101年度特殊教育教學示例 國小資優教育國語文教學設計-修辭大 …¹´度國小特殊教育教學示例... · 關修辭法」。分為:諧音雙關、詞義雙關與語義雙關三種。
指導教授:嚴立模 博士 《當代中文課程》 語教材一~四冊 華 情景...
126
國立屏東大學 華語文教學碩士學位學程班碩士論文 指導教授:嚴立模 博士 研究生:余玉雯 撰 中華民國 107 年 1 月 《當代中文課程》華語教材一~四冊 情景語境之研究
Transcript of 指導教授:嚴立模 博士 《當代中文課程》 語教材一~四冊 華 情景...
KB102113
The Context of situation in a dialogue from “A Course
in Contemporary Chinese” Volume 1 to Volume 4
Abstract
This study aimed to research the context of situation from“ A
Course in Contemporary Chinese” printed in 2015. With language
communication theory as the foundation, the Common European
Framework of Reference (CEFR) as the standard validation, we
are commencing a close study of the compositions of the context,
through the method of contextual analysis. They are of two
make-ups: setting, theme. In this study we find that the social
settings are mostly in public fields, almost place of restaurant and
public. People major are students. The first and second volumes
are mainly talking about oral training. The contents of the
textbooks are mainly narratives of Taiwanese culture. The Third
and Fourth volumes enter the written language training and took
the social events in Taiwan as their main themes. The themes of
communication are the highest proportion of daily life, and the
majority of topics are diet and shopping in daily life. The articles
mainly describe Taiwan’s consumption habits and attitude to life.
IV
In addition, the modules of classroom activities and cultural
attractions can be combined with each other, to design a clear
context, to match the textbook, so as to make each unit more
coherent, and to allow learners to integrate into the language and
to learn the text more quickly. Teachers can use actual or virtual
scene to design scenarios of context in the classroom teaching and
to make the content more detailed and complete.
Keywords: A Course in Contemporary Chinese, language
communication theory, the context of situation
V
......................................................................... 47
............................................................................. 47
................................................................. 48
............................................................................. 51
.................................................................. 56
........................................................................... 56
................................................................... 56
............................................................ 67
2-2-1 ... 34
3-3-1 ......................... 52
3-3-2 ..................... 55
3-4-2 A1A2B1 ................. 62
3-4-3 B2C1C2 .................. 64
3-4-4 CEFR .................................. 69
4-1-1 ............... 82
4-1-2 ............... 85
4-1-3 ............... 89
4-1-4 ............... 93
4-2-1 ............... 97
4-2-2 ............... 98
4-2-3 .............. 100
4-2-4 .............. 102
VIII
Cultures Connection Comparisons
Communities
423
2
3
( )
2 2009 42
3 2005 19-20
8
( )
( )
( )
9
( )
10
(Lyons)
4
11
12
Threshold Level 1990
CEFR (The Common European
Framework of Reference for Languages : Learning, Teaching, Assessment)
CEFR
(context)
5
5 2012 79
1.
2.
6 Malinowski B.(1923). The problem of meaning in primitive languages (Supplement
I). In: Ogden C K, Richards I A. The meaning of meaning. New York & London:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich P264.
Halliday 8
7 Firth J R. (1950). Personality and language in society. In:Firth J R, ed. Papers in
linguistics 1934-1951. London: Oxford University Press. P37-52. 8 M A K Halliday, A. McIntosh and P.D. Strevens (1964). The Linguistic Sciences
and Language Teaching. London: Longmans P90-92.
18
9
Saeed
Saeed 1997LSemantics
9 Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics.(Vols.102). CamgridgeCamgridge University Press.
P574.
19
Verdler
Verdler 1967
Hymes
1968
speaking
participants
ends
act sequence
10
John I Saeed (1997). Semantics. London: Oxford University Press. P182 . .
20
instrumentallties
norms
gentres
11
Sperber & Wilson
11
2008 206
21
Firth
Halliday
Hymes
Lyons
12
2012 82-83
22
Verschueren
1932
13
13
24
1982
14
239-248 15
25
17
1989
1992 301 17
1987 4
26
1993
20
1996
18
77 19
438 20
27
21
2002
1.
2.
21
28
1.
2.
1.
2.
22
" "
22
29
"
" " "
"
" " "
23
2012 91
31
24
24
32
25
2003 314
26
34
35
Schegloff and Jefferson1974
2006
19972000
2008
context
43
--
- - A1
CulturesConnections
5C
5C
CEFR
CEFR
CEFR
46
…
1
Guidelines
1990
31
32
2009
196-205 CEFR CEFR
32
J.A. van EK & J.L.M. Trim.Threshold Level 1990. New YorkCambridge University Press,
1998, P65.
33
-68-
CEFR
User) A1 (Breakthrough)A2 (Way Stage)B
(Independent User) B1 (Threshold) B2
(Vantage)C (Proficient User)(Effective
Operational Proficiency)(Mastery)
34
2003 322
-69-
Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. New York. Cambridge University
Press, 2001, P24.
CEFR
-71-
B2
Upper
Intermidiate
(plurilingualism) (intercultuality)
(1) ?
36
- - C E F R B 1
2 0 1 1 1 4 0 - 1 4 2
-76-
CEFR
CEFR
CEFR
-82-
-83-
1-L2
2
4
-90-
3-L1
3 4
5
2 2
-96-
22%
50%
4%
24%
-97-
24% 13
22% 12 4% 2
1-L1
1-L2
2 5
3 2 3 1
5
4-2-2
2-L1
2-L2
3 4
2 3 3
3
2
3-L1
5 2
1 3 1
5 CEFR B1
B2C1
4-L1
4-L2
4-L3
4-L4
4-L5 *
4-L6 *
1 4
2 1 3 1
4
CEFR
1
12 21.82%
9 16.36% 6 10.91%
7 12.73% 3 5.45%
7
3
10.91%
32.73%
16.36%
12.73%
21.82%
5.45%
L14L5L8L10
L15 5 L12
L9L11L7
L13L6L3
L8L11L12 5
-105-
4
2. L6→L5
3. L3? → L6
4. L7 → L8
5. L11 → L9
6. L9 → L3
L153
165
L1 L132
-110-
-112-
2002
2002
1992
2000
2000
2008
2014
2005
2006
2007
-114-
Council of Europe.2001. Common European Framework of Reference for
Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. New YorkCambridge University. .
Firth, J. R. (1950). Personality and language in society. In J. R. Firth (ed.), Papers in
linguistics (pp.1934-1951). London : Oxford University.
Halliday, M. A. K., Mclntosh Angus and Strevens Peter (1964). The Linguistic
Sciences and Language Teaching. London: Longmans.
J.A. van EK & J.L.M. Trim.1998 .Threshold Level 1990. New YorkCambridge
University.
Malinowski, B. (1923). The problem of meaning in primitive languages. In C. K.
Ogden, I. A. Richards (eds.), Papers in The meaning of meaning (pp.296).
-115-
Saeed, John I (1997). Semantics. London: Oxford University.
2007
15314
2006CEFR2
136-143
-116-
180-184
47-51
2205-224
2007
The Context of situation in a dialogue from “A Course
in Contemporary Chinese” Volume 1 to Volume 4
Abstract
This study aimed to research the context of situation from“ A
Course in Contemporary Chinese” printed in 2015. With language
communication theory as the foundation, the Common European
Framework of Reference (CEFR) as the standard validation, we
are commencing a close study of the compositions of the context,
through the method of contextual analysis. They are of two
make-ups: setting, theme. In this study we find that the social
settings are mostly in public fields, almost place of restaurant and
public. People major are students. The first and second volumes
are mainly talking about oral training. The contents of the
textbooks are mainly narratives of Taiwanese culture. The Third
and Fourth volumes enter the written language training and took
the social events in Taiwan as their main themes. The themes of
communication are the highest proportion of daily life, and the
majority of topics are diet and shopping in daily life. The articles
mainly describe Taiwan’s consumption habits and attitude to life.
IV
In addition, the modules of classroom activities and cultural
attractions can be combined with each other, to design a clear
context, to match the textbook, so as to make each unit more
coherent, and to allow learners to integrate into the language and
to learn the text more quickly. Teachers can use actual or virtual
scene to design scenarios of context in the classroom teaching and
to make the content more detailed and complete.
Keywords: A Course in Contemporary Chinese, language
communication theory, the context of situation
V
......................................................................... 47
............................................................................. 47
................................................................. 48
............................................................................. 51
.................................................................. 56
........................................................................... 56
................................................................... 56
............................................................ 67
2-2-1 ... 34
3-3-1 ......................... 52
3-3-2 ..................... 55
3-4-2 A1A2B1 ................. 62
3-4-3 B2C1C2 .................. 64
3-4-4 CEFR .................................. 69
4-1-1 ............... 82
4-1-2 ............... 85
4-1-3 ............... 89
4-1-4 ............... 93
4-2-1 ............... 97
4-2-2 ............... 98
4-2-3 .............. 100
4-2-4 .............. 102
VIII
Cultures Connection Comparisons
Communities
423
2
3
( )
2 2009 42
3 2005 19-20
8
( )
( )
( )
9
( )
10
(Lyons)
4
11
12
Threshold Level 1990
CEFR (The Common European
Framework of Reference for Languages : Learning, Teaching, Assessment)
CEFR
(context)
5
5 2012 79
1.
2.
6 Malinowski B.(1923). The problem of meaning in primitive languages (Supplement
I). In: Ogden C K, Richards I A. The meaning of meaning. New York & London:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich P264.
Halliday 8
7 Firth J R. (1950). Personality and language in society. In:Firth J R, ed. Papers in
linguistics 1934-1951. London: Oxford University Press. P37-52. 8 M A K Halliday, A. McIntosh and P.D. Strevens (1964). The Linguistic Sciences
and Language Teaching. London: Longmans P90-92.
18
9
Saeed
Saeed 1997LSemantics
9 Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics.(Vols.102). CamgridgeCamgridge University Press.
P574.
19
Verdler
Verdler 1967
Hymes
1968
speaking
participants
ends
act sequence
10
John I Saeed (1997). Semantics. London: Oxford University Press. P182 . .
20
instrumentallties
norms
gentres
11
Sperber & Wilson
11
2008 206
21
Firth
Halliday
Hymes
Lyons
12
2012 82-83
22
Verschueren
1932
13
13
24
1982
14
239-248 15
25
17
1989
1992 301 17
1987 4
26
1993
20
1996
18
77 19
438 20
27
21
2002
1.
2.
21
28
1.
2.
1.
2.
22
" "
22
29
"
" " "
"
" " "
23
2012 91
31
24
24
32
25
2003 314
26
34
35
Schegloff and Jefferson1974
2006
19972000
2008
context
43
--
- - A1
CulturesConnections
5C
5C
CEFR
CEFR
CEFR
46
…
1
Guidelines
1990
31
32
2009
196-205 CEFR CEFR
32
J.A. van EK & J.L.M. Trim.Threshold Level 1990. New YorkCambridge University Press,
1998, P65.
33
-68-
CEFR
User) A1 (Breakthrough)A2 (Way Stage)B
(Independent User) B1 (Threshold) B2
(Vantage)C (Proficient User)(Effective
Operational Proficiency)(Mastery)
34
2003 322
-69-
Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. New York. Cambridge University
Press, 2001, P24.
CEFR
-71-
B2
Upper
Intermidiate
(plurilingualism) (intercultuality)
(1) ?
36
- - C E F R B 1
2 0 1 1 1 4 0 - 1 4 2
-76-
CEFR
CEFR
CEFR
-82-
-83-
1-L2
2
4
-90-
3-L1
3 4
5
2 2
-96-
22%
50%
4%
24%
-97-
24% 13
22% 12 4% 2
1-L1
1-L2
2 5
3 2 3 1
5
4-2-2
2-L1
2-L2
3 4
2 3 3
3
2
3-L1
5 2
1 3 1
5 CEFR B1
B2C1
4-L1
4-L2
4-L3
4-L4
4-L5 *
4-L6 *
1 4
2 1 3 1
4
CEFR
1
12 21.82%
9 16.36% 6 10.91%
7 12.73% 3 5.45%
7
3
10.91%
32.73%
16.36%
12.73%
21.82%
5.45%
L14L5L8L10
L15 5 L12
L9L11L7
L13L6L3
L8L11L12 5
-105-
4
2. L6→L5
3. L3? → L6
4. L7 → L8
5. L11 → L9
6. L9 → L3
L153
165
L1 L132
-110-
-112-
2002
2002
1992
2000
2000
2008
2014
2005
2006
2007
-114-
Council of Europe.2001. Common European Framework of Reference for
Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. New YorkCambridge University. .
Firth, J. R. (1950). Personality and language in society. In J. R. Firth (ed.), Papers in
linguistics (pp.1934-1951). London : Oxford University.
Halliday, M. A. K., Mclntosh Angus and Strevens Peter (1964). The Linguistic
Sciences and Language Teaching. London: Longmans.
J.A. van EK & J.L.M. Trim.1998 .Threshold Level 1990. New YorkCambridge
University.
Malinowski, B. (1923). The problem of meaning in primitive languages. In C. K.
Ogden, I. A. Richards (eds.), Papers in The meaning of meaning (pp.296).
-115-
Saeed, John I (1997). Semantics. London: Oxford University.
2007
15314
2006CEFR2
136-143
-116-
180-184
47-51
2205-224
2007