普通话儿童疑问词原位习得研究
发布时间：2019-01-08 15:18
【摘要】：疑问词原位现象在伊拉克阿拉伯语,法语,印地文,马来文,黎巴嫩阿拉伯语,日语,韩语和汉语等不同语言中是有所不同的。对于普通话来说,疑问词原位可以有以下几种解读：(1)单元疑问句；(2)多元疑问句；(3)长距离逻辑式疑问词移位；(4)驴句；(5)否定极词。在逻辑式层面上,所有这些疑问词原位的表达式都可以由(6)这样的算子-变量结构表达出来。其中,疑问短语在语义上可以被拆分为算子(OP),变量(VAR)(x),约束(RES)和辖域(SCOPE): (6)[CP(OP,VAR(x),RES) C [Scope…x…]] 除了有大量文献探讨(6)表达式的衍生以及它在疑问词移位和疑问词原位中的条件,也不乏很多关于疑问词移位的习得研究,而对于疑问词原位习得的研究却是寥寥可数,更有甚者,几乎没有关于多元疑问句和驴句的习得研究。 本研究试图从普通话儿童习得疑问词原位的大量数据中对以上几种解读进行分析并给出一些尝试性的解释。相关的习得数据是来自2岁6个月到7岁11个月的698名普通话儿童完成的问题匹配图片任务。该试验的结果可总结如下： (一)3岁5个月以下的儿童中有50%能够理解疑问句的疑问属性；4岁到4岁11个月达到80%；5岁几乎能达到100%。 (二)在疑问词原位的习得发展中,儿童对于算子变量结构中的约束是敏感的。“事件”和“人物”的约束要易于“时间”、“地点”、“工具”和“方式”。最难的约束是“原因”。 (三)儿童对于变量的数目和出现次数也是相当敏感的。多元疑问句和驴句都是多个变量,所以它们的习得要难于单元疑问句。 (四)从显性移位语言中的长距离疑问词移位中我们可以看到儿童对于Spec-CP和原位疑问词的距离也是敏感的。超过40%的2岁6个月到4岁5个月的儿童和20%4岁6个月到7岁11个月的儿童在理解含有复杂NP的疑问短语的疑问句上有困难。 (五)疑问句的习得过程与极词的习得过程基本保持一致。 这些关于习得研究的事实表明： (六)儿童被赋予先验知识：(1)识别句类(包括C[+WH])；(2)算子变量结构的逻辑概念；(3)变量约束；(4)疑问句和驴句中null-OP[wH]的词汇选项。如Crain(2012)所述有关逻辑连词的本质,这些都是UG的一部分,在基本数据的基础上需要时间来圈定词汇选项或重新内化(Chomsky,2004).这就是为什么一些年幼的儿童在解读疑问句和驴句上比年长的儿童要缓慢,而年长的儿童在所有题项上都要好于年幼的儿童。 (七)算子变量结构的运算复杂性调节着儿童习得发展的时间轴。多元疑问句中典型的配对解读依附于同一从句中一个疑问算子约束两个以上的变量：0P{WH}(X,y)(…x…y…),但在驴句中,一个疑问算子是在两个从句中约束两次出现的同一变量：OP{WH}(x1,x2)((…x1…)(…x2…)).这种复杂的计算使得多元疑问句和驴句的习得变成了一个漫长的过程。这不能被归因于工作记忆的负担。
[Abstract]:The in situ phenomenon of interrogative words is different in different languages, such as Iraqi Arabic, French, Hindi, Malay, Lebanese Arabic, Japanese, Korean and Chinese. For Putonghua, interrogative words in situ can be interpreted as follows: (1) unit interrogative sentences; (2) multiple interrogative sentences; (3) long distance logical interrogative words shift; (4) donkey sentences; (5) negative polar words. At the logical level, all these expressions in situ can be expressed by the operator-variable structure (6). Among them, question phrases can be semantically split into operator (OP), variable (VAR) (x), constraint (RES) and domain (SCOPE): (6) [CP (OP,VAR (x), RES) C [Scope]. X.] In addition to a great deal of literature on the derivation of expression and its conditions in interrogative word shift and interrogative word in situ, there is also a lot of research on the acquisition of interrogative word shift, but there are few researches on interrogative word in situ acquisition. Moreover, there is little research on the acquisition of multiple questions and donkey sentences. This study attempts to analyze the above interpretations and give some tentative explanations from a large number of data on the acquisition of interrogative words in Putonghua. The relevant acquisition data were from 698 Putonghua children aged 2 years 6 months to 7 years 11 months. The results of the experiment can be summarized as follows: (1) 50% of children under 3 years of age and 5 months can understand the interrogative attribute of interrogative sentence, and 80% of the children aged 4 to 4 years 11 months can almost reach 100%. (2) in the development of in situ acquisition of interrogative words, children are sensitive to constraints in the structure of operator variables. Events and people are easily constrained by time, place, tool, and manner. The most difficult constraint is the cause. (III) Children are also sensitive to the number and frequency of variables. Multiple questions and donkey sentences are multiple variables, so they are difficult to acquire. (4) from the shift of long distance interrogative words in explicit shift language, we can see that children are also sensitive to the distance between Spec-CP and in situ interrogative words. More than 40 percent of children aged 2 years, 6 months to 4 months old and 5 months old and 20 years, 6 months to 7 months old and 11 months old have difficulty understanding interrogative sentences containing complex NP phrases. (5) the acquisition process of interrogative sentence is basically consistent with that of polar word acquisition. These facts show that: (6) Children are endowed with prior knowledge: (1) the logical concept of the structure of operator variables in identifying sentence classes (including C [WH]); (2); (3) variable constraints; (4) the lexical options of null-OP [wH] in interrogative and donkey sentences. The nature of logical conjunctions, as described by Crain (2012), is part of UG, and it takes time to encircle lexical options or re-internalize (Chomsky,2004) on the basis of basic data. This is why some young children interpret questions and donkey sentences more slowly than older children, while older children are better at all topics than young children. (7) the complexity of operator variable structure regulates the time axis of children's acquisition and development. A typical pair interpretation in a polymorphic interrogative sentence is attached to a question operator in the same clause that constrains more than two variables: 0P {WH} (XY) (. X. Y) But in donkey sentence, a interrogative operator is the same variable that appears twice in two clauses: OP {WH} (x1 + x 2) (. X1) ( X2) . This complicated calculation makes the acquisition of multiple questions and donkey sentences a long process. This cannot be attributed to the burden of working memory.
【学位授予单位】：天津师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：H193.1
本文编号：2404790
[Abstract]:The in situ phenomenon of interrogative words is different in different languages, such as Iraqi Arabic, French, Hindi, Malay, Lebanese Arabic, Japanese, Korean and Chinese. For Putonghua, interrogative words in situ can be interpreted as follows: (1) unit interrogative sentences; (2) multiple interrogative sentences; (3) long distance logical interrogative words shift; (4) donkey sentences; (5) negative polar words. At the logical level, all these expressions in situ can be expressed by the operator-variable structure (6). Among them, question phrases can be semantically split into operator (OP), variable (VAR) (x), constraint (RES) and domain (SCOPE): (6) [CP (OP,VAR (x), RES) C [Scope]. X.] In addition to a great deal of literature on the derivation of expression and its conditions in interrogative word shift and interrogative word in situ, there is also a lot of research on the acquisition of interrogative word shift, but there are few researches on interrogative word in situ acquisition. Moreover, there is little research on the acquisition of multiple questions and donkey sentences. This study attempts to analyze the above interpretations and give some tentative explanations from a large number of data on the acquisition of interrogative words in Putonghua. The relevant acquisition data were from 698 Putonghua children aged 2 years 6 months to 7 years 11 months. The results of the experiment can be summarized as follows: (1) 50% of children under 3 years of age and 5 months can understand the interrogative attribute of interrogative sentence, and 80% of the children aged 4 to 4 years 11 months can almost reach 100%. (2) in the development of in situ acquisition of interrogative words, children are sensitive to constraints in the structure of operator variables. Events and people are easily constrained by time, place, tool, and manner. The most difficult constraint is the cause. (III) Children are also sensitive to the number and frequency of variables. Multiple questions and donkey sentences are multiple variables, so they are difficult to acquire. (4) from the shift of long distance interrogative words in explicit shift language, we can see that children are also sensitive to the distance between Spec-CP and in situ interrogative words. More than 40 percent of children aged 2 years, 6 months to 4 months old and 5 months old and 20 years, 6 months to 7 months old and 11 months old have difficulty understanding interrogative sentences containing complex NP phrases. (5) the acquisition process of interrogative sentence is basically consistent with that of polar word acquisition. These facts show that: (6) Children are endowed with prior knowledge: (1) the logical concept of the structure of operator variables in identifying sentence classes (including C [WH]); (2); (3) variable constraints; (4) the lexical options of null-OP [wH] in interrogative and donkey sentences. The nature of logical conjunctions, as described by Crain (2012), is part of UG, and it takes time to encircle lexical options or re-internalize (Chomsky,2004) on the basis of basic data. This is why some young children interpret questions and donkey sentences more slowly than older children, while older children are better at all topics than young children. (7) the complexity of operator variable structure regulates the time axis of children's acquisition and development. A typical pair interpretation in a polymorphic interrogative sentence is attached to a question operator in the same clause that constrains more than two variables: 0P {WH} (XY) (. X. Y) But in donkey sentence, a interrogative operator is the same variable that appears twice in two clauses: OP {WH} (x1 + x 2) (. X1) ( X2) . This complicated calculation makes the acquisition of multiple questions and donkey sentences a long process. This cannot be attributed to the burden of working memory.
【学位授予单位】：天津师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：H193.1
【共引文献】
相关硕士学位论文 前3条
1 吴淼;汉英双语者WH-位移句子加工过程中心理机制的ERP研究[D];大连理工大学;2013年
2 李昭锦;中国英语学习者Wh-疑问句习得研究[D];北京外国语大学;2014年
3 杨先;普通话特殊型语言障碍儿童对全称量词“都”的习得研究[D];广东外语外贸大学;2013年
，本文编号：2404790
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/wenyilunwen/yuyanxuelw/2404790.html
