| Summary: | 本研究參考王(2005)的研究，探討台灣國中生在英語現在完成式的學習表現。研究對象為台北縣120名國三學生，測驗學生在40分鐘內填答包含文法正確性判斷是非題、時態填充題及中英翻譯題共計50道題目。研究重點在：(1)受試者對時態和時貌的理解；(2) 現在完成式的誤用情形；(3) 現在完成式不同功能的習得，以及 (4) 母語的影響及對副詞的依賴狀況。研究發現如下：首先，學習者在中文及英文的時態時貌表現有理解上的困難，顯示他們並未真正理解中英文表達時間概念的差異。其次，現在完成式的誤用最常發生在現在簡單式及過去簡單式。他們習慣依賴常用於現在式的時間副詞或頻率副詞來決定使用時態，在看到這些副詞時，未真正理解上下文語境意涵而誤用成現在簡單式；而學習者對於過去已完成事件，未意識到其和現在的關聯及說話者態度，所以用過去式。這些結果顯示學習者並未真正理解英文現在式、過去式的真正涵義，也不了解現在完成式核心意涵及其語用功能為何。此外，現在完成式的四個主要功能中，學習者在表動作連續性的完成態 (continuative perfect)和表經驗的完成態 (experiential perfect)表現的最理想。而中文的影響顯示學習者習慣依賴副詞來決定使用時態為何，有副詞的句子或情境現在完成式的答對率偏高。研究進一步發現動詞特性會影響學習者對現在完成式的使用判斷，學生在狀態類動詞（包含心智類動詞）用於現在完成式的理解表現較差，此結果可能和中英文的差異有關。此外，檢視國中課本中現在完成式呈現方式的結果顯示這四種功能出現的語言輸入次數和學生的學習速率並未有直接關係，很可能是單句（不含上下文）的呈現方式讓學生有不完整的概念，因此建議教科書或文法書作者避免僅提供單句式例句及過度強調副詞的搭配。最後，教授現在完成式的老師本身應該對中文及英文的時間概念及時態、時貌有清楚的認識，無論是在給予講解範例、課堂練習或評量測驗，都應給予上下文情境讓學生能理解事件時間的相對應關係及覺察到說話者的觀點來決定是否該事件有現在關連性(current relevance) 而能正確使用現在完成式。本研究最後參考幾位研究者觀點及根據研究發現提出一些教授現在完成式的建議。 === This study explores Taiwanese junior high students’ performance on the English present perfect use. One hundred and twenty participants in Taipei County finished 50 questions out of three types of elicitation questions within 40 minutes. The test included a grammaticality judgment task, a blank-filling test and a translation task. The analyses focus on (1) learners’ awareness of tense/aspect; (2) misuses of other tense/aspect forms for the present perfect; (3) acquisition rates of the four functions of the present perfect, and (4) L1 interference and dependence on the adverbials. The main findings are as follows. First, the learners have difficulty acquiring the concept of tense/aspect for the difference of the temporal concepts of Chinese and English. Then, misuses of other tense/aspect forms for the present perfect mainly fall on simple past and simple present. The former misuse may result from the fact that learners do not see completed past events’ relations to the speech moment and neglect the speaker’s attitude; the latter misuse is observed to happen when learners rely much on certain temporal markings that goes mostly with the simple present and thus their judgment on tense/aspect use is misled. These results suggest that learners do not fully understand the semantics of the present simple and past simple, nor do they comprehend the semantic and pragmatic meanings of the present perfect. Furthermore, L1 interference can be witnessed in learner’s reliance on the adverbials. The accuracy rate increases in contexts with certain adverbials. As for the performance on the four uses of the present perfect, learners demonstrate satisfactory performance on the ‘continuative perfect’ and ‘experiential perfect’. A close look into learners’ errors also reveals that lexical aspect plays a role in the comprehension of the present perfect; learners have difficulty in using stative verbs (including mental verbs) in the present perfect. Such performance may result from the difference of lexical aspect and grammatical aspect between Chinese and English. A review on the presentation of the present perfect in the domestic textbooks then discloses that frequency of input alone cannot be responsible for the differentiated acquisition rates. It is, however, the isolated sentence patterns that lead the learners to form rudimentary concepts about the perfect aspect. It is therefore suggested that textbook or grammar book writers avoid sentential examples and overemphasis of its association with certain adverbials. Last but not the least, classroom teachers who are to teach the present perfect should equip themselves with the distinct concepts of tense/aspect between English and Chinese. On giving modeling examples, drill practices, or assessment, contexts should always be given for learners to anchor the relational concept of time so that they make appropriate tense/aspect uses.
|
|---|
