Analysis on Text-level Reading

nwsy@overseaen.comISSN 100- -5039hp://ww.overcaen.comOverseas English 圃图圆霜Tel:+86- 551 -5690811 5690812Analysis on Text -level Reading佘桂婷(中山大学新华学院外语系,广东广州510520)Abstract: Reading, especially reading at text Level, is 2 proces of continuously repeating, consolidating and undersanding words, phrases,and sentences. However, from the perspective of psycholinguistics, the compariosn and contrast of empirical data from experiments and re-searches would be evidences to support the idea that reading at text level is mainly infuenced by readers' ability of identfying a text's co-hesion and coherence, balancing the activation and supession of background knowledge, as well as readers' utilization of working memo-ry. Readers can make good use of these three aspects in order to advance their understanding of reading at text level.Key words: text level reading; cohesion; coherence; background knowledge; working memory中圈分类号:H319文献标识码:A文章编号 :1009 -5039(2010)07- -0238 021 IntroductionIt is not the combination of isolated words and sentences. Read-ers have to associate diferent parts of the text to search for itsinner connection and to combine them with background knowl-prehension of a whole reading text quite often poses dficulitesedge to construct the whole meaning (Koda, 2005). As text com-for readers. While having text level reading, readers need to en-dow themselves with the familarity of words and phrases, the un-prehension is rather complex and flexible, it involves the com-pleted match of both local and global coherence for the underly-derstanding of sentences' structure and meaning, and the abilitying meaning. One of the most important features of a text may beto make some inferences and to accumulate abundant informa-coherence and cohesion. It is the cohesive devices that connecttion. Kintsch's construction -integration model (Kintsch, 1988)the new inhformation with given information to be coherent as aseems to be a promising model of text reading because it explainswhole and form an integrated meaning of the text. Readers makehow a text is represented in menory as well as how the text isgreat eforts to decode coherence and cohesion while reading.integrated with readers' general knowledge beyond the text. InMaintaining coherence of a text requires making inference be-the early construction stage, readers activate the words' meaningyond the literal meaning of a text to enter higher level informa-and make inference. Then in the integration stage, it is time to(Harley, 2001). Oakhill and Gamham (1988) suggest thatintegrate the related network to gain a global coherence and sta-poor readers have problems, especially dificulty of making a setble structure (Harley, 2001). It is atempted to combine this con-of inferences. Some readers have better ability to detect and no-stnuction -integration model with some psycholinguistic theories,tice the inconsistency of comprehension that ffect them to con-researches and experiments to analyze readens' diferences fromtinue reading and they know when to reread and what should bethe fllowing three factors, aiming to come up with hints forreaders to figure out their weakness and facilitate themselves toreread to solve the problems. However, poor readers may havefailure to do such prompt monitoring (Rayner, Foorman, Perfetti,make improvements.Pesetsky, and Seidenberg, 2001).2 Text Level ReadingOne method of achieving text coherence is the use ofBecause text is associated with coherence as its inner fea-anaphora and its antecedent. As Hist and Brill (Field, 2003)ture to maintain meaning, whether readers can seize the deep co-suggest, text comprehension is directed by anaphor, The ties be-herence of the text itself is critical for text comprehension, in thistween anaphor and its antecedents may be diverse and looselysense, pursuing this may explain the difterences of readers abili-distributed in a text. They may have certain distances elsewherety. Moreover, readers' individual operation of working memoryin a text. One of the important higher level skillsl of reading is tovaries much during text comprebension. Therefore, in many p8y-process anaphors correctly. Readers have to find out the cohesivecholinguisic researches, working memory is often perceived todevices and extract the correct matching of the anaphor and itsanalyze readers' reading ability. Finally, readers' activation andrelated antecedent. Whether readers can easily resolve thesuppression of background knowledge and the use of them toanaphor with its antecedent or not distinguishes good readers andbenefit their readings also differ from each other. It seems con-poor readers because it really needs extensive coping strategiesvincing to take these factors into consideration in order to explain(Harley, 2001). As Haviland and Clark state (Whitney, 1998), thediferent readers' reading at text level.anaphoric reference requires readers to connect the information2.1 Coberence and cohesionappropriately using a bridging inference that retrieves informnationfrom the memory to ease the connection. According to HarleyText is undoubtedly endowed with coherence to make sense.中国煤化工YHCNMHG收稿日期:2010-04-24修回日期:2010-05-02作者简介:余桂婷(1982-),助教,硕士研究生,主要研究方向为语言学,应用语言学及英语教学法。238顺D 美丽剪本栏目责任编舞:谢嫒嫒2010年7月Overseas English 海外 美语(2001), it is the bridging inference that try to connect the newers' working memory is overloaded by the decoding processingand given information in a text to link the ideas and achieve co-which therefore results in litle psbility to use working memoryherence.to construct meaning. In addition, because their decoding is quiteslow, every time the working memory can just receive a smallseem to have problems of accurately resolving anaphors and theirpart of information that is much less than enough for the workingantecedents. Those readers are argued to be less able to retrievememory to begin the global level meaning building but just staythe referent accurately from the preceding part of the text. Somein a lower level processing.studies demonstrate that as distance increases, it becomes moreAlthough working memory is quite limited, researches showdificulh for anaphors to match antecedents. I is expected thatthal readers are able to combine specific information into severalpoor readers may be in an inferior position when the distance oflarger units which is also named chunking. A chunk is a unit ofthe anaphors and antecedents become more remote. They may behampered from linking different parts of the text which thereforememory retention. Through chunking, good readers can managemake them poorer to understand a text with coherence usingto use the limited working memory as much as possible (arroll,complex cohesive devices, and such linkage make them con-2004), (Smith, 1985), Although good readers' decoding is stronglyfused.automatic, anticipating the lext may require a lot of working2.2 Working memorymemory. Many psycholinguists (Field, 2003) believe that goodreaders would use working memory to integrate both new and oldText comprehension requires great working memory. Duringinformation instead of just saving decoding efort.reading, working memory is crucial for the maintenance of the-matic concepts achieved from the processing of coherence.2.3 Activation and suppression of background knowledgeWorking menory holds the informnation of a current situation forext comprehension demands readers to have clear andpresent use. It is so limited and temporary, and it may be easilyclose connection to a meaning entity. Reading text would be aoverwhelmed. Wurking memory's processing is such a short pro-tough task because readers not only base mainly on the informa-cedure that readers sometimes struggle about what information totion of the text, but also have to activate extensive backgroundbe held. What make is limitation worse is the conflict betweenknowledge for asance.its own functions of processing and storage.Studies suggest that general knowledge helps readers to establish coherence and facilitate the whole text processing. Thememory limitation is one of the factors that diferentiate readers'Cconstructivist view', supported also by Bransford and Johnsonreading ability (Rayner, Fooman, Perfetti, Pesetsky, and Seiden-(Whitney,1998: 237) claims that the information stored in read-berg, 2001). According to Budd, Whitney and Turley (Whitney,en' mind. are mainly based on readers general knowledge rather1998), if readers read with a purpose for specific details for cer-than the text itself, and therefore text comprehension demands atain questions, readers with lower working memory capacity aregreat amount of top down processing to bring in many back-just able to focus on processing certain details while readers withground knowledge.higher capacity can both cover the details and the whole thematicThe term 'schemata” is referred to readers' backgroundconstruction. The reason why poor readers have deficit in theirknowledge of the world. Readers take account of schemata whenworking memory capacity is because it is over occupied for lowerthey are reading (Field, 2003). No proper schemata for the text orlevel access or is stored with too much irelevant information. Itfailure to activate or detemnine the appropriate schemata both re-is readens' 'activation, maintenance and suppression' (Whitney,sult in poor comprehension. It helps readers to retrieve and sum-1998: 267) of information in memory that makes the dfference.marize the details that are read. Studies of schemata effect onAs Field (2003) suggests, there are lower level and highertext comprehension provide evidence to insist their signifcant ef-evel processing in reading. It appears that good readers can au-fect on recall (Carroll, 2004). It may be the readers' prerioustonmatically process the lower level information very quickly andknowledge rtrieved from long tem memory, it may be the read-leave more working memory space for higher level processng.ers' prompt knowledge assimilated from the text. No matter whatThis is limited by readers' working memory but sill quite underkind of background knowledge it might be, they all serve to helpcontrol of the readers to some degree. Therefore, due to this lim-readers to anticipate the text and support the comprehensionited working memory (Whitney, 1998), poor readers' inferior in(Field, 2003).the lower level processing of lexical meaning or phonologicalSuch activation of background knowledge also distinguishcoding may leave less working memory for higher level proce8s-different readers. It is not because poor readers can not activateing of the whole text.adequate background knowledge to assist the comprehension, buStanovich (Field, 2003) points out that readers' workingbecause they are poorer to handle the knowledge that is activat-memory difference affects their purpose of using context. This ised. Sometimes too much knowledge is collected to influence andsupported by evidence that poor readers are characterized to usedisnupt their comprehension. As Gersbacher states (Harley,context as supplemnental information to replenish the text's partial2001), good readers are better to suppress such inappropriate in-information. They have to fall back strongly to the informationformation and inhibit them from activation. They are better toprovided by context for the purpose of supplementing their poorhandle and reduce the interference. However, poor readers aredecoding sill. Nevertheless, good readers are supposed to usemuch less capable of doing this.context to enrich their understanding. The reason for this is ex-中国煤化工itegraion model (Ko-plicitly explained by their diference in working memory. BecausedaCrasonable explanation ofgood readers' reading processing is relatively automatic, there iswhyfYHC N M H Gasily inluenced or moremore space left in working memory capacity for them to considerreliable on their incomplete or inaccurate understanding becausecontextual information for higher level undernstanding. Poor read-(下转第243页)本栏目责任编巽:谢嫒娩239.2010年7月Overseas Engish藩外英诲换,然而惟有这句广告词最为经典,最能代表可口可乐的精神意图与交际意图的关联广告话语与受众的关联、广告语言与内涵,很好地诠释了该企业的核心价值。语境的关联,并会选择恰当的关联方式，或明说或隐含,从而2)隐含充分制造广告和受众的互动。在实现劝说或者影响功能的时候，广告主会遇到诸多相广告语言,作为一种语言艺术,在实现其-般语言功能的互牵扯的难题，因而广告需要运用“隐蔽交际策略"。他们希望.同时,具有很强的实用性和特殊性,对于人们的学习、生产和避免广告的某些方面产生负面的社会反响,比如对性、虚荣等生活都产生了重大而深刻的影响。对于广告语言的解读,关联方面的涉及,但这些又显得有助于广告的效果。因而- -方面要理论具有很强的解释功能。本文运用关联理论分析广告语言,继续对这些方面加以利用，同时另一方面得避免对此承担任希望抛砖引玉,以期引起大家对广告语言更多的关注和研究,何的责任。使其更好地服务于我们的社会。例11.没有不做的小生意，没有解决不了的大向题(No参考文献:business too small,no problem to~ big)(IBM公司)M作为世界薯名的电器业巨头,IBM公司的广告语显得朴[1]何兆熊.新编语用学概要[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社，2000.实无华,为客户解决问题,而且甘愿做-些小生意。然而,这其[2]黄国文.语篇分析的理论与实践一广 告语篇研究[M]上中透漏出的经营理念则让人仰慕,其一,胸怀宽广:众所周知，海:上海外语教育出版社,2001.“不积跬步,无以至千里;不积小流,无以成江海。"任何大事业[3]赵艳芳.认知语言学概论[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,都要从小做起,IBM公司的胸襟可见一斑;其二,对自己公司的专业水平信心十足,让客户没有任何的后顾之忧,也使得一[4]牛汝辰,魏燕云.广告词写作技巧与优秀范例大观[M].北京:般的客户也感觉到了IBM公司的亲和力。中央民族大学出版社,1994.3结束语[S]中国新闻网[E/:/tp:pw/wchinanews com.cn/gn/news/从关联理论的观点来看，结合本文上面的分析，可以看2010/03- -04/2152614.shtml.出,成功的广告语言在制造广告效应的时候,会充分考虑信息(上接第239页)they are not sficient enough to be well constraint by the text. readers have a more dynamic mechanism for the activation andand abandon the irelevant information from disupting. It is quitesuppression of background knowledge. In a word, text level read-a tough lask for readers to balance the adoptability of text infor-ing is much more complicated that it demands nore challengingmation and background knowledge. If readers engage in the topand influential work, especially, readers' extensive reading input.down processing too much, namely, strongly depend on back-With the emphasizing of the above three remarkable and agreeground knowledge, it may decrease their interest to focus on theable factors respectively, readers with lower ability can adoptoriginal text (Koda, 2005). According to this approach that goodthem a guidance and hints to carry out more purpose -builtreaders have more fficient suppression mechanism, they can se-reading activities and tackle the problems of text undertanding.lect the useful information and suppress the irrelevant ones moreReferences:quickly, whereas poor readers seem to have deficiency in such[1] Cartol D W.Psychology of LanguageMlLondonThomson.2004.kind of sppression Rayner, Foormnan, Peretti, Pesetsky, and[2] Field J.Pesychlnguistics:A resource book to students[M].Lon-Seidenberg, 2001).don:Routledge,2003.Gernsbacher's comprehension view of 'structure building[3] Harley T.The Peychology of Languge:rom data to theory[M.framework' (Whitney, 1998: 265) can explain the diference be-Hove:Psychology Press,2001.tween good readers and poor readers as well. It argues that poor[4] Kintsch W.The Role of Knowledge in Discourse Comprehen-readers may develop too many substructures when they read ev-sion:A Construction -Integration Model []Psychological Re-ery part of the inonation which therefore confuse and distractview,1988(95):163-182.them from selecting the crrelated ones to combine an integrated[5] Koda K.Insight into Second Language Reading:a cross -lin-representation. Indeed, Gernsbacher (Whitney, 1998) asserts thatguistic approach [M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,poor readers are less able to suppress the irelevant infomnation2005.that is activated. Gemsbacher points out that if tbhe irelevant in[6] Oakhill J,Gamham A.Becoming a Skilled Reader [M].Newformation remains to exert interfering inluence, it is probablyYork:Bsil Blackwell,1988.that real accurate integration can not be achieved. Too many[切] Rayner KFoorman BR.Perferti CA.Pesetsky D,Seidenberg MS.substructures may lead to the failure of the overall structure ofHow psychological science inorms the teaching of reading[].the text. Germsbacher's study shows that poor readers can notPsychological Science in the Public Interest,2001,2(2):31-74.well prevent themselves from activating the other irelevant infor-mation.中国煤化IeCambidge Univenity3 Conclusion[9]YHC N M H Gge[M].Boston:HoughtonTo sum up, good readers frstly seem to have priority inMiflin Company,1998.achieving text coherence and cohesion, and they are advocated to本栏目贵任输辑:岢嫒蝉243