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「steady」與「stable」之辨析
Discrimination of Near-Synonyms "steady" and "stable"
作者 徐翌珍
Hsu, Yi-Chen
貢獻者 鍾曉芳
Chung, Siaw-Fong
徐翌珍
Hsu, Yi-Chen
關鍵詞 英文形容詞
近義詞
語料庫
搭配詞
生成詞庫理論
問卷
Adjective
Near-synonym
Corpus
Collocation
Generative Lexicon
Questionnair
日期 2022
上傳時間 1-Mar-2022 16:30:58 (UTC+8)
摘要 在語言學習的過程中，常會遇到的問題就是如何分辨近義詞，由於這些詞彙的詞義相近，常使非母語者無法正確地使用這些詞彙。近義詞steady與stable同為多義詞（polysemy），各具有數個詞義，而兩者共有的詞義卻較為顯著，使人難以區分，且兩者皆為形容詞，語法特性相近，因此辨別兩者詞義與其使用時機，對於非英語母語者來說相當困難，而至今卻未有相關研究，故本研究將補足此缺口針對近義詞組steady與stable進行詞義分析。
本研究首先彙整steady與stable之辭典義，並透過語料庫考察兩者語料詞頻與搭配詞之分佈情形，接著進一步利用詞典義進行抽樣語料標記，結果顯示stable獨有詞義為【保持同樣原子結構或化學狀態】，而steady獨有詞義則為【規律的持續發展或進行】，另外亦得出兩者共有的詞義為【不易變動】、【情緒不易起伏】、【可靠】。語料庫研究結果呈現兩者共有的詞義皆能修飾搭配詞為「與人相關」之詞彙，因此本研究進一步採用Pustejovsky（1991）提出的生成詞庫理論（Generative Lexicon）中物性結構（qualia structure）概念設計問卷以調查英語母語者與華語為母語的英語學習者在選用steady與stable時是否會受不同「與人相關」的搭配詞影響。研究結果顯示stable傾向描述搭配詞的「形式性角色」，而steady則傾向描述「主事性角色」（形式性角色表達物件在一個更大的概念域中得以被區分開來的特性；主事性角色表達出物件的起源）；句型方面的結果則呈現steady較容易出現在限定句型（attributive）。
In language learning, the problem that learners often encounter is that they cannot tell the differences between two near-synonyms because the differences are subtle.
Steady and stable are both polysemous, which means both of them have different senses. Yet, people tend to activate their shared senses, making them a pair of near-synonym. In addition, both adjectives have similar grammatical features, which makes them hard to distiguish. However, there is no research on this pair of near-synonyms. To fill the gap, this present research aims to analyze the two near-synonyms so as to help nonnative speakers of English get more understanding of these two words, and to postulate a compositional semantic view of near-synonym.
The present research first classified the senses of stable and steady from online dictionaries and compared their senses. We then investigated their co-occurrence in corpus. The result of the corpus research indicated that the stable-only sense is ‘remain in the same chemical or atomic state’, and the steady-only sense is ‘continuing or developing gradually or without stopping’. The shared senses of stable and steady are (a) ‘not likely to change’ (b) ‘sensible reliable, dependable’ (c) ‘calm’. To know if there are other unstated differences between stable and steady within the three senses, the present research then designed a questionnaire based on these three senses. All the three shared senses could be used to describe a person’s traits, so the questionnaire only selected words referring to person to be the collocation words in the sentences. Our research then applied Pustejovsky’s Generative Lexicon Theory (1991) into the analysis to observe the interaction between the two adjectives and the modified collocations within predicative and attributive sentence structures. The results showed that stable tends to describe the FORMAL quale of the collocation words, while steady presents the meanings related to the AGENTIVE quale of the words (the FORMAL quale distinguishes the object within a larger domain; the AGENTIVE quale refers to the origin of an object or how it’s created), and steady is more often used in attributive sentence structure.
參考文獻 方淑華（2018）。台籍母語者語日、美籍學習者華語拒絕語用研究及教學建議。國立臺灣師範大學華語文教學系暨研究所博士論文。
王智儀（2012）。基於語料庫之近義詞辨析—以動作及物動詞「建立、成立、設立」為例。文藻外語學院華語文教學研究所碩士論文。
王慶華（2021）。近義詞ADMIT和CONFESS—以語料庫及問卷為本之研究。國立政治大學英國語文學系（英語教學組）碩士論文。
何宜庭（2019）。中文關係子句與指量結構分佈之語料庫研究。國立中山大學外國語文學系碩士論文。
吳品嬅（2021）。華語「知道類」近義詞辨析及教學研究：以「知道」、「懂」、「了解」、「明白」為例。國立政治大學華語文教學博士學位學程博士學位論文。
吳品嬅（2021）。華語「知道類」近義詞辨析及教學研究：以「知道」、「懂」、「了解」、「明白」為例。國立政治大學華語文教學博士學位學程博士學位論文。
宋曜廷（2011）。數位學習研究方法。台灣：高教出版。
周晏菱（2011）。析論近義詞「表達」、「表現」、「表明」與「表示」之語法應用。修平人文社會學報，15，107-134。
林淑媛（2020）。近義詞「永遠、永久、久遠」的辨析及其教學—以語料庫為本。中國文化大學教育學院華語文教學碩士學位學程碩士論文。
林靜熙（2017）。英文為母語者、台灣及其他亞洲學習者在寫作中使用Make之語法及詞彙研究：以ICNALE語料庫為例。國立台北科技大學應用英文研究所碩士學位論文。
洪嘉馡、黃居仁（2004）。「聲」與「音」的近義辨析：詞義與概念的關係。漢語詞彙語意研究的現狀與發展趨勢國際學術研討會論文集。北京大學。
胡裕樹（1992）。現代漢語。香港：三聯書店。
栗原祐美（2017）。華語口語中反對意見表達之語步分析：母語者與日籍學習者之比較。國立政治大學華語文教學博士學位學程博士學位論文。
陳怡靜（2015）。「一切」、「全部」、「所有」之近義詞辨析與教材編寫建議。臺大華語文教學研究，3，1-24。
游雅嵐（2019）。Pretty與Charming之辨析：以語料庫與心理語言學為本的研究。國立政治大學英國語文學系（英語教學組）碩士論文。
黃姵文（2021）。行為特徵分析：以量化語料庫方法研究中文口語程度副詞「很」、「太」、「蠻」、「超」。國立臺灣師範大學英語學系碩士論文。
楊美儀（2014）。近義詞「生命、生活」與「Life」之華英對比辨析—以語料庫及問卷研究為本。國立政治大學華語文教學研究所碩士論文。
鄭妤真（2016）。以語料庫為本之台灣英語學習者錯誤學術動名詞搭配詞分析。國立臺灣師範大學英語學系碩士論文。
謝佩璇（2020）。近義詞「恐懼」與「恐慌」之辨析——以語料庫為本。國立政治大學語言學研究所碩士論文。
謝舒凱（譯）（2020）。生成詞庫理論：展開語意計算的新視野。台灣﹕聯經出版社。（Pustejovsky, 1995）。
關芳芳（2016）。漢語心理動詞「愛」字近義詞群區辨架構。國立臺灣師範大學華語文教學系暨研究所博士論文。


英文文獻
Ahrens, Kathleen, Chang, Li-li, Chen, Keh-jiann, & Huang, Chu-ren. (1998). Meaning Representation and Meaning Instantiation for Chinese Nominals. Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing, 3, 45-60.
Bennett, Gena. (2010). Using corpora in the language learning classroom: Corpus linguistics for teachers. Michigan ELT.
Blackwell, A. A. (1998). Adjectives in acquisition: On the semantic and syntactic development of English adjectives. Doctoral dissertation, Boston University.
Bolinger, D. (1998). Adjectives in English: Attribution and Predication. Lingua, 18, 1-34.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher`s course. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Check, Joseph & Schutt, Russell. (2012). Research methods in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cruse, Alan. (1986) Lexical Semantics. Cambridge University Press.
Cruse, Alan. (2000). Meaning in language: an introduction to semantics and pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Duffelmeyer, F. A., & Banwart, B. H. (1992). Word Maps for Adjectives and Verbs. The Reading Teacher, 46(4), 351-353.
Edmonds, Philip & Hirst, Graeme. (2002). “Near-synonymy and lexical choice”. Computational Linguistics, 28(2), 105-144.
Ferris, Connor. (1993). The Meaning of Syntax: A Study in the Adjectives of English. London: Longman.
Finkbeiner, Matthew. & Nicol, Janet. (2003). Semantic category effects in second language word learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24(3), 369-383.
Firth, John Rupert. (1957). Papers in Linguistics 1934-1951. London: Oxford University Press.
Frawley, W. (1992). Linguistic semantics. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Fried, Mirjam. (2015). Construction Grammar. In A. Alexiadou, T. Kiss (Eds), Syntax- Theory and Analysis. An International Handbook. Mouton de Gruyter.
Givón, T. (1970). Notes on the Semantic Structure of English Adjectives. Language, 46(4), 816-837.
Goldberg, Adele. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
Goldberg, Adele (2006). Constructions at Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goldberg, Adele. (2013). Constructionist Approaches. In Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 15-31. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gove, P. B. (1968). On Defining Adjectives: Part I. American Speech, 43(1), 5-32.
Halliday, M.A.K. & Hasan, Ruqaiya. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Kachru, B. (1992). The Other Tongue. English Across Cultures (2nd ed.). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Kennedy, Graeme (2014). An Introduction to Corpus Linguistics. New York: Routledge.
Le, Thi Hien Thao & Kim, Sung Yeon. (2018). A corpus analysis of collocational behaviors of near-synonymous adjectives. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning, 21(4), 181-210.
Liu, Dilin. (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.
Liu, Mei-chun. (2002). Mandarin Verbal Semantics: A Corpus-based Approach, 2nd. Taipei： Crane Publishing Co.
Manara, Christine. (2016). “No Need-Lah, Uncle”: Teachers’ Perspective on English(es) Communication and Pedagogy. International Journal of Culture and History, 3(1), 22-35
Nesselhauf, Nadja (2011). Corpus Linguistics: A Practical Introduction [originally October 2005; last updated September 2011].
Ninio, A. (2004). Young children’s difficulty with adjectives modifying nouns. Journal of Child Language, 31, 255-285.
Panyapayatjati, Chatchawan. (2016). A corpus-based study of English verbs synonyms: grieve, mourn, and regret. Thammasat University.
Parsons, T. (1990). Event in the semantics of English: A study in subatomic semantics. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Phoocharoensil, supakorn. (2010). A Corpus-Based Study of English Synonyms. International Journal of Arts and Sciences, 3(10), 227-245.
Ponto, Julie. (2015). Understanding and Evaluating Survey Research. Journal of the Advanced Practitioner in Oncology, 6(2), 168-171.
Pustejovsky, James. (1991). The Generative Lexicon. Computational Linguistics 17, 409-441.
Pustejovsky, James. (1995). The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ramonda, Kris. (2014). Goldberg`s construction. In Jeannette Littlemore and John R. Taylor (Eds.), The Bloomsbury Companion to Cognitive Linguistics, 60-71. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Saussure, Ferdinand de. (1916). Cours de linguistique générale. Translated by Roy, Harris as Course in General Linguistics. London: G. Duckworth, 1983.
Sayyed, Sa`ida Walid & Al-Khanji, Rajai Rasheed (2019). A Corpus-Based Analysis of Eight English Synonymous Adjectives of Fear. International Journal of Linguistics, 11(1), 111-138.
Sinclair, John. (1991). Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Singleton, Royce. & Straits, Bruce. (2009). Approaches to social research (5th ed.). New York:Oxford University Press.
Taylor, John R. 1992. Old problems: Adjectives in Cognitive Grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 3(1), 1-36.
van Tiel, B. & Pankratz, E. (2021). Adjectival polarity and the processing of scalar inferences.Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 6(1), 1-21
Webb, Stuart. (2007) The effects of synonymy on second-language vocabulary learning. Reading in a Foreign Language, 19(2), 120-136.
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1986. What’s in a Noun? (Or: How do nouns differ in meaning from adjectives?). Studies in Language 10:2.353-389.
Wu, Meng-chen. (2019). A study of semantic prosody of three near-synonyms of cause in Mandarin Chinese under different topics: A quantitative corpus-based perspective. National Chengchi University.


網路資源
國教院華英雙語索引典系統: https://coct.naer.edu.tw/bc/
語言訓練測驗中心: https://www.lttc.ntu.edu.tw/wordlist.htm
Cambridge Dictionary: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/
Collins: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/
Longman: https://www.ldoceonline.com/
Merriam-Webster: https://www.merriam-webster.com/
Oxford Learners’ Dictionary: https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/
Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
語言學研究所
106555006
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106555006
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 鍾曉芳zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Chung, Siaw-Fongen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 徐翌珍zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Hsu, Yi-Chenen_US
dc.creator (作者) 徐翌珍zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Hsu, Yi-Chenen_US
dc.date (日期) 2022en_US
dc.date.accessioned 1-Mar-2022 16:30:58 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 1-Mar-2022 16:30:58 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Mar-2022 16:30:58 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0106555006en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/139130-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 語言學研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 106555006zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 在語言學習的過程中，常會遇到的問題就是如何分辨近義詞，由於這些詞彙的詞義相近，常使非母語者無法正確地使用這些詞彙。近義詞steady與stable同為多義詞（polysemy），各具有數個詞義，而兩者共有的詞義卻較為顯著，使人難以區分，且兩者皆為形容詞，語法特性相近，因此辨別兩者詞義與其使用時機，對於非英語母語者來說相當困難，而至今卻未有相關研究，故本研究將補足此缺口針對近義詞組steady與stable進行詞義分析。
本研究首先彙整steady與stable之辭典義，並透過語料庫考察兩者語料詞頻與搭配詞之分佈情形，接著進一步利用詞典義進行抽樣語料標記，結果顯示stable獨有詞義為【保持同樣原子結構或化學狀態】，而steady獨有詞義則為【規律的持續發展或進行】，另外亦得出兩者共有的詞義為【不易變動】、【情緒不易起伏】、【可靠】。語料庫研究結果呈現兩者共有的詞義皆能修飾搭配詞為「與人相關」之詞彙，因此本研究進一步採用Pustejovsky（1991）提出的生成詞庫理論（Generative Lexicon）中物性結構（qualia structure）概念設計問卷以調查英語母語者與華語為母語的英語學習者在選用steady與stable時是否會受不同「與人相關」的搭配詞影響。研究結果顯示stable傾向描述搭配詞的「形式性角色」，而steady則傾向描述「主事性角色」（形式性角色表達物件在一個更大的概念域中得以被區分開來的特性；主事性角色表達出物件的起源）；句型方面的結果則呈現steady較容易出現在限定句型（attributive）。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) In language learning, the problem that learners often encounter is that they cannot tell the differences between two near-synonyms because the differences are subtle.
Steady and stable are both polysemous, which means both of them have different senses. Yet, people tend to activate their shared senses, making them a pair of near-synonym. In addition, both adjectives have similar grammatical features, which makes them hard to distiguish. However, there is no research on this pair of near-synonyms. To fill the gap, this present research aims to analyze the two near-synonyms so as to help nonnative speakers of English get more understanding of these two words, and to postulate a compositional semantic view of near-synonym.
The present research first classified the senses of stable and steady from online dictionaries and compared their senses. We then investigated their co-occurrence in corpus. The result of the corpus research indicated that the stable-only sense is ‘remain in the same chemical or atomic state’, and the steady-only sense is ‘continuing or developing gradually or without stopping’. The shared senses of stable and steady are (a) ‘not likely to change’ (b) ‘sensible reliable, dependable’ (c) ‘calm’. To know if there are other unstated differences between stable and steady within the three senses, the present research then designed a questionnaire based on these three senses. All the three shared senses could be used to describe a person’s traits, so the questionnaire only selected words referring to person to be the collocation words in the sentences. Our research then applied Pustejovsky’s Generative Lexicon Theory (1991) into the analysis to observe the interaction between the two adjectives and the modified collocations within predicative and attributive sentence structures. The results showed that stable tends to describe the FORMAL quale of the collocation words, while steady presents the meanings related to the AGENTIVE quale of the words (the FORMAL quale distinguishes the object within a larger domain; the AGENTIVE quale refers to the origin of an object or how it’s created), and steady is more often used in attributive sentence structure.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章、 緒論 1
1.1 研究動機與目的 2
1.2 研究問題 5
1.3 預期貢獻 5
第二章、 文獻回顧 6
2.1 近義詞定義 6
2.2 近義詞研究與語言學習與教學 7
2.3 形容詞 11
2.3.1 形容詞與其他詞類之比較 11
2.3.2 形容詞的類別 12
2.3.3 形容詞限定用法與敘述用法比較 16
2.4 生成詞庫理論（Generative Lexicon Theory） 19
2.5 語料庫研究 21
2.6 搭配詞 22
2.7 問卷調查法 23
2.8 學習者相關研究 23
第三章、 詞典義與語料庫研究 26
3.1 研究方法 26
3.1.1 研究工具 26
3.1.2 研究範圍 26
3.1.3 研究步驟 27
3.2 詞典義與語料庫研究結果 28
3.2.1 詞典義比較分類 28
3.2.2 搭配詞考察結果 29
3.2.3 詞典義與語料標記綜合分析 31
3.2.4 小結 33
第四章、 問卷調查研究 34
4.1 研究方法 34
4.1.1 研究工具 34
4.1.2 研究範圍 34
4.1.3 問卷調查之步驟 35
4.1.4 「與人相關」辭彙之物性結構 36
4.2 問卷設計 40
4.2.1 變項與例句 41
4.2.2 問卷分卷 43
4.2.3 問卷內容 46
4.3 問卷研究結果 48
4.3.1英語母語受測者之問卷結果分析 50
4.3.2 華語母語受測者之問卷結果分析 62
4.4 問卷研究之小結 73
第五章、 研究成果與討論 77
5.1 主要研究發現 77
5.1.1 近義詞steady與stable之共現詞研究發現 77
5.1.2 近義詞steady與stable之詞義差異 79
5.1.3名詞搭配詞對於英語母語者與學習者解讀steady與stable之影響 79
5.1.4 研究問題討論 81
第六章、 結論 85
6.1 總結 85
6.2 學術貢獻與教學建議 86
6.3 研究限制與建議 87
參考文獻 89
附錄一、 華語母語受測者背景資訊 93
附錄二、 英語母語受測者背景資訊 93
附錄三、 性別設定x搭配詞x選字（英語母語） 97
附錄四、 性別設定x搭配詞x選字x詞義（英語母語） 97
附錄五、 性別設定x搭配詞x句型x選字x詞義（英語母語） 98
附錄六、性別設定x搭配詞x選字（華語母語） 100
附錄七、性別設定x搭配詞x選字x詞義（華語母語） 100
附錄八、句型x性別設定x搭配詞x選字x詞義（華語母語） 101		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 6506850 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106555006en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 英文形容詞zh_TW
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) 搭配詞zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 生成詞庫理論zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 問卷zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Adjectiveen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Near-synonymen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Corpusen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Collocationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Generative Lexiconen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Questionnairen_US
dc.title (題名) 近義詞「steady」與「stable」之辨析zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Discrimination of Near-Synonyms "steady" and "stable"en_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 方淑華（2018）。台籍母語者語日、美籍學習者華語拒絕語用研究及教學建議。國立臺灣師範大學華語文教學系暨研究所博士論文。
王智儀（2012）。基於語料庫之近義詞辨析—以動作及物動詞「建立、成立、設立」為例。文藻外語學院華語文教學研究所碩士論文。
王慶華（2021）。近義詞ADMIT和CONFESS—以語料庫及問卷為本之研究。國立政治大學英國語文學系（英語教學組）碩士論文。
何宜庭（2019）。中文關係子句與指量結構分佈之語料庫研究。國立中山大學外國語文學系碩士論文。
吳品嬅（2021）。華語「知道類」近義詞辨析及教學研究：以「知道」、「懂」、「了解」、「明白」為例。國立政治大學華語文教學博士學位學程博士學位論文。
吳品嬅（2021）。華語「知道類」近義詞辨析及教學研究：以「知道」、「懂」、「了解」、「明白」為例。國立政治大學華語文教學博士學位學程博士學位論文。
宋曜廷（2011）。數位學習研究方法。台灣：高教出版。
周晏菱（2011）。析論近義詞「表達」、「表現」、「表明」與「表示」之語法應用。修平人文社會學報，15，107-134。
林淑媛（2020）。近義詞「永遠、永久、久遠」的辨析及其教學—以語料庫為本。中國文化大學教育學院華語文教學碩士學位學程碩士論文。
林靜熙（2017）。英文為母語者、台灣及其他亞洲學習者在寫作中使用Make之語法及詞彙研究：以ICNALE語料庫為例。國立台北科技大學應用英文研究所碩士學位論文。
洪嘉馡、黃居仁（2004）。「聲」與「音」的近義辨析：詞義與概念的關係。漢語詞彙語意研究的現狀與發展趨勢國際學術研討會論文集。北京大學。
胡裕樹（1992）。現代漢語。香港：三聯書店。
栗原祐美（2017）。華語口語中反對意見表達之語步分析：母語者與日籍學習者之比較。國立政治大學華語文教學博士學位學程博士學位論文。
陳怡靜（2015）。「一切」、「全部」、「所有」之近義詞辨析與教材編寫建議。臺大華語文教學研究，3，1-24。
游雅嵐（2019）。Pretty與Charming之辨析：以語料庫與心理語言學為本的研究。國立政治大學英國語文學系（英語教學組）碩士論文。
黃姵文（2021）。行為特徵分析：以量化語料庫方法研究中文口語程度副詞「很」、「太」、「蠻」、「超」。國立臺灣師範大學英語學系碩士論文。
楊美儀（2014）。近義詞「生命、生活」與「Life」之華英對比辨析—以語料庫及問卷研究為本。國立政治大學華語文教學研究所碩士論文。
鄭妤真（2016）。以語料庫為本之台灣英語學習者錯誤學術動名詞搭配詞分析。國立臺灣師範大學英語學系碩士論文。
謝佩璇（2020）。近義詞「恐懼」與「恐慌」之辨析——以語料庫為本。國立政治大學語言學研究所碩士論文。
謝舒凱（譯）（2020）。生成詞庫理論：展開語意計算的新視野。台灣﹕聯經出版社。（Pustejovsky, 1995）。
關芳芳（2016）。漢語心理動詞「愛」字近義詞群區辨架構。國立臺灣師範大學華語文教學系暨研究所博士論文。


英文文獻
Ahrens, Kathleen, Chang, Li-li, Chen, Keh-jiann, & Huang, Chu-ren. (1998). Meaning Representation and Meaning Instantiation for Chinese Nominals. Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing, 3, 45-60.
Bennett, Gena. (2010). Using corpora in the language learning classroom: Corpus linguistics for teachers. Michigan ELT.
Blackwell, A. A. (1998). Adjectives in acquisition: On the semantic and syntactic development of English adjectives. Doctoral dissertation, Boston University.
Bolinger, D. (1998). Adjectives in English: Attribution and Predication. Lingua, 18, 1-34.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher`s course. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Check, Joseph & Schutt, Russell. (2012). Research methods in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cruse, Alan. (1986) Lexical Semantics. Cambridge University Press.
Cruse, Alan. (2000). Meaning in language: an introduction to semantics and pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Duffelmeyer, F. A., & Banwart, B. H. (1992). Word Maps for Adjectives and Verbs. The Reading Teacher, 46(4), 351-353.
Edmonds, Philip & Hirst, Graeme. (2002). “Near-synonymy and lexical choice”. Computational Linguistics, 28(2), 105-144.
Ferris, Connor. (1993). The Meaning of Syntax: A Study in the Adjectives of English. London: Longman.
Finkbeiner, Matthew. & Nicol, Janet. (2003). Semantic category effects in second language word learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24(3), 369-383.
Firth, John Rupert. (1957). Papers in Linguistics 1934-1951. London: Oxford University Press.
Frawley, W. (1992). Linguistic semantics. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Fried, Mirjam. (2015). Construction Grammar. In A. Alexiadou, T. Kiss (Eds), Syntax- Theory and Analysis. An International Handbook. Mouton de Gruyter.
Givón, T. (1970). Notes on the Semantic Structure of English Adjectives. Language, 46(4), 816-837.
Goldberg, Adele. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
Goldberg, Adele (2006). Constructions at Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goldberg, Adele. (2013). Constructionist Approaches. In Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 15-31. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gove, P. B. (1968). On Defining Adjectives: Part I. American Speech, 43(1), 5-32.
Halliday, M.A.K. & Hasan, Ruqaiya. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Kachru, B. (1992). The Other Tongue. English Across Cultures (2nd ed.). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Kennedy, Graeme (2014). An Introduction to Corpus Linguistics. New York: Routledge.
Le, Thi Hien Thao & Kim, Sung Yeon. (2018). A corpus analysis of collocational behaviors of near-synonymous adjectives. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning, 21(4), 181-210.
Liu, Dilin. (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.
Liu, Mei-chun. (2002). Mandarin Verbal Semantics: A Corpus-based Approach, 2nd. Taipei： Crane Publishing Co.
Manara, Christine. (2016). “No Need-Lah, Uncle”: Teachers’ Perspective on English(es) Communication and Pedagogy. International Journal of Culture and History, 3(1), 22-35
Nesselhauf, Nadja (2011). Corpus Linguistics: A Practical Introduction [originally October 2005; last updated September 2011].
Ninio, A. (2004). Young children’s difficulty with adjectives modifying nouns. Journal of Child Language, 31, 255-285.
Panyapayatjati, Chatchawan. (2016). A corpus-based study of English verbs synonyms: grieve, mourn, and regret. Thammasat University.
Parsons, T. (1990). Event in the semantics of English: A study in subatomic semantics. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Phoocharoensil, supakorn. (2010). A Corpus-Based Study of English Synonyms. International Journal of Arts and Sciences, 3(10), 227-245.
Ponto, Julie. (2015). Understanding and Evaluating Survey Research. Journal of the Advanced Practitioner in Oncology, 6(2), 168-171.
Pustejovsky, James. (1991). The Generative Lexicon. Computational Linguistics 17, 409-441.
Pustejovsky, James. (1995). The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ramonda, Kris. (2014). Goldberg`s construction. In Jeannette Littlemore and John R. Taylor (Eds.), The Bloomsbury Companion to Cognitive Linguistics, 60-71. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Saussure, Ferdinand de. (1916). Cours de linguistique générale. Translated by Roy, Harris as Course in General Linguistics. London: G. Duckworth, 1983.
Sayyed, Sa`ida Walid & Al-Khanji, Rajai Rasheed (2019). A Corpus-Based Analysis of Eight English Synonymous Adjectives of Fear. International Journal of Linguistics, 11(1), 111-138.
Sinclair, John. (1991). Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Singleton, Royce. & Straits, Bruce. (2009). Approaches to social research (5th ed.). New York:Oxford University Press.
Taylor, John R. 1992. Old problems: Adjectives in Cognitive Grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 3(1), 1-36.
van Tiel, B. & Pankratz, E. (2021). Adjectival polarity and the processing of scalar inferences.Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 6(1), 1-21
Webb, Stuart. (2007) The effects of synonymy on second-language vocabulary learning. Reading in a Foreign Language, 19(2), 120-136.
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1986. What’s in a Noun? (Or: How do nouns differ in meaning from adjectives?). Studies in Language 10:2.353-389.
Wu, Meng-chen. (2019). A study of semantic prosody of three near-synonyms of cause in Mandarin Chinese under different topics: A quantitative corpus-based perspective. National Chengchi University.


網路資源
國教院華英雙語索引典系統: https://coct.naer.edu.tw/bc/
語言訓練測驗中心: https://www.lttc.ntu.edu.tw/wordlist.htm
Cambridge Dictionary: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/
Collins: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/
Longman: https://www.ldoceonline.com/
Merriam-Webster: https://www.merriam-webster.com/
Oxford Learners’ Dictionary: https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/
Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/		zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202200342en_US