初級日語教科書之語篇分析 ―以『学ぼう！日本語初級I』教材為例―

Abstract

目前有關初級日語教科書分析，大多是以語彙、句型、會話場面為主，欠缺以閱讀文及會話文為研究對象，探討其語篇結構之研究。為探討教科書中所編寫的閱讀文與會話文的語篇結構，以及各個語篇是否具備連貫性(coherence，指語篇中的成分在意義上的關聯)，本論文以『学ぼう!日本語初級I』為範本，從以下四個觀點來分析此教科書中的47篇語篇： 1.達成語篇連貫的手段―銜接(cohesion)2.句子與句子之間存在的句際關係(intersentential relationship)3.會話中，發話者與受話者所發出的兩個相關話段所構成的言語功能(speech function)4.從「開始部分」「展開部分」「結束部分」三個部分來看各個語篇的話題展開情形。 分析結果得知，此教科書中的銜接手段以主語或補語等的「省略」，以及相同語句的「反覆」為最多。然而，也有因不自然的省略手法，或因缺少連接詞、與前文相關語句的使用，毗鄰應對(adjacency pairs)對答上的不對應而造成語篇不連貫的情形。此外，在話題展開方面，閱讀文各篇都以「作為開場白的開始部分，進而進入主要部分的敘述，最後進入結束話題的部分」的方式編寫，然而會話文卻有一半左右在編寫上無法兼顧到這三個部分。 連貫上有問題的語篇對學習者而言，在閱讀上會造成障礙。而話題展開上欠缺「開始部分」「展開部分」「結束部分」的會話文是極為不自然的會話內容。若能就這些問題進行修正與改善，相信學習者更能理解、把握教科書中這些閱讀文與會話文所要表達的意思內容，並且也能透過學習教科書中編寫的會話，習得如同實際會話一般的會話能力。

So far based on the analysis of the basic Japanese textbooks, vocabulary, sentence patterns, and situational conversations have been mostly regarded as major issues, but these textbooks lack readings, dialogues for the study, and exploration of structure of the texts. To explore the structure of reading and dialogues in the Japanese textbooks and to know if the texts are all qualified with coherence, this thesis takes the textbook “ Manabou Nihongo Vol. 1 ” as a model and analyses the 47 texts in the textbook from four aspects: 1.cohesion 2.inter-sentential relationship 3.speech functions 4.the development of the topic, including the “part of beginning ”, “the main part” and “part of Ending” . The results show that this textbook uses cohesive means the most, such as the “ellipsis” of the subject or the complement, and the “repetition” of the same phrase. However, unnatural abridge skills, missing conjunctions and related phrases helping link paragraphs together, and non-corresponsive dialogue of adjacency pairs make the texts not fluent. In addition, in terms of development of topic in reading, the reading articles always start from “the part of beginning”, then enter “the main part of the article”, and eventually proceed the final part of the topic while half of the dialogues take no consideration about the three parts. For learners the texts with cohesive problems would be an obstacle in reading. Furthermore, conversations lacking the absence of beginning, the main part, and ending are unnatural. If problems mentioned above would be revised and improved, I believe that learners can better understand and grasp what these readings and dialogues express in the textbooks and can also acquire the general conversation ability via the conversations in the textbook.