學術產出-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

  • No doi shows Citation Infomation
題名 The Basic Units Processed in the Discourse-Based and Non-Discourse-Based Texts under the Constraints of Working Memory
工作記憶限制之下,在篇章及非篇章段落中的語句處理基本單位
作者 徐東伯
Dennis Dong-Bo Hsu
貢獻者 萬依萍 博士
Dr. I-PING WAN
徐東伯
Dennis Dong-Bo Hsu
關鍵詞 語句處理基本單位
工作記憶
短期記憶
語言獨立性
日期 2002
上傳時間 14-Sep-2009 12:59:07 (UTC+8)
摘要 當我們在處理語句的訊息時,即使接收到的訊息是處於一種模糊不清的狀態之下,我們仍然可以藉由語境或者是儲存在長期記憶中的知識表徵來幫助我們理解語句。然而,在可以被視為一般語句處理的篇章中以及去除儲存在長期記憶的知識表徵的非篇章段落中的基本的言語的處理單位,甚少被提及。在本文中,我們將探討在兩種韻律結構的篇章語句以及非篇章為主的言語基本處理單位為何。 接著,我們將用具有心理實證的語句基本單位檢視詞彙學派以及範疇學派在句法分析上所使用的初始單位,探討哪一個學派的句法分析同時具有理論性以及實證性的證據支持。此外,經由探究韻律結構、詞語分斷之間的互動,來檢驗語言以及句法的獨立性假說。更進一步的,我們比較男女之間,對於語句提取的效率是否存有差異。分別有六男、六女,共十二名的大學生參與這次的實驗。實驗的材料是由實驗者將兩種韻律結構的篇章以及非篇章的段落分別錄音之後,讓受試者對所聽到的語句,做斷詞的工作。我們使用分斷派典以及統計考驗,來驗證本文中提出的各個假說。結果發現,在相似於我們一般說話語句的篇章中,基本處理的言語單位是詞,而在去除韻律結構以及分篇章為主的段落中,處理的基本言語單位是音節。這樣的結果符合工作記憶模式的預測。另外,詞彙學派的句法分析得到了理論上及實證上的支持。構詞、音韻、句法、以及長期記憶中的知識表徵,應該被視為是一個整體,而非句法、語言是獨立於整個認知系統之外的。至少,在本文中,利用語句產生證據來看,是反駁這個觀點的。大體上,男女之間對於語句處理的基本單位是沒有差別的,但似乎女孩子在語句產出時,更依賴韻律結構存在的與否。作者在文中提出了社會語言學的解釋。由本文可以得知,在語句產出的證據看來,詞彙句法學派得到了理論上及實證上的支持。語言是和整個認知系統互動的一種機制。而男女在提取言語單位上的效率並無不同。
It is widely accepted that the routine of the perceptual processing of ongoing speech can be comprehended even in a degraded quality through the aid of the context or real-world knowledge stored in LTM. However, the basic units processed in the discourse-based text that can be recognized as the normal sentential input and those processed in the non-discourse-based text which removes the contribution of the knowledge representation stored in LTM are not yet investigated. In this study the basic units processed in these two textual patterns were discovered. The basic unit processed in normal prosodic, discourse-based text was employed to resolve the controversy between lexicalists’ and categorical syntacticians’ primitives of syntactic analyses. In addition, purposes of the interaction between prosodic patterns, namely the prosodic pattern, prosody-free pattern and the syntactic segmentation were examined to testify the autonomy hypotheses whether they gain the support from the speech production. Furthermore, the retrieval efficiency between genders were analyzed as well to investigate whether different genders employed different retrieval efficiency in different textual and prosodic patterns. 12 undergraduate students, six male and six female students participated in the two experiments. Discourse-based texts with two prosodic patterns and non-discourse-based pattern were recorded in the auditory form to conduct the experiments. Segmentation paradigm and statistical analysis were used to make the production analyses. Results indicated that a word is the basic unit processed in the prosodic, discourse-based text while a syllable is the basic unit processed in the prosody-free discourse-based text and non-discourse-based text which confirms to the prediction of WM model. The evidence favors lexicalists’ primitive of syntactic analysis psychologically. The cooperation between morphology, syntax, phonology and knowledge representations in general cognitive system argues against the autonomy hypotheses. Language should be recognized as a submechanism embedded in the cognitive system. The results suggested that, in general, there was no difference between genders but it seemed that female subjects tended more to rely on phonological cues. A plausible sociolinguistic reason was proposed. The results suggest that lexicalists’ primitive for syntactic analysis has theoretical as well as psychological support. In speech production, language seems to interact with other cognitive mechanisms rather than isolate to form an independent, self-contained domain. No retrieval difference exists between genders.
參考文獻 Adams, A.M., & S.E. Gathercole. (1995). Phonological working memory and speech production in preschool children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38 (2), 403-414.
Adams, A. M., & S.E. Gathercole. (1996). Phonological working memory and spoken language development in you ng children. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A (1), 216-233.
Atkinson, R. C., & R. M. Shiffrin. (1968). Human Memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K. W. Spence and J. T. Spence (Eds.) The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory, Vol. II. New York: Academic Press. 89-195.
Baddeley, A. D.(1986). Working memory. Oxford: Clarendon.
Baddeley A. D. & G. J. Hitch. (1974). Working memory. In G. Bower (Ed.) The psychology of learning and motivation, (Vol. 8, pp 47-90). New York: Academic Press.
Baddely, A. D., N. Thompson., & M. Buchanan. (1975). Word length and the structure of short-term memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 575-589.
Barrett, M. (1989). Early language development. In A. Slater & G. Bremner (Eds.), Infant development. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.
Beckman, H. B. & R. M. Frankel. (1984). The effect of physician behaviour on the collection of data. Annals of Internal Medicine, 101, 692-6.
Beebe-Center, J. G., M. S. Rogers., & D. N. O’Connell. (1955). Trasmission of information about sucrose and saline solutions through the sense of taste. Journal of Psychology, 39, 157-160.
Beech, C. M. (1991). The interpretation of prosodic patterns at points of syntactic structural ambiguity: Evidence for cue trading relations. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 644-663.
Blake, J. et al. (1994). The relationship between memory span and measures of imitative and spontaneous language complexity in preschool children. International Journal of Behavioural Development, 17 (1), 91-107.
Brown, R. A. (1973). A first language: The early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Chomksy, Noam. (1957). Syntactic structures. Uanua Linguarum Series Minor 4. The Hague: Mouton.
Chomsky, Noam (1972). Language and mind. Enlarged edition. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Chomsky, Noam. (1975). Reflections on language. New York: Pantheon.
Chomsky, Noam. (1980). Rules and representations. New York: Columbia University Press.
Chomsky, Noam (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Craik, F. I. M., & R. S. Lockhart, (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal behavior, 20, 641-655.
Craik, F. I. M., & P. A. Masani, (1969). Age and Intelligence differences in coding and retrieval of word lists. British Journal of Psychology, 60, 315-319.
Craik, F.I.M., R.G. Morris., & M.L. Gick. (1990). Adult age differences in working memory. In G. Vallar, & T. Shallice (Eds.), Neuropsychological impairments of short-term memory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Croft, William (1995). Autonomy and functionalist linguistics. Language 71: 490-532.
Crystal, D. (1982). Profiling linguistic disability. London: Edward Arnold.
Crystal, D., P. Fletcher. , & M. Garman. (1976). The grammatical analysis of language disability: A procedure for assessment and remediation. London: Edward Arnold.
Dai, Xiang-lin. (1992). Chinese morphology and its interface with the syntax. Ohio State University dissertation. Ann Arbor: UMI.
Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93 (3), 283-321.
Fodor, Jerry A. (1983). The Modality of Mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Frazier, L., & J. D. Fodor. (1978). The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition, 6, 291-325.
Garner, W. R. (1953). An informational analysis of absolute judgments of loudness. Journal of Experimental Psychology., 46, 373-380.
Garrett, M. F., T. G. Bever., & J. Fodor. (1966). The active use of grammar in speech perception. Perception and Psychophysics, 1, 30-32.
Gathercole, S. E. & A. D. Baddeley. (1993). Working Memory and language. LEA: UK.
Gleason, J. B. & N. B. Ratner. (1993). Psycholinguistics. Harcourt: USA.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (Eds). Syntax and Semantics, Vol 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press.
Hebb (1961). Distinctive features of learning in the higher animals. In J. F. Delafresnaye (Ed.), Brain mechanisms and learning. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hauson, M. D., N. Chomaky., & W. T. Fitch. (2002). The Faculty of Language: what is it, who has it, and how did evolve? Science, 298, 1569-1579.
Hopper, Paul J. (1988). Emergent grammar. Berkeley Linguistic Society, 13, 139-157.
Hsu Dong-bo. (2002). Working memory as a constraint on Chinsese sentential processing. Paper for the 10th International Conference on Cognitive Processing of Chinese and Related Asian Languages. December 9-11, NTU, Taipei.
Hulme, C., S. Maughan., & G. D. A. Brown. (1991). Memory for familiar and unfamiliar words: Evidence for a long-term memory contribution to short-term memory span. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 685-701.
Jackendoff, R. (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Katamba, F. (1993). Morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Klapp, S. T. (1976). Short-term memory as a response preparation state. Memory and Cognition, 4, 721-729.
Labov, William (1966). The linguistic variable as a structural unit. Washingrton Linguistics Review 3: 4-22.
Lakoff, George. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: what categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, George. (1991). Cognitive versus generative linguistics: how commitments influence results. Language and Communication, 11, 53-62.
Langacker, R. W. (1987a). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol 1, Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press.
Li and Thompson. (2000). Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Crane: Taipei.
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Marks, L. E., & G. A. Miller. (1964). The role of semantic and syntactic constraints in the memorization of English Sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 3, 1-5.
Marslen-Wison, W. D. (1975). Sentence perception as an interactive parallel process. Science, 189, 226-228.
Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & L. K. Tyler. (1980). The temporal structure of spoken language understanding. Cognition, 8, 1-71.
Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & A. Welsh. (1978). Processing interactions and lexical access during word recognition in continuous speech. Cognitive Psychology, 10, 29-63.
Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. New York: Harvard University Press.
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.
Morton. J. (1970). A functional model for memory. In D. A. Norman (Ed.), Models of human memory. New York: Academic Press.
Nelson, K. (1973). Structure and strategy in learning to talk. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 38, (1-2, Serial No. 149).
Newmeyer, Frederick J. (1998). Language Form and Language Function. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Onifer, W., & D. Swinney, (1981). Accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Effects of frequency-of-meaning and contextual bias. Memory and Cognition, 9, 225-236.
Pollack, I. (1952). The information of elementary auditory displays. Journal of Acoustics., Soc. Amer., 24, 745-749.
Pollack, I., & J. M. Pickett. (1963). The intelligibility of excerpts from conversation. Language and Speech, 28, 165-171.
Potter, M. C. & L. Lombardi. (1990). Regeneration in the short-term recall of sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 633-654.
Potter, M. C. (1993). Very short-term conceptual memory. Memory and Cognition, 21, 156-161.
Radford, R. (1998). Syntax---A minimalist introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Salthouse, T.A. et al. (1989). Effects of adult age and working memory on reasoning and spatial abilities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 15, 507-516.
Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Cognitive Psychology. Wadsworth: Thomson Learning.
Stubbs, M. (1983). Discourse analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.
Swinney, D., (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re) consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 645-659.
Tang Ting-chi. (1993). Hanyu cifa jufa sanji. Taiwan: Student Bookstore.
Tang Ting-chi. (1995a). Hanyude ci: ciyude fenduan. Renwun ji shehuei xueke jiaoxu tongxun, Vol 6, 2, 95-117.
Tang Ting-chi. (1995b). The ‘Generalized’ X-bar conventions and word- formation typology. Renwen ji shehuei xueke jiaoxu tongxun, Vol 5, 1, 225-263.
Tang, Ting-chi. (1996). Hanyude ci: ziyouyu yu nianzhouyude huafen. Hanxu yanjiu, Vol 14, 2, 187-239.
Tang, Ting-chi. (1999). Hanya fuheci yanjiu. Hawen shijie, 91, 20-31.
Tannen, D. (1990a). Gender difference in topical coherence: creating involvement in best friends’ talk. Discourse Process, 13 (1), 73-90.
Tannen, D. (1990b). You just don’t understand. New York: William Morrow.
Ted, S., S. Joost, & S. Wibert. (Eds). (2001). Text representation: linguistic and psychological aspects. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Van der Linden, M., S. Bregart., & A. Beerton. (1994). Age related differences in updating working memory. British Journal of Psychology, 84, 145-152.
Waugh, N. C., & D. A. Norman. (1965). Primary memory. Psychological Review, 72, 89-104.
Wingfield, A., & B. Butterworth. (1984). Running memory for sentences and parts of sentences: Syntactic parsing as a control function in working memory. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X: Control of language processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wingfield, A. (1975). The intonation-syntax interaction: prosodic features in perceptual processing of sentences. In A. Cohen & S.G. Nooteboom (Eds.), Structure and process in speech perception. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Zheng, Li-ling (2001). The correlation studies between the subcomponents of working memory model and Mandarin Reading. MA thesis of Graduate Institute of Primary Education at National Tai-Tung Normal College. Unpblished
Zhou, Yu-Chin (周裕欽).(1999). The related research between working memory and Mandarin Reading (The linkage of the theory of working memory model and the capacity theory of comprehension). MA thesis of Graduate Institute of Primary Education at National Tai-Tung Normal College. Unpblished.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
語言學研究所
90555003
91
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0090555003
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 萬依萍 博士zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Dr. I-PING WANen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 徐東伯zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Dennis Dong-Bo Hsuen_US
dc.creator (作者) 徐東伯zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Dennis Dong-Bo Hsuen_US
dc.date (日期) 2002en_US
dc.date.accessioned 14-Sep-2009 12:59:07 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 14-Sep-2009 12:59:07 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 14-Sep-2009 12:59:07 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0090555003en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/32043-
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) 90555003zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 91zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 當我們在處理語句的訊息時,即使接收到的訊息是處於一種模糊不清的狀態之下,我們仍然可以藉由語境或者是儲存在長期記憶中的知識表徵來幫助我們理解語句。然而,在可以被視為一般語句處理的篇章中以及去除儲存在長期記憶的知識表徵的非篇章段落中的基本的言語的處理單位,甚少被提及。在本文中,我們將探討在兩種韻律結構的篇章語句以及非篇章為主的言語基本處理單位為何。 接著,我們將用具有心理實證的語句基本單位檢視詞彙學派以及範疇學派在句法分析上所使用的初始單位,探討哪一個學派的句法分析同時具有理論性以及實證性的證據支持。此外,經由探究韻律結構、詞語分斷之間的互動,來檢驗語言以及句法的獨立性假說。更進一步的,我們比較男女之間,對於語句提取的效率是否存有差異。分別有六男、六女,共十二名的大學生參與這次的實驗。實驗的材料是由實驗者將兩種韻律結構的篇章以及非篇章的段落分別錄音之後,讓受試者對所聽到的語句,做斷詞的工作。我們使用分斷派典以及統計考驗,來驗證本文中提出的各個假說。結果發現,在相似於我們一般說話語句的篇章中,基本處理的言語單位是詞,而在去除韻律結構以及分篇章為主的段落中,處理的基本言語單位是音節。這樣的結果符合工作記憶模式的預測。另外,詞彙學派的句法分析得到了理論上及實證上的支持。構詞、音韻、句法、以及長期記憶中的知識表徵,應該被視為是一個整體,而非句法、語言是獨立於整個認知系統之外的。至少,在本文中,利用語句產生證據來看,是反駁這個觀點的。大體上,男女之間對於語句處理的基本單位是沒有差別的,但似乎女孩子在語句產出時,更依賴韻律結構存在的與否。作者在文中提出了社會語言學的解釋。由本文可以得知,在語句產出的證據看來,詞彙句法學派得到了理論上及實證上的支持。語言是和整個認知系統互動的一種機制。而男女在提取言語單位上的效率並無不同。zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) It is widely accepted that the routine of the perceptual processing of ongoing speech can be comprehended even in a degraded quality through the aid of the context or real-world knowledge stored in LTM. However, the basic units processed in the discourse-based text that can be recognized as the normal sentential input and those processed in the non-discourse-based text which removes the contribution of the knowledge representation stored in LTM are not yet investigated. In this study the basic units processed in these two textual patterns were discovered. The basic unit processed in normal prosodic, discourse-based text was employed to resolve the controversy between lexicalists’ and categorical syntacticians’ primitives of syntactic analyses. In addition, purposes of the interaction between prosodic patterns, namely the prosodic pattern, prosody-free pattern and the syntactic segmentation were examined to testify the autonomy hypotheses whether they gain the support from the speech production. Furthermore, the retrieval efficiency between genders were analyzed as well to investigate whether different genders employed different retrieval efficiency in different textual and prosodic patterns. 12 undergraduate students, six male and six female students participated in the two experiments. Discourse-based texts with two prosodic patterns and non-discourse-based pattern were recorded in the auditory form to conduct the experiments. Segmentation paradigm and statistical analysis were used to make the production analyses. Results indicated that a word is the basic unit processed in the prosodic, discourse-based text while a syllable is the basic unit processed in the prosody-free discourse-based text and non-discourse-based text which confirms to the prediction of WM model. The evidence favors lexicalists’ primitive of syntactic analysis psychologically. The cooperation between morphology, syntax, phonology and knowledge representations in general cognitive system argues against the autonomy hypotheses. Language should be recognized as a submechanism embedded in the cognitive system. The results suggested that, in general, there was no difference between genders but it seemed that female subjects tended more to rely on phonological cues. A plausible sociolinguistic reason was proposed. The results suggest that lexicalists’ primitive for syntactic analysis has theoretical as well as psychological support. In speech production, language seems to interact with other cognitive mechanisms rather than isolate to form an independent, self-contained domain. No retrieval difference exists between genders.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents Acknowledgements (致謝詞)………………………………......................iv
     Table of Contents..……………………………….…………….........................v
     List of Tables and Figures…………………………………......................viii
     Chinese Abstract………………………………………………………………x
     English Abstract…………………………………………………………..…..xi
     Chapter
     1. Introduction
     1.1 Motivation………………………………………………………………1
     1.2 Purposes………………………………………………………………...2
     1.3 Research Questions………………………………………………..........7
     1.4 The Conventions of the Notations………………………………………8
     1.5 The Organization of the Thesis………………………………………....8
     
     2. Literature Review
     2.1 Memory Types…………………………………………………………10
     2.2 Short-term Memory (STM) and Long-term Memory (LTM)…….........13
     2.3 The Interaction between Working Memory and Sentential Process…..15
     2.4 The Working Memory Model…………………………………….........18
     2.5 Factors Affecting Recall Performance…………………………….......23
     2.5.1 Age……………………………………………………….........23
     2.5.2 Rehearsal Strategy…………………………………………….24
     2.5.3 Material………………………………………………………..25
      2.6 Working Memory and Age…………………………………………….26
     2.7 Gender and Language Style and Speech Act…………………………..28
     2.8 Three Autonomy Hypotheses………………………………………….29
     2.8.1 The Autonomy of AUTOSYN………………………………...…35
     2.8.2 The Autonomy of Knowledge of Language with Respect to Use of Language………………………………………………………………38
     2.8.3 The Autonomy of Grammar as a Cognitive System……………..39
     2.9 The Definition of Prosody and its Function……………………….......49
     2.10Syntactic Structure as a Perceptual Cue and its Interaction with Prosody
     …………………………………………………………………………49
     2.11 The Language Production Model…………………………………….51
     2.12 WM model and Linguistic Research in Mandarin…………………...55
     2.13 The Definition of a Word…………………………………………….57
     2.14 Primitives for Syntactic Analysis in Two Camps……………………75
     2.15 Research Hypotheses…………………………………………….......81
     
     3. Methodology
     3.1 Subjects………………………………………………………………83
     3.2 Materials……………………………………………………………...85
     3.3 Procedure……………………………………………………………..90
     
     4. Results and Discussion
     4.1The Basic Units Processed in the Discourse-Based Texts…………….93
     4.1.1 What Is the Basic Units Processed in the Discourse-Based Text, Syllables, Words Phrases……………………………………….93
     4.1.2 The Basic Units Processed in Two Prosodic Patterns………….101
     4.1.3 The Relations between the Prosodic Patterns and Syntactic Pause
      …………………………………………………………………104
     4.1.4 The Semantic Consideration from Garrett’s Model and Chomsky’s
      Model………………………………………..………………...109
     4.2 The Basic Unit Processed in the Non-Discourse-Based Text………..115
     4.3 The Relations between Genders and Speech Production…………….119
      4.3.1 The Gender Effect in the Chunk Recalled in Prosodic Pattern...119
      4.3.2 The Gender Effect in the Chunk Recalled in Prosody-Free Pattern .............................................................................................121
      4.3.3 The Gender Effect in the Syntactic Segmentation in Two Prosodic Patterns………………………………………………………...123
      4.3.4 The Gender Effect in the Chunk Recalled in the Non- Discourse- Based Text..................................................................................125
     
     5. Conclusion
     5.1 Conclusion……………………………………………………………131
     5.2 Future Research………………………………………………………136
     References……………………...…………………………………...…..139
     Appendix
      1. Discourse-Based Texts…………..…………………………………….149
      Better Man, Go! Go!..............................................................................149
      Cixi Empress at Home…………………………………………………152
      Leave to Brush Up. No! No!..................................................................154
      Lock & Make-up………………………………………………………156
      2. Non-Discourese-Based Text..………………………………………….159
zh_TW
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0090555003en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 語句處理基本單位zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 工作記憶zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 短期記憶zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 語言獨立性zh_TW
dc.title (題名) The Basic Units Processed in the Discourse-Based and Non-Discourse-Based Texts under the Constraints of Working Memoryzh_TW
dc.title (題名) 工作記憶限制之下,在篇章及非篇章段落中的語句處理基本單位zh_TW
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Adams, A.M., & S.E. Gathercole. (1995). Phonological working memory and speech production in preschool children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38 (2), 403-414.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Adams, A. M., & S.E. Gathercole. (1996). Phonological working memory and spoken language development in you ng children. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A (1), 216-233.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Atkinson, R. C., & R. M. Shiffrin. (1968). Human Memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K. W. Spence and J. T. Spence (Eds.) The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory, Vol. II. New York: Academic Press. 89-195.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Baddeley, A. D.(1986). Working memory. Oxford: Clarendon.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Baddeley A. D. & G. J. Hitch. (1974). Working memory. In G. Bower (Ed.) The psychology of learning and motivation, (Vol. 8, pp 47-90). New York: Academic Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Baddely, A. D., N. Thompson., & M. Buchanan. (1975). Word length and the structure of short-term memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 575-589.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Barrett, M. (1989). Early language development. In A. Slater & G. Bremner (Eds.), Infant development. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Beckman, H. B. & R. M. Frankel. (1984). The effect of physician behaviour on the collection of data. Annals of Internal Medicine, 101, 692-6.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Beebe-Center, J. G., M. S. Rogers., & D. N. O’Connell. (1955). Trasmission of information about sucrose and saline solutions through the sense of taste. Journal of Psychology, 39, 157-160.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Beech, C. M. (1991). The interpretation of prosodic patterns at points of syntactic structural ambiguity: Evidence for cue trading relations. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 644-663.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Blake, J. et al. (1994). The relationship between memory span and measures of imitative and spontaneous language complexity in preschool children. International Journal of Behavioural Development, 17 (1), 91-107.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Brown, R. A. (1973). A first language: The early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Chomksy, Noam. (1957). Syntactic structures. Uanua Linguarum Series Minor 4. The Hague: Mouton.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Chomsky, Noam (1972). Language and mind. Enlarged edition. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Chomsky, Noam. (1975). Reflections on language. New York: Pantheon.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Chomsky, Noam. (1980). Rules and representations. New York: Columbia University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Chomsky, Noam (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge: MIT Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Craik, F. I. M., & R. S. Lockhart, (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal behavior, 20, 641-655.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Craik, F. I. M., & P. A. Masani, (1969). Age and Intelligence differences in coding and retrieval of word lists. British Journal of Psychology, 60, 315-319.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Craik, F.I.M., R.G. Morris., & M.L. Gick. (1990). Adult age differences in working memory. In G. Vallar, & T. Shallice (Eds.), Neuropsychological impairments of short-term memory. New York: Cambridge University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Croft, William (1995). Autonomy and functionalist linguistics. Language 71: 490-532.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Crystal, D. (1982). Profiling linguistic disability. London: Edward Arnold.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Crystal, D., P. Fletcher. , & M. Garman. (1976). The grammatical analysis of language disability: A procedure for assessment and remediation. London: Edward Arnold.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Dai, Xiang-lin. (1992). Chinese morphology and its interface with the syntax. Ohio State University dissertation. Ann Arbor: UMI.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93 (3), 283-321.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Fodor, Jerry A. (1983). The Modality of Mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Frazier, L., & J. D. Fodor. (1978). The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition, 6, 291-325.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Garner, W. R. (1953). An informational analysis of absolute judgments of loudness. Journal of Experimental Psychology., 46, 373-380.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Garrett, M. F., T. G. Bever., & J. Fodor. (1966). The active use of grammar in speech perception. Perception and Psychophysics, 1, 30-32.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Gathercole, S. E. & A. D. Baddeley. (1993). Working Memory and language. LEA: UK.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Gleason, J. B. & N. B. Ratner. (1993). Psycholinguistics. Harcourt: USA.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (Eds). Syntax and Semantics, Vol 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hebb (1961). Distinctive features of learning in the higher animals. In J. F. Delafresnaye (Ed.), Brain mechanisms and learning. New York: Oxford University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hauson, M. D., N. Chomaky., & W. T. Fitch. (2002). The Faculty of Language: what is it, who has it, and how did evolve? Science, 298, 1569-1579.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hopper, Paul J. (1988). Emergent grammar. Berkeley Linguistic Society, 13, 139-157.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hsu Dong-bo. (2002). Working memory as a constraint on Chinsese sentential processing. Paper for the 10th International Conference on Cognitive Processing of Chinese and Related Asian Languages. December 9-11, NTU, Taipei.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hulme, C., S. Maughan., & G. D. A. Brown. (1991). Memory for familiar and unfamiliar words: Evidence for a long-term memory contribution to short-term memory span. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 685-701.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Jackendoff, R. (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Katamba, F. (1993). Morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Klapp, S. T. (1976). Short-term memory as a response preparation state. Memory and Cognition, 4, 721-729.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Labov, William (1966). The linguistic variable as a structural unit. Washingrton Linguistics Review 3: 4-22.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Lakoff, George. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: what categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Lakoff, George. (1991). Cognitive versus generative linguistics: how commitments influence results. Language and Communication, 11, 53-62.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Langacker, R. W. (1987a). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol 1, Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Li and Thompson. (2000). Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Crane: Taipei.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Marks, L. E., & G. A. Miller. (1964). The role of semantic and syntactic constraints in the memorization of English Sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 3, 1-5.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Marslen-Wison, W. D. (1975). Sentence perception as an interactive parallel process. Science, 189, 226-228.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & L. K. Tyler. (1980). The temporal structure of spoken language understanding. Cognition, 8, 1-71.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & A. Welsh. (1978). Processing interactions and lexical access during word recognition in continuous speech. Cognitive Psychology, 10, 29-63.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. New York: Harvard University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Morton. J. (1970). A functional model for memory. In D. A. Norman (Ed.), Models of human memory. New York: Academic Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Nelson, K. (1973). Structure and strategy in learning to talk. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 38, (1-2, Serial No. 149).zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Newmeyer, Frederick J. (1998). Language Form and Language Function. Cambridge: MIT Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Onifer, W., & D. Swinney, (1981). Accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Effects of frequency-of-meaning and contextual bias. Memory and Cognition, 9, 225-236.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Pollack, I. (1952). The information of elementary auditory displays. Journal of Acoustics., Soc. Amer., 24, 745-749.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Pollack, I., & J. M. Pickett. (1963). The intelligibility of excerpts from conversation. Language and Speech, 28, 165-171.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Potter, M. C. & L. Lombardi. (1990). Regeneration in the short-term recall of sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 633-654.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Potter, M. C. (1993). Very short-term conceptual memory. Memory and Cognition, 21, 156-161.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Radford, R. (1998). Syntax---A minimalist introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Salthouse, T.A. et al. (1989). Effects of adult age and working memory on reasoning and spatial abilities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 15, 507-516.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Cognitive Psychology. Wadsworth: Thomson Learning.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Stubbs, M. (1983). Discourse analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Swinney, D., (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re) consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 645-659.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Tang Ting-chi. (1993). Hanyu cifa jufa sanji. Taiwan: Student Bookstore.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Tang Ting-chi. (1995a). Hanyude ci: ciyude fenduan. Renwun ji shehuei xueke jiaoxu tongxun, Vol 6, 2, 95-117.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Tang Ting-chi. (1995b). The ‘Generalized’ X-bar conventions and word- formation typology. Renwen ji shehuei xueke jiaoxu tongxun, Vol 5, 1, 225-263.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Tang, Ting-chi. (1996). Hanyude ci: ziyouyu yu nianzhouyude huafen. Hanxu yanjiu, Vol 14, 2, 187-239.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Tang, Ting-chi. (1999). Hanya fuheci yanjiu. Hawen shijie, 91, 20-31.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Tannen, D. (1990a). Gender difference in topical coherence: creating involvement in best friends’ talk. Discourse Process, 13 (1), 73-90.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Tannen, D. (1990b). You just don’t understand. New York: William Morrow.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ted, S., S. Joost, & S. Wibert. (Eds). (2001). Text representation: linguistic and psychological aspects. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Van der Linden, M., S. Bregart., & A. Beerton. (1994). Age related differences in updating working memory. British Journal of Psychology, 84, 145-152.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Waugh, N. C., & D. A. Norman. (1965). Primary memory. Psychological Review, 72, 89-104.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Wingfield, A., & B. Butterworth. (1984). Running memory for sentences and parts of sentences: Syntactic parsing as a control function in working memory. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X: Control of language processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Wingfield, A. (1975). The intonation-syntax interaction: prosodic features in perceptual processing of sentences. In A. Cohen & S.G. Nooteboom (Eds.), Structure and process in speech perception. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Zheng, Li-ling (2001). The correlation studies between the subcomponents of working memory model and Mandarin Reading. MA thesis of Graduate Institute of Primary Education at National Tai-Tung Normal College. Unpblishedzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Zhou, Yu-Chin (周裕欽).(1999). The related research between working memory and Mandarin Reading (The linkage of the theory of working memory model and the capacity theory of comprehension). MA thesis of Graduate Institute of Primary Education at National Tai-Tung Normal College. Unpblished.zh_TW