检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:吴门吉[1] 高定国[2] 肖晓云[2] 章睿健[2]
机构地区:[1]中山大学国际交流学院,510275 [2]中山大学心理系,510275
出 处:《语言教学与研究》2006年第6期64-71,共8页Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies
基 金:国家社科基金项目(项目号为01BYY003);国家汉办"十五"科研规划项目(项目号为HBK01-05/067)的资助
摘 要:本文采用注音、听写、选择填空等实验方法,对欧美韩国日本的89名学生的汉字认读与书写习得情况进行了调查,旨在考察不同文字背景对汉字学习的影响。结果显示:(1)欧美学生的汉字认读(声韵拼合)不如韩国学生;(2)与声韵拼合成绩相比,所有被试的声调成绩都不好,且不随汉语水平的提高而改善;(3)欧美学生的汉字书写在初级阶段劣势明显,而中级阶段进步显著;(4)欧美、韩国学生字形书写错误突出,日本学生音近字错误较多;(5)欧美初级组的汉字认读与书写成绩存在显著关联性。89 CSL( Chinese as a second language)learners from Korea, Japan and Western Countries participated in the study. The aim of the study is to investigate the learning of reading and writing Chinese characters by learners with different first-language writing systems by means of phonetic transcription, dictation and multiple-choice tasks. The results show: (1) the performance of phonetic transcription by the alphabetic language group was significantly worse than that of the Korean group; (2) compared with phonetic transcription, the scores for the tone in Chinese were much poorer for all groups, and no improvement was demonstrated in the learners at the intermediate level ; (3) the performance of Chinese character writing by the alphabetic language group was very poor at the elementary level, but much improvement was achieved at the intermediate level; (4) learners of the alphabetic language group and the Korean group made much more errors in the writing of Chinese characters with similar forms, while Japanese learners make more errors when writing Chinese characters with similar pronunciations; and (5) the reading score of the learners at the primary level in the alphabetic language group showed significant correlation with their writing score.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.229