第六章 教學應用
第三節 結語
由《新版實用視聽華語》、《遠東生活華語》、《新實用漢語課本》……
等常用教材中有大量的句式結構，可知這些教材的編輯人員不認為中文沒 有句法結構。但長久以來，常有語意為主、意合語言等名稱加諸在中文上，
若是真如這些名稱所指，中文母語者總是採用最符合世界知識、語意聯想 方式的解讀，即使這樣的解讀方式違反句法結構也無妨。若為如此，華語 教師只需告訴學習者「中文沒有句法結構，在說中文或聽中文的時候只用 語意聯想的解讀方式即可」，教材中也不需要羅列詳細的句法架構幫助學 習者學習中文。試想，倘若真的在這樣的教學下，學習者不能正確解讀「人 咬狗」、「小偷抓警察」……等這類的句子，因為這些句子與世界知識格格 不入。不過，就本研究的學習者處理中文的實驗結果看來，學習者是知道 中文有句法結構的，華語教材以及學習者的表現都無法與中文競爭模型達 到一致的結論。另外，由中文母語者處理中文的表現，可思考「語意為主」、
「意合語言」是否在中文語言學中佔了過高的地位。
之前的中文研究與教學無法達到產學合一，冀望透過本研究的努力，
將研究與實務結合，讓華語工作者知道有實證研究證明中文是以語序結構 為主的語言，教材、課堂上的語序架構不僅幫助學習者學習中文，也是中 文知識真實情形的反映。最後，希望也能讓華語工作者更清楚在未來的教 學中，還有哪些部份是教師、學習者都能夠有再進一步的空間。
81
82 El perro golpea al pajaro La profesora empuja a mama El jefe colisiona con la profesora
El perro al pajaro presiona La profesora a mama golpea El jefe a la profesora empuja Mama al jefe colisiona
AI
El pajaro presiona la silla El perro golpea la piña Mama empuja la roca La profesora colisiona el coche
El perro a la silla presiona El pajaro a la roca golpea La profesora al tren empuja El perro al coche colisiona
IA
La silla presiona a la profesora El televisor empuja al perro La roca golpea a mama La mesa colisiona con el pajaro
La silla al pajaro presiona El televisior al perro golpea La roca a mama empuja La mesa a la profesora colisiona
（2）偏好第一個名詞
NVN NNV
AA
Mamá presiona al perro.
El perro golpea al gato.
El hermano empuja al sapo
La profesora cosiliona con la hermana
El perro al gato presiona
La profesora al estudiante golpea La hermana al sapo empuja.
Mamá al hermano colisiona
AI
Mamá presiona la roca El perro golpea la lluvia Mamá empuja el coche El sapo colisiona el viento
El perro a la roca presiona Mama a la mesa golpea El gato a la manzana empuja El jefe a la cometa hala
IA
El coche colisiona con mama El viento empuja al pajaro La lluvia golpea al sapo
La puerta al pajaro presiona La lluvia al sapo golpea El viento al gato empuja
83
La roca presiona al perro El tren al perro colisiona
（3）偏好第二個名詞
NVN NNV
AA
El sapo patea a la profesora El pajaro golpea al jefe El perro empuja a mama El gato conlisiona con el tigre
El perro a la profesora golpea El sapo a mama patea El gato a la profesora empuja.
Mama al toro colisiona
AI
El gato hala la puerta El pajaro golpea la roca Mama empuja el tren El perro colisiona el coche
El perro al tren empuja El gato al balón colisiona La profesora a la silla golpea Mama a la manzana patea
IA
La puerta colisiona con el gato El balón hala al hermano La manzana mordió al perro La silla patea a mama
La ventana al gato colisiona La roca al perro patea La silla a Mamá empuja El cellular a la profesora golpea
84
4. 出生年月日(date of birth)YYYY/MM/DD：
5. 大學/研究所/專科的專業(what’s your major):
6. 幾歲開始學中文？(when did you start to learn Chinese)：
7. 學習中文多久？(how long have you been learning Chinese)：
8. 在哪裡學中文？(where have you been learning Chinese)：
9. 每週時數？(how many hours per week)：
10. 現在學習的書 (the Chinese textbook you are using now)：
11. 在中文的環境多久 (how long have you been in Chinese speaking environment)：
12. 學習中文的時候，當地人是否用中文？(did you learn Chinese in Chinese speaking environment) ：
13. 除了上課，是否還有其他機會使用中文？(do you have chance to speak Chinese outside the classroom)
14. 承上題，如果是的話，使用機會與場合？(if yes, where was it? With whom?) 15. 是否參加過華語能力測驗 (have you ever taken TOCFL/TOP/HSK) ？
16. 承上題，如果是，華語文能力測驗名稱與測驗結果 (if yes, what test did you take and what’s the grade)
17. 除了中文，是否還學習其他語言？(did you learn other language except for Chinese) 18. 如果是，其他語言能力如何？ (if yes, how is your other language skill?)
85
7. 如果是，幾歲開始學該語言？
8. 如果是，學習該語言多久？
9. 在哪裡學西班牙文？
10. 每週學習時數？
11. 在西班牙文的環境多久
12. 學習西班牙文的時候，當地人日常生活是否用該語言？
13. 除了上課，是否還有其他機會使用西班牙文？
14. 承上題，如果是的話，使用機會與場合？
15. 參加過什麼語言能力檢定？
16. 承上題，如果是，參加的測驗名稱與結果
86
參考書目
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1981). Second language acquisition from a functionalist perspective:
Pragmatic, semantic, and perceptual strategies. In H. Winitz (Ed.), Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences Conference on Native and Foreign Language Acquisition (pp. 190–214). New York:
Academy Press
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1982). Functionalist approaches to grammar. In E. Wanner & L.
Gleitman (Eds.), Language acquisition: The state of art (pp. 173–218). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bates, E, MacWhinney B., Caselli C., Devescovi A., Natale F., & Venza V. (1984). A cross-linguistic study of the development of sentence interpretation strategies. Child Development 55, 341–354.
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1989). Functionalism and the competition model. In B. MacWhinney &
E. Bates (Eds.), The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing (pp. 3–73). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bates, E., McNew, S., MacWhinney, B., Devescovi, A., & Smith, S. (1982). Functional constraints on sentence-processing: A cross-linguistic study. Cognition, 11, 245–299.
Belikova Alyona & White Lydia. (2009). Evidence for fundamental difference hypothesis or not?
Island constraint revisited. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 199-223
Chan A, Lieven e, Tomasello M. (2009). Children's Understanding of the Agent-Patient relations in the Transitive construction: Cross Linguistic comparisons between Cantonese, German and
English. Cognitive Linguistics, 20(2), 267-300.
Chao, Y. R. (1968). A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Chen, H.-C. (1992). Lexical processing in bilingual or multilingual speakers. In R. J. Harris (Ed.), Cognitive processing in bilinguals (pp. 253–264). New York: Elsevier Science Publishers.
Christianson, K., Hollingworth, A., Halliwell, J. F., & Ferreira, F. (2001). Thematic roles assigned along the garden path linger. Cognitive Psychology, 42, 368–407.
Clashen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3-42.
Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1974). Natural sequences in child second language acquisition. Language Learning, 24, 37–53.
Dulay, H., Burt, M., & Krashen, S. (1982). Language two. New York: Oxford University Press.
Erickson, T. D., & Mattson, M. E. (1981). From words to meaning: A semantic illusion. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 540–551.
Ferreira, F. (2003). The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 47, 164–
87 203.
Ferreira, F., & Henderson, J. M. (1990). Use of verb information in syntactic parsing: Evidence from eye movements and word-by-word self-paced reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 555–568.
Gass, S. (1987). The resolution of conflicts among competing systems: A bidirectional perspective.
Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 329–350.
Garnham, A., & Oakhill, J. (1987). Interpreting elliptical verb phrases. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39A, 611–625.
Gigerenzer, G. (2000). Adaptive thinking: Rationality in the real world. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P.M., & ABC Research Group (1999). Simple heuristics that make us smart.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Harrington, M. (1987). Processing transfer: Language-specific processing strategies as a source of interlanguage variation. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 351–377.
Heilenman, L., & McDonald, J. (1993). Processing strategies in L2 learners of French: The role of transfer. Language Learning, 43, 507–557.
Hernandez, A., Bates, E., & Avila, L. (1994). On-line sentence interpretation in Spanish-English bilinguals: What does it mean to be “in between”? Applied Psycholinguistics, 15, 417–446.
Kail, M. (1989). Cue validity, cue cost, and processing types in sentence comprehension in French and Spanish. In B. MacWhinney & E. Bates (Eds.), The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kamas, E. N., Reder, L. M., & Ayers, M. S. (1996). Partial matching in the Moses illusion: Response bias not sensitivity. Memory Cognition, 24, 687–699.
Kilborn, K., & Cooreman, A. (1987). Sentence interpretation strategies in adult Dutch–English bilinguals. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 415–431.
Li, C., & Thompson, S. (1976). Subject and topic: A new typology for language. In C. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic. New York: Academic.
Li, P. (1989). What cues can Chinese speakers use in sentence processing? Paper presented at the workshop on cross-linguistic studies of sentence processing, Department of Psychology,
Carnegie-Mellon University.
Li, P., MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (1991). Processing a language without morphology: An on-line study of sentence interpretation in Chinese. CRL Technical Report 9102, University of California, San Diego.
88
Li, P., Bates, E., Liu, H., & MacWhinney, B. (1992). Cues as functional constraints on sentence processing in Chinese. In H. C. Chen &O. Tzeng (Eds.), Language processing in Chinese. Amsterdam:
Elsevier.
Li, P., Bates, E., Liu, H., & MacWhinney, B. (1993). Processing a language without inflections: A reaction time study of sentence interpretation in Chinese. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 169–192.
Liu, H., Bates, E.,& Li, P. (1992). Sentence interpretation in bilingual speakers of English and Chinese.
Applied Psycholinguistics, 13, 451–484.
MacWhinney, B., Bates, E., & Kligel, R. (1984). Cue validity and sentence interpretation in English, German and Italian. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 127–150.
MacWhinney, B. (1985). Hungarian language acquisition as an exemplification of a general model of grammatical development. In D. I. Slobin (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition: Vol.
2. Theoretical issues. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (1987). Competition, variation, and language learning. In B. Mac- Whinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 157–193). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Magiste, E. (1984). Stroop tasks and dichotic translation: The development of interference patterns in bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 10,
304–315.
Marinis, T., Roberts, L., Felser, C., & Clahsen, H. (2005). Gaps in second language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27.
Matessa, M. & Anderson, J. (2000). Modeling focused learning in role assignment. Language and Cognitive Processes 15(3), 263–292.
McDonald, J. (1987). Sentence interpretation in bilingual speakers of English and Dutch. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 379–413.
McDonald, J., & Heilenman, K. (1991). Determinants of cue strength in adult first and second language speakers of French. Applied Psycholinguistics, 12, 313–348.
MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676–703.
Miao, X. (1981). Word order and semantic strategies in Chinese sentence comprehension. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 8, 23–33.
Miao, X. (1986). The effects of word order and semantics in Chinese sentence comprehension. In Zhu, M. S. (ed.), Er tong yu yan fa zhan yan jiu (Research on children’s language development). Shang-hai:
Hua dong shi fan da xue chu ban she.
89
Morett, L., MacWhinney, B. (2013). Syntactic transfer in english-speaking Spanish learners.
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16(1), 132-151.
Su, I. (2001a). Transfer of sentence processing strategies: A comparison of L2 learners of Chinese and English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 83–112.
Sasaki, Y. (1991). English and Japanese interlanguage comprehension strategies: An analysis based on the Competition Model. Applied Psycholinguistics, 12, 47–73.
Sasaki, Y. (1994). Paths of processing strategy transfers in learning Japanese and English as foreign languages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 43–72.
Sanford, A. J. (1999). Word meaning and discourse processing: A tutorial review. In S. Garrod, & M.
Pickering (Eds.), Language processing (pp. 301–334). East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.
Sanford, A. J. (2002). Context, attention, and depth of processing during interpretation. Mind Language, 17, 188–206.
Steinhauer, K., Alter, K., & Friederici, A. D. (1999). Brain potentials indicate immediate use of prosodic cues in natural speech processing. Nature, 2, 191–196.
Su, I. (2001b). Context effects on sentence processing: A study based on the Competition Model.
Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 167–189.
Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268, 1632–1634.
Tokowicz, N., & MacWhinney, B. (2005). Implicit and explicit measures of sensitivity to violations in second language grammar: An event-related potential investigation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 173–204.
Tokowicz,N.,&Warren, T. (2010). Beginning adult L2 learners’ sensitivity to morphosyntactic violations: A self-paced reading study. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22, 1092–1106.
Townsend, D. J., & Bever, T. G. (2001). Sentence comprehension: The integration of habits and rules.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Von Berger, E., Wulfeck, B., Bates, E., & Fink, N. (1993). Developmental changes in realtime sentence processing (Tech. Rept. No. 9201). La Jolla: University of California, San Diego, Center for
Research in Language, Project in Cognitive Neurodevelopment.
Wulfeck, B., Juarez, L., Bates, E., & Kilborn, K. (1986). Sentence interpretation strategies in healthy and aphasic bilingual adults. In J. Vaid (Ed.), Language processing in bilinguals: Psycholinguists and neuropsychologicalperspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.