越語母語者之中文被字句習得探究

Abstract

本研究在生成語法的研究框架下，探討越語為母語的學習者習得中文被字句的過程及結果。被字句為中文中一特殊句式，越語中也存在的相對應結構，是為 bi 字句，兩者都有[被動]表徵，但主要有以下三點差異。第一，中文被字句除了受事者、「被」字、動詞和施事者，還須加上補充語成分；在越語中，補充成分是可有可無。第二，中文被字句只能和及物動詞連用，不能與不及物動詞連用；而越語被字句則兩者皆可。第三，中文被字句能用來表達正面或負面的語境；越語只能表達負面的語境。如上所述，越語為母語的學習者學習中文被字句時，需要(1)屏除[不需補充成分]表徵；(2)習得[正面語境]表徵；及(3)屏除[與不及物動詞連用]表徵，因此，本研究藉以檢測相關的二語習得理論，分別為表徵重組假說(FRH)、失敗的功能性表徵假說(FFFH)和解釋性表徵假說(IH)，採用「文法判斷測驗」和「完成句子測驗」兩種實驗方法，以三組不同語言程度的越南籍中文學習者作為實驗組以及一組中文母語者作為對照組。結果顯示，屏除[+不需補充成分]及[+與不及物動詞連用]相較於習得[+正面語境]表徵而言容易許多，連高級學習者皆未習得[+正面語境]表徵。此結果反駁 FRH 和 IH，在語意層面上卻支持 FFFH。FRH 認為完全習得第二語言是可能的，而本研究的數據卻顯示學習者只習得了[+不需補充成分]表徵和[+不及物動詞]表徵，無法習得[+正面語境]表徵。IH 主張學習者只能習得語意取向的表徵，無法習得語法取向的表徵，然而本研究卻顯示學習者成功屏除[+不需補充成分]的語法表徵，對於[+正面語境]的語意表徵則習得失敗。實驗的結果在語意層面上大致支持 FFFH，連高級母語者都無法習得母語中不存在的[+正面語境]表徵，說明二語習得是有缺陷的。This study aims to investigate the developmental process and learning outcome of Chinese ‘Bei’ sentences by Vietnamese speakers. ‘Bei’ constructions is a special structure in Chinese. There is also a corresponding ‘Bei’ structure in Vietnamese, which is specified by ‘bi’. Both ‘Bei’ and “bi” carry a [passive] feature. However, there are three main differences between the two. First, ‘Bei’ sentences in Chinese is constructed by patient、‘Bei’、verb、agent and complement elements. But in Vietnamese, complement elements are not required. Second, Chinese ‘Bei’ can only be used in sentences with transitive verbs; Vietnamese ’Bi’ can be used in sentences with transitive verbs or intransitive verbs. Third, Chinese ‘Bei’ carries [positive] and [negative] features; however, Vietnamese ’Bi’ carries only [negative] feature.As noted above, when Vietnamese Speakers learn Chinese ‘Bei’ constructions, they need to (1) inhibit the [complement unrequirement] feature; (2) acquire the [positive] feature; and (3) inhibit the [intransitive verb] feature. This study re-examines the related SLA theories, such as Feature Reassembly Hypothesis (FRH) and Failed Functional Features Hypothesis (FFFH) and Interpretability Hypothesis (IH). We adopt two experimental methods, which are Grammaticality Judgement Test and Sentence Completion Test. The participants are three Vietnamese learner groups at different language proficiency levels as experimentgroups and one Chinese nativespeaker group as a control group.According to the result, inhibiting the [intransitive verb] and [complement unrequirement] features is easier than acquiring the [positive] feature for the Vietnamese Speakers. Even the highest level of Chinese learners could not succeed in acquiring the [positive] feature.

The results refute FRH and IH, but support FFFH at the level of semantic. FRH assumes that learners can acquire the second language after features reassembled, but the results report that learners can’t acquire the [positive] feature. IH advocates that learners can only acquire interpretability features, not uninterpretability features, however the result demonstrates the success of inhibiting the [complement unrequirement] feature and the failure of acquiring the [positive] feature. As FFFH assumes, the reason why the highest level of Chinese learners failed acquiring the [positive] feature is there is no [positive] feature in their mother language. The results of the experiment support FFFH at the level of semantic, evidencing that second language acquiring is not possible.