基于语料库的中国英语专业学生英语作文中双宾构式研究

发布时间：2018-05-09 10:27

本文选题：双宾构式 + 构式语法　；参考：《郑州大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：双宾构式,即传统语法上的NP+V+NP1+NP2结构,一直是各语言学流派的研究热点,而Goldberg的构式语法体系更是对双宾构式进行了较系统的研究,为双宾构式的理解提供了新的理论指导,在学界产生了较大影响。同时,语料库语言学的发展使得双宾构式的实证研究也日益增加,但之前国内的相关研究主要以中国非英语专业学生为主体,而针对中国英语专业学生的研究很少。本研究以Goldberg的构式语法为理论框架,基于CLEC和LOCNESS,试探析以下两个问题:(1)与英语本族语者相比,中国英语专业学生在双宾构式的使用上有什么特征?(2)不同水平的中国英语专业学生在双宾构式的使用上有何差异?为回答以上两个问题,本研究以85个常见双宾动词为切入点,借助Excel和Log-likelihood value calculator,从动词类型、构式意义分布和论元三个方面考察CLEC和LOCNESS语料库中双宾构式的使用情况。研究发现:(1)中国英语专业学生与本族语者相比,就构式意义分布而言,前者多用中心意义“成功转移”,而少用“打算转移”意义;就“施事”论元而言,前者多用“有生命”施事,后者倾向使用“无生命”施事;就“接受者”论元而言,前者过度依赖“有生命”代词,后者对“有生命”名词和“有生命”代词的使用无明显差异;就“受事者”论元而言,前者多用“物体类”、“交流类”和“感知类”受事,后者多用“其他类”受事。(2)低水平和高水平中国英语专业学生相比,就构式意义分布而言,前者多用中心意义,少用延伸意义,且使用的动词类型较少;就“施事”论元而言,前者多用“有生命”施事,后者多用“无生命”施事;就“接受者”论元而言,前者完全依赖“有生命”接受者,未用“无生命”接受者,后者兼顾使用“无生命”接受者;就“受事者”论元而言,前者常用“交流类”受事,后者多用“其他类”受事。总体上,中国英语专业学生与本族语者比,及低水平与高水平中国英语专业学生比,对此构式的动词类型、构式意义分布和论元的使用有明显差异。基于以上研究发现,本研究从构式语法角度为外语教学中的语法教学提出了一些建议,希望对外语教学有所帮助。
[Abstract]:The double object construction, which is the NP V NP1 NP2 structure in traditional grammar, has always been a hot topic in various linguistic schools, and the construction grammar system of Goldberg has made a systematic study on the double object construction. It provides a new theoretical guidance for the understanding of double object construction and has a great influence in academic circles. At the same time, with the development of corpus linguistics, the empirical study of double-object construction is increasing day by day. However, previous studies mainly focused on Chinese non-English majors, but few on Chinese English majors. This study takes Goldberg's construction grammar as the theoretical framework, based on CLEC and LOCNESS, tries to analyze the following two questions: 1) compared with native English speakers. What are the characteristics of Chinese English majors in the use of double object constructions? (2) what are the differences in the use of double object constructions among Chinese English majors at different levels? In order to answer the above two questions, using 85 common double-object verbs as the starting point and with the help of Excel and Log-likelihood value calculator, this study investigates the use of double-object constructions in CLEC and LOCNESS corpus from three aspects: verb type, construction meaning distribution and argument. The study found that Chinese English majors, compared with their native speakers, use the central meaning of "successful transfer" rather than the meaning of "intended transfer" in terms of the distribution of constructional meaning, and in the case of "agent" argument, the former is more likely to use the "successful transfer" than the "intended transfer". The former often uses "living" agents, while the latter tends to use "inanimate" agents; in the case of "receiver" arguments, the former excessively relies on "living" pronouns. The latter has no significant difference in the use of "living" nouns and "living" pronouns; in the case of "subject" arguments, the former uses "object class", "communication class" and "perceptual class". In the latter case, compared with the high level Chinese English majors, the former uses more central meaning, less extended meaning, and fewer verb types; in the case of "agent" argument, the former uses more central meaning, less extended meaning and fewer verb types. The former mostly uses "living" agent, the latter "inanimate"; as far as the "recipient" argument is concerned, the former totally depends on "living" receiver, not "inanimate" recipient, while the latter uses "inanimate" recipient; As far as the subject argument is concerned, the former often uses the communication type of patient, while the latter uses the other type of patient. In general, there are significant differences in the verb types, the distribution of construction meaning and the use of arguments between Chinese English majors and native speakers, as well as between low and high level Chinese English majors. Based on the above findings, this study puts forward some suggestions for grammar teaching in foreign language teaching from the perspective of construction grammar, hoping to be helpful to foreign language teaching.
【学位授予单位】：郑州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：H319.3

【相似文献】