本論文旨在調查日本的華語教師在課堂上，其華、日教學媒介語的實際使用狀況。從教師的角度出發，只使用日語為媒介語，或只使用華語，或夾雜使用華日語進行上課及糾錯，找出基本原則與因素。另從學生的角度出發，探討學生對教師使用之華語和日語的態度以及不同教學媒介語的教學方式對學生的學習產生有什麼樣的效果，並探討在什麼情況下使用哪一種教學媒介語，才能達到最好的學習效果。
本研究方法主要採用問卷調查法以及課室觀察資料。問卷以華語教師與日籍學生為對象，課室觀察則以日本的學校及語言機構之華語課堂作為觀察對象，進行教學媒介語比較分析。
論文架構總共分為五章，前三章說明本論文研究之緣起、目的、文獻探討及研究方法之分析整理；第四章第一節先從教師與學生兩種問卷調查之內容做分析討論，包括個人資料、教師常使用之教學媒介語、糾錯所使用的教學媒介語，以及學生對糾錯媒介語的理解度以及滿意度等。再從語音、詞彙、語法、語用、文化的五種教學內容分析教學媒介語的使用；第四章第二節則深入探討比較課堂中使用不同教學媒介語上課的情形，並且以錄音、非正式訪談以及訪談札記作為研究分析的材料。
本論文第五章歸納前述各章之探討結果，得出如下結論：華語教師與日籍學生對課堂教學媒介語的使用存在著頗大的差異。華語教師認為，針對不同的教學內容、學習任務和學習目的，需要使用一定比例的學生母語作為教學媒介語；初級階段的日籍學生也認為，在華語學習過程中，以日語作為教學媒介語是必要的。
另外，華語教學中應如何正確使用教學媒介語，並在此基礎上，幫助學生有效習得華語，本文也提出具體的教學媒介語使用建議。

Medium of instruction, as an important parameter in foreign language teaching refers to the language used by teachers in language teaching classroom. Different teaching methods used in different environments hold different ideas on how to use instructional media.
This study investigates the medium of instruction in Chinese language education in Japan. First of all, the author studies how Chinese teachers’ use of target language, mother tongue or both languages as the medium of instruction in Chinese language classrooms affects the style of teaching, the ways of correction and explanation of basic rules and their causes. Next, the author studied the ideas and opinion of Japanese students on the teachers’ use of instructional media, and the learning effectiveness of using Chinese or Japanese as medium of instruction for Japanese students studying the Chinese language.
　　In this research, the study methods employed were mainly questionnaire and classroom observation. The questionnaires were administered to Chinese language teachers and Japanese learners, and classroom observation was done at Japanese schools and in Chinese language classrooms in various foreign language institutions. The results of these studies were used to do a comparative analysis of instructional media.
This thesis is divided into five chapters. The initial three chapters explain the motivation for the study and its purpose, investigate prior research and analyze and categorize the research methods.
In chapter 4, there are separate two parts. The first analyzes the results of the two questionnaires from Japanese students and Chinese teachers to find the differences between the two. The results were totaled as to their ideas about using Chinese or Japanese as the medium of instruction, the situation in which each medium of instruction was used by Chinese language teachers, the way teachers used a medium of instruction when the student committed an error, the students’ satisfaction with the teachers choice of medium of instruction, and their understanding of the course material. The second part is actual classroom observation of the three different types of classes, and in-depth interviews and recordings of classroom recording used as reference data.
In Chapter 5, the conclusions and results are presented. The teachers were clearly in favor of the use of a certain amount of Japanese as the medium of instruction dependent on different learning level, different learning tasks, and different content. From Japanese students’ point of view, it was apparent that the use of Japanese as the medium of instruction was felt to be necessary.
Finally, in response to the question of what is the appropriate instructional language usage to bring about effective acquisition of Chinese, the author puts forward several key ideas and concrete suggestions for Chinese language teaching and learning.

一、中文部分
王文科（1994）。質的研究方法論。台北市：師大書苑。
王斌華（2003）。雙語教育與雙語教學。上海市：上海教育出版社。
平文江（2002）。母語在成人英語教學中的應用調查。中國成人教育（1），54-54。
吳芝儀、廖梅花譯(2001)。Strauss, A., & Corbin, J.著。質性研究入門：紮根理論
研究方法(Basis of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing
grounded theory. (2nd ed.))。台北市：濤石文化事業有限公司。
余佩璇（2009）。華語課堂教學媒介語之使用研究：以零起點課堂教學為討論
範圍。高雄市：國立高雄師範大學碩士論文。
杜耀梅（2003）。母語在英語精讀課中的應用。北京理工大學學報，5，57-58。
陳立平（2004）。英語專業教師在課堂上語碼轉換調查。解放軍外國語學院學報，27（5），34-40。
康立新（2004）。母語在外語詞彙學習中的作用：一次實證研究。河南科技大學學報，22（3），69-71。
黃光雄(主譯) (2003)。Bogdan, R. C. & Biklen, S. K.著。質性教育研究：理論與方法 (Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods.(3rd ed.))。 台北市：濤石文化事業有限公司。
張秀琴(1991)。A Case Study of Classroom Interaction in Teaching English to Elementary School Children. (兒童英語教學教室內師生互動的個案研究)。台北：國立政治大學碩士論文。
張東正(2002)。論雙語教學。基礎教育外語教學研究，(7)，11-17。
陸效用（2002）。試論母語對二語習得的正面影響。外語界，（4），12- 16。
張桂萍，王新鳳（2001）。母語在外語教學中的應用。山東外語教學（3），82-84。
葉德明（1999）。華語文教學規範與理論基礎—華語文為第二語言教學芻議。台北市：師大書苑。
葉德明（2002 a）。華語文教學規範與理論基礎。台北市：師大書苑。
葉德明（2002 b）。雙語教學之理論與實踐。台北市：師大書苑。
董文蘭（2002）。論高職英語教學中母語與目標語的運用。南京工業職業技術學院學報，2（4），26-28。
喬佳義（2003）。大學英語課堂教學媒介語對比實驗研究。外語教學與研究，35，（5），372-377。
鄭樹棠，衛乃興，陳永捷（1997）。關於大學英語教學法的研究-大學英語教學現狀研究之四。外語界，(3)，2-8。
鐘啟泉(2003)。雙語教學之我見。全球教育展望，(3)，5-7。
二、日文部分
財務省（1988年－2007年）。日中貿易額の推移。日本：財務省統計。
裁判所法（2008）。最終改正：6月18日法律第七十一号。日本国憲法。
台北日僑學校（2007）。學校要覽。台北：日僑學校。
田野村忠温(2010)。日本語の話者数順位について：日本は世界大６位の言語か？国語学。189集、31－47。
文字・活字文化振興法（2005）。七月二十九日法律第九十一号。日本国憲法。
文部科学省生涯学習政策局調査企画課（2002年－2004年）。文部科学統計要覧。日本：文部科学省。
三、英文部分
Appel, R., and Muysken, P. (1987). Language contact and bilingualism. New York:Edward Arnold.
Atkinson, D. (1993). Teaching monolingual classes. London: Long man.
Barnes, D. (1969). Language in the secondary classroom. Penguin: Harmonds worth.
Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language classroom: Research on teaching and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cook, V. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(3), 402-23.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2007). Basis of qualitative research:Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). CA: Sage.
Cummins, J. (1980). The entry and exit fallacy in bilingual education. NABE Journal,4, 402-23.
Cummins, J. (1997). Introduction. In　Cummins, J. & Corson, D. (Eds.) Bilingual education. Vol. 5. International encyclopedia of language and education,11-16. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Deller, S., & M. Rinvolucri. (2002). Using the mother tongue: Making the most of the learner’s language. Surrey, Kent: Delta Publishing.　
Duff, P., & C. Polio. (1990). How much foreign language is there in the foreign language classroom? Modern Language Journal, 74, 154-166.
Ellis, R. (1984). Classroom second language development. Oxford: Pergamon.
Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Flyman-Mattsson, A. & N. Burenhult. (1999). Code-switching in second language teaching of french. Lund University, Dept. of Linguistics Working Papers, 47, 59-72.
Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Grosjean, F. (1989). Neurolinguists beware! The bilingual is not two monolinguals in one person. Brain and Language, 36, 3-15.
Howatt, A. (1984). A history of English language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers. (Second Edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haugen, E. (1953). The Norwegian language in America. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. New York: Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. D., and T. D. Terrell (1983). The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. Oxford: Pergamon.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1985). State of the art on input in second language acquisition. In Gass, S. M., & Madden, C. G. (Ed.). Input in Second Language Acquisition. 433- 444. Rowley, MA: Newbury.
Levine, G. S. (2003). Student and instructor beliefs and attitudes about target language use, first language use, and anxiety: Report of a questionnaire study. The Modern Language Journal, 87(3), 343-364.
Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Long, M. H. (1983). Does second language instruction make a difference? A review of research. TESOL Quarterly, 17 (3), 359-382.
Long, M. H. and Sato C. J. (1983). Classroom foreigner talk discourse: form and functions of teacher’s questions. In Selinger, H. W. and Long, M. H. (Ed.). Classroom Oriented Research in Second Language Acquisition, 268- 285. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
Macaro, E. (2001). Analysing student teachers’ code- switching in foreign language classrooms: Theories and Decision Making. Modern Language Journal, 85(4), 531-48.
Mackey, W. (1968). The description of bilingualism. In Joshua. F., (Ed.). Readings in the sociology of language. The Hague: Mouton, 554-584.
Macnamara, J. (1967). The effects of instruction in a weaker language. Journal of Social Issues, 2, 121-135.
Martin-Jones, M. (2000). Bilingual classroom interaction: A review of recent of research. Language Teaching, 33, 1-9.
Polio, C., & P. Duff. (1994). Teachers’ language use in university foreign language classrooms: A qualitative analysis of English and target language alternation. Modern Language Journal, 78, 313-326.
Poplack, S. (1988). Contrasting patterns of code-switching in two communities. In Heller, M., (Ed.). Code- switching: Anthropological and sociolinguistic perspectives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 215-244
Prodromou, L. (1991). The good language teacher. English Teaching Forum, 19(2), 2-17.
Prodromou, L. (2000). From mother tongue to other tongue. Greece: British Council.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (Second Edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schweers, C. W. Jr. (1999). Using L1 in the L2 classroom. English Teaching Forum, 37(2), 6-13.
Selinger, H. W. (1983). Learner interaction in the classroom and its effect on language acquisition. In Seliger H. W. and Long, M. H. (Ed.). Classroom Oriented Research in Second Language Acquisition, 89-107. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
Stern, H. H. (1992). Issues and options in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Turnbull, M. (2001). There is a role for the L1 in second and foreign language teaching, but.... Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 531-540.
Turnbull, M. & K. Arnett. (2002). Teachers’ uses of the first languages in second and foreign classrooms. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,22, 204-218.
Zacharias, N. T. (2004). Teachers’ beliefs about the use of the students’ mother tongue: A Survey of tertiary English teachers in Indonesia. EA JOURNAL, 22(1), 44-52.