1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. College of Foreign Languages and Literature
  4. Theses
  5. Item

學術產出-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

題名 近義詞ADMIT 和 CONFESS—以語料庫及問卷為本之研究
An Analysis of the Near-Synonyms ADMIT and CONFESS based on Corpus and Questionnaire
作者 王慶華
Wang, Ching-Hua
貢獻者 鍾曉芳
Chung, Siaw-Fong
王慶華
Wang, Ching-Hua
關鍵詞 近義詞
語料庫
短語
問卷
Near-synonyms
ADMIT
CONFESS
Corpus
Phraseology
Questionnaire
日期 2021
上傳時間 1-Jul-2021 15:52:18 (UTC+8)
摘要 近義詞組ADMIT及CONFESS於語義及句法使用上皆有重疊之處，例如：兩者皆能銜接名詞片語、介系詞片語以及that子句等。雖然這組近義詞組在語義或句法上的使用皆十分雷同，然而，在過往研究中並未論及兩者的差異，因此，本研究採用語料庫研究法，以《英國國家語料庫》（British National Corpus）作為研究工具，檢索ADMIT及CONFESS作為動詞的語料，並且從中隨機分別抽樣300筆進行分析。本研究採用短語的概念，包含了ADMIT及CONFESS的句法結構及ADMIT及CONFESS的語境之分析。另外，根據語料庫分析結果和從辭典中提取出的語義特徵，本研究亦包含一份問卷，此問卷旨在檢驗英語者使用ADMIT和CONFESS時，面對不同的句法結構和語義特徵，是否影響這組近義詞的選用傾向。
研究結果顯示ADMIT比CONFESS具有較高的使用頻率。此外，ADMIT擁有較 多的語義，另一方面，CONFESS則是被用來描述更狹窄且特定的語義。最後，ADMIT和不同的句法結構的搭配分佈較為平均，而CONFESS則更傾向與特定句型搭配。
最後，本研究希望透過分析這組近義詞組在句法、語境及語義特徵的差異，來區辨ADMIT和CONFESS，並提供此方法以區辨別組近義詞組。
This study shows a corpus and questionnaire study of the near-synonymous pair, ADMIT and CONFESS. Both words share a similar meaning and have overlaps of sentence patterns. For instance, both words can be followed by a noun phrase, a prepositional phrase, and a that-clause, respectively. Even though the two words behave similarly, no corpus-based analysis on the two near-synonyms can be seen. Thus, we utilized the British National Corpus to extract the concordance lines of ADMIT and CONFESS for the following analysis. By adopting the concepts of phraseology, the study includes the analysis of syntactic structures and semantic contexts of ADMIT and CONFESS.
On top of the results of the corpus analysis and the semantic features extracted from the dictionaries, we also included a questionnaire. The questionnaire aimed to examine English native speakers’ word selections of ADMIT and CONFESS when different syntactic structures and semantic features of the two words were manipulated.
Overall, the results of the study showed that ADMIT has a much higher usage frequency than CONFESS does. Second, ADMIT contains more definitions and it can be used to convey more general meanings. By contrast, CONFESS is mostly used to describe more specific meanings. Lastly, ADMIT collocates more evenly with different syntactic structures while CONFESS shows a more specific tendency with certain syntactic structures. The results can shed light on the usage of the two words and provide the way to be applied for other pairs of near-synonyms as well.
參考文獻 REFERENCES
Bergler, S. (1991, April). The semantics of collocational patterns for reporting verbs. In Proceedings of the fifth conference on European chapter of the Association for
Computational Linguistics (pp. 216-221). Association for Computational Linguistics.
Bergler, S. (1993, September). Semantic dimensions in the field of reporting verbs. In Proceedings of the ninth annual conference of the University of Waterloo
Centre for the New Oxford English Dictionary and Text Research (pp. 1-11).
Biber, D., Douglas, B., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge University Press.
Church, K. W., Gale, W., Hanks, P., Hindle, D., & Moon, R. (1994). Lexical substitutability.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Firth, J. R. (1957). Papers in linguistics, 1931-1951. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gropen, J., S. Pinker, M. Hollander, R. Goldberg, and R. Wilson (1989) "The Learnability and Acquisition of the Dative Alternation in English," Language 65, 203-257.
Gu, B. J. (2017). Corpus-Based Study of Two Synonyms—Obtain and Gain. Sino-US English Teaching, 14(8), 511-522
Halliday, M. A. (1966). Lexis as a linguistic level. In memory of JR Firth, 148, 162.
Hunston, S. (1995). Grammar in teacher education: The role of a corpus. Language Awareness, 4(1), 15–31.
Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in applied linguistics. Ernst Klett Sprachen.
Inkpen, D., & Hirst, G. (2006). Building and using a lexical knowledge base of near-synonym differences. Computational linguistics, 32(2), 223-262.
Inkpen, D. (2007). A statistical model for near-synonym choice. ACM Transactions on Speech and Language Processing (TSLP), 4(1), 2.
Kachru, B. B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. na.
Levin, B. (1993). English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation.
University of Chicago press.
Liu, D. (2010). Is it a chief, main, major, primary, or principal concern?: A corpus-based behavioral profile study of the near-synonyms. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(1), 56-87.
Li, X., & Liu, J. (2017). A corpus-based contrastive study on the acquisition of synonyms of Chinese EFL Learners. Journal of Literature and Art Studies, 7(7), 925-934.
Lyons, J., 1977. Semantics (2 Vols). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Miller, G. A. (1995). WordNet: a lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM, 38(11), 39-41.
Taylor, J. R. (2003). Near synonyms as co-extensive categories:‘high’and ‘tall’revisited. Language Sciences, 25(3), 263-284.
Tsui, A. B. (2004). What teachers have always wanted to know–and how corpora can help. How to use corpora in language teaching, 12, 39-61.
Williams, I. A. (1996). A contextual study of lexical verbs in two types of medical research report: clinical and experimental. English for Specific Purposes, 15(3), 175-197. 
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
英國語文學系
106551007
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106551007
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 鍾曉芳zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Chung, Siaw-Fongen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 王慶華zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Wang, Ching-Huaen_US
dc.creator (作者) 王慶華zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Wang, Ching-Huaen_US
dc.date (日期) 2021en_US
dc.date.accessioned 1-Jul-2021 15:52:18 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 1-Jul-2021 15:52:18 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Jul-2021 15:52:18 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0106551007en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/135893-
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) 106551007zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 近義詞組ADMIT及CONFESS於語義及句法使用上皆有重疊之處，例如：兩者皆能銜接名詞片語、介系詞片語以及that子句等。雖然這組近義詞組在語義或句法上的使用皆十分雷同，然而，在過往研究中並未論及兩者的差異，因此，本研究採用語料庫研究法，以《英國國家語料庫》（British National Corpus）作為研究工具，檢索ADMIT及CONFESS作為動詞的語料，並且從中隨機分別抽樣300筆進行分析。本研究採用短語的概念，包含了ADMIT及CONFESS的句法結構及ADMIT及CONFESS的語境之分析。另外，根據語料庫分析結果和從辭典中提取出的語義特徵，本研究亦包含一份問卷，此問卷旨在檢驗英語者使用ADMIT和CONFESS時，面對不同的句法結構和語義特徵，是否影響這組近義詞的選用傾向。
研究結果顯示ADMIT比CONFESS具有較高的使用頻率。此外，ADMIT擁有較 多的語義，另一方面，CONFESS則是被用來描述更狹窄且特定的語義。最後，ADMIT和不同的句法結構的搭配分佈較為平均，而CONFESS則更傾向與特定句型搭配。
最後，本研究希望透過分析這組近義詞組在句法、語境及語義特徵的差異，來區辨ADMIT和CONFESS，並提供此方法以區辨別組近義詞組。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) This study shows a corpus and questionnaire study of the near-synonymous pair, ADMIT and CONFESS. Both words share a similar meaning and have overlaps of sentence patterns. For instance, both words can be followed by a noun phrase, a prepositional phrase, and a that-clause, respectively. Even though the two words behave similarly, no corpus-based analysis on the two near-synonyms can be seen. Thus, we utilized the British National Corpus to extract the concordance lines of ADMIT and CONFESS for the following analysis. By adopting the concepts of phraseology, the study includes the analysis of syntactic structures and semantic contexts of ADMIT and CONFESS.
On top of the results of the corpus analysis and the semantic features extracted from the dictionaries, we also included a questionnaire. The questionnaire aimed to examine English native speakers’ word selections of ADMIT and CONFESS when different syntactic structures and semantic features of the two words were manipulated.
Overall, the results of the study showed that ADMIT has a much higher usage frequency than CONFESS does. Second, ADMIT contains more definitions and it can be used to convey more general meanings. By contrast, CONFESS is mostly used to describe more specific meanings. Lastly, ADMIT collocates more evenly with different syntactic structures while CONFESS shows a more specific tendency with certain syntactic structures. The results can shed light on the usage of the two words and provide the way to be applied for other pairs of near-synonyms as well.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IV
CHINESE ABSTRACT VIII
ABSTRACT IX
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1
Background and Motivation of the Study 1
Research Questions of the Study 3
Significance of the Study 3
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 5
Near-Synonymy 5
ADMIT and CONFESS 7
Phraseology: Patterns and Meanings 10
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 11
The Corpus 11
The Method for Extracting Data 11
Data Analysis 14
Analyzing the Grammatical Patterns 15
Analyzing the Semantic Contexts 18
Summary of the Chapter 21
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS of ADMIT and CONFESS 23
Distributional Information of Each Word Form 23
Grammatical Patterns 24
Semantic Contexts 30
The Relationship between Grammatical Patterns and Semantic Contexts 35
Summary of the Chapter 41
CHAPTER FIVE: QUESTIONNAIRE 43
Methodology of Questionnaire 44
Participants 44
Materials and Design 45
Procedure 54
Data Analysis 55
Results and Discussion 57
Summary of the Chapter 65
CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSION 67
Summary 67
Pedagogical Implication 70
Limitations and Future Studies 74
REFERENCES 76
APPENDIX A: Questionnaire 78
APPENDIX B: English Native Speakers’ Basic Personal Information 82
APPENDIX C: The Results From the American and British Participants in the
Cross-Tabulation 86		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 2969873 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106551007en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 近義詞zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 語料庫zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 短語zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 問卷zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Near-synonymsen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) ADMITen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) CONFESSen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Corpusen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Phraseologyen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Questionnaireen_US
dc.title (題名) 近義詞ADMIT 和 CONFESS—以語料庫及問卷為本之研究zh_TW
dc.title (題名) An Analysis of the Near-Synonyms ADMIT and CONFESS based on Corpus and Questionnaireen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) REFERENCES
Bergler, S. (1991, April). The semantics of collocational patterns for reporting verbs. In Proceedings of the fifth conference on European chapter of the Association for
Computational Linguistics (pp. 216-221). Association for Computational Linguistics.
Bergler, S. (1993, September). Semantic dimensions in the field of reporting verbs. In Proceedings of the ninth annual conference of the University of Waterloo
Centre for the New Oxford English Dictionary and Text Research (pp. 1-11).
Biber, D., Douglas, B., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge University Press.
Church, K. W., Gale, W., Hanks, P., Hindle, D., & Moon, R. (1994). Lexical substitutability.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Firth, J. R. (1957). Papers in linguistics, 1931-1951. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gropen, J., S. Pinker, M. Hollander, R. Goldberg, and R. Wilson (1989) "The Learnability and Acquisition of the Dative Alternation in English," Language 65, 203-257.
Gu, B. J. (2017). Corpus-Based Study of Two Synonyms—Obtain and Gain. Sino-US English Teaching, 14(8), 511-522
Halliday, M. A. (1966). Lexis as a linguistic level. In memory of JR Firth, 148, 162.
Hunston, S. (1995). Grammar in teacher education: The role of a corpus. Language Awareness, 4(1), 15–31.
Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in applied linguistics. Ernst Klett Sprachen.
Inkpen, D., & Hirst, G. (2006). Building and using a lexical knowledge base of near-synonym differences. Computational linguistics, 32(2), 223-262.
Inkpen, D. (2007). A statistical model for near-synonym choice. ACM Transactions on Speech and Language Processing (TSLP), 4(1), 2.
Kachru, B. B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. na.
Levin, B. (1993). English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation.
University of Chicago press.
Liu, D. (2010). Is it a chief, main, major, primary, or principal concern?: A corpus-based behavioral profile study of the near-synonyms. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(1), 56-87.
Li, X., & Liu, J. (2017). A corpus-based contrastive study on the acquisition of synonyms of Chinese EFL Learners. Journal of Literature and Art Studies, 7(7), 925-934.
Lyons, J., 1977. Semantics (2 Vols). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Miller, G. A. (1995). WordNet: a lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM, 38(11), 39-41.
Taylor, J. R. (2003). Near synonyms as co-extensive categories:‘high’and ‘tall’revisited. Language Sciences, 25(3), 263-284.
Tsui, A. B. (2004). What teachers have always wanted to know–and how corpora can help. How to use corpora in language teaching, 12, 39-61.
Williams, I. A. (1996). A contextual study of lexical verbs in two types of medical research report: clinical and experimental. English for Specific Purposes, 15(3), 175-197. 		zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202100542en_US