打印1词块理论在高中英语阅读中的应用_张国林.docx

《打印1词块理论在高中英语阅读中的应用_张国林.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《打印1词块理论在高中英语阅读中的应用_张国林.docx（78页珍藏版）》请在淘文阁 - 分享文档赚钱的网站上搜索。

1、福建师范人学硕十学位论文 中文摘要 阅读是第二语言学习一项重要的技能。外语教学的其中一个主要目的就 是培养学生的阅读理解能力，因此，从事第二语言学习的专家学者、外语老 师和教育工作者从不同的角度对阅读进行了研究并且在阅读方面作出了极大 的成果。学生在阅读中一个主要的难点是不能理解课文中的词块。然而词块 不同与传统上的词汇，它是语篇功能和语篇意义的结合。为了要想正确理解 语篇，必须掌握这些固定、半固定的词块。也就是说，学习理解生成语篇并 不是对孤立的词和句子的学习，而是学习如何将这些语言的预制结构有机地 结合起来。基于对目前阅读教学模式的描述，认为传统的阅读方法应该改进， 因为这种教学方法过于

2、“ 教师满堂灌 ” ，使阅读效果不显著。这篇论文考察了 阅读的主要缺陷，提出了应用词块理论融入阅读教学中来解决问题。有关研 究调查表明词块在英语阅读课堂教学的必要性，并且能用这理论来提高阅读 理解能力。为了验证词块教学的有效性，作者设计了一个实验并取的相关的 数据，这个实验持续了一个学期，在两次测试中实验班和控制班具有的显著性 差异，因此，运用词块理论能提高学生的阅读理解能力。 关键词： 词块 ;词汇法；阅读能力 福建师范人学硕士学位论文 Abstract Reading is one of the most important skills in second language learni

3、ng. As one of the leading goals of foreign language teaching is to cultivate the students5 reading ability, teachers, linguistics and educators involved in second language learning have pursued researches into reading teaching from different aspects, and made great contribution to reading teaching.

4、One of the difficult points in students reading is their failure to comprehend the lexical chunks in the text. However, the lexical chunk is not to be taken as the equivalent for the traditional concept of vocabulary, for it is a combined working of textual function and textual meaning. To effective

5、ly comprehend a text, a student needs to master the more or less fixed lexical chunks within that text. In other words, the key to effective comprehension lies not in isolated words and sentences, but in the students ability to identify and combine those pre-structures of language and to produce des

6、irable comprehension output. Based on a general description of the present reading teaching models, This paper argues that the traditional teaching approach in reading should be improved, for it is too “ teacher centered” to be of benefits for the students long-term effective reading. Therefore, It

7、examines the problem of inefficient reading comprehension from the insights of recent research on the lexical chunks. A general survey of related research suggests further the necessity for the introduction of lexical approaches to English reading comprehension classroom and improve reading comprehe

8、nsion by this theoretical knowledge. In order to test the feasibility of lexical approaches, the 祸建师范大学硕士学位论文 author has designed an experiment which was lasted for one term .The marked differences of the means between the experimental class and control class in the two tests indicate that the effec

9、tiveness of lexical approaches in reading is significant. Hence, the lexical chunks can help students improve their reading ability. Key words: Lexical chunks; Lexical approach； Reading ability m 福建师范人学硕士学位论文 中文文摘 培养学生的阅读理解能力是中学英语教学的主要任务，它在英语教学学中起重要作 用。根据高中英语课程标准，英语课堂教学的目的就是要提高学生的听说读写四项基本语 言技能，并且特别强

10、调对学生阅读能力的训练和培养。全日制普通高中英语新课程标准 (2003年教育部颁发 )课程目标明确规定：“根据高中生认知能力发展的特点和学业发展 的需求，高中课程应注重发展学生的理解能力，在进一步发展学生综合语言运用能力的基 础上，着重提高学生用英语获取信息、处理信息、分析问题和解决问题的能力，特别注重 提高学生用英语进行思维和表达的能力；”近年来，随着取代语法结构功能法 ,词汇法 应用于第二语言教学得到很大的热潮。国内外许多学者不仅从理论上去研究，而且越来越 重视运用词块对语言学作用的研究，尤其是应用于外语教学来提高学生的学习语言能力。 本文作者在进行一番文献宗述后发现很 多关于理论上或大学

11、阶段或更高阶段，很少探讨探 讨对高中英语阅读教学的作用。学生在阅读中一个主要的难点是不能理解课文中的词块。 然而，词块不等于传统上的词汇，它是语篇功能和语篇意义的结合。为了正确理解语篇， 必须掌握这些固定、半固定的词块。也就是说，学习理解生成语篇并不是对孤立的词和句 子的学习，而是学习如何将这些语言的预制结构有机地结合起来。因而引发了这样的问题 : 在教学中应用词汇法能否促进高中英语的阅读理解能力的提高。正是在这背景下，本论文 有意进行理论的分析和实验来说明词汇法在高中英语阅读中的作用，从而 找到提高阅读能 力的方法，以适应高中英语新课标的要求。 因此，基于对目前阅读教学模式的描述，认为传统的

12、阅读方法应该改进，因为这种教 学方法过于“教师满堂灌”，使阅读效果不显著。这篇文章从最近有关词块的研究上考察 了阅读理解的主要缺陷，提出了应用词汇法教学融入阅读教学中来解决问题。有关研究调 查表明在英语阅读课堂教学的必要性，通过这理论知识来提高阅读理解能力。为了验证词 块教学的有效性，作者设计了一个实验并取得相关的数据，这个实验持续了一个学期。在 两次测试中，实验班和控制班平均分的显著性差异表明词汇法学 习在阅读中有明显的效 果 本论文采用文献综述和实证的方法进行研究。本文共六个章节，第一章 ,序言；第二 章，回顾目前流行的阅读模式；第三章，词块法及其理论框架 ;第四章，词块在高中英语教 学中

13、的应用：第五章，实证研究；第六章，结论 . 各个章节的内容安排如下： 第 章为绪论部分。 这部分主要对全文做了简介，介绍了研究方向、目的和研究问题。 第二章回顾目前流行的阅读模式 主要介绍了研究背景，回顾了目前相关研究内容的理论模式和理论依据。 本文介绍了 4种阅读模式：自下而上式、自上而下式、图式理论和交互模式。 1、 Gough等 人提出“自下而上”的阅读模式，认为阅读是读者从字母和单词的辨认开始，不断进行信 息组合完成阅读任务的过程。但这一阅读模式在实际的教学中出现了许多问题：太强调逐 词逐句阅读，导致阅读速度太慢；只见树木不见森林。 2、提出“自上而下”的模式。把 阅读称作一种“心理语

14、言猜测游戏”，阅读过程中读者根据自身原有的知识、经验和当前 的视觉信息进行主动的选择、预测、验证和确定，即阅读是一种主动的“猜谜一证实”的 过程，是一种“互相交流”的过程 （ Carrel (、 t al. 1985)。但它的局限性在于太强调了 自 上而下的过程，而忽视了 &下而上的过程走向了另一个极端，导致读者知识的积累停滞 了。 3、Rimelhart 吸収了人 T.智能研究领域的最新成果，提出了“相互作用模式”：它是 祸建师范人学硕士学位论文 “ fl上而下”和“自下而上”两利 1理解方式“相互作用”的过程。然而在于怎样应月 I这理 论到实践，它是否成为一种有效和成熟的教学方法然存在有争

15、议和疑问的。 4.图式理论常 被用来解释语言行为以及外语教 1 /学多个方面的心理过程。图式主要分为内容图式、形式 图式和语言图式。按照图式理论课文的理解是读者的背景知识和课文之间的相互作用的 过程，但它过依赖背景知识的作用，走向另一极端。 . 第三章主要阐述词汇法 。 词汇法用来代替语法结构功能法近年来产生极大的兴趣 。 Michael Lewis (1993)认为： “语言是语法化的词汇，而不是词汇化的语法”。词汇法的中心是词块。本章主要有几个 部分组成： 第一部分是阐明词块的定义和它的不同的名称 :“ gambits”（ Keller, 1979)， “ speech formulae

16、” (Peters， 1983), “ lexicalized stems” (Pawley&Syder, 1983)， and “ lexical phrases” （ Nattinger&DeCarrico， 1992)。 许多语言学家提出了自己的定义标准。 第二部分是有关词块的分类。许多语言学家根据个人的观点分类，但有很多重复。 Michael Lewis (1997)把词块分为四类： 1)单词和多义词，如 book, by the way。 2) 搭配，如 ： community service， absolutely convinced .3)惯用话语，如 ： I ll get it

17、， if I were you. 。 4)句子框架和引语，如 ： that is not as as you think， The fact/suggestion/problem/danger was. 而 Nattinger&DeCarric J s (1992)从语篇 功能上把词块分为四类 ： 1)多词词汇，如 ： by the way , all in all 2)惯用表达式， 如 ： How do you do?， Have a nice day。 3)短语限制语，如： a_ ago, The _ er， the _ er, 4)句子框架，如 ： not only X, but als

18、o Y; The _ er X, the _ er Y； 还有其他如 Becker， Alexander 等人的分类。 第三部分是有关国内外有关词块的相关文献进行宗述。在国外除了 Michael Lewis和 Nattinger&DeCarrico 外， Arnaud&Savignon (1997)进行了实证研究 ， GrabeandStoller (1997)通过个案分析词汇与阅读的关系，研究表明通过广泛的阅读训练，词汇和阅读能 力得到提高，然而他们的词汇而不是词块。在国内也进行了词块与阅读关系的研究，如： 李俊 （ 2003)研究了词汇的深度和广度与阅读的关系；姚宝梁 (2003)研究怎样

19、应用预制 语块在中学英语口语中；汤显利、冉瑞兵表和张荣华 （ 2003)写了以词块为基础的文章但 重点不是在阅读上而在怎样学英语词汇；根据国外词块的研究吴静和王瑞东 (2002)写了 有关国外词块研究的调查，提倡读者要注意词块的功能和优点。 第四部分是理论依据，讨论了词汇法的原则，与心理语言学，学习理论和语言习得的 关系，它是结构法和交际法的桥梁。词汇法以讲 解词块为核心，以心理语言学为基础。结 合了结构法和交际法的特点，在教学过程中既注重语法结构有注重语言在具体环境中的 应。词块是作为语言中的记忆单位存储在大脑里的预制短语，它在第一语言和第二语言习 得中都有非常重要的作用。 第四章论述词汇法

20、在高中英语阅读中的应用。 阅读是外语学习的四项基本技能之一。到目前为止我国在教学上进行几次改革，但阅 读能力差的问题依然存在，许多因素的影响，其中词汇量小是重要的方面。他们不能理解 课文中的词块。如果老师能唤醒学生学习词块的意识，引导他们不同方面的训练，储存相 关的词块，学 生作为记忆单元的词块记住，在阅读训练上就有很多优势。词块在课文中作 为结构功能，给出理解课文的线索，如逻辑连接，如 as a result (of X) ; nevertheless; 话题转换，如 that reminds me ol. X; Id like/wanted to ask you about X; by t

21、he way； 总结，如 in summary; in conclusion;等等。在做阅读理解测试时，伴随的问题用词块 的形式设 il.， 如 What does Lh( passage mainly discuss?， What is implied in the s(、nU!nce .? The main pu.rpos! of this passage is. 等等。 .熟悉这些设计问题的 福建师范人学硕士学位论文 词块，学生就会有更多的时间去理解短文的意思。 第五章是实证研究 其目的是进一步证实在教学中运用诎块法是否有助于提高高中学生英语的阅读理解 能力。基于这个问题，本文提出了虚无

22、假设：在英语的阅读教学中运用词块法不能提高学 生的阅读能力。实验前，除了进行必要的准备之外，如：被试的选取、实验材料和工具的 采用、变量的采用等，对被试的前测，其目的是为了保证实验前实验组和控制组之间在统 计学上没有明显的差别。实验期间先对学生词块态度的调查，调查结果表明了在阅读教学 中词块教学的必要性的，接着用一个学期的不同的教学方法，再进行后测，采用统计软件 SPSS. 13 对数据进行独立样本 T检 验。实验结果表明，通过实验处理后，实验班和控制班 存在着显著性差别 （ P=.000WordsPhrase and clauses Meaning From this we can see

23、that the processes involved in traditional reading appear to be organized, hierarchically. But even so, this perspective of reading still dominates in both first and second language researches and theories until comparatively recently. (Yi Xiubo,2004:334) However, the assumption that phonic analysis

24、 skills are all that is needed to become a successful independent reader is questionable. Most teachers of reading have encountered poor readers who are able to decode print and thereby read3 without actually extracting meaning from the text. A number of other major criticisms have been made of this

25、 approach. Much of this criticism is based on research into human memory. In the first place, with only twenty-six letters to present over forty sounds in English, spelling-to sound correspondences are both complex and unpredictable. Research also shows that the serial processing of every letter in

26、a text would slow reading up to the point where it would be very difficult for meaning to be retained. The research initiated by Goodman and Burke(1972) provides additional evidence that something more than mechanical decoding is going on when readers process texts. They found in the analysis of err

27、ors made by the reader when reading aloud that many deviations from what was actually written on the page made sense semantically. 2.2 Top-down models An alternative to the bottom-up approach is the assumption of the top-down or psycholinguistic approach to reading. As with the bottom-up models, the

28、re are a number of variations in this approach, but basically all agree that the reader rather than the tct is at the Chapter Two A Brief Overview the Prevalent Reading Models center of the reading processed. Top-down processing is the making of predictions about the text based on prior experience o

29、r background knowledge, and then checking the text for confirmation or refutation of those predictions. In Goodman s top-down model(l973), good readers “ sample” the text. Prior knowledge is crucial for reducing the amount of text information processed. By using syntactic and semantic information (i

30、.e.? context) it is possible to avoid reading every word in the text. Top-down theorists rely on the use of higher-lever processes to help explain how this happens. As Goodman(1985:835)puts it: Inference and prediction make it possible to leap toward meaning without fully completing the optical， per

31、ceptual and syntactic cycles. Yet the reader， once sense is achieved, has the sense of having seen every graphic feature, identified every pattern and wordy and assigned every syntactic pattern. Contrary to the bottom-up models, the top-down models centers on the macro level of information processin

32、g, encouraging learners to rely on their prior knowledge for inference, prediction, and finally, for message decoding. Cambourne (1979) provides the following schematization of the top-down approach.( Yi Xiubo,2004:336) Past experience, language intuitions and expectations -Selectiveaspects of print

33、-Meaning Sound, pronunciation if necessary From the diagram, it can be seen that this approach emphasizes the reconstruction of meaning rather than the decoding of form. The interaction of the reader and the text is central to the process, and readers bring to this interaction their knowledge of the

34、 subject at hand, knowledge of and expectations about how language works, motivation, interest and attitudes towards the content of the text. Rather than decoding each symbol, or ever every word, the reader forms hypotheses about text elements and then ?, and that these chunks become the raw data by

35、 which learners perceive patterns of language traditionally thought of as grammar (Lewis, 1993:95). Instruction focuses on relatively fixed expressions that occur frequently in spoken language， such as, “ I m sorry，” “ I didn t mean to make you jump，” or “ that will never happen to me, ” rather than

36、 on originally created sentences(Lewis,1997a:212) The Lexical approach makes a distinction between vocabulary traditionally understood as a stock of individual words with fixed meanings and lexis, which includes not only the words but also the word combinations that store in our mental lexicons. Lex

37、ical approach advocates argue that language consists of meaningful chunks that, when combined, produce continuous coherent text, and only a minority of spoken sentences are entirely novel creations. As the core of lexical approach, lexical chunks have gained wide interest. 3*1 Definition of lexical

38、chunks Up to now, however, there is a surprising lack of consensus over the definition of lexical chunks. Weinert(1995) claimed that it is difficult to define lexical chunks, although researchers have basically the same concept in mind. Most researchers define it as whole chunks, or phrases, produce

39、d or recalled in the same way as lexical items. Many linguists have proposed their own Chapter Three Lexical Chunks, Language Acquisition, and Reading criteria. The way words are combined to form formulaic and meaningful lexical units has been the focus of attention among researchers. Indeed, the ro

40、le of formulaic, many-word lexical units have been stressed in both first and second language acquisition research. ( Richards & Rodgers, 2001) They have been referred to by many different labels， including “ gambits” （ Keller， 1979)， “ speech formulae”(Peters， 1983)，“ lexicalized stems” （ Pawley&Sy

41、der， 1983)， and “ lexical phrases” (Nattinger&DeCarrico, 1992)， and so on. The existence and importance of these lexical units has been discussed by a number of linguists. For example, Cowie (1988,136) argues that the existence of lexical units in a language such as English serves the needs of both

42、native English speakers and English language learners, who are as predisposed to store and reuse them as they are to generate them from scratch. The widespread (fusion? of such expressions, which appear to satisfy the individual communicative needs at a given moment and are later reused, is one mean

43、s by which the public stock of formulae and composites is continuously enriched. Although vocabulary has conventionally been conceptualized as individual words, it has now become clear that much of lexis consists of sequences of words which operate as single units. Traditional approaches have long b

44、een dealt with multi-word units wherein a single meaning is attached to more than one word， for example， phrasal verbs “ give up”， compounds freeze dry1, and idioms burn the midnight oil. But corpus-based research has shown that collocation (the tendency for words to occur together in discourse) ext

45、ends far beyond the level of such multi-words. In fact，it appears quite common for longer sequences of words to pattern together. Some of these recur frequently enough to be treated as units in their own right, as, for instance, in the phrase “ to make a long story short.” Numerous terms have been c

46、oined to refer to this type of sequences, but the most commonly used are lexical chunks, and lexical phrases. No matter how different kinds of terms to describe the nature of lexical chunks, in this paper, Lewis s term “ lexical chunks” is adopted. 3.2 Classification of lexical chunks Many linguists

47、 and applied linguists have attempted to classify lexical chunks, They present their classification from different perspectives, but obviously their classifications are overlapping. 12 Chapter Three Lexical Chunks, Language Acquisition, and Reading 3.2.1 Michael Lewis classification . One of the mos

48、t recent research on lexical chunks is undoubtedly. Lewis, who suggests that “ language consists broadly of four different kinds of lexical items，the constituent chunks of any language. Each chunk may be placed on a generative spectrum between poles ranging from absolutely fixed to very free” （ Lewi

49、s,1997b:255). The four kinds of lexical items are: 1) words such as n book, pen and polywords such as by the way, upside down. It is a relatively small group of lexical items. They have usually been considered as essential vocabulary for learners to memorize. 2) Collocations or word partnerships such as community service and absolutely convin