漢語(yǔ)委婉語(yǔ)識(shí)解機(jī)制的ERP研究
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-09-11 06:58
【摘要】：委婉語(yǔ)現(xiàn)象十分普遍,應(yīng)用領(lǐng)域廣泛。從十六世紀(jì)開始,國(guó)內(nèi)外許多學(xué)者對(duì)委婉語(yǔ)做了大量研究。學(xué)者們主要從定義、歷史文化背景、社會(huì)心理、分類、構(gòu)成方式、語(yǔ)用、認(rèn)知、英漢對(duì)比等角度,對(duì)委婉語(yǔ)做了詳細(xì)深入研究。前人的研究成果豐碩,極具參考價(jià)值,但是也有不足之處,如重復(fù)現(xiàn)象較普遍,研究問(wèn)題不深入等;國(guó)外有學(xué)者就委婉語(yǔ)做過(guò)實(shí)證研究,但都是英文材料,且僅局限于英語(yǔ)國(guó)家。廖巧云(2015)提出“內(nèi)涵外延關(guān)聯(lián)傳承模型”理論,已有文章用ERP技術(shù),從漢語(yǔ)反語(yǔ)、轉(zhuǎn)喻、隱喻、雙關(guān)、夸張等角度,來(lái)驗(yàn)證漢語(yǔ)語(yǔ)義修辭識(shí)解機(jī)制的“內(nèi)涵外延關(guān)聯(lián)傳承模型”,證明了這些漢語(yǔ)修辭的識(shí)解過(guò)程存在“可能性特征提取的心理現(xiàn)實(shí)性”,但是還沒(méi)有文章從漢語(yǔ)委婉修辭的角度對(duì)該理論進(jìn)行論證。本文研究問(wèn)題為:漢語(yǔ)委婉語(yǔ)識(shí)解過(guò)程中是否存在“可能性特征提取的心理現(xiàn)實(shí)性”?本文將利用ERP技術(shù)來(lái)探討漢語(yǔ)委婉修辭的識(shí)解機(jī)制并為其提供證據(jù)。本實(shí)驗(yàn)采用單因素三水平被試內(nèi)設(shè)計(jì)(關(guān)鍵句類型:委婉句、直義句和無(wú)關(guān)句),精心選取30組句子作為實(shí)驗(yàn)材料,其中兩組為練習(xí)材料,選取24名四川外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué)研究生作為被試。實(shí)驗(yàn)過(guò)程為:首先呈現(xiàn)語(yǔ)境句,然后呈現(xiàn)關(guān)鍵句(委婉句、直義句或者無(wú)關(guān)句),隨后呈現(xiàn)關(guān)鍵詞,被試要判斷關(guān)鍵詞真假,最后呈現(xiàn)陳述句,被試要判斷該陳述句與語(yǔ)境句和關(guān)鍵句的意思是否相符。本實(shí)驗(yàn)在四川外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué)外語(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí)認(rèn)知神經(jīng)實(shí)驗(yàn)室完成。使用E-prime2.0軟件對(duì)實(shí)驗(yàn)材料和過(guò)程進(jìn)行設(shè)計(jì)編程,用Neruoscan4.5和Syn Amps2對(duì)行為數(shù)據(jù)和腦電數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行采集,最后使用SPSS16.0對(duì)ERP數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行重復(fù)測(cè)量方差分析,配對(duì)樣本T檢驗(yàn)等統(tǒng)計(jì)分析。本實(shí)驗(yàn)研究結(jié)果如下:(1)測(cè)探詞的反應(yīng)時(shí)在無(wú)關(guān)句條件下最長(zhǎng),平均值為1052.53毫秒,其次為委婉句,平均值為915.69毫秒,探測(cè)詞在直義句條件下的反應(yīng)時(shí)最短,平均值為906.14毫秒;直義句與委婉句條件下探測(cè)詞真假判斷的反應(yīng)時(shí)差異不顯著[t(18)=.110,p=.915.05];直義句與無(wú)關(guān)句條件下探測(cè)詞真假判斷的反應(yīng)時(shí)差異顯著[t(18)=-1.185,p=.041.05];委婉句與無(wú)關(guān)句條件下探測(cè)詞真假判斷的反應(yīng)時(shí)差異顯著[t(18)=-1.325,p=.028.05]。(2)N100和N400的平均波幅:無(wú)關(guān)句條件下探測(cè)詞真假判斷引起的N100和N400平均波幅最大,其次為委婉句,最后為直義句,兩兩對(duì)比差異顯著;P200的平均波幅:直義句條件下探測(cè)詞真假判斷引起的P200平均波幅最大,其次為委婉句,最后為無(wú)關(guān)句,兩兩對(duì)比差異顯著。(3)委婉句和直義句條件下探測(cè)詞真假判斷引發(fā)的N100波幅在右中央?yún)^(qū)差異顯著[t(18)=-2.331,p=.040.05];直義句和無(wú)關(guān)句條件下探測(cè)詞真假判斷引發(fā)的N100波幅在左頂區(qū)[t(18)=2.837,p=.016.05]和中部頂區(qū)[t(18)=2.393,p=.036.05]差異顯著。(4)委婉句和無(wú)關(guān)句條件下探測(cè)詞真假判斷引發(fā)的P200波幅在右頂區(qū)差異顯著[t(18)=3.024,p=.012.05];直義句和無(wú)關(guān)句條件下探測(cè)詞真假判斷引發(fā)的P200波幅在左中央?yún)^(qū)[t(18)=2.573,p=.026.05]、中部中央?yún)^(qū)[t(18)=2.579,p=.026.05]、右額區(qū)[t(18)=2.564,p=.026.05]、右頂區(qū)[t(18)=3.383,p=.006.05]、中部頂區(qū)[t(18)=3.493,p=.005.05]以及中部額區(qū)[t(18)=2.411,p=.035.05]差異顯著。(5)直義句和無(wú)關(guān)句條件下探測(cè)詞真假判斷引發(fā)的N400波幅在左中央?yún)^(qū)[t(18)=2.227,p=.048.05]差異顯著。(6)常用委婉表達(dá)已經(jīng)成為一種常規(guī)表達(dá),他們的識(shí)解過(guò)程與直義表達(dá)差異已經(jīng)不顯著了,因?yàn)橹绷x表達(dá)不常見,人們反而會(huì)覺(jué)得奇怪。本研究得出以下結(jié)論:漢語(yǔ)委婉語(yǔ)的識(shí)解促進(jìn)了對(duì)探測(cè)詞真假的判斷,并存在“可能性特征提取”的過(guò)程。本研究為漢語(yǔ)委婉語(yǔ)的識(shí)解存在“可能性特征提取”的過(guò)程提供了證據(jù),從委婉語(yǔ)角度驗(yàn)證并支持廖巧云(2015)提出的修辭話語(yǔ)識(shí)解框架,即內(nèi)涵外延關(guān)聯(lián)-傳承模型。
[Abstract]:Since the sixteenth century, many scholars at home and abroad have done a lot of research on euphemism, mainly from the perspectives of definition, historical and cultural background, social psychology, classification, composition, pragmatics, cognition, English-Chinese comparison and so on. Liao Qiaoyun (2015) put forward the theory of "connotation-extension-relevance-inheritance model". Some articles have used ERP technology, from Chinese irony to Chinese irony, to turn it into English. From the perspectives of metaphor, metaphor, pun and exaggeration, this paper tries to verify the "connotation-extension-relevance-inheritance model" of the Chinese semantic rhetoric interpretation mechanism, and proves that there is a "psychological reality of possibilistic feature extraction" in the process of Chinese rhetoric interpretation. However, no article has demonstrated this theory from the perspective of Chinese euphemism. In this study, 30 groups of Chinese euphemisms were carefully selected by using a single factor and three-level design (key sentence types: euphemism, direct sentences and irrelevant sentences). Sentences were used as experimental materials. Twenty-four postgraduates from Sichuan Foreign Studies University were selected as subjects. The experiment was conducted by presenting contextual sentences first, then key sentences (euphemism, literal sentences or irrelevant sentences), and then key words. Subjects were asked to judge whether the key words were true or false, and then declarative sentences were presented. This experiment was carried out in the Cognitive Neurology Laboratory of Foreign Language Learning, Sichuan Foreign Language University. The experimental materials and procedures were designed and programmed with E-prime 2.0 software. Neruoscan 4.5 and Syn Amps 2 were used to collect behavior data and EEG data, and SPSS16.0 was used to collect ERP data. The results of this experiment are as follows: (1) The response time of detective words is the longest under the condition of irrelevant sentences, with an average of 1052.53 ms, followed by euphemism, with an average of 915.69 Ms. The response time of detective words is the shortest under the condition of direct sentences, with an average of 906.14 Ms. There was no significant difference in the reaction time of detecting words'true and false judgments under euphemism conditions [t (18) = 110, P =. 915.05]; there was significant difference in the reaction time of detecting words' true and false judgments under direct meaning and irrelevant sentences [t (18) = - 1.185, P =. 041.05]; there was significant difference in the reaction time of detecting words'true and false judgments between euphemism and irrelevant sentences [t (18) = - 1.325, P =. 028.05]. (2) N100 and N40. Average amplitude of 0: the average amplitude of N100 and N400 is the largest under the condition of irrelevant sentences, followed by euphemism, and finally direct sentences, the difference between the two is significant; the average amplitude of P200 is the largest under the condition of direct sentences, followed by euphemism, and finally irrelevant sentences. The difference was significant. (3) The N100 amplitude caused by the detection of true and false words in euphemism and literal sentences was significantly different in the right central region [t (18) = - 2.331, P =. 040.05]; the N100 amplitude caused by the detection of true and false words in literal and irrelevant sentences was significantly different in the left top region [t (18) = 2.837, P =. 016.05] and the middle top region [t (18) = 2.393, P =. 036.05]. There was a significant difference in the amplitude of P200 between euphemisms and irrelevant sentences [t (18) = 3.024, P =.012.05]; the amplitude of P200 caused by detective verbs was in the left central region [t (18) = 2.573, P =.026.05], the central region [t (18) = 2.579, P =.026.05], and the right frontal region [t (18) = 2.564, P =.026.05]. There were significant differences in the right parietal region [t (18) = 3.383, P =.006.05], the middle parietal region [t (18) = 3.493, P =.005.05] and the central frontal region [t (18) = 2.411, P =.035.05]. (5) The N400 amplitude triggered by the true and false judgment of the probing words in the direct and irrelevant sentences was significantly different in the left central region [t (18) = 2.227, P =.048.05]. This study concludes that the understanding of Chinese euphemisms promotes the judgment of the truth and falsehood of the detected words, and there is a process of "possibilistic feature extraction". The process of possibilistic feature extraction provides evidence to verify and support the rhetorical discourse interpretation framework proposed by Liao Qiaoyun (2015) from the perspective of euphemism.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：四川外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：H136
本文編號(hào)：2235948
[Abstract]:Since the sixteenth century, many scholars at home and abroad have done a lot of research on euphemism, mainly from the perspectives of definition, historical and cultural background, social psychology, classification, composition, pragmatics, cognition, English-Chinese comparison and so on. Liao Qiaoyun (2015) put forward the theory of "connotation-extension-relevance-inheritance model". Some articles have used ERP technology, from Chinese irony to Chinese irony, to turn it into English. From the perspectives of metaphor, metaphor, pun and exaggeration, this paper tries to verify the "connotation-extension-relevance-inheritance model" of the Chinese semantic rhetoric interpretation mechanism, and proves that there is a "psychological reality of possibilistic feature extraction" in the process of Chinese rhetoric interpretation. However, no article has demonstrated this theory from the perspective of Chinese euphemism. In this study, 30 groups of Chinese euphemisms were carefully selected by using a single factor and three-level design (key sentence types: euphemism, direct sentences and irrelevant sentences). Sentences were used as experimental materials. Twenty-four postgraduates from Sichuan Foreign Studies University were selected as subjects. The experiment was conducted by presenting contextual sentences first, then key sentences (euphemism, literal sentences or irrelevant sentences), and then key words. Subjects were asked to judge whether the key words were true or false, and then declarative sentences were presented. This experiment was carried out in the Cognitive Neurology Laboratory of Foreign Language Learning, Sichuan Foreign Language University. The experimental materials and procedures were designed and programmed with E-prime 2.0 software. Neruoscan 4.5 and Syn Amps 2 were used to collect behavior data and EEG data, and SPSS16.0 was used to collect ERP data. The results of this experiment are as follows: (1) The response time of detective words is the longest under the condition of irrelevant sentences, with an average of 1052.53 ms, followed by euphemism, with an average of 915.69 Ms. The response time of detective words is the shortest under the condition of direct sentences, with an average of 906.14 Ms. There was no significant difference in the reaction time of detecting words'true and false judgments under euphemism conditions [t (18) = 110, P =. 915.05]; there was significant difference in the reaction time of detecting words' true and false judgments under direct meaning and irrelevant sentences [t (18) = - 1.185, P =. 041.05]; there was significant difference in the reaction time of detecting words'true and false judgments between euphemism and irrelevant sentences [t (18) = - 1.325, P =. 028.05]. (2) N100 and N40. Average amplitude of 0: the average amplitude of N100 and N400 is the largest under the condition of irrelevant sentences, followed by euphemism, and finally direct sentences, the difference between the two is significant; the average amplitude of P200 is the largest under the condition of direct sentences, followed by euphemism, and finally irrelevant sentences. The difference was significant. (3) The N100 amplitude caused by the detection of true and false words in euphemism and literal sentences was significantly different in the right central region [t (18) = - 2.331, P =. 040.05]; the N100 amplitude caused by the detection of true and false words in literal and irrelevant sentences was significantly different in the left top region [t (18) = 2.837, P =. 016.05] and the middle top region [t (18) = 2.393, P =. 036.05]. There was a significant difference in the amplitude of P200 between euphemisms and irrelevant sentences [t (18) = 3.024, P =.012.05]; the amplitude of P200 caused by detective verbs was in the left central region [t (18) = 2.573, P =.026.05], the central region [t (18) = 2.579, P =.026.05], and the right frontal region [t (18) = 2.564, P =.026.05]. There were significant differences in the right parietal region [t (18) = 3.383, P =.006.05], the middle parietal region [t (18) = 3.493, P =.005.05] and the central frontal region [t (18) = 2.411, P =.035.05]. (5) The N400 amplitude triggered by the true and false judgment of the probing words in the direct and irrelevant sentences was significantly different in the left central region [t (18) = 2.227, P =.048.05]. This study concludes that the understanding of Chinese euphemisms promotes the judgment of the truth and falsehood of the detected words, and there is a process of "possibilistic feature extraction". The process of possibilistic feature extraction provides evidence to verify and support the rhetorical discourse interpretation framework proposed by Liao Qiaoyun (2015) from the perspective of euphemism.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：四川外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：H136
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 龍娟;;性別差異的社會(huì)調(diào)查——以委婉語(yǔ)的使用為例[J];海外英語(yǔ);2015年12期
2 徐盛桓;;因果蘊(yùn)涵與婉曲話語(yǔ)的生成[J];外語(yǔ)教學(xué)與研究;2015年03期
3 姚吉?jiǎng)?;順應(yīng)論視角下的英漢委婉語(yǔ)對(duì)比研究[J];廣東工業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2013年05期
4 黃麗君;;委婉表達(dá)的認(rèn)知機(jī)制新解[J];當(dāng)代外語(yǔ)研究;2010年12期
5 傅琳;;試論英語(yǔ)委婉語(yǔ)語(yǔ)用功能及語(yǔ)言等級(jí)[J];廣東外語(yǔ)外貿(mào)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2008年05期
6 周福娟;湯定軍;;英語(yǔ)委婉語(yǔ)概念的轉(zhuǎn)喻認(rèn)知理?yè)?jù)[J];外語(yǔ)學(xué)刊;2008年05期
7 羅俊龍;邱江;懷章翠;張慶林;;句子加工水平上判斷任務(wù)的腦機(jī)制[J];西南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(自然科學(xué)版);2008年06期
8 邵軍航;;委婉語(yǔ)的定義[J];黃石理工學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年03期
9 袁秀鳳;;人向著死亡的存在與語(yǔ)言——委婉禁忌語(yǔ)的最根本心理機(jī)制初探[J];外國(guó)語(yǔ)言文學(xué);2006年03期
10 黎昌抱,吳鋒針;英漢“死亡”委婉語(yǔ)對(duì)比研究[J];西安外國(guó)語(yǔ)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年01期
相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條
1 劉倩;委婉表達(dá)新論[D];河南大學(xué);2013年
相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前7條
1 喬tR;漢語(yǔ)轉(zhuǎn)喻識(shí)解中可能性特征提取的ERPs研究[D];四川外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué);2016年
2 譚志鵬;基于ERPs技術(shù)的漢語(yǔ)雙關(guān)修辭識(shí)解機(jī)制的實(shí)證研究[D];四川外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué);2016年
3 曹湘潔;漢語(yǔ)反語(yǔ)心物隨附性主特征提取的ERPs研究[D];四川外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué);2016年
4 廣露;基于ERPs的漢語(yǔ)實(shí)據(jù)因果句的認(rèn)知加工機(jī)制研究[D];四川外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué);2015年
5 朱霞;假裝理解的ERP研究[D];西南大學(xué);2012年
6 王瑜;英語(yǔ)委婉語(yǔ)使用中性別差異的一項(xiàng)實(shí)證調(diào)查[D];安徽師范大學(xué);2007年
7 張艷敏;論性別差異在中美大學(xué)生委婉語(yǔ)使用中的映射[D];東南大學(xué);2006年
，本文編號(hào)：2235948
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/wenyilunwen/yuyanyishu/2235948.html
最近更新
教材專著
