Zhang Haiwei, Kim Sun-A, Zhang Xueyan
School of Chinese as a Second Language, Peking University, Beijing, China.
College of International Education, Minzu University of China, Beijing, China.
Front Psychol. 2022 Mar 25;13:753913. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.753913. eCollection 2022.
Measuring Chinese character recognition ability is essential in research on character learning among learners of Chinese as a second language (CSL). Three methods are typically used to evaluate character recognition competence by investigating the following properties of a given character: (a) pronunciation (phonological method), (b) meaning (semantic method), and (c) pronunciation and meaning (phonological and semantic or PS method). However, no study has explored the similar or dissimilar outcomes that these three measurements might yield. The current study examined this issue by testing 162 CSL learners with various L1 backgrounds and Chinese proficiency levels. Participants' performance in character recognition measured using a phonological method, a semantic method, and a PS method was compared, which led to two major findings. In terms of similarity, participants' performance in character recognition and the influence of L1 background and Chinese proficiency level on character recognition was similar across the three methods. As for differences, the semantic method could yield a character recognition test with better quality than the other two methods, and the three methods yielded different best fitting models and showed different predictions for Chinese proficiency across different L1 groups. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are proposed.
测量汉字识别能力对于汉语作为第二语言(CSL)学习者的汉字学习研究至关重要。通常有三种方法来评估汉字识别能力,即通过研究给定汉字的以下属性:(a)发音(语音法),(b)意义(语义法),以及(c)发音和意义(语音和语义或PS法)。然而,尚无研究探讨这三种测量方法可能产生的相似或不同结果。本研究通过对162名具有不同母语背景和汉语水平的CSL学习者进行测试,考察了这一问题。比较了参与者在使用语音法、语义法和PS法测量的汉字识别中的表现,得出了两个主要发现。在相似性方面,参与者在汉字识别中的表现以及母语背景和汉语水平对汉字识别的影响在这三种方法中是相似的。至于差异,语义法能够产生比其他两种方法质量更高的汉字识别测试,并且这三种方法产生了不同的最佳拟合模型,对不同母语组的汉语水平显示出不同的预测。本文提出了这些发现的理论和实践意义。