本研究主要探討三個問題：第一為應用「認知架構邏輯法」增進英語為外國語言學習者準 學術表達能力的可行性；第二為連結折衷的英語教學法與認知語言學及語用學導向為基本 原理間的挑戰；和第三為突破英語為外國語言學習與英語為教學媒介間界線的困境。來自 北台灣一所私立大學六個學院、十四個學系、一百零九位計有三個非英語主修大一及大二 班級的九十七位男生及十二位女生同意主要藉由小組簡報所選專業科目寫作內容、填寫英 語學習問卷與回答準面談後問卷問題回饋等方式參與此項研究。經由量化及質化分析的結 果顯示，除暫時解決了第三個問題之外，可從所回答的第一及第二個問題當中得到令人信 服的結論。顯著的統計結果證明：採用「認知架構邏輯法」，的確可以增進英語為外國語 言學習者準學術表達能力之餘，靈活整合折衷的英語教學法與認知語言學及語用學導向為 基本原理的理念，不失為有效的跨界創意，實有助於英語為外國語言學習者提升表達能力。 然而儘管如此，另有三個難題尚待克服：第一個是英語為外國語言學習者運用認知學術語 言能力的困難，特別除了一般寫作策略以外，極度需要有關學術寫作的技巧。第二個為介 於在小組簡報之前的「寫作為經」與臨場呆板或自然地「表達為緯」之間，所發現後設認 知轉變的不易。第三則為在本研究中，同時毫無疑問持續困惑著英語為外國語言學習者與 研究者，結合英語為外國語言學習與英語為教學媒介，以達學術目的的機會與契機。 The purpose of this study aims to explore three research questions: firstly, the practicability of conducting Cognitive Framed Logic Approach (CFLA) to enhance the English as a foreign language (EFL) learners’ quasiacademic communicative competence; secondly, the challenge of bridging the gap between the eclectic methodologies of Teaching English to speakers of other languages (TESOL) and the Cognitive-linguistics(CL)-driven-and-pragmatics-based rationale; and thirdly, the opportunity of breaking the boundaries between EFL and English as a medium of instruction (EMI). From 14 departments in 6 colleges of a private university in northern Taiwan, 109 non-English major freshmen and sophomores in three classes, comprising 97 males and 12 females, consented to partaking in this study mainly by means of presenting their discipline-based written works, completing ESLP 82 questionnaire: Self-assessment of English writing skills and use of writing strategies, and replying their quasi-interviewed feedback of post-survey questions. The results after quantitative and qualitative analysis indicated the first two questions were persuasively resolved although the third one was tentatively done. The statistical significance proved it was achievable to improve the EFL learners’ quasiacademic presentation performances through CFLA. Besides, the idea of flexibly integrating the eclectic TESOL methodologies and the CL-driven-and-pragmatics-based rationale could yet be regarded as effective creativity of boundary crossing, constructive to facilitate the EFL learners’ communicative competence. Be that as it may, three existent predicaments remain to be answered. The first concern goes to the EFL participants’ difficulties of taking advantage of their cognitive academic language proficiency, especially they are in dire need of pertinent academic writing skills apart from general writing strategies. The second one is the challenge found in their metacognitive shifts between what they had written ahead of their group-based presentation and what they mechanically or spontaneously expressed on the spot. Third, what still perplexed them as well as the researcher in this study goes no doubt to the chances and challenge for bridging EFL to EMI for academic purposes.
