中国高级英语学习者对反义关系的习得.pptVIP

中国高级英语学习者对反义关系的习得? 山东大学外国语学院 王勇 摘要 根据国外研究者对反义关系典型性的研究，本文作者设计了一套76对反义词对，对山东某大学英语专业三年级学生和美国某高校的本族语者进行了反义关系典型性判断的测试，并将测试结果进行对比，以期找出中国高级英语学习者在反义关系习得方面的规律，并对结果做出解释。实验结果表明，中国高级英语学习者在部分反义词对的判断上与英语本族语者有着显著差异，这些显著差异在典型性反义词和一般性反义词中均有反映，其原因较为复杂，包括但不限于反义词对的共现频率、语义范围以及概念对立性；其中反义词对的共现频率及MI值对于中国高级英语学习者及英语本族语者的反义词对典型性判断测试具有最强烈的影响。同时，对某些反义词对进行了案例研究，深入探讨了上述因素对于反义词对典型性判断的影响。 Canonicity of antonymous pairs反义词对的典型性 “Language users can intuitively sort ‘good’ (or prototypical) antonyms from not-so-good ones and downright bad ones” (Murphy, 2003: 11). This is often referred to as the ‘clang phenomenon’ – a term used to describe the reaction to those pairs that intuitively strike the hearer as being good ‘opposites’ (Charles and Miller, 1989; Muehleisen, 1997). The following working definition of canonical antonyms is adopted in this thesis: Canonicity of antonymous pairs反义词对的典型性 Canonical antonyms are pairs of words in binary semantic opposition associated by convention as well as by semantic relatedness (e.g. wide/narrow). The notion of canonical antonymy is different from semantic opposition in which the meanings are incompatible, but the words are not necessarily conventionally paired (e.g. cold/scorching, calm/nervous). antonymous pairs反义词对的选择 The antonymous pairs used in the canonicity judgment task are mainly taken from two sources: that of Deese (1964) and Sabourin (1998). Deese (1964: 347-57) picked from the data from the psycholinguistic elicitation tests forty word pairs which he considered among the most important in English. Justeson and Katz used these antonyms in their research and regarded them as “historically important” (1991: 142). However, since Deese’s work was conducted before access to corpora was possible, it was based entirely on the results of word association tests. Deese chose 278 adjectives and used them to elicit response from 100 informants. When a pair of contrast words successfully elicited one another more than any other word, they were added to the