagazine/2010-Archives/JanuaryFebruary-2010/top-10.aspx

Grosseck, G. & Holotescu, C. (2008, April). Can We Use Twitter For Educational Activities? Proceedings of the 4th International Scientific Conference, eLearning and software for education. Bucharest, Romania.

Hata, M. (2003). Literature Review: Using Computer-Mediated Communication in Second Language Classroom. Osaka Keidai Ronshu, v54 n3: p.115-125.

He, A. W. (1993). Language use in peer review texts. Language in Society, v22, pp 403-420. doi:10.1017/S0047404500017292.

Herring, S. C. (Ed.). (1996a). Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives. Amsterdam: Benjamins

Holahan, C. J. (1982). Environmental psychology. New York: Random House.

Horng, S., M. (2009). The Behavior and Preferences of Users on Web 2.0 Social Network Sites: An Empirical Study. Information Technology, p.934-939. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5070743&isnumber=5070575

Hsieh, M. C., Kao, Y. W., & Yuan, S., M. (2008). Web 2.0 Toolbar: Providing Web 2.0 Services for Existence Web Pages. IEEE, p. 507-512. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4780725&isnumber=4780615

Hymes, D. (1968). The ethnography of speaking. In J. Fishman (ed.). Reading in the sociology of Language, Mouton, The Hague, p. 99-138.

Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. PA, US: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Java, A., Song, X. D., Finin, T., & Tseng, B. (2007, August). Why we twitter: Understanding microblogging usage and communities. Proceedings of the Joint 9thWEBKDD and 1st SNA-KDD Workshop 2007.

Jiang, W. Q. (2000). Pragmatics: Theories and Applications. Beijing University Press.

Krefting, L. (1991). Rigor in qualitative research: The assessment of trustworthiness. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, v45n3, p. 214-222. Retrieved from http://ajot.aotapress.net/content/45/3/214.full.pdf

Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Lincoln, Y., Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. CA: Sage.

Markham, A. (2004). “Internet communication as a tool for qualitative research” Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice. Silverman, D. (ed.). UK: Sage.

Marshall, C., & Gretchen B. R. (4th Ed.). (2006). Designing qualitative research. US: Sage, Inc.

Matthew, B. M., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: an expanded sourcebook. US: Sage.

Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. CA: Sage.

Mey, J. L. (1993). Pragmatics: an introduction. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Murray, D. E. (2000). Protean Communication: The Language of Computer-Mediated Communication. TESOL Quarterly, v34 n3, p.397-421. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3587737

Murugesan, S. (2007). Understanding Web 2.0. IT Professional, v9 n4, p.34-41. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4287373&isnumber=4287363

Nemoto, N. & Beres, D. (2010). Staring Lifelong Japanese Learning via Twitter. Retrieved from http://www.princeton.edu/pjpf/past/17th-pjpf/NemotoBeresProceeding2010.pdf

Nastri, J., Pena, J., & Hancock, J. T. (2006). The construction of away messages: A speech act analysis. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 1025-1045.

Peccei, J. S. (1999). Pragmatics. London, England: Routledge.

Ponterotto, J. G. (2006). Brief Note on the Origins, Evolution, and Meaning of the Qualitative Research Concept “Thick Description”. The Qualitative Report, v11n 3, p. 538-549. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR11-3/ponterotto.pdf

Qadir, A. & Riloff, E. (2011, July). Classifying sentences as speech acts in message board posts. Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, p. 748-758. Association for Computational Linguistics.

Richards, L. (2005). Handling Qualitative Data: A Practical Guide. London, England: Sage.

Ryle, G. (1949). Concept of the mind. London, England: Hutchinson and Company.

Ryle, G. (1971). Collected papers. Volume II collected essays, p. 1929-1968. London, England: Hutchinson.

Searle, J. (1971). The Philosophy of Language. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Searle, J. (1975). Indirect speech acts. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics, vol. iii: Speech acts (p. 59–82).New York: Academic Press.

Searle, J. (1979). Expression and Meanings: Studies in the Theory of Speech Act. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Smith, J. E. & Tirumala, L. N. (2012). Twitter’s Effects on Student Learning and Social Presence Perceptions. Teaching Journalism and Mass Communication, v2, n1, p. 21-31. Retrieved May 9th, 2013 from http://aejmc.net/spig/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/tjmc-s12-res-smith.pdf

Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Verschueren, J. (1999). Understanding pragmatics. London, England: Arnold

Vossler, K. A. (2010). Differential use of language by adolescents across models of written communication. The University of North Dakota. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 140.

Winifred, H. B. (1983). Speech-act Theory and Writing. FForum: Essays on Theory and Practice in the Teaching of Writing. New Jersey: Boyton

Wood, L. A., & Kroger, Q. O. (2000). Doing Discourse Analysis: Methods for studying action in talk and text. US: Sage publication.

Wu, H., & Wu, P. (2011). Learners' Perceptions on the Use of Blogs for EFL Learning. Online Submission.

Yin, R. K. (3rd Ed.). (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Zhang, R., Gao, D., & Li, W. (2011, August). What Are Tweeters Doing: Recognizing Speech Acts in Twitter. In Analyzing Microtext.

Zhao, X., & Jiang, J. (2011). An Empirical Comparison of Topics in Twitter and Traditional Media. Technical Report, Singapore Management University School of Information Systems.

Zhao, D., & Rosson, M. B. (2009). How and why people Twitter: the role that micro-blogging plays in informal communication at work. Proceedings of the ACM 2009 international conference on Supporting group work, p. 243-252.