@article{oai:bunkyo.repo.nii.ac.jp:00000913,
 author = {Takamiya, Yumi},
 journal = {言語と文化, Language and Culture},
 month = {2011-03-01, 2011-10-07},
 note = {Bardovi-Harlig & Dörnyei（1998）、Niezgoda & Röver（2011）、Schauer（2006）、Xu, Case & Wang（2009）らの研究によって、プラグマティックスと文法に関する意識は、それぞれ独立していることが明らかにされている。しかし、意識がどのようにプラグマティックスや文法の能力と関連しているかや、学習環境との関連性については、検証が行われていない。そのため、本研究では以下の点を検証することにする。
1) 学習環境の違いによって、意識に差はあるか。
2) 学習者の言語能力はプラグマティックスの不適切さ、文法の誤りに関する意識に差を生み出すか。
3) プラグマティックスの不適切さや文法の誤りを意識できる学習者は、より適切で正しい産出をすることができるか。また、第二言語か、外国語かという環境による差はあるか。
4) プラグマティックスの転移は、高い言語能力をもつ学習者に多くみられるか。
談話完成テストを用いて調査した結果、JSLグループは、プラグマティックスと文法の間違いを同等に捉えていることがわかった。間違いの深刻さは、JFLグループのほうがJSLグループよりも、より深刻だと認識していたものの、間違いを特定できる率はJFLグループのほうが、JSLグループよりも低かった。質問紙を分析した結果、学習環境は学習者の意識には常に影響を及ぼすということはないものの、学習者の言語能力は意識に影響を及ぼすことが明らかになった。
\nL2 learners often develop grammatical competence in the absence of concomitant pragmatic competence (Bardovi-Harlig & Hartford, 1990). In an exploration of the relationship between pragmatic and grammatical competence, Bardovi-Harlig and Dörnyei (1998) undertook a study to investigate the effects of environment and language proficiency on learners' metalinguistic assessment of pragmatic and grammatical errors in the target language. They found that learners in a second language (SL) setting assessed pragmatic errors as more severe than grammatical errors, whereas learners in a foreign language (FL) setting assessed grammatical errors as more severe than pragmatic errors. This study is a replication of their study in the context of learning Japanese as a second/foreign language. The research questions are as follows:
1) Does an environmental experience in the L2 culture influence awareness? Do JSL and JFL learners show the same degree of awareness?
2) Does the learners' level of proficiency influence the degree of awareness of pragmatic and grammatical errors?
3) Do learners who perceive more pragmatic and grammatical errors have more grammatically and pragmatically accurate/appropriate production? Are there any differences in this respect between SL and FL settings?
4) Is there more pragmatic transfer in the production of higher proficiency learners than in the production of lower proficiency learners?
JSL learners and JFL learners were compared using a written questionnaire containing contextualized pragmatic and grammatical judgment tasks consisting of seven speech acts. Participants were asked to answer a Discourse-Completion Test to uncover the relationship between learners' perception and production. A total of 90 learners participated to this study.
Results showed that JSL groups considered pragmatic and grammatical errors to be identical. Although the error severity ratings of the JFL group were higher than those of the JSL group, the error identification rate of the former was much lower than that of the latter. The analysis of the questionnaire demonstrated that a learner's environment does not always influence the learner's awareness whereas proficiency does. Results for production were inconclusive.},
 pages = {91--136},
 title = {Pragmatic and Grammatical Awareness in Learners of Japanese : A Comparison of JSL and JFL Environments},
 volume = {23},
 year = {}
}