跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(100.28.2.72) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/06/13 12:35
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:趙琪芬
研究生(外文):Chi-fen Chao
論文名稱:高中生英文寫作中人稱代名詞使用分析
論文名稱(外文):An Analysis of the Usage of Personal Pronouns in Senior High School Students' Compositions
指導教授:尤雪瑛尤雪瑛引用關係
指導教授(外文):Hsueh-ying Yu
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立政治大學
系所名稱:英語教學碩士在職專班
學門:教育學門
學類:普通科目教育學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2002
畢業學年度:91
語文別:英文
論文頁數:82
中文關鍵詞:人稱代名詞指稱用法語用功能篇章結構指示詞
外文關鍵詞:personal pronounspronominal formsreference functionpragmatic functionmismatch between pronominal form and referentpronouns switchtextual structuredeixis on personal pronouns
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:282
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:45
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:7
國立政治大學英國語文學系在職碩士班
碩士論文提要
論文名稱:高中生英文寫作中人稱代名詞使用分析
指導教授:尤雪瑛博士
研究生:趙琪芬
論文提要內容:
本研究旨在分析高中生在英文寫作中如何使用人稱代名詞,並對學生使用人稱代名詞不一致的現象加以分析,以期了解學生使用人稱代名詞的原則及考量因素。
本研究採用質及量的分析方法。質的分析涵蓋:在學生作文中(一)人稱代名詞的功能;(二)人稱代名詞與指稱之間的關係;(三)影響學生使用人稱代名詞的因素。量的分析則在研究:在學生作文中(一)各人稱代名詞出現的頻率,(二)人稱代名詞出現轉換的次數。
本研究結果如下:在學生使用人稱代名詞時,除了基本的指稱用法外,語用功能的因素,及篇章結構的考量,都會影響對代名詞的選擇。而當這些因素同時出現時,學生往往會捨棄基本的指稱功能,因而造成文章中人稱代名詞不一致的現象。
本研究最後提出在英語教學上的建議:在課堂上教授學生人稱代名詞時,應對指稱用法、指示詞、語用功能,及篇章結構等四方面加以探討,以期學生能在文章中正確使用人稱代名詞。

ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to analyze the usage of personal pronouns in the compositions of senior high school students. It is a common phenomenon that different personal pronouns are frequently mixed up in a sentence or a paragraph and cause problems for readers to find the referents of these pronouns in texts. The study aims to investigate how students use personal pronouns and find out the factors affecting the choice of personal pronouns.
This study adopts both qualitative and quantitative analyses. The qualitative analysis includes examining the functions of the personal pronouns, analyzing the relationship between pronominal forms and their referents, and finding the factors to be considered by students in choosing pronominal forms. The quantitative analysis is done by calculating the occurrences of mismatch cases and shift patterns in the data.
The findings of this study are summarized as follows: reference is not the primary factor to be considered by students on selecting pronominal forms, although it is the basic function of pronouns. Pragmatic considerations and textual patterns are two additional important factors on the selection of pronominal forms. When these two factors conflict with the basic reference function, the students would sacrifice the latter. This results in inconsistent use of pronouns.
Finally, this study offers pedagogical implications for the teaching of personal pronouns. That is, pronouns should be taught from different aspects: grammatical cohesion, deixis, pragmatic usage, and textual structure. If our students can take these factors into consideration, they will be able to use the appropriate forms of personal pronouns, and compose a clear and logical composition.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………..iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………………...v
LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………...vii
CHINESE ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………..viii
ENGLISH ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………ix
CHPATER
1. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………1
1.1 Motivation…………………………………………………………………...1
1.2 Research Questions………………………………………………………….2
1.3 Purpose of the Study………………………………………………………4
1.4 Organization………………………………………………………………….5
2. LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………………………6
2.1 Grammatical Descriptions of Personal Pronouns…………………………..6
2.2 Functions of Personal Pronouns………………………………………………9
2.2.1 Reference and Personal Pronouns………………………………………9
2.2.1.1 Anaphoric Reference……..……………………………………..9
2.2.1.2 Cataphoric Reference………………………………………...11
2.2.1.3.Exophoric Reference…………………………………………12
2.2.2 Deixis and Personal Pronouns………………………………………….15
2.2.2.1 Person Deixis…………………………………………………16
2.2.2.2 Social Deixis…………………………………………………17
2.2.3 Pragmatic Usage and Personal Pronouns………………………………19
2.2.3.1 Egocentricity….……………………………………………...20
2.2.3.2 Solidarity……………………………………………………..22
2.2.3.3 Generalization………………………………………………..26
2.3 Summary……………………………………………………………………..28
3. PRONOMINAL FORMS IN STUDENTS’ WRITING………………………..…31
3.1 Methodology………..………………………………………………………..31
3.1.1 Subjects…………………………………………………..…………….31
3.1.2 Data Collection………………………………………………………..32
3.1.3 Analysis Methods…………………………………………...………..33
3.2 Findings and Discussions…………………………………………………...37
3.2.1 The Functions of Personal Pronouns in Students’ Compositions…….39
3.2.2 Mismatches of Pronominal Forms and Referents…………………….44
3.2.3 The Pronominal Switch Strategies……………………………………48
3.2.3.1 The Shifting Strategy……………………………………….53
3.2.3.2 The Extending plus Shifting Strategy…………………………57
3.2.3.3 The Narrowing plus Shifting Strategy………………………...58
3.2.3.4 The Narrowing Strategy………………………………………60
3.2.3.5 The Extending Strategy……………………………………….61
3.2.4 Textual Patterns and Pronouns Switch……………………………….63
3.2.4.1 The General-Specific Pattern…………………………………..63
3.2.4.2 The Statement-Conclusion Pattern……………………………..64
3.2.4.3 The Description-Conclusion Pattern…………………………65
3.2.4.4 The Phenomenon-Reason Pattern……………………………66
3.2.4.5 The Claim-Counterclaim Pattern……………………………..66
3.3 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………..67
4. CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………70
4.1 Summary………………………………………………………………..……70
4.2 Implications and Suggestions for Teaching…………………………………74
4.3 Limitations of the Present Study……………………………………………77
APPENDIX A The Instruction in the Writing Test…………………………………..78
REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………….79

REFERENCES
Bernstenin, B. 1971. Class Codes and Control. London: Routledge Kegan Paul.
Bakhtin, M. 1981. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Austin: University of
Texas Press.
Bar-Hillel, Y. 1954 Indexical Expressions. Mind 63. Bosch, P. (1983). Agreement
and Anaphora. London: Academic Press Inc.
Bloomfield, M.W. and Newmark, Z. 1963. A linguistic introduction to the history of
English. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Bosch, P. 1983. Agreement and Anaphora. London: Academic Press Inc.
Braun, F. 1988. Terms of Address: problems of patterns and usage in various
languages and cultures. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Brown, G., & Yule, G. 1983. Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. 1978. Universals in language use: politeness phenomena. In E.N. Goody (ed.) Questions of politeness. Cambridge University Press.
Carter, R. 1984. Why have I started to talk to you like this? Narrative voices,
discourse pragmatics and textual openings. In W. van Peer and J. Renkema (eds.)
Pragmatics and syntax. Louvain: Acco.
Chang, Yu-hsiu (張玉秀). 1998. The Study of Personal Pronouns in Mandarin
Political Discourse. Unpublished M.A. Thesis. Graduate Institute of English.
National Taiwan Normal University. Taipei.
Crew, F. 1987. The Random House Handbook. New York: McGraw Hill.
Crystal, D. 1988. Rediscover English Grammar. London: Longman.
Fillmore, C. J. 1975. Santa Cruz Lectures on Deixis, 1971. Mimro. Indiana University
Linguistics Club.
Fillmore, C. J. 1997 Lectures on Deixis. California: CSLI publications.
Friedrich, P. 1966. Structural Implications of Russian Pronominal Usage. Fanun Linguarum (XX). The Hague and Paris: Mouton, pp.214-59.
Thomas, G. 1991. Linguistic purism. London: Longman.
Green, G.M. 1989. Pragmatics and Natural Language Understanding. New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Greenbaum, S. 1991. An Introduction to English Grammar. London: Longman.
Haiman, J. & P. Munro, (Eds.). 1983. Switch Reference: Typological Studies in
Language (Vol. 2). 51-82. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Halliday, M. A. K. , & Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Horowitz, R. & Samuels, J. S. 1987. Comprehending Oral and Written Language:
Critical Contrasts for Literacy and Schooling. In R. Horowitz & S. J.
Samuels, Comprehending Oral and Written Language. London: Academic Press
Inc.
Huddleston, R. 1988. English grammr: an outline. Cambridge University Press.
Hurford, J. R. 1994. Grammar. Cambridge University Press.
Jesepersen, O. 1949. A modern English grammar on historical principles, vol. VII.
London: Allen and Unwin.
Kramer, M. G., Leggett, G., & Mead, C. D. 1995. Prentice Hall handbook for writers.
Englewood, N.J. : Prentice Hall.
Langacker, R. W. 1996, Conceptual Grouping and pronominal Anaphora. In B. Fox
(Ed.), Studies in Anaphora. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Leech, G. 1992. Introducing English Grammar. London: Penguin.
Levinson, S. C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lyons, J. 1968. Introduction to theoretical linguistics. Cambridge University Press.
1977. Semantics, vols. I and II. Cambridge University Press.
Marius, R. & Wiener, H. S. 1994. The McGraw-Hill college handbook. New York: McGraw Hill.
McArthur, T. (ed.) 1992. The Oxford companion to the English laguage. Oxford
University Press.
McCarthy, M. 1991. Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Mey, L. J. 1993. Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Muhlhausler, P., & Harre, R. 1990. Pronouns and People. Oxford: Blasil Blackwell
Ltd.
Onions, C.T. 1971. Modern English Syntax. London: Routledge.
Peirce. C.S. 1931-58. Collected Papers. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. and Svartvik, J. 1985. A Comprehensive
Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
Renkenma, J. 1993. Discourse Studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Rosten, L. 1968. The Joys of Yiddish. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Schegloff, E. A. 1996. Some Practices for Referring to Persons in Talk-in-Interaction:
A Partial Sketch of a Systematics. In B. Fox (Ed.), Studies in Anaphora.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Shu-Hung Huang. 1997. “Pronominal Errors in Written Discourse: Topical
Antecedents.” 第六屆中華名國英語文教學國際研討會論文集. 台北:文鶴.
Steiner, G. 1978. Heidegger. London: Fontana.
Tannen, Deborah. 1989. Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
van Dijk, T. A. 1977. Text and Context. Explorations in the Semantics and
Pragmatics of Discourse. London: Longman.
Wales, K. 1996. Personal Pronouns in Present-day English. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Weissberg, B. “Speaking of Writing: Some Functions of Talk in the ESL Composition
Class.” Jounral of Second Language Writing 1994: 121-139.

QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top