台灣大學生運用英語道歉之研究

An Investigation of the Useof Apology Strategiesin English by the Taiwanese EFL College Students

本文探討臺灣大學生用英語道歉的「社會語言能力」（sociolinguisticcompetence）。研究方法以問卷調查─discourse completion test─方式進行，針對六種冒犯的類型─行為失態的冒犯、空間權益的冒犯、談話時的冒犯、與時間有關的冒犯、使對方感到不便的冒犯，以及因損傷物品而造成的冒犯─設計了十二個情境。實驗對象為五十二名英文程度中級的臺灣大一學生。研究結果顯示：臺灣大學生的道歉行為，多半能讓以英語為母語的人士接受。對於較輕微的冒犯，他們用簡單的道歉；對於嚴重的冒犯，則用含有多種策略的道歉。但是臺灣大學生的道歉行為和以英語為母語者的道歉行為仍有相異之處。就冒犯類型而言，針對前五種冒犯，以英語為母語者的道歉行為，較側重A策略（道歉語彙）及A、B（對冒犯處加以解釋或說明）綜合策略的使用；臺灣大學生的道歉行為，則涵蓋A策略、AB策略，和其他類型的綜合策略。針對第六種冒犯，以英語為母語者的道歉行為，多半是A策略，AB策略，及含有A的綜合策略；臺灣大學生的道歉行為，則多半為A、C （承認應付責任）的綜合策略。另外，就冒犯的嚴重性而言，針對輕微的冒犯，以英語為母語者的道歉行為，多屬A策略和AB策略；臺灣大學生的道歉行為，除了A策略、AB策略、還有AC策略。針對嚴重的冒犯，以英語為母語者的道歉行為，多使用A策略、含有A的綜合策略，及他類綜合策略；臺灣大學生的道歉行為，則多為A策略及含有AB或AC的綜合策略。本文最後以教學應用作結，盼英語教學界能增強英語道歉語言行為的教學。

The paper investigates Taiwanese college students’ sociolinguistic competence in making apologies in English. The study includes six types of offence: social gaffe, space, talk, time, inconvenience, and possession. Apologies for twelve offence situations were elicited from fifty-two freshmen at an intermediate level of English. The results indicate that the majority of the elicited apologies were acceptable, with simple apologies dealing with the lighter offences and multiple apologies dealing with the heavier offences. However, there are still differences between the native and the nonnative apologies. For social gaffe, space, talk, time, and inconvenience, the native apologies relied heavily on Strategy A and combinations with AB, whereas the nonnative apologies involved not only Strategy A and combinations with AB but also combinations with strategies other than A and B. For possession, native apologies showed a heavy reliance on Strategy A, combinations of AB, and combinations with A; whereas the nonnative apologies were mainly combinations containing AC. In relation to the severity of the offence, for light offences, the native apologies showed a heavy use of Strategy A and combinations of AB, whereas the nonnative apologies showed a heavy use of Strategy A and combinations with AB or AC. For heavy offences, the native apologies made a heavy use of Strategy A and combinations with A and other types of combinations, whereas the nonnative apologies made a heavy use of Strategy A and combinations with AB or AC. The paper ends with a number of pedagogical implications.