發(fā)布時間：2018-06-10 16:38

  本文選題：可讀性公式 + 文本閱讀難度　； 參考：《蘭州大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：近年來,可讀性公式由于在測試文本難度時簡單易用和操作性高的特點受到了廣泛的關(guān)注。然而其信度和效度卻受到了很大的爭議。尤其在EFL領(lǐng)域,是否可以利用可讀性公式來測試文本難度成為很大的爭議。但是以往大多數(shù)研究都只是對可讀性公式進行簡單,片面的利用研究,沒有對多種可讀性公式進行綜合,全面的研究。本文綜合應(yīng)用了六種可讀性公式,通過Main Divergence和Index Means對可讀性公式結(jié)果的綜合分析探討了可讀性公式在測試EFL文本難度的可行性,旨在回答以下問題： (1)對EFL課本閱讀材料的可讀性指數(shù)進行綜合分析能否得出與在課本中的難度指數(shù)相符合的結(jié)果? (2)可讀性指數(shù)綜合分析得出的結(jié)果在不同語言水平的表現(xiàn)是否一致? (3)四個不同可讀性公式在測試文本難度得出的結(jié)果是否一致?如果不一致,哪個公式表現(xiàn)最好,哪個最差? 本文測試了四個語言水平的20篇EFL文本的難度。文本難度是通過對六個可讀性公式結(jié)果的綜合分析得出,對可讀性指數(shù)進行了Main Divergence和Index Means分析。結(jié)果顯示通過可讀性公式綜合分析得出的文本難度與其在課本中的文本難度有一定偏差。六個可讀性公式在測試難度水平最低和最高文本最能達到一致,而在難度中等的文本中分歧較大。我們可以得出可讀性公式在EFL領(lǐng)域的綜合應(yīng)用只能給我們一個大概的難度分類,對單個文本很難提供準確,有效的測試結(jié)果。
[Abstract]:In recent years, readability formulas have attracted wide attention due to their ease of use and high maneuverability in testing text. However, its reliability and validity have been greatly disputed. Especially in the field of EFL, it is controversial whether the readability formula can be used to test the text. However, most of the previous studies are only simple, one-sided use of the readability formula, there is no comprehensive and comprehensive study of the various readability formulas. In this paper, six kinds of readability formulas are synthetically applied, and the feasibility of the readability formula in testing the difficulty of EFL text is discussed through the comprehensive analysis of the results of main divergence and Index means. The purpose of this paper is to answer the following questions: (1) can a comprehensive analysis of the readability index of EFL textbooks produce a result consistent with the difficulty index in the textbook? (2) the results of the comprehensive analysis of the readability index are in different languages. Is Ping's performance consistent? (3) are the results of the four different readability formulas consistent in terms of the difficulty of testing the text? If not, which formula performs best and which is the worst? this paper tests the difficulty of 20 EFL texts at four language levels. The difficulty of the text is obtained by synthetically analyzing the results of the six readability formulas, and the main divergence and Index means are used to analyze the readability index. The results show that there is a deviation between the difficulty of the text and the difficulty of the text in the textbook by comprehensive analysis of the readability formula. The six readability formulas are the most consistent in the lowest and the highest text level, but diverge in the middle difficulty text. We can conclude that the comprehensive application of readability formula in EFL can only give us a rough classification of difficulty, and it is difficult to provide accurate and effective test results for a single text.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：H09

【共引文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 安衛(wèi)華;;我國開展兒童分級閱讀研究的探討[J];科技情報開發(fā)與經(jīng)濟;2014年16期

2 馬立東;;英語單詞音節(jié)計數(shù)算法分析及改進[J];信息技術(shù);2014年11期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 張磊;英文文本自動分類系統(tǒng)研究與算法改進[D];江西師范大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號：2003889