A survey of related literature showed that, although many educational researchers have stressed the importance of idioms in the English language, very few experimental studies have been carried out to ascertain the role played by idioms in the reading process. The author conducted a study to determine whether idioms cause difficulty for children in the reading and understanding of prose. A pilot study was performed to facilitate the selection of test items and to establish testing procedures. The experimental study consisted of four randomly chosen groups in each of two schools. Randomly assigned children in each group were given one of the four reading tests as follows: Non Literal 1 (N.L. 1), which contained idioms in all eighteen test items; Non Literal 2 (N.L. 2), which contained idioms in twelve of the eighteen test items; Non Literal 3 (N.L. 3), which contained idioms in six of the eighteen test items; Literal, which did not contain idioms in any of the eighteen test items. The children read their assigned test and answered comprehension questions by selecting one of the four multiple choice alternatives for each test item. The following statistical results were obtained: the treatment effect was highly significant; the means increased steadily, with the highest scores associated with the Literal test and the lowest scores associated with Non Literal 1 test. There was no significant difference between the performance of girls and boys in the tests; there was no linear or curvilinear interaction with I.Q. and treatment, nor was there a sex by treatment interaction. An analysis of the four treatment groups showed that there were significant differences between the means of all groups except Non Literal 1 and Non Literal 2, the two groups containing the greatest number of idioms in the test items. The results of the study raised several implications which necessitate further research. Several questions are concerned with the incidence and type of idiomatic language used in books and the best method of teaching idioms to school children. Another raises the possibility of having to allow for idioms when compiling readability formulae. A further implication is that there may be a need for strictly literal reading materials which would serve as a transitional link between the multiplicity of dialects existing in society today, and the need to read and understand written Standard English. / Education, Faculty of / Graduate

Despite claims by some theorists to the contrary, investigators have shown that information about grammatical errors is available to young children learning language via the conversational responses of their parents. The present study described five categories of responses in the conversations of working mothers and fathers to their normally developing two-year-old sons, and investigated whether any of these responses were differentially related to well-formed vs. ill-formed child utterances. Subjects were six middle-class, monolingual (English) parent-child dyads. Parents worked full-time jobs and the children were enrolled in full-time daycare. Within a two week period, four 20-minute conversational samples were audio and video recorded for each dyad in the subjects' homes during freeplay activities of the subjects' choice. Results indicated that the pattern of responses for these six parents was very similar to that reported for other parent-child dyads. The most frequent type of response for all parents was one that continued the conversation without either repeating or clarifying the child's previous utterance. The least frequent type of response was one that explicitly corrected portions of the child's utterance. Of all responses, repetitions--both clarifying and nonclarifying--appeared to be the type of response most differentially related to well-formed and ill-formed child utterances. Exact repetitions were more likely to follow well-formed utterances, while the remaining repetitions were more likely to follow ill-formed utterances. This pattern of differential responses was similar for all six dyads. Very few differences regarding the style or pattern of interaction were noted for fathers and mothers. Implications were drawn regarding the nature of linguistic input that is available to two-year-old children learning language.

by Guo Sujuan. / Bibliography: leaves 145-151 / Thesis (M.Ph.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1986

呂淑貞 = A study of lexical errors of secondary school students in Hogn Kong / Lui Suk Ching. / 據手稿本影印. / Thesis (M.A.)--香港中文大學硏究院敎育學部. / Ju shou gao ben ying yin. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 278-284). / Lü Shuzhen = A study of lexical errors of secondary school students in Hong Kong / Lui Suk Ching. / Thesis (M.A.)--Xianggang Zhong wen da xue yan jiu yuan jiao yu xue bu. / 論文摘要 / Chapter 第一章 --- 引言 --- p.1 / Chapter (I) --- 香港寫作教學的現狀 --- p.4 / Chapter (II) --- 研究動機與目的 --- p.6 / Chapter (III) --- 研究意義 / Chapter 第二章 --- 文獻回顧 / Chapter 甲 --- 詞是什麼 / Chapter (I) --- 詞的定義 --- p.8 / Chapter (II) --- 詞和詞組 --- p.11 / Chapter (III) --- 詞和詞素 --- p.14 / Chapter (IV) --- 詞的詞匯意義和語法意義 --- p.16 / Chapter (V) --- 漢語的造詞法體系 --- p.25 / Chapter 乙 --- 現代漢語詞匯現範化的標準和內容 --- p.27 / Chapter (I) --- 方言詞的規範 --- p.28 / Chapter (II) --- 外來詞的規範 --- p.29 / Chapter 丙 --- 語誤分析 --- p.31 / Chapter (I) --- 語誤分析與語誤分類 --- p.31 / Chapter (II) --- 語誤分析的理論依据 --- p.31 / Chapter (III) --- 錯誤的來源 --- p.33 / Chapter (IV) --- 語誤分析的應用 --- p.34 / Chapter 丁 --- 謬詞分準則的釐訂 --- p.35 / Chapter (I) --- 謬詞的主要類型舉隅 --- p.35 / Chapter (II) --- 謬詞分類依據 --- p.37 / Chapter (III) --- 謬詞分類模式 --- p.38 / Chapter 第三章 --- 研究設計 --- p.41 / Chapter (I) --- 研究問題 --- p.41 / Chapter (II) --- 研究方法 --- p.42 / Chapter (III) --- 研究對象與取樣 --- p.43 / Chapter (IV) --- 研究工具 --- p.46 / Chapter (V) --- 實驗程序 --- p.47 / Chapter (VI) --- 資料分析及整理 --- p.49 / Chapter (VII) --- 研究局限 --- p.51 / Chapter 第四章 --- 研究結果及計論 / Chapter (I) --- 香港一般中學生作文中謬詞類型的分佈情況 --- p.52 / Chapter (II) --- 不同年級、不同語文程度及中、英文中學學生作文中謬詞類型分佈情況的差異 --- p.58 / Chapter (III) --- 各類型謬詞錯誤的原因 --- p.65 / Chapter 第五章 --- 建議 --- p.78 / Chapter 第六章 --- 結論 --- p.81 / 表（二）至表（五十五） --- p.84 / 註釋 / Chapter 附錄(一) --- 謬詞的主要類型舉隅 --- p.116 / Chapter (二) --- 謬詞的主要類型舉隅 --- p.117 / Chapter (三) --- 謬詞的主要類型舉隅 --- p.121 / Chapter (四) --- 各類型謬詞實錄 --- p.123 / 中文參考書目 --- p.278 / 英文參考書目 --- p.283

姜貝玲. / 據手稿本影印. / Thesis (M.A.)--香港中文大學硏究院敎育學部. / Ju shou gao ben ying yin. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 142-146). / Jiang Beiling. / Thesis (M.A.)--Xianggang Zhong wen da xue yan jiu yuan jiao yu xue bu. / Chapter 第一章 --- 導言 --- p.1 / 研究緣起與目的 --- p.1 / 理論根據 --- p.4 / 假設 --- p.25 / 術語說明 --- p.26 / Chapter 第二章 --- 研究方法 --- p.30 / 研究設計 --- p.30 / 研究對象 --- p.34 / 研究工具 --- p.36 / 實驗程序 --- p.44 / 資料分析 --- p.47 / Chapter 第三章 --- 結果與討論 --- p.51 / 結果 --- p.51 / 討論 --- p.98 / Chapter 第四章 --- 摘要、結論與建議 --- p.128 / 摘要 --- p.128 / 結論 --- p.133 / 建議 --- p.138 / 參考文獻 --- p.142 / 附錄 --- p.153 / Chapter 一 --- 按提示在語段中填詞測驗卷 --- p.153 / Chapter 二 --- 按提示選詞在語段中填空測驗卷 --- p.157 / Chapter 三 --- 按提示在句子中填詞測驗卷 --- p.162 / Chapter 四 --- 按提示選詞在句子中填空測驗卷 --- p.166 / Chapter 五 --- 遣詞能力測驗評分參考 --- p.171

No description available.

The problematic areas of the teaching of Korean as a foreign language have been largely neglected in the past. Few studies combine the following three aspects: 1) an examination of learner Korean; 2) the provision of substantial linguistic and pedagogical explanations; and 3) the devising of teaching or learning strategies based on empirical evidence. By studying KFL learners and their language production, insights can be gained relating to the learning of KFL and instructors will be able to provide appropriate corrective measures. This study investigated errors produced by KFL learners, focusing primarily on high frequency orthographic, lexical and grammatical errors in written language production. The study attempts to identify key areas of difficulty in learning Korean, to investigate the possible cause of difficulties and to provide more adequate information for the teaching and learning of KFL. To this end the study uses two classes of textual data and employs both statistical and descriptive analyses. At an orthographic level the study has identified four main error categories: 1) mismatch in three series consonants, 2) mismatch in vowel sounds, 3) misuse of nasals and laterals, and 4) omission and addition of ???h???. Overall the cause of key error types correlates strongly with the differences in sound quality and sound patterns between Korean and English, with some intralingual features. At a lexical level, the study found nine types of errors including 1) semantic similarity, 2) lexical misselection and 3) overgeneralization. The findings suggest that learners have a great deal of difficulty in differentiating lexical items with similar meaning and in selecting words appropriate to particular contexts or situations. As for grammatical errors, the study identified the five most active error categories, which made up more than 80% of the total grammatical errors. An overwhelming majority of grammatical errors and case particle errors in particular were errors of substitution. Many high frequency grammatical errors had distinctive triggering factors such as particular types of verb and sentence construction. The findings of the study have several pedagogical implications. First, there are key common errors for English L1-KFL learners and these common errors need increased linguistic and pedagogical attention. Secondly, the results reinforce the need to pay more active attention to the usage of the main case particles, along with the triggering constructions causing substitutions. Thirdly, the findings suggest that different types of analysis should be done in order to facilitate a plausible description of the problematic KFL items. The study argues that despite being problematic, the items discussed in this thesis are learnable and worthy of being taught with explicit or intentional strategies and that there is a need for pedagogically effective and adequate instructional input to maximize the potential of the learner???s language development in Korean.

This study attempts to discover and describe patterns of variation in college students' overt attitudes toward a limited set of grammatical and lexical variables, the shibboleths of edited written American English usage. The basic instrument used in the study is a 115 item multiple choice questionnaire prepared by the researcher. Fifteen questions were designed to assess the respondents' social, economic, and demographic backgrounds, whereas the major part of the questionnaire elicited judgments about one hundred English sentences offering the choice between the attributes "good," "bad," and "I can't decide." This questionnaire was administered to 172 students in nine freshman composition classes during the spring semester of 1994 at Ball State University. The study sought to discover and describe systematic relationships between the answers to the first set of questions (extralinguistic data) and the second set of questions (linguistic data) by using various analytical methods and statistical techniques, such as correlation coefficients, chi-square tests, and multidimensional scaling.It was hypothesized that variation in subjects' overt judgments about linguistic variables would parallel the findings of numerous sociolinguistic studies about variation in linguistic production, and hence would pattern along the social and demographic characteristics of the subjects. However, although this study found considerable variation in the freshman students' judgments about the usage shibboleths, it did not find social or demographic correlates to the respondents' judgments.By investigating the nature of the variation in freshman composition students' notions about linguistic correctness, this study attempted to answer questions which have not been asked by traditional usage studies, sociolinguistics, or composition research. Moreover, this study has added support for linguists' claims that the traditional "mistakes" in usage handbooks have almost no empirical basis, even if they remain the favorites of most handbook authors and English teachers. / Department of English

The problematic areas of the teaching of Korean as a foreign language have been largely neglected in the past. Few studies combine the following three aspects: 1) an examination of learner Korean; 2) the provision of substantial linguistic and pedagogical explanations; and 3) the devising of teaching or learning strategies based on empirical evidence. By studying KFL learners and their language production, insights can be gained relating to the learning of KFL and instructors will be able to provide appropriate corrective measures. This study investigated errors produced by KFL learners, focusing primarily on high frequency orthographic, lexical and grammatical errors in written language production. The study attempts to identify key areas of difficulty in learning Korean, to investigate the possible cause of difficulties and to provide more adequate information for the teaching and learning of KFL. To this end the study uses two classes of textual data and employs both statistical and descriptive analyses. At an orthographic level the study has identified four main error categories: 1) mismatch in three series consonants, 2) mismatch in vowel sounds, 3) misuse of nasals and laterals, and 4) omission and addition of ???h???. Overall the cause of key error types correlates strongly with the differences in sound quality and sound patterns between Korean and English, with some intralingual features. At a lexical level, the study found nine types of errors including 1) semantic similarity, 2) lexical misselection and 3) overgeneralization. The findings suggest that learners have a great deal of difficulty in differentiating lexical items with similar meaning and in selecting words appropriate to particular contexts or situations. As for grammatical errors, the study identified the five most active error categories, which made up more than 80% of the total grammatical errors. An overwhelming majority of grammatical errors and case particle errors in particular were errors of substitution. Many high frequency grammatical errors had distinctive triggering factors such as particular types of verb and sentence construction. The findings of the study have several pedagogical implications. First, there are key common errors for English L1-KFL learners and these common errors need increased linguistic and pedagogical attention. Secondly, the results reinforce the need to pay more active attention to the usage of the main case particles, along with the triggering constructions causing substitutions. Thirdly, the findings suggest that different types of analysis should be done in order to facilitate a plausible description of the problematic KFL items. The study argues that despite being problematic, the items discussed in this thesis are learnable and worthy of being taught with explicit or intentional strategies and that there is a need for pedagogically effective and adequate instructional input to maximize the potential of the learner???s language development in Korean.

No description available.