| 其他摘要 | The structural particles“De”(的) and “De”(地) in Chinese are often mixed up in both spoken and written language, arousing heated debate on whether “De”(地) could be replaced by “De”(的). However, most of the current studies focus on grammatical or pragmatic differences of these two words, while no studies have been conducted to look into the effect of the misuse of these two words on information processing and whether there are differences between the effect of two non-standard usage patterns—“De”(地)for “De”(的) and “De”(的) for “De”(地). In this study, a questionnaire was designed and distributed to examine college students' understanding of the usage of “De”(的) and “De”(地) and whether they could distinguish these two words or not. In addition, two eye-tracking experiments with the violation paradigm were conducted to examine the effects of the non-standard usage of “De”(的) and “De”(地) on information processing and whether different patterns have different impacts on information processing and on groups with different recognition ability. In the first study, a questionnaire survey was conducted to investigate the college students’ understanding of the usage of“De”(的) and “De”(地)and the distinction between these two words in application. The results show that: (1) 98% of the respondents learned the difference between the two words, 75% of the respondents knew the difference between the two words, and 85% of the respondents thought it was necessary to make distinction. In addition, 62% of the respondents did pay attention to the distinction in practice, but only 47% of the respondents believed that non-standard usage of the two words affected their reading experience. (2) the respondents were likely to identify the non-standard usage of the two words (mean score=2.85/4) , but more attention was paid to the more unreasonable scenario- “De”(地) substituting “De”(的). Both study 2 and study 3 were eye-tracking studies under the violation paradigm. In the second study, the effects of the mixed use on information processing and that of different usage patterns were investigated. The experimental design was made with 2(sentence type: “De”(的) sentence and “De”(地)sentence) × 2(usage: standard and non-standard) . The results were as follows: (1) non-standard use of “De”(的) and “De”(地) affected the reading of whole sentences. Whether it was “De”(地) substituding “De”(的) or “De”(的) substituting “De”(地), the difference of “one character” increased the dwell time and the fixation counts; (2) the usage of “De”(的) and “De”(地) interacted with the sentence type, and “De”(地) substituding “De”(的) had a stronger influence on eye movement; (3) “De”(的) substituting “De”(地) significantly increased the fixations counts in the area after the target word. In study 3, the effects of the non-standard use on different groups of recognition ability were investigated, and a 2(sentence type: “De”(的) sentence, “De”(地)sentence) × 2(usage: norm, violation) × 2(group: high score group, low score group) three-factor mixed experimental design was adopted. The results showed that: (1) for both high and low groups, the mixed use of “De”(的) and “De”(地) increased the dwell time of the sentences and affected the information processing; (2) the usage of “De”(的) and “De”(地) interacted with the sentence type on multiple eye movement indexes in the interest area of the target word, and the effects of “De”(地) substituting “De”(的) on eye movement is stronger than that of “De”(的) substituting“De”(地), which is true for both high and low groups; (3) the usage of “De”(的) and “De”(地) interacted with the sentence type on the indexes of eye movement in the region behind the target word, but the impact is mainly caused by “De”(的) substituting “De”(地), which is true for both groups. All three studies showed that the mixed use of “De”(的) and “De”(地) interfered with the cognitive processing of reading, while “De”(的) substituting “De”(地), the more reasonable scenario mainly affected the later stage of information processing. The eye movement evidence suggested that the structural auxiliary particles “De”(的) and “De”(地) should be distinguished. Based on the theory of word chunking and word processing, this study investigates how the mixed use of of “De”(的) and “De”(地) on information processing through the eye-tracking research under the violation paradigm, and therefore provides cognitive evidences accordingly . |
修改评论