An Empirical Study on the Production of Dou: Is Native-like Performance Attainable?

「都」的習得與產出：漢語學習者能否達到類似母語者的表現？

李豔(Yan Li)

漢語作為外語的習得 ； 範圍副詞「都」 ； 英語的影響 ； CFL acquisition ； scope adverb dou ； influence of English

華語文教學研究

10卷3期（2013 / 09 / 01）

121 - 162

英文

本文考察了母語是英語的漢語學習者在一項控制下的引發輸出任務中使用「都」的情況。實驗結果表明，不同於母語者，中上級水準的學習者「都」的使用率在各類實驗條件下相似；而高級漢語學習者雖然「都」的使用率不完全跟母語者相同，但「都」的使用率隨著「都」所總括的名詞性詞語的特徵變化而變化。這表明雖然他們在「都」的使用上還沒有完全達到母語者的水平，但是他們處於習得「都」的過程中。實驗結果顯示必須使用「都」的情況較難也較晚習得。基於漢語學習者的表現，本文認為，對外漢語教學中在「都」的教學上，應該把重點放在句法上必須使用「都」的情況。

This study examines the production data of dou in a controlled elicitation task performed by English-speaking learners of Chinese. The results show that post-intermediate learners produced dou at a similar rate regardless of the type of NP that is intended to be quantified by dou , which indicates that learners in this group have not fully acquired or understood the use of dou. The advanced learners produced dou at a comparable rate to that of native speakers, and the production rate of dou by advanced learners varied in a similar way to that of the native controls, which indicates that, although advanced learners have not fully used dou in a native-like way, they are approaching greater understanding of dou's use. The results show that the syntactically obligatory dou is harder to acquire for English-speaking learners of Chinese than the syntactically optional dou. Based on subjects' performance, it is suggested that more emphasis be placed on the syntactically obligatory use of ”dou” in CFL teaching.

1. Li, Yen-Hui. A. 1996. Indefinite subject in mandarin Chinese (ms.) University of Southern California..
2. 黎錦熙. 1924. 《新著國語文法》。北京:商務印書館。[Li, Jinxi. 1924. The New Grammar of Chinese. Beijing: Commercial Press.]
3. Beghelli, Filippo,Stowell, Tim(1997).Distributivity and negation: the syntax of each and every.Ways of Scope Taking,Dordrecht, The Netherlands:
4. Beghelli, Filippo,Stowell, Tim(1994).The direction of quantifier movement.GLOW Newsletter,32,56-57.
5. Chao, Yuen Ren(1968).Grammar of Spoken Chinese.Berkeley:University of California Press.
6. Cheng, Lisa L.-S.(1995).On dou-quantification.Journal of East Asian Linguistics,4,197-234.
7. Cheng, Lisa L.-S.(1991).Cambridge,Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
8. Chiu, Bonnie(1993).Los Angeles,University of California at Los Angeles.
9. Chomsky, Noam(1992).A minimalist program for linguistic theory.MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics,1
10. Chomsky, Noam(1995).The Minimalist Program.Cambridge, Mass:MIT Press.
11. Hsieh, Ruoh-mei(1994).Dou and universal quantification in Chinese.Sixth North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics,Los Angeles:
12. Huang, Shi.-Zhe(1995).Dou as an existential quantifier.NACCL-6 V. I.
13. Huang, Shi.-Zhe(1996).Philadelphia,University of Pennsylvania.
14. Lee, Thomas H.(1986).Los Angeles,University of California at Los Angeles.
15. Li, Charles,Thompson, Sandra(1981).Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar.Berkeley:University of California Press.
16. Li, Jie(1995).Dou and wh-Questions in mandarin Chinese.Journal of East Asian Linguistics,4,313-323.
17. Li, Yan(2012).What English-speaking learners of Chinese don't know about dou: study on the acquisition of‘都'.Journal of Chinese Language Teachers Association,47(3),115-149.
18. Li、 Yan(2012).Comparison between dou and all (both) and related pedagogical issues.Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language,1,10-16.
19. Li, Yen-Hui. A.(1992).Dou: Syntax of LF.Fourth North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics,Ann Arbor:
20. Lin, Jo-wang(1998).Distributivity in Chinese and its implications.Natural Language Semantics,6,201-243.
21. Liu, Feng-hsi(1990).Los Angeles,University of California.
22. Shyu, Shu-ing(1995).Los Angeles,University of Southern California.
23. Tsai, Wei-Tian. D.(1994).Cambridge,Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
24. Tsai, Wei-Tian. D.(1996).Subject specificity, raising modals and extended mapping hypothesis.Symposium of Referential Properties of Chinese Noun Phrases
25. Wu, Jianxin(1999).College Park,University of Maryland.
26. Xu, Ding(1997).Functional Categories in Mandarin Chinese.Netherlands:Holland Institute of Generative Linguistics.
27. Yuan, Boping(2009).Non-permanent representational deficit and apparent target-likeness in second language: Evidence from wh-words used as universal quantifiers in English and Japanese speakers' L2 Chinese.Representational Deficits in SLA: In Honour of Roger Hawkins,Amsterdam:
28. Zhang, Niina Ning(2008).Encoding exhaustivity.USTWPL,4,133-143.
29. 方立、范莉(2003)。“都”的事件—驅動分析。中國語文研究，2003(1)，71-84。
30. 王還(1988)。再談談“都”。語言教學與研究，1988(2)，52-53。
31. 王還(1983)。“All” 與“都”。語言教學與研究，1983(4)，24-28。
32. 呂叔湘(1980)。現代漢語八百詞。北京=Beijing:商務印書館=Commercial Press。
33. 李艷(2012)。“都"和“ all（both）”的比較以及“都”的教學問題。對外漢語教學與研究，2012(1)，10-16。
34. 李艷(2000)。與範圍副詞“都”相關的一個問題。語言文字應用，2000(4)，16-20。
35. 周小兵、王宇(2007)。與範團副詞“都”有關的偏誤分析。漢語學習，2007(1)，71-76。
36. 胡英(2003)。第二語言學習者使用虛詞的偏誤分析。語言與翻譯，2003(1)，65-67。
37. 范莉(2007)。兒童和成人語法中的否定和否定轄域。安徽=Anhui:安徽大學出版社=Anhui University Press。
38. 馬真(1983)。關於“都／全”所總括的對象的位置。漢語學習，1983(1)，27-34。
39. 張誼生(2003)。範圍副詞“都”的選擇限制。中國語文，2003(5)，392-398。
40. 董秀芳(2003)。“都”與其他成分的語序及相關問題。世界漢語教學，2003(1)，40-47。
41. 解燕勤(2005)。留學生學習漢語副詞“都”的偏誤分析及思考。昆明師範高等專科學校學報，2005(1)，68-69+75。
42. 劉月華(2003)。實用現代漢語語法。北京=Beijing:商務印書館=Commercial Press。
43. 劉愛群(2009)。對日本大學漢語學習者漢語副詞“都”的習得情況的考察。多維視野下的對外漢語教學研究—第七屆國際漢語教學學術研究會論文集，桂林=Guilin:
44. 蔣靜(2003)。“都”總括全量手段的演變及其分類。漢語學習，2003(4)，72-76。