文字的意義是怎樣的儲存於我們的記憶？又是透過怎樣的方式來了解文字中的意義呢？本研究藉由語義促發效果的探討，一方面檢視語義與連結促發作用對字彙辨識的影響，另一方面提供中文的辨識歷程及記憶表徵方面的訊息。 本研究在三個相關的實驗中，藉著操弄了各種獨變項來回答上述的問題，第一個獨變項是促發項與目標項的關係；例如，促發項與目標項配對不但會形成（1）雙字詞，且彼此具有相似的意義（如，酣—睡），（2）雙字詞，但彼此具有不同的意義（如，餅—乾），（3）促發項與目標項之間具有相似的意義成分，但不會形成雙字詞（如，扔—丟），以及（4）促發項與目標項之間沒有意義上的關聯。本研究操弄的第二個獨變項是相關配對佔所有刺激的百分比（50％與25％），第三個獨變項則是促發項與目標項之間的聯想強度（高聯想與低聯想）。 綜觀本三個實驗的結果發現（1）當促發項與目標項具有意義上的關聯時，有加速文字辨識的歷程，（2）在高相關配對百分比的情境中，不論高、低聯想強度，意義關聯的刺激配對有顯著的促發效果，（3）在低相關配對百分比的情境中，刺激配對形成雙字詞，但彼此具有不同的意義，則高、低聯想強度都有顯著的促發效果；至於刺激配對形成雙字詞，且彼此具有相似的意義以及刺激配對具有相似的意義成分，但不會形成雙字詞時，則只有高聯想強度有顯著的促發效果，但低聯想強度沒有顯著的促發效果。 這樣的結果顯示在字彙判斷作業中，當促發項與目標項只有意義相似性的成分時，並無法加速受試者對文字的辨識。至於當促發項與目標項形成雙字詞，但彼此具有不同的意義時，並不同於其他的刺激配對，其促發效果可能是藉由組合線索，觸及字彙層次的連結訊息，因而加快文字的辨識速度。

自Greenberg (1972) 以來，陸續有學者探討世界語言中的複數標記和分類詞之間的關係，並指出兩者的相似之處(Greenberg, 1972; Sanches and Slobin, 1973; Borer, 2005; Her, 2012)。本文稱這些研究為CL-PM Convergence View。這些研究指出分類詞 (numeral classifier; CL) 與複數標記 (plural marker; PM)呈現互補分布的關係。學者們 (Borer, 2005; Her, 2012) 更進一步認為，分類詞與複數標記在同一名詞組裡呈現互補分布，表示兩者在句法結構上佔據相同的位置，應視為相同的成分。然而本文發現，台灣華語「Num+CL+N們」結構有一定的能產性。若將「們」視為複數標記，則台灣華語對於上述學者的理論就形成了反例。有鑑於此，本文目的在於以句法接受度實驗及語料庫兩項方法，重新檢視台灣華語「們」的各種用法，以期解決文獻上對於「們」的諸多爭議。接著，在建立語言事實後，本文探討「們」對於CL-PM Convergence View的意義，並對於台灣華語「們」與分類詞在歷時和共時上的互動作出新的解釋。 具體來說，本文釐清了下列六項事實，為文獻上的爭議提供新的證據: (一)「們」可用於非指人的名詞；(二)「N們」為定指；(三)「Proper N們」僅表示 ‘多位Proper N’；(四)「¬1群N們」合法；(五)「Num+CL+N們」合法；(六) 在有接受英語教育的前提下，母語者的英語程度越低，對於「Num+CL+N們」的接受度越高，也越容易受到英語句法結構的促發(priming)，表示「Num+CL+N們」的產生與和英語的接觸有密切關係。考慮這些事實及其他台灣華語沒有爭議的特性，本文認為台灣華語「們」應視為一個集合標記(collective plural marker)，而非文獻所說的伴同標記(associative plural, Iljic, 2001,2005; 陳俊光，2009)或是普通複數標記(additive plural, Li, 1999; Hunag et al, 2009)。最後，本文提出兩個論點: 第一，我們根據Her et al (to appear)的洞見，區分「語意複數」(semantic plural)及「語法複數」(grammatical plural)；第二，我們提出新的事實，論證「們」在句法上，台灣華語「們」是一個附綴(clitic)而非詞綴(suffix)。這兩項論點證明台灣華語「們」並不違反CL-PM Convergence View的預測，亦可以解釋「們」與分類詞在歷時(李豔惠、石毓智，2000)和共時上的互動。 / Since Greenberg (1972), there have been many studies addressing the issue of the relationship between numeral classifiers (CL) and plural markers (PM) (Greenberg, 1972; Sanches and Slobin, 1973; Borer, 2005; Her, 2012). These scholars (henceforth CL-PM Convergence View) discovered that CL and PM tend not to co-occur in the same language, and even if they do co-occur, they are complementarily distributed within NP. Some linguists (Borer, 2005; Her, 2012) take this generalization further to propose that CL and PM in fact belong to the same category. However, when we look at Taiwan Mandarin (TM) data, a potential counterevidence can be found: [Num+CL+N-men], in which CL and –men, generally taken to be a plural suffix, co-occur within the same NP. In light of this, this study aims to take a realist look at TM –men, collecting relevant data from grammaticality judgment task and corpora so as to capture the behavior of –men. We then test CL-PM Convergence View against empirical data obtained in the study, showing that [Num+CL+N-men] does not constitute a counterexample to CL-PM Convergence View. The apparent interaction between CL and –men in TM can also be accounted for under our analysis of –men. Specifically, this study establishes the following facts for TM –men: (1) the use of –men is not restricted to human Ns; (2) N-men must be definite; (3) Proper N denotes ‘more than one Proper N’; (4) [¬1 qun N-men] is grammatical; (5) [Num+CL+N-men] is grammatical; (6) native speakers’ acceptability of [Num+CL+N-men] is in negative correlation with their English proficiency, and priming effects of English structure [Num+N-s] are observed on speakers with low English proficiency. Taking these findings into account, this study proposes that TM –men should be best analyzed as a collective plural marker, contra Iljic, (2001,2005) and 陳俊光’s (2009) “associative” analysis on the one hand, and Li (1999) and Hunag et al’s (2009) “additive” analysis on the other. Accordingly, we argue that –men as a collective does not constitute a counterexample to CL-PM Convergence View, citing two further pieces of evidence: Her et al’s (to appear) insight that “semantic plural” and “grammatical plural” should be distinguished and the proposal made there to revise CL-PM Convergence View, and the “clitic” analysis of TM –men proposed in this study. Finally, we show that the distinction between “semantic plural” and “grammatical plural” also nicely explains the synchronic and diachronic interaction between CL and –men in TM.

每個人遇到曾經看過的物體時，辨識該物體速度會增加（或辨識的正確率增加），這個現象稱為促發(priming)效果（簡稱P-P促發），同樣地，閱讀某物體的名稱（亦即文字）後，隔幾分鐘後再看該物體的圖形，這樣也會產生一種促發量（簡稱W-P促發）。許多研究都指出W-P促發是一種內隱(implicit)記憶，亦即，個體不需要刻意想起曾經看過的物件，促發效果仍會產生，而且P-P促發量都高於W-P促發量。然而，一些研究卻發現W-P促發量等於P-P促發量，顯然地，內隱記憶理論無法對於這種反直覺現象提出合理的解釋。 根據Paivio的雙重收錄理論(dual coding theory)(Paivio, 1986, 1991)，辨識具體(concrete)名詞（例如，物體的名稱）會同時觸及(access)或激發兩種知識表徵，一種是涉及左腦的口語(verbal)表徵，另一種是涉及左腦與右腦的影像(image)表徵，而許多神經語言學研究皆指出，涉及處理具體名詞的神經機制不只包含左腦，同時也包含右腦，是以，閱讀具體名詞可能會觸及或激發物體的內在表徵，如果物體輪廓相當獨特或明顯，那麼閱讀此類型物體之名稱可能會觸及或激發此類物體的完整或重要表徵，致使W-P促發量等於P-P促發量現象。因此本研究試圖操弄物體輪廓診斷性來解釋W-P促發量等於P-P促發量之現象。 實驗一與實驗二分別以「圖形唸名」以及「圖形知覺辨識作業」來檢驗「物體輪廓診斷性」對促發的影響，結果顯示，「整體診斷性不高」物體（globally non-diagnostic object，簡稱GN類物體）的P-P促發量高於W-P促發量，和先前許多研究結果一致，然而，「整體診斷性高」物體（globally diagnostic object，簡稱GD類物體）的W-P促發量等於P-P促發量，顯示「物體輪廓診斷性」會影響促發的表現，同時也顯示閱讀GD類物體名稱可以觸及或激發GD類物體的整體或必要的知識表徵。 實驗三以分視野(divided visual field)呈現方式檢驗GD類物體的W-P促發之腦側化現象。本研究發現，顯著的W-P促發只出現在右腦，顯示W-P促發主要經由右腦來處理，根據Paivio的雙重收錄理論來推論，W-P促發之本質可能主要涉及以影像為基礎的(image-based)的知識表徵。 本研究同時操弄外顯記憶以檢驗外顯記憶是否污染W-P促發而導致W-P促發量等於P-P促發量，結果顯示，不管哪一種物體，P-P情境的再認記憶表現都顯著比W-P情境好，顯示GD類物體的促發表現與外顯記憶表現之間有單一分離(single dissociation)的關係，換言之，GD類物體之W-P促發並不受外顯記憶影響或污染。此外，實驗四顯示刻意的心像策略並不涉及W-P促發，顯示閱讀GD類物體名稱觸及GD類物體概念表徵是一種自動化而且相當快速的歷程。 / Implicit memory is usually assessed by showing repetition priming effects, when better performance in accuracy or response time for stimuli that have been previously encountered in comparison with performance with new stimuli. Picture-naming priming has been examined in studies that compared priming in participants who named pictures in the study phase and named those same pictures in the test phase (P-P condition) versus participants who read words that were the names of pictures in the study phase and named pictures cor-responding to those words in the test phase (W-P condition). Many studies demonstrated W-P priming is less than P-P priming in the picture-naming task and other similar object recognition tasks. However, in sharp contrast to the above studies, some studies reported equivalent magnitudes of P-P and W-P naming priming. Theories of implicit memory cannot account for the counter-intuitive phenomenon. According to Paivio’s dual-coding theory, the processing of abstract nouns (e.g., justice) relies on verbal code representations of the left cerebral hemisphere only, whereas concrete nouns (e.g., airplane) additionally access a second image-based processing system in the right cerebral hemisphere (Paivio, 1986, 1991). Paivio’s theory is supported by many researches on neurolinguistics. If the contour of an object is very distinctive or diagnostic, there should be the possible result that reading the name of the distinctive objects could access the whole or essential representation of the object. Following the idea, I manipulated global diagnosticity of object contour to examine whether P-P priming is always larger than W-P priming. I found P-P priming was equivalent to W-P priming on “globally diagnostic” (GD) objects, but the P-P priming was still larger than W-P priming on “glob-ally non-diagnostic” (GN) objects. This phenomenon appeared on both pic-ture-naming (Experiment 1) and picture perceptual-identification (Experiment 2) tasks. Experiment 3 showed that significant W-P priming appeared only when GD objects in the test phase were presented to the right cerebral hemi-sphere (in the left visual field). Based on the Paivio’s dual coding theory (Paivio, 1986, 1991) and research on neurolinguistics, the nature of W-P priming for GD objects was inferred to be image-based processing. Better explicit (conscious) memory performance (recognition memory) in P-P condition than that in W-P condition showed that equivalent priming across P-P and W-P conditions on GD objects was dissociated from the influence of conscious recognition memory. Experiment 4 showed that the intentional strategy of generating mental imagery was not necessarily involved in the W-P priming. These results suggested that reading names of globally diagnostic objects can access, automatically and unconsciously, the representation or essential features of globally diagnostic objects, and right cerebral hemisphere might be responsible for the processing.

本研究欲探討在模擬甄選情境中，情境因素對降低社會期許之效果。本研究採三因子2×2×2受試者間之實驗設計，所操弄的三個獨變項為： 1.促發(priming)受試者誠實作答的傾向之有無 2.測謊題警告之有無 3.作答時間的限制之有無；依變項為社會期許正、負向題分數與三個人格測驗向度（適應性、親和性、審慎性）的分數。本研究分為研究一、研究二兩階段進行。研究一之受試者包括企業應徵者81人與國小實習老師92人，研究結果顯示：三個獨變項中，只在有「測謊題警告」情境下能顯著降低社會期許正向題的分數。「時間限制」則在無「促發」之情況下，會提升「親和性」人格之分數。針對研究一的結果，研究者改變「促發」與「時間限制」的操弄方式，其它研究程序相同，進行研究二。研究二之受試者為503位大學生，研究結果顯示：「促發」會提升社會期許負向題的分數，且在有「時間限制」、無「警告」的情況下，亦可提升「適應性」分數。「測謊題警告」可降低社會期許正向題的分數，並有降低「親和性」分數之趨勢。「時間限制」仍然沒有任何效果。 研究者分別就研究一、研究二之結果加以討論並提出可能的解釋。此外，研究者亦嘗試驗證與討論社會期許量表中正向題與負向題之建構。最後研究者檢討本研究之限制，並對未來之研究方向提出若干建議。 / The influence of three situational factors on reducing social desirability bias under simulated selection context was investigated in 2 studies. A 2×2×2 experimental design was used in these 2 studies. The three independent variables were: 1.’’Priming’’ the honest responding tendency. 2.Warning of having a lie scale. 3.Time limit for each question. The dependent variables included: 1.Two dimension scores of social desirability scale (positive keying items and negative keying items). 2.Scores of three personality dimensions (adjustment, likeability, prudence). Subjects of study1 were 81 job applicants and 92 elementary school interns. The results indicated that “warning of having a lie scale” could reduce the scores of positive keying social desirability scale. “Time limit” increased the scores of “likeability” under “no priming” situation. According to the results of study1, the author modified the manipulations of “priming” and “time limit”, and conducted study2. The subjects of study2 were 503 college students. The results indicated that “priming” could increase the scores of negative keying social desirability scale. “Priming” also increased the scores of “adjustment” under “time limit” and “no warning” situation. “Warning of having a lie scale” could reduce the scores of positive keying social desirability scale, and also had the trend to reduce the scores of “likeability”. “Time limit” still didn’t have any main effect on dependent measures. Base on the results for study1 and study2, the author discussed the effects of 3 situational factors on reducing social desirability bias, and also tried to clarify the construct validity of two-dimensional social desirability scale. The author also discussed the limitations of the present research, and made some suggestions for future research.

本論文採用負向促發作業，探討中英雙語者之認知處理，主要研究目的為：一、探討雙語連結因不同促發順序（L1-L2 或 L2-L1）所致的不對稱性，及其連結性質的差異。二、探討不同 L2 熟練度的雙語者，是否表現出不同的雙語連結型態，而有發展性變遷的現象。三、探討雙語概念、詞彙的連結，是否會因文字形式、雙語文字間的相關或對譯關係的不同，而有不同的型態。 在兩個實驗中，所進行之負向促發作業卻產生正向促發效果，根據文獻推論可能是 SOA 間距不夠長；且繼續分析此促發效果型態，仍有其理論意義。 實驗一以 20 名中文四同學、 20 名英文四同學，進行匿視促發項之跨語言語意相關字彙判斷作業，結果發現：促發順序 L1-L2 產生顯著效果、L2-L1 無顯著效果、兩方向間的不對稱值隨著 L2 熟練度提高而變小。顯示雙語間的不對稱現象，是因兩方向之連結性質不同所致，且此不對稱有發展性變遷的現象，與雙語之「修正階層模式」預測一致。 實驗二以 24 名一般大學生，採相同作業程序，進行匿視促發項之跨語言對譯字（具體、抽象）、相關字字彙判斷，結果發現：整體之數據分析，顯示對譯字並未比相關字產生較大效果；具體對譯字也沒有比抽象對譯字產生較大效果；具體對譯字在兩促發順序之不對稱值也沒有比抽象對譯字小。但分別將對譯字、相關字在不同促發順序分析其不對稱情形、及在 L2-L1 情況對譯字、相關字之效果差異，顯示此部份結果符合以「修正階層模式」為基礎所提出之預測。 總括而言，中英雙語之概念、詞彙連結之不對稱性，亦能以「修正階層模式」加以解釋；但是文字形式對中英雙語之影響，仍有待更進一步研究來加以釐清。