|
Modern Linguistics 2024
基于语料库的中国英语学习者写作中因果连接词研究
|
Abstract:
因果逻辑关系作为四种基本逻辑关系之一,对英语写作的逻辑性和流畅性起着至关重要的作用。因此,本研究基于ETS和LOCNESS语料库,通过R和Wordsmith对比分析中国英语学习者与英语本族语者在因果连接词使用上的异同点以及不同成绩段的中国英语学习者的特点。研究发现,中国英语学习者整体使用因果衔接词的频率高于英语本族语者,尤其是“so”和“because”,这体现了他们对口语化衔接词以及显性衔接使用上的偏好。相比之下,他们在“since”,“hence”和“as a result”等词的使用上与英语本族语者存在差异,但并不如“so”和“because”明显。而对于“therefore”、“consequently”和“due to”等词的使用,中国学习者能较好地接近英语本族语者的习惯。此外,研究还指出中国英语学习者在不同成绩段中因果连接词的使用上存在明显的层次性。高成绩段的学习者显示出较成熟的语言运用能力,而低成绩段的学生则表现出对口语化以及简单直接表达的偏好。中等成绩段的学生则处于两者之间。最后在对中国英语学习者因果连接词的错误分析中概括出了因果连接词误用、因果连接词过度使用以及因果连接词缺失这三个错误分类,以期为教师加强对学生使用因果连接词的指导,从而为有效提升他们的英语写作水平提供帮助。
Causal logic, as one of the four fundamental logical relations, plays a pivotal role in ensuring coherence and fluency in English writing. Consequently, this study draws upon the ETS and LOCNESS corpora to conduct a comparative analysis of similarities and differences in the usage of causal connectives between Chinese English learners and native English speakers, as well as identifying distinctive features among Chinese learners across varying proficiency levels. The findings reveal that Chinese English learners overall employ causal connectives more frequently than native speakers, particularly favoring colloquial connectives, such as so and because. In contrast, their usage of terms like since, hence, and as a result differs from that of native speakers, though not as markedly as with so and because. However, they demonstrate a closer alignment with native speaker habits in the usage of words like therefore, consequently, and due to. Additionally, the study highlights a clear gradation in the use of causal connectives among Chinese English learners across different performance levels. High-achieving learners exhibit a more sophisticated command of language, while low-achieving students show a preference for colloquial and straightforward expressions. Middle-achieving students fall somewhere in between. Finally, the study summarizes three categories of errors related to causal connectives among Chinese English learners: misuse, overuse, and omission of causal connectives. This categorization aims to offer instructors insights for better guiding students on the use of causal connectives, thereby helping to enhance students’ English writing proficiency.
[1] | 戴俊红. 非英语专业学生限时议论文写作中的因果连接词使用研究[J]. 牡丹江大学学报, 2013, 22(12): 176-180. |
[2] | Halliday, M.A.K. and Hasan, R. (1976) Cohesion in English. Longman, London. |
[3] | 吴晓春, 杨忠. 认知视角与外语学习者逻辑连接词使用错误[J]. 东北师大学报(哲学社会科学版), 2011(1): 139-142. |
[4] | 凌梦琪. 基于语料库的高中生英语写作中连接词的使用状况调查研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 赣州: 赣南师范大学, 2023. |
[5] | 莫俊华. 中国学生在议论文写作中使用因果连接词的语料库研究[J]. 外语教学, 2005(5): 45-50. |
[6] | 杨建生. 基于语料库的英语专业学生议论文中因果连接词使用研究[J]. 河北联合大学学报(社会科学版), 2012, 12(2): 82-85. |
[7] | 刘西娟, 刘秀蓉. 非英语专业本科生议论文中的因果连接词研究[J]. 西安石油大学学报(社会科学版), 2015, 24(6): 100-106. |
[8] | 韩存新, 陈京娜. 中学生英语议论文中的因果连接词研究[J]. 基础外语教育, 2020, 22(1): 22-29 109. |
[9] | 施雅倩, 雷蕾. 语言数字人文与R语言实践[M]. 上海: 上海交通大学出版社, 2023. |
[10] | 文秋芳, 丁言仁, 王文宇. 中国大学生英语书面语中的口语化倾向——高水平英语学习者语料对比分析[J]. 外语教学与研究, 2003(4): 268-274 321. |