本文選題：詞匯豐富性 + 詞匯多樣性��； 參考：《華東師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：語言學(xué)習(xí)者首先要學(xué)習(xí)的就是詞匯,因為無論是書面表達(dá)還是口頭表達(dá),都需要相關(guān)的詞匯知識才能表達(dá)意義。國內(nèi)外研究均表明,在學(xué)習(xí)第二語言的過程中,詞匯能力對于二語學(xué)習(xí)者來說是較難習(xí)得的一項基本能力之一。研究發(fā)現(xiàn)詞匯能力的的欠缺會給一些外語學(xué)習(xí)者的寫作能力造成困難,而詞匯也是決定寫作質(zhì)量的最重要因素之一。盡管國內(nèi)外在詞匯的發(fā)展特征方面都有大量研究,但是并沒有哪項研究提出并構(gòu)建了系統(tǒng)全面的詞匯發(fā)展模型。同時,在梳理文獻(xiàn)過程中研究者也發(fā)現(xiàn),針對詞匯發(fā)展的有效的歷時研究并不多見。因此此研究將嘗試通過一個為期四年的歷時研究來探究詞匯在豐富性方面的發(fā)展特征。研究問題如下:1.詞匯豐富性在詞匯多樣性、詞匯密度、詞匯復(fù)雜度、以及詞匯頻率分布四個維度的發(fā)展特征是怎樣的?2.不同語言水平的學(xué)生之間在詞匯多樣性的發(fā)展特征方面是否有不同?3.寫作水平與詞匯豐富性之間是否相關(guān)?在此研究中,本文作者選取英語專業(yè)課程改革數(shù)據(jù)庫中的部分語料作為分析對象,該語料由就讀于上海某高校的52名英語專業(yè)學(xué)生在四年內(nèi)的四次考試中的作文構(gòu)成。研究使用了包括Antword Profiler和SPSS在內(nèi)的多項工具來處理和分析數(shù)據(jù)。經(jīng)過深入分析數(shù)據(jù)后,所得結(jié)果如下:1.詞匯豐富性的四個維度的發(fā)展特征。1)在詞匯多樣性方面,英語專業(yè)學(xué)生在四年學(xué)習(xí)期間取得了很大進(jìn)步,其中第一年到第二年期間的增長在數(shù)據(jù)上達(dá)到顯著。但在隨后的兩年中,詞匯多樣性的發(fā)展表現(xiàn)出了 "詞匯高原"現(xiàn)象。2)詞匯密度在四年學(xué)習(xí)期間也取得了進(jìn)步,但在第一年到第二年期間有些許退步。從第二年開始,詞匯密度逐年提高,但是相鄰兩年內(nèi)增長在數(shù)據(jù)上并不顯著,第一年到第四年的總體增長在數(shù)據(jù)上是顯著的。3)詞匯復(fù)雜度在四年里以不同的速度逐年提高。在第一年到第二年和第三年到第四年兩個區(qū)間內(nèi),學(xué)生的詞匯復(fù)雜度都有顯著的提高,而在第二年到第三年期間,詞匯復(fù)雜度的發(fā)展進(jìn)入了停滯期。但停滯期只短暫的持續(xù)了一年,隨后詞匯復(fù)雜度又得到了顯著發(fā)展。4)在詞匯頻率分布方面,盡管在四年里高頻率詞匯的使用顯著下降,英語專業(yè)學(xué)生仍有濫用高頻率詞匯的現(xiàn)象,而在相對"第一個常用1000詞詞匯表"頻率更低的"第二個常用1000詞"上,學(xué)生的使用率在四年間有顯著增長。因此結(jié)合詞匯復(fù)雜度的結(jié)論來看,隨著英語學(xué)習(xí)時間的增加,英語專業(yè)學(xué)生更傾向于多用低頻率詞匯。2.不同語言水平的學(xué)習(xí)者之間在詞匯豐富性發(fā)展特征上的相似之處和不同之處。1)低水平學(xué)習(xí)者的詞匯豐富性水平在除了詞匯密度以外的其他各維度上都低與中間水平和高水平學(xué)習(xí)者,且他們的差距在數(shù)據(jù)上有顯著性。2)雖然高水平學(xué)習(xí)者和中間水平學(xué)習(xí)者的詞匯豐富性水平之間不存在顯著性差異,但是后者相比前者在四年間的發(fā)展的速度更慢且具有更大的波動性。3.寫作水平與詞匯豐富性之間的相關(guān)性。1)寫作水平和詞匯豐富性各維度之間的相關(guān)不盡相同。2)寫作水平與詞匯多樣性、詞匯復(fù)雜度、以及前2000常用高頻詞的占比都有顯著的相關(guān)性。3)寫作水平與詞匯密度沒有顯著的相關(guān)性。
[Abstract]:Language learners should learn is vocabulary, because whether it is written or verbal expression, are relevant to the needs of vocabulary to express meaning. Both domestic and foreign research shows that in the process of learning a second language, vocabulary is one of the basic ability to acquire better for two language learners who study found. The lack of vocabulary ability will cause difficulties in some foreign language learners' writing competence, vocabulary is one of the most important factors deciding the quality of writing. Although the development characteristics at home and abroad have a lot of words, but no study proposes and constructs a vocabulary development model system comprehensively. At the same time, the research on combing the researchers also found that in the process, according to the diachronic study of effective vocabulary development is rare. Therefore this research will attempt by a four year longitudinal study to explore In terms of the characteristics of rich vocabulary development. The research questions are as follows: 1. lexical richness in lexical variation, lexical density, lexical complexity, and the characteristics of the development of lexical frequency distribution in four dimensions is? Between 2. different language proficiency levels and whether students in the development of lexical diversity has different characteristics of 3.? The level of writing and vocabulary is the correlation between? In this study, the author of this paper selects part of the curriculum reform of English Majors in the corpus database as the analysis object, by studying the corpus of 52 English in the University of Shanghai students' professional examinations for the four time in four years in the compositions. Research using a number of tools including Antword Profiler and SPSS, the data processing and analysis. After analyzing the data, the results are as follows: 1. the four dimensions of vocabulary development characteristics of diversity in the word.1) exchange English majors, has made great progress during the four years of study, during the first second years of growth significantly in the data. But in the following two years, the development of lexical diversity showed "vocabulary plateau" phenomenon.2) lexical density in four years has made progress during learning but, in the first year to second years. Some decline from the second year, the lexical density increased year by year, but the growth is not significant between two years in the data, the first year to fourth years of overall growth in the data is significant.3) lexical complexity in four years at different speeds increase year by year in the first year to second and third to fourth years of the two interval, the students' vocabulary complexity are improved significantly, and in the second years to third years, the development of lexical complexity has entered a period of stagnation. But only a short period of stagnation For a year, then lexical complexity has been a significant development in terms of the frequency distribution of.4), although in the four years the use of high frequency words decreased significantly, English majors still have high frequency vocabulary abuse phenomenon, and in the relative "the first 1000 words commonly used vocabulary" lower frequency "second a commonly used 1000 words", the students use rate increased significantly in four years. So the combination of lexical complexity conclusion, with the increase of English learning time, English majors tend to use more similarities and differences in lexical richness.1 development characteristics between the low-frequency words.2. different language level learners) low level learners' vocabulary richness level in addition to other dimensions of lexical density is low and middle level and high level learners, and the gap between them was significant in.2 data) Although a high level of learning, there are no significant differences between them and the intermediate level learners' lexical richness level, but compared with the former four years in the development of more slowly and with greater volatility.3. writing level and rich vocabulary.1 correlations between) between the writing and lexical richness of each dimension related is not the same as the.2) writing level and lexical variation, lexical complexity, as well as the top 2000 common high-frequency words are accounted for.3 had a significant correlation) no significant correlation between the level of writing and lexical density.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：H319.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王海華;周祥;;非英語專業(yè)大學(xué)生寫作中詞匯豐富性變化的歷時研究[J];外語與外語教學(xué);2012年02期

2 龍滿英;許家金;;大學(xué)生英漢同題議論文中立場標(biāo)記的對比研究[J];外語與外語教學(xué);2010年03期

3 萬麗芳;;中國英語專業(yè)大學(xué)生二語寫作中的詞匯豐富性研究[J];外語界;2010年01期

4 劉文慧;陽志清;;英語專業(yè)學(xué)生筆語詞匯發(fā)展研究[J];中南大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2009年02期

5 鮑貴;;二語學(xué)習(xí)者作文詞匯豐富性發(fā)展多緯度研究[J];外語電化教學(xué);2008年05期

6 盧敏;;產(chǎn)出性詞匯知識廣度的發(fā)展特征——基于英語專業(yè)學(xué)生書面語的研究[J];外語教學(xué)理論與實踐;2008年02期

7 梁茂成;;中國大學(xué)生英語筆語中的情態(tài)序列研究[J];外語教學(xué)與研究;2008年01期

8 譚曉晨;;英語學(xué)習(xí)者產(chǎn)出性詞匯深度知識發(fā)展的研究[J];外語教學(xué);2007年02期

9 崔艷嫣;王同順;;接受性詞匯量、產(chǎn)出性詞匯量與詞匯深度知識的發(fā)展路徑及其相關(guān)性研究[J];現(xiàn)代外語;2006年04期

10 文秋芳;;英語專業(yè)學(xué)生使用口語-筆語詞匯的差異[J];外語與外語教學(xué);2006年07期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 紀(jì)小凌;中國英語專業(yè)學(xué)生二語寫作中的發(fā)展特征[D];上海外國語大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號：1732568