The Application of English-Chinese Comparison to Culture Teaching APPLICATION DE LA COMPARAISON ANGLAIS-CHINOIS A L'ENSEIGNEMENT DE CULTURE
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract: This thesis is a tentative endeavor to employ English-Chinese comparison to culture teaching so as to help English learners overcome negative transfer from their native culture and learn more idiomatic English. Key words: the English language, the Chinese language, comparison, culture teaching Resume: Cet essai tente d'employer la comparaison anglais-chinois a l'enseignement de culture afin d'aider les apprenants de l'anglais a vaincre les transferts negatifs de leur culture native a la culture anglaise et a apprendre davantage un anglais impeccable. Mots-Cles: langue anglaise, langue chinoise, comparaison, enseignement de culture 1. INTRODUCTION Language and culture are inseparable. Language is an integral component of culture. The ultimate goal of EFL teaching is to make learners achieve better intercultural communicative competence, a fuller understanding of the target people, their way of life and their society as well. Therefore, in addition to linguistic knowledge itself, language learning and teaching should involve corresponding sociocultural background knowledge of the target language, and aim at conquering the interference from one's own culture and habits. 2. THEORETICAL BASIS At the very beginning of 20th century, linguists began to compare English and Chinese and gain an insight into both the homogeneity and heterogeneity of the two languages. The early contributors involve Ma Jianzhong, Ya Fu, Wang Li, etc. It is their great efforts and findings that establish a theoretical framework and practical foundation for the later study and application in teaching. Since 1970s, linguists and foreign language specialists employ gradually the principles and findings of comparison of English and Chinese to guide foreign language and culture teaching. As famous linguist Lu Shuxiang (1982) indicates, by comparison only, the characteristics of Chinese and English are revealed and easier to learn and teach. Lado (1957:1), at the beginning of his influential work, Linguistics across Cultures, quotes words of Fries: The best textbook is like this - its standing point should describe scientifically the second language learned by students; On the other hand, it provides a paralleled description of the first language of students and compare them attentively. So, it is utterly necessary for English teachers to draw a systematic English-Chinese comparison in their English language and culture teaching. 3. CAUSES Nevertheless, after having received several years of formal English teaching, students still remain deficient in the ability to actually use the language, and to understand its use in normal communication. Most students lack the ability of using proper language in proper situation. It is mainly caused by different cultural background of the people in contact. Interlocutors from different cultural background are apt to share different beliefs, manifest different behaviors, and no two interactants have the identical perception of the social world. Hence, there are conflicts of values between the different cultures and different assessments of relative power. Different cultures have different culture conventions. Different language has different language conventions. When a person learns and uses English, he is confronted with the problem of cultural inappropriateness. As Lado (1957:2) states, individuals tend to transfer the forms and meanings, and distribution of forms and meanings of their native language and culture to the foreign language and culture - both productively when attempting to speak the language and to act in the culture, and receptively when attempting to grasp and understand the language and the culture as practiced by the natives. For example, once a Chinese student met with a foreigner who was lost in his way back to his hotel. The student said that he happened to go in the same direction and if he followed him he could show him the right way back. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».