二语学习者词汇心理特征的动态变化研究

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2015.04.006

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 研究采用纵向和横断面相结合的方法,基于25名二语学习者为期135天的书面语语料,以时间和英语水平为自变量,词汇的心理特征(具体程度、意象程度、意义丰富程度和熟悉程度)为因变量来考察二语学习者书面语词汇心理特征及其关系是否随着时间的推移和英语水平提高发生变化。研究结果显示:(1)随着二语学习者学习时间的推移和英语水平的提高,学习者的词汇具体程度、意象程度、意义丰富程度和熟悉程度也随之发生变化,其均值由高变低;(2)学习者词汇熟悉程度和意象程度、具体程度、意义丰富程度之间的关系随着时间的推移和英语水平的提高逐渐加强,而它们之间的相关性却随着时间的推移和英语水平的提高逐渐降低。鉴于此,在二语词汇习得研究中,要把学习者词汇心理特征以及特征构成的词汇网络发展作为评价二语学习者词汇能力发展的指标之一。

关键词: 具体程度, 意象程度, 意义丰富程度, 熟悉程度

Abstract: Based on a written English corpus of 25 Chinese learners of English over 135 days, the study aims to investigate whether or not word psycholinguistic features and their correlations change with the course of time and language proficiency by treating time and language proficiency as an independent variable and word psycholinguistic features as dependent variables in a combination of longitudinal and cross-sectional methods. The results show: (1) word psycholinguistic features change with the course of time and the development of language proficiency in that the values of concreteness, imagery, meaningfulness and familiarity become smaller than before respectively; (2)correlations between word psycholinguistics features such as concreteness, imagery, meaningfulness and familiarity turn stronger with the elapse of time and the growth of language proficiency. Therefore, it is assumed that word psycholinguistic features and their network might indicate the development of vocabulary competence of second language learners.

中图分类号:

H319

易保树, 倪传斌. 二语学习者词汇心理特征的动态变化研究[J]. 当代外语研究, 2015, 15(4): 43-48.

YI Baoshu, NI Chuanbin. The Dynamic Change of Word Psycholinguistic Features of Chinese Learners of English[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2015, 15(4): 43-48.

参考文献

Aizawa, K. 2006. Rethinking frequency markers for English-Japanese dictionaries [A]. In M. Murata, K. Minamide, Y. Tono & S. Ishikawa (eds.). English Lexicography in Japan [C]. Tokyo: Taishukan. 108-19.
Barber, H. A, L. J. Otten, S. Kousta & G. Vigliocco. 2013. Concreteness in word processing: ERP and behavioral effects in a lexical decision task [J]. Brain & Language 125: 47-53.
Crossley, S. A., D. Allen & D. McNamara. 2011. Text readability and intuitive simplification: A comparison of readability formulas N1 English [J]. Reading in a Foreign Language 23(1): 86-101.
Crossley, S. A., T. Salsbury & D.S. McNamara. 2009. Measuring L2 lexical growth using hypernymic relationships [J]. Language Learning 59: 307-34.
Crossley, S. A., T. Salsbury & D.S. McNamara. 2010. The development of semantic relations in second language speakers: A case for Latent Semantic Analysis [J]. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics 7: 55-74.
Crossley, S. A., T. Salsbury, McNamara, D. S. & S. Jarvis. 2011. What is lexical proficiency? Some answers from computational models of speech data [J]. TESOL Quarterly 45: 182-193.
Daller, H. & H. Xue. 2007. Lexical richness and the oral proficiency of Chinese EFL students [A]. In H. Daller, J. Milton & J. Treffers-Daller (eds). Modeling and Assessing Vocabulary Knowledge [C]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 93-115.
Ellis, R. 2002. Frequency effects in language processing. A review with implications for theories of implicit and explicit language acquisition [J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24(2): 143-88.
Ellis, N. & A. Beaton. 1993. Psycholinguistic determinants of foreign language vocabulary acquisition [J]. Language Learning 43: 559-617.
Gee, N. R. & D. Krawezyk. 1999. Is the concreteness effect a result of underlying network interconnectivity? [J] Journal of Memory and Language 40: 479-97.
Gilhooly, K. J. & R. H. Logie. 1980. Age of acquisition, imagery, concreteness, familiarity and ambiguity measures of 1944 words [J]. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation 12: 395-427.
Graesser, A. C., D. S. McNamara, M. Louwerse & Z. Cai. 2004. Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language [J]. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 36: 193-202.
Haastrup, K. & B. Henriksen. 2000. Vocabulary acquisition: Acquiring depth of knowledge through network building [J]. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 10: 221-40.
Huckin, T & J. Coady. 1999. Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language [J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 21: 181-93.
Kline, R. B. 1998. Principles and Practices of Structural Equation Modeling [M]. New York: Guilford.
Laufer, B. & P. Nation. 1995. Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production [J]. Applied Linguistics 16: 307-22.
Liu, Y., M. Hao, H. Shu, H. Tan & S. Weeks. 2008. Age of acquisition effects on oral reading in Chinese [J]. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 15(2): 344-50.
Meara, P. 2009. Connected Words: Word Associations and Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition [M]. Phila-delphia: John Benjamins.
Meara, P & E. Schur. 2002. Random association networks: A baseline measure of lexical complexity [J]. British Association for Applied Linguisitcs 34: 169-82.
Miller, G. A. 2009. WordNet—About Us, Wordnet [EB/OL]. [2014-01-20]. http//wordnet.princeton.edu.
Milton, J. 2009. Measuring Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition [M]. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Paivio, A., J. C. Juille & S. Madigan. 1968. Concreteness, imagery and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns [J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology Monograph Supple-ment 76: 1-25.
Rabovsky, M, M. Sommer & R. Abdel Rahman. 2012. Depth of conceptual knowledge modulates visual processing during word reading [J]. Journal of Cognitive Neuro-science 24(4): 990-1005.
Roncato, S. 1974. Concreteness, imagery, meaningfulness and a new index: Values for 100 Italian nouns [J]. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia/ Italian Journal of Psychology 1: 195-209.
Salsbury, T., S. A. Crossley & D. S. McNamara. 2011. Psycholinguistic word information in second language oral discourse [J]. Second Language Research 27(3): 343-60.
Schmitt, N. & P. Meara. 1997. Researching vocabulary through a word knowledge framework [J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19: 17-36.
Tanaka, S. 2012. New directions in L2 lexical development [J]. Vocabulary Learning and Instruction 1(1): 1-9.
Toglia, M. P. & W. F. Battig. 1978. Handbook of Semantic Word Norms [M]. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Vermeer, A. 2000. Coming to grip with lexical richness in spontaneous speech data [J]. Language Testing 17: 65-83.
Wison, M. D. 1988. The MRC psycholinguistic database: Machine readable dictionary, version 2 [J]. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments and Computers 20(1): 6-11.
Zevin, J. D. & D. A. Balota. 2000. Priming and attentional control of lexical and sublexical pathways during naming [J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology 26: 121-35.
刘东虹.2003.词汇量对英语写作的影响[J].现代外语26(2):180-87.
马广惠、文秋芳.1999.大学生英语写作能力影响因素研究[J].外语教学与研究6:34-39.

[1]	徐斌. 高校外语课程思政中的国家意识培育[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 454(4): 35-41.
[2]	苗兴伟. 新文科背景下师范类院校外语专业人才培养体系建设[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 454(4): 72-81.
[3]	屈文生. 新文科理念下的新时代高等外语教育意象——以“大外语”等命题为中心[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 454(4): 82-91.
[4]	常辉. 新文科背景下上海交通大学英语专业改革与人才培养探索[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 454(4): 92-96.
[5]	纪秀明, 曾春葙. 新文科视域下外语学科改革的几个平衡点与适度性问题[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 454(4): 97-102.
[6]	徐鹰, 毕宇, 章雅青. 《词汇和专门用途英语研究:定量和定性视角》评介[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 453(3): 104-108.
[7]	郭鸿杰, 张达球, 丁冬. 一体三通,融创合一:新文科背景下财经类高校外语人才培养模式创新[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 453(3): 35-44.
[8]	潘海英, 刘淑玲. 新文科建设背景下大学外语课程创新发展的若干思考[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 453(3): 45-52.
[9]	马炳军, 常辉. 汉语二语句法加工研究:理论与实验[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 453(3): 61-70.
[10]	陶继芬. POA“读说”模式英语口语课堂教学设计[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 453(3): 96-103.
[11]	李建波, 张格堃. 文化观念和文学典籍交相辉映——《文化观念流变中的英国文学典籍研究》评述[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 452(2): 106-110.
[12]	田秘, 赵永峰. 概念整合理论的批评认知语言学阐释——以“the *ly challenged”委婉构式为例[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 452(2): 84-95.
[13]	杨港, 彭楠. 数字时代高校外语教材研究的自传式叙事范式[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 452(2): 96-105.
[14]	黄立鹤. 多模态范式与后疫情时代的外语教学[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 451(1): 75-85.
[15]	郑咏滟. 后疫情时代的多语研究:反思与展望[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 451(1): 64-74.