社會文化因素 SOCIOCULTURAL FACTORS

1. 社會文化因素SOCIOCULTURALFACTORS 4A0C0080 林于安 4A0C0083 盧貴香 4A0C0086 廖婉廷 4A0C0090 藍曼婷 4A0C0092 陳雪芹 4A0C0093 唐若瑄

2. 第二文化習得SECOND CULTURE ACQUISITION • Robinson-Stuart and Nocon suggested that language learners undergo culture learning as a “process, that is, as a way of perceiving, interpreting, feeling, being in the world, … and relating to where one is and who one meets”

3. Second language learning, as we saw in the previous chapter in the discussion of language ego, involves the acquisition of a second identity. This creation of a new identity is at the heart of culture learning, or what some might call acculturation. Acculturation(文化適應)：

4. If a French person is primarily cognitive oriented(認知為導向) and an American is psychomotor-oriented(心理動決為導向)and a Spanish speaker is affective-oriented(情意為導向), as claimed by Condon.

5. to a Spanish speaker, the methodical essence of planned change in France may seem cold-blooded, just as much as his own proclivity toward spur-of-the-moment decisions may strike his French counterpart as recklessly irresponsible • Consider the implications:

6. culture shock refers to phenomena ranging from mild irritability to deep psychological panic and crisis. persons undergoing culture shock view their new world out of resentment and alternate between self-pity and anger at others for not understanding them. Culture shock (文化衝擊)：

7. It is common to describe culture shock as the second of four successive stages of culture acquisition： • stage 1 is a period of excitement and euphoria over the newness of the surroundings.

8. stage 2 –culture shock-emerges as individuals feel the intrusion of more and more cultural differences into their own images of self and security. • stage 3 is one of the gradual, and at first tentative and vacillating, recovery. • stage 4 represents near or full recovery.

9. 社會差距social distance • Social distancerefers to the cognitive and affective proximity of two cultures that come into contact within an individual. • “Distance” is obviously used in a metaphorical sense to depict dissimilarity between two cultures.

10. John Schumann descried social distance as consisting of the following parameters: Dominance(主導性) Integration(整合性) Cohesiveness(凝聚性) Congruence(一致性) Permanence(永恆性) Schumann used the above factors to describe hypothetically “good” and “bad” language learning situations, and illustrated each situation with two actual cross-cultural contexts.

11. The TL group(目標語言族群) views the L2 group(第二語言學習者) as dominant and the L2 group views itself in the same way. • Thesecond bad situation has all the characteristics of the first except that in this case, the L2 group itself subordinate and is considered subordinate by the TL group. Schumann’s two hypothetically “bad” language learning situations：

12. Thank you for listening