词汇歧义与双语语义发展的跨语言实证研究

当代外语研究 ›› 2013, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (11): 26-30.

词汇歧义与双语语义发展的跨语言实证研究

李海龙

上海交通大学,上海,200240

出版日期:2013-11-15 发布日期:2020-07-25
作者简介:李海龙,上海交通大学外国语学院在读博士。主要研究方向为二语习得和心理语言学。电子邮箱:hailong8108@163.com
基金资助:
*本文受教育部人文社会科学研究“外国留学生汉语阅读中的超读障碍研究及iSTART策略应用”项目(编号10YJC740103)资助。

A Cross-language Empirical Study on Lexical Ambiguity and Bilingual Semantic Development

LI Hailong

Online:2013-11-15 Published:2020-07-25

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 心理语言学领域已有不少有关双语心理词汇的理论与实证研究,然而很少有研究同时从两种语言的交互以及心理表征发展的角度研究词汇歧义现象。在将词汇歧义根据意义之间的联系度分为同形异义、隐喻多义和转喻多义的基础上,本研究以中国大学英语专业学生为被试,运用E-Prime软件呈现的翻译识别任务考察各类歧义词的语义表征与发展。结果发现不同类型的词汇歧义之间以及不同英语水平的被试之间存在显著差异,但汉译英方向和英译汉方向没有显著差异。根据Pavlenko(2009)提出的修正层级模型,我们结合实验结果探讨了歧义词的心理表征、双语语义表征的激活与抑制及其对歧义词习得的启示。

关键词: 歧义词, 翻译识别, 意义联系度, 语义发展

Abstract: Studies on lexical ambiguity set to investigate the interactive and developmental nature of the bilingual mental lexicon remain underrepresented in the literature. On the basis of distinguishing different types of lexical ambiguity (homonymy, metaphorical polysemy and metonymic polysemy), this study employed a translation recognition task presented by E-Prime software to investigate the mental representation of ambiguous words in Chinese EFL learners. The results indicated significant difference for different types of ambiguous words and for subjects of different English proficiency levels, but not for the direction of translation. In light of the modified hierarchical model, the representational development of ambiguous words, the activation and inhibition of semantic representations and their implications for the acquisition of ambiguous words are discussed.

中图分类号:

H313

李海龙. 词汇歧义与双语语义发展的跨语言实证研究[J]. 当代外语研究, 2013, 13(11): 26-30.

LI Hailong. A Cross-language Empirical Study on Lexical Ambiguity and Bilingual Semantic Development[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2013, 13(11): 26-30.

参考文献

Altarriba, J. & D. M. Basnight-Brown. 2007. Methodological considerations in performing semantic-and translation-priming experiments across languages [J]. Behavior Research Methods (1): 1-18.
Bartsh, R. 2003. Generating polysemy: Metaphor and metonymy [A]. In R. Dirven & R. Parings (eds.). Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast [C]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 49-74.
Bialystok, E. 2007. Cognitive effects of bilingualism: How linguistic experience leads to cognitive change [J]. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism (3): 210-23.
Budanitsky, A. & G. Hirst. 2006. Evaluating wordnet-based measures of lexical semantic relatedness [J]. Computational Linguistics (1): 13-47.
de Groot, A. M. B. 1992. Determinants of word translation [J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition (5): 1001-1018.
Degani, T. & N. Tokowicz. 2010. Semantic ambiguity within and across languages: An integrative review [J]. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (7): 1266-1303.
Hino, Y., S. J. Lupker & P. M. Pexman. 2002. Ambiguity and synonymy effects in lexical decision, naming, and semantic categorization tasks: Interactions between orthography, phonology, and semantics [J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition (4): 686-713.
Jiang, N. 2000. Lexical representation and development in a second language [J]. Applied Linguistics (1): 47-77.
Klepousniotou, E. 2002. The processing of lexical ambiguity: Homonymy and polysemy in the mental lexicon [J]. Brain and Language (1): 205-23.
Klepousniotou, E. & S. R. Baum. 2007. Disambiguating the ambiguity advantage effect in word recognition: An advantage for polysemous but not homonymous words [J]. Journal of Neurolinguistics (1): 1-24.
Laxen, J. & J. M. Lavaur. 2009. The role of semantics in translation recognition: Effects of number of translations, dominance of translations and semantic relatedness of multiple translations [J]. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition (2): 157-83.
Lin, C.-J.C. & K. Ahrens. 2009. Ambiguity advantage revisited: Two meanings are better than one when accessing Chinese nouns [J]. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research (1): 1-19.
Littlemore, J. 2009. Applying Cognitive Linguistics to Second Language Learning and Teaching [M]. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lyons, J. 1977. Semantics (Vol. 2) [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McLaughlin, B. 1990. Restructuring [J]. Applied Linguistics (2): 113-28.
Murphy, G. L. 2007. Parsimony and the psychological representation of polysemous words [A]. In M. Rakova, G. Petho & C. Rakosi (eds.). The Cognitive Basis of Polysemy [C]. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. 47-70.
Pavlenko, A. 2009. Conceptual representation in the bilingual lexicon and second language vocabulary learning [A]. In A. Pavlenko (ed.). The Bilingual Mental Lexicon: Interdisciplinary Approaches [C]. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. 125-60.
Pavlenko, A. & S. Jarvis. 2002. Bidirectional transfer [J]. Applied Linguistics (2): 190-214.
Rodd, J., G. Gaskell & W. Marslen-Wilson. 2002. Making sense of semantic ambiguity: Semantic competition in lexical access [J]. Journal of Memory and Language (2): 245-66.
Rodd, J. M., R. Berriman, M. Landau, T. Lee, C. Ho, M. G. Gaskell & M. H. Davis. 2012. Learning new meanings for old words: Effects of semantic relatedness [J]. Memory & Cognition (7): 1095-1108.
Tokowicz, N. & J. F. Kroll. 2007. Number of meanings and concreteness: Consequences of ambiguity within and across languages [J]. Language and Cognitive Processes (5): 727-79.
蔡任栋、董燕萍.2012.词汇层面双语控制的工作记忆效应[J].当代外语研究(4):11-15.
石进芳.2012.母语概念迁移能力、隐喻能力与语言水平的发展关系研究[J].外语教学理论与实践(3):57-63.
杨雯琴、李荣宝.2013.“竞争选择”还是“反应排除”——国外言语产出词汇选择机制的争鸣与思考[J].现代外语(1):92-98.
张绍全.2010.国英语学习者多义词习得的认知语言学研究[M].重庆:重庆大学出版社.
张晓鹏.2010.词义典型性在英语多义词词义表征和提取过程中的作用[J].现代外语(4):395-402.
赵晨.2010.中国英语学习者歧义词心理表征的发展模式[J].现代外语(1):55-63.
赵翠莲.2005.多义词心理表征的发展模式——基于对中国EFL学习者的实验研究[J].外语教学与研究(4):294-302.
赵艳芳.2001.认知语言学概论[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.