臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

溝通式語言教學(CLT)的原則和特色自從1995年就被帶進台灣高中英文教科書的編纂。在溝通能力的四個構成要素之中，社會語言能力是成功溝通的關鍵而且能夠經由語言行為的使用被展現出來。因此，本研究旨在探測語言行為教學在台灣英文教科書中是如何被呈現的。首先，五個最常被使用及研究的語言行為─恭維、請求、道歉、抱怨以及拒絕─在台灣最受歡迎的兩套高中英文教科書─遠東和三民─之對話中出現的次數被統計。然後，對話中主要運用到的觀點，美國的或中國的，以及教科書和教師手冊中的跨文化對照跟比較被檢視。最後，以跨文化的角度分析常和語言行為一起出現的支持性話語以及閒聊，同時，教科書和教師手冊是否有相關的解釋也被探索。
研究結果顯示，五種語言行為當中的大多數在兩套教科書中並沒有被平均地分佈，而以該五種語言行為的呈現手法來看，遠東版教科書在比例上運用較多的中國式觀點，然而三民版教科書在比例上則運用較多的美國式觀點。但是，無論兩套教科書較偏向哪一種觀點，在教科書以及其對應的教師手冊中幾乎沒有跨文化的對照和比較。至於支持性話語和閒聊的呈現方式，研究結果顯示遠東版教科書在恭維、請求和抱怨這三種語言行為的支持性話語和閒聊的呈現並不多，而三民版教科書在請求和抱怨這兩種語言行為的支持性話語和閒聊的呈現也不多，無法提供學生充足的練習機會，同時，就算有支持性話語和閒聊出現在語言行為中，在教科書跟其對應的教師手冊中仍然沒有進一步的解釋以指出美國人跟中國人在使用上的文化差異。基於本研究的研究結果，獲得之教學啟示如後。首先，雖然台灣的高中英文教科書，至少遠東版跟三民版，還沒如此地嚴肅看待語言行為教學，但對於老師來說，向學生介紹語言行為的知識卻是相當重要的，因為如此一來，方能使他們學習如何更有效地與人溝通。再者，身為一位台灣的英文老師，既然語言行為以及伴隨的支持性話語和閒聊在教科書或教師手冊當中，幾乎沒有或很少有跨文化差異性的解釋存在，增加我們語言行為教學的知識就變成了一項不可或缺的事。此外，台灣教科書的出版者應該反省教科書中對話部份的適當呈現方式，使老師能經由語言行為教學的實施改善同學的社會語言能力。最後，本研究當中被用來分析語言行為呈現所運用的主要的觀點(美國的或中國的)之分類系統，不僅對於未來針對台灣其它版本教科書做類似研究的研究者有幫助，也提供第一線教師評判教科書中對話結構呈現適當與否之標準，同時也將語言行為教學的背景知識灌輸給第一線教師。

The principles and characteristics of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) have been brought into senior high school English textbooks editing in Taiwan since 1995. Among the four components of communicative competence, sociolinguistic competence is the key to successful communication and can be shown through the use of speech acts. This study, therefore, intended to probe into how speech act teaching is carried out in senior high school English textbooks in Taiwan. Firstly, the frequency of the five much used and explored speech acts—compliment, request, apology, complaint, and refusal—in the conversation part of two sets of the most popular senior high school English textbooks in Taiwan—Textbook F and Textbook S—was counted. Then, the preference, American or Chinese, as well as cross-cultural comparisons and contrasts in both the textbooks and teachers’ manuals, were examined. Lastly, the common co-occurring phenomenon of supportive moves and small talk in speech acts was analyzed cross-culturally and related explanations in both the textbooks and teachers’ manuals were investigated as well.
The results showed that most of the five speech acts were not appropriately distributed in both sets of the textbooks, and that Textbook F offered much more Chinese preference than American one, while Textbook S provided proportionately more American preference than Chinese one, in presenting the five speech acts. However, no matter which preference both sets of textbooks favored, there were almost no cross-cultural comparisons and contrasts made in the textbooks or their corresponding teachers’ manuals. As to the presentation of supportive moves and small talk, the findings showed that Textbook F did not present enough supportive moves and small talk in the speech acts of compliment, request, and complaint, and that Textbook S did not display enough supportive moves and small talk in the speech acts of request and complaint for students to learn from, and if supportive moves or small talk were presented, there were still no further explanations in the textbooks or their corresponding teachers’ manuals to point out cultural differences between American and Chinese usage. With regard to the findings in this study, some pedagogical implications are provided. Firstly, although the senior high school English textbooks in Taiwan, at least Textbook F and Textbook S, have not taken speech act teaching so seriously, it is quite important for teachers to introduce the knowledge of speech acts to make students learn how to communicate more effectively. Secondly, as an English teacher in Taiwan, increasing our knowledge of speech act teaching becomes a ‘must’ since there are no or few explanations of cross-cultural differences of speech acts and their supportive moves or small talk in the textbooks or teachers’ manuals. Thirdly, textbook publishers in Taiwan should reflect upon the appropriate way to present the conversation part in textbooks to improve students’ sociolinguistic competence through speech act teaching. Last but not least, the coding scheme used for analyzing the preference, American or Chinese one, in this research, can not only be helpful to future researchers conducting similar studies on other sets of textbooks in Taiwan, but also offer teachers criteria to make judgments on the organization of the conversation part in textbooks and provide them the background knowledge of speech act teaching at the same time.

Acknowledgements iii
碩士論文提要 viii
Abstract x
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
Motivation and Goal 1
Purpose of the Study 3
Significance of the Study 4
Organization of the Chapters 4
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 7
Communicative Competence 7
Sociolinguistic Competence 8
Speech Act Theory 9
Universality Versus Cultural-Specificity of Speech Acts 10
Context 11
Cultural Differences Between American and Chinese Speech Acts 13
Compliment 13
Request 17
Apology 20
Complaint 25
Refusal 29
Supportive Moves and Small Talk 32
Studies of Speech Acts in ELT Materials 35
Research Questions 36
Hypotheses 37
CHAPTER 3 METHOD 39
Materials 39
Procedure 40
Data Analysis 41
Frequency of Compliment, Request, Apology, Complaint, and Refusal 41
Cross-Cultural Differences in Speech Acts 41
Supportive Moves and Small Talk 48
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 49
Frequencies of the Five Much Used Speech Acts 49
Preference: American or Chinese 51
Compliment 51
Request 61
Apology 67
Complaint 74
Refusal 80
Cross-cultural Comparisons and Contrasts in Textbooks or Teachers’ Manuals 94
Textbooks 94
Teachers’ Manuals 96
The Occurrence of Supportive Moves or Small Talk 100
Explanations of Cultural Differences in Textbooks or Teachers’ Manuals 102
Textbooks 102
Teachers’ Manuals 109
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION 110
Summary of the Major Findings 110
Pedagogical Implications 115
Limitations of the Study 117
Suggestions for Future Research 118
REFERENCES 119
APPENDIX A 126
APPENDIX B 157

Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Baleghizadeh, S. (2007). Speech acts in English language teaching. Iranian Journal of Language Studies, 1(2), 143–154.
Bergman, M. L. & Kasper G. (1993). Perception and performance in native and nonnative apology. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage Pragmatics, (pp. 82-107). NY: Oxford University Press.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (Eds.). (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics:
Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Blum-Kulka, S. & Olshtain, E. (1984). Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP). Applied Linguists, 5(3), 196-213.
Borkin, N. & Reinhart, S.M. (1978). Excuse me and I’m sorry. TESOL Quarterly, 12(1), 57-70.
Boxer, D. & Pickering L. (1995). Problems in the presentation of speech acts in ELT materials: The case of complaints. ELT Journal, 49(1), 44–58.
Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. C. Richards & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and Communication (pp. 2-27). London: Longman.
Canale, M. & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
Chang, Y. Y. (2003). Responding to English requests: A study on speech act of EFL junior high school students in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taipei Teachers College, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Chen, H. J. (1996). Cross-cultural comparison of English and Chinese metapragmatics in refusal. Indiana University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 408860).
Chen, R. (1993). Responding to compliments: A contrastive study of politeness strategies between American English and Chinese speakers. Journal of Pragmatics, 20, 49-75.
Chen, S. C. (2007). Interlanguage refusals: A cross-cultural study of EFL learners in Taiwan and native speakers of American English. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Cheng Chi University, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Chen, Y. S. (2007). EFL learners’ strategy use and instructional effects in interlanguage pragmatics: The case of complaints. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Clark, H. H. (1979). Responding to indirect speech acts. Cognitive Psychology, 11, 430-477.
Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational Psychological Measurement, 20, 37-46.
Edmondson W. & House J. (1981). Let’s talk and talk about it. Munich: Urban & Schwarzenberg.
Fan, K. Y. (2007). A cross-cultural study on EFL responding to indirect requests. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Cheng Chi University, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Herbert, R. (1989). The ethnography of English compliments and compliment responses: A contrastive sketch. In W. Oleksy (Ed.), Contrastive pragmatics (pp.3-35). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Holmes, J. (1986). Compliments and compliment responses in New Zealand English. Anthropological Linguistics, 28(1-4), 485-508.
Holmes, J. (1988). Paying compliments: A sex-preferential politeness strategies. Journal of Pragmatics, 12, 445-465.
Holmes, J. (1989). Sex differences and apologies: One aspect of communicative competence. Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 194-213.
Holmes, J. (2001). An introduction to sociolinguistics (2nd ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education.
Hong, C. Y. (2008). An interlanguage pragmatic study of complaints made by Chinese learners of English in Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Hsiang, Y. C. (2007). A cultural content evaluation on senior high school English textbooks. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Cheng Chi University, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Hu, H. L. (2004). A study on strategy use of EFL high school students in the face-threatening speech acts. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chung Cheng University, Chiayi, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Hymes, D. H. (1979). On communicative competence. In C. J. Brumfit & K. Johnson (Eds.), The communicative approach to language teaching (pp. 5-26). Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
King, K. A. & Silver R. E. (1993). “Sticking points”: Effects of instruction on NNS refusal strategies. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 9(1), 47-82.
Knapp, M., Hopper, R., & Bell, R. (1984). Compliments: A descriptive taxonomy.
Journal of Communication, 34, 12-31.
Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lakoff, G. & Mark, J. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lee-Wong, S. M. (1994). Imperatives in requests: Direct or impolite observations from Chinese. Pragmatics, 4, 491-515.
Lewandowska-tomaszczyk, B. (1989). Praising and complimenting. In W. Oleksy
(Ed.), Contrastive pragmatics (pp.73 – 100). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Liao. C. (1997). Comparing directives: American English, Mandarin and Taiwanese English. Taipei: The Crane Publishers.
Liao, C., & Bresnahan M. I. (1996). A contrastive pragmatic study on American English and Mandarin refusal strategies. Language sciences, 18(3-4), 703-727.
Lin, A. K. (2008). On English and Chinese compliments. US-China Foreign Language, 6(1), 65-68.
Lin, C. Y. (2004). Teaching speech acts in high school: An analysis of English textbooks. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Lycan, W. G. (1984). Logical form in natural language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Manes, J. (1983). Compliments: A mirror of cultural values. In N. Wolfson & E. Judd
(Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition (pp.96 – 102). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Mir. M. (1992). Do we all apologize the same? An empirical study on the act of apologizing by Spanish speakers learning English. Pragmatics and Language Learning, 3, 1-19.
Murphy, B. & Neu, J. (1996), My grade's too low: The speech act set of complaining. In S.M. Gass & J. Neu, (Eds.), Speech Acts across Cultures: Challenge to Communication in a Second Language (pp.191-216). Berlin/NY: Mouton de Gruyter.
Nunan D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Oliver, R. T. (1971). Communication and culture in ancient India and China. New York: Syracuse University Press.
Olshtain, E., & Cohen, A. D. (1983). Apology: A speech act set. In N. Wolfson & E. Judd (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and Language Acquisition (pp. 18-35). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Olshtain, E., & Weinbach, L. (1993). Interlanguage features of the speech act of complaining. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 108-122). New York: Oxford University Press.
Pan L. M. (2005). A cross-cultural study on the refusal behavior of the junior high school students in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Cheng Chi University, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Pomerantz, A. (1978). Compliment responses: Notes on the cooperation of multiple constraints. In J. Schenkein (Ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction (pp.79-112). New York: Academic Press.
Richards, J. C., Platt, J., & Platt, H. (2003). Longman dictionary of language teaching & applied linguistics (3rd ed.). Hong Kong: Pearson Education Asia Limited.
Richards, J. & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1979). The classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society, 8, 137-151.
Shih, H. C. (2006). The effect of English proficiency and social variables on L2 apology strategies: A case study on Taiwanese EFL junior high school students of Taipei County. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taipei University of Education, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Shih, H. Y. (2006). An interlanguage study of the speech act of apology made by EFL learners in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Sun Yat-Sen University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Tanck, S. (2002). Speech act sets of refusal and complaint: A comparison of native and non-native English speakers’ production. Retrieved March, 28, 2009, from American University, AU TESOL Program Web site: http://www.american.edu/tesol/wptanck.pdf
Trosborg, A. (1995). Interlanguage pragmatics: Requests, complaints, and apologies. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co.
Tsai, P. C. (2002). A study of the speech act of apology in Chinese. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Wei, M. C. (2006). A contrastive analysis of complaints between American students and native speakers of Mandarin Chinese with teaching applications. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Wierzbicka, A. (1991). Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Wolfson, N. (1989). Perspectives: Sociolinguistics and TESOL. New York: Newbury House.
Yang, S. (1987). A comparison between Chinese and American cultures in forms of address, greetings, farewells, and compliments. Cross Currents, 13, 13-28.
Ye, L. (1995). Complimenting in Mandarin Chinese. In G. Kasper (Ed.), Pragmatics
of Chinese as native and target language (pp.207 – 295). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.
Yu, M. (1999). Universalistic and culture-specific perspectives on variation in the acquisition of pragmatic competence in a second language. Pragmatics, 9, 281-312.
Yu, M. (2004). Interlinguistic variation and similarity in second language speech act behavior. The Modern Language Journal, 88(1), 102-119.
Yu, M. (2005). Sociolinguistic competence in the complimenting act of native Chinese and American English speakers: A mirror of cultural value. Language and Speech, 48(1), 91-119.
Yu, M. (2008). Teaching and learning sociolinguistic skills in university EFL classes in Taiwan. TESOL Quarterly, 42(1), 31-53.
Zhang, Y. (1995). Strategies in Chinese requesting. In G. Kasper (Ed.), Pragmatics of Chinese as native and target language (pp. 23-68). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.