本文選題：英漢框架比較　切入點(diǎn)：詞匯教學(xué)　出處：《廣州大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：本研究基于詞匯在語(yǔ)言習(xí)得中的重要性以及初中生英語(yǔ)詞匯量少、記不住的現(xiàn)實(shí),以認(rèn)知語(yǔ)言學(xué)的框架理論為基礎(chǔ),探討初中英語(yǔ)詞匯教學(xué)的新方法及其效果。據(jù)此,本研究試圖回答以下兩個(gè)問(wèn)題:(1)基于英漢框架比較的詞匯教學(xué)是否有利于增加初中生的英語(yǔ)詞匯量?(2)基于英漢框架比較的詞匯教學(xué)對(duì)初中生英語(yǔ)詞匯記憶有何影響?本研究采用實(shí)驗(yàn)研究方法。廣州市某中學(xué)的初二年級(jí)(2)班和(3)班的80名學(xué)生作為受試者參與了本研究,研究者將受試分為兩組,(2)班為參照組(40人),(3)班為實(shí)驗(yàn)組(40人)。實(shí)驗(yàn)組采用基于英漢框架比較的詞匯教學(xué)模式,對(duì)照組則采用傳統(tǒng)的詞匯教學(xué)模式進(jìn)行詞匯教學(xué)。研究工具包括詞匯水平測(cè)試,即時(shí)記憶測(cè)試和延時(shí)記憶測(cè)試以及詞匯量測(cè)試。實(shí)驗(yàn)前的詞匯水平測(cè)試旨在確保實(shí)驗(yàn)前兩組的詞匯水平無(wú)顯著性差異。即時(shí)測(cè)驗(yàn)時(shí)間于每次詞匯課結(jié)束后的一個(gè)小時(shí)之后進(jìn)行,而延時(shí)測(cè)驗(yàn)時(shí)間則于每次詞匯課結(jié)束后的一周之后進(jìn)行。進(jìn)行兩種測(cè)試前,受試者都未被告知會(huì)進(jìn)行詞匯測(cè)試。測(cè)試的數(shù)據(jù)由研究者搜集,采用獨(dú)立樣本t檢驗(yàn)方法分析可能存在的差異。實(shí)驗(yàn)結(jié)束后,受試者進(jìn)行一次詞匯量測(cè)試,以探究基于英漢框架比較的詞匯教學(xué)模式是否有利于增加初中生的英語(yǔ)詞匯量。研究結(jié)果顯示:(1)在詞匯量測(cè)試中,對(duì)照組的成績(jī)平均值均低于實(shí)驗(yàn)組的成績(jī)平均值(10.9812.05;5.207.13)且兩者存在顯著性差異;(2)在各個(gè)單元的即時(shí)記憶測(cè)試中,對(duì)照組的成績(jī)平均值均高于實(shí)驗(yàn)組的成績(jī)平均(6.185.38;5.985.73;6.105.13;6.385.43;6.305.88;6.465.10;6.335.13)且兩者存在顯著性差異;在延時(shí)測(cè)試中,對(duì)照組的成績(jī)平均值普遍低于實(shí)驗(yàn)組的成績(jī)平均值(5.356.55;5.656.63;7.307.08;6.257.40;6.387.40;7.187.90;6.457.35)且兩者存在顯著性差異.基于實(shí)驗(yàn)數(shù)據(jù)分析,本研究得出以下結(jié)論:(1)基于英漢框架比較的詞匯教學(xué)模式在一定程度上有利于初中生英語(yǔ)詞匯量的增加。(2)傳統(tǒng)的詞匯教學(xué)模式更有利于初中生對(duì)英語(yǔ)詞匯的即時(shí)記憶;基于英漢框架比較的詞匯教學(xué)模式更有利于初中生對(duì)英語(yǔ)詞匯的延時(shí)記憶。本研究為初中英語(yǔ)詞匯教學(xué)提供了新的理論視角,同時(shí)為初中英語(yǔ)詞匯教學(xué)提供了具有借鑒意義的方法:首先,探尋詞匯教學(xué)的新模式和新思路并不意味著否定傳統(tǒng)的詞匯教學(xué)模式;其次,要培養(yǎng)學(xué)生運(yùn)用框架語(yǔ)義學(xué)來(lái)進(jìn)行詞匯學(xué)習(xí)的意識(shí);其次,要在課堂上教授框架的相關(guān)知識(shí),從而幫助學(xué)生建構(gòu)語(yǔ)義框架;最后,學(xué)生要不斷豐富百科知識(shí),以豐富其框架知識(shí)。
[Abstract]:Based on the importance of vocabulary in language acquisition and the fact that junior middle school students have less vocabulary and can't remember, this study explores the new methods and effects of English vocabulary teaching in junior high school based on the framework theory of cognitive linguistics. The present study attempts to answer the following two questions: 1) is the English vocabulary teaching based on the comparison between English and Chinese frameworks conducive to increasing the vocabulary of junior high school students? (2) how does vocabulary teaching based on the comparison of English and Chinese frameworks affect junior high school students' English vocabulary memory? In this study, 80 students from Grade 2 (Grade 2) and Grade 3 (Grade 2) of a middle school in Guangzhou participated as subjects. The subjects were divided into two groups: the control group (n = 40), the control group (n = 40) and the experimental group (n = 40). The experimental group adopted a lexical teaching model based on the comparison of English and Chinese frameworks. In the control group, the traditional vocabulary teaching model was used. The vocabulary level test before the experiment was designed to ensure that there was no significant difference in vocabulary level between the two groups. The instant test was conducted one hour after the end of each vocabulary class. The delay test was conducted one week after the end of each vocabulary class. The subjects were not told they would take the vocabulary test before either test. The data were collected by the researchers. Independent sample t-test was used to analyze the possible differences. After the experiment, the subjects were given a vocabulary test. In order to explore whether the lexical teaching model based on the comparison between English and Chinese frameworks is beneficial to increase the vocabulary size of junior high school students, the results show that: 1) in the vocabulary test, The average score of the control group was lower than that of the experimental group (10.9812.055.207.13) and there was a significant difference between the two groups. The average score of the control group was higher than that of the experimental group (6.185.38 / 5.985.73 / 6.105.13 / 6.385.436.305.88 / 6.465.105.106.335.13). The average score of the control group was generally lower than that of the experimental group (5.356.55 / 5.656.63 / 7.307.08 / 6.257.406.387.407.387.407.187.90 / 6.457.35) and there was a significant difference between the two groups. The present study draws the following conclusions: (1) the lexical teaching model based on the comparison of English and Chinese frameworks is helpful to increase the vocabulary size of junior high school students to a certain extent) the traditional vocabulary teaching model is more beneficial to the instant memory of English vocabulary among junior high school students; The lexical teaching model based on the comparison of English and Chinese frameworks is more conducive to the delayed memory of English vocabulary among junior high school students. This study provides a new theoretical perspective for junior high school English vocabulary teaching. At the same time, it provides a useful method for junior high school English vocabulary teaching. Firstly, exploring new models and new ideas of vocabulary teaching does not mean negating the traditional vocabulary teaching mode. In order to cultivate students' awareness of using frame semantics to learn vocabulary; secondly, to teach the relevant knowledge of frame in class to help students construct semantic framework; finally, students should enrich encyclopedic knowledge. To enrich its framework knowledge.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：廣州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：G633.41

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 馬驊;Language teachers should develop students' vocabulary learning skills[J];陜西師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2000年S1期

2 ;Elementary Introduction Of Vocabulary Teaching In The Classroom[J];延安教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2000年01期

3 龔雷;A Brief Talk on Two methods of vocabulary Teaching[J];伊犁教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2000年01期

4 王旎鈮;;Implication of lexicology in vocabulary teaching[J];讀與寫(xiě)(教育教學(xué)刊);2010年04期

5 郭建;;Approaches to Building up English Vocabulary[J];海外英語(yǔ);2011年14期

6 謝少萬(wàn);Is Language a Fundamental Basis of Thought?[J];梧州師專(zhuān)學(xué)報(bào);1996年02期

7 李重陽(yáng);;Cultivating the students' memory of English vocabulary in games[J];魅力中國(guó);2010年17期

8 ;VOCABULARY STRATEGIES AND VOCABULARY LEARNING[J];Teaching English in China;2001年02期

9 ;The Role of Vocabulary in ESP Teaching and Learning[J];Teaching English in China;2004年03期

10 ;On How to Teach New Words in the Class of English for Civil Servants[J];科技信息(學(xué)術(shù)研究);2007年20期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前6條

1 ;Modeling Vocabulary Loss——Approach leading to a comprehensive analysis of vocabulary attrition?[A];語(yǔ)言與文化研究（第一輯）[C];2007年

2 冬加勇;;How to improve vocabulary teaching[A];江蘇省教育學(xué)會(huì)2006年年會(huì)論文集（英語(yǔ)專(zhuān)輯）[C];2006年

3 曲囡囡;;On the Absence of the English Learners' Vocabulary Notebooks[A];語(yǔ)言與文化研究（第四輯）[C];2009年

4 黃春燕;;China English——An Objective Existence as a Performance Variety[A];語(yǔ)言與文化研究（第二輯）[C];2008年

5 郭海燕;石樂(lè)波;;A Study of Vocabulary Learning from a Psycholinguistic Perspective[A];語(yǔ)言與文化研究（第七輯）[C];2010年

6 ;The Role of China English in Translating Culturally Loaded Words[A];中國(guó)英漢語(yǔ)比較研究會(huì)第八次全國(guó)學(xué)術(shù)研討會(huì)論文摘要匯編[C];2008年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 王玉玲;基于英漢框架比較的初中英語(yǔ)詞匯教學(xué)效果實(shí)驗(yàn)研究[D];廣州大學(xué);2017年

2 胡喬石;思維導(dǎo)圖在初三英語(yǔ)詞匯復(fù)習(xí)中運(yùn)用的實(shí)證研究[D];廣州大學(xué);2017年

3 馬思林;關(guān)于小學(xué)《牛津英語(yǔ)》（上海版）教材詞匯的詞頻角度分析[D];上海師范大學(xué);2017年

4 楊曉麗;基于思維導(dǎo)圖的中職英語(yǔ)詞匯教學(xué)實(shí)驗(yàn)研究[D];廣州大學(xué);2017年

5 彭巧蘭;基于語(yǔ)境的高中英語(yǔ)詞匯教學(xué)實(shí)驗(yàn)研究[D];廣州大學(xué);2017年

6 王怡凡;基于注意假設(shè)的非英語(yǔ)專(zhuān)業(yè)大學(xué)生英語(yǔ)詞匯磨蝕的原因研究[D];河南工業(yè)大學(xué);2017年

7 石未芳;英語(yǔ)詞匯磨蝕的詞類(lèi)差異研究[D];西北大學(xué);2017年

8 吳怡瀟;漢英食物類(lèi)詞匯對(duì)比研究[D];寧波大學(xué);2017年

9 朱易;詞匯游戲在初中英語(yǔ)詞匯教學(xué)中的運(yùn)用[D];上海師范大學(xué);2017年

10 龔瀅瑩;課文—單詞教學(xué)路徑對(duì)初中學(xué)生英語(yǔ)詞匯記憶影響的實(shí)驗(yàn)研究[D];廣州大學(xué);2017年

，

本文編號(hào)：1682024