本文關(guān)鍵詞： 特殊型語言障礙 論元疑問句 附加語疑問句 損傷　出處：《廣東外語外貿(mào)大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：有關(guān)特殊型語言障礙(簡稱SLI)的研究在中國大陸還屬于起步階段。國外關(guān)于特殊型語言障礙兒童的研究表明,這類兒童在習(xí)得特殊疑問句尤其是習(xí)得賓語疑問句方面存在嚴(yán)重困難。另外,中國大陸僅有的一篇研究普通話SLI兒童習(xí)得普通話特殊疑問句的文章也發(fā)現(xiàn)這類兒童習(xí)得賓語疑問句要難于主語疑問句。然而,前人的研究大都圍繞疑問代詞諸如“什么”、“誰”、“哪”引導(dǎo)的疑問句,對于這類兒童習(xí)得疑問副詞如“哪里”、“怎么樣”以及“為什么”引導(dǎo)的疑問句情況還不了解。因此,在前人研究的基礎(chǔ)上,本文旨在探索普通話SLI兒童漢語論元疑問句及附加語疑問句的習(xí)得情況,試圖揭示此類兒童在習(xí)得附加語疑問句方面是否存在困難。此外,本文還試圖揭示正常兒童與SLI兒童在習(xí)得論元疑問句和附加語疑問句時有何異同點(diǎn),并探究導(dǎo)致異同點(diǎn)的原因。本文通過實(shí)驗(yàn)來解決上述問題。三組兒童參加實(shí)驗(yàn),每組15人。一組為通過一系列相關(guān)量表篩查確認(rèn)的SLI兒童。一組為語言發(fā)育正常的年齡匹配(簡稱TD-AM)組,要求與SLI兒童在年齡和性別上相互匹配。另一組兒童為語言發(fā)育正常但年齡顯著小(簡稱TD-Y)于SLI的兒童。實(shí)驗(yàn)測試包括特殊疑問句的產(chǎn)出和理解,每一部分的測試題都包括9個主語疑問句、9個賓語疑問句和9個附加語疑問句,每一道題都配有一幅圖片。本文用SPSS 21.0對收集到的數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行分析,發(fā)現(xiàn)如下:(1)SLI兒童不僅在產(chǎn)出論元疑問句方面存在困難,而且在產(chǎn)出附加語疑問句方面也存在困難;(2)除how-問句外,SLI兒童在理解特殊疑問句方面不存在困難;(3)盡管SLI兒童在論元疑問句和附加語疑問句的產(chǎn)出方面都顯著差于與之匹配的兩組兒童,但SLI兒童與語言發(fā)育正常兒童一樣,附加語疑問句產(chǎn)出要好于論元疑問句的產(chǎn)出;(4)SLI兒童組內(nèi)在主語疑問句的產(chǎn)出上存在明顯的個體差異。本文探討了SLI兒童在主語疑問句產(chǎn)出上的差異性,認(rèn)為結(jié)合損傷程度和“推導(dǎo)復(fù)雜度假說”可以解釋SLI兒童在本研究中的不同表現(xiàn)。本文還發(fā)現(xiàn)SLI兒童組內(nèi)差異性可以為驗(yàn)證漢語疑問句研究中已建立的一些理論提供證據(jù),結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn)黃正德(1982)提出的邏輯式移位說可以很好地解釋SLI兒童在本實(shí)驗(yàn)中的不同表現(xiàn)。此外,本文認(rèn)為在兒童的語言輸入中,相對于其他問句來說,表達(dá)方式的how-問句的輸入頻率較低,導(dǎo)致兒童在how-問句理解方面存在困難。最后,本文認(rèn)為兩類兒童在附加語疑問句的表現(xiàn)好于論元疑問句是由論元、附加語的不同句法性質(zhì)所決定的。本研究在理論和實(shí)踐方面均具有較大的意義。理論上,本研究能為驗(yàn)證已有的研究提供一些新的證據(jù);實(shí)踐方面,本研究對普通話SLI兒童的鑒定、診斷及干預(yù)治療具有積極的意義。
[Abstract]:The research on special language disorder (SLI) is still in its infancy in mainland China. These children have serious difficulties in acquiring special questions, especially in object questions. The only article in mainland China that studies the acquisition of Putonghua special questions by SLI children also finds that the acquisition of object interrogative sentences is more difficult than that of subject-question sentences. Previous studies have mostly focused on interrogative pronouns such as "what", "who" and "which", and have not yet understood the situation of such children in the acquisition of interrogative adverbs such as "where", "how" and "why". On the basis of previous studies, this paper aims to explore the acquisition of Chinese meta-interrogative sentences and adjunctive interrogative sentences in SLI children, and try to find out whether there are difficulties in the acquisition of additional interrogative sentences in such children. This paper also attempts to reveal the similarities and differences between normal children and SLI children in the acquisition of argument questions and additional question sentences, and to explore the causes of differences and similarities. This paper attempts to solve the above problems through experiments. Three groups of children participate in the experiment. There were 15 children in each group. One group was confirmed by a series of related scales. One group was age matched group with normal language development (TD-AM). Children with SLI were asked to match their age and sex. The other group was children with normal language development but significantly younger (TD-Y) in SLI. The experiment included the output and understanding of special questions. Each part of the test questions includes 9 subject questions, 9 object questions and 9 additional questions, each question is accompanied by a picture. This paper uses SPSS 21. 0 to analyze the collected data. It is found that the following children not only have difficulty in producing argument questions, Besides how-question children have no difficulty in understanding special interrogative sentences, although SLI children have significant differences in the output of both meta-interrogative and adjunctive interrogative sentences. To match the two groups of children, But SLI children are the same as children with normal language development. The output of additional interrogative sentence is better than that of meta-interrogative sentence. There are obvious individual differences in the output of internal subject-interrogative sentence in children with SLI. This paper discusses the differences in the output of subject-interrogative sentence in children with SLI. It is suggested that the combination of damage degree and "deductive complexity hypothesis" can explain the different performance of SLI children in this study. It is also found that the differences within the SLI children group can provide evidence for the verification of some theories established in the study of Chinese interrogatives. The results show that the logical shift theory proposed by Huang Zhengde (1982) can explain the different performance of SLI children in this experiment. The low input frequency of the how-question sentence in the expression mode leads to difficulties in the understanding of how-question sentences. Finally, the author thinks that the two kinds of children perform better in the supplementary question sentence than in the argument question sentence. This study is of great significance in both theory and practice. In theory, this study can provide some new evidence for the verification of existing studies. This study has positive significance for the identification, diagnosis and intervention treatment of putonghua SLI children.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：廣東外語外貿(mào)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：H193.1

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 盧思源;英語的附加語、外加語和聯(lián)加語[J];現(xiàn)代外語;1983年01期

2 許汝民;;英語附加語標(biāo)準(zhǔn)(1)質(zhì)疑[J];山東外語教學(xué);1985年03期

3 趙政清;漫談英語中的聯(lián)加語[J];寶雞師院學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);1987年04期

4 姚曉波;;略論全句附加語[J];錦州師院學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);1991年03期

5 吳明清,彭家玉;論作外加語的副詞[J];十堰大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);1996年04期

6 莫一鈞;;我們是這樣教附加語的[J];語文學(xué)習(xí);1954年09期

7 李寧寧;;從謂語附加語看日本人的心理[J];成功(教育);2013年20期

8 劉凌;附加語的妙用[J];漢語學(xué)習(xí);1982年05期

9 孟自黃;“限制”和附加語[J];邏輯與語言學(xué)習(xí);1982年04期

10 無害;;長句分析練習(xí)〔五〕[J];語文學(xué)習(xí);1953年09期

相關(guān)會議論文 前1條

1 藍(lán)越群;;論英語的情態(tài)附加語及其功能[A];福建省外國語文學(xué)會2009年年會暨學(xué)術(shù)研討會論文集[C];2009年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 彭家法;附加語的句法位置[D];北京語言大學(xué);2007年

2 李楓;英語評論附加語的評價意義及其動因研究[D];河南大學(xué);2011年

3 楊竹;不同文化背景的英語使用者使用英語情態(tài)附加語的差異[D];廣東外語外貿(mào)大學(xué);2009年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 羅小艷;普通話特殊型語言障礙兒童論元及附加語疑問句習(xí)得研究[D];廣東外語外貿(mào)大學(xué);2017年

2 蔡璐璐;英漢運(yùn)動事件表征方式對比研究[D];華東理工大學(xué);2017年

3 周銳;從漢語句首名詞性獨(dú)立附加語看漢英句構(gòu)差異[D];北京外國語大學(xué);2017年

4 余浩;現(xiàn)代漢語中的附加語左置結(jié)構(gòu)研究[D];湖南農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué);2014年

5 陽運(yùn)清;系統(tǒng)功能語言學(xué)視角下的漢語附加語研究[D];西南大學(xué);2013年

6 賈玉嘉;學(xué)術(shù)語篇中評論附加語的對比研究[D];山西大學(xué);2012年

7 任立婷;中美英語使用者使用英語情態(tài)附加語的差異研究[D];西北師范大學(xué);2012年

8 莊正坤;當(dāng)代歌曲歌詞疑問句研究[D];華中師范大學(xué);2017年

9 林嘉妮;圭亞那學(xué)習(xí)者習(xí)得漢語疑問句的偏誤分析及教學(xué)建議[D];廣東外語外貿(mào)大學(xué);2017年

10 吳宇晴;南寧普通話疑問句語調(diào)實(shí)驗(yàn)研究[D];廣西大學(xué);2017年

，

本文編號：1546236