面向初级汉语学习者和汉语母语者的指称选用
上海师范大学, 对外汉语学院, 上海 200240
| 摘 要： | 本研究在交际有效性假说的框架之下考察和对比听话人为初级汉语学习者和汉语母语者时说话人的指称选用策略。使用无字绘本《青蛙，你在哪儿》作为引导自然语料的文本材料，实验一考察汉语教师面向初级汉语学习者的22位被试的自然引出语料，实验二考察面向汉语母语者的24位被试的自然引出语料。首先使用多元方差分析考察听话人为初级汉语学习者的对外汉语教师组和听话人为汉语母语者的汉语母语者组在指称选用方面是否具有显著性差异。接着使用两个混合效应逻辑回归模型来考察说话人面对汉语学习者和汉语母语者时指称选用策略的冗余性程度，从而验证交际有效性假说。分析显示代词使用的显著效应，说话者在听话者语言能力高的情况下使用更多代词，降低使用冗余性指称。通过以上控制其他影响因素模型的分析，认为说话人面对语言能力较低的听话人倾向于更多使用冗余性的指称形式并不是话语调整结果，而是基于交际有效性的内在需求。 |
| 关 键 词： | 指称选用; 冗余性; 交际有效性假说 |
| DOI： | 10.57237/j.cll.2023.04.001 |
View:
Downloads:
收稿日期: 2023-08-08
接受日期: 2023-09-25
在线出版日期: 2023-10-09
Speaker’s Referential Choice with Elementary Chinese Learners and Native Chinese Speakers
International College of Chinese Studies, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200240, China
| Abstract: | Speaker’s referential choice with elementary Chinese learners and native Chinese speakers is investigated by comparing participants’ descriptions of the “frog story” picture book. The description data are elicited from 22 speakers with elementary Chinese learners and 24 speakers with native Chinese speakers. Firstly, a multivariate analysis of variance is used to test there is a significant group difference between the speakers with elementary Chinese learners and native Chinese speakers. Then, two mixed-effect logistic regression models are used to examine the effect of listener’s language proficiency on redundancy in speakers’ referential choice. The analysis shows the effect of pronoun that speakers with high language proficiency use more pronouns and decrease redundancy. The findings support the ideas that speakers increasing redundancy when talking to less proficient language learners is the requirement of communicative efficiency, other than discourse adaptation. |
| Keywords: | Referential Choice; Redundancy; Communicative Efficiency Hypothesis |
参考文献
| [1] | Jaeger, T. F., & Buz, E. (2017). Signal reduction and linguistic encoding. In E. Fern´ andez, & H. Cairns (Eds.), The handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 38–81). John Wiley & Sons. |
| [2] | Pate, J. K., & Goldwater, S. (2015). Talkers account for listener and channel characteristics to communicate efficiently. Journal of Memory and Language, 78, 1–17. |
| [3] | Aylett, M., & Turk, A. (2004). The Smooth Signal Hypothesis: A functional explanation for relationships between redundancy, prosodic prominence, and duration in spontaneous speech. Language and Speech, 47(1), 31–56. |
| [4] | Levy, R., & Jaeger, T. F. (2007). Speakers optimize information density through syntactic reduction. In B. Schlokopf, ¨ J. Platt, & T. Hoffman (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems (NIPS) 19 (pp. 849–856). MIT Press. |
| [5] | Cohen Priva, U. (2015). Informativity affects consonant duration and deletion rates. Laboratory Phonology, 6(2), 243–278. https://doi.org/10.1515/lp-2015-0008 |
| [6] | Kurumada, C., & Jaeger, T. F. (2015). Communicative efficiency in language production: Optional case-marking in Japanese. Journal of Memory and Language, 83, 152–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.03.003 |
| [7] | Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. Routledge. |
| [8] | Arnold, J. E. (2008). Reference production: Production-internal and addressee-oriented processes. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 495–527. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 01690960801920099 |
| [9] | Chafe, W. L. (1994). Discourse, consciousness, and time. Chicago University Press. |
| [10] | Bannon, J., Saryazdi, R., & Chambers, C. G. (2020). Designing referential descriptions for children, young adults, and computers: A comprehensive examination of talker informativity. In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2957–2963). |
| [11] | Loy, J. E., & Smith, K. (2020). Syntactic adaptation may depend on perceived linguistic knowledge: Native English speakers differentially adapt to native and nonnative confederates in dialogue. Doi: 10.31234/osf.io/pu2qa. |
| [12] | Tippenhauer, N., Fourakis, E. R., Watson, D. G., & Lew-Williams, C. (2020). The scope of audience design in child-directed speech: Parents’ tailoring of word lengths for adult versus child listeners. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46 (11), 2163–2178. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004 |
| [13] | Uther, M., Knoll, M. A., & Burnham, D. (2007). Do you speak E-NG-L-I-SH ? A comparison of foreigner- and infant-directed speech. Speech Communication, 49, 2–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2006.10.003 |
| [14] | Tal, S., Grossman, E., & Arnon, I. (2021). Infant-directed speech becomes less redundant as infants grow: implications for language learning. https://psyarxiv.com/bgtzdC/. |
| [15] | Rodriguez-Cuadrado, S., Baus, C., & Costa, A. (2017). Foreigner talk through word reduction in native/non-native spoken interactions. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728917000402 |
| [16] | Long, M. H. (1983). Linguistic and conversational adjustments to non native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 5, 177–193. |
| [17] | Wooldridge, B. (2001). “Foreigner talk”: An important element in cross-cultural management education and training. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 67(4), 621–634. |
| [18] | Arnold, J. E., & Zerkle, S. A. (2019). Why do people produce pronouns? Pragmatic selection vs. rational models. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 34(9), 1152–1175. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2019.1636103 |
| [19] | Van der Meulen, F. F., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. M. (2001). Eye movements during the production of nouns and pronouns. Memory and Cognition, 29(3), 512–521. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196402 |
| [20] | Vogels, J., Krahmer, E., & Maes, A. (2015). How cognitive load influences speakers’ choice of referring expressions. Cognitive Science, 39(6), 1396–1418. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12205 |
| [21] | Tily, H., & Piantadosi, S. (2009). Refer efficiently: Use less informative expressions for more predictable meanings. Proceedings of the workshop on the production of referring expressions: Bridging the gap between computational and empirical approaches to reference. |
| [22] | Tal, S., Grossman, E., Rohde, H., & Arnon, I. (2023). Speakers use more redundant references with language learners: Evidence for communicatively-efficient referential choice. Journal of Memory and Language, 128, 104378. |
| [23] | Rohde, H., & Kehler, A. (2014). Grammatical and information-structural influences on pronoun production. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(8), 912–927. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2013.854918 |
| [24] | Grosz, B. J., Joshi, A. K., & Weinstein, S. (1995). Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics - Association for Computational Linguistics, 21(2), 203–225. |
| [25] | Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information structure and sentence form: Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge University Press. |
| [26] | Arnold, J. E., & Griffin, Z. M. (2007). The effect of additional characters on choice of referring expression: Everyone counts. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 521–536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.09.007 |
| [27] | Fukumura, K., & Van Gompel, R. P. G. (2012). Producing pronouns and definite noun phrases: Do speakers use the addressee’s discourse model? Cognitive Psychology, 36, 1289–1311. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2012.01255.x |
| [28] | Mayer, M. (1969). Frog, where are you? Dial Press. |
| [29] | Guerriero, A. M. S., Oshima-Takane, Y., & Kuriyama, Y. (2006). The development of referential choice in English and Japanese: A discourse-pragmatic perspective. Journal of Child Language, 33(4), 823–857. https://doi.org/10.1017/S030500090600763X |
| [30] | Rosa, E. C., & Arnold, J. E. (2017). Predictability affects production: Thematic roles can affect reference form selection. Journal of Memory and Language, 94, 43–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2016.07.007 |
| [31] | Arnold, J. E. (2010). How Speakers Refer: The Role of Accessibility, 4, 187–203. |
| [32] | Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R. (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language, 69(2), 274–307. |
| [33] | Van Engen, K. J., Baese-Berk, M., Baker, R. E., Choi, A., Kim, M., & Bradlow, A. R. (2010). The wildcat corpus of native-and foreign-accented english: Communicative efficiency across conversational dyads with varying language alignment profiles. Language and Speech, 53(4), 510–540. https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830910372495 Velupillai, V. (2012). An introduction to linguistic typology. John Benjamins. |
| [34] | Bard, E. G., & Aylett, M. (2004). Referential form, word duration, and modeling the listener in spoken dialogue. In J. C. Trueswell, & M. K. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Approaches to studying world-situated language use: bridging the language-as-product and languageas-action traditions (pp. 173–191). MIT Press. |
