臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究旨在探討文字強化、大量輸入及傳統文法教學對於台灣高職學生英文副詞用分詞構句的學習與注意力成效。研究對象為中台灣某國立高職的三班三年級學生，總人數為一百一十三人。此三班隨機分成三組，分別施予為期五天共四節課的教學課程。在第一堂和最後一堂課的開始、三班學生閱讀文章後分別進行螢光筆畫重點的活動以測量學生們對於分詞構句的注意力。此外，在課程前後所有學生均施予包含理解與運用測驗的文法前測及後測。實驗有以下三個結果：第一，除了大量輸入外，文字強化及傳統文法教學對於學生整體學習分詞構句或在理解或運用的表現上均產生顯著效益。第二，三組學生在整體學習分詞構句或在理解或運用的表現上有顯著的差異，而且傳統文法教學之學習成效明顯優於文字強化及大量輸入，然而文字強化及大量輸入之間卻無顯著的差異。第三，注意力結果方面，文字強化比起大量輸入及傳統文法教學更能引起學生對於分詞構句的注意。本研究結果顯示，文字強化之成效雖然沒有優於傳統文法教學，但仍然有效促進學生對於英語分詞構句的學習與注意的提升，並因此可提供台灣在第二語言教學過程中文法教學法的另一個選擇或補充。

This quasi-experimental study aimed to investigate the effects of textual enhancement (TE), input flood (IF), and traditional instruction (TI) on Taiwanese vocational high school students’ learning and noticing of the English adverbial participle clause construction. One hundred and thirteen third-year national vocational high school students from three intact classes in central Taiwan were randomly assigned to the TE, IF, or TI group. Each group received their respective instruction for four 50-minute class periods in five days. At the beginning of the first and the last class period, a highlighting activity was conducted for the three groups to collect the noticing data. Before and after the treatment sessions, a grammar test used as the pretest and the posttest consisting of a production and a comprehension section was administered to all the participants. Three results were as follows. First, both TE and TI made significant improvement on the students’ overall learning, production, and comprehension of the target construction, while IF did not. Second, there were significant differences among the three groups in production, comprehension and overall performance with the TI group outperforming the TE and IF groups, but there was no difference between the TE and the IF group. Third, the TE group noticed significantly more target structures than the IF and TI groups. The findings suggest that though not superior to TI, TE facilitates the learning and noticing of the target construction and TE could therefore be used in Taiwan EFL classrooms as an alternative or a supplement to grammar instruction.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

ABSTRACT (ENGLISH)......................................i
ABSTRACT (CHINESE).....................................ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS......................................iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS......................................iv
LIST OF TABLES........................................vii

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION............................................1
Background of the Study.................................1
Motivation of the Study.................................9
Research Questions.....................................11
Significance of the Study..............................12
Definitions of Terms...................................12

CHPATER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW......................................16
The Role of Grammar Instruction in SLA.................16
Arguments against the Necessity of Grammar Instruction…16
Studies Showing the Effects of Grammar Instruction.....17
Focus-on-forms, Focus-on-meaning, and Focus-on-form....19
Various Focus-on-form Approaches.......................22
Implicit versus Explicit Instruction...................22
Input-based versus Output-based Instruction............24
Input Enhancement......................................26
Empirical Studies of Textual Enhancement...............27
Empirical Studies of Input Flood.......................34
The Measures of Noticing...............................35
The Noticing Hypothesis................................36
Studies on the Effect of TE/IF on Noticing.............36
Studies on the English Adverbial Participle Clause Construction...........................................41

CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY............................................46
Participants...........................................46
Instruments............................................47
Instructional Packages.................................47
Instrument to Measure Noticing.........................51
A Grammar Test.........................................52
Data Collection Procedures.............................56
Scoring and Data Analysis..............................58

CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS................................................63
Comparison of the Pretest Performance among the TE, IF, and TI Groups..............................................63
Comparison between the Pretest and Posttest Scores of the TE Group...............................................64
Comparison between the Pretest and Posttest Scores of the IF Group...............................................65
Comparison between the Pretest and Posttest Scores of the TI Group...............................................65
Comparison of the Posttest Performance among the TE, IF, and TI Groups..........................................66
Comparison of the Noticing Effects among the TE, IF, and TI Groups.................................................67

CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSION.............................................69
Discussion of the Results..............................69
Learning Effects of TE.................................69
Learning Effects of IF.................................70
Learning Effects of TI.................................71
Comparable Learning Effects among TE, IF, and TI.......72
Comparable Noticing Effects among TE, IF and TI........72
Findings of the Study..................................73
Pedagogical Implications...............................73
Limitations of the Study...............................74
Suggestions for Further Research.......................75

REFERENCES.............................................76

APPENDIX A.............................................86
APPENDIX B.............................................89
APPENDIX C.............................................91
APPENDIX D............................................101

Abraham, R. G. (1985). Field independence-dependence and the teaching of grammar. TESOL Quarterly, 20(4), 599-702.
Alanen, R. (1995). Input enhancement and rule presentation in second language acquisition. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language acquisition (pp. 259-302). Honolulu: University of Hawaii.
Alsadoon, R. & Trude, H. (2015). Textual input enhancement for vowel blindness: A study with Arabic ESL learners. The Modern Language Journal. 99, 57-59.
Andrews, K. (2007). The effects of implicit and explicit instruction on simple and complex grammatical structures for adult English language learners. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language, 11(2), 1-15.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. Second Edition. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
Carr, T. H., & Curran, T. (1994). Cognitive factors in learning about structured sequences: Applications to syntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,16,205-230.
Celce-Murcia, M. & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher’s course (2nd ed). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Chafe, W. & Danielewicz, J. (1987). Properties of spoken and written language. In R.Horowitz & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), Comprehending oral and written language (pp. 83-113). San Diego: Academic Press.
Chuang, C. H. (2010). English teachers’ and students’ beliefs in grammar teaching and learning in Taiwan vocational high schools. Unpublished master thesis.
National Changhua University of Education, ROC.
Cosme, C. (2008). Participle clauses in learner English: The role of transfer. Language and Computers, 66, 177-198.
De Graaff, R. (1997). The experanto experiment: Effects of explicit instruction on second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(2),249-276.
Dekeyser, R. (1995). Learning second language grammar rules: An experiment with a miniature linguistic system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17(3),379-410.
Doughty, C. (1991). Second language instruction does make a difference: Evidence from an empirical study of ESL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13(4), 431-469.
Doughty, C. (2001). Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In P. Robinson (Ed.),Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 206-238). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Doughty, C. (2004). Effects of instruction on learning a second language: A critique of instructed SLA research. In B. J. Williams, S. Rott, & M. Overstreet (Eds.),
Form-meaning connections in second language acquisition (pp. 181-202). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In C.Doughty & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197-261). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, N. (1993). Rules and instances in foreign language learning: Interactions of implicit and explicit knowledge. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 5(3), 289-319.
Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (1990). Instructed second language acquisition: Learning in the classroom. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (1995). Interpretation tasks for grammar teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1),87-105.
Ellis, R. (1997). SLA research and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (1997b). Second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2001). Introduction: Investigation form-focused instruction. Language learning, 51(3), 1-46.
Ellis, R. (2002a). Grammar teaching-Practice or consciousness-raising? In Richards, J. C. & Renandya, W. A. (Eds.). (2002). Methodology in language teaching:
An anthology of current practice (pp. 167-174).Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Ellis, R. (2002d). Does form-focused instruction affect the acquisition of implicit knowledge? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(2), 223-236.
Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLA perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 83-107.
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001a). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51, 281-318.
Erlam, R. (2003a). Evaluating the relative effectiveness of structure-input and output-based instruction in foreign language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25(4), 559-582.
Erlam, R. (2003b). The effects of deductive and inductive instruction on the acquisition of direct object pronouns in French as a second language. The Modern Language Journal, 87, 242-260.
Fang, T. (2013). Effects of implicit and explicit focus on form on EFL Learners’ anaphor resolution performance in reading. English Teaching & Learning, 37(1), 141-177.
Fang, T. (2014). Effects of textual enhancement on English as a foreign language learners’ anaphor resolution performance and reading comprehension in Taiwan. Journal of Research in Reading, ISSN 0141-0423, 1–19.
Farley, A. P. (2005). Structured input: Grammar instruction for the acquisition-oriented classroom. Taipei: McGraw-Hill International.
Fotos, S. (1993). Consciousness raising and noticing through focus on form: Grammar task performance versus formal instruction. Applied Linguistics, 14(4), 385-407.
Fotos, S. (1994). Integrating grammar instruction and communicative language use through grammar consciousness-raising tasks. TESOL Quarterly, 28(2),323-351.
Fotos, S., & Ellis, R. (1991). Communicating about grammar: A task-based approach.TESOL Quarterly, 25(4), 605-628.
Gass, S. M. (1997). Input interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NY:Erlbaum.
Granger, S. (1997). On identifying the syntactic and discourse features of participle clauses in academic English: Native and non-native writing compared. In J. Aarts & I. de Monnink & H. Wekker (Eds.), Studies in English Language and Teaching (pp. 185-198). Rodopi: Amsterdam & Atlanta.
Greenbaum, S. (1991). An introduction to English grammar. Harlow: Longman.
Greenbaum, S. & Quirk, R. (1990). A student’s grammar of the English language. Essex, England: Longman.
Harley, B. (1993). Instructional strategies and SLA in early French immersion. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(2), 245-259.
Harley, B., & Swain, M. (1984). The interlanguage of immersion students and its implications for second language teaching. In A. Davies, C. Criper, & A.P.R.
Howatt (Eds.), Interlanguage (pp. 291-311). Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press.
Heo, Y. (2007). The effects of grammar instruction with three noticing levels on ESL learners’grammar tests. Unpublished master’s thesis. University of Michigan State, East Lansing.
Ho, T. L. (2011). Effects of input enhancement on Taiwanese junior high school students learning the English relative clause construction. Unpublished Master’s thesis, National Changhua University of Education, ROC.
Hossein, S., & Sandra, F. (2004). Current developments in research on the teaching of grammar. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 126-145.
Hsu, H. H. (2007).Textual input enhancement: On the performance of indirect wh-questions in EFL Classroom. The International Journal of Learning, 14, 73-80.
Hsu, Y. N. (2014). The effects of input flood, textual enhancement, and traditional grammar instruction on the learning of English conditionals. Unpublished Master’s thesis, National Changhua University of Education, ROC.
Izumi,S.(2000). Promoting noticing and SLA: An experimental study of the effects of output and input enhancement on ESL relativization. University of
Georgetown—Washington D. C.
Izumi, S. (2002). Output, input enhancement and the noticing hypothesis: An experimental study on ESL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(4), 541-577.
Izumi, S., & Bigelow, M. (2000). Does output promote noticing and second language acquisition? TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 239-78.
Jourdenais, R., Ota, M., Stauffer, S., Boyson, B., Doughty, C. (1995). Does textual enhancement promote noticing? A think-aloud protocol analysis. In Schmidt, R.
(Ed.), Attention and Awareness in Second Language Learning (pp. 183–216). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Kameen, P. (1983). Syntactic skills and ESL writing quality. In A. Freeman, I. Pringle & J. Yalden (Eds.), Learning to write: First language/second language (pp.162-170). London & New York: Longman.
Krashen, S.D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Krashen, S.D. (1982). Principles and practices in second language acquisition. New York: Pergamon.
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis. London: Longman.
Krashen, S. D. (1992). Teaching issues: Formal grammar instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 26(2), 409-411.
Krashen, S. D. (1993). The effect of formal grammar study: Still peripheral. TESOL Quarterly, 24(4), 722-25.
Krashen, S. D. (1999). Seeking a role for grammar: A review of some recent studies. Foreign Language Annals, 33(2), 245-257.
Lai, S. J. (2004). High school English teachers’ beliefs on grammar instruction in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.
Lai, M. C. & Wang, H. C. (2008). Differences in student and teacher perceptions of grammar instruction and error correction. Paper presented at the 25PPPthPPP International Conference of English Teaching and Learning.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2001). Teaching grammar. In M. Celce-Murcia(Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp 251-285). MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Larsen-Freeman, D. & Long, M. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. London: Longman.
Lee, H. J (2012). The effects of textual enhancement on Eighth graders' learning of third person singular verbs. Unpublished Master’s thesis, National Chungcheng
University, ROC.
Lee, P. Y. (2005). A study of English grammar instruction in elementary schools in Taipei. Unpublished Master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung First University of
Science and Technology, Taiwan.
Lee, S. K. (2007). Effects of textual enhancement and topic familiarity on Korean EFL students’ reading comprehension and learning of passive form. Language
Learning, 57, 87–118.
Leeman, J., Aregagoitia, I., Fridman, D., and Doughty, C. (1995). Integrating attention to form with meaning: Focus on form in content-based Spanish instruction. In R.
Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 217-258). Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press.
Leow, R. (1997). The effect of input enhancement and text length on adult L2 readers’ comprehension and intake in second language acquisition. Applied Language Learning, 8, 151-182.
Leow, R. (2000). Attention awareness and foreign language behavior. Language Learning, 51, 113-55.
Leow, R. (2001). Attention, awareness, and foreign language behavior. Language Learning, 51, 113-155.
Leow, R., Egi, T., Nuevo, A., & Tsai, Y. (2003). The roles of textual enhancement and type of linguistic item in adult L2 learners’comprehension and intake. Applied
Language Learning,13,1-16.
Lightbown, P. M. (2000). Anniversary article Classroom SLA research and second language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), 431-62.
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1990). Focus-on-form and corrective feedback in communicative language teaching: Effectson second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12(4), 429-448.
Liu, Y. H. (2008). A discourse analysis of adverbial participle clauses in Taiwanese senior high students' writing. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan
Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Long, M. H. (1983). Does second language instruction make a difference? A review of research. TESOL Quarterly, 17(3), 359-382.
Long, M. (1990). Maturational constraints on language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 251-286.
Long, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology.
In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Long, M. H., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focu on form: Theory, research and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom language acquisition (pp. 15-41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Manley, J., & Calk, L. (1997). Grammar instruction for writing skills: Do students perceive grammar as useful? Foreign Language Annals, 30, 73-81.
Master, P. (1994). The effect of systematic instruction on learning the English article system. In T. Odlin (Ed.), Perspectives on pedagogical grammar (pp. 229-252).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nahavandi, N, & Mukundan, J. (2012). The impact of textual input enhancement and explicit rule presentation on Iranian elementary EFL learners’ intake of simple
past tense, English Language Teaching 6, 92-102.
Nassaji, H. (1999). Towards integrating form-focused instruction and communicative interaction in the second language classroom: Some pedagogical possibilities.
The Canadian Modern Language Review, 55, 385-402.
Nassaji, H. (2000). A reply to Sheen. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 56, 507-513.
Nassaji, H., & Fotos, S. (2004). Current developments in research on the teaching of grammar. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 126-145.
Nassaji, H., & Fotos, S. (2011). Teaching grammar in second language classrooms: Integrating form-focused instruction in communicative context. NY: Routledge.
Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), 417-528.
Overstreet, M. (1998). Text enhancement and content familiarity: The focus of leaner attention. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 2, 229-258.
Overstreet, M. H. (2002). The effect of textual enhancement on second language reading comprehension and form recognition. Unpublished thesis, Urbana, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Pienemann, M. (1984). Psychological constraints on the teachability of languages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 6(2), 186-214.
Pienemann, M. (1988). Determining the influence of instruction on L2 speech processing. AILA Review, 5, 40-72.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. New York: Longman.
Reber, A. (1989). Implicit learningand tacit knowledge: Journal of Experimental Psychology, 118(3), 219-235.
Reber, A. (1993). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge: An essay on the cognitive unconscious. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Robinson, P. (1995). Aptitude, awareness, and the fundamental similarity of implicit and explicit second language learning. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and
awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 303-357). Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press.
Robinson, P. (1996). Learning simple and complex second language rules under implicit, incidental, rule-search, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(1), 27-67.
Robinson, P. (1997). Generalizability and automaticity of second language under implicit, incidental, enhanced and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 223-247.
Rutherford, W., & Sharwood, S, M. (1985). Consciousness-raising and universal grammar. Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 274-282.
Rutherford, W. (1987). Second language grammar: Learning and teaching. London: Longman.
Saeidi, M., & Zaferanieh, E., & Shatery, H. (2012). On the effects of focus on form, focus on meaning, and focus on forms on learners’ vocabulary learning in ESP context. English Language Teaching, 5(10), 72-79.
Shak, J., & Gardner, S. (2008). Young learner perspectives on four focus-on-form tasks. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 387-408.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Appiled Linguisgtics, 11, 129-158.
Schmidt, R. (1993). Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 11, 17-46.
Schmidt, R. W. (1994a). Deconstructing consciousness in search of useful definitions for applied linguistics. AILA Review, 11, 11-26.
Schmidt, R. W. (1994b). Implicit learning and the cognitive unconsciousness: Of artificial grammars and SLA. In N. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of
language (pp. 165-209). London: Academic Press.
Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language teaching and learning (Technical Report No. 9) (pp. 1-64). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i at Manoa.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sharwood Smith, M. (1981). Consciousness raising and the second language learner.Applied Linguistics, 2(2), 159-168.
Sharwood Smith, M. (1991). Speaking to many minds: On the relevance of different types of language information for the L2 leaner. Second Language Research, 7(2), 118-132.
Sharwood Smith, M. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA: Theoretical bases.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165-179.
Shih. H. J. (2002). Grounding in adverbial clauses in high school students' English narrative compositions. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal
University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Shook, J. D. (1994). FL / L2 reading, grammatical information, and the input to intake phenomenon. Applied Language Learning, 5, 57-93.
Simard, D. (2009). Differential Effects of Textual Enhancement Formats on Intake, System 37, 124-135.
Skehan, P. (1996). Second language acquisition research and task-based instruction. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp.
17-30). Oxford: Heinemann.
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2001). Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 183–205). New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Spada, N. (1997). Form-focused instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research. Language teaching, 29(1), 1-15.
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (2008). Form-focused instruction: isolated or integrated? TESOL Quarterly, 42(2), 181-207.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensive input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input and second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & Seidlehofer (Eds.), Principles and practice in applied linguistics (pp.245-256). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. (1998). Focus on form through conscious reflection. In C. Doughty & J.Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom language acquisition (pp. 64-81). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Takimoto, M. (2008). The effects of deductive and inductive instruction on the development of language learners’ pragmatic competence. The Modern Language Journal, 369-385.
Thompson, S. A. (1983). Grammar and discourse: The English detached participial clause. In F. Klein-Andreu (Ed.), Discourse perspectives on syntax (pp. 43–65).
New York: Academic Press.
Tomlin, R., & Villa, V. (1994). Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16(2), 183-203.
Trahey, M. & White, L. (1993). Positive evidence and preemption in the second language classroom. Studies in second language acquisition, 16, 183-203.
VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction: Theory and research. New J: Ablex Publishing Cooperation.
VanPatten, B. (2002). Processing instruction: An update. Language Learning, 52,755-803.
VanPatten, B. (2003). From input to output: A teacher’s guide to second language acquisition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
VanPatten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 225–259.
Wagner-Gough, J. & Hatch, E. (1975). The importance of input data in second language acquisition studies. Language Learning, 25, 297–308.
White, L. (1987). Against comprehensible input: The input hypothesis and the development of L2 competence. Applied Linguistics, 8(1), 95-110.
White, L. (1991). Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some positive and negative evidence in the classroom. Second Language Research, 12, 133-161.
White, J. (1998). Getting the learners’ attention: A typographical input enhancement study. In C. Doughty. & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in second language
classroom acquisition (pp. 91-128). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, J., & Evans, J. (1998). What kind of focus and on which forms? In C.Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in second language classroom acquisition (pp. 139-155). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Winitz, H. (1996). Grammaticality judgment as a function of explicit and implicit instruction in Spanish. Modern Language Journal, 80(1), 32-46.
Wong, W. (2002b). Decreasing attentional demands in input processing: A textual Enhancement study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Second
Language Research Forum. (SLRF), Toronto, Canada. October 3-6, 2002.
Wong, W. (2003). Textual enhancement and simplified input: Effects on L2 comprehension and acquisition of non-meaningful grammatical form. Applied Language Learning 13, 17–45.
Wong, W. (2005). Input enhancement: From theory and research to the classroom.Taipei: McGraw-Hill.
Wong, W. (2004). Processing instruction in French: The roles of explicit information and structured input. In VanPatten, B. (Ed.). Processing Instruction: Theory,
Research, and Commentary (pp. 187-205). Albex Publishing Cooperation. Norwood, New Jersey.
Wu, C. M. (2003). A study of the comparative effect of input-based grammar instruction and output-based instruction on the acquisition of the English
subjunctive mood. Unpublished Master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, ROC.
Yang, H, C (2014). Teaching English object pronouns: A comparison of input flood, textual enhancement, and rule explanation. Unpublished Master’s thesis, National Changhua University of Education, ROC.Yeh, S.W. (2002). A study of teaching grammar communicatively in the EFL
vocational high school classroom. Unpublished Master’s thesis, National Chungcheng University, ROC.
Yu, H. Y. (2001). The placement of English adverbial clauses in narrative texts of native speakers and Chinese college students. English Teaching & Learning, 26(2), 89-106.
Yu, J. W. (2010). The use of English adverbial clauses in Taiwanese senior high school students’ writing. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.