句對閱讀中的連貫作用
-
周 妘珊
周妘珊 : 臺灣師範大學華語文教學系碩士畢業, 研究方向及興趣主要為認知語言學、對外漢語教學、閱讀相關議題研究。目前在大腦與學習實驗室擔任研究助理。Yunshan Chou obtained her M.A. degree from National Taiwan Normal University in 2020. She was a gradate student at Department of Chinese as a Second Language, NTNU. Currently, she is a research assistant at Brain and Learning LAB. Her main research interests include Cognitive Linguistics, TCSL, and reading-related issues.
周妘珊 : 臺灣師範大學華語文教學系碩士畢業, 研究方向及興趣主要為認知語言學、對外漢語教學、閱讀相關議題研究。目前在大腦與學習實驗室擔任研究助理。Yunshan Chou obtained her M.A. degree from National Taiwan Normal University in 2020. She was a gradate student at Department of Chinese as a Second Language, NTNU. Currently, she is a research assistant at Brain and Learning LAB. Her main research interests include Cognitive Linguistics, TCSL, and reading-related issues.
提 要
本文旨在探究漢語母語者閱讀由不同因果關聯以及語意關聯所組成之連貫句對時, 連貫關係作用於句對處理之影響。整個實驗透過E-Prime軟體進行, 調查母語者閱讀不同句對時, 其反應在連貫性評估、目標句閱讀時間以及目標句回憶表現的情況與差異。研究結果發現, 首先, 當因果關聯的連貫關係高, 受試者認為該句對較有連貫性, 語意關聯亦是如此。第二, 因果關聯高的句對, 其目標句閱讀時間較短;語意關聯的效果僅在高因果時, 使高語意的目標句閱讀時間較低語意來得快。第三, 受試者閱讀因果關聯和語意關聯皆高的句對時, 其目標句回憶表現較佳。
Abstract
During the reading process, the successful understanding of the text comes from a consistent mental representation (Kintsch, 1988), and mental representation is inseparable from coherence relation (Hobbs, 1979). Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of coherence on the sentence pairs reflected in the reading time, coherence judgment, and recall performance when native Chinese speakers read the four types of coherent sentence pairs. The sentence pairs are composed of high/low causal relatedness and high/low semantic relatedness. The entire research was conducted through E-Prime Professional 2.0.
The research findings are as follows: (1) The main effect of both causal relatedness and semantic relatedness on reading time is significant: causal relatedness, F1 (1, 62) = 94.56, p = 0.000; F2 (1, 62) = 67.95, p = 0.000 (high causal, M = 2,192.62 vs. low causal, M = 3,057.71); semantic relatedness, F1 (1, 62) = 5.31, p = 0.02 (high semantic, M = 2,717.57 vs. low semantic, M = 2,532.77). When sentences have high causal relatedness, high semantic sentence pair is faster than low semantic of the simple main effect (high semantic, M = 2,039.27 vs. low semantic, M = 2,345.98). When sentences have low causal relatedness, high semantic sentence pair is slower than low semantic (high semantic, M = 3,395.87 vs. low semantic, M = 2,719.56). (2) The main effect of both causal relatedness and semantic relatedness on coherence judgment is significant: causal relatedness, F1 (1, 62) = 1,212.66, p = 0.000; F2 (1, 62) = 2,670.82, p = 0.000 (high causal, M = 1.96 vs. low causal, M = 1.17); semantic relatedness, F1 (1, 62) = 58.08, p = 0.000; F2 (1, 62) = 55.684, p = 0.000 (high semantic, M = 1.63 vs. low semantic, M = 1.50). (3) The main effect of both causal relatedness and semantic relatedness on recall performance is significant: causal relatedness, F1 (1, 62) = 70.57, p = 0.000; F2 (1, 62) = 80.363, p = 0.000 (high causal, M = 0.67 vs. low causal, M = 0.52); semantic relatedness, F1 (1, 62) = 93.94, p = 0.000; F2 (1, 62) = 59.460, p = 0.000 (high semantic, M = 0.67 vs. low semantic, M = 0.17). In general, this study shows that semantic relatedness plays an important role just as causal relatedness to judge whether a sentence pair is coherent or not. Also, causal relatedness effectively promotes the processing speed of sentence pairs, while the effect of semantic relatedness is not as strong as causal relatedness. Lastly, both of these coherence relations are beneficial to the quality of the recall performance in terms of short-term memory.
About the authors
周妘珊: 臺灣師範大學華語文教學系碩士畢業, 研究方向及興趣主要為認知語言學、對外漢語教學、閱讀相關議題研究。目前在大腦與學習實驗室擔任研究助理。
Yunshan Chou obtained her M.A. degree from National Taiwan Normal University in 2020. She was a gradate student at Department of Chinese as a Second Language, NTNU. Currently, she is a research assistant at Brain and Learning LAB. Her main research interests include Cognitive Linguistics, TCSL, and reading-related issues.
蕭惠貞: 博士 (紐約州立大學水牛城分校), 現任臺灣師範大學, 華語文教學系暨研究所教授, 研究方向及興趣主要為認知語言學、詞彚語義學、對外漢語教學及應用語言學。主要論著有《認知語言學視角下之華語教學實證探究》與 《 臺灣華語萬花筒 華語看世界》。
Prof. Huichen S. Hsiao obtained her Ph. D. degree from Univtersity at Buffalo, SUNY in 2009. Currently, she is a professor at Department of Chinese as a Second Language, National Taiwan Normal University. Dr. Hsiao got her Ph. D. in Linguistics from University at Buffalo, SUNY. Her major research interests include Cognitive Linguistics, Lexical Semantics, TCSL, and Applied Linguistics. Her main publication is “Cognitive Linguistic-inspired Perspectives and Empirical Studies of Teaching Chinese as a Second Language”, and “Key to the World: A Kaleidoscope of Taiwan.”.
周妘珊: 臺灣師範大學華語文教學系碩士畢業, 研究方向及興趣主要為認知語言學、對外漢語教學、閱讀相關議題研究。目前在大腦與學習實驗室擔任研究助理。
Yunshan Chou obtained her M.A. degree from National Taiwan Normal University in 2020. She was a gradate student at Department of Chinese as a Second Language, NTNU. Currently, she is a research assistant at Brain and Learning LAB. Her main research interests include Cognitive Linguistics, TCSL, and reading-related issues.
蕭惠貞: 博士 (紐約州立大學水牛城分校), 現任臺灣師範大學, 華語文教學系暨研究所教授, 研究方向及興趣主要為認知語言學、詞彚語義學、對外漢語教學及應用語言學。主要論著有《認知語言學視角下之華語教學實證探究》與 《 臺灣華語萬花筒 華語看世界》。
Prof. Huichen S. Hsiao obtained her Ph. D. degree from Univtersity at Buffalo, SUNY in 2009. Currently, she is a professor at Department of Chinese as a Second Language, National Taiwan Normal University. Dr. Hsiao got her Ph. D. in Linguistics from University at Buffalo, SUNY. Her major research interests include Cognitive Linguistics, Lexical Semantics, TCSL, and Applied Linguistics. Her main publication is “Cognitive Linguistic-inspired Perspectives and Empirical Studies of Teaching Chinese as a Second Language”, and “Key to the World: A Kaleidoscope of Taiwan.”.
致謝 (Acknowledgements)
感謝所有曾參與本實驗的受試者。本研究感謝CASLAR期刊匿名審稿人的建議。最後, 感謝臺灣科技部計畫經費挹注 (MOST 106-2410-H-003-060), 使本研究與實驗得以順利完成。文中若有任何疏漏, 責在作者。
附錄一(Appendix I): 回憶測驗範例(以清單一為例)
附錄二(Appendix II): 目標句閱讀時間、連貫性判斷、目標句回憶表現之單純主效果分析
目標句閱讀時間之單純主效果分析 (N = 64)
| 變異來源 | SS | df | MS | F | p | ηp2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 因果關聯(C) | ||||||
| at 語意關聯高 | 58,891,547.10 | 1 | 58,891,547.10 | 119.13 | 0.000*** | 0.490 |
| at 語意關聯低 | 4,465,972.57 | 1 | 4,465,972.57 | 9.03 | 0.003** | 0.067 |
| 誤差 | 61,300,447.43 | 124 | 494,358.45 | |||
| 語意關聯(S) | ||||||
| at 因果關聯高 | 3,010,155.00 | 1 | 3,010,155.00 | 6.74 | 0.01* | 0.051 |
| at 因果關聯低 | 14,636,884.98 | 1 | 14,636,884.98 | 32.77 | 0.000*** | 0.209 |
| 誤差 | 22,713,054.10 | 124 | 298,855.98 | |||
連貫性判斷之單純主效果分析 (N = 64)
| 變異來源 | SS | df | MS | F | p | ηp2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 因果關聯(C) | ||||||
| at 語意關聯高 | 16.36 | 1 | 16.36 | 817.96 | 0.000*** | 0.868 |
| at 語意關聯低 | 24.50 | 1 | 24.50 | 1,225.00 | 0.000*** | 0.908 |
| 誤差 | 2.48 | 124 | 0.02 | |||
| 語意關聯(S) | ||||||
| at 因果關聯高 | 0.08 | 1 | 0.08 | 8.00 | 0.005** | 0.060 |
| at 因果關聯低 | 1.41 | 1 | 1.41 | 141.12 | 0.000*** | 0.532 |
| 誤差 | 1.24 | 124 | 0.01 | |||
目標句回憶測驗表現之單純主效果分析 (N = 64)
| 變異來源 | SS | df | MS | F | p | ηp2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 因果關聯(C) | ||||||
| at 語意關聯高 | 0.17 | 1 | 0.17 | 8.14 | 0.005** | 0.006 |
| at 語意關聯低 | 1.77 | 1 | 1.77 | 86.17 | 0.000*** | 0.410 |
| 誤差 | 2.54 | 124 | 0.02 | |||
| 語意關聯(S) | ||||||
| at 因果關聯高 | 0.21 | 1 | 0.21 | 10.91 | 0.001** | 0.080 |
| at 因果關聯低 | 1.89 | 1 | 1.89 | 99.66 | 0.000*** | 0.445 |
| 誤差 | 2.36 | 124 | 0.02 | |||
參考文獻 [References]
Bayraktar, Hasan. 2014. The impact of coherence relations on text comprehension of Turkish EFL readers. Journal of Theory & Practice in Education 10(4). 1120–1142. https://doi.org/10.17244/eku.86379.Suche in Google Scholar
Chen, Minglei, Hsuehcheng Wang & Hwawei Ko (陳明蕾、王學誠、柯華葳). 2009. Zhongwen yuyikongjian jianzhi ji xinlixiaodu yanzheng: yi qianzaiyuyi fenxijishu wei jichu 中文語意空間建置及心理效度驗證: 以潛在語意分析技術為基礎 [The construction and validation of chinese semantic space by using latent semantic analysis]. Zhonghua xinli xuekan 《中華心理學刊》 [Chinese Journal of Psychology] 51(4). 415–435.Suche in Google Scholar
Connell, Louise & Mark T. Keane. 2004. What plausibility affects plausibility? Concept-coherence and distributional word coherence as factors influencing plausibility judgments. Memory and Cognition 32(2). 185–197. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03196851.Suche in Google Scholar
Dandotkar, Srikanth, Joseph P. Magliano & M. Anne Britt. 2016. Effect logical relatedness and semantic overlap on argument evaluation. Discourse Processes 53(7). 581–602. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853x.2015.1087295.Suche in Google Scholar
Graesser, Arthur C., Murray Singer & Tom Trabasso. 1994. Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review 101(3). 371–395. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.101.3.371.Suche in Google Scholar
Graesser, Arthur C., Keith K. Millis & Rolf A. Zwaan. 1997. Discourse comprehension. Annual Review of Psychology 48(1). 163–189. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.163.Suche in Google Scholar
Hobbs, Jerry R. 1979. Coherence and coreference. Cognitive Science 3(1). 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0301_4.Suche in Google Scholar
Horowitz, Rosalind. 1987. Rhetorical structure in discourse processing. In Rosalind Horowitz & S. Jay Samuels (eds.), Comprehending Oral and Written Language, 117–160. San Diego, CA, US: Academic Press.10.1163/9789004653436_008Suche in Google Scholar
Kintsch, Walter. 1988. The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review 95(2). 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.95.2.163.Suche in Google Scholar
Kintsch, Walter & Teun A. van Dijk. 1978. Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review 85(5). 363–394. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.85.5.363.Suche in Google Scholar
Li, Ying, Lei Mo & Ruiming Wang (李瑩、莫雷、王瑞明). 2007. Jixuwenzhong yinguo lianguan dui kongjianqing jingmoxing huisujiangou de cujin 記敘文中因果連貫對空間情境模型回溯建構的促進 [Effect of causal coherence on backward construction of situation model of space during narrative comprehension]. Xinlifazhan yu jiaoyu 《心理發展與教育》 [Psychological Development and Education] 2007(3). 79–88.Suche in Google Scholar
Meyer, Bonnie J. F. & Roy O. Freedle. 1984. Effects of discourse type on recall. American Educational Research Journal 21(1). 121–143. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312021001121.Suche in Google Scholar
Morishima, Yasunori. 2016. Elaborations for the validation of causal bridging inferences in text comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 45(4). 961–977. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-015-9387-x.Suche in Google Scholar
Myers, Jerome L., Makiko Shinjo & Susan A. Duffy. 1987. Degree of causal relatedness and memory. Journal of Memory and Language 26(4). 453–465. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596x(87)90101-x.Suche in Google Scholar
Nahatame, Shingo. 2017. Standards of coherence in second language reading: Sentence connectivity and reading proficiency. Reading in a Foreign Language 29(1). 86–112.Suche in Google Scholar
Sanders, Ted J. M. & Leo G. M. Noordman. 2000. The role of coherence relations and their linguistic markers in text processing. Discourse Processes 29(1). 37–60. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp2901_3.Suche in Google Scholar
Singer, Murray. 1993. Causal bridging inferences: Validating consistent and inconsistent sequences. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 47(2). 340–359. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0078825.Suche in Google Scholar
Singer, Murray & Michael Halldorson. 1996. Constructing and validating motive bridging inferences. Cognitive Psychology 30(1). 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1996.0001.Suche in Google Scholar
Todaro, Stacey, Keith Millis & Srikanth Dandotkar. 2010. The impact of semantic and causal relatedness and reading skill on standards of coherence. Journal of Memory and Language 47(5). 421–446. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638530903253825.Suche in Google Scholar
Wittwer, Jörg & Natalie Ihme. 2014. Reading skill moderates the impact of semantic similarity and causal specificity on the coherence of explanations. Discourse Processes 51(1–2). 143–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853x.2013.855577.Suche in Google Scholar
Wolfe, Michael B. W., Joseph P. Magliano & Benjamin Larsen. 2005. Causal and semantic relatedness in discourse understanding and representation. Discourse Processes: A Multidisciplinary Journal 39(2–3). 165–187. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp3902&3_4.10.1207/s15326950dp3902&3_4Suche in Google Scholar
Wu, Limei & Lei Mo (伍麗梅、莫雷). 2010. Shuomingwen yueduzhong jubulianguan yinguotuili de chansheng 說明文閱讀中局部連貫因果推理的產生 [Constructing causal inference for local coherence in expository text comprehension]. Xinlixuebao 《心理學報》 [Acta Psychologica Sinica] 2010(2). 200–215. https://doi.org/10.3724/sp.j.1041.2010.00200.Suche in Google Scholar
Wu, Limei & Lei Mo (伍麗梅、莫雷). 2012. Shuomingwen yueduzhong zhengtilianguan yinguotuili de chansheng 說明文閱讀中整體連貫因果推理的產生 [Constructing causal inference for global coherence in expository text comprehension]. Huanan shifandaxue xuebao (shehuikexueban) 《華南師範大學學報(社會科學版)》 [Journal of South China Normal University (Social Science Editon)] 2012(3). 40–49.Suche in Google Scholar
Yu, Yi (余意). 1999. Waiyu xuexizhe yuedugushi de yinguotuili moshi 外語學習者閱讀故事的因果推理模式 [The causal reasoning model of foreign language learners in story reading]. Xiandai waiyu 《現代外語》 [Modern Foreign Languages] 1999(4). 399–407.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Research Articles
- Situation-bound utterances in Chinese as a foreign language: the effectiveness of the identification task
- CFL learners’ Mandarin syllable-tone word production: effects of task and prior phonological and lexical learning
- Input enhancement improved L2 learners’ production of Chinese classifiers
- 句對閱讀中的連貫作用
- 汉语国际教育专业硕士语法教学能力评价: 基于对五位汉硕生趋向补语教学视频的剖析
- 香港大专生普通话学习中“了”的偏误分析: 对体习得普遍趋势和多语教学的启示
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Research Articles
- Situation-bound utterances in Chinese as a foreign language: the effectiveness of the identification task
- CFL learners’ Mandarin syllable-tone word production: effects of task and prior phonological and lexical learning
- Input enhancement improved L2 learners’ production of Chinese classifiers
- 句對閱讀中的連貫作用
- 汉语国际教育专业硕士语法教学能力评价: 基于对五位汉硕生趋向补语教学视频的剖析
- 香港大专生普通话学习中“了”的偏误分析: 对体习得普遍趋势和多语教学的启示
