双语背景下的运动事件认知——以英汉学习者为例

本书为国家社科基金项目“英汉双语学习者运动事件的心理呈现”（15BYY063）研究成果。 萨不尔-沃尔夫假说认为，语言决定了人的思维方式。虽然后人对此假说提出了种种不同的看法，但语言与思维关系的问题，历来受到多个领域学者的关注。如果说话者在婴幼儿阶段学会母语后即发展出一种与之对应的思维模式，那么到他长大后学习第二种语言（外语）时，是否意味着他要习得一种新的思维模式？本研究采用相似性判断的行为实验范式，通过范畴化（显性层面的选择策略）和连续性（隐性层面的反应时）两种测量手段考察了英汉单语学习者和不同水平的英汉双语学习者对空间运动事件的心理概念化过程。 研究发现，首先，所有被试均倾向于依靠运动路径（而非运动方式）是否相似来判断运动事件之间的整体相似性。其次，反应时的分析显示，在判断运动事件的整体反应时上，汉语单语人群显著短于英语单语人群，表明英汉两种语言的空间事件类型学差异及其心理蕴涵的不同。最后，研究表明，对于成人二语习得者而言，学习一门新语言不仅仅意味着学习新的语法规则和语言技能，更意味着学习并内省一种新的思维模式。

纪瑛琳，女，英国剑桥大学理论与应用语言学博士，英国学术院博士后，剑桥盖茨学者，深圳大学特聘教授，博士生导师，校语言与认知研究中心主任，深圳市政府海外高层次人才。

List of Figures
List of Tables
Chapter 1 Introduction:Representing Motion Events Within and Beyond Language
Chapter 2 Narrating Motion Events in an L2-Evidence from English and Korean Learners of Chinese 13
2.1 How English learners across proficiencies acquire motion expressions in Chinese:A review of study by Ji (2021)
2.2 How Korean learners across proficiencies acquire motion expressions in Chinese:A review of study by Jin (2020)
Chapter 3 Motion Event Cognition in Bilingual Speakers
3.1 Representing motion events in an L2 context
3.2 Manner-salience in English and Manner-and Path-salience in Chinese
3.3 Motion event cognition in L2 learners
Chapter 4 The Coneeptualisation of Voluntary Motion Events in L2 English Learners (Experiment 1)
4.1 Predictions
4.2 Methodology
4.2.1 Participants
4.2.2 Materials
4.2.3 Pretest
4.2.4 Testing session
4.2.5 Coding
4.3 Results
4.3.1 Mean number of Manner-matches and Path-matches across 5 participant groups
4.3.2 RT in judgment across 5 groups of participants
4.4 Discussion
Chapter 5 The Coneeptualisation of Caused Motion Events in L2 English Learners ( Experiment 2)
5.1 Research questions and hypotheses
5.2 Materials
5.3 Results
5.3.1 Number of Manner-and Path-matched judgments across 5 participant groups
5.3.2 RT in Manner-and Path-matched judgments across 5 participant groups
5.4 Discussion
Chapter 6 Conceptualising Motion Events in L2 Chinese Learners ( Experiments 3)
6.1 Research methodologies
6.2 Results
6.2.1 Mean proportion of Manner-matches and Path-matches across 4 participant groups
6.2.2 The proportion of Path-matches across stimulus items
6.2.3 RT across 4 participant groups
6.3 Discussion of the results
Chapter 7 General Remarks
7.1 Significance of the study
7.2 Directions for future research
References
Appendices