不同英语水平中国学习者英语复合词加工比较研究
|
摘要
复合词是多词素词的重要组成部分,对其加工机制的研究有助于揭示大脑如何同时加工多种词汇信息。然而目前复合词加工机制研究较少,且未考虑二语水平的作用。本文采用重复启动的在线词汇判断任务,考察中国高、低水平学习者英语复合词加工异同。结果发现:两组学习者都采用多通道模式;区别是低水平组整词语义激活较晚,发生在首词素激活后、尾词素激活前,尾词素加工不彻底,首词素产生熟悉度效应,尾词素产生透明度效应;高水平组整词语义线索加工始于复合词加工初期,在整词形式激活后增强,尾词素加工较彻底,首尾词素都产生透明度效应和熟悉度效应,但透明度效应弱于熟悉度效应。该结果表明复合词加工不同于复杂词,二语水平虽然不影响其加工模式,但是影响复合词及其词素激活的时间和加工强度。
Research on the processing of compounds-an important component of polymorphemic words-helps to explore how human brains process multiple lexical information.However,such research is very limited and has not examined the influence of L2 proficiency.This study explores how Chinese learners with high/low English proficiencies process English compounds by carrying a repeated lexical decision task.The experiment shows that both high and low groups use a multi-route model to process compounds.But there are also differences between them.For the low group,compound word is activated after the left constituent,but before the right constituent.The right constituent isn't activated fully.Familiarity effect appears in the left constituent and transparency effect appears in the right constituent.For the high group,the compound transparency effect emerges at the very beginning of processing and strengthens after the recognition of the compound.The right constituent is activated fully.Familiarity effect and transparency effect bothappear in the left and right constituents,but transparency effect is weaker than familiarity effect.These findings show that compound word processing differs from complex word processing.L2 proficiency doesn't affect the route of processing,but affect the time course and the strengths of the activation of compound word and its constituents.
Research on the processing of compounds-an important component of polymorphemic words-helps to explore how human brains process multiple lexical information.However,such research is very limited and has not examined the influence of L2 proficiency.This study explores how Chinese learners with high/low English proficiencies process English compounds by carrying a repeated lexical decision task.The experiment shows that both high and low groups use a multi-route model to process compounds.But there are also differences between them.For the low group,compound word is activated after the left constituent,but before the right constituent.The right constituent isn't activated fully.Familiarity effect appears in the left constituent and transparency effect appears in the right constituent.For the high group,the compound transparency effect emerges at the very beginning of processing and strengthens after the recognition of the compound.The right constituent is activated fully.Familiarity effect and transparency effect bothappear in the left and right constituents,but transparency effect is weaker than familiarity effect.These findings show that compound word processing differs from complex word processing.L2 proficiency doesn't affect the route of processing,but affect the time course and the strengths of the activation of compound word and its constituents.
引文
[1]Allen,M.&W.Badecker.2002.Inflectional regularity:Probing the nature of lexical representation in a cross-modal priming task[J].Journal of Memory and Language,(4):705-722.
[2]Baayen,R.,D.Davidson&D.Bates.2008.Mixed effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items[J].Journal of Memory and Language,(4):390-412.
[3]Baayen,R.&R.Schreuder.1999.War and peace:Morphemes and full forms in a non-interactive activation parallel dual-route model[J].Brain and Language,(68):27-32.
[4]Fiorentino,R.&E.Fund-Reznicek.2009.Masked morphological priming of compound constituents[J].Mental Lexicon,(2):159-193.
[5]Elston-Guttler,K.,S.Paulmann&S.Kotz.2005.Who’s in control?Proficiency and L1 influence on L2Processing[J].Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,(10):1593-1610.
[6]Giraudo,H.&J.Grainger.2001.Priming complex words:Evidence for supralexical representation of morphology[J].Psychonomic Bulletin&Review,(8):127-131.
[7]Ji,H.,C.Gagné&T.Spalding.2011.Benefits and costs of lexical decomposition and semantic integration during the processing of transparent and opaque English compounds[J].Journal of Memory and Language,(4):406-430.
[8]Kirkici,B.&H.Clahsen.2013.Inflection and derivation in native and non-native language processing:Masked priming experiments on Turkish[J].Bilingualism:Language and Cognition,(4):776-791.
[9]Kuperman,V.,R.Schreuder,R.Bertram&R.Baayen.2009.Reading Polymorphemic Dutch Compounds:Toward a Multiple Route Model of Lexical Processing[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance,(3):876-895.
[10]Li,M.,N.Jiang&K.Gor.2015.L1 and L2 processing of compound words:Evidence from masked priming experiments in English[J].Bilingualism:Language and Cognition,(2):384-402.
[11]Libben,G.1998.Semantic transparency in the processing of compounds:Consequences for representation,processing,and impairment[J].Brain&Language,(1):30-44.
[12]Macgregor,L.&Y.Shtyrov.2013.Multiple routes for compound word processing in the brain:Evidence from EEG[J].Brain and Language,(2):217-229.
[13]Marelli,M.&C.Luzzatti.2012.Frequency effects in the processing of Italian nominal compounds:Modulation of headness and semantic transparency[J].Journal of Memory and Language,(66):644-664.
[14]Raveh,M.2002.The contribution of frequency and semantic similarity to morphological processing[J].Brain Language,(81):312-325.
[15]Silva,R.&H.Clahsen.2008.Morphologically complex words in L1 and L2 processing:Evidence from masked priming experiments in English[J].Bilingualism:Language and Cognition,(11):245-260.
[16]Taft,M.&K.Forster.1975.Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words[J].Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,(14):638-647.
[17]Taft,M.&K.Forster.1976.Lexical storage and retrieval of polymorphemic and polysyllabic words[J].Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,(15):607-620.
[18]Ullman,M.2001.The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language:The declarative/procedural model[J].Bilingualism:Language and Cognition,(4):105-122.
[19]陈士法.2009.英语复合词在英汉心理词典中存储单位的实验研究[J].外语教学与研究,(3):211-216.
[20]甘彩虹张金桥.2013.重复启动条件下汉英双语者英语复合词的词汇通达机制[J].心理与行为研究,(5):595-600.
[21]余清萍.2017.基于时间进程的中国学习者英语复合词加工模式研究[J].现代外语,(5):654-663.
[22]赵晨.2014.中国英语学习者的名词性合成词表征及通达机制研究[J].现代外语,(6):815-825.
(1)目前有两种测量方法,侧重不同。一种看整词语义透明度(Ji et al.2011),该方法重语义合成;另一种是词素语义是否与整词语义相关(Libben et al.,2003),该方法重词素语义。本文同时采用这两种方法。
(2)本实验发现高水平组加工复合词类似本族语者,由于本族语者加工速度快于非本族语者(Li et al.,2015),高水平组加工速度应该快于低水平者,但是考虑到高水平组平均年龄远大于低水平者,且Baayen和Milin(2010)发现白发长者比黑发年轻人反应速度慢,可以推论高水平组词汇判断速度慢是年龄因素造成的。
[2]Baayen,R.,D.Davidson&D.Bates.2008.Mixed effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items[J].Journal of Memory and Language,(4):390-412.
[3]Baayen,R.&R.Schreuder.1999.War and peace:Morphemes and full forms in a non-interactive activation parallel dual-route model[J].Brain and Language,(68):27-32.
[4]Fiorentino,R.&E.Fund-Reznicek.2009.Masked morphological priming of compound constituents[J].Mental Lexicon,(2):159-193.
[5]Elston-Guttler,K.,S.Paulmann&S.Kotz.2005.Who’s in control?Proficiency and L1 influence on L2Processing[J].Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,(10):1593-1610.
[6]Giraudo,H.&J.Grainger.2001.Priming complex words:Evidence for supralexical representation of morphology[J].Psychonomic Bulletin&Review,(8):127-131.
[7]Ji,H.,C.Gagné&T.Spalding.2011.Benefits and costs of lexical decomposition and semantic integration during the processing of transparent and opaque English compounds[J].Journal of Memory and Language,(4):406-430.
[8]Kirkici,B.&H.Clahsen.2013.Inflection and derivation in native and non-native language processing:Masked priming experiments on Turkish[J].Bilingualism:Language and Cognition,(4):776-791.
[9]Kuperman,V.,R.Schreuder,R.Bertram&R.Baayen.2009.Reading Polymorphemic Dutch Compounds:Toward a Multiple Route Model of Lexical Processing[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance,(3):876-895.
[10]Li,M.,N.Jiang&K.Gor.2015.L1 and L2 processing of compound words:Evidence from masked priming experiments in English[J].Bilingualism:Language and Cognition,(2):384-402.
[11]Libben,G.1998.Semantic transparency in the processing of compounds:Consequences for representation,processing,and impairment[J].Brain&Language,(1):30-44.
[12]Macgregor,L.&Y.Shtyrov.2013.Multiple routes for compound word processing in the brain:Evidence from EEG[J].Brain and Language,(2):217-229.
[13]Marelli,M.&C.Luzzatti.2012.Frequency effects in the processing of Italian nominal compounds:Modulation of headness and semantic transparency[J].Journal of Memory and Language,(66):644-664.
[14]Raveh,M.2002.The contribution of frequency and semantic similarity to morphological processing[J].Brain Language,(81):312-325.
[15]Silva,R.&H.Clahsen.2008.Morphologically complex words in L1 and L2 processing:Evidence from masked priming experiments in English[J].Bilingualism:Language and Cognition,(11):245-260.
[16]Taft,M.&K.Forster.1975.Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words[J].Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,(14):638-647.
[17]Taft,M.&K.Forster.1976.Lexical storage and retrieval of polymorphemic and polysyllabic words[J].Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,(15):607-620.
[18]Ullman,M.2001.The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language:The declarative/procedural model[J].Bilingualism:Language and Cognition,(4):105-122.
[19]陈士法.2009.英语复合词在英汉心理词典中存储单位的实验研究[J].外语教学与研究,(3):211-216.
[20]甘彩虹张金桥.2013.重复启动条件下汉英双语者英语复合词的词汇通达机制[J].心理与行为研究,(5):595-600.
[21]余清萍.2017.基于时间进程的中国学习者英语复合词加工模式研究[J].现代外语,(5):654-663.
[22]赵晨.2014.中国英语学习者的名词性合成词表征及通达机制研究[J].现代外语,(6):815-825.
(1)目前有两种测量方法,侧重不同。一种看整词语义透明度(Ji et al.2011),该方法重语义合成;另一种是词素语义是否与整词语义相关(Libben et al.,2003),该方法重词素语义。本文同时采用这两种方法。
(2)本实验发现高水平组加工复合词类似本族语者,由于本族语者加工速度快于非本族语者(Li et al.,2015),高水平组加工速度应该快于低水平者,但是考虑到高水平组平均年龄远大于低水平者,且Baayen和Milin(2010)发现白发长者比黑发年轻人反应速度慢,可以推论高水平组词汇判断速度慢是年龄因素造成的。