摘要
本論文利用眼動實驗深入探討大學生閱讀英文多義詞激發歷程的影響。在不同詞彙能力與語境條件變動下，擷取眼球軌跡反應得出詞意點選正確率及三項依變項，包含 1. 詞意點選正確率; 2. 前導句閱讀時間的眼動型態; 3. 詞義激發歷程中閱讀的凝視時間 (latency); 其總閱讀時間包含、主要語義 (Domain-biased TVT) 的閱讀時間、次要語義的閱讀時間 (Secondary-biased TVT) 及中性無語境的閱讀時間 ( Non-biased TVT)，並回答關於多義詞的解歧語境在前和多義詞無解歧語境其語義關聯程度的主、次意義激發歷程之研究。
本研究發現讀者在閱讀多義詞解歧語境在前時，其語意的主、次意義激發歷程符合Sereno等人在2006年再排序觸接模型的研究。即歧義詞的多個意義是按頻率高低順序被激發，語境會促進合適語意激發程度進而影響詞彙觸接，而歧義詞相對頻率的主、次意義及語境效應都是影響中文英文讀者閱讀多義詞的重要因素。語境沒有偏向任何意義時主、次要意義皆可能被激發且主要意義激發程度被提升，而次要意義的相對頻率被壓制，其結果發現中文英文讀者閱讀多義詞詞彙激發的歷程與英文母語讀者相似，通常被激發的程度都是主要語意大於次要語意。
綜合英文詞彙能力測驗及眼動試驗結果，發現中文讀者英文詞意掌握能力是影響閱讀多義詞的重要因素。此結果與國外許多學者認為閱讀含有多義詞的歧義句，詞意判斷是主要三個影響因素之一是一致的 (Cruse﹐2000; Rayner﹐1989)。本研究結果也發現在具有指標性意義的詞意點選正確率方面僅有讀者英文詞意掌握能力對閱讀多義詞的觸接和激發具有顯著的影響，影響閱讀速度的主要原因不是平均凝視時間而是凝視次數。另外讀者的英語發音規則能力僅對於閱讀前導句的凝視時間有邊緣顯著的差異。

Abstract
In this paper, eye movement experiments used to explore the influence of the stimulating course of reading English polysemy. Under the change of lexical ability and contextual conditions, the correct rate and three variables were obtained by capturing the eyeball trajectory, including 1. The correct rate of the word meaning by chosen; 2. The eye movement pattern of the leading sentence reading time; 3. The reading time (latency) in the stimulating process of word meaning. The total reading time includes the reading time of the main semantics (domain-biased TVT)﹐the reading time of the secondary semantics (secondary-biased TVT) and the neutral and non-contextual reading time (non-biased TVT). This paper also answers the study of the main and secondary meaning of the semantic relevance of polysemy in the context of ambiguity in the former and non-contextual.
This study found that when reading the context of polysemy, the semantic primary and secondary meaning excitation course accords with the study of Sereno in 2006. That is, the multiple meanings of ambiguous words are stimulated according to the frequency, the context will promote the appropriate semantic excitation degree and then influence the lexical touch, and the main, secondary and contextual effects of the relative frequencies of ambiguous words are the important factors that affect Chinese English readers ' reading polysemy. Context does not favor any meaning when the main, secondary meaning is likely to be stimulated and the main meaning of the excitation level promoted, and the secondary significance of the relative frequency suppressed. The results found that the Chinese English reader reading polysemy words in the process of stimulating the same as the English-language readers, usually stimulated by the degree of the main semantics is greater than the secondary semantics.
Comprehensive English vocabulary proficiency test and eye movement experiments results, it found that Chinese readers’ English word meaning mastery is an important factor affecting reading polysemy. This result and many foreign scholars believe that reading ambiguous sentences containing polysemy, word meaning judgment is one of the main three influential factors is consistent (cruse,2000;rayner,1989). The results of the study also found that only the reader's ability to grasp the meaning of the words in the sense of meaning has a significant effect on the touch and stimulation of reading polysemy, and the main reason of the reading speed is not the average gaze time but the gaze number. In addition, the reader's ability on pronunciation rules only has a significant marginal difference in the gaze time of the reading leading sentences.

參考文獻

(一) 中文部分
李美方 (2003)。從語意架構和構造語法的觀點分析英語多義詞take。
國立政治大學語言學研究所碩士論文。民92，6月。
李書卿、楊靜 (2009)。從典型理論來解釋一詞多義。語言文化論文。
但昭蕙 (2006)。台灣國小四年級學童中英文聲韻覺識與英文識字能力之研究。
國立台北教育大學兒童英語教育學系碩士論文，未出版。
吳瑞屯、楊馥菱、林維駿 (2013)。跨越單字辨識歷程研究裡的語音處理議題。
中華心理學刊 民102，55卷，3期，289-318。
陳昱蓉 (2014)。現代漢語「做」字詞歧義與消解歧義研究。國立臺灣師範大學
華語文教學系暨研究所碩士論文。
張克禮、侯明慧 (2014)。「英語歧義詞句詳解」。北京商務印刷國際有限公司
出版。
張葶葶 (2004)。英語為外國語學習者的英語字詞辨識歷程―以詞長效果及事件
相關電位指標論證。國立中央大學認知與神經科學研究所碩士論文，未出
版。
張葶葶、李俊仁 (2004)。台灣大學生英語詞彙熟悉度習得年齡評定。教育心理
學報，民98，41卷，2期，441-452頁。
曾筱婷 (2006)。EFL大學生閱讀英文的眼動資料分析。
國立中央大學 學習與教學研究所碩士論文。
楊芝瑜 (2010)。記憶廣度與語境效應對閱讀歧義句的影響 : 來自眼動的證據。
國立中央大學 學習與教學研究所碩士論文。
鄭昭明（1993）。認知心理學。台北：桂冠圖書出版。
錡寶香 (2006)。兒童語言障礙―理論、評量與教學。台北 : 心理。
簡育岑 (2006)。以眼動型態探討背景知識對詞彙辨識的影響。
國立中央大學 學習與教學研究所碩士論文。

(二) 英文部分
Aaron, P. G., & Joshi, R. M. (1992). Reading problem : Consultation and remediation. NY: The Guiford Press.
Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Agirre, E. & Edmonds, P. G. (2007). Word Sense Disambiguation. Dordrecht: Springer.
Alderson, J. C., & Urquhart, A. H. (1988). This test is unfair: I’m not an economist.
Chapter 12 (pp.168-182) in P. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive
Approaches to Second Language Reading. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Paul D. Allopenna, James S. Magnuson, and Michael K. Tanenhaus (1998). Tracking the Time Course of Spoken Word Recognition Using Eye Movements: Evidence for Continuous Mapping Models. Journal of Memory and Language 38, 419–439 (1998) article No. ML972558.
Baddeley, A., Logie, R., Nimmo-Smith, I. & Brereton, A. (1985). Components of fluent reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 119-131.
Ball E., Blachman B. (1991). Does phoneme awareness training in kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spelling? Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 49–66.
Barr, D.J., & Seyfeddinipur, M., (2010). Using the visual world paradigm to study language processing: A review and critical evaluation. Acta Psycholigica Volume 137, Issue 2, June 2011. Pages 151-171.
Beretta, A., Fiorentino, R., & Poeppel, D. (2005). The effects of homonymy and
polysemy on lexical access:an MEG study. Cognitive Brain Research ,24, 57–
65.
Best, R. M., Rowe, M. P., Ozuru, Y., & McNamara, D. S. (2005). Deep-level
comprehension of science texts: The role of the reader and the text. Topics in
Language Disorders, 25, 65-83.
Binder, K.S., & Rayner, K. (1998). Contextual strength does not modulate the subordinate bias effect: Evidence from eye fixations and self-paced reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 271-276.
Duffy, S. A., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and fixation
times in reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 429-446.
Folk, J.R. & Morris, R.K. (2003). Effects of Syntactic Category Assignment on Lexical Ambiguity Resolution in Reading: An Eye Movement Analysis. Memory & Cognition, 31, 87-99.
Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 178-210.
Hallahan, D. P., Lloyd, J. W., Kauffman, J. M., Weiss, M. P, & Martinez, E. A. (2005). Learning disabilities: Foundations, characteristics, and effective teaching (3rd ed.).
Hoosain, R. (1992). Psychological reality of the word in Chinese. In H.-C. Chen & O.
J.-L. (Eds.), Language processing in Chinese (pp. 111-130). Amsterdam,
Netherlands: North-Holland.
Hu, C. F. (胡潔芳) (2003). Phonological memory, phonological awareness, and foreign language word learning. Language learning, 53, 429-462.
Hu, C. F. & Schuele, C. M. (2005). Learning nonnative names: The effect of poor native phonological awareness. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26, 343-362.
Huettig, F., Rommers, J., Meyer, A.S. (2011). Using the visual world paradigm to study language processing: A review and critical evaluation. Acta Psychologica, 137, 151−171.
Joshi, R.M.,& Aaron, P.G. (2000). The component model of reading: Simple view of reading made a little more complex.Reading Psychology, 21,85-97.
Kaakinen, J. K., Hyönä, J., & Keenan, J. M. (2003): How prior knowledge, WMC, and relevance of information affect eye fixations in expository text. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 29, 447-457.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a
construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182.
Kintsch, W. (2005). An Overview of top-down and bottom-up effects in 57
comprehension: the CI perspective. Discourse Processes, 39, 125-128.
Klepousniotou, E.(2002). The processing of lexical ambiguity: Homonymy and
polysemy in the mental lexicon. Brain and Language, 81, 205–223.
Laufer, B. & Sim, D. D. (1985). Measuring and explaining the reading threshold
needed for English for academic purposes texts. Foreign Language Annals,
18(5), 405-413.
Lefton, L. A., Nagle, R. J., Johnson, G., & Fisher, D. F. (1979). Eye movement dynamics of good and poor readers: Then and now. Journal of Reading Behavior, 11(4), 319–328.
Lerner, J. (2003). Learning disabilities : Theories, diagnosis, and teaching strategies (9th ed.). Houghton Mifflin.
McNamara, D. S., Kintsch, E., Songer, N. B., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts
always better? Text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of
understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 1-43.
Meschyan, G. & Hernandze, A. ( 2002). Is native-language decoding skill related to
Second-language learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 14-22.
Morris, R. K., & Williams, R. S. (2003). Bridging the gap between old and new: Eye movement and vocabulary acquisition in reading. In J. Hyona, R. Radach, & H Deubel (Eds), The mind’s eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp.235-252). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
Nagy, W. E. (1995). On The Role of Context In First- And Second-Language Vocabulary Learning. Technical Report (No, 627). 1-21.
Nassaji, H. (2003). Higher-level and lower-level text processing skills in advanced
ESL reading comprehension. The Modern Language Journal, 87, 261-276.
William Onifer & David A. Swinney (1981). Accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Effects offrequency of meaning and contextual bias.
Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York: Oxford University Press.
Pratt, A. & Brady, S. (1988). Relation of phonological awareness to reading disability children and adults. Journal of Educational Psychology. 80(3), 319-323.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422.
Rayner, K., & Duffy, S. A. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word
frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory & Cognition, 14,191-201.
Rayner, K., Foorman, B. R., Perfetti, C. A., Pesetsky, D., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2002).
How should reading be taught. Scientific American, March, 286 (3), 84-91.
Rayner, K., & Frazier, L. (1989). Selection mechanisms in reading lexically
ambiguous words. Journal of Experiment Psychology: Learning, Memory and
Cognition, 15, 779-790.
Rayner, K., & McConkie, G. W. (1976). What guides a reader's eye movements? Vision Research, 16, 829-837.
Rayner, K., Li, X., & Pollatsek, A. (2007).Extending the E-Z teader model to Chinese reading. Cognitive Science, 31, 1021-1033.
Sanders, M. S., & McCormick, E. J.(1987). Human factors in engineering and design: McGRAW-HILL book company.
Schmauder, A. R., Morris, R. K., & Poynor, D. V. (2000). Lexical processing and text integration of function and content words: Evidence from priming and eye fixations. Memory & Cognition, 28, 1098-1108.
Sereno, S.C., O’ Donnell, P.J., & Rayner, K. (2006). Eye movements and lexical ambiguity resolution: Investigating the subordinate-bias effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 335-350.
(G. B. Simpson & C. Burgess, 1985, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 28–39).
Van der Schoot, M., Vasbinder, A. L., Horsley, T. M., Reijntjes, A., & van Lieshout,
E.C. D. M. (2009). Lexical ambiguity resolution in good and poor
comprehenders: An eye fixation and self-paced reading study in primary school
children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 21-36.
Vellutino, F. R., Fletcher, J. M., Snowling, M. J., & Scanlon, D. M. (2004). Specific reading disability (dyslexia): What have we learned in the past four decades?Journal of Child Psychiatry, 45(1), 2-40.
Williams, R. S., & Morris, R. K. (2004). Eye movements, word familiarity, and vocabulary acquisition. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16(1-2), 312-339.
Yarowsky, D. (1995). Unsupervised word sense disambiguation rivaling supervised methods. ACL ’95 Proceedings of The 33rd Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, 189-196.
Yin, L., Anderson, R. C. & Zhu, J. (2007). Stages in Chinese children’s reading of English words. Journal of Education Psychology, 99, 852-866.