汉语学龄前儿童主、宾关系从句认知特点及语义因素效应的研究

doi:10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2022.05.07

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 关系从句是人类语言领域句法结构较为复杂的句式,汉语3~5岁儿童是否具有加工关系从句的认知能力,以及该能力是否受句法结构和语义因素的影响,成为该领域当前研究的热点。本研究选取120名3~6岁学龄前儿童,以汉语主、宾关系从句为研究材料,通过操纵从句中核心名词的生命性格局对上述问题进行了考察。结果显示:(1)汉语领域内,3~4岁儿童基本上具备了理解句式较为简单的关系从句的能力;(2)5~6岁左右的儿童基本上具备了利用语义因素辅助关系从句加工的能力。总之,汉语学龄前儿童具备了加工关系从句的认知能力,且高年级儿童可以利用语义因素辅助从句加工。

关键词: 汉语, 关系从句, 生命性, 学龄前儿童

Abstract: One of the important tasks in psycholinguistic literature is to explore the innate mechanisms and the universal principles guiding parsing in sentence processing. To explore whether 3~6 years old children have the ability to utilize semantic cues in comprehension of relative clauses or not, 120 children were recruited in the study. The study employed a 2×2×3 mixed design, with RC type (SRC vs.ORC), the configuration of animacy of the head nouns (animaicy-inanimacy vs. inanimacy-animacy) as within-subject factors, and grade (one vs. two vs. three) as between-subject factors. The data were addressed using general logistic mixed effect regression model (GLMER) and the results indicated that the main effect of grade was significant, but no significant differences were found for type of sentences and animacy of the head nouns. There were significant interactions between type of sentence and grades, simple analyses showed that no significances were found between SRCs and ORCs for grade 1 and grade 2, but for grade 3, there were significant differences between SRCs and ORCs. The three-way sentence×grade×animacy interactions were marginal significant. For children from grade 3, sentences with inanimacy-animacy configuration were more difficult to process than sentences with animacy-inanimacy configuration under conditions of ORCs, but under conditions of SRCs, sentences with inanimacy-animacy configuration were easier to comprehend than sentences with animacy-inanimacy configuration. Under conditions of inanimacy-animacy configuration, children from grade 1 have more difficult in comprehending SRCs compared to children from grade 2 and 3, but no significant differences were found between grade 2 and 3. On the other hand, under conditions of animacy-inanimacyconfiguration, no significant differences were found in comprehending ORCs between grade 1 and grade 2, but their accuracy was lower than children from grade 3.In conclusion, this paper firstly found that 3~4 years old children from China have the ability to comprehend RCs with simple structure, but until about 6 years old, they could utilize the semantic cues in comprehension of RCs.

Key words: Chinese, relative clause, aniamcy, preschool child

中图分类号:

G442

何文广, 杨谢兰. 汉语学龄前儿童主、宾关系从句认知特点及语义因素效应的研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(5): 667-674.

HE Wenguang, YANG Xielan. A Study about Chinese Relative Clause Processing and the Effects of Animacy for Preschool Children[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2022, 38(5): 667-674.

参考文献

Ambridge, B., Bidgood, A., Pine, J. M., Rowland, C. F., & Freudenthal, D. (2015). Is passive syntax semantically constrained? Evidence from adult grammaticality judgment and comprehension studies.Cognitive Science, 40, 1435-1459.
Aron, I. (2010). Rethinking child difficulty:The effect of NP on children's processing of relative clause in Hebrew. Journal of Children Language, 37(01), 1-31.
Arosio, F., Adani, F., & Guasti, M. T. (2009). Grammatical features in the comprehension of Italian relative clauses by children. In J. M. Brucart, A. Gavarro, & J. Sola(Eds.), Merging Features:Computation, Interpretation, and Acquisition(pp.138-157).Oxford University Press.
Bentea, A., Durrleman, S., & Rizzi, L. (2016). Refining intervention:The acquisition of featural relations in object A-bar dependencies. Lingua, 169, 21-41.
Chen, B. G., Ning, A. H., Bi, H. Y., & Dunlap, S. (2008).Chinese subject-relative clauses are more difficult to process than the object-relative clauses. Acta Psychologica, 129, 61-65.
Felser,C., Marinis, T., & Clahsen, H. (2003). Children's processing of ambiguous sentences:A study of relative clause attachment. Language Acquisition, 11(3), 127-163.
Frank S. L., & Ernst, P. (2018). Judgements about double-embedded relative clauses differ between languages.Psychological Research, 83(7), 1581-1593.
Gallego, C., Martín-Aragoneses.,M. T., López-Higes., R., & Pisón, G. (2016). Semantic and syntactic reading comprehension strategies used by deaf children with early and late cochlear implantation. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 49/50, 153-170.
Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity:Locality of syntactic dependencies.Cognition, 68, 1-76.
Hakansson, G., & Hansson, K. (2000). Comprehension and production of relative clauses:A comparison between Swedish impaired and unimpaired children. Journal of Child Language, 27(2), 313-333.
He, W., & Bi, X. (2020). Perspective-shifting is helpful for children in Chinese passive sentence comprehension. Acta Psychologica, 205,103059.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103059
He, W., & Chen, B. (2013). The role of animacy in Chinese relative clause processing.Acta Psychologica, 144 (1),145-153.
He, W., Xu, N., & Ji, R. Q. (2017). Age and location effects in Chinese relative clause processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 46(5), 1067-1086.
Hisao, F., & Gibson, E. (2003). Processing relative clauses in Chinese.Cognition, 90, 3-27.
Hu, S., Gavarró, A., & Guasti, M. T. (2016). Children's production of head-final relative clauses:The case of Mandarin. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37(02), 323-346.
Keenan, K., & Comrie, B. (1977). Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar.Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 63-99.
Kidd, E., Brandt, S., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2007). Object relatives made easy:A cross-linguistic comparison of the constraints influencing young children's processing of relative clauses. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22(6), 860-897.
Langlois, V. J., & Arnold, J. E. (2020). Print exposure explains individual differences in using syntactic but not semantic cues for pronoun comprehension. Cognition, 197, 104155.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104155
Lin, C. J. C.(2018). Subject prominence and processing dependencies in prenominal relative clauses:The comprehension of possessive relative clauses and adjunct relative clauses in Mandarin Chinese. Language, 94(4), 758-797.
Mak, W. M., Vonk, W., & Schriefers, H. (2006). Animacy in processing relative clauses:The hikers that rocks crush.Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 466-490.
Mimeau, C., Laroche, A., & Deacon, S. H. (2019). The relation between syntactic awareness and contextual facilitation in word reading:what is the role of semantics? Journal of Research in Reading, 42(1), 178-192.
Panda, S., Taranikanti, M., Behara, J., Yasmeen, N., & Tiyyagura, S. (2015). Role of audio visual aids in medical teaching and their impact on students. Language and Cognitive Processes, 5(1), 449-494.
R Core Team. (2017). R:A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from https://www.r-project.org
Sheldon, A. (1979). On strategies for processing relative clauses:A comparison of children and adults.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 6(4),305-318.
Staub, A., Dillon, B., & Clifton, C. (2017). The matrix verb as a source of comprehension difficulty in object relative sentences. Cognitive Science, 41(6), 1353-1376.
Uzundag,B.A., & Küntay, C.A. (2019). The acquisition and use of relative clauses in Turkish-learning children's conversational interactions:a crosslinguistic approach. Journal of Child Language, 46(6), 1142-1168.
Wu, F., Kaiser, E., & Andersen, E. (2011). Animacy effects in Chinese relative clause processing.Language and Cognitive Processes, 1, 1-36.
Wu, F., Kaiser, E., & Vasishth, S. (2017). Effects of early cues on the processing of Chinese relative clauses:Evidence for experience-based theories. Cognitive Science, 42(6), 1101-1133.
Xu,K., Wu, D.H., & Duann, J-R. (2020). Enhanced left inferior frontal to left superior temporal effective connectivity for complex sentence comprehension:fMRI evidence from Chinese relative. Brain and Language, 200, 104712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2019. 104712
何文广, 陈宝国. (2016). 汉语主、宾关系从句加工难度及其核心名词生命性效应. 心理科学, 39(1), 43-49.
刘丹青. (2005). 汉语关系从句标记类型初探. 中国语文, 1, 3-15.
杨亦鸣, 刘涛. (2013). 汉语话题句中语迹的神经机制研究. 中国社会科学, 6,146-166.

相关文章 15

[1]	王敬欣, 赵赛男, 徐倩倩. 字间空格与词频对青年人和老年人阅读的影响:眼动研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(6): 781-787.
[2]	张玉平, 董琼, 宋爽, 舒华. 小学低年级儿童的阅读发展轨迹:早期语言认知技能的预测作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(2): 210-218.
[3]	王颖, 朱海东, 张馨艺, 肖沿. 学龄前留守儿童亲子依恋对执行功能的影响:祖孙依恋的调节作用和中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(2): 195-206.
[4]	张潮, 程亚华, 李利平, 范雨婷, 伍新春. 汉语儿童词语结构意识在阅读理解中的预测作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(2): 236-243.
[5]	周婷娜, 李宜逊, 李虹, 徐钟庚, 张锋, 程亚华. 汉语儿童口语流畅性与阅读理解的关系:一项三年追踪研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(5): 691-700.
[6]	王菡, 俞稼钰, 梁丹丹. 汉语高功能自闭症儿童代词加工:利用提及顺序和重读线索的表现[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(4): 481-488.
[7]	王笑楠, 郝洋, 苏彦捷. 竞争和合作对学龄前儿童分配模式的影响:心理理论和抑制控制的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(4): 385-392.
[8]	赵英, 伍新春, 陈红君. 汉语儿童语素意识对阅读理解的影响:默读流畅性的中介效应[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(4): 430-438.
[9]	马心宇, 陈福美, 玄新, 王耘, 李燕芳. 父亲、母亲抚养压力在母亲抑郁和学龄前儿童内外部问题行为间的链式中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(1): 103-111.
[10]	刘涵隆, 赵婧. 汉语发展性阅读障碍儿童视觉注意广度的发展及其对阅读流畅性的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2018, 34(5): 533-540.
[11]	程亚华, 伍新春. 小学一年级阅读流畅性对二、三年级阅读理解的预测[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2018, 34(3): 314-321.
[12]	刘宇飞, 钱怡, 宋耀武, 毕鸿燕. 4~6岁汉语儿童正字法意识的萌芽与发展[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2018, 34(1): 65-72.
[13]	张玉平, 董琼, 舒华, 吴燕. 语音意识、命名速度和语素意识在汉语阅读发展中的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2017, 33(4): 401-409.
[14]	廖宗卿, 张佳昱, 苏彦捷. 从毕生发展的角度看个体分类倾向的两次转变——材料的生命性和可操作性的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2015, 31(5): 531-538.
[15]	白学军, 李馨, 闫国利. 汉语阅读眼动控制:20年研究的总结[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2015, 31(1): 85-91.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed