泰籍華語學習者之語詞發音與語句清晰度

A Study on the Pronunciation of Words and Sentence Intelligibility of Thai Mandarin Learners

梁月美(Kamolwan NOPPADOLSATHAN)；劉惠美(Huei-Mei LIU)

泰語者 ； 華語作為第二語言學習 ； 華語發音教學 ； 溝通能力 ； 語音產出 ； Chinese as a second language learning ； oral communication skills ； pronunciation teaching ； speech production ； Thai

華語文教學研究

18卷4期（2021 / 12 / 01）

111 - 154

繁體中文

本研究以二十名在臺灣學習華語之泰籍學生和二十名華語母語者為對象，蒐集其在語詞、句子、短文層次的說話樣本，再由六十名華語母語者進行清晰度評分。十二項最小語音對比雙音節語詞採項目辨識法，句子和短文的清晰度評分採視覺類比結合直接大小估計法。結果顯示，泰籍華語學習者語詞清晰度最低的四項語音對比，依序為「舌尖前音與舌尖後音」、「送氣與否塞擦音」、「展圓唇元音」、「二聲與三聲」。逐步迴歸分析顯示「一聲與二聲」、「送氣與否塞擦音」和「展圓唇元音」對語詞清晰度總分達79.1%的預測力。學習者的語詞、句子和短文清晰度皆低於母語者，且三者之間呈現中度以上的正相關，顯示華語學習者的語詞發音與言語清晰度之間有一定的關聯性。

This research aimed to investigate the pronunciation of words and sentence intelligibility of 20 Thai learners learning Mandarin in Taiwan, and 20 native Mandarin speakers. Speech samples produced at the levels of words, sentences, and a short essay were collected, and then evaluated by sixty Mandarin native speakers. The item identification method was used to evaluate word intelligibility that include 88 bisyllabic words with twelve minimal phonetic contrasts. The intelligibility scores of 10 sentences and a passage were determined by the combination of a visual analogue scale and a direct magnitude estimation method. The results showed that for Thai Mandarin leaners, the four phonetic contrasts with lowest intelligibility score are, in order, retroflex and nonretroflex, aspirated-unaspirated affricate, rounded-unrounded vowel, contrasts between tone two and tone three. The analysis of pronunciation errors showed that the round-lip vowel [y] was determined as [u]; the aspirated affricative was determined as a fricative; and the second and third tones are confused with each other. From the stepwise regression analysis, it was found that contrasts between tone one and tone two, aspirated-unaspirated affricates, and rounded-unrounded vowels have significant predictive power of 79.1% for the total score of word intelligibility. The intelligibility scores in words, sentences, and an essay for Thai Mandarin-learners are lower than that of native speakers, and there are positive correlations between the three levels, which shows that there are certain correlations between the pronunciation of words and speech intelligibility of Thai Mandarin-learners. Based on the results of the present study, i t is expected to have some implications for improving communication effectiveness for Thai Mandarin-learners, as well as providing suggestions for teaching Mandarin as a second language.

1. 張曉涵, Hsiao-Han,劉惠美, Huei-Mei(2012)。延長言語時長與刻意停頓對痙攣型腦性麻痺兒童言語清晰度的影響。特殊教育研究學刊，37(1)，27-51。
   連結：
2. (1988).Teaching English Pronunciation.London:Longman.
3. Anderson-Hsieh, Janet,Johnson, Ruth,Koehler, Kenneth(1992).The relationship between native speaker judgments of nonnative pronunciation and deviance in segmentais, prosody, and syllable structure.Language Learning,42(4),529-555.
4. Bent, Tessa,Bradlow, Ann R.(2003).The interlanguage speech intelligibility benefit.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,114(3),1600-1610.
5. Bess, Fred H.(ed.)(1977).Childhood Deafness.New York:Grune and Stratton.
6. Best, Catherine T.,Tyler, Michael D.(2007).Nonnative and second-language speech.Language Experience in Second Language Speech Learning: In Honor of James Emil Flege,17,13-34.
7. Derwing, Tracey M.,Munro, Murray J.(2005).Second language accent and pronunciation teaching: A research-based approach.TESOL Quarterly,39(3),379-397.
8. Derwing, Tracey M.,Munro, Murray J.(1997).Accent, intelligibility, and comprehensibility.Studies in Second Language Acquisition,19(1),1-16.
9. Derwing, Tracey M.,Munro, Murray J.,Wiebe, Grace(1998).Evidence in favor of a broad framework for pronunciation instruction.Language Learning,48(3),393-410.
10. Fucci, Donald,Ellis, Lee,Petrosino, Linda(1990).Speech clarity/intelligibility: Test-retest reliability of magnitude-estimation scaling.Percept and Motor Skills,70(1),232-234.
11. Hallé, Pierre A.,Best, Catherine T.,Levitt, Andrea(1999).Phonetic vs. phonological influences on French listeners’ perception of American English approximants.Journal of Phonetics,27(3),281-306.
12. Ingvalson, Erin M.,Ettlinger, Marc,Wong, Patrick C. M.(2014).Bilingual speech perception and learning: A review of recent trends.International Journal of Bilingualism,18(1),35-47.
13. Jenkins, Jennifer(2000).The Phonology of English as an International Language.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
14. Kachru, Yamuna,Smith, Larry E.(2008).Cultures, Contexts, and World Englishes.New York:Routledge.
15. Kent, Ray D.,Weismer, Gary,Kent, Jane F.,Rosenbek, John C.(1989).Toward phonetic intelligibility testing in dysarthria.Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders,54(4),482-499.
16. Lado, Robert(1957).Linguistics Across Cultures: Applied Linguistics for Language Teachers.Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press.
17. Levis, John M.(2005).Changing contexts and shifting paradigms in pronunciation teaching.TESOL Quarterly,39(3),369-377.
18. Metz, Dale E.,Samar, Vincent J.,Schiavetti, Nicholas,Sitler, Ronald W.(1990).Acoustic dimensions of hearing-impaired speakers’ intelligibility segmental and supresegmental characteristics.Journal of Speech and Hearing Research,33(3),476-487.
19. Munro, Murray J.,Derwing, Tracey M.(2011).The foundations of accent and intelligibility in pronunciation research.Language Teaching,44(3),316-327.
20. Munro, Murray J.,Derwing, Tracey M.(2002).Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners.Language Learning,49(1),285-310.
21. Munro, Murray J.,Derwing, Tracey M.,Morton, Susan L.(2006).The mutual intelligibility of L2 speech.Studies in Second Language Acquisition,28(1),111-131.
22. Reed, Marnie(ed.),Levis, John(ed.)(2015).The Handbook of English Pronunciation.Hoboken, New Jersey:Wiley-Blackwell.
23. Samar, Vincent J.,Metz, Dale E.(1988).Criterion validity of speech intelligibility rating-scale procedures for the hearing-impaired population.Journal of Speech and Hearing Research,31(3),307-316.
24. Schiavetti, Nicholas(1992).Scaling procedures for the measurement of speech intelligibility.Intelligibility in Speech Disorders,Philadelphia:
25. Smith, Larry E.,Rafiqzad, Khalilulah(1979).English for cross-cultural communication: The question of intelligibility.TESOL Quarterly,13(3),371-380.
26. Wu, Xianghua,Munro, Murray J.,Wang, Yue(2014).Tone assimilation by Mandarin and Thai listeners with and without L2 experience.Journal of Phonetics,46,86-100.
27. 吉娜, Sangsrijan,簡啟賢, Qi-xian(2004)。泰國學生初學漢語的偏誤分析。雲南師範大學學報，2(3)，46-49。
28. 朱川, Chuan(2013).外國學生漢語語音學習對策.臺北=Taipei:新學林=New Sharing Culture Enterprise Co., Ltd..
29. 何山燕, Shanyan(2010)。從對比分析角度淺析對泰漢語語音教學策略。梧州學院學報，20(4)，90-94。
30. 李紅印, Hongyin(1995)。泰國學生漢語學習的語音偏誤。世界漢語教學，1995(2)，66-71。
31. 林燾, Dao,王理嘉, Li-jia(2011).語音學教程.臺北=Taipei:五南=Wu-Nan Book Inc..
32. 國際語音學會=The International Phonetic Association(2008).國際語音學會手冊：國際音標使用指南.上海=Shanghai:上海教育出版社=Shanghai Education Publishing House.
33. 曹逢甫, Feng-fu(2000)。臺式日語與臺灣國語－百年來在臺灣發生的兩個語言接觸實例。漢學研究，18(特刊=Special Issue)，273-297。
34. 梅麗, Li(2011)。泰國學習者漢語塞擦音的知覺同化與區分。世界漢語教學，2011(2)，276-288。
35. 陳晨, Chen,李秋楊, Qiu-Yang(2008)。語音偏誤標記與語音對比－談泰國學生語音習得問題。雲南師範大學學報（對外漢語教學與研究版），2008(2)，82-87。
36. 趙元任, Yuen-Ren(1980).中國話的文法.香港=Hong Kong:中文大學出版社=The Chinese University of Hong Kong Press.
37. 潘德鼎, De-Ding(2015).泰語教程（第一冊）.北京=Beijing:北京大學出版社=Peking University Press.
38. 蔡整瑩, Zhengying,曹文, Wen(2002)。泰國學生漢語語音偏誤分析。世界漢語教學，2002(2)，86-92。
39. 鄭尊仁, Tsun-Jen(2008)。臺北=Taipei，國立臺灣師範大學=National Taiwan Normal University。
40. 鄭靜宜, Jing-Yi(2013).話在心．口難言－運動性言語障礙的理論與實務.臺北=Taipei:心理出版社=Psychological Publishing Co., Ltd..
41. 鍾榮富, Raung-Fu(2009).對比分析與華語教學.新北=Taipei County:正中書局=Cheng Chung Book Co., Ltd..