文言文閱讀理解歷程探究

The Comprehension Process of Reading Classic Chinese Texts

齊瑮琛(Li-Chen Chi)；邱貴發(Guey-Fa Chiou)

國文教學 ； 閱讀理解 ； 文言文教學 ； 閱讀歷程 ； Chinese teaching ； reading comprehension ； Classic Chinese reading ； reading process

華語文教學研究

12卷2期（2015 / 06 / 01）

51 - 74

繁體中文

本研究探討國中生閱讀文言文時的理解歷程，分析閱讀理解時的困難點，找出可能增進理解文言文本的方法，提供文言文閱讀教學時參考。研究採用放聲思考原案分析法，對象為基隆市某中學六位九年級學生，請其以放聲思考方式閱讀並解釋文言文本，再填寫讀後回饋問卷。得到研究結果如下：（1）國中生閱讀文言文時呈現四種理解歷程，分別是「拆解詞義」、「統整句意」、「深化理解」和「修正理解」。（2）「統整句意」的理解歷程出現次數最多，「拆解詞義」的理解歷程則在不能順利統整句意時才會出現。（3）「深化理解」和「修正理解」的理解歷程皆是以統整句意為基礎發展而來，有助於提升理解成效但卻鮮少出現。（4）生難字詞是國中生閱讀文言文時最感困難的部份，詞語歧義與省略句則最易引發意義混淆造成理解錯誤。因此建議進行文言文閱讀教學時，除了有效增加學子的詞彙量與文本相關的背景知識之外，可讓學子學會運用推論思考和後設認知思考的技巧自主閱讀文言文本，以增進對文言文的閱讀理解能力。

This study explores ninth grade students' classic-Chinese reading comprehension processes, analyzes their comprehension difficulties, and finds out approaches to enhance the comprehension. Six ninth grade students at Keelung City participated in this study. Think-aloud protocols and feedback questionnaire were used to collect qualitative data. The results show that: (1) Four comprehension processes, including sentence meaning conjecture, word explanation, comprehension deepening, and comprehension correction, were observed in classic Chinese reading. (2) The frequency of sentence meaning conjecture is highest among the four processes. However, when the readers have difficulty to understand the meaning of the sentence, they adopt the process of word explanation. (3) Although the processes of comprehension deepening and comprehension correction can enhance understanding, they were seldom used. (4) The word recognition is the most difficult part of classic Chinese reading, and the lexical ambiguity and elliptical sentences always cause misunderstanding easily. This study suggests that Classic Chinese teaching should not only give vocabulary and background knowledge, but also encourage students to read classical Chinese texts independently and practice inferential comprehension and meta-cognitive thinking skills.

1. 李清筠(2013)。古典散文教學重點與方法─從《兒時記趣》出發。中等教育，64(3)，52-66。
   連結：
2. 張馨如(2011)。九年一貫古典文學教材之研究。中等教育，61(2)，94-121。
   連結：
3. Chall, J. S.(1996).Stages of reading development.Fort Worth, TX:Harcourt Brace.
4. Edwards, V.(ed.),Corson, D.(ed.)(1997).Encyclopedia of Language and Education.Amsterdam:Kluwer Academic Publishers.
5. Ericsson, K. Anders,Simon, Herbert A.(1993).Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports As Data.Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press.
6. Gagne, E. D.,Yekovich, C. W.,Yekovich, F. R.(1993).The cognitive psychology of school learning.New York:Harper Collins College Publishers.
7. Gunning, T. G.(1996).Greating reading instruction for all children.Boston, MA:Allyn & Bacon.
8. IEA,Mullis, I. V. S.(ed.),Martin, M. O.(ed.),Kennedy, A. M.(ed.),Trong, K. L.(ed.),Sainsbury, M.(ed.)(2009).PIRLS 2011 Assessment Framework.Amsterdam, Netherlands:TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
9. Kuo, W.J.,Yeh, T.C.,Lee, J.R.,Chen, L.F.,Lee, P.L.,Chen, S.S.,Ho, L.T.,Hung, D.L.,Tzeng, O.J.L.,Hsieh, J.C.(2004).Orthographic and Phonological Processing of Chinese Characters: an fMRI Study.Neuroimage,21,1721-1731.
10. Mayer, R. E.(1996).Learning strategies for making sense out of expository text: The SOI model for guiding three cognitive processes in knowledge construction.Educational Psychology Review,8(4),357-371.
11. OECD(2013).PISA 2012 Assessment and analytical framework: mathematics, reading, science problem solving and financial literacy.OECD Publishing.
12. 李佳穎(2009)。中文識字的認知與神經基礎。基礎教育學報，18(2)，63-85。
13. 李畊緯、廖晨惠(2010)。談詞素覺識與中文閱讀之相關。特殊教育與輔助科技，6，28-31。
14. 洪月女(2010)。以古德曼的閱讀理論探討中英文閱讀之異同。新竹教育大學人文社會學報，3(1)，87-114。
15. 唐郁涵(2011)。Taiana，國立台南大學=National University of Taiana。
16. 鄭婉君(2012)。Hualien，國立東華大學=National Dong Hwa University。
17. 盧雪梅(2011)。國中基測國文科閱讀文本暨學生表現分析。教育研究與發展，7(2)，115-152。
18. 顏晴榮(2007)。有聲思考法的應用。中等教育，58(4)，106-116。

1. 程芷萱(2016)。排版模式對文言文閱讀之影響。交通大學理學院科技與數位學習學程學位論文。2016。1-96。