导　　师： 谭智

学科专业： 040102

授予学位： 硕士

作　　者： ;

机构地区： 广东外语外贸大学

摘　　要： 教师话语是中国EFL课堂上语言输入的重要来源。在过去相当长的时间里，教师言语吸引了许多研究者及教育工作者的关注。然而有些问题，如教师语言的构成、特点，以及对学生学习的影响等仍然存在许多争论，这是由于课堂环境的复杂性，学生群体的多样性及其他的一些因素造成的。虽然有一些基于观察和经验的研究揭示了教师言语的许多方面，但在中国背景下的教师言语研究不论从定性还是定量方面来看，都十分缺乏。 为了弥补这一缺陷，本论文试图探讨：1）教师言语是否对学生的学习存在破坏性的影响，如果是，什么样的言语是破坏性的。2）破坏性的教师语言是如何影响学生学习的。3）为什么教师要在课堂上用这些“破坏性”的语言。研究数据通过三个方面进行收集：课堂观察、问卷调查和访谈。课堂观察收集到的数据能体现中国英语课堂的一般模式，也是设计问卷题目的来源。问卷调查可以揭示学生对于不同教师语言的态度，这为判断教师语言是建设性还是破坏性提供了最直接的证据。通过采访可以发现学生在判断破坏性的教师语言时的标准，这也为问卷调查提供了更丰富的信息。 这项研究的独特之处在于将学生和教师都包含在内。前者是学习的主体，后者是帮助学生学习的关键因素。尽管学生的判断存在许多主观因素，但他们的评判是决定教师语言作用最直接也是最可靠的证据。本研究得出以下结果：1）的学生认为低认知问题、形式和内容上的反馈、重复学生说话及打断学生对他们的学习有破坏性的影响。2）学生认为低认知问题有碍他们的学习是因为这类问题限制了他们的创造力和批判性思维；而对于教师给出的形式上的反馈，他们认为反馈的方式过于直接、生硬，会伤害他们的自尊心。对于教师针对内容上的反馈，学生认为没有纠正他们的错误，所以不是真正意义上的反馈。学生还认为，重复学生的话语是在浪费时间而且不利于他们重视其他学生的回答。打断学生说话也被认为是有破坏性的，因为它打断了学生的思路，而且显得教师不尊重他们，让他们觉得丢脸。3）在教师看来，他们使用低认知问题主要是为了引入话题，提高学生兴趣，集中学生的注意力及增加学生的参与度。形式上的反馈直接且及时，可以让学生加深印象。而内容上的反馈是为了鼓励学生多说，不因为细小的错误打断学生说话。重复学生话语是为了保证其他学生能听到，并却如果学生回答错了，可以通过改变音调的方式提醒学生。打断学生说话很多情况下是要让学生不要跑题，或者维持课堂纪律。4）这五个方面的教师言语中，给予帮助是学生最喜欢的。教师最常使用的是改变说法这一方式，它直接而且有效。而学生最喜欢的是举例，因为这种方式可以增加课堂的活跃度和趣味性。 本研究的结果对教学有一定的启示。例如，教师可以鼓励学生互相帮助，这样教师花费在纠错的时间会少一些，这在一定程度上可以减轻教师的负担。此外，教师应该给学生更多的尊重。因为在初高中阶段的学生都很关心他们在同学眼中的形象，而且他们对教师的评价很敏感。另外，教师应把握好语言教学、学生学习和考试之间的平衡。 As one of the most important sources of language input in the EFL classroom, teachertalk has attracted the attention of many researchers and has been studied by manyeducators for a long time. Related theories have been developed in the past decades,but issues such as the constitutes of TT, the features of TT, as well as the effects of TTare still in debate, due to the complexity of the classroom environment, the diversityof the student body and probably some other factors. Both observational andempirical studies have been done to reveal TT in classroom, but researches in theChinese context still fall short from both qualitative and quantitative perspectives. To remedy the defects in the study of TT, this paper sets out to explore1/) whether TThas destructive effects on students' learning, if yes, what kinds of TT are destructive;2/) what are the destructive effects; and3/) why teachers talk in the destructive way.The data were collected through a triangulation: classroom observation, questionnairesurvey and interview. Classroom observations were conducted to obtain the generalpatterns of TT in Chinese EFL classrooms and to collect data as the source ofquestionnaire design. The questionnaire survey was to disclose students' attitudetowards different kinds of TT, which gave the most direct evidence in judging theeffects of TT. The interviews were conducted to probe students' criteria of making thejudgment and to make clear teacher's consideration in making the “destructive” TT,which also provides supplementary evidence to the questionnaire. Although thestudents' subjective judgment may not be conclusive, it is the most direct and reliableevidence in determining the effects of TT. This study yields the following results:1/) students think lower cognitive questions,form-focused feedback, content feedback, echoing students' utterance and interruptingstudnets' contribution are destructive to their learning.2/) the students think lowercognitive question is destructive because it restrict their creativity and critical thinking;they regard both form-focused and content feedback as destructive because the former way of correcting is too blunt and thus hurt their confidence, and the latter is not a realfeedback in their eye. They also think echoing students' utterance is obstructive totheir learning since it is boring, wasting the time and encouraging students to ignoreother student's contribution. Interrupting students' utterance is also destructive in theireye because it disrupts students' flow of thinking, shows teacher's disrespect to themand make them feel loseing face.3/) on the teacher's part, they make the “destructive”TT for some reasons: they use lower cognitive questions to lead in a topic, to raisestudents' interest, to call the stduents' attention and to involve the poor students in theclass. The use of form-focused feedback is to correct students directly and promprty,which makes the students have deeper impression. Content feedback is usedespecially when students have much to say, since it ignores some minor errors, andencourage students to talk. Echoing students' utterance is to make sure other studentscan hear, and reinforce the right answer as well as remind the wrong answer bychanging intonation. Interrupting students, in many casese, is to remind the studentsto be pertinent to the topic and some times to maintain the discipline of the class.4/) ofall the five dimensions of TT, scaffolding is welcome by students. Teacher usesreformulation most frequently as a way of scaffolding since it is direct and to thepoint. However, the students prefer modeling the most, because they think givingexample can be quite interesting in class. The results of present study also have some pedagogical implications. For example,teacher can encourage the establishment of mutual aid between students, which willbe less time-consuming and to some degree, relieve the teachers' burden of correctingthem in class. Besides, teachers should show more respect to students. Since studentsin this development stage are quite care about his//her image in other students' eye,and the students are also quite sensitive to teachers' judgment. Moreover, teachersshould strike a balance between learning and examination in language teaching..

关 键 词： 教师言语 破坏性影响 提问 反馈 帮助 重复 打断

分 类 号： [H319.3]

领　　域： [语言文字]