英语论文网

chunks. Table 1 shows that 3-word lexical chunks constitute the largest proportion, while6-word chunks the smallest, with 4 and 5 word chunks falling in between. This patternswith previous studies (e.g., Wei (卫乃兴, 2007) and Wang & Huang (王文宇&黄燕,2011) that as the frequency of lexical chunks decreases as the number of words withinthem increases. In other words, long and complex chunks are less commonly used bystudent interpreters than shorter and simpler ones.In addition, the number of words contained in lexical chunks accounted forapproximately 30.5% of all the words in the sub-corpus, a far cry from Altenberg’(1998) study in which he found that in native-speakers’ oral English production,words contained in chunks accounted for 80% of the total number of words. However,the present study is qualitatively different from Altenberg’ (1998) in that aninterpretation corpus was used here instead of a spoken language corpus. The nature ofthe former precludes extensive and flexible use of lexical chunks due to limitations incontent. On the other hand, the result of the present study was higher than that of Wang& Huang (王文宇&黄燕, 2011), which found that words contained in lexical chunksmade for 18.4% of the total number of words.
……………

Conclusion

This study also has implications for interpreting training, especially for L2 students.As students’ interpretation performance positively correlates with their command oflexical chunks, therefore it is advisable for teachers to put more emphasis on lexicalchunks in teaching interpretation. Traditionally, the emphasis in interpretation traininghas been on topic-related words. It is often assumed intuitively that learners’interpreting deficits and lack of fluency can be attributed solely to their small size ofvocabulary, especially vocabulary related to the text to be interpreted. As aconsequence, many interpretation textbooks, more often than not, include at thebeginning or the end of each chapter a long list of topic-related vocabulary andexpressions, with the hope that once learners’ have remembered those words, theirinterpreting performance will naturally get better. But to the dismay of many teachers,students’ interpreting most often is still far from satisfactory. Their interpreting is stillfragmented, ill-expressed, and lacking in cohesion, coherence and fluency. It seemsfrom the present study as well as from some previous studies that the importantmissing link in traditional interpreting training is exactly the underestimation of therole played by lexical chunks. Therefore in the future teachers may be able toreconsider their interpreting teaching formula and take into consideration the teachingof lexical chunks.
……………
Reference (omitted)

本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。