注意在二语动名词搭配习得中的差别效应

出版时间：1970-1  出版社：复旦大学出版社  作者：范烨  页数：260  

内容概要

　　《注意在二语动名词搭配习得中的差别效应》运用注意理论分析了学生习得二语动名词搭配的过程。作者研究了不同的注意形态在中国学生学习英语动名词搭配特征时所起的作用，以及这种作用是否受搭配模式的繁简程度和学生本身英语综合水平的影响。有关二语搭配习得的研究目前仍然较少，已有的研究主要集中于分析搭配错误而非动态的学习过程。《注意在二语动名词搭配习得中的差别效应》在这一领域作了一些探索，可供外语教学及二语习得研究者参考。

书籍目录

Chapter 1 Introduction1.1 Background1.2 Purpose and significance of this studyChapter 2 Literature Review2.1 The nature of collocations2.1.1 Types of eolloeatiom2.1.1.1 Grammatical and lexical collocations collocations and idioms2.1.1.3 Sunmarv of the types of collocations2.1.2 Collocations and rules2.1.3 Significance of coUocational knowledge2.2 Basic features of attention2.3 Acquisition of L1 collocations2.3.1 Implicit learning2.3.2 Implicit learning of L1 collocations2.3.2.1 Process of chunking2.3.2.2 Results of chunking2.3.2.3 Summary2.4 Acquisition of L2 collocations2.4.1 Problems in production2.4.2 Attention in learning I_2 collocations2.5 More issues about attention2.5.1 Attention in learning L2 syntax and morphology2.5.1.1 Attention at the level of noticing the Noticing Hypothesis2.5.1.2 Empirical evidence for the Noticing Hypothesis2.5.1.3 Attention at the level of nile understanding2.5.2 Attention in learning L2 word meaning2.5.3 Attention and different aspects of language2.5.3.1 Complexity of different language aspects2.5.3.2 The interaction between attention and complexity2.5.4 Attention and proficiency level2.5.5 The role of negative evidence2.5.6 Summary of the role of attention in SLAChapter 3 The Present Study3.1 Research questions3.2 Method3.2.1 Participants3.2.2 Linguistic items to be investigated3.2.3 Material and procedure3.2.3.1 Treatment3.2.3.2 Test and scoring3.2.3.3 Exit questionnaire3.3 Research hypothesesChapter 4 Results4.1 Acquisition of the basic meanings of the target verbs4.2 Production of collocates of the target verbs4.2.1 Classification of the IL production： procedure and method4.2.2 An overall picture of the collocate production4.2.2.1 Number of collocates4.2.2.2 Production of collocates for each target verb4.2.3 Production of old collocates4.2.4 Production of new collocates —— overall comparison4.2.5 Production of new target-like collocates4.2.6 Production of non-target-like collocates4.2.7 Production of semi-target-like collocates4.2.8 Summary of collocate production4.2.9 NS judgment of IL production4.3 Judgment of collocations of the target verbs4.3.1 Judgment of good collocations4.3.2 Judgment of bad collocations4.4 Summary of the test results4.5 Rule detection4.5.1 Semantic processing group4.5.2 Memorization for recall group4.6 Rule recall4.7 Three-day treatmentChapter 5 Analysis And Discussion5.1 Attention and acquisition of the basic meaning5.2 Attention and production of collocates5.2.1 Production of old collocates5.2.1.1 Overall effects of attention5.2.1.2 The interaction between attention and proficiency level5.2.1.2.1 The memorization for recall group （Level 2）5.2.1.2.2 The rule given plus negative evidence group （Level 2）5.2.2 Production of new target-like collocates5.2.2.1 Overall effects of attention5.2.2.2 The interaction between attention and proficiency level5.2.3 Production of non-target-like collocates5.2.3.1 The rule given group vs. semant/c processing group5.2.3.2 The rule given plus negative evidence group vs. ru/e given group5.2.3.3 The memorization for recall group vs. semantic processing group5.2.4 NS judgment of IL production5.3 Attention and judgment of collocations5.3.1 Judgment of good collocations5.3.2 Judgment of bad collocations5.4 The lack of interaction between attention and complexity5.5 SummaryLIST OF TABLESLIST OF FIGURESAppendix ATreatment Exercises for Semantic Processing Group（Day 1- Day 3）Appendix BTreatment Exercises for Memorization for RecallGroup （ Day 1- Day 3）Appendix CTreatment Exercises for Rule Given Group（Day 1- Day 3）Appendix DTreatment Exercises for Rule Given Plus NegativeEvidence Group （Day 1- Day 3）Appendix ETestBIBLIOGRAPHY……

章节摘录

　　all the target verb-noun collocations and asked to rank thedifficulty in classifying the noun collocates of each of the fourverbs. All of them agreed that it was easier to make theclassification for wield and warp than for make and take. The second reason for the distinction is related to thedifficulty in storing the patterns in LTM. The two types of nouncollocates of wield and warp， one concrete and the other abstract，can be easily associated with each other through metaphor. Forinstance， both power and weapon can follow wield， and powercan be regarded as a type of weapon. This metaphoricalrelationship can facilitate the retention of the two types ofcollocates. However， for the delexical use of make and take， thetwo types of noun collocates targeted in the study are unrelatedwith each other. For instance， the noun collocates of make ——speech and change —— refer to two disparate things. Obviously， itis more difficult to encode two unrelated items in LTM andassociate them with one verb than to store two related items.Moreover， as previously described， in their delexical use， thebasic meaning of make and take is somewhat reduced， so thesemantic connection between a delexical verb and its followingnoun is quite loose， which can make the long-term storage of thecombination even harder. In fact， besides the above two reasons， which are related tosemantic complexity， there is another factor that causes thecollocafional features of make and take to be more difficult tolearn， that is， the two verbs can take numerous types of nouns.However， to avoid confounding these two factors （the difficulty inacquiring a particular pattern and the quantity of patterns to beacquired）， this study will only target two collocational patterns foreach of the four target verbs.