ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B

心理学报 ›› 2014, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (7): 885-900.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2014.00885

• 论文 •    下一篇



  1. (1中国人民大学心理学系, 北京 100872) (2江苏师范大学教育科学学院, 徐州 221116) (3北京大学心理学系, 北京 100871)
  • 收稿日期:2012-07-03 出版日期:2014-07-25 发布日期:2014-07-25
  • 通讯作者: 张积家
  • 基金资助:


The Role of Phonetic Radicals and Semantic Radicals in Phonetics and Semantics Extraction of Phonogram Characters: An Eye Movement Study on Components Perception

ZHANG Jijia;WANG Juan;YIN Cong   

  1. (1 Department of Psychology, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China) (2 School of Education Science, Jiangsu Normal University, Xuzhou 221116, China) (3 Department of Psychology, Beijing University, Beijing 100871, China)
  • Received:2012-07-03 Online:2014-07-25 Published:2014-07-25
  • Contact: ZHANG Jijia


采用眼动技术记录汉语阅读者在形声字的语音、语义提取中对声符和义符的注意规律, 考察形声字部件的位置、功能和正字法意识对汉字认知的影响。结果表明:(1)在汉字的视觉加工中, 阅读者对部件空间位置的注意加工优势受到声旁位置的调节。对左形右声结构的汉字, 被试更多地注意字的右边, 对右形左声结构的汉字, 被试更多地注意字的左边; (2)在汉语阅读者的正字法规则中, 存在着“左侧释义、右侧释音”的部件的位置-功能联结。(3)在通达形声字的语音、语义的过程中, 与义符相比, 声符具有注意资源的优势, 这种优势在语音提取任务中更加明显:声符无需依赖义符的信息便可以相对独立地激活整字的语音, 但声符需要义符的配合才能够提取整字的语义。

关键词: 语音, 语义, 义符, 声符, 正字法意识


A phonogram character consists of a semantic radical, usually reflecting the meaning of the character; and a phonetic radical, typically supplying partial information about the pronunciation of the character. A majority of these phonogram characters have a left-right structure, with the two radicals standing side by side; about 90% of them have the semantic radical on the left and the phonetic radical on the right (SP character), and the other 10% have the semantic radical on the right and the phonetic radical on the left (PS character). The ratio between SP characters and PS characters is about 5.5 to 1. When people are reading, how to make use of visual input to extract words’ phonetic and semantic information from mental lexicon? The question has been highlighted in the study of psycholinguistics. The study was conducted to investigate eye movements of Mandarin Chinese native speakers while they made readable judgement and word categorizing tasks in SP characters and PS characters. Two experiments were adopted to investigate SP characters and PS characters’ processing characteristics. Readable judgement task was performed in Experiment 1. 32 college students (14 males and 18 females respectively) were tested. Single-factor which comprises SP and PS characters was used. The target stimuli included 60 phonogram characters (30 SP characters and 30 PS characters). Frequency and strokes numbers were balanced between these two characters. Word categorizing task was performed in Experiment 2. Thirty college students (14 males and 16 females respectively) were tested. The experiment design was the same with Experiment 1. The target stimuli included 48 phonogram characters (24 SP characters and 24 PS characters). Four compound semantic categories were used: (1) person (semantic radical of “亻” was included) or place name (semantic radical of “阝”was included); (2) female (semantic radical of “女”wad included )or bird (semantic radical of “鸟”was included); (3) Actions tools by fire or knife (semantic radical of “火” or “刂”was included); (4) Body actions by eyes or mouth (semantic radical of “目” or “口”was included). Behavioral data and eye movement indexes (proportion of dwell-time, proportion of fixations, and first-fixation-index) were analyzed. In two experiments, SP characters were judged more quickly faster than PS characters. There was no significant difference in error rate. Comparison of the eye movement indexes between SP characters and PS characters were shown that, significance difference existed among different interest areas, but the trend was different. For SP characters, right components acquired more proportion of dwell-time and more proportion of fixations, and subjects gave priority to right component. For PS characters, left component acquired more more proportion of dwell-time and more proportion of fixations, and subjects gave priority to left components. For the index of first-fixation-time, SP characters were fell earlier than PS characters. For the index of first-fix-interest-area-x-offset, in Experiment 1, both two characters were focused on the right side of center of the priority areas; in Experiment 2, both two characters were focused on the left side of center of the priority areas. The results showed that: (1) In phonogram characters’ processing, readers’ attention priority to components’ spatial position were mediated by phonetic components’ position. For SP characters, right side of characters were paid more attention by readers, for PS characters, left side of characters were paid more attention by readers; (2) Position-function connection which left component reflects semantics and right component supplies pronunciation existed in readers’ orthographic rules. (3) Phonetic radicals were paid more attention than semantic radicals in both phonetic and semantic processing of the phonogram characters, and the advantages are more significant in phonetic processing: phonetic radicals act more independently in readable judgment task, while phonetic radicals need to combine the information provided by semantic radicals in categorizing task.

Key words: phonetics, semantics, phonetic radical, semantic radical, orthographic awareness