中美大学生隐喻理解能力比较研究被引量：28

A comparative study of metaphor comprehension ability between Chinese and American university students

导出

摘要本研究运用隐喻理解程度测验,对251名中国英语专业大学生和35名美国大学生的隐喻理解能力进行了比较研究。研究结果显示,尽管中国被试对测验题项的理解总体上略好于美国被试,但两者的理解差异并不具有统计学上的显著性。进一步分析表明,两者在部分隐喻例句的理解方面呈显著性差异,这些差异在一定程度上与隐喻例句词汇的具体程度有关。 Based on a judgment test of metaphor comprehension difficulty, this study compares 251 Chinese English majors＇ metaphor comprehension ability with 35 American university students＇. The results indicate that though the Chinese students understand the test items somehow better than their American counterparts, the understanding of both groups exhibits no significant statistical differences. Further analysis that reveals there are significant statistical differences in the understanding of certain test items, which are to some extent related to the concreteness of the words in the metaphors.

作者袁凤识许保芳王立非

机构地区北方工业大学文法学院对外经济贸易大学英语学院

出处《外语界》 CSSCI 北大核心 2012年第1期73-81,共9页 Foreign Language World

基金北京市2010年人才强教中青年骨干项目(编号PHR201108062) 北方工业大学科研基金项目"英语专业大学生隐喻能力实证研究"的部分成果

关键词中美大学生隐喻理解比较 Chinese and American university students metaphor comprehension comparison

分类号 H319 [语言文字—英语]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献24

1Boers F & Demecheleer M. Measuring the impact of cross-cultural differences on learners' comprehension of imaginable idioms [ J ]. English Language Teaching Journal, 2001,55 ( 3 ) : 255-262.
2Cummins J. Bilingualism and Special Education: Issues in Assessment and Pedagogy [ M ]. San Diego : College Hill Press, 1984.
3Danesi M. The role of metaphor in second language pedagogy [ J ]. Rossegna Italiana di Linguistica Applicata, 1986, 18(3): 1-10.
4Danesi M. Metaphorical competence in second language acquisition and second language teaching: The neglected dimension [ A ]. In Alatis J E (ed.). Language Communication and Social Meaning [ C ]. Washington, D. C. : Georgetown University Press, 1993.
5Danesi M. Learning and teaching languages: The role of "conceptual fluency" [ J ]. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1995, (5) : 3-20.
6Hulstijn J H. Incidental and intentional learning [ A ]. In Doughty C J & Long M H (eds.). The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition [ C ]. Oxford : Blackwell, 2003. 349-381.
7Iijima M & Murrow P. Communicative Competence in ESL and Metaphoric Competence [ R ]. Vancouver: The 28th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 2006.
8Johnson J. Factors related to cross-language transfer and metaphor interpretation in bilingual children [ J]. Ap- plied Psycholinguistics, 1989, 10(2): 157-177.
9Johnson J. Developmental versus language-based factors in metaphor interpretation [ J]. Journal of Education- al Psychology, 1991, 83(4) : 470-483.
10Johnson J & Rosano T. Relation of cognitive style to metaphor interpretation and second language proficiency [J]. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1993, 14(2): 159-175.