本文係根據席氏（Csikszentmihalyi，）的神馳概念針對一位北美籍學生，在一對一家教語言教學情境下，為期三個月的閩南語學習個案研究。資料藉由訪談，研究對象的日誌，錄音，上課筆記，個人通訊與回想等方式蒐集，並以紮根理論的編碼方式施予質性分析。研究發現在一對一外語學習情境中，比起單純強調意識狀態，神馳在闡明學生的權利或是老師的責任更具特殊意義。這些領悟源自於課程開始的五至七分鐘的開場時所發現的神馳空檔，這意味著研究對象是否會進入到神馳的境界。在本個案中，老師並未提供神馳空檔，因而研究對象即離開神馳狀態，並不悅地進行該課程。研究結果指出該研究對象的神馳經驗同時存在於心理與身理兩種層面；有趣的是，根據他的說法，當老師未奉行Grice的言談準則(1975) 或研究對象未能讓老師進入所謂的「神馳產生模式」，而無法進入神馳境界，他經歷「神馳抽離症狀」並且掉進一種「神馳失望的狀態」。毋須贅言，本研究的發現強調外語老師必須在上課前應用可靠的教學工具，如先進的管理工具(Ausubel, 1968)以增進學生在語言學習時進入神馳狀態。本研究的教學啟示與建議的研究方向分別在討論與結論中。

This paper reports on a classroom-based case study of a North American’s learning of the Southern Min (a.k.a., Taiwanese) Language in a dyadic (one-on-one) context over the course of three months at a private language school in Taiwan in light of Csikszentmihalyi’s (1990) concept of flow. Data were gathered via interviews, the focal participant’s reflective journal, audio-recordings, class notes, personal communication, and stimulated recall, and analyzed qualitatively according to Strauss and Corbin’s (1990) grounded theoretical coding procedures. The study’s findings underscore the need for a more specific definition of flow for dyadic L2 learning environments that depicts it as more of a “student’s right” or a “teacher’s obligation” than a merely enhanced state of consciousness. These realizations stemmed from the discovery of a “flow window” that was found to “open” during the first five to seven minutes of class that governed whether or not the focal participant would achieve flow during that particular lesson. In the cases in which the instructor did not proffer a “flow window,” the focal participant “turned himself off” and spent the remainder of class in frustration. Results also indicated that the focal participant’s flow experiences were discerned as being both mental and physical in nature; curiously enough, he reportedly experienced “flow withdrawal-symptoms” and spiraled down into a “flow-downer stage” when flow-enhancing instruction failed to occur as the result of the instructor’s non-adherence to Grice’s Discourse Maxims (1975) or when he failed to steer the instructor into what was termed as “flow-delivery mode. Needless to say, the study’s findings underscore the need for foreign language instructors to employ time-tested teaching tools such as advance organizers (Ausubel, 1968) early on in class periods to increase the likelihood that students will reach the “flow state” in their language learning. The study’s pedagogical implications and suggested directions for future “flow-related” research are presented in the study’s discussion section and conclusion, respectively.

REFERENCES
Atkins, A. (2001). Sinclair and Coulthard’s ‘IRF' model
in a one-to-one classroom: An analysis. Retrieved
June 12, 2008, from http://www.bham.ac.uk/resources
/essays/Atkins_4.pdf
Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Education psychology: A cognitive
view. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Bassey, M. (2006). Case study research. In M. Coleman & A.
J. Briggs (Eds.), Research methods in educational
leadership and management (pp. 108-221). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Beaser, D. (2006, August). The outlook for Taiwanese
language preservation. Sino-Platonic Papers, 172.
Retrieved December 15, 2008, from
http://www.sino-platonic.org/complete
/spp0172_taiwanese_language.pdf
Bruner, J. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Chen, H. (2000). Exploring web users on-line optimal flow
experiences. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York.
Crystal, D. (2000). Language death. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of
optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.
DeBernardi, J. (1991, August). Linguistic nationalism: The
case of Southern Min. Sino-Platonic Papers, 25.
Retrieved September 18, 2008, from
http://www.sino-platonic.org/complete
/spp025_taiwanese.html
Dennis, R. (2004). Public performance, personal story: A
study of Playback Theatre. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia.
Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second
language learning. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel
(Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language
research (pp. 33-56). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Douglas, S. A. (1995). Lingworlds: An intelligent object
oriented environment for second language tutoring.
In V. M. Holland, J. D. Kaplan, & M. R. Sams (Eds.),
Intelligent language tutors: Theory shaping technology
(pp. 201-220). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Egbert, J. (2003). A study of flow theory in the foreign
language classroom. The Modern Language Journal,
4, 499-518.
Ericsson, K., & Simon, H. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal
reports as data (2nd ed.). Boston: MIT Press.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and motivation.
London: Edward Arnold.
Geirland, J. (1996). Go with the flow: An interview with
Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi. Wired ,4. Retrieved January
26, 2009, from http://www.wired.com/wired.com/wired
/archive/4.09/czik_pr.html
Gibbons, P. (1999). Discourse contexts for second language
development in the mainstream classroom.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Technology, Sydney, Australia.
Gibbons, P. (2006). Bridging discourses in the ESL
classroom: Students, teachers and researchers. New
York: Continuum.
Gibbons, P. (2007). Mediating academic language learning
through classroom discourse. In J. Cummins & C.
Davison, (Eds.), The International Handbook of English
Language Teaching (pp. 701-778). New York: Springer
Science.
Gillani, B. (2003). Learning theories and the design of
e-learning environments. Lanham, ML: University Press
of America.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of
grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research.
Chicago: Aldine.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole &
J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, Volume 3:
Speech acts (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
Hefferton, K. M., & Otis, S. (2006). ‘Just clicks’: An
interpretive phenomenological analysis of
professional dancers’ experience of flow. Research in
Dance Education, 7, 141-159.
Jackson, S., & Marsh, H. (1996). Development and validation
of a scale to measure optimal experience: The flow
state scale. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology,
18, 17-35.
Li, C. A. (2008). The lexical influence of colonial
language policies on Taiwanese novel-writing,
1924-1998: A computer-assisted corpus analysis.
National Taiwan Normal University Journals: Humanities
and Social Sciences, 53, 65-81.
Loa, I.-S. (2009, February, 22). Award recipients warn of
danger to dialects. The Taipei Times, p. 2.
Macaloon, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1983). Deep play and
the flow experience in rock climbing. In J. C. Harris &
R. J. Park (Eds.), Play, games and sport in cultural
contexts (pp. 361-384).
Nelson, G. L., & Weigle, S. C. (2004). Novice tutors and
their ESL tutees: Three case studies of tutor roles and
perceptions of tutorial success. Journal of Second
Language Writing, 13, 203-225.
Pratt, M. L. (1991). Arts of the contact zone. Profession,
91, 33-40.
Sato, I. (1988). Bosozoku: Flow in Japanese motorcycle
gangs. In M. Csikszentmihalyi & I. Csikszentmihalyi
(Eds.), Optimal experience: Psychological studies of
flow in consciousness (pp. 92-117). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Schmidt, R., Boraie, D., & Kassagby, O. (1996). Foreign
language motivation: Internal structure and external
connections. In R. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning
motivation: Pathways to the new century (pp. 9-56).
Manoa: University of Hawai’I Press.
Schmidt, R., & Savage, W. (1992). Challenge, skill, and
motivation. PASAA, 22, 14-28.
Schuman, H., & Johnson, M. P. (1976). Attitudes and
behavior. In A. Inkeles (Ed.), Annual Review of
Sociology (pp. 161-207). Palo Alto: Annual Reviews.
Shernoff, D. J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Shernoff, E. S.
(2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms
from the perspective of flow theory. School of
Psychology Quarterly, 18, 158-176.
Snyder, B., & Tardy, C. M. (2001, March). ‘That’s why I
do it’: Flow and teachers' values, beliefs,
and practices. Paper presented at TESOL Annual
Convention, Saint Louis, MS.
Storch, N. (2002). Patterns of interaction in ESL pair
work. Language Learning, 52, 119-158.
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative
research. Grounded theory procedures and techniques.
Newbury Park: Sage Productions.
Thonus, T. (2004). What are the differences?: Tutor
interactions with first- and second-language writers.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 227-242.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind and Society. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Wells, G. (1992). Language and the inquiry-oriented
curriculum. Paper presented at the annual National
Council of Teachers of English Conference, Louisville,
KY.
Wolff, J. M. (2000). Tutoring in the “contact zone.” In
L. Briggs & M. Woolbright (Eds.), Stories from the
center: Connecting narrative and theory in the writing
center (pp. 43-50.). Urbana, IL: National Council of
Teachers of English.
Yifat, R., & Zadunaisky-Ehrlich, S. (2008). Metapragmatic
comments indexing conversational practices of school
children in institutional discourse. First Language,
28, 329-347.