基于韵律的英语介词短语挂靠歧义消解研究

doi:10.12002/j.bisu.525

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

在言语交际过程中，说话人口语表达的韵律线索对交际双方的语言理解发挥着重要作用。为了深入了解中国英语学习者英语口语产出的韵律线索与预期表达含义之间的相关性，本文以中国大学英语学习者为研究对象，采用基于情境的半开放式口语产出任务，考察在特定的情境化实验条件下，被试对英语介词短语挂靠造成的歧义句的朗读任务完成情况。研究结果表明：中国大学英语学习者具有对口语韵律特征与句法结构之间关系的潜在敏感性，能够通过口语的韵律停顿和音高重音实现对英语介词短语动、名词挂靠引起的歧义的消解。本研究结果进一步证实了英语口语韵律特征与预期含义之间的相互关系，凸显了韵律训练在大学英语课堂教学中的重要性，为高校英语听说及阅读教学实践的开展提供了参考建议。

关键词: 歧义消解; 介词短语挂靠; 韵律线索; 情境化语境; 韵律句法

Abstract:

The prosodic cues in a speaker’s verbal output play a vital role in smooth, mutual communication for both parties. Research has shown that native English speakers can use prosodic cues during speech production to convey the intended meaning of an utterance. However, little is known about whether Chinese learners of English as a second language (L2) provide prosodic cues to achieve syntactic disambiguation when producing sentences in their L2. The present study aims to determine the precise prosodic cues that the Chinese learners of L2 English use to disambiguate prepositional phrase attachment (PP-attachment) sentences and whether these cues differ from those used by native English speakers. Under contextualized experimental conditions, Chinese college students who were learning English participated in a constrained task involving the verbal production of ambiguous English sentences with prepositional phrases. The results revealed that the Chinese college students who were learning English could use similar prosodic cues to those used by native English speakers to resolve the ambiguity in PP-attachment sentences. The findings highlight the interaction between prosodic features and implied meaning in English speech production, and suggest ways in which training in English prosody can improve not only Chinese learners’ pronunciation ability, but also their listening and reading proficiency.

Keywords: ambiguity resolution; prepositional phrase attachment; prosodic cues; contextualized setting; prosody-syntax

中图分类号:

H043/H319

何享, 吴明军, 王青. 基于韵律的英语介词短语挂靠歧义消解研究[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2024, 46(3): 132-147.

He Xiang, Wu Mingjun, Wang Qing. A Study of the Ambiguity Resolution of English Prepositional Phrase Attachment via Prosodic Cues[J]. Journal of Beijing International Studies University, 2024, 46(3): 132-147.

图/表 3

参考文献 45

[1]	BLODGETT A R. The Interaction of Prosodic Phrasing, Verb Bias, and Plausibility during Spoken Sentence Comprehension[D]. Columbus: Ohio State University, 2004.
[2]	BREISS C & HAYES B. Phonological markedness effects in sentence formation[J]. Language, 2020(2):1-33.
[3]	CARLSON K, CLIFTON C Jr. & FRAZIER L. Prosodic boundaries in adjunct attachment[J]. Journal of Memory and Language, 2001(1):58-81.
[4]	CRAIN S & STEEDMAN M. On not being led up the garden path: The use of context by the psychological syntax processor[C]// DOWTY D R,KARTTUNEN L & ZWICKY A M. Natural Language Parsing: Psychological, Computational, and Theoretical Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985:320-358.
[5]	DUSSIAS P E & PIÑAR P. Sentence parsing in L2 learners: Linguistic and experience-based factors[C]// RITCHIE W C & BATHIA T K. The New Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. Bingley:Emerald, 2009:295-318.
[6]	FERNÁNDEZ E M. The prosody produced by Spanish-English bilinguals: A preliminay investigation and implications for sentence processing[J]. Revista da ABRALIN, 2005(1-2):109-141.
[7]	FERREIRA F & CLIFTON C. The independence of syntactic processing[J]. Journal of Memory and Language, 1986(3):348-368.
[8]	FODOR J D. Learning to parse?[J]. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 1998(2):285-319.
[9]	FODOR J D. Prosodic disambiguation in silent reading[C]// HIROTANI M. Proceedings of NELS 32. Amherst: GLSA Publications, 2002:113-132.
[10]	FRAZIER L. Sentence processing: A tutorial review[C]// COLTHEART M. Attention and Performance 12: The Psychology of Reading. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987:559-586.
[11]	GIBSON E & WU H H I. Processing Chinese relative clauses in context[J]. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2013(1-2):125-155.
[12]	GUT U. Non-Native Speech: A Corpus-Based Analysis of Phonological and Phonetic Properties of L2 English and German[M]. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2009.
[13]	JACKSON C N & O’BRIEN M G. The interaction between prosody and meaning in second language speech production[J]. Die Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 2011(1):1-11.
[14]	KRALJIC T & BRENNAN S E. Prosodic disambiguation of syntactic structure: For the speaker or for the addressee?[J]. Cognitive Psychology, 2005(2):194-231.
[15]	LEHISTE I, OLIVE J P & STREETER L A. Role of duration in disambiguating syntactically ambiguous sentences[J]. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1976(5):1199-1202.
[16]	MACDONALD M C. Probabilistic constraints and syntactic ambiguity resolution[J]. Language and Cognitive Processes, 1994(2):157-201.
[17]	MCRAE K, SPIVEY-KNOWLTON M J & TANENHAUS M K. Modeling the influence of thematic fit (and other constraints) in on-line sentence comprehension[J]. Journal of Memory and Language, 1998(3):283-312.
[18]	MENNEN I. Bi-directional interference in the intonation of Dutch speakers of Greek[J]. Journal of Phonetics, 2004(4):543-563.
[19]	MILLOTTE S, RENÉ A, WALES R, et al. Phonological phrase boundaries constrain the online syntactic analysis of spoken sentences[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2008(4):874-885.
[20]	NESPOR M & VOGEL I. Prosodic Phonology[M]. Dordrecht: Foris Publications, 1986.
[21]	O’BRIEN M G, JACKSON C N & GARDNER C E. Cross-linguistic differences in prosodic cues to syntactic disambiguation in German and English[J]. Applied Psycholinguistics, 2014(1):27-70.
[22]	PENNINGTON M C & ELLIS N C. Cantonese speakers’ memory for English sentences with prosodic cues[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2000(3):372-389.
[23]	RAN K. Prosodic end-weight reflects phrasal stress[J]. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 2019(1):315-356.
[24]	RAYNER K, CARLSON M & FRAZIER L. The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences[J]. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1983(3):358-374.
[25]	SCHAFER A J, SPEER S R & WARREN P. Prosodic influences on the production and comprehension of syntactic ambiguity in a game-based conversation task[C]// TANENHAUS M & TRUESWELL J. Approaches to Studying World Situated Language Use: Psycholinguistic, Linguistic and Computational Perspectives on Bridging the Product and Action Tradition. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2005:209-226.
[26]	SCHAFER A J, SPEER S R, WARREN P, et al. Intonational disambiguation in sentence production and comprehension[J]. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2000(2):169-182.
[27]	SNEDEKER J & TRUESWELL J. Using prosody to avoid ambiguity: Effects of speaker awareness and referential context[J]. Journal of Memory and Language, 2003(1):103-130.
[28]	SNEDEKER J & YUAN S. Effects of prosodic and lexical constraints on parsing in young children (and adults)[J]. Journal of Memory and Language, 2008(2):574-608.
[29]	TROFIMOVICH P & BAKER W. Learning second language suprasegmentals: Effect of L2 experience on prosody and fluency characteristics of L2 speech[J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2006(1):1-30.
[30]	VAN GOMPEL R P G. Sentence Processing, Current Issues in the Psychology of Language[M]. London: Psychology Press, 2013.
[31]	VAN HELL J G & TOKOWICZ N. Event-related brain potentials and second language learning: Syntactic processing in late L2 learners at different L2 proficiency levels[J]. Second Language Research, 2010(1):43-74.
[32]	VERDUGO D R. Non-native interlanguage intonation systems: A study based on a computerized corpus of Spanish learners of English[J]. ICAME Journal, 2002, 26:115-132.
[33]	WATSON D & GIBSON E. Intonational phrasing and constituency in language production and comprehension[J]. Studia Linguistica, 2005(2-3):279-300.
[34]	XU Y & XU C X. Phonetic realization of focus in English declarative intonation[J]. Journal of Phonetics, 2005(2):159-197.
[35]	戴运财. 中国学习者对英语关系从句挂靠的歧义消解[J]. 外国语, 2016(6):65-74.
[36]	戴运财, 王同顺, 余樟亚. 二语关系从句挂靠的歧义消解研究[J]. 外语界, 2013(4):55-62.
[37]	韩迎春, 莫雷. 英语句法歧义消解过程中基于激发点的权变模型[J]. 心理科学, 2013(1):20-25.
[38]	李寿欣, 陈慧媛, 张建鹏. 语境位置对不同认知方式个体歧义句歧义消解的影响[J]. 心理科学, 2013(5):1073-1077.
[39]	宋劲庞. 形态与音系的关联及其处理——《形态与音系的交互作用》介评[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2018(2):122-128.
[40]	晏小琴. 中国大学生英语暂时句法歧义加工的定性研究[J]. 山东外语教学, 2007(5):36-41.
[41]	于秒, 闫国利. 内隐韵律与语境影响歧义结构加工的眼动研究[J]. 天津大学学报(自然科学与工程技术版), 2015(8):686-691.
[42]	于泽, 韩玉昌. 书面韵律边界与语境对歧义句歧义消解的影响[J]. 心理科学, 2011(6):1320-1324.
[43]	赵晨. 中国学生英语关系从句挂靠偏向研究[J]. 外语与外语教学, 2013(6):29-32,48.
[44]	赵永刚. 韵律结构音系-句法接口研究:问题、目标及对策[J]. 外语教学, 2016(4):24-29.
[45]	赵永刚. 句法-音系的交互与汉语韵律层级理论研究[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2018(2):23-44.

挂靠条件	动词时长（ms）	动词-直接宾语间停顿时长（ms）	动词-直接宾语间停顿频率（%）	直接宾语时长（ms）	直接宾语-介词短语间停顿时长（ms）	直接宾语-介词短语间停顿频率（%）	with音高重音频率（%）
挂靠条件	均值/ 标准差	均值/ 标准差	均值/ 标准差	均值/ 标准差	均值/ 标准差	均值/ 标准差	均值/ 标准差
名词挂靠	377/45	42.6/70	53.8/24.3	517.4/126	51.3/108	32.1/13.6	39.2/26.9
动词挂靠	370/52	43.8/73	42.7/11.7	528/118	109^*/88.6	67.9^*/24.4	57.1/11.7

挂靠条件	动词时长（ms）	动词-直接宾语间停顿时长（ms）	动词-直接宾语间停顿频率（%）	直接宾语时长（ms）	直接宾语-介词短语间停顿时长（ms）	直接宾语-介词短语间停顿频率（%）	with音高重音频率（%）
挂靠条件	均值/ 标准差	均值/ 标准差	均值/ 标准差	均值/ 标准差	均值/ 标准差	均值/ 标准差	均值/ 标准差
名词挂靠	377/45	42.6/70	53.8/24.3	517.4/126	51.3/108	32.1/13.6	39.2/26.9
动词挂靠	370/52	43.8/73	42.7/11.7	528/118	109^*/88.6	67.9^*/24.4	57.1/11.7