Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/149462
|
Title: | 華語3D分類詞之認知基礎與教學應用——以「間、棟、座、所、家、幢」為例 Cognitive Basis and Pedagogical Applications of Mandarin 3D Classifiers: Taking “Jian, Dong, Zuo, Suo, Jia, Chuang” as Examples |
Authors: | 黃兆薇 Huang, Zhao-Wei |
Contributors: | 張郇慧 陳淳迪 Chang, Hsun-Huei Chen, Chun-Di 黃兆薇 Huang, Zhao-Wei |
Keywords: | 分類詞 華語教學 認知 具象化 Classifiers Teaching Chinese as a Second Language Cognition Visualization |
Date: | 2023 |
Issue Date: | 2024-02-01 10:53:04 (UTC+8) |
Abstract: | 分類詞(classifier)是華語一項重要且特殊的詞類。學界對分類詞的討論精深多元,在對外華語教學領域中,分類詞教學卻明顯不足,對學習者而言,更是一大學習難點;學生在分類詞學習上的困擾,是華語教學工作者面臨的考驗,也是研究者欲深究的議題。研究者以分類詞「間、棟、座、所、家、幢」為題,研究目的有二,一是釐清華語母語者對分類詞「間、棟、座、所、家、幢」的使用偏好與認知,二是將研究結果以圖像應用於華語教學之中,提供教案示例與建議。 本研究採用的研究方法分為兩階段,第一階段是語料庫研究,第二階段為問卷實驗調查。在語料庫研究中,研究者首先歸納辭典語義,接著整理本組分類詞在語料庫中的分佈情形,進一步分析出共現搭配詞的視覺特徵。在第二階段的問卷實驗裡,研究者根據前一階段的分析結果,繪製具不同視覺特徵的3D模型與2D圖片,再請30位受試者選擇分類詞的接受程度,同步進行訪談調查,以探討體積、形狀及文化符號對分類詞使用偏好的影響。最後,本研究彙整實驗結果,提供分類詞教材建議與教案示例。 研究結果顯示,分類詞「間」常用於小型而沒有尖端頂部的建築,因其泛用性使它能與各種不同的文化符號搭配;分類詞「棟」適用於高大建築,形狀多為長方體,著重於高度和形狀的描述,不太受文化符號影響。分類詞「座」多見於大型建築,形狀以具備大底面積為主,並可與宗教相關建築結合。分類詞「所」更強調抽象指涉,體積取決於搭配名詞,形狀偏向方正,常見於正式或非營利場所。分類詞「家」通常與小型建築相關,形狀偏向方形,常與商業或品牌場所相聯繫。最後,分類詞「幢」的使用多樣,外型上主要受高度影響,功能方面則似乎與可居住的華美建築有關。 本研究採用3D模型影片作為輔助,拓展了以往僅限於2D圖片的研究設計,能更深入的討論分類詞的外顯知覺。其學術價值體現於將理論與實際教學結合,以實驗了解母語者認知,進而驗證了使用圖像進行分類詞教學的可行性。 Classifiers in Mandarin Chinese represent a crucial and distinctive part of its lexical structure. While academia extensively discusses the intricacies of classifiers, their pedagogical treatment in the field of teaching Chinese as a foreign language remains noticeably inadequate. The challenges faced by learners in understanding classifiers present a significant hurdle, posing both a test for Chinese language educators and an intriguing subject for researchers. This study focuses on the classifiers “間 (jiān), 棟 (dòng), 座 (zuò), 所 (suǒ), 家 (jiā), 幢 (chuáng)” with dual objectives: to elucidate the usage preferences and cognitive patterns of native Mandarin speakers regarding these classifiers and to apply the research findings through visual aids in teaching Chinese as a second language, offering pedagogical suggestions and lesson examples.
This research employs a two-phase methodology. The first phase involves a corpus study, where the researcher initially synthesizes dictionary semantics, organizes the distribution of the classifiers in the corpus, and further analyzes the visual features of collocations. In the second phase, a questionnaire-based experimental investigation is conducted. Building on the analysis from the first phase, this research creates 3D models and 2D images with distinct visual characteristics. Thirty participants are then asked to assess the acceptability of these classifiers, accompanied by simultaneous interviews to explore the impact of volume, shape, and cultural symbols on usage preferences. The results indicate that the classifier “間” is commonly used for small buildings without pointed tops, owing to its versatility that allows it to blend with various cultural symbols. “棟” is suitable for tall structures with a predominantly rectangular shape, emphasizing height and shape descriptors, with minimal influence from cultural symbols. “座” is prevalent in large buildings, characterized by a large base area and often associated with religious structures. “所” emphasizes abstract reference, with volume determined by the accompanying noun, exhibiting a preference for a square shape and commonly found in formal or non-profit places. “家” is typically associated with small buildings, leaning towards a square shape and often linked with commercial or brand-related locations. Finally, the usage of “幢” is diverse, primarily influenced by height in terms of appearance and seemingly associated with luxurious habitable structures. The incorporation of 3D model videos in this study supplements the traditional use of 2D images, enabling a more in-depth discussion of the explicit perceptions of classifiers. The academic value is manifested in the integration of theory with practical teaching, leveraging experiments to understand native speakers’ cognition and validating the feasibility of using images for classifier instruction. |
Reference: | 中文書目 田意民、曾志朗、洪蘭(2002)。漢語分類詞的語義與認知基礎:功能語法觀點。語言暨語言學,3(1),101-132。 石毓智(2001)。表物體形狀的量詞的認知基礎。語言教學與研究,1,34-41。 朱德熙(1982)。語法講義。北京:商務印書館。 何安平(1997)。談語料庫研究。外國語學報,5,21-26。 吳昭亮(2010)。台灣客家話量詞研究。(碩士論文。國立中央大學)臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/22ax9t 吳莉雯(2001)。臺灣四縣客語量詞系統研究。(碩士論文。國立中正大學)臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/52myb5 吳毓瑩(1996)。量表奇偶點數的效度議題。調查研究—方法與應用,2,5-34。 呂叔湘(1980)。現代漢語八百詞。北京:商務印書館。 李曉鳳(2008)。初級量詞活動教學研究。(碩士論文。國立臺灣師範大學)臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 https://hdl.handle.net/11296/2z5xkx。 周新富(2007)。教育研究法。臺北:五南。 宗守云(2011)。量詞範疇化的途徑和動因。上海師範大學學報,40(3),109-116。 林金定、嚴嘉楓、陳美花(2005)。質性研究方法:訪談模式與實施步驟分析。身心障礙研究,3(2),122-136。 邱湘雲(2007)。閩南語和客家話的「量詞」-與國語比較。玄奘人文學報,(7),175-206。https://doi.org/10.29956/HCHJ.200707.0007 姚雙雲、樊中元(2002)。漢語空間義量詞考察。湖南師範大學社會科學學報,31(6),101-112。 國立臺灣師範大學(2015)。當代中文課程(全冊)。臺北:正中書局。 國立臺灣師範大學主編(2008)。實用視聽華語1。臺北:正中書局。 國立臺灣師範大學國語教學中心(2008)。新版實用視聽華語(第一版全冊)。臺北:正中書局。 國家華語測驗推動工作委員會(2018)。華語八千詞。國家華語測驗推動工作委員會。 張紹勳(2004)。研究方法。臺中:滄海書局。 教育部(2023)。幼兒園行政組織及員額編制標準。臺北:教育部。 陳羿如(2012)。量詞與分類詞:教學的反思與建議。(碩士論文。國立政治大學)臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/5k3p4p。 陳韻伃(2003)。臺灣閩南語及客語量詞系統比較研究。(碩士論文。國立中正大學)臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/nq883a 黃居仁、陳克健、賴慶雄主編(1997)。國語日報量詞典。臺北:國語日報出版中心。 黃寶園(2006)。心理與教育研究法。臺北:華立圖書。 葉德明主編(2002)。遠東生活華語(全冊)。臺北:遠東圖書公司。 廖加穎(2021)。華語教材常用量詞之辨析與教學應用。(碩士論文。國立臺灣師範大學)臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統https://hdl.handle.net/11296/m5x839。 劉月華、潘文娛、故韡(1996)。實用現代漢語語法繁體版。臺北:師大書苑。 蔡貴琳(2016)。近義量詞「間、家、所」、「部、台、輛」之搭配分析及教學應用--以語料庫為本。(碩士論文。國立臺中教育大學)臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 https://hdl.handle.net/11296/mvyt2y。 鄭昭明(2006)。認知心理學——理論與實踐。臺北:學富文化。 鄭媛(2021)。區分華語量詞與分類詞對教學運用之分析。(碩士論文。國立政治大學)臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/5behp4。 賴慶雄(2012)。實用量詞用法詞典。新北:小螢火蟲出版社。
外文書目 Adams, K. L. & Conklin, N. F. (1973). Toward a theory of natural classification. Paper from Ninth Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistics Society, 1-10. Ahrens, K. & Huang, C. R. (1996). Classifiers and semantic type coercion: motivating a new classification of classifiers. Proceedings from the 11th Pacific Asia Conference in Language Information and Computation. Kyung Hee University, 1-10. Aikhenvald, A. (2000). Classifiers: A typology of noun categorization devices. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Allan K. (1977). Classifiers. Language, 53(2), 285-311. Barthes, R. (1977). Image-music-text (Selected and Translated by Stephen Heath). Landon: Fontana Press. Chao, Y. R. (1968). A Grammar of Spoken Chinese. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Her, O. S. & Hsieh, C. T. (2010). On the semantic distinction between classifiers and measure words in Chinese. Language and Linguistics, 11(3), 527-551. Her, O. S. (2012). Distinguishing classifiers and measure words: A mathematical perspective and implications. Lingua, 122(14), 1668-1691. Her, O. S. (2012). Structure of classifiers and measure words: a lexical functional account. Language and Linguistics, 13:6: 1211-1251. Kavokina, I. (2023). The Near-Synonymous Classifiers in Mandarin Chinese: Etymology, Modern Usage, And Possible Problems in L2 Classroom. Masters Theses. 1386. Labov, W. (1973). The boundaries of words and their meanings. In C.-J. N. Bailey & R. W. Shuy (Eds.). New ways of analyzing variation in English. Washington, D. C.: Georgetown University Press. Lakoff, G. (1987a). Woman, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the World. Chicago: The Univeristy of Chicago Press. Li, Charles. & Thompson, Sandra. (1981). Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press. Mitchell, W. J. T. (1994). Picture Theory: Essays on Verbal and Visual Representation. University of Chicago Press. Mitchell, W. J. T. (2005). What Do Pictures Want: The Lives and Loves of Images. The University of Chicago Press. Peirce, C. S. (1974). Collected papers of charles sanders peirce (Vol. 2). Harvard University Press. Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In Rosch & Lloyd (eds.). Cognition and Categorization, 27-48. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Saussure, F. (1966). Course in general linguistics (W. Baskin, trans.). New York: McGraw-Hill Book. (Original work published 1949). Tai, James H-Y. & Chao, F. (1994). A semantic study of the classifier zhang (張). Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, 29(3), 67-78. Tai, James H-Y. & Wang, Lianqing. (1990). A semantic study of the classifier tiao (條). Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, 25(1), 35-56. Tai, James H-Y. (1992). Variation in classifier systems across Chinese dialects: towards a cognition-based semantic approach. Chinese Languages and Linguistics, 1, 587-608. Tai, James H-Y. (1994). Chinese classifier system and human categorization. In Chen M. & Tzeng, O. (ed). Essays In Honor of Professor William S-Y Wang, 479-494. Taipei: Pyramid Publishing Company. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.
線上資源 中央研究院現代漢語平衡語料庫4.0版:http://asbc.iis.sinica.edu.tw/ 教育部重編國語辭典修訂本:http://dict.revised.moe.edu.tw/cbdic/ 全國法規資料庫:https://law.moj.gov.tw/ |
Description: | 碩士 國立政治大學 華語文教學碩博士學位學程 106161014 |
Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106161014 |
Data Type: | thesis |
Appears in Collections: | [華語文教學博/碩士學位學程] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
101401.pdf | | 9762Kb | Adobe PDF | 1 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|