@article{oai:sucra.repo.nii.ac.jp:00019925,
 author = {望月, 雅美},
 issue = {20},
 journal = {日本アジア研究 : 埼玉大学大学院人文社会科学研究科博士後期課程 (学際系) 紀要, Journal of Japanese & Asian studies},
 month = {},
 note = {本稿では，日本語学習者が有対自他動詞文をどのように読み分けているのか調べるために，母語話者と日本語学習者との比較調査を行った．
　その結果，初級の文型と語彙を使用した会話文でありながら，母語話者と同じように読み分けている学習者(JLPT のN3 レベル以上)は全体の3 割に留まった．主語を省略した場合，母語話者は前後に特別な文脈がなければ他動詞文の動作主は話し手であると判断する傾向がある．しかし日本語学習者にはその傾向は見られなかった．自動詞文については，母語話者は過失の結果としてとらえる人が半数おり，中には第三者の行為の結果ととらえて責任追及する文も見られたのに対し，学習者は自然に起こった出来事の結果ととらえる文が多数を占めた．
　これらの差異は，日本語の学習過程が影響している可能性がある．この研究結果は，自他動詞の意味に関する学習方法を再考し、自他動詞を産出ではなく受容から教える必要性など、今後の日本語教育の方向性に示唆を与えるものとなった。

　In this study, I conducted a comparative survey of native speakers and learners to investigate how Japanese learners interpreted intransitive and transitive verb sentences.
　As a result, even though the conversational sentences were at the beginner level, only 30% of the learners (JLPT-N3 level and above) read them the same way as the native speakers. When they omitted the subject, the native speakers tended to judge that the agent of the transitive verb sentence was the speaker unless there was a particular context before or after the sentence．However, Japanese learners did not exhibit this tendency. Half of the native speakers considered an intransitive verb sentence to be the result of negligence. Some perceived such sentences to be the result of a third party’s actions. On the other hand, many learners regarded intransitive verb sentences to be the result of an event that occurred naturally.
　The process of learning Japanese might have influenced the aforementioned differences. The study findings hold implications for the future of Japanese language education, such as the need to reconsider methods for learning the meanings of intransitive and transitive verbs and teaching based on the reception, rather than production, of intransitive and transitive verbs., text, application/pdf},
 pages = {65--89},
 title = {日本語学習者は自他動詞文をどのように受容するか : 母語話者との比較調査の試み《論文》},
 year = {2023},
 yomi = {モチヅキ, マサミ}
}