• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >The expression of temporality in the written discourse of L2 learners of English: Distinguishing text-types and text passages.
【24h】

The expression of temporality in the written discourse of L2 learners of English: Distinguishing text-types and text passages.

机译：第二语言学习者的书面语篇中的时间性表达：区分文字类型和文字段落。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The interlanguage discourse hypothesis (Bardovi-Harlig, 1994, 1995, 2000) predicts that language learners use their developing systems of temporal expression to distinguish the main route (known as foreground) from side routes (known as background) in a narrative text, as is found cross-linguistically in L1 narratives (Labov & Waletsky, 1967; Hopper, 1979). Questions have been raised, however, as to whether this phenomenon is an artifact of narrative discourse structure (Hopper & Thompson, 1980; Caenepeel & Moens, 1994, Bardovi-Harlig, 2000), or whether grounding distinctions are made in non-narrative texts as well. If learner non-narrative text-types do not reveal temporally distinct main and side structures in the discourse, the interlanguage discourse hypothesis may need to be restated as the interlanguage narrative hypothesis.; The current cross-sectional study of 270 essays from 90 learners writing two non-narrative essays and one narrative essay indicates that learners produced texts with temporal profiles that distinguished the narrative from the two non-narratives, and the two non-narratives from each other as indicated by use of past or nonpast time orientation, stative or dynamic verb-types, modality, and a variety of other linguistic resources with temporal features. In addition, learners at all levels of proficiency used temporal expression to produce two types of side passages in the non-narrative texts. Thus, the addition of non-narrative text-types results in broader support for the interlanguage discourse hypothesis.; The analysis of learner narratives has provided greater evidence for the development of the perfective than the imperfective (Kumpf, 1984; Veronique, 1987; Trevise, 1987; Flashner, 1989; von Stutterheim, 1991; Bardovi-Harlig, 1995), but this too, may be an artifact of narrative discourse structure, since the foreground of narratives privileges the use of the perfective.; Although there was development of some temporal features (modal types, stative inventories, passive, perfect, and adverbial repertoires) with greater proficiency, overall there was little evidence for the development of the imperfective. Be and can dominated the stative and modal types; the progressive, passive, and perfect were seldom used, and except for more passives in the higher proficiency argument essays, the narrative text-type promoted their use more than the non-narrative text-types.
机译：中介语话语假说（Bardovi-Harlig，1994，1995，2000）预测语言学习者使用其发展的时间表达系统来将叙事文本中的主要路径（称为前景）与旁路（称为背景）区分开来，例如在L1叙事中是跨语言的（Labov＆Waletsky，1967; Hopper，1979）。然而，有人质疑这种现象是否是叙事性话语结构的产物（Hopper＆Thompson，1980； Caenepeel＆Moens，1994； Bardovi-Harlig，2000），还是在非叙事文本中进行了区分？也一样如果学习者的非叙事文本类型在话语中没有揭示时间上截然不同的主语和副语结构，则可能需要重新提出中介语话语假设作为中介语叙事假设。目前对来自90位学习者的270篇论文进行的横断面研究，撰写了两篇非叙事性论文和一篇叙事性论文，表明学习者所产生的文本具有时态特征，从而将叙事与两种非叙事性以及两种非叙事彼此区分开例如通过使用过去或非过去的时间取向，静态或动态动词类型，情态以及其他具有时态特征的语言资源来表示。此外，各个水平的学习者都使用时态表达在非叙事文本中产生两种类型的旁注。因此，非叙事文本类型的添加导致对中介语话语假设的更广泛支持。对学习者叙事的分析为完美主义者的发展提供了比非完美主义者更大的证据（Kumpf，1984； Veronique，1987； Trevise，1987； Flashner，1989； von Stutterheim，1991； Bardovi-Harlig，1995）。 ，可能是叙事话语结构的人工产物，因为叙事的前景优先考虑了完美词的使用。尽管某些时态特征（模态类型，静态清单，被动，完美和副词库）的发展具有更高的熟练度，但总的来说，几乎没有证据表明这种不完美的发展。是并且可以主导状态和情态类型；进步，被动和完美很少使用，除了在熟练程度较高的论点论文中使用更多的被动语外，叙事文本类型比非叙事文本类型更多地促进了它们的使用。

著录项

  • 作者

    Ewert, Doreen Elizabeth.;

  • 作者单位

    Indiana University.;

  • 授予单位 Indiana University.;
  • 学科 Education Language and Literature.; Language Linguistics.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2006
  • 页码 249 p.
  • 总页数 249
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 语言学;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号