L1和L2中的描述能力和文本凝聚力:比较罗曼语和日耳曼语

IF 0.1 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Patrizia Giuliano, L. D. Maio
{"title":"L1和L2中的描述能力和文本凝聚力:比较罗曼语和日耳曼语","authors":"Patrizia Giuliano, L. D. Maio","doi":"10.6092/LEF_25_P125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper deals with discourse cohesion in descriptive texts focusing both on Germanic and Romance languages. Each language is investigated as L1 as well as L2 with respect to Italian on the basis of a large data base. The informants described a picture to a listener who couldn’t see it. Our cross-linguistic comparison demonstrates, in agreement with Carroll et al. (2000), that the options found in the expression of reference maintenance in a static spatial task reflect distinct principles of typological nature, which are associated with different patterns of grammaticalisation: a. Germanic languages share some adverbial means of discourse cohesion (Engl. here/ there..; Ger. hier/da/dort/daneben..; Swed. da/dar/har/har/bredvid..) that are not exploited by Romance languages native speakers, although they too have some equivalent means at their disposal in the lexical repertoire of their L1s (It. qui/qua/li/la/li vicino..; Fr. ici/la/la dessous.. ; Sp. aqui/aca/ahi/alli/alla/aqui cerca..); b. structures in language which reflect core principles in information organisation are difficult to acquire since learners have to recognize clusters of form-function relations which range over different domains; c. learners tend to employ L1 cohesive means, which proves the enormous difficulty they have in reviewing their L1 “perspective”. L1 data show that Germanic languages focus – even though in different ways – on the concept of “space” via the selection of the means quoted above, in contrast with the Romance speakers, who seem to pay attention to “objects” in a stricter way, by marking the reference maintenance by full prepositional phrases or their equivalents. As to L2 data, they show that learners shape the selection of information and cohesive linguistic means by the “space oriented” or “object oriented” perspective imposed by their L1.","PeriodicalId":40434,"journal":{"name":"Linguistica e Filologia","volume":"25 1","pages":"125-205"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2007-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Abilità descrittiva e coesione testuale in L1 e L2: lingue romanze e lingue germaniche a confronto\",\"authors\":\"Patrizia Giuliano, L. D. Maio\",\"doi\":\"10.6092/LEF_25_P125\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The paper deals with discourse cohesion in descriptive texts focusing both on Germanic and Romance languages. Each language is investigated as L1 as well as L2 with respect to Italian on the basis of a large data base. The informants described a picture to a listener who couldn’t see it. Our cross-linguistic comparison demonstrates, in agreement with Carroll et al. (2000), that the options found in the expression of reference maintenance in a static spatial task reflect distinct principles of typological nature, which are associated with different patterns of grammaticalisation: a. Germanic languages share some adverbial means of discourse cohesion (Engl. here/ there..; Ger. hier/da/dort/daneben..; Swed. da/dar/har/har/bredvid..) that are not exploited by Romance languages native speakers, although they too have some equivalent means at their disposal in the lexical repertoire of their L1s (It. qui/qua/li/la/li vicino..; Fr. ici/la/la dessous.. ; Sp. aqui/aca/ahi/alli/alla/aqui cerca..); b. structures in language which reflect core principles in information organisation are difficult to acquire since learners have to recognize clusters of form-function relations which range over different domains; c. learners tend to employ L1 cohesive means, which proves the enormous difficulty they have in reviewing their L1 “perspective”. L1 data show that Germanic languages focus – even though in different ways – on the concept of “space” via the selection of the means quoted above, in contrast with the Romance speakers, who seem to pay attention to “objects” in a stricter way, by marking the reference maintenance by full prepositional phrases or their equivalents. As to L2 data, they show that learners shape the selection of information and cohesive linguistic means by the “space oriented” or “object oriented” perspective imposed by their L1.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40434,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Linguistica e Filologia\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"125-205\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2007-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Linguistica e Filologia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.6092/LEF_25_P125\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistica e Filologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6092/LEF_25_P125","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

本文以日耳曼语和罗曼语为研究对象,探讨了描述语篇中的语篇衔接问题。在一个大型数据库的基础上,每种语言都被调查为与意大利语相关的L1和L2语言。告密者向一个看不见的听者描述一幅画。我们的跨语言比较表明,与Carroll等人(2000)的观点一致,静态空间任务中指称维持表达的选项反映了不同的类型学本质原则,这些原则与不同的语法化模式有关:a.日耳曼语言共享一些话语衔接的状语手段(英语:english1)。这里/那里. .;蒙古包。海尔/ da /讨论/ daneben…;Swed。da/dar/har/har/bredvid…),这些都是母语为罗曼语的人没有利用的,尽管在他们的英语词汇库里也有一些类似的意思。李,李/必要/ /拉/维奇诺……;i/la/la dessous…;Sp. aqui/aca/ahi/alli/真主安拉/aqui cerca..);B.反映信息组织核心原则的语言结构很难习得,因为学习者必须识别跨越不同领域的形式-功能关系集群;c.学习者倾向于使用母语衔接手段,这证明他们在回顾自己的母语“视角”时遇到了巨大的困难。L1数据显示,日耳曼语(尽管方式不同)通过上述方法的选择来关注“空间”的概念,而罗曼语使用者似乎更严格地关注“对象”,通过用完整的介词短语或其等同物来标记指称维持。至于第二语言数据,他们表明学习者通过他们的母语强加的“面向空间”或“面向对象”的视角来塑造信息和衔接语言手段的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Abilità descrittiva e coesione testuale in L1 e L2: lingue romanze e lingue germaniche a confronto
The paper deals with discourse cohesion in descriptive texts focusing both on Germanic and Romance languages. Each language is investigated as L1 as well as L2 with respect to Italian on the basis of a large data base. The informants described a picture to a listener who couldn’t see it. Our cross-linguistic comparison demonstrates, in agreement with Carroll et al. (2000), that the options found in the expression of reference maintenance in a static spatial task reflect distinct principles of typological nature, which are associated with different patterns of grammaticalisation: a. Germanic languages share some adverbial means of discourse cohesion (Engl. here/ there..; Ger. hier/da/dort/daneben..; Swed. da/dar/har/har/bredvid..) that are not exploited by Romance languages native speakers, although they too have some equivalent means at their disposal in the lexical repertoire of their L1s (It. qui/qua/li/la/li vicino..; Fr. ici/la/la dessous.. ; Sp. aqui/aca/ahi/alli/alla/aqui cerca..); b. structures in language which reflect core principles in information organisation are difficult to acquire since learners have to recognize clusters of form-function relations which range over different domains; c. learners tend to employ L1 cohesive means, which proves the enormous difficulty they have in reviewing their L1 “perspective”. L1 data show that Germanic languages focus – even though in different ways – on the concept of “space” via the selection of the means quoted above, in contrast with the Romance speakers, who seem to pay attention to “objects” in a stricter way, by marking the reference maintenance by full prepositional phrases or their equivalents. As to L2 data, they show that learners shape the selection of information and cohesive linguistic means by the “space oriented” or “object oriented” perspective imposed by their L1.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Linguistica e Filologia
Linguistica e Filologia LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
25 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信