| Based on the Speech Act theory and “Multi-Competence Model ”and“Common Underlying Conceptual Base”,this paper is trying to discuss the pragmatic backward transfer from L2 to L1 among Chinese learners who have proficiency in Chinese studying their comforting speech act.This paper has adopted the questionnaire survey method.30 samples were collected from each group.Corpus 1and 2 consisted of 30 Chinese native speakers and English native speakers respectively.Corpus 3 was collected from 30 English native speakers who have reached English-Chinese bilingual level.According to Lazarus & Folkman and Wangjiao’s classification of comforting strategies and semantic components,contrasts and comparisons were made between different corporus by comparing the frequency of different strategies and semantic components delivered by participants in diverse scenarios.As this study reveals:(1)the bilingual comforting strategy tends to be different from the English monolingual but similar to Chinese monolingual;(2)among the three semantic formulas in which there is a significant difference between the two monolinguals,there are two formulas which indicate the bilinguals resemble Chinese monolinguals;(3)bilinguals and Chinese monolinguals have obvious similarities in the choice of comfort strategies in different situations;(4)the frequency of the comforting strategy and semantic formula of bilinguals is not always between the two monolinguals,as it’s for the “emotion-problem centre” strategy,and“comforting set” as well as the “analysing problem” semantic formula.The bilinguals deviate the two monolinguals which reflects the uniqueness of the bilingual.The conclusion shows that the comforting speech act exhibited by bilinguals are more influenced by Chinese the comforting speech act.In summary,although the sample and methodology need to be improved,certainly,the study identified the pragmatic backward transfer of Chinese to English appears in English-Chinese bilinguals.This would play an irreplaceable role in studying second language acquisition and interlanguage pragmatics. |