普通話兒童疑問詞原位習(xí)得研究
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2019-01-08 15:18
【摘要】：疑問詞原位現(xiàn)象在伊拉克阿拉伯語,法語,印地文,馬來文,黎巴嫩阿拉伯語,日語,韓語和漢語等不同語言中是有所不同的。對(duì)于普通話來說,疑問詞原位可以有以下幾種解讀：(1)單元疑問句；(2)多元疑問句；(3)長(zhǎng)距離邏輯式疑問詞移位；(4)驢句；(5)否定極詞。在邏輯式層面上,所有這些疑問詞原位的表達(dá)式都可以由(6)這樣的算子-變量結(jié)構(gòu)表達(dá)出來。其中,疑問短語在語義上可以被拆分為算子(OP),變量(VAR)(x),約束(RES)和轄域(SCOPE): (6)[CP(OP,VAR(x),RES) C [Scope…x…]] 除了有大量文獻(xiàn)探討(6)表達(dá)式的衍生以及它在疑問詞移位和疑問詞原位中的條件,也不乏很多關(guān)于疑問詞移位的習(xí)得研究,而對(duì)于疑問詞原位習(xí)得的研究卻是寥寥可數(shù),更有甚者,幾乎沒有關(guān)于多元疑問句和驢句的習(xí)得研究。 本研究試圖從普通話兒童習(xí)得疑問詞原位的大量數(shù)據(jù)中對(duì)以上幾種解讀進(jìn)行分析并給出一些嘗試性的解釋。相關(guān)的習(xí)得數(shù)據(jù)是來自2歲6個(gè)月到7歲11個(gè)月的698名普通話兒童完成的問題匹配圖片任務(wù)。該試驗(yàn)的結(jié)果可總結(jié)如下： (一)3歲5個(gè)月以下的兒童中有50%能夠理解疑問句的疑問屬性；4歲到4歲11個(gè)月達(dá)到80%；5歲幾乎能達(dá)到100%。 (二)在疑問詞原位的習(xí)得發(fā)展中,兒童對(duì)于算子變量結(jié)構(gòu)中的約束是敏感的�！笆录焙汀叭宋铩钡募s束要易于“時(shí)間”、“地點(diǎn)”、“工具”和“方式”。最難的約束是“原因”。 (三)兒童對(duì)于變量的數(shù)目和出現(xiàn)次數(shù)也是相當(dāng)敏感的。多元疑問句和驢句都是多個(gè)變量,所以它們的習(xí)得要難于單元疑問句。 (四)從顯性移位語言中的長(zhǎng)距離疑問詞移位中我們可以看到兒童對(duì)于Spec-CP和原位疑問詞的距離也是敏感的。超過40%的2歲6個(gè)月到4歲5個(gè)月的兒童和20%4歲6個(gè)月到7歲11個(gè)月的兒童在理解含有復(fù)雜NP的疑問短語的疑問句上有困難。 (五)疑問句的習(xí)得過程與極詞的習(xí)得過程基本保持一致。 這些關(guān)于習(xí)得研究的事實(shí)表明： (六)兒童被賦予先驗(yàn)知識(shí)：(1)識(shí)別句類(包括C[+WH])；(2)算子變量結(jié)構(gòu)的邏輯概念；(3)變量約束；(4)疑問句和驢句中null-OP[wH]的詞匯選項(xiàng)。如Crain(2012)所述有關(guān)邏輯連詞的本質(zhì),這些都是UG的一部分,在基本數(shù)據(jù)的基礎(chǔ)上需要時(shí)間來圈定詞匯選項(xiàng)或重新內(nèi)化(Chomsky,2004).這就是為什么一些年幼的兒童在解讀疑問句和驢句上比年長(zhǎng)的兒童要緩慢,而年長(zhǎng)的兒童在所有題項(xiàng)上都要好于年幼的兒童。 (七)算子變量結(jié)構(gòu)的運(yùn)算復(fù)雜性調(diào)節(jié)著兒童習(xí)得發(fā)展的時(shí)間軸。多元疑問句中典型的配對(duì)解讀依附于同一從句中一個(gè)疑問算子約束兩個(gè)以上的變量：0P{WH}(X,y)(…x…y…),但在驢句中,一個(gè)疑問算子是在兩個(gè)從句中約束兩次出現(xiàn)的同一變量：OP{WH}(x1,x2)((…x1…)(…x2…)).這種復(fù)雜的計(jì)算使得多元疑問句和驢句的習(xí)得變成了一個(gè)漫長(zhǎng)的過程。這不能被歸因于工作記憶的負(fù)擔(dān)。
[Abstract]:The in situ phenomenon of interrogative words is different in different languages, such as Iraqi Arabic, French, Hindi, Malay, Lebanese Arabic, Japanese, Korean and Chinese. For Putonghua, interrogative words in situ can be interpreted as follows: (1) unit interrogative sentences; (2) multiple interrogative sentences; (3) long distance logical interrogative words shift; (4) donkey sentences; (5) negative polar words. At the logical level, all these expressions in situ can be expressed by the operator-variable structure (6). Among them, question phrases can be semantically split into operator (OP), variable (VAR) (x), constraint (RES) and domain (SCOPE): (6) [CP (OP,VAR (x), RES) C [Scope]. X.] In addition to a great deal of literature on the derivation of expression and its conditions in interrogative word shift and interrogative word in situ, there is also a lot of research on the acquisition of interrogative word shift, but there are few researches on interrogative word in situ acquisition. Moreover, there is little research on the acquisition of multiple questions and donkey sentences. This study attempts to analyze the above interpretations and give some tentative explanations from a large number of data on the acquisition of interrogative words in Putonghua. The relevant acquisition data were from 698 Putonghua children aged 2 years 6 months to 7 years 11 months. The results of the experiment can be summarized as follows: (1) 50% of children under 3 years of age and 5 months can understand the interrogative attribute of interrogative sentence, and 80% of the children aged 4 to 4 years 11 months can almost reach 100%. (2) in the development of in situ acquisition of interrogative words, children are sensitive to constraints in the structure of operator variables. Events and people are easily constrained by time, place, tool, and manner. The most difficult constraint is the cause. (III) Children are also sensitive to the number and frequency of variables. Multiple questions and donkey sentences are multiple variables, so they are difficult to acquire. (4) from the shift of long distance interrogative words in explicit shift language, we can see that children are also sensitive to the distance between Spec-CP and in situ interrogative words. More than 40 percent of children aged 2 years, 6 months to 4 months old and 5 months old and 20 years, 6 months to 7 months old and 11 months old have difficulty understanding interrogative sentences containing complex NP phrases. (5) the acquisition process of interrogative sentence is basically consistent with that of polar word acquisition. These facts show that: (6) Children are endowed with prior knowledge: (1) the logical concept of the structure of operator variables in identifying sentence classes (including C [WH]); (2); (3) variable constraints; (4) the lexical options of null-OP [wH] in interrogative and donkey sentences. The nature of logical conjunctions, as described by Crain (2012), is part of UG, and it takes time to encircle lexical options or re-internalize (Chomsky,2004) on the basis of basic data. This is why some young children interpret questions and donkey sentences more slowly than older children, while older children are better at all topics than young children. (7) the complexity of operator variable structure regulates the time axis of children's acquisition and development. A typical pair interpretation in a polymorphic interrogative sentence is attached to a question operator in the same clause that constrains more than two variables: 0P {WH} (XY) (. X. Y) But in donkey sentence, a interrogative operator is the same variable that appears twice in two clauses: OP {WH} (x1 + x 2) (. X1) ( X2) . This complicated calculation makes the acquisition of multiple questions and donkey sentences a long process. This cannot be attributed to the burden of working memory.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：天津師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：H193.1
本文編號(hào)：2404790
[Abstract]:The in situ phenomenon of interrogative words is different in different languages, such as Iraqi Arabic, French, Hindi, Malay, Lebanese Arabic, Japanese, Korean and Chinese. For Putonghua, interrogative words in situ can be interpreted as follows: (1) unit interrogative sentences; (2) multiple interrogative sentences; (3) long distance logical interrogative words shift; (4) donkey sentences; (5) negative polar words. At the logical level, all these expressions in situ can be expressed by the operator-variable structure (6). Among them, question phrases can be semantically split into operator (OP), variable (VAR) (x), constraint (RES) and domain (SCOPE): (6) [CP (OP,VAR (x), RES) C [Scope]. X.] In addition to a great deal of literature on the derivation of expression and its conditions in interrogative word shift and interrogative word in situ, there is also a lot of research on the acquisition of interrogative word shift, but there are few researches on interrogative word in situ acquisition. Moreover, there is little research on the acquisition of multiple questions and donkey sentences. This study attempts to analyze the above interpretations and give some tentative explanations from a large number of data on the acquisition of interrogative words in Putonghua. The relevant acquisition data were from 698 Putonghua children aged 2 years 6 months to 7 years 11 months. The results of the experiment can be summarized as follows: (1) 50% of children under 3 years of age and 5 months can understand the interrogative attribute of interrogative sentence, and 80% of the children aged 4 to 4 years 11 months can almost reach 100%. (2) in the development of in situ acquisition of interrogative words, children are sensitive to constraints in the structure of operator variables. Events and people are easily constrained by time, place, tool, and manner. The most difficult constraint is the cause. (III) Children are also sensitive to the number and frequency of variables. Multiple questions and donkey sentences are multiple variables, so they are difficult to acquire. (4) from the shift of long distance interrogative words in explicit shift language, we can see that children are also sensitive to the distance between Spec-CP and in situ interrogative words. More than 40 percent of children aged 2 years, 6 months to 4 months old and 5 months old and 20 years, 6 months to 7 months old and 11 months old have difficulty understanding interrogative sentences containing complex NP phrases. (5) the acquisition process of interrogative sentence is basically consistent with that of polar word acquisition. These facts show that: (6) Children are endowed with prior knowledge: (1) the logical concept of the structure of operator variables in identifying sentence classes (including C [WH]); (2); (3) variable constraints; (4) the lexical options of null-OP [wH] in interrogative and donkey sentences. The nature of logical conjunctions, as described by Crain (2012), is part of UG, and it takes time to encircle lexical options or re-internalize (Chomsky,2004) on the basis of basic data. This is why some young children interpret questions and donkey sentences more slowly than older children, while older children are better at all topics than young children. (7) the complexity of operator variable structure regulates the time axis of children's acquisition and development. A typical pair interpretation in a polymorphic interrogative sentence is attached to a question operator in the same clause that constrains more than two variables: 0P {WH} (XY) (. X. Y) But in donkey sentence, a interrogative operator is the same variable that appears twice in two clauses: OP {WH} (x1 + x 2) (. X1) ( X2) . This complicated calculation makes the acquisition of multiple questions and donkey sentences a long process. This cannot be attributed to the burden of working memory.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：天津師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：H193.1
【共引文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條
1 吳淼;漢英雙語者WH-位移句子加工過程中心理機(jī)制的ERP研究[D];大連理工大學(xué);2013年
2 李昭錦;中國(guó)英語學(xué)習(xí)者Wh-疑問句習(xí)得研究[D];北京外國(guó)語大學(xué);2014年
3 楊先;普通話特殊型語言障礙兒童對(duì)全稱量詞“都”的習(xí)得研究[D];廣東外語外貿(mào)大學(xué);2013年
，本文編號(hào)：2404790
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/wenyilunwen/yuyanxuelw/2404790.html
最近更新
教材專著
