اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 20 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 398 |
| تعداد مقالات | 3,249 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 4,600,615 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 3,123,659 |
آموزش حرف اضافه فارسی «به» به غیرفارسی‌زبانان برپایۀ رویکرد شناختی | ||
| پژوهش نامه آموزش زبان فارسی به غیر فارسی زبانان | ||
| مقاله 6، دوره 12، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 25، فروردین 1402، صفحه 73-100 اصل مقاله (1.13 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30479/jtpsol.2023.18525.1634 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| شهلا رقیب دوست1؛ شهره مختاری* 2 | ||
| 1دانشیار زبان شناسی، دانشگاه علّامه طباطبائی (ره)، تهران، ایران. | ||
| 2نویسندۀ مسئول، دانشجوی دکتری آموزش زبان فارسی به غیر فارسی زبانان، دانشگاه علّامه طباطبائی (ره)، تهران، ایران. | ||
| تاریخ دریافت: 22 اسفند 1401، تاریخ بازنگری: 11 اردیبهشت 1402، تاریخ پذیرش: 23 اردیبهشت 1402 | ||
| چکیده | ||
| از آنجاکه فراگیری حروف اضافه، یکی از حوزه‌های چالش‌برانگیز آموزش و یادگیری زبان تلقی می‌شود و برخی از محققان اعتقاد دارند که این معانی به صورت تصادفی ایجاد‌شده و تنها روش یادگیری آنها حفظ‌نمودن این معانی است، پژوهش حاضر سعی دارد به کمک رویکرد معنیشناسی واژگانی شناختی، ابتدا شبکۀ معنایی حرف اضافۀ «به» را به دست آورد و سپس محتوایی منسجم برای آموزش کاربردهای گوناگون این حرف اضافه در ساختارها و بافت‌های گوناگون ارائه دهد. در این تحقیق همچنین، ویژگی‌های محتوای درسی آموزش حروف اضافه با رویکرد شناختی مطرح گردیده و درس‌نامه‌ای با محوریت حروف اضافه پیشنهاد شده است. محتوای آموزشی تدوین‌شده برای این حرف اضافه به دو کلاس 15 نفره از فارسی‌آموزان عرب زبان سطح میانی زن آموزش داده شد، به این صورت که برای گروه آزمایش درسی با رویکرد شناختی تهیه شد اما در گروه کنترل درسی به شیوۀ سنتی آموزش داده شد. سپس در آزمونی، درک و کاربرد مفاهیم گوناگون حرف اضافۀ «به» سنجیده شد. نتایج به دست‌آمده گویای آن است که گروه آزمایش نسبت به گروه کنترل عملکرد بهتری داشته است. این نتایج نشان‌دهندۀ این نکته است که چنین محتوا و طرح درسی که مبتنی بر طرح‌واره تصویری حرف اضافه است به درک و فراگیری منسجم کاربردهای گوناگون حروف اضافه در قالب یک مقولۀ شعاعی کمک فراوانی می‌کند. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| آموزش فارسی به غیرفارسی‌زبانان؛ رویکرد معنیشناسی شناختی؛ حرف اضافۀ «؛ به»؛ شبکۀ معنایی؛ محتوای آموزشی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Teaching The Persian Preposition “Be” to Non-Persian Speakers Based on Cognitive Approach | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Shahla Raghibdoust1؛ Shohreh Mokhtari2 | ||
| 1Associate Professor in Linguistics, Dept. of Linguistics, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| 2Corresponding author, PhD candidate in Teaching Persian to Non-Persian Speakers, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Since learning of prepositions is considered one of the challenging areas of language teaching and learning and some researchers believe that these meanings are created randomly and the only way to learn them is to memorize these meanings, the present study tries to use the Cognitive lexical semantics approach to obtain the semantic network of the preposition "be" and then provides a coherent content to teach the multiple senses of this preposition in various structures and contexts. Also, in this research, the features of the curriculum of teaching prepositions with a cognitive approach are presented and a textbook focusing on prepositions is proposed. The educational content compiled for this preposition was taught to two classes of 15 female intermediate Farsi learners, in such a way that for the experimental group, a lesson was prepared with a cognitive approach, but in the control group, the lesson was taught in a traditional way. Then, in a test, the understanding and application of various concepts of the preposition "be" were measured. The obtained results show that the experimental group performed better than the control group. These results show that such content and lesson plan, which is based on the visual schema of prepositions, helps a lot to understand and learn the multiple senses of prepositions in the form of a radial category. Extended Abstract: Introduction Prepositions play a significant role in language as they join words and phrases in a sentence. Prepositions have traditionally been seen as unpredictable, implying that the best way to learn them would be through rote learning. The cognitive approach on the other hand, argues that the distinct meanings associated with a particular preposition are systematically related in principled ways, which may have important ramifications for second language instruction. One of the challenges facing cognitive semanticists is to explain how polysemy is formed because, in this view, it is assumed that linguistic categories are no different from other types of categories and are organized by the same general cognitive mechanisms. Based on this approach, sub-concepts branch off from the meaning of the prototype. The semantic network for a lexical element can include several different meanings that are related to each other and each of them may have different meanings. Also, the semantic network predicts the emergence of concepts that are part of the main or secondary meanings. The process that connects these primary and secondary meanings is called chaining (Evans and Green, 2005: 332-333). Language teachers and researchers (e.g. Selce-Murcia & Larsen-Freeman, 1999) have found that learning prepositions poses major challenges for language learners. One of the reasons for this is that it is difficult to describe the meaning of prepositions. In addition, prepositions have wide and complex meanings (Tyler, Muller, & Hu, 2011); Even the best dictionaries and grammars offer multiple meanings of prepositions, mostly arbitrarily. Traditional grammar has shown the meanings of prepositions are unrelated to each other (Bloomfield, 1933; Frank, 1972; Chomsky, 1995); As a result, memorization is often suggested as the best way to learn the different meanings of prepositions. Tyler and Evans (2003: 45-47) propose criteria for determining the prototypical meaning of prepositions, which in their research are considered criteria for determining the primary meaning within the semantic network: A: Earliest attested meaning B: Predominance in the semantic network C: Use in composite forms D: Relation to other prepositions E: Grammatical prediction Methodology The research was conducted in four stages. At first, we extracted the meanings of the preposition "be" and investigated them. In the second step, we found the prototype meaning of the preposition by the criteria of Tyler and Evans (2003) and drew its semantic network. In the third stage, we developed a material for teaching this preposition. In the fourth stage, to evaluate the effectiveness of the cognitive approach in teaching the Persian prepositions, we selected 30 virtual intermediate-level Persian learners of Qom State University, 15 of whom were selected as the experimental group and were taught cognitive educational content, and the other 15 were selected as the control group and were traditionally taught prepositions. At first, the students completed a questionnaire related to the level of familiarity with the Persian language, to eliminate heterogeneous samples from the experimental and control groups. Next, both groups participated in a pre-test to ensure that their language level was not above or below the intermediate level. Then, the control group was taught the preposition "be" in the traditional way, while the teaching of these prefixes was cognitively done to the experimental group. Then, all Persian learners participating in the research took part in the post-test and the obtained data were analyzed. The independent variable in this research is teaching Persian prepositions based on the cognitive linguistics approach and the traditional approach, and the dependent variable is learning the concepts of the preposition "be". Results In order to investigate the effect of using the cognitive approach in teaching the preposition "be", in the learning process of Persian students, a sample lesson designed to teach the various concepts of this preposition was used in Qom State University. In the pre-test, the experimental group had an average score of 17 and the control group obtained an average score of 17.13. The experimental and control groups obtained almost similar results in the pre-test. After teaching the various meanings of the preposition "be", a post-test was conducted to measure the understanding and application of the various concepts of this preposition, by Persian students in two groups, and the resulting data were analyzed. In this test, the highest score of the experimental group was 20 with a frequency of 6, and in the control group, the highest score was 19 with a frequency of 1. The lowest score in the experimental group is 18 with a frequency of 4 and the lowest score in the control group is 16 with a frequency of 3. According to the calculations, the average score in the experimental group was 19.13 and in the control group was 17.20. The standard deviation in the experimental group was 0.83 and in the control group was 0.94. According to the obtained results, it seems that the experimental group performed better than the control group, and the performance of the subjects in this group was somewhat more homogeneous. To compare the average score of the test, the two experimental and control groups, from the t-test It was used independently. The use of this test requires checking the normality of the distribution of test scores in two groups. Due to the non-significance of the Kolmogorov Smirnov test (0.77) and the result of the Kolmogorov Smirnov test (0.151), it was determined that the data of the test has a normal distribution and the use of independent t-test is allowed. In the t-test (P=0.05), a significance level of less than 0.05 was obtained, which indicates the significance of the difference between the performance of the two experimental and control groups. The higher the value of t, it indicates the non-randomness of the obtained findings. The t value of 6.24 with a degree of freedom of 28 indicates that the difference between the scores obtained in the control and experimental groups was significant and the hypothesis of the effectiveness of the cognitive teaching method of the preposition "be" was confirmed. In this research, to check the validity of the form and content of the test, 5 experts in the field of teaching Persian language to non-Persian speakers were consulted and they evaluated the test as suitable in terms of appearance and content. Reliability was obtained from the method of dividing the test into two halves to measure the reliability of the test, and then the results of the two tests were compared with each other and the correlation coefficient of the two was determined through the Pearson method. Considering the correlation coefficient of "0.838" and the P value of "0", it can be concluded that the test has an acceptable correlation. In the next step, with the help of the Spearman-Brown formula, the reliability coefficient of the whole test was obtained, which was equal to "0.91", which indicates the appropriate reliability of the test. Conclusion The first goal of this theoretical research was to examine the suffix "be" based on the approach of cognitive semantics and determine the meaning of using the criteria suggested by Tyler and Evans (2003), finding the various meanings of this preposition, specifying the prototype meaning and drawing its semantic network. The second goal of this research was to develop a cognitive material to teach the concepts of the preposition "be". Based on the test results, using a cognitive approach to teach the concepts of prepositions can be effective and has a significant impact on the process of learning the different concepts of prepositions in the learners` minds. Accordingly, it seems that cognitive educational material for teaching the various concepts of prepositions should have the following features: To cover the concepts in the semantic network as much as possible in different textures. To emphasize the primary spatial meaning of the prepositions. to start the teaching of preposition grammar by presenting the various concepts in the semantic network in a meaningful process with a particular order of teaching more physical concepts first and objective concepts next. Content arrangement should be in such a way that the learner can understand the potential reason for the formation of more abstract applications and can relate abstract concepts to their daily experiences, understand the various content in a unified way, understand the various contents in a unified way, and not to be obliged to memorize all the meanings of the prepositions to use them in different contexts. Conflict of Interest No conflicts of interest are reported by the author for this article. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| teaching Persian to non-Persian speakers, cognitive semantics approach, preposition ", be", semantic network, lesson content | ||
|
سایر فایل های مرتبط با مقاله
|
||
| مراجع | ||
|
ابوالقاسمی، محسن (1389)، تاریخ زبان فارسی، چاپ هفتم. تهران: سمت.
راسخمهند، محمد (۱۳۸۹)، «بررسی معانی حروف اضافه مکانی فرهنگ سخن بر اساسِ معنیشناسیِ شناختی». ادبپژوهی، ۱٤،۶۶-٤۹.
رضائی، ح.. مختاری، ش. کرمانی، م (1392)، «بررسی شناختی مقولهی «بر» در گلستان سعدی» ، نشریة پژوهشهای زبانشناسی تطبیقی. شماره 6. 7-20.
رضویان، ح، و خانزاده، م. (1393). چندمعنایی حرف اضافۀ «به» در زبان فارسی با رویکرد معنیشناسی شناختی. مطالعات زبان و گویشهای غرب ایران. 7، 57- 79.
زاهدی، ک. محمدی زیارتی، ع. (1390)، «شبکۀ معنایی حرف اضافۀ فارسی «از» در چهارچوب معنیشناسی شناختی»، تازههای علوم شناختی، سال13، شماره1، 80-67.
قریب، ع. همایی، ج، یاسمی، ر، ملکالشعرای بهار، و فروزانفر، ب. (1389) .دستور زبان فارسی. به اهتمام جهانگیر منصور. تهران: ناهید.
گلفام، ا. عاصی، م. آقاگل زاده، ف. یوسفیراد، ف. (1388)، «بررسیِ حرف اضافه (از) در چارچوب معناشناسیِ شناختی و مقایسة آن با رویکرد سنتی»، زبان و زبانشناسی، شماره 10.
گلفام، ارسلان و یوسفیراد، فاطمه (۱۳۸۱)، «زبانشناسی شناختی و استعاره». تازههای علوم شناختی، دوره۳. شماره3.
مختاری، ش. و رضایی، ح. (1392)، « .بررسی شناختی شبکة معنایی حرف اضافة «با» در زبان فارسی». مجلة زبانشناسی و گویشهای خراسان: دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد. 7(9)، 94- 73
معین, م. (1371)، فرهنگ معین (6 جلدی). تهران: انتشارات امیرکبیر.
References:
Abolghasemi, M. (2010). Persian Language History. Tehran: Samt. [In Persian].
Bloomfield, L. (1933). Language. New York: Holt, Reinehart and Winston.
Brown, J.D. (1995). The elements of language curriculum: A systematic approach to program development. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Brugman, Claudia. (1981) The Story of ‘over’: Polysemy, Semantics and the Structure of the Lexicon, MA thesis, University of California, Berkeley (published New York: Garland, 1988).
Brugman, C. (1988). The Story of Over: Polysemy, Semantics and the Structure ofThe Lexicon. New York:Garland.
Brugman, Claudia and George Lakoff. (1988) Cognitive topology and lexical networks .in S. Small, G. Cottrell and M. Tannenhaus (eds), Lexical Ambiguity Resolution. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufman, pp. 477–507.
Chomsky, Noam. (1995) The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Croft,W. and Alan Cruse .D. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dewell, Robert. (1994). ‘Over again: image-schema transformations in semantic analysis’, Cognitive Linguistics, 5, 4, 351–80.
Dirven, R. (1993). Dividing Up Physical and Mental Space into ConceptualCategories by Means of English Prepositions. In C. Zelinsky-Wibbelt (ed.). TheSemantics of Prepositions. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.73-98.
Evans, V. and Green, M. (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: an introduction. Edinburgh University Press.
Evans, V. and Tyler, A.(2004).Rethinking English ‘prepositions of movement: The case of to and through. Belgium Journal of Linguistics, 18, 2004 (pp. 247-270).
Geeraerts, D. (1995). Cognitive linguistics: Handbook of pragmatics. Amsterdam: J. Benjamin Pub. Co.
Geeraerts, D. (2006). Words and Other Wonders. Papers on lexical and Semantic Topics. Berlin/ New York : Mouton de Gruyter.
Geeraerts, D. & Cuyckens, H. (2007). Cognitive Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gharib, A. Homai, J., Yasmi, R., Malek-al-Shaarai Bahar, and Forozan-far, B. (1389). Persian grammar. By Jahangir Mansour. Tehran: Nahid. [In Persian].
Gulfam, A. Asi, M. Aghagolzadeh, F. Yousefi Rad, F. (2008), "Investigation of the preposition (from) in the framework of cognitive semantics and its comparison with the traditional approach", Language and Linguistics, No. 10. [In Persian].
Golfam, A. &Yousefi Rad, F. (2010). A Cognitive Semantic Approach to Persian Spatial Prepositions, a Pedagogical Perspective, Case Study: Persian Preposition /dær/. Pazhuhesh-e Zabanha-ye Khareji, 56, 167-179. [In Persian].
Hawkins, B. W. (1984). The semantics of English spatial prepositions. University of California San Diego, ph. Dissertation.
Herskovits, A.(1997). Language and Spatial Cognition and Vision. In OlivieroStock. Construction Grammars: Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions.Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 147–190.
Herskovits, A. (1986). Language and spatial cognition- an interdisciplinary study for the prepositions in English. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Hung, B. P. (2017). Vietnamese students learning the semantics of English prepositions. GEMA Online@ Journal of Language Studies, 17(4), 14-27.
Johnson, M. (1987). The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning Imagination, and Reason. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Langacker, Ronald W. (1987(. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Theoretical Prerequisites, vol. 1. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Langacker, Ronald W. (1990). Concept, Image, and Symbol: The Cognitive Basis of Grammar. Cognitive Linguistics Research 1. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Langacker, Ronald W. (1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 2: Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1998). Expanded roles of learners and teachers in learner-centered instruction. in Renandya, W. and G. Jacobs (eds.). Learners and Language Learning. Singapore: SEAMEO Rigional Language Center.
Lee, David. (2001). Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Lindstronberg, S. (1998).English prepositions explained. Amsterdam: John Benjamin.
Moin, M. (1371), Farhan Moin (6 volumes). Tehran: Amir Kabir Publications. [In Persian].
Mokhtari, Sh. and Rezaei, H. (2012), "Cognitive investigation of the semantic network of the suffix "ba" in Persian language". Journal of Linguistics and Dialects of Khorasan: Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. 7(9), 73-94. [In Persian].
Mori, S. (2019). A Cognitive Analysis of the Preposition OVER: Image-schema transformations and metaphorical extensions. Canadian Journal ofLinguistics/Revue Canadienne de Linguistique, 64(3), 1–31. doi:10.1017/cnj.2018.43
Okuno, T. (2014). A Cognitive-Linguistic Analysis of the English Preposition ON. Japan: Hirosaki University, (112), 71-79.
Pavlović, V. (2010). Cognitive linguistics and English language teaching at English departments. FACTA UNIVERSITATIS-Linguistics and Literature, 8(1), 79-90.Roussel, E. (2012). The viewpoint of the preposition over. Open Edition Journals, Corela Cognition,
Rasekh Mahand, M. (2010). "Investigation of the meanings of spatial prepositions in speech culture based on cognitive semantics". Literature Studies, 14, 66-49. [In Persian].
Razavian, H., and Khanzadeh, M. (2013). The polysemy of the additional letter "be" in Persian language with the approach of cognitive semantics. Studies of the language and dialects of western Iran. 7, 57-79.
Rezaei, H.. Mokhtari, Sh. Kermani, M. (2012), "Cognitive study of the category of 'ber' in Golestan Saadi", Comparative Linguistics Research. 6, 7-20. [In Persian].
Tyler, Andrea, and Vyvyan Evans. (2003). The Semantics of English Prepositions: Spatial Scenes, Embodied Meaning and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tyler, A., Mueller, C. M., & Ho, V. (2011). Applying Cognitive Linguistics to Learning the English Prepositions To, For, and At: an experimental investigation. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, (8), 122-140.l,gv
Zahedi, K., Mohammadi ziarat, A. (2011), “Semantic network of a modern Persian preposition (az) in a cognitive semantic framework”. Journal of Advances in Cognitive Science, 13,1,67-80. [In Persian]. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 383 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 414 |
||
