小學國語教科書第三人稱代名詞的性別語義特徵之內容分析

Analysis of Third Person Pronouns with Gender Semantic Features in Elementary School Mandarin Textbooks

10.6481/JTR.201204.0085

黃秋華(Chiu-Hua Huang)；陸偉明(Wei-Ming Luh)

性別語義特徵 ； 指稱詞推論 ； 第三人稱代名詞 ； gender semantic feature ； anaphora ； third-person pronouns

教科書研究

5卷1期（2012 / 04 / 15）

85 - 113

繁體中文

人稱代名詞的性別語義特徵對閱讀理解的重要性已被過去許多研究證實，並有教學實務上的應用價值，故檢視現行教科書中人稱代名詞性別語義特徵的運用情形，是相當重要的議題。本研究旨在分析現行小學國語教科書康軒版、翰林版、南一版在呈現第三人稱代名詞性別語義特徵的適切性，以及學習順序的連貫性。本研究採內容分析法，主要發現如下：（1）三種版本皆以不同性別人物鋪陳且性別語義特徵清楚的課文占多數。（2）第三人稱代名詞學習順序的部分，指稱男性「他」比指稱女性「她」的學習時間更早，此外，課文中第三人稱代名詞的運用有良好的連貫性。最後，建議教科書編輯提早將指稱女性的「她」編列為正式生字學習，並將指稱不同性別的人稱代名詞安排在同一課；建議編輯小單元來介紹人稱代名詞與文章連貫性的關係。建議未來研究從閱讀發展觀點分析各學習階段學童在代名詞的推論能力；以及探討第二人稱代名詞的性別語義特徵在代名詞推論歷程扮演的角色。

Research in the past has shown that gender semantic cues for personal pronouns are essential for reading comprehension and it can be applied to teaching. Therefore, it is crucial to examine how semantic cues are used in textbooks today. This study analyzes the appropriateness of gender semantic cues for third person pronouns in elementary school level textbooks published by three publishers: Kang-Xuan, Han-Lin, and Nan-Yi. The findings are as follows: (1) All three editions use various names for different genders with clear semantic cues. (2) As for the sequence used when learning pronouns, the character representing the third person pronoun ＂he＂ is learned earlier than that for ＂she.＂ This sequence is shown in all three textbooks. Lastly, the present study propose listing the character for the female pronoun in the formal vocabulary, putting characters representing pronouns for different genders in the same lesson, and introducing the relationships between pronouns and composition cohesion in a separate small unit. It is recommended that future research focus on the pronoun resolution ability of children in different learning stages and how semantic cues in second person pronouns could influence pronoun resolution.

1. 李翠玲(2011)。國小語文領域教科書中身心障礙人物之內容分析研究。教科書研究，4(1)，31-54。
   連結：
2. 周珮儀、鄭明長(2006)。一個我國教科書研究資料庫的建置與分析。教育學刊，26，109-132。
   連結：
3. 林于弘、林佳均(2008)。九年一貫國語教科書標點符號教材內容分析比較。教科書研究，1(1)，105-121。
   連結：
4. 柯華葳、陳冠銘(2004)。文章結構標示與閱讀理解─以低年級學生為例。教育心理學報，36(2)，185-200。
   連結：
5. 柯華葳、詹益綾(2007)。國民中學閱讀推理篩選測驗編製報告。測驗學刊，54(2)，429-449。
   連結：
6. 曾彥翰、蔡昆瀛(2007)。文章結構教學對增進國小聽覺障礙學生說明文閱讀理解成效之研究。特殊教育研究學刊，32，67-91。
   連結：
7. American Psychological Association(1983).Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (3rd ed.).Washington, DC:Author.
8. Ariel, M.(1991).The function of accessibility in a theory of grammar.Journal of Processes,16,443-463.
9. Arnold, J. E.,Brown-Schmidt, S.,Trueswell, J.(2007).Children's use of gender and order-of-mention during pronoun comprehension.Language and Cognitive Processes,22,527-565.
10. Arnold, J. E.,Eisenband, J. G.,Brown-Schmidt, S.,Trueswell, J.(2000).The rapid use of gender information: Evidence of the time course of pronoun resolution from eyetracking.Cognition,76,B13-B26.
11. Bodine, A.(1975).Androcentrism in prescriptive grammar: Singular 'they', sex-indefinite 'he', and 'he' or 'she'.Language in Society,4(2),129-146.
12. Brener, R.(1983).Learning the deictic meaning of third person pronouns.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research,12,235-262.
13. Caramazza, A.,Miozzo, M.(1997).The relation between syntactic and phonological knowledge in lexical access: Evidence from the "tip-of-the-tongue" phenomenon.Cognition,64,309-343.
14. Carreiras, M.,Garnham, A.,Oakhill, J. V.(1993).The use superficial and meaning-based representations in interpreting pronouns: Evidence from Spanish.European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,5,93-116.
15. Crawley, R.,Stevenson, R.,Kleinman, D.(1990).The use of heuristic strategies in the interpretation of pronouns.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research,4,256-264.
16. Dell, G. S.,McKoon, G.,Ratcliff, R.(1983).The activation of antecedent information during the processing of anaphoric reference in reading.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,22,121-132.
17. Ehrlich, M. F.,Rémond, M.(1997).Skilled and less skilled comprehenders: French children's processing of anaphoric devices in written texts.British Journal of Developmental Psychology,15,291-309.
18. Garnham, A.(2001).Mental models and the interpretation of anaphora.Hove, East Sussex:Psychology Press.
19. Garnham, A.,Oakhill, J. V.(1985).On-line resolution of anaphoric pronouns: Effects of inference making and verb semantics.British Journal of Psychology,76,385-393.
20. Garnham, A.,Oakhill, J. V.,Cruttenden, H.(1992).The role of implicit causality and gender cue in the interpretation of pronouns.Language and Cognitive Processes,7,231-255.
21. Gordon, P. C.,Grosz, B. J.,Gilliom, L. A.(1993).Pronouns, names, and the centering of attention.Cognitive Science,17,311-347.
22. Gordon, P. C.,Hendrick, R.(1997).Intuitive knowledge of linguistic coreference.Cognition,62,325-370.
23. Gordon, P. C.,Hendrick, R.,Johnson, M.,Lee, Y.(2006).Similarity-based interference during language comprehension: Evidence from eye tracking during reading.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,32(6),1304-1321.
24. Kintsch, W.(1998).Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition.New York:Cambridge University Press.
25. Lee, Y.,Lee, H.,Gordon, P. C.(2006).Linguistic complexity and information structure in Korean: Evidence from eye-tracking during reading.Cognition,104,495-534.
26. Li, C. N.,Thompson, S. A.(1981).Mandarin Chinese: A functional referecene grammar.Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.
27. MacWhinney, B.(Ed.),Bates, E.(Ed.)(1989).The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
28. McDonald, J. L.,MacWhinney, B.(1995).The time course of anaphor resolution: Effects of implicit verb causality and gender.Journal of Memory and Language,34,543-566.
29. Moulton, J.,Robinson, G. M.,Elias, C.(1978).Psychology in action: Sex bias in language use.American Psychologist,33,1032-1036.
30. Oakhill, J.,Yuill, N.(1986).Pronoun resolution in skilled and less-skilled comprehensions: Effects of memory load and inferential complexity.Language and Speech,29(1),25-37.
31. Rapp, B.,Goldrick, M.(2000).Discreteness and interactitivity in spoken word production.Psychological Review,107,460-499.
32. Song, H.,Fisher, C.(2005).Who's "she"? Discourse prominence influences preschoolers' comprehension of pronouns.Journal of Memory and Language,52,29-57.
33. Tan, L. H.(Ed.),Bates, E.(Ed.),Tzeng, O. J. L.(Ed.),Li, P.(Ed.)(2006).The handbook of East Asian psycholinguistics.New York:Cambridge University Press.
34. Tyler, L. K.(1983).The development of discourse mapping processes: The on-line interpretation of anaphoric expressions.Cognition,13,309-341.
35. Yang, C. L.,Gordon, P. C.,Hendrick, R.,Hue, C. W.(2003).Constraining the comprehension of pronominal expressions in Chinese.Cognition,86,283-315.
36. Yang, C. L.,Gordon, P. C.,Hendrick, R.,Wu, J. T.(1999).Comprehension of referring expressions in Chinese.Language and Cognitive Processes,14,715-743.
37. Yang, C. L.,Gordon, P. C.,Hendrick, R.,Wu, J. T.,Chou, T. L.(2001).The processing of coreference for reduced expressions in discourse integration.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research,30,24-35.
38. Yuill, N.,Oakhill, J.(1991).Children's problems in text comprehension: An experimental investigation.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
39. Yuill, N.,Oakhill, J.(1988).Understanding of anaphoric relations in skilled and less skilled comprehenders.British Journal of Psychology,79,173-186.
40. Zuber, S.,Reed, A. M.(1993).The politics of grammar handbooks: Generic he and singular they.College English,55(5),515-530.
41. 王石番(1999)。傳播內容分析法─理論與實證。臺北市:幼獅。
42. 江美華編、劉振中編、忻詩婷編、賈宛倩編、林榮勤編、趙予彤編(2010)。國民小學國語。臺南市:南一。
43. 呂叔湘(1985)。近代漢語指代詞。上海市:學林。
44. 柯華葳(1999)。閱讀理解困難篩選測驗。中國測驗學會測驗年刊，46(2)，1-11。
45. 教育部(2011)。在職教師閱讀教學增能研習手冊。臺北市:作者。
46. 陳玉玲譯、王明傑譯、American Psychological Association(2005)。美國心理協會出版手冊：論文寫作格式（五版）。臺北市:雙葉。
47. 陳姝蓉、王瓊珠(2003)。故事結構教學對增進國小閱讀障礙學生閱讀理解能力之研究。特殊教育研究學刊，25，221-242。
48. 黃光雄、簡茂發(1996)。教育研究法。臺北市:師大書苑。
49. 黃繼仁、陳欣蘭(2010)。課程變革對小學國語教科書要素數量變化之影響。教育資料與研究雙月刊，92，111-138。
50. 楊孟麗譯、謝水南譯、Fraenkel, J. R.、Wallen, N. E.(2003)。教育研究法─研究設計實務。臺北市:心理。
51. 楊國樞編、文崇一編、吳聰賢編、李亦園編(1989)。社會及行為科科學研究法。臺北市:東華。
52. 歐用生(1992)。開放社會的教育改革。臺北市:心理。
53. 鄭昭明(2009)。華語文的教與學：理論與應用。臺北市:正中。

1. 陳均伊(2013)。國小自然與生活科技教科書的語句類型分析─因果性解釋與預測性解釋的探討。教科書研究，6(1)，57-85。
2. 黃秋華、曾玉村、陸偉明(2014)。中文兒童代名詞推論能力的發展研究：提及順位與性別語義特徵的影響。教育心理學報，45(4)，555-576。
3. (2017)。代名詞與人名之性別訊息對兒童閱讀代名詞句之影響。臺東大學教育學報，28(1)，53-76。