Publication: 汉字部首认知调查--以泰国易三仓大学商务中文系为例
Submitted Date
Received Date
Accepted Date
Issued Date
2018
Copyright Date
Announcement No.
Application No.
Patent No.
Valid Date
Resource Type
Edition
Resource Version
Language
cn
File Type
No. of Pages/File Size
ISBN
ISSN
eISSN
DOI
Scopus ID
WOS ID
Pubmed ID
arXiv ID
item.page.harrt.identifier.callno
Other identifier(s)
Journal Title
汉学研究
Journal of Sinology
วารสารจีนวิทยา
Journal of Sinology
วารสารจีนวิทยา
Volume
12
Issue
Edition
Start Page
140
End Page
162
Access Rights
Access Status
Rights
Rights Holder(s)
Physical Location
Bibliographic Citation
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Title
汉字部首认知调查--以泰国易三仓大学商务中文系为例
Alternative Title(s)
The Survey of Chinese Radicals Perception: A Case of Business Chinese Department of Assumption University in Thailand
Author(s)
Author’s Affiliation
Author's E-mail
Editor(s)
Editor’s Affiliation
Corresponding person(s)
Creator(s)
Compiler
Advisor(s)
Illustrator(s)
Applicant(s)
Inventor(s)
Issuer
Assignee
Other Contributor(s)
Series
Has Part
Abstract
泰国大学中文系除了跟台湾相关的汉语学校外，目前已倾向于只教授简体字，而国际大学易三仓大学商务中文系在汉字教学上因系主任的理念采取了正、简体相结合的教学方法。一年级学生虽使用简体教材，但认简体写正体，二、三年级则全用简体，四年级在台湾教师的课堂上则全用正体或认正体写简体。笔者发现中高级学生会出现正体字和简体字混用的情况，如部首错置的问题。像看到正体字 “鄰”，却在写简体字 “邻”时将左右部件对调。 在对外汉语汉字教学中，部首教学是不容忽视的重要一环。虽然很名初级教材中会给出一些字的象形字并配图来帮助学生学习，其中一些字也是成字部件，但是整体不够系统。初级班的老师虽然会重点练习汉字的读写，但是对于部件的教学却没有重点强调；到了中高级阶段，出于交际或专科训练的需要，汉字部件的教学会被弱化或忽视。 针对这个问题，笔者设计了一份调查问卷，选择了 21 个构字能力最强的常用部首来了解中级班的学生对汉字部首的认知情况。分析结果显示，学生对部首位置认知的正确率高于对部首含义的认知；对部首原形认知的正确率高于对部首变体的认知；对简体宇部首认知的正确率高于对正体字部首的认知。
Apart from the Taiwanese Chinese language school affiliated in Thailand, Chinese language departments in Thailand tend to teach only simplified Chinese characters. One noteworthy exception is at the International Assumption University which teaches both traditional and simplified Chinese characters. Although freshman students use simplified character textbooks, they are asked to use traditional characters in class. Sophomore and third year students use only simplified characters while fourth year students use both traditional and simplified characters, but can opt to write only in simplified characters if they so choose. This approach of mixing two different character sets, from intermediate and advanced students, cause errors in their learning and delivery, such as incorrect placement of radicals. For example, "neighbour" using a traditional character “鄰” positions the radical to the right part, but positions this same radical to the left for the simplified version “邻” of the same character. When teaching Chinese as a foreign language, radicals cannot be ignored. Although many beginner textbooks give some examples of pictographic characters to help students to learn, some of which are also a semantic component, the overall learning process is not systematic. Teachers in the early basic classes focus on reading and writing Chinese characters but place little or no emphasis on the teaching of radicals used with components. This leads to a weaker understanding of the language from the student. A questionnaire is designed for investigating the perception of radicals to intermediate students. 21 most commonly used radicals with the highest character structuring ability are used. Analysis shows that students have higher perception of radical positions than the meaning of radicals, higher perception of radical prototypes than radical variants, and higher perception of simplified radicals than traditional radicals.
Apart from the Taiwanese Chinese language school affiliated in Thailand, Chinese language departments in Thailand tend to teach only simplified Chinese characters. One noteworthy exception is at the International Assumption University which teaches both traditional and simplified Chinese characters. Although freshman students use simplified character textbooks, they are asked to use traditional characters in class. Sophomore and third year students use only simplified characters while fourth year students use both traditional and simplified characters, but can opt to write only in simplified characters if they so choose. This approach of mixing two different character sets, from intermediate and advanced students, cause errors in their learning and delivery, such as incorrect placement of radicals. For example, "neighbour" using a traditional character “鄰” positions the radical to the right part, but positions this same radical to the left for the simplified version “邻” of the same character. When teaching Chinese as a foreign language, radicals cannot be ignored. Although many beginner textbooks give some examples of pictographic characters to help students to learn, some of which are also a semantic component, the overall learning process is not systematic. Teachers in the early basic classes focus on reading and writing Chinese characters but place little or no emphasis on the teaching of radicals used with components. This leads to a weaker understanding of the language from the student. A questionnaire is designed for investigating the perception of radicals to intermediate students. 21 most commonly used radicals with the highest character structuring ability are used. Analysis shows that students have higher perception of radical positions than the meaning of radicals, higher perception of radical prototypes than radical variants, and higher perception of simplified radicals than traditional radicals.