基于语料库的译林版和人教版小学英语教材词汇对比分析

发布时间：2018-05-12 22:17

本文选题：语料库方法 + 词汇　；参考：《扬州大学》2016年硕士论文

【摘要】：众所周知,词汇在教材中具有重要的地位和作用。本文将采用语料库的方法对比分析人教版小学英语教材和译林版小学英语教材中的词汇。本文主要的研究问题：1)译林版小学英语教材词汇和人教版小学英语教材词汇对新课程标准所规定的二级词汇表的覆盖情况是否存在差异?如果有,差异主要表现在哪些方面?2)译林版小学英语教材词汇和人教版小学英语教材词汇在词汇册次间的过渡是否存在差异?如果有,差异主要表现在哪些方面?本文采用了语料库研究的方法,自建了两个小型语料库并进行分析。在分析的过程中所使用的工具分别是Range和Wordsmith Tools 5.0。Range用于讨论这两套教材对课标词汇的覆盖情况。使用Wordsmith Tools 5.0中的词表(WordList),我们可以研究词汇册次间的过渡是否合理。本研究得出如下的结论：第一,尽管两套教材的形符总量有些差异,译林版共有24959个形符,PEP版则有21849个形符,两套教材对于新课标二级词汇表的覆盖情况比较相似。大约有一半的类符是课标以外的；这些类符在教材中并没有很高的重复率,因为它们相应的形符在形符总量中所占比率不高,译林是19.11%,人教版是20.4%。两套教材大多数的形符是符合新课程标准的要求第二,这两套教材在词汇册次间的过渡上有相同点也有不同点。从3A到6B,二者的类符皆呈增长的趋势。年级相同,这两套教材的类符增长是比较平稳的,比如4A和4B之间。但是不同年级之间,这两套教材的类符增长是迅速的,比如4B和5A之间。从3A到6B,这两套教材的STTR值都呈现增长的趋势。但是,这二者间的差异值得我们关注。从类符的角度进行分析,首先,在人教版教材中,6B的形符下降了144个；第二,在人教版教材当中,除了6B以外,每一册的类符相比译林版都要多些；第三,在不同年级之间,人教版教材的增长不如译林版教材迅速,这表明了不同年级之间人教版教材的过渡更加平稳。从STTR角度进行分析,首先,人教版教材3A的STTR值比译林版教材3A的STTR值高,前者是23.7%,后者是18%；第二,在人教版教材中,从4A到4B,STTR值有些许下降(从22.45%到22.33%),从4B到5A, STTR值呈现上升的趋势(从22.33%到28.03%)；译林版教材中,从3B到4A,STTR值忽然增加(从20.2%到25.6%),但是从6A到6B又呈现些许下降趋势(从27.95%到26.94%)。总之,这两套教材各自都拥有它们的缺点和优点。这两套教材对教师和教材编写者都具有重要的意义。本研究能够帮助教师更好的利用教材中的词汇,学会用客观的方式去分析和评价教材。对于教材编写者来说,它能够帮助他们更加有效的编写教材词汇当然,该研究不可避免的有一些局限性。首先,对于非课标词汇的选择与控制,本文并没有详细分析；其次,由于时间和精力有限,该研究只选取了两套教材的词汇进行研究。
[Abstract]:As we all know, vocabulary plays an important role in textbooks. In this paper, a corpus method is used to compare and analyze the vocabulary in the primary school English teaching material and the translated version of the primary school English textbook. The main research question of this paper is: (1) is there a difference in the coverage of the vocabulary of primary school English textbooks in Yilin version and that of the vocabulary of primary school English textbooks in human education edition in the secondary vocabulary list stipulated in the new curriculum standard? If so, what are the main aspects of the difference? (2) are there any differences between the vocabulary of primary school English textbooks in Yilin version and the vocabulary of primary school English textbooks in human education edition in terms of lexical order? If so, what are the main aspects of the difference? In this paper, two small corpuscles are built and analyzed by using the method of corpus research. The tools used in the analysis are Range and Wordsmith Tools 5.0.Range, respectively, to discuss the coverage of the two sets of textbooks to the syllabus vocabulary. Using the word list in Wordsmith Tools 5.0, we can study whether the transition between lexical canonings is reasonable. The conclusions of this study are as follows: first, although there are some differences in the total number of shapes and symbols between the two sets of textbooks, there are 24959 characters in the translated forest version and 21849 characters in the PEP edition, and the two sets of textbooks have similar coverage for the new syllabus two levels of vocabulary. About half of the class characters are outside the curricular standard; they do not have a high repetition rate in the textbook, because their corresponding form characters account for a low percentage of the total number of shapes and symbols, the Yilin is 19.11, and the teaching version is 20.4. Most of the two sets of textbooks meet the requirements of the new curriculum standards. Second, there are similarities and differences between the two sets of textbooks in the transition of lexical canonization. From 3A to 6B, both of the characters are on the rise. At the same grade, the two sets of classes are relatively stable growth, such as 4A and 4 B. However, between grades, the two sets of classes are growing rapidly, as between 4 B and 5A. From 3A to 6B, the STTR values of the two sets of textbooks showed an increasing trend. However, the difference between the two deserves our attention. From the perspective of class characters, first, in the teaching materials of the teaching edition, there are 144 fewer characters in the shape symbols; second, in the teaching materials of the teaching edition of people, except 6B, the number of characters in each volume is more than that in the translated forest version; third, between different grades, the number of characters in each volume is more than that of the translated forest version; third, between different grades, the number of characters in each volume is higher than that in the translated forest version. The increase of teaching materials is not as fast as that of translated version, which indicates that the transition of teaching materials between different grades is more stable. From the perspective of STTR, first of all, the STTR value of 3A is higher than the STTR value of 3A in translation edition, the former is 23.7and the latter is 180.The second, in the teaching material of human education, The STTR values from 4A to 4B decreased slightly (from 22.45% to 22.33%, from 4B to 5A, from 22.33% to 28.03%, from 22.33% to 28.03%; from 3B to 4A, from 20.2% to 25.6%, but from 6A to 6B, from 27.95% to 26.94%). In short, the two sets of teaching materials each have their shortcomings and advantages. These two sets of textbooks are of great significance to both teachers and textbook writers. This study can help teachers make better use of the vocabulary in the textbooks and learn to analyze and evaluate the textbooks in an objective way. For textbook writers, it can help them to write textbook vocabulary more effectively, of course, the study inevitably has some limitations. First of all, there is no detailed analysis on the choice and control of non-curricular vocabulary. Secondly, due to the limited time and energy, the study only selects two sets of textbooks to study the vocabulary.
【学位授予单位】：扬州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：G624.31

【相似文献】