在交談中在人們的交談中，順暢不間斷的話語是很少存在的。說話者對話語的修復 (repair)才是口語會話中普遍存在的現象。而修復的使用會因為可執行的語用功能有所不同，同時也可能受到學習者的語言程度而有所影響。過去國內外已有許多關於自我修復的研究，但是針對以華語為第二外語學習者的自我修復現象，則尚未見到較為深入的研究。本研究主要為了瞭解華語學習者使用的修復方式 (repair) 以及語用功能 (Pragmatic Function) 和他們的華語程度之間的關係。 為達研究目的，本研究採用實地錄製而來的語料分析。 一共使用九份語料， 受試者來自不同的國家學習華語者，年齡層約介於19-30歲之間。依他們的華語程度分成中級、中高級、高級三個等級。 在每個等級中，皆採用三份會話語料，而這三份會話語料之受試者性別分別是男女、女女、男男，總共採用18名受試者的語料，他們彼此的關係都是好朋友或為同班同學。每筆語料約擷取三十分鐘的長度，對話的形式則是面對面的、未經事先計畫的真實、自然的互動。 語料蒐集後，依照不同的修復方式分為：重複、補全、詳述、替代、重啟、重組六種；說話者的語用功能為：保留話輪、補充說明、更正、確認。所有語料經過分類統計過後，結果發現：1.程度較高的學習者修復次數比程度低的多；2.說話者做的詞彙方面的修復頻率高於句法方面的修復；3.說話者使用的修復方式受到語用功能與句法的影響，其偏好順序為：重複、詳述、替代、補全、重啟、重組；4.說話者為保留話輪使用重複多於補全與重啟；為補充說明說話者使用詳述多於替代與重組；為確認使用重複多於替代與補全；5.說話者的程度不影響為保留話輪與確認所做的修復方式，只有在補充說明此功能中的替代這種方式有顯著差異。 / Many linguists have found that perfect utterances do not actually exist all the time during a conversation. In fact, an unclear message is usually sent and need to be Repaired. This study aims to investigate self-Repairs made by Chinese learners, in particular with respect to inter-relationships among repair types, the pragmatic functions of repairs, and the speaker’s language proficiency. Data analyzed in this study are collected from nine dyadic, face-to-face daily conversations, each lasting at least 30 minutes. There are 18 participants from different countries aged between 19 and 30. They are divided into three different groups according to their language level. In order to see whether the different interactions between Repair types, pragmatic functions and speaker’s proficiency is significant or not, this study will use ANOVA to analyze those data. The findings are as follows: For the pragmatic function of Floor-holding, speakers use Repeat more than Complete and Restart. For the pragmatic function of Clarification, Elaboration is the type most frequently used, and then follows the types Replace and Reorder. For the pragmatic function of Confirmation, Repeat is also the most favored type. With the speaker’s language level taken into consideration, this study finds that interlocutors’ proficiency does not influence the choice of Repair types to serve the pragmatic function of Floor-holding and Confirmation. The only significant difference found in the pragmatic function of clarification is found in intermediate level and high level.