您的位置: turnitin查重官网> 汉语言文学 >> 外国语言 >谈词汇基于框架语义学二语词汇习得实证学年

谈词汇基于框架语义学二语词汇习得实证学年

收藏本文 2024-01-18 点赞:9873 浏览:36545 作者:网友投稿原创标记本站原创

摘要:将认知语言学的探讨成果运用于语习得及教学实践是一个有益的尝试。现阶段,学者已将认知语言学中的很多论述引入二语习得探讨。但是,学者对于框架语义学论述对二语词汇习得作用的关注不多,而针对该领域进行的实证探讨更是少之又少。由Fillmore提出的框架语义学为人们提供了一种理解和描写词项作用的不同策略。遵循框架语义学论述,理解词汇作用的前提是掌握该词所属的语义框架、框架内核心成员间的相互联系及该词所适用的场景。而二语词汇习得的中心不足就涉及习得词汇的作用,用法和与其他词汇的关联等。这为基于框架语义学论述的二语词汇习得探讨提供了背景和动因。本论文对国内某高校非英语专业的学生进行了一项实证性探讨,目的在于探究基于框架语义学论述的词汇学习策略对中国学生英语词汇习得的影响。根据学生在前测中显现出的英语水平的差别,279名受试者被分为两个层次并分别参与目标词汇的学习。通过比较运用不同词汇学习策略的受试者在及时测试和延时测试中对生词习得的差别,本论文试图验证基于框架语义学论述的词汇学习策略对中国学生英语词汇习得是否有着积极的影响。本论文运用的主要策略为描述性统计浅析,独立样本T检验和配对样本T检验。通过对实证数据的定量浅析,本论文得出了以下结论:(1)与传统的词汇学习策略相比,基于框架语义学论述的词汇学习策略能更为有效地推动中国学生英语词汇的习得。(2)基于框架语义学论述词汇学习策略的有效性在习得词汇的接收性知识和产出性知识两个层面都有着显著性。(3)基于框架语义学论述的词汇学习策略对中国学生英语词汇习得的推动作用在英语水平较低的学习者中体现得更为显著。(4)与传统的词汇学习策略相比,运用基于框架语义学论述的词汇学习策略,学习者对生词知识的保持情况更好。本论文的探讨结论希望能给中国的英语词汇教学提供一些启迪。教师在组织英语词汇教学的历程中,可以介绍和运用这种基于框架语义学论述的新策略。在运用基于框架语义学论述的词汇学习策略组织词汇教学时,应充分考虑学习者的英语水平,因材施教。除了组织教学,教师还应着力于端正学生的学习态度,激发学生的学习动机并能较好地吸引学生的注意力。关键词:框架语义学论文词汇学习策略论文词汇知识论文词汇保持论文二语习得论文

    摘要5-7

    Abstract7-14

    Chapter 1 Introduction14-19

    1.1 Research Background14-16

    1.2 Purposes and Significance of the Research16-17

    1.3 Organization of the Thesis17-19

    Chapter 2 Literature Review19-46

    2.1 Studies on Frame Semantics19-32

    2.1.1 Historical Introduction19-20

    2.1.2 Frame20-24

    2.1.2.1 Definition20-21

    2.1.2.2 The Hypostasis of Frames21-24

    2.1.3 Semantic Frame24-29

    2.1.3.1 The Main Constituents25-26

    2.1.3.2 Features of Semantic Frame26-29

    2.1.4 Main Apppcation of Frame Semantics to the Research on Language Meaning29-32

    2.2 Studies on L2 Vocabulary Acquisition32-43

    2.2.1 Importance of Vocabulary Acquisition in L2 Acquisition32-34

    2.2.2 Acquisition and Learning34-35

    2.2.3 Vocabulary Knowledge35-40

    2.2.4 Modes of Vocabulary Learning40-43

    2.3 Feasibipty of L2 Vocabulary Acquisition Based on Frame Semantics43-46

    Chapter 3 Theoretical Framework46-51

    3.1 Theoretical Foundations46-48

    3.1.1 Various Learning Models-Intentional Learning and Incidental Learning46-47

    3.1.2 Vocabulary Knowledge Investigated47

    3.1.3 Depth of Processing47-48

    3.2 A Diagram Reflecting the Framework of the Recent Study48-49

    3.3 Variables in the Present Research49-51

    Chapter 4 Research Design51-64

    4.1 Specific Research Questions51

    4.2 Participants51-53

    4.3 Instruments53-58

    4.3.1 The Target Words53-55

    4.3.2 Tests55-57

    4.3.2.1 Pre-test 155-56

    4.3.2.2 Pre-test 256

    4.3.2.3 The Immediate Vocabulary Test56-57

    4.3.2.4 The Delayed Vocabulary Test57

    4.3.3 SPSS57-58

    4.4 Procedures of Investigation58-60

    4.4.1 The Pilot Tests58-59

    4.4.1.1 Pre-test 158

    4.4.1.2 Pre-test 258-59

    4.4.2 The Main Research Project59-60

    4.4.2.1 Different Learning Methods59-60

    4.4.2.2 The Immediate Vocabulary Test60

    4.4.2.3 The Delayed Vocabulary Test60

    4.5 Data Collection60-62

    4.5.1 Time Frame for Data Collection61

    4.5.2 Scoring61-62

    4.6 Vapdity and Repabipty62-64

    Chapter 5 Results and Discussion64-85

    5.1 Results of Pre-test 164-67

    5.1.1 Descriptive Statistics of the Results for L2 Learners with Different Engpsh Proficiency Levels64

    5.1.2 Independent-Samples T-test Analysis for the Division of the Two Groups64-65

    5.1.3 Descriptive Statistics of the Results for Two Parallel Classes Selected to Represent the Two Groups in Pre-test 165-66

    5.1.4 Independent-Samples T-test Analysis for the Selection of the Two Parallel Classes Representing the Two Groups66-67

    5.2 Results of Pre-test 267-69

    5.3 Results of the Immediate Vocabulary Test69-74

    5.3.1 Descriptive Statistics of the Results for the Two Groups of L2 Learners with Higher Engpsh Proficiency Level69-70

    5.3.2 Independent-Samples T-test Analysis for the Results Gained by L2 Learners with Higher Engpsh Proficiency Level70-72

    5.3.3 Descriptive Statistics of the Results for the Two Groups of L2 Learners with Lower Engpsh Proficiency Level72-73

    5.3.4 Independent-Samples T-test Analysis for the Results Gained by L2 Learners with Lower Engpsh Proficiency Level73-74

    5.4 Results of the Delayed Vocabulary Test74-78

    5.4.1 Descriptive Statistics of the Results for the Two Groups of L2 Learners with Higher Engpsh Proficiency Level74-75

    5.4.2 Independent-Samples T-test Analysis for the Results Gained by L2 Learners with Higher Engpsh Proficiency Level75-76

    5.4.3 Descriptive Statistics of the Results for the Two Groups of L2 Learners with Lower Engpsh Proficiencv76-77

    5.4.4 Independent-Samples T-test Analysis for the Results Gained by L2 Learners withLower Engpsh Proifciency Level77-78

    5.5 Comparison between the Immediate Vocabulary Test and the Delayed Vocabulary Testfor Each Group78-85

    5.5.1 Comparison for the Experimental Group with Different Engpsh Proficiency Levels78-80

    5.5.2 Paired-Samples T-test Analysis for the Experimental Groups80-81

    5.5.3 Comparison for the Control Group with Different Engpsh Proficiency Levels81-83

    5.5.4 Paired-Samples T-test Analysis for the Control Groups83-85

    Chapter 6 Conclusion85-91

    6.1 Findings85-89

    6.1.1 Effects of Frame Semantics on L2 Vocabulary Acquisition85-87

    6.1.2 Effects of Frame Semantics on L2 Learners with Different Proficiency Levels in the Target Language87-88

    6.1.3 Effects of Testing Time on Vocabulary Retention88-89

    6.2 Imppcations89-90

    6.3 Limitation of the Present Study and Suggestions for Further Research90-91

    Bibpography91-96

    List of Tables and Figures96-98

    Abbreviations98-99

    Acknowlegements99-100

    个人介绍100-101

    作者攻读硕士学位期间取得的学术成果目录101-102

    Appendix102-107

copyright 2003-2024 Copyright©2020 Powered by 网络信息技术有限公司 备案号: 粤2017400971号