事件框架对初中英语动词教学的启示
|
摘要
目前,中国初中学生在英语动词使用上存在过多使用方式动词,并且路径动词使用错误率相对较高。英语教学研究早在二十世纪中期就进行了大量二语动词习得的讨论,到九十年代基本达成了动词比名词更难正确表达的共识。而国内更多的英语教学研究集中讨论词汇在听说读写中进行习得,对方式动词和路径动词在学习者英语初级学习阶段缺乏有针对性的教学方法。因此本研究基于类型学和Slobin的“为说而想”理论进行讨论,它涉及到中国初级中学学生的英语动词习得的动态过程,其目的在于开展事件框架概念在中学英语动词教学中的运用。在研究中,它呈现了中国的初中学生是如何在日常学习英语过程中,研究汉语和英语两种语言在事件框架理论下表达方式和路径。
该研究分析了来自东莞市某中学两个班级的学生的事件框架调查。这项研究的参与者包括104个初中的学生。首先研究先从语料库中抽取部分中国初中生较容易出错的内容进行呈现和讨论,然后在列出研究过程中所发现的各类路径动词中国学生的错误表达,分别进行分析讨论,并且研究提高正确率的方法。
这项研究表明：
(1)中国初中学生较多使用方式动词,而路径动词则相对使用较少。而且他们在描述事件框架的时候,倾向于重视描述运动的方式,而不是描述路径动词。普遍存在的情况：学生对“来”和“去”的正确的表达率非常低。
(2)另一个有趣的发现是,学生对方式动词的运用有一个相对低的使用趋势,尽管他们重视方式的表达,但涉及到“走”和“跑”的表达准确率较低。
(3)中国初中学生在以英语为二语的学习中,以事件框架为指导的语义表达中,对于英语本族语使用者经常使用的路径动词学习方面似乎有困难。然而,卫星语言的词汇和语法的特点似乎是从学生幼年开始就存在了,这让学生根据两种语言的话语特点,对于如何表达方式和路径进行发展认知,继续在其成长的同时慢慢地克服这些认知和语言的限制和趋势。
最后,该研究试图分析非母语学生在选择正确动词的决定因素：虽然中英文都是卫星语言,但学生在意识到语言的特殊性以及在事件框架指导下选择什么动词进行阐述,发展缓慢,而不是一蹴而就的。中国初级中学的英语教学人员可以尝试在两种语言的事件框架下,对动词及其短语进行分析教学,提高学生的正确表达率。
As early as the mid-twentieth century, researchers discussed about verb acquisition and did many experiments, and they made a conclusion that verb acquisition is more difficult than noun acquisition. In China, most researches focus on verb learning in the process of listening, speaking, reading and writing, but there are few teaching methods to teach students to learn manner verb and path verb correctly.
Recently, Chinese junior middle school students have a problem of over use manner verb than path verb, and in their expression, they make more errors of path verb than manner verb. Therefore, the present study is based on the typology and Slobin's thinking for speaking hypothesis, and it concerns the dynamic process of English verb acquisition in Chinese junior middles school students, and it is meant to continue to open up the concept of event-frames in teaching English verbs. In the research, it illustrated and examined how manner verb and path verb are expressed in event-frames characterization in daily English studying course among Chinese junior middle students.
The study analyzes the verb expressions of students from two classes of a junior middle school in Dongguan City, Guangdong Province. The participants of the study consisted of 104 junior middle school students. This project tried to examine factors that determine choosing correct verbs by non-native speakers. Firstly, the research collected error types of verb in the CLEC Corpus. Secondly, it classified the errors most frequently found in the middle school students'expressions. Thirdly, analyzing the errors in event-frames and discussion on the verb acquisition were illustrated.
Major results of this study show that: (1) Chinese junior middle school students in this study produced more correct manner verbs than path verbs. They also described event-frames by expressing manner and ignoring path more frequently than describing them by expressing path and ignoring manner. Besides, Chinese junior middle school students have difficulty in using path verbs meaning ENTER or EXIT.
(2) Apart from their attention to manner, another interesting finding of the present investigation was that some young students had a very low tendency to elaborate manner further than a particular level, for instance, WALK and RUN, despite their apparent attention bias to manner.
(3) The study presented in this paper indicated that a semantic focus in descriptions of event-frames by Chinese junior middle school students had difficulty using certain path verbs that are quite frequently used by English native speakers. However, the lexical and grammatical characteristics of S- languages seem to be in place from an early age, with regarding how manner and path are typically expressed, more general discourse characteristics of S-languages need to be learned by the students throughout their childhood. Maybe in this way, students can slowly overcome certain cognitive and linguistic limitations and tendencies.
Insights gained from this study are that language-specificity, in terms of what aspects of events are attended to and how much they are elaborated in verbal descriptions, develops slowly, rather than being mastered at an early age. Teachers may find out that the high accuracy of verb expression can be developed with the growth of the students'knowledge of verb with using the event-frames to teach English verb.
该研究分析了来自东莞市某中学两个班级的学生的事件框架调查。这项研究的参与者包括104个初中的学生。首先研究先从语料库中抽取部分中国初中生较容易出错的内容进行呈现和讨论,然后在列出研究过程中所发现的各类路径动词中国学生的错误表达,分别进行分析讨论,并且研究提高正确率的方法。
这项研究表明：
(1)中国初中学生较多使用方式动词,而路径动词则相对使用较少。而且他们在描述事件框架的时候,倾向于重视描述运动的方式,而不是描述路径动词。普遍存在的情况：学生对“来”和“去”的正确的表达率非常低。
(2)另一个有趣的发现是,学生对方式动词的运用有一个相对低的使用趋势,尽管他们重视方式的表达,但涉及到“走”和“跑”的表达准确率较低。
(3)中国初中学生在以英语为二语的学习中,以事件框架为指导的语义表达中,对于英语本族语使用者经常使用的路径动词学习方面似乎有困难。然而,卫星语言的词汇和语法的特点似乎是从学生幼年开始就存在了,这让学生根据两种语言的话语特点,对于如何表达方式和路径进行发展认知,继续在其成长的同时慢慢地克服这些认知和语言的限制和趋势。
最后,该研究试图分析非母语学生在选择正确动词的决定因素：虽然中英文都是卫星语言,但学生在意识到语言的特殊性以及在事件框架指导下选择什么动词进行阐述,发展缓慢,而不是一蹴而就的。中国初级中学的英语教学人员可以尝试在两种语言的事件框架下,对动词及其短语进行分析教学,提高学生的正确表达率。
As early as the mid-twentieth century, researchers discussed about verb acquisition and did many experiments, and they made a conclusion that verb acquisition is more difficult than noun acquisition. In China, most researches focus on verb learning in the process of listening, speaking, reading and writing, but there are few teaching methods to teach students to learn manner verb and path verb correctly.
Recently, Chinese junior middle school students have a problem of over use manner verb than path verb, and in their expression, they make more errors of path verb than manner verb. Therefore, the present study is based on the typology and Slobin's thinking for speaking hypothesis, and it concerns the dynamic process of English verb acquisition in Chinese junior middles school students, and it is meant to continue to open up the concept of event-frames in teaching English verbs. In the research, it illustrated and examined how manner verb and path verb are expressed in event-frames characterization in daily English studying course among Chinese junior middle students.
The study analyzes the verb expressions of students from two classes of a junior middle school in Dongguan City, Guangdong Province. The participants of the study consisted of 104 junior middle school students. This project tried to examine factors that determine choosing correct verbs by non-native speakers. Firstly, the research collected error types of verb in the CLEC Corpus. Secondly, it classified the errors most frequently found in the middle school students'expressions. Thirdly, analyzing the errors in event-frames and discussion on the verb acquisition were illustrated.
Major results of this study show that: (1) Chinese junior middle school students in this study produced more correct manner verbs than path verbs. They also described event-frames by expressing manner and ignoring path more frequently than describing them by expressing path and ignoring manner. Besides, Chinese junior middle school students have difficulty in using path verbs meaning ENTER or EXIT.
(2) Apart from their attention to manner, another interesting finding of the present investigation was that some young students had a very low tendency to elaborate manner further than a particular level, for instance, WALK and RUN, despite their apparent attention bias to manner.
(3) The study presented in this paper indicated that a semantic focus in descriptions of event-frames by Chinese junior middle school students had difficulty using certain path verbs that are quite frequently used by English native speakers. However, the lexical and grammatical characteristics of S- languages seem to be in place from an early age, with regarding how manner and path are typically expressed, more general discourse characteristics of S-languages need to be learned by the students throughout their childhood. Maybe in this way, students can slowly overcome certain cognitive and linguistic limitations and tendencies.
Insights gained from this study are that language-specificity, in terms of what aspects of events are attended to and how much they are elaborated in verbal descriptions, develops slowly, rather than being mastered at an early age. Teachers may find out that the high accuracy of verb expression can be developed with the growth of the students'knowledge of verb with using the event-frames to teach English verb.
引文
[1]Berman, R. A.,& D. I. Slobin.1994. Relating events in narratives:A crosslinguistic developmental study[M]. Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[2]Bowerman,M.,& S. Choi.2001. Shaping meanings for language:Universal and language-specific in the acquisition of spatial semantic categories[A]. In M. Bowerman & S. Levinson (Eds.) Language acquisition and conceptual development[C], 475-511. Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
[3]Choi, S.,& M. Bowerman.1991. Learning to express motion events in English and Korean:The influence of language-specific lexicalization patterns[A]. Cognition[C],41,83-121.
[4]Chu, C.2004. Event conceptualization and grammatical realization:The case of motion in Mandarin Chinese[D]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii.
[5]Ellis, R.1994. Studies of Second Language Acquisition [M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
[6]Fillmore, C.1982. Frame semantics. Linguistics in the morning calm[A], ed. By The Linguistic Society of Korea[C],111-137. Seoul:Hanshin Publishing Co.
[7]Gennari, S.,& S. Sloman.& B. Malt.& W. Fitch.2002. Motion events in language and cognition[A]. Cognition[J],83.49-79.
[8]Gentner, D.1978. On relational meaning:The acquisition of verb meaning[A]. Child Development[J] 49,988
[9]Gillette, J.H. Gleitman,& L. Gleitman,& A. Lederer.1998. Human simulations of vocabulary learning[A]. IRCS Tech Report 98-22. University of Pennsylvania.
[10]Gleitman, L.1944. The structural sources of verb meanings[A]. In P. Bloom (Ed.), Language Acquisition:Core Readings[C]. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press,184-221.
[11]Gropen, J.,& S. Pinker.,& M. Hollander.,& R. Goldberg.,1991. Syntax and semantics in the acquisition of locative verbs[A]. Journal of Child Language[J] 18.115-151.
[12]Jackendoff, R.1983. Semantics and cognition[M]. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
[13]Jackendoff, R.1990. Semantic structures[M]. Cambridge, Mass:MIT Press.
[14]Laufer, B.1989. What percentage of text-lexis is essential for comprehension?[A] In C. Lauren & L. Nordman (Eds.), Special language:From humans thinking to thinking machine[C] 316-323. Clevedon, UK:Multilingual Matters.
[15]Laufer, B.1992. How much lexis is necessary for reading comprehension?[A] In H. Bejoint & P. Arnaud (Eds.), Vocabulary and applied linguistics[C] 126-132. London:MacMillan.
[16]Laudar, B.& L. Gleitman.1985. Language and experience:Evidence from the blind child[M]. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
[17]Laufer, B.& P. Nation.1995. Vocabulary size and use:Lexical richness in L2 written production[A]. Applied Linguistics[J],16,3,307-322.
[18]Naigles, L.,& A. Eisenberg.,& E. Kako.,& M. Highter.,& N. McGraw.,1998. Speaking of motion:Verb use in English and Spanish[A]. Language and Cognitive Processes[J],13,521-549.
[19]Nation, I. S. P.1990. Teaching and learning vocabulary[M]. New York:Newbury House.
[20]Nation, I. S. P.2001. Learning vocabulary in another language[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[21]Pinker, S.1989. Learnability and cognition[M]. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
[22]Pinker, S.1994. How could a child use verb syntax to learn verb semantics?[A] In Gleitman, L. and Landar, B. (Eds.) The Acquisition of the Lexicon[J]. Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press,377-410.
[23]Quine, W.V.O.1960. Word and Object[M]. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
[24]Read, J.2000. Assessing vocabulary[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
[25]Rechards, J. C.1976. The role of vocabulary teaching[A]. TESOL Quarterly[J], 10(1),77-89.
[26]Rohde, A.2001. Analyzing PATH:The interplay of verbs prepositions and constructional semantics[D]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rice University.
[27]Singleton, D.1999. Exploring the second language mental lexicon[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
[28]Slobin, D.I.1985. Crosslinguistic evidence for the Language-Making Capacity[A]. In D.I. Slobin (Ed.) The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition:Vol.2. Theoretical issues[C] 1157-1256. Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erbaum Associates.
[29]Slobin, D.I.1996a. Two ways to travel:Verbs of motion in English and Spanish[A]. In M. Shibatani & S.A. Thompson (Eds.), Grammatical constructions:Their form and meaning [C].195-220. Oxford:Clarendonn Press.
[30]Slobin, D.I.1996b. From "thought and language" to "thinking for speaking." [A] In J. Gumperz, J. John,& S.C. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity[C] 70-96. Cambridge, MA:Cambridge University Press.
[31]Slobin, D.I.1997a. Mind, code, and text[A]. In J. Bybee, J. Haiman,& S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Essays on language function and language type: Dedicated to T. Givon[C].437-467. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
[32]Slobin, D.I.1997b. The universal, the typological, and the particular in acquisition[A]. In D. I. Slobin (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition, Vol.5.:Expanding the contexts[C] 1-40. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[33]Slobin, D.I.1998. Coding of motion events in texts[M]. Department of Psychology and Linguistics, University of California, Berkeley.
[34]Slobin, D.I.2000. Verbalized events:A dynamic approach to linguistic relativity and determinism[A]. In S. Niemeier & Dirven (Eds.), Evidence for linguistic relativity[C] 107-138. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
[35]Slobin, D.I.2001. Form-function relations:How do children find out what they are? [A]. In M. Bowerman & S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development[J] 406-449. Cambridge. MA:Cambridge University Press.
[36]Slobin, D.I.2003. Language and thought online:Cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity[A].. In D. Gentner & Goldin-Meadow (Eds.) Advances in the investigation of language and thought[C].157-192. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[37]Slobin, D.I.,& Hoiting, N.1994. Reference to movement in spoken and signed languages:Typological considerations[A]. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society[C] 20,487-505.
[38]Talmy, L.1975. Semantics and syntax of motion[A]. Syntax and semantics 4[C]. ed. By J.P. Kimball,181-238. New York:Academic Press.
[39]Talmy, L.1985. Lexicalization patterns:Semantic structure in lexical forms[A]. In T. Shopen (Ed.) Language typology and lexical description:Vol.3. Grammatical Categories and the lexicon[C] 36-149. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
[40]Talmy, L.1991. Path to realization:A typology of event conflation[A]. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society[C],17,480-519.
[41]Talmy, L.2000. Toward a cognitive semantics:Vol. Ⅱ:Typology and process in concept structuring[M]. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
[42]Tomasello, M. and A.C. Kruger.1992. Joint attention on actions:Acquiring verbs in ostensive and non-ostensive contexts[A]. Journal of Child Language[J] 19, 311-333.
[43]桂诗春、杨惠中,2003,中国学生英语库[M],上海：上海外语教育出版社。
[44]桂诗春,2004, 以语料库为基础的中国学习者英语错误分析的认知模型[J],现代外语(2)：129-139
[45]韩宝成,2000,外语教学科研中的统计方法[M],北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
[46]汪立荣,2003,语法及其研究与学习[J],广州大学学报(8)。
[47]汪立荣,2005, 概念整合理论对移就的阐释[J],现代外语(3)。
[48]文秋芳,俞洪亮,周维杰,2004,应用语言学研究方法与论文写作[M],北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
[2]Bowerman,M.,& S. Choi.2001. Shaping meanings for language:Universal and language-specific in the acquisition of spatial semantic categories[A]. In M. Bowerman & S. Levinson (Eds.) Language acquisition and conceptual development[C], 475-511. Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
[3]Choi, S.,& M. Bowerman.1991. Learning to express motion events in English and Korean:The influence of language-specific lexicalization patterns[A]. Cognition[C],41,83-121.
[4]Chu, C.2004. Event conceptualization and grammatical realization:The case of motion in Mandarin Chinese[D]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii.
[5]Ellis, R.1994. Studies of Second Language Acquisition [M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
[6]Fillmore, C.1982. Frame semantics. Linguistics in the morning calm[A], ed. By The Linguistic Society of Korea[C],111-137. Seoul:Hanshin Publishing Co.
[7]Gennari, S.,& S. Sloman.& B. Malt.& W. Fitch.2002. Motion events in language and cognition[A]. Cognition[J],83.49-79.
[8]Gentner, D.1978. On relational meaning:The acquisition of verb meaning[A]. Child Development[J] 49,988
[9]Gillette, J.H. Gleitman,& L. Gleitman,& A. Lederer.1998. Human simulations of vocabulary learning[A]. IRCS Tech Report 98-22. University of Pennsylvania.
[10]Gleitman, L.1944. The structural sources of verb meanings[A]. In P. Bloom (Ed.), Language Acquisition:Core Readings[C]. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press,184-221.
[11]Gropen, J.,& S. Pinker.,& M. Hollander.,& R. Goldberg.,1991. Syntax and semantics in the acquisition of locative verbs[A]. Journal of Child Language[J] 18.115-151.
[12]Jackendoff, R.1983. Semantics and cognition[M]. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
[13]Jackendoff, R.1990. Semantic structures[M]. Cambridge, Mass:MIT Press.
[14]Laufer, B.1989. What percentage of text-lexis is essential for comprehension?[A] In C. Lauren & L. Nordman (Eds.), Special language:From humans thinking to thinking machine[C] 316-323. Clevedon, UK:Multilingual Matters.
[15]Laufer, B.1992. How much lexis is necessary for reading comprehension?[A] In H. Bejoint & P. Arnaud (Eds.), Vocabulary and applied linguistics[C] 126-132. London:MacMillan.
[16]Laudar, B.& L. Gleitman.1985. Language and experience:Evidence from the blind child[M]. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
[17]Laufer, B.& P. Nation.1995. Vocabulary size and use:Lexical richness in L2 written production[A]. Applied Linguistics[J],16,3,307-322.
[18]Naigles, L.,& A. Eisenberg.,& E. Kako.,& M. Highter.,& N. McGraw.,1998. Speaking of motion:Verb use in English and Spanish[A]. Language and Cognitive Processes[J],13,521-549.
[19]Nation, I. S. P.1990. Teaching and learning vocabulary[M]. New York:Newbury House.
[20]Nation, I. S. P.2001. Learning vocabulary in another language[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[21]Pinker, S.1989. Learnability and cognition[M]. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
[22]Pinker, S.1994. How could a child use verb syntax to learn verb semantics?[A] In Gleitman, L. and Landar, B. (Eds.) The Acquisition of the Lexicon[J]. Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press,377-410.
[23]Quine, W.V.O.1960. Word and Object[M]. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
[24]Read, J.2000. Assessing vocabulary[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
[25]Rechards, J. C.1976. The role of vocabulary teaching[A]. TESOL Quarterly[J], 10(1),77-89.
[26]Rohde, A.2001. Analyzing PATH:The interplay of verbs prepositions and constructional semantics[D]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rice University.
[27]Singleton, D.1999. Exploring the second language mental lexicon[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
[28]Slobin, D.I.1985. Crosslinguistic evidence for the Language-Making Capacity[A]. In D.I. Slobin (Ed.) The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition:Vol.2. Theoretical issues[C] 1157-1256. Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erbaum Associates.
[29]Slobin, D.I.1996a. Two ways to travel:Verbs of motion in English and Spanish[A]. In M. Shibatani & S.A. Thompson (Eds.), Grammatical constructions:Their form and meaning [C].195-220. Oxford:Clarendonn Press.
[30]Slobin, D.I.1996b. From "thought and language" to "thinking for speaking." [A] In J. Gumperz, J. John,& S.C. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity[C] 70-96. Cambridge, MA:Cambridge University Press.
[31]Slobin, D.I.1997a. Mind, code, and text[A]. In J. Bybee, J. Haiman,& S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Essays on language function and language type: Dedicated to T. Givon[C].437-467. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
[32]Slobin, D.I.1997b. The universal, the typological, and the particular in acquisition[A]. In D. I. Slobin (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition, Vol.5.:Expanding the contexts[C] 1-40. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[33]Slobin, D.I.1998. Coding of motion events in texts[M]. Department of Psychology and Linguistics, University of California, Berkeley.
[34]Slobin, D.I.2000. Verbalized events:A dynamic approach to linguistic relativity and determinism[A]. In S. Niemeier & Dirven (Eds.), Evidence for linguistic relativity[C] 107-138. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
[35]Slobin, D.I.2001. Form-function relations:How do children find out what they are? [A]. In M. Bowerman & S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development[J] 406-449. Cambridge. MA:Cambridge University Press.
[36]Slobin, D.I.2003. Language and thought online:Cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity[A].. In D. Gentner & Goldin-Meadow (Eds.) Advances in the investigation of language and thought[C].157-192. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[37]Slobin, D.I.,& Hoiting, N.1994. Reference to movement in spoken and signed languages:Typological considerations[A]. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society[C] 20,487-505.
[38]Talmy, L.1975. Semantics and syntax of motion[A]. Syntax and semantics 4[C]. ed. By J.P. Kimball,181-238. New York:Academic Press.
[39]Talmy, L.1985. Lexicalization patterns:Semantic structure in lexical forms[A]. In T. Shopen (Ed.) Language typology and lexical description:Vol.3. Grammatical Categories and the lexicon[C] 36-149. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
[40]Talmy, L.1991. Path to realization:A typology of event conflation[A]. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society[C],17,480-519.
[41]Talmy, L.2000. Toward a cognitive semantics:Vol. Ⅱ:Typology and process in concept structuring[M]. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
[42]Tomasello, M. and A.C. Kruger.1992. Joint attention on actions:Acquiring verbs in ostensive and non-ostensive contexts[A]. Journal of Child Language[J] 19, 311-333.
[43]桂诗春、杨惠中,2003,中国学生英语库[M],上海：上海外语教育出版社。
[44]桂诗春,2004, 以语料库为基础的中国学习者英语错误分析的认知模型[J],现代外语(2)：129-139
[45]韩宝成,2000,外语教学科研中的统计方法[M],北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
[46]汪立荣,2003,语法及其研究与学习[J],广州大学学报(8)。
[47]汪立荣,2005, 概念整合理论对移就的阐释[J],现代外语(3)。
[48]文秋芳,俞洪亮,周维杰,2004,应用语言学研究方法与论文写作[M],北京：外语教学与研究出版社。