Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 檢視高中英文教科書及學生作文中之近義動詞
A Critical Review of Near-synonym Verbs in Taiwan High School English Textbooks and Students’ Compositions作者 姚韋如
Yao, Wei-Ju貢獻者 張郇慧
Chang, Hsun-Huei
姚韋如
Yao, Wei-Ju關鍵詞 近義詞
教科書
近義動詞
Near-synonyms
Textbooks
Near-synonym verbs日期 2020 上傳時間 3-Aug-2020 17:17:01 (UTC+8) 摘要 近似同義詞被定義為在廣義上字義相同的字,但在特定的上下文中,他們不是每次都可以替換。因為差異對於語言學習者實在非常細微,所以可能會造成學生字使用這些字時產生問題。本研究的目的是要第一先歸類廣泛被使用的高中英文課本中動詞的近似同義詞成四個類別:句法及搭配詞的變化、風格的變化、表達情緒的變化以及字義的變化。並進一步觀察這些近似同義詞如何在最被廣泛使用的高中英文教科書中呈現及被學生使用在大學入學考試的作文佳作中,並了解學生是否可以從這些同義詞的變化的到幫助。在此研究中,除了檢視最被廣泛使用的教科書本身外,其補充教材也一併審視。研究中的學生作文涵蓋了106至109年的兩種入學考試。藉由根據Edmonds (2002)的近似詞變化來分類近似詞組及對照這些字在學生作文佳作的使用,此研究發現近似詞組在課本中呈現的變化數量,不見得可以幫助或干擾學生對於近似詞在作文佳作中的使用。
Near-synonyms are defined as words that share the same meaning in a broad level, but in certain context, they are not always interchangeable. Since the difference is so subtle to language learners, it may cause problems when students are using these words. The aim of the study is to first classify the verb near-synonyms presented in the vastly used series of English textbooks among senior high schools into four categories: syntactic and collocational variations, stylistic variations, expressive variations and denotational variations. And further look into how these near-synonyms were presented in the most-used textbooks in senior high schools in Taiwan and used in high-scoring essays of College Entrance Exams to see if students can benefit from the variations of these near-synonym pairs/groups.In the study, the most popular series of textbooks were examined and besides textbooks themselves, the supplements are also investigated in the study. Students’ high scoring essays are from year 106 to 109 for both college entrance exams. By first classifying the near-synonym pairs/groups according to Edmonds’ (2002) near-synonyms variations and comparing them with students’ uses of these words in their high-scoring esassys, the study found that the number of variations presented in the textbooks for near-synonym pairs/groups do not necessarily help or interfer with students’ use of those near-synonym words in their essays.參考文獻 ReferencesAhrens, K., & Huang, C. R. (2001, February). A Comparative Study of English and ChineseSynonym Pairs: An Approach based on The Module-Attribute Representation of Verbal Semantics. In Proceedings of the 15th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation (pp. 27-32).Arppe, A. (2002, March). The usage patterns and selectional preferences of synonyms in amorphologically rich language. In JADT-2002. 6th International Conference on Textual Data Statistical Analysis (Vol. 1, pp. 21-32).Arppe, A., & Järvikivi, J. (2007). Every method counts: Combining corpus-based andexperimental evidence in the study of synonymy. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 3(2), 131-159.Atkins, B. T., & Levin, B. (1995). Building on a corpus: A linguistic and lexicographical lookat some near-synonyms. International Journal of lexicography, 8(2), 85-114.Biber, D, Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998) Corpus Linguistics. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge.Bresnan, J. (2006) Is knowledge of syntax probabilistic? Experiments with the English dativealternation. Pre-proceedings of the International Conference on Linguistic Evidence. Empirical, Theoretical and Computational Perspectives, 2–4.2.2006, SFB441 “Linguistic Data Structures”, University of Tübingen, Germany, 3–10.Chang, Y. C., Chang, J. S., Chen, H. J., & Liou, H. C. (2008). An automatic collocationwriting assistant for Taiwanese EFL learners: A case of corpus-based NLP technology. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(3), 283-299.Chen, C. C. (1979). An error analysis of English composition written by Chinese students inTaiwan. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.Chiang, T. H. (1981). Error analysis: A study of errors made in written English by Chineselearners. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co., LTD.Chung, S. F. (2011). A corpus-based analysis of “create” and “produce”. Chang GungJournal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 4(2), 399-425.Cruse, D. A (1986). Lexical semantics. Cambridge university press.DiMarco, C., Hirst, G., & Stede, M. (1993, March). The semantic and stylistic differentiationof synonyms and near-synonyms. In AAAI Spring Symposium on Building Lexicons for Machine Translation (pp. 114-121).Divjak, D. (2006). Ways of intending: Delineating and structuring near synonyms. Corporain cognitive linguistics: corpus-based approaches to syntax and lexis, 19-56.Divjak, D., & Gries, S. T. (2008). Clusters in the mind?: Converging evidence from nearsynonymy in Russian. The Mental Lexicon, 3(2), 188-213.Edmonds, P. G. (2000). Semantic representations of near-synonyms for automatic lexicalchoice. University of Toronto.Edmonds, P., & Hirst, G. (2002). Near-synonymy and lexical choice. Computationallinguistics, 28(2), 105-144.Erten, İ. H., & Tekin, M. (2008). Effects on vocabulary acquisition of presenting new wordsin semantic sets versus semantically unrelated sets. System, 36(3), 407-422.Gove, P. B. (1973). Webster`s New Dictionary of Synonyms (WNDS). Springfield: Merriam.Halliday, M. A. K. , and Hasan, R. (1976).Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. (2013). Halliday`s introduction to functionalgrammar. Routledge.Harley, B. (1986). Age in second language acquisition (Vol. 22). Multilingual MattersLimited.Hatch, E., & Brown, C. (1995). Vocabulary, semantics, and language education. CambridgeUniversity Press, 40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211 (hardback: ISBN-0-521-47409-4; paperback: ISBN-0-521-47942-8).Higa, M. (1963). Interference effects of intralist word relationships in verbal learning. Journalof verbal learning and verbal behavior, 2(2), 170-175.Hourani, T. M. Y. (2008). An analysis of the common grammatical errors in the Englishwriting made by 3rd secondary male students in the Eastern Coast of the UAE.Huang, S. L. (2001). Error analysis and teaching composition. Master Degree Dissertation,Taiwan: National Tsing Hua University.Inkpen, D. (2007). A statistical model for near-synonym choice. ACM Transactions onSpeech and Language Processing (TSLP), 4(1), 1-17.Laufer, B. (1990). Ease and difficulty in vocabulary learning: Some teaching implications.Foreign Language Annals, 23(2), 147-155.Lee, C., & Liu, J. (2009). Effects of collocation information on learning lexical semantics fornear synonym distinction. Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing,14(2), 205-220.Lyons, J. 1995. Linguistic Semantics: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.Palmer, S. E. (1975). The nature of perceptual representation: An examination of theanalog/propositional controversy. In Theoretical issues in natural language processing.Quine, W.V.O., 1990. Quiddities: an Intermittently Philosophical Dictionary. Penguin,Harmondsworth.Taylor, J. R. (2003). Near synonyms as co-extensive categories:‘high ’and ‘tall’ revisited.Language sciences, 25(3), 263-284.Zhuang, L. I. X. U. E. (2011). A study of verb errors committed in written English byChinese college students in Taiwan. Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 7(1), 91-101. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
英國語文學系
103551018資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0103551018 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 張郇慧 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Chang, Hsun-Huei en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 姚韋如 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Yao, Wei-Ju en_US dc.creator (作者) 姚韋如 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Yao, Wei-Ju en_US dc.date (日期) 2020 en_US dc.date.accessioned 3-Aug-2020 17:17:01 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 3-Aug-2020 17:17:01 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 3-Aug-2020 17:17:01 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0103551018 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/130885 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 英國語文學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 103551018 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 近似同義詞被定義為在廣義上字義相同的字,但在特定的上下文中,他們不是每次都可以替換。因為差異對於語言學習者實在非常細微,所以可能會造成學生字使用這些字時產生問題。本研究的目的是要第一先歸類廣泛被使用的高中英文課本中動詞的近似同義詞成四個類別:句法及搭配詞的變化、風格的變化、表達情緒的變化以及字義的變化。並進一步觀察這些近似同義詞如何在最被廣泛使用的高中英文教科書中呈現及被學生使用在大學入學考試的作文佳作中,並了解學生是否可以從這些同義詞的變化的到幫助。在此研究中,除了檢視最被廣泛使用的教科書本身外,其補充教材也一併審視。研究中的學生作文涵蓋了106至109年的兩種入學考試。藉由根據Edmonds (2002)的近似詞變化來分類近似詞組及對照這些字在學生作文佳作的使用,此研究發現近似詞組在課本中呈現的變化數量,不見得可以幫助或干擾學生對於近似詞在作文佳作中的使用。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) Near-synonyms are defined as words that share the same meaning in a broad level, but in certain context, they are not always interchangeable. Since the difference is so subtle to language learners, it may cause problems when students are using these words. The aim of the study is to first classify the verb near-synonyms presented in the vastly used series of English textbooks among senior high schools into four categories: syntactic and collocational variations, stylistic variations, expressive variations and denotational variations. And further look into how these near-synonyms were presented in the most-used textbooks in senior high schools in Taiwan and used in high-scoring essays of College Entrance Exams to see if students can benefit from the variations of these near-synonym pairs/groups.In the study, the most popular series of textbooks were examined and besides textbooks themselves, the supplements are also investigated in the study. Students’ high scoring essays are from year 106 to 109 for both college entrance exams. By first classifying the near-synonym pairs/groups according to Edmonds’ (2002) near-synonyms variations and comparing them with students’ uses of these words in their high-scoring esassys, the study found that the number of variations presented in the textbooks for near-synonym pairs/groups do not necessarily help or interfer with students’ use of those near-synonym words in their essays. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents TABLE OF CONTENTSChinese Abstract viEnglish Abstract viiChapters1. Introduction 11.1 Motivation 11.2 Significance of the Study 21.3 Research Questions 31.4 Organization 42. Literature Review 52.1 Definition of Near-synonyms 52.2 Classifications of Near-synonyms 72.3 Problems of Near-synonyms in Language Learning 112.3.1. Taiwanese Students’ Near-synonym Use and Struggles 132.4 Research on Verb Near-synonyms 142.5 Summary and Gap of the Previous Studies 153. Method 173.1 Data for Analysis 173.2 Procedures of Data Analysis 203.2.1 Classification of Near-synonyms in Textbooks 203.2.2 Presentation of the Near-synonyms in Textbooks 223.2.2.1 Presentation of the syntactic and collocational variations 223.2.2.2 Presentation of the stylistic variations 273.2.2.3 Presentation of the the expressive variations 283.2.2.4 Presentation of the the denotational variations 293.2.3 Analysis of the Presentation of Near-synonyms in Textbooks 313.2.4 Near-synonyms in High-scoring Essays 344. Results and Discussion 374.1 Near-synonym Pair/Group in the Textbooks 374.1.1 One Variation Dimension Near-synonym Pair/Group in the Textbooks 394.1.1.1 Collocational and syntactic variation pair/group in textbooks 394.1.1.2 Expressive variation pair/group in textbooks 424.1.1.3 Denotational variation pair/group in textbooks 434.1.2 Two Variation Dimension Near-synonym Pair/Group in the Textbooks 444.1.2.1 Collocational and syntactic & stylistic variation pair/group in textbooks 444.1.2.2 Collocational and syntactic & denotational variation pair/group in textbooks 464.1.2.3 Denotational & expressive variation pair/group in textbooks 504.1.2.4 Denotational & stylistic variation pair/group in textbooks 514.1.3 Three Variation Dimension Near-synonym Pair/Group in the Textbooks 534.1.3.1 Collocational and syntactic, denotational & stylistic variation pair/group in textbooks 534.1.4 Four Variation Dimension Near-synonym Pair/Group in the Textbooks 554.1.5 No Variation Dimension Near-synonym Pair/Group in the Textbooks 554.2 Students’ Use of Near-synonyms in High-scoring Essays 564.2.1 One Variation Dimension Near-synonym Pair/Group in High-scoring Essays 574.2.1.1 Collocational and syntactic variation pair/group in high-scoring essays 574.2.1.2 Denotational variation pair/group in high-scoring essays 604.2.2 Two Variation Dimension Near-synonym Pair/Group in High-scoring Essays 614.2.2.1 Collocational and syntactic & stylistic variation pair/group in high-scoring essays 614.2.2.2 Collocational and syntactic & denotational variation pair/group in high-scoring essays 644.2.2.3 Denotational & expressive variation pair/group in high-scoring essays 704.2.3 Three Variation Dimension Near-synonym Pair/Group in High-scoring Essays 704.2.3.1 Collocational and syntactic, denotational & stylistic variation pair/group in high-scoring essays 704.2.4 Zero Variation Dimension Near-synonym Pair/Group in High-scoring Essays 724.3 Misuses of Near-synonyms in Students’ Essays 725. Conclusion 775.1 Summary of the Major Findings 775.2 Implications 795.3 Limitations and Suggestions for Further Studies 79References 81Appendix A 84 zh_TW dc.format.extent 2151670 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0103551018 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 近義詞 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 教科書 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 近義動詞 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Near-synonyms en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Textbooks en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Near-synonym verbs en_US dc.title (題名) 檢視高中英文教科書及學生作文中之近義動詞 zh_TW dc.title (題名) A Critical Review of Near-synonym Verbs in Taiwan High School English Textbooks and Students’ Compositions en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ReferencesAhrens, K., & Huang, C. R. (2001, February). A Comparative Study of English and ChineseSynonym Pairs: An Approach based on The Module-Attribute Representation of Verbal Semantics. In Proceedings of the 15th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation (pp. 27-32).Arppe, A. (2002, March). The usage patterns and selectional preferences of synonyms in amorphologically rich language. In JADT-2002. 6th International Conference on Textual Data Statistical Analysis (Vol. 1, pp. 21-32).Arppe, A., & Järvikivi, J. (2007). Every method counts: Combining corpus-based andexperimental evidence in the study of synonymy. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 3(2), 131-159.Atkins, B. T., & Levin, B. (1995). Building on a corpus: A linguistic and lexicographical lookat some near-synonyms. International Journal of lexicography, 8(2), 85-114.Biber, D, Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998) Corpus Linguistics. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge.Bresnan, J. (2006) Is knowledge of syntax probabilistic? Experiments with the English dativealternation. Pre-proceedings of the International Conference on Linguistic Evidence. Empirical, Theoretical and Computational Perspectives, 2–4.2.2006, SFB441 “Linguistic Data Structures”, University of Tübingen, Germany, 3–10.Chang, Y. C., Chang, J. S., Chen, H. J., & Liou, H. C. (2008). An automatic collocationwriting assistant for Taiwanese EFL learners: A case of corpus-based NLP technology. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(3), 283-299.Chen, C. C. (1979). An error analysis of English composition written by Chinese students inTaiwan. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.Chiang, T. H. (1981). Error analysis: A study of errors made in written English by Chineselearners. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co., LTD.Chung, S. F. (2011). A corpus-based analysis of “create” and “produce”. Chang GungJournal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 4(2), 399-425.Cruse, D. A (1986). Lexical semantics. Cambridge university press.DiMarco, C., Hirst, G., & Stede, M. (1993, March). The semantic and stylistic differentiationof synonyms and near-synonyms. In AAAI Spring Symposium on Building Lexicons for Machine Translation (pp. 114-121).Divjak, D. (2006). Ways of intending: Delineating and structuring near synonyms. Corporain cognitive linguistics: corpus-based approaches to syntax and lexis, 19-56.Divjak, D., & Gries, S. T. (2008). Clusters in the mind?: Converging evidence from nearsynonymy in Russian. The Mental Lexicon, 3(2), 188-213.Edmonds, P. G. (2000). Semantic representations of near-synonyms for automatic lexicalchoice. University of Toronto.Edmonds, P., & Hirst, G. (2002). Near-synonymy and lexical choice. Computationallinguistics, 28(2), 105-144.Erten, İ. H., & Tekin, M. (2008). Effects on vocabulary acquisition of presenting new wordsin semantic sets versus semantically unrelated sets. System, 36(3), 407-422.Gove, P. B. (1973). Webster`s New Dictionary of Synonyms (WNDS). Springfield: Merriam.Halliday, M. A. K. , and Hasan, R. (1976).Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. (2013). Halliday`s introduction to functionalgrammar. Routledge.Harley, B. (1986). Age in second language acquisition (Vol. 22). Multilingual MattersLimited.Hatch, E., & Brown, C. (1995). Vocabulary, semantics, and language education. CambridgeUniversity Press, 40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211 (hardback: ISBN-0-521-47409-4; paperback: ISBN-0-521-47942-8).Higa, M. (1963). Interference effects of intralist word relationships in verbal learning. Journalof verbal learning and verbal behavior, 2(2), 170-175.Hourani, T. M. Y. (2008). An analysis of the common grammatical errors in the Englishwriting made by 3rd secondary male students in the Eastern Coast of the UAE.Huang, S. L. (2001). Error analysis and teaching composition. Master Degree Dissertation,Taiwan: National Tsing Hua University.Inkpen, D. (2007). A statistical model for near-synonym choice. ACM Transactions onSpeech and Language Processing (TSLP), 4(1), 1-17.Laufer, B. (1990). Ease and difficulty in vocabulary learning: Some teaching implications.Foreign Language Annals, 23(2), 147-155.Lee, C., & Liu, J. (2009). Effects of collocation information on learning lexical semantics fornear synonym distinction. Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing,14(2), 205-220.Lyons, J. 1995. Linguistic Semantics: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.Palmer, S. E. (1975). The nature of perceptual representation: An examination of theanalog/propositional controversy. In Theoretical issues in natural language processing.Quine, W.V.O., 1990. Quiddities: an Intermittently Philosophical Dictionary. Penguin,Harmondsworth.Taylor, J. R. (2003). Near synonyms as co-extensive categories:‘high ’and ‘tall’ revisited.Language sciences, 25(3), 263-284.Zhuang, L. I. X. U. E. (2011). A study of verb errors committed in written English byChinese college students in Taiwan. Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 7(1), 91-101. zh_TW dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202000939 en_US