对泰汉语动物类个体量词教学探讨The individual quantifier teaching in Thai and Chinese animal 摘要:（摘要内容经过系统自动伪原创处理以避免复制，泰语论文网站，下载原文正常，泰语论文，内容请直接查看目录。） 汉语和泰语同属于汉藏语系,而汉藏语系的特色之一就是具有丰硕的量词。既然是两种分歧的说话,那末必定存在很多分歧的地方。好比汉、泰语中润饰植物类个别量词就存在很年夜的差别,不论是在量词的数目、名量搭配、数目名构造上,照样两个平易近族对植物名量词的搭配认知上都有很年夜差别。这类差别招致以泰语为母语的泰国粹生在进修汉语植物类个别量词时弗成防止发生许多偏误。汉语量词研究比拟汉语其他词类研究起步较晚,也还存在很多缺乏的地方；绝关于其他说话的量词,汉语量词的比较研究剖析也绝对滞后。汉、泰语量词的比较研究更软弱。笔者在汇集对于汉泰两种说话量词比较研究的材料时,发明从全体构造上议论两种说话量词差别的文章占多数,但从量词外部小类动身停止比较剖析的论文少之又少。也有过从某一类量词角度动身研究差别的,好比潘秀英曾揭橥过《汉语和泰语个别量词研究》,但详细到笔者如许小规模的汉、泰语植物类个别量词比较剖析的文章,笔者至今还没有发明；对外汉语教授教养中对于植物类个别量词的教授教养也缺少扶植性看法。联合以上各种缘由,笔者决议做这方面的相干查询拜访研究,运用在泰支教时代以问卷查询拜访的措施,搜集先生的偏误,剖析偏误缘由,从说话本体常识、平易近族认知和文明差别等角度对汉、泰语植物类个别量词停止剖析研究。汉语中每一个量词与植物的搭配都是有理据可循,其面前隐含的平易近族认知和文明差别都对泰国粹生进修汉语植物类个别量词有主要作用,所以笔者提出要重视说话本体、语义来源的解析,而不只仅是以汉平易近族的说话习气来解答先生对于名量搭配上的困惑。所以本论文想经由过程商量汉、泰语各植物类个别量词在语义来源、认知和文明等方面的差异点来解析泰国粹临盆生偏误的缘由,从而为对泰汉语植物类个别量词教授教养供给一些自创和有用建议。 Abstract: Chinese and Thai Sino Tibetan family, and one of the Sino Tibetan language feature is a rich quantifier. Since there are two different types of talk, then there must be a lot of different places. Like Chinese and Thai polishing plant individual quantifiers exists very big difference, regardless of the collocations in the number of quantifiers, amount, number, name of the structure, still two ethnic groups of Noun Classifiers of plant collocation cognitive have very big difference. This kind of difference lead to native Thai Thai pure in the study of Chinese plant individual quantifiers Eph into to prevent the occurrence of many errors. Compared with other Chinese quantifiers research Chinese lexical category research started late, there are still many places where the lack of absolute; in other speaking quantifiers, analysis of comparative study of Chinese quantifiers is definitely lagging. A comparative study of Chinese and Thai words more weak. The author in pooled about both Chinese and Thai speaking quantifier comparative study materials, the invention of from the overall structure of the discussion two speak quantifier difference of the majority, but from quantifier external classes start stop comparisons and analyses of the very few. There have been from a category quantifier perspective study difference, like Pan had enunciated over the Chinese and Thai individual quantifiers research ", but specific to the author, such as small scale of Chinese and Thai plant individual quantifiers comparisons and analyses the, I still hadn't been invented; the teaching of Chinese as a foreign language teaching a class of plant individual quantifiers is also a lack of support of the view. Combined with the above reason, I decided to do the relevant investigation research, application in the era of Thai volunteer questionnaire inquiry method to visit, Mr. collection bias, analysis of error reason, from the common ontology language and ethnic cognitive and cultural difference perspective on Chinese and Thai plant individual quantifiers stop * *. Chinese every quantifier and plant collocation is rational according to follow, implied in the front of the plain near family cognitive and cultural differences are in Thailand pure students learning Chinese plant individual quantifiers have a major impact, so the author proposed should pay attention to the body to speak, source of semantic analysis, not only is to answer Mr. confusion about the amount of collocation in Han ethnic speaking habits. So this paper want to through process to discuss Chinese and Thai the plant individual quantifiers in sources of semantic, cognitive and other aspects of civilization the similarities and differences between analytical Thailand pure birth birth cause errors, so as to supply of Thai Chinese plant individual quantifiers teaching some invented and useful suggestions. 目录: |
