论 ACTFL 语言能力指南中描述词的有效性

Qijie Li, Hao Feng, Yiping Cui
{"title":"论 ACTFL 语言能力指南中描述词的有效性","authors":"Qijie Li, Hao Feng, Yiping Cui","doi":"10.1075/csl.00032.qij","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n ACTFL Language Proficiency Guidelines (hereinafter called Guidelines) are a\n multi-lingual framework mainly based on the language proficiency development of several European languages. Little consideration\n is given to the peculiarity of Chinese. Efforts are made to assess the validity of the descriptors in Guidelines\n in comparison with Chinese Proficiency Grading Standards for International Chinese Language Education\n (hereinafter called Standards). A total of five parameters from Guidelines that are not\n compatible with Standards have been selected and two questionnaires compiled by the authors are answered by local\n American Chinese language teachers to evaluate the validity of these descriptors. The study shows that the descriptors in\n Standards are more valid in differentiating language proficiency levels of Chinese. In accordance with this\n study, some revisions and amendments should be made to Guidelines.","PeriodicalId":517052,"journal":{"name":"Chinese as a Second Language (漢語教學研究—美國中文教師學會學報). The journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, USA","volume":"227 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the validity of descriptors in ACTFL Language Proficiency Guidelines\",\"authors\":\"Qijie Li, Hao Feng, Yiping Cui\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/csl.00032.qij\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n ACTFL Language Proficiency Guidelines (hereinafter called Guidelines) are a\\n multi-lingual framework mainly based on the language proficiency development of several European languages. Little consideration\\n is given to the peculiarity of Chinese. Efforts are made to assess the validity of the descriptors in Guidelines\\n in comparison with Chinese Proficiency Grading Standards for International Chinese Language Education\\n (hereinafter called Standards). A total of five parameters from Guidelines that are not\\n compatible with Standards have been selected and two questionnaires compiled by the authors are answered by local\\n American Chinese language teachers to evaluate the validity of these descriptors. The study shows that the descriptors in\\n Standards are more valid in differentiating language proficiency levels of Chinese. In accordance with this\\n study, some revisions and amendments should be made to Guidelines.\",\"PeriodicalId\":517052,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chinese as a Second Language (漢語教學研究—美國中文教師學會學報). The journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, USA\",\"volume\":\"227 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chinese as a Second Language (漢語教學研究—美國中文教師學會學報). The journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, USA\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/csl.00032.qij\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese as a Second Language (漢語教學研究—美國中文教師學會學報). The journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, USA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/csl.00032.qij","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

ACTFL 语言能力指南》(以下简称《指南》)是一个多语言框架,主要基于欧洲几种语言的语言能力发展。对汉语的特殊性考虑甚少。我们将《指南》中的描述性指标与《汉语国际教育能力分级标准》(以下简称《标准》)进行对比,以评估其有效性。研究选取了《指南》中与《标准》不一致的五个参数,由作者编制了两份问卷,由美国当地汉语教师回答,以评估这些描述词的有效性。研究结果表明,《标准》中的描述语在区分汉语水平等级方面更为有效。根据这项研究,应对《指南》进行一些修订和修正。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On the validity of descriptors in ACTFL Language Proficiency Guidelines
ACTFL Language Proficiency Guidelines (hereinafter called Guidelines) are a multi-lingual framework mainly based on the language proficiency development of several European languages. Little consideration is given to the peculiarity of Chinese. Efforts are made to assess the validity of the descriptors in Guidelines in comparison with Chinese Proficiency Grading Standards for International Chinese Language Education (hereinafter called Standards). A total of five parameters from Guidelines that are not compatible with Standards have been selected and two questionnaires compiled by the authors are answered by local American Chinese language teachers to evaluate the validity of these descriptors. The study shows that the descriptors in Standards are more valid in differentiating language proficiency levels of Chinese. In accordance with this study, some revisions and amendments should be made to Guidelines.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信