臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

隨著越來越多研究探討「隱含式的著重形式教學」（implicit focus on form instruction），本研究旨在檢視與比較兩個不同隱含指正回饋類型（重鑄 recasts和澄清詢問clarification requests）對台灣小學生某個語音單位（無聲齒間音th）的發展。本研究採取僅後測設計；實驗對象為三十六位來自溝通式教學環境（政大實小）的小學生，基本上沒有英語溝通的問題。這些受試者被隨機地分派到其中一個組別，並在溝通活動中接受不同的隱含指正回饋類型（沒有隱含指正回饋、重鑄、澄清詢問）。實驗開始前一星期，受試者填寫英語學習相關問卷以確保他們在放學後的英語學習行為具同質性；此外，受試者還參與診斷測驗以確認他們無法正確地發出「標的語音」（target sound item）。在實驗期間，受試者完成兩個溝通式活動、回溯的口頭報告和立即後測；口頭報告的目的為檢視是否受試者察覺到隱含指正回饋與標的語音的存在。實驗結束後三天，受試者完成和立即後測完全相同的延宕後測。為了探討三組間是否因為不同的隱含指正回饋類型而展現出不同的學習成效，本研究利用了單因子變異數分析和獨立t檢定以達成研究目的。
研究結果顯示隱含指正回饋在立即與延宕後測中均促進了標的語音的正確性。此結果可歸因於選擇一個明確的語言形式（a specific linguistic form）和對這個形式持續提供指正回饋（consistent treatments），而這樣的實驗設計促使受試者注意到指正回饋與標的語音的存在並使他們較能針對有問題的語音作修正。然而，不同的隱含指正回饋類型，無論在立即或延宕測驗中，均沒有對標的語音的正確性產生顯著不同的效果（澄清詢問原本假設會產生較重鑄更顯著的成效因為前者不會直接提供正確的語言形式而是要求受試者自行修改有問題的發音，如此以來受試者可能比較會注意到「指正」回饋和有問題的語音）。此結果受到受試者之前的英語學習經驗和任務型態（task-type effect）的影響。本研究發現這些受試者在原本的英語學習環境中就常接收到「重鑄」這個指正回饋，因此他們對此回饋類型的敏感性很強；此外，一些接收重鑄為指正回饋類型的受試者在立即與延宕測驗時接收來自研究者不經意的指正回饋，因此相較於其他受試者，他們也許在後測中特別注意到標的語音的存在。由於以上的原因，關於澄清詢問與重鑄這兩個隱含指正回饋類型的成效與注意力分配（attentional distribution）的假設並未獲得證明。
根據本研究結果，隱含指正回饋對語音學習所產生的成效和各式各樣的因素有所關聯，像「如何執行隱含指正教學」和「學習者對隱含指正回饋的認知」，而這些發現也為未來的研究提供了相關的啟示與建議。

With regard to research into implicit focus on form instruction, the present study examines and compares the effects of two implicit corrective feedback types (recasts and clarification requests) on the development of the phonological unit (the voiceless th sound) in child L2 learners of English in Taiwan. This study was a posttest-only control group research design that recruited thirty-six students from a communicative language teaching/learning context (The Affiliated Experimental Elementary School of National Chengchi University). Hence, these students had no problems communicating with others in the target language within meaningful contexts. The thirty-six participants were randomly assigned to one control group or one of the experimental groups, each receiving different implicit corrective feedback types during communication (no implicit corrective feedback, recasts, or clarification requests). One week before the treatment, the participants filled in language background questionnaires to ensure their English learning after school was homogeneous; moreover, the participants received a diagnostic test to confirm that they had difficulty producing the target sound item accurately. During treatment, the participants performed two information-gap tasks, each followed by a retrospective verbal report to examine their awareness of the implicit corrective feedback and target sound item and another similar information-gap task as the immediate posttest. Three days after the treatment, the participants performed the same tasks again as those in the immediate posttests. One-way ANOVA and the independent t test were employed to investigate the differences among the three groups in terms of the immediate uptake and short-term memory of the target sound item.
The results show that implicit corrective feedback facilitated the accuracy of the target form production on both the immediate and delayed posttests. This situation can be attributed to the choice of a specific linguistic form and consistent treatments on this form, which encouraged the participants to notice the implicit “corrective” feedback and problematic form and modify their output. However, different implicit corrective feedback types did not result in differential effects on the accuracy of the target form production on both the immediate and delayed posttests (Clarification requests were assumed to demonstrate significantly better effects than recasts because the former withheld correct models and pushed learners to modify output. To avoid communication breakdown, those who received clarification might better notice its corrective function and the problematic sound item.). This finding may be confounded by the participants’ previous English learning experience and a task-type effect. The participants had frequently received recasts on their linguistic errors in their original English-learning context, which increases their sensitivity to this feedback type. Moreover, some participants in the recast group were unexpectedly provided with corrective feedback during post-task performance, which may focus learner attention on the target sound item. Due to these factors, the assumption that those receiving clarification requests might have better chance to notice the target form than those receiving recasts was not justified.
Based on the present findings, the effects of implicit corrective feedback on the phonological learning interact with various factors, such as the way implicit focus on form instruction is implemented and L2 learners’ perception of implicit corrective feedback. These findings also provided related implications and suggestions for future research.

中文摘要 i
ABSTRACT ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS vi
LIST OF FIGURES ix
LIST OF TABLES x
CHAPTER ONE 1
INTRODUCTION 1
Background and Motivation 1
The Way Communicative Language Teaching arises 1
The Relationship between Oral Communication and Pronunciation 2
English Pronunciation Teaching in Elementary Schools in Taiwan 4
The Pedagogical Functions of Oral Communication Tasks 5
Rationale of the Study 8
Purpose of the Study 11
Significance of the Study 12
Organization of the Thesis 13
CHAPTER TWO 15
LITERATURE REVIEW 15
Theories of SLA 16
Input-Driven L2 Acquisition 16
Output-Driven L2 Acquisition 18
Oral Negotiation and L2 Development: Empirical Studies 22
“Focus on Form” Instruction 23
The Contexts for “Focus on Form” Instruction 24
The Nature of “Focus on Form” Instruction 26
The Principles for “Focus on Form” Instruction 30
Explicitness of “Focus on Form” Instruction 36
Involvement of Attentional Resources during “Focus on Form” Instruction 57
Summary of the Findings and Potential Research Gaps in the Existing Research 68
Research Questions 74
CHAPTER THREE 77
METHODOLOGY 77
Materials and Instruments 80
Questionnaires 80
Target Sound Selection 82
Target Word Selection 85
Treatment Task Selection 86
Measures 90
The Diagnostic Test 90
The Posttests 91
The Retrospective Verbal Report 92
Procedure 93
Scoring 100
Research Design 100
CHAPTER FOUR 104
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 104
The Questionnaire Data 105
The Participant’s English Learning at School 105
The Participant’s English Learning after School 108
The Diagnosis Data 109
The Verbal Report Data 109
The Posttest Data 112
The Effects of Oral Implicit Corrective Feedback on the Immediate Uptake of the Target Voiceless th Sound 113
The Effects of Oral Implicit Corrective Feedback on the Short-Term Memory of the Target Voiceless th Sound 133
CHAPTER FIVE 145
CONCLUSION 145
Summary of the Findings 145
Implications 148
Pedagogical Implications 148
Theoretical Implications 152
Limitations of the Present Study 154
Suggestions for Future Research 156
REFERENCES 160
APPENDIXES 168
Appendix A: The Consent Form 168
Appendix B: The Instructions for Researcher Training 171
Appendix C: The Language Background Questionnaire (for students) 174
Appendix D: The Language Teaching Questionnaire (for English teachers) 177
Appendix E: Information-gap task A Spot-the-Differences I 180
Appendix F: Information-Gap Task B Asking for Schedules I 182
Appendix G: The Diagnostic Test (Four Brief Dialogues) 184
Appendix H: Information-Gap Task C Spot-the-Differences II 185
Appendix I: Information-Gap Task D Asking for Schedules II 187

Alcon-Soler, E. (2009). Focus on form, learner uptake and subsequent lexical gains in learners’ oral production. IRAL, International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 47, 347-365.
Al-Hejin, B. (2005). Attention and awareness: Evidence from cognitive and second language acquisition research. Teachers College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 4, 1-22.
Allport, A. (1988). What concept of consciousness? In A. J. Marcel & E. Bisiach (Eds.), Consciousness in contemporary science (pp. 159-182). London: Clarendon Press.
Bardovi-Harling, K. (1995). The interaction of pedagogy and natural sequences in the acquisition of tense and aspect. In F. Eckman, D. Highland, P. Lee, J. Mileham, & R. Weber (Eds.), Second language acquisition theory and pedagogy (pp. 151-168). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York: Longman.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. New York: Longman.
Carr, T. H., & Curran, T. (1994). Cognitive factors in learning about structured sequences: Applications to syntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 205-230.
Carroll, S., & Swain, M. (1993). Explicit and implicit negative feedback: An empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalizations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 357-386.
Chaudron, C. (1985). Intake: on models and methods for discovering learners’ processing of input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 1-14.
Comeau, L., Cormier, P., Grandmaison, E., & Lacroix, D. (1999). A longitudinal study of phonological processing skills in children learning to read in a second language. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 29-43.
Curran, T., & Keele, S. W. (1993). Attentional and nonattentional forms of sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 189-202.
de Bot, K. (1996). The psycholinguistics of the output hypothesis. Language Learning, 46, 529-555.
de Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2005). Second language acquisition: An advanced resource book. New York: Routledge.
DeKeyser, R. (1993). The effect of error correction on L2 grammar knowledge and oral proficiency. Modern Language Journal, 77, 501-514.
DeKeyser, R. (1998). Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing second language grammar. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 42-63). New York: Cambridge University Press.
de la Fuente, M. J. (2002). Negotiation and oral acquisition of L2 vocabulary: The roles of input and output in the receptive and productive acquisition of words. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 81-112.
Dong, Z. H. (1983). Chinese syllables and English syllables. Taipei: Student Book.
Doughty, C., & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 114-138). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197-261). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Eckman, F. R. (1981). On the naturalness of interlanguage phonological rules. Language Learning, 31, 195-216.
Egi, T. (2010). Uptake , modified output, and learner perceptions of recasts: Learner responses as language awareness. Modern Language Journal, 94, 1-21.
Eisele, B., Eisele, C. Y., Hanlon, R. Y., & Hanlon, S. M. (2004). Hip Hip Hooray. New York: Longman.
Ellis, R. (1995) Modified oral input and the acquisition of word meanings. Applied Linguistics, 16, 409-441.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2002). System, 30, 419-432.
Ellis, R., & He, X. (1999). The roles of modified input and output in the incidental acquisition of word meanings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 285-301.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339-368.
Ellis, R., Tanaka, Y., &Yamazaki, A. (1994). Classroom interaction, comprehension, and the acquisition of L2 word meanings. Language Learning, 44, 449-491.
Fotos, S. (1994). Integrating grammar instruction and communicative language use through grammar consciousness-raising tasks. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 323-351.
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2007). Data elicitation for second and foreign language research. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gass, S. M., Mackey, A., & Pica, T. (1998). The role of input and interaction in second language acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 82, 299-307.
Gass, S. M., & Varonis, E. M. (1994). Input, interaction, and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 283-302.
Hammarberg, B. (1985). Learnability and learner strategies in second language syntax and phonology. In K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann (Eds.), Modelling and assessing second language acquisition (pp. 113-136). San Diego: College Hill Press.
Han, Z., Park, E. S., & Combs, C. (2008). Textual enhancement of input: issues and possibilities. Applied Linguistics, 29, 597-618.
Hansen, J. G. (2001). Linguistic constraints on the acquisition of English syllable codas by native speakers of Mandarin Chinese. Applied Linguistics, 22, 338-365.
Hsieh, W. L. (2008). Effects of task-based form-focused instruction on Taiwanese junior high school students learning the English relative construction. Unpublished master thesis, National Changhua University of Education, Changhua City, Taiwan.
Hu, C. F. (2003). Phonological memory, phonological awareness, and foreign language word learning. Language Learning, 53, 429-462.
Hulstijn, J. (1995). Not all grammar rules are equal: Giving grammar instruction in proper place in foreign language teaching. In R. Schmidt (Ed.) Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 359-386). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Hulstijn, J., & De Graaff, R. (1994). Under what conditions does explicit knowledge of a second language facilitate the acquisition of implicit knowledge? In J. Hulstijn & R. Schmidt (Eds.) Consciousness in second language learning (pp. 97-112): AILA Review, Vol. 11.
Jourdenais, R., Ota, M., Stauffer, S., Boyson, B., & Doughty, C. (1995). Does textual enhancement promote noticing? A think-aloud protocol analysis. In R. Schmidt (Ed.) Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 183-216). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Juff, A. (2004). Representation, processing, and working memory in a second language. Transactions of the Philological Society, 102, 1–27.
Kang, H. S. (2009). The relative efficacy of explicit and implicit feedback in the learning of a less-commonly-taught foreign language. IRAL, International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 47, 303-324.
Kim, Y. (2006). Effects of input elaboration on vocabulary acquisition through reading by Korean learners of English as a foreign language. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 341-373.
Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman.
Krashen, S. (1994). The effect of formal grammar teaching: Still peripheral. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 722-725.
Krashen, S., & Terrell, T. (1983). The natural approach. New York: Pergamon.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986). Techniques and principles in language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.
Leeman, J. (2003). Recasts and second language development: Beyond negative evidence. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 37-63.
Leow, R. P. (1997). Attention, awareness, and foreign language behavior. Language Learning, 47, 467-505.
Leow, R. P. (1998). Toward operationalizing the process of attention in SLA: Evidence for Tomlin and Villa’s (1994) fine-grained analysis of attention. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 133-159.
Leow, R. P. (2000). A study of the role of awareness in foreign language behavior: Aware versus unaware learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 557-584.
Leow, R. P. (2001a). Attention, awareness, and foreign language behavior. Language Learning, 51 (Suppl. 1), 113-155.
Leow, R. P. (2001b). Do learners notice enhanced forms while interacting with the L2? An online and offline study of the role of written input enhancement in L2 reading. Hispania, 84, 496-509.
Leow, R. P., & Bowles, M. A. (2005). Attention and awareness in SLA. In C. Sanz (Ed.), Mind and context in adult second language acquisition: methods, theory, and practice (pp. 179-203). Washington, D.C. : Georgetown University Press.
Levy, E. (2004). Effects of language experience and consonantal context on perception of French front rounded vowels by adult American English learners of French. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, City University of New York, NY.
Li, Y. C. (2003). Effects of the “Focus on Form” Approach on EFL Learning in an Immersion Program in Taiwan. Unpublished master thesis, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu City, Taiwan.
Lightbown, P. M. (1998). The importance of timing in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 177-196). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lightbown, P. M. (2008). Transfer appropriate processing as a model for classroom second language acquisition. In Z. Han & E. S. Park (Eds.), Understanding second language process (pp. 27-44). New York: Multilingual Matters.
Long, M. (1983). Native speaker/ non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 5, 177-194.
Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of language acquisition: Vol. 2. Second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Long, M., Inagaki, S., & Ortega, L. (1998). The role of implicit negative evidence in SLA: Models and recasts in Japanese and Spanish. Modern Language Journal, 82, 357-371.
Long, M., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 15-41). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Loschky, L., & Bley-Vroman, R. (1993). Grammar and task-based methodology. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning (pp. 123-167). Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.
Lyster, R. (1998). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 48, 183-218.
Lyster, R. (2002). Negotiation in immersion teacher-student interaction. International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 237-253.
Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts on form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399-432.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective Feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37-66.
Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction, and second language development: an empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 557-587.
Mackey, A., & Abbuhl, B. (2005). Input and interaction. In C. Sanz (Ed.), Mind and context in adult second language acquisition: methods, theory, and practice (pp. 207-233). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Mackey, A., Gass, S., & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive implicit negative feedback? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 471-497.
Mackey, A., & Philp, J. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings. Modern Language Journal, 82, 338-356.
Mackey, A., & Oliver, R. (2002). Interactional feedback and children’s L2 development. System, 30, 459-477.
Mackey, A., & Silver, R. E. (2005). Interactional tasks and English L2 learning by immigrant children in Singapore. System, 33, 239-260.
McDonough, K. (2005). Identifying the impact of negative feedback and learners’ responses on ESL question development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 79-103.
McLeod, S., van Doorn, J., & Reed, V. A. (2001). Normal acquisition of consonant clusters. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 10, 99–110.
Morris, C. D., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (2001). Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519-533.
Nairne, J. S. (2002). The myth of the encoding－retrieval match. Memory, 10, 389-395.
Nassaji, H. (2009). Effects of recasts and elicitations in dyadic interaction and the role of feedback explicitness. Language Learning, 59, 411-452.
Newton, J. (1995). Task-based interaction and incidental vocabulary learning: a case study. Second Language Research, 11, 159-177.
Nobuyoshi, J., & Ellis, R. (1993). Focused communication tasks and second language acquisition. ELT Journal, 47, 203-210.
Pica, T. (1987). Second language acquisition, social interaction, and the classroom. Applied Linguistics, 8, 3-21.
Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning, 44, 493-527.
Pienemann, M. (1989). Is language teachable? Applied Linguistics, 10, 52-79.
Pienemann, M., & Johnston, M. (1987). Factors influencing the development of language proficiency. In Nunan, D. (Ed.), Applying second language acquisition research (pp. 45-141). Adelaide: National Curriculum Resource Center, AMEP.
Polio, C., & Gass, S. M. (1998). The role of interaction in native speaker comprehension of nonnative speaker speech. Modern Language Journal, 82, 308-319.
Rau, D. V., Chang, A., & Tarone, E. E. (2009). Think or sink: Chinese learners’ acquisition of the English voiceless interdental fricative. Language Learning, 59, 581-621.
Robinson, P. (1995). Attention, memory, and the “noticing” hypothesis. Language Learning, 45, 283-331.
Rosa, E., & Leow, R. P. (2004). Awareness, different learning conditions, and L2 development. Applied Psycholonguistics, 25, 269-292.
Rosa, E., & O’Neill, M. D. (1999). Explicitness, intake, and the issue of awareness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 511-556.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129-158.
Schmidt, R. (1993). Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 206-226.
Schmidt, R. (1994). Deconstructing consciousness in search of useful definitions for applied linguistics. AILA Review, 11, 11-26.
Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In R. W. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 1-64). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii at Manoa, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
Simard, D., & Wong, W. (2001). Alertness, orientation, and detection: The conceptualization of attentional functions in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 103-124.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (1993). Instruction and the development of questions in L2 classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 205-224.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Swain, M. (1998). Focus on form through conscious reflection. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 64-81). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step toward second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 370-391.
Tomlin, R. S., & Villa, V. (1994). Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 183–203.
Van den Branden, K. (1997). Effects of negotiation on language learners’ output. Language Learning, 47, 589-636.
VaPatten, B. (2004). Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
VaPatten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 225-243.
Varonis, E., & Gass, S. (1985). Nonnative/ nonnative conversations: A model for negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 6, 71-90.
Wang, M., & Geva, E. (2003). Spelling acquisition of novel English phonemes in Chinese children. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 16, 325-348.
Westney, P. (1994). Rules and pedagogical grammar. In T. Odlin (Ed.), Perspectives on pedagogical grammar (pp. 72-96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
White, L. (1987). Against comprehensible input: The input hypothesis and the development of second language competence. Applied Linguistics, 8, 95-110.
White, J. (1998). Getting the learners’ attention: A typographical input enhancement study. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 85-113). New York: Cambridge University Press.
教育部（2008）。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要 ─ 語文學習領域（英語）。2008年5月26日，取自 http://www.edu.tw/EJE/content.aspx?site_content_sn=15326