臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

論文內容摘要：
本研究旨在探討詞語搭配教學對於英文學習成就不同之台灣高中生，就其英文字彙搭配能力方面，有無顯著效益。尤其是探討在詞語搭配教學前，不同英文學習成就之學生其再生及認知搭配詞能力是否有顯著差異？而在詞語搭配教學後，各組學生又是否有顯著進步？其進步是在於再生搭配詞能力方面或是認知搭配詞能力方面？此外，學生對於詞語搭配教學活動的反應也列入討論當中。
本研究以來自高雄女中及三民家商綜合高中部共八十九位高三學生為對象，再依其英文能力分別納入高成就組及低成就組。在詞語搭配學習活動前，學生先接受第一次搭配詞測驗，該測驗分為兩部分：第一部份為填充題，旨在測驗學生的再生搭配詞能力；第二部份為選擇題，旨在測驗學生的認知搭配詞能力。在詞語搭配教學活動結束後，學生又分別接受第二次及第三次搭配詞測驗並填寫一份問卷，描述對此教學活動之看法並勾選出最有助益之三項活動。
本研究結果摘要如下：
1. 無論在詞語搭配教學前或教學後，兩組學生的認知搭配詞能力均顯著高於其再生搭配詞能力。
2. 無論在詞語搭配教學前或教學後，高成就組學生的再生搭配詞能力及認知搭配詞能力均顯著比低成就組學生來得強。
3. 接受詞語搭配教學後，兩組學生在認知搭配詞能力的進步幅度比在再生搭配詞能力的進步幅度來得大。
4. 接受詞語搭配教學後，兩組學生的認知搭配詞能力均有進步，且所有進步幅度皆達顯著水準。
5. 接受詞語搭配教學後，兩組學生的再生搭配詞能力均有進步，但除了低成就組在測驗三的進步幅度顯著外，其餘的進步幅度並未達顯著水準。
6. 此外，兩組學生均對詞語搭配教學活動抱持肯定態度，也認為此活動提升了他們字彙運用的能力。
總括而言，本研究顯示：無論是高成就組或低成就組的學生，都從詞語搭配教學中受益。此外，詞語搭配教學亦提高學生學習字彙運用之興趣。因此，本研究建議：詞語搭配教學應融入英文教學中，課本應加入搭配詞單元，教師應多協助學生發現並累積詞語搭配知識，以增進他們英文字彙發展和運用能力。

ABSTRACT
This study explored the effects of collocation instruction (CI) on EFL students’ vocabulary development, particularly the effects on high- and low-achievement students’ productive and receptive collocation competence. Three collocation tests were given to the subjects to see if there was any progress in their collocation competence between before and after CI. In addition, a questionnaire was adopted to investigate the subjects’ perception toward the CI activities.
Eighty-nine third-grade students from Kaohsiung Girls’ High School and San-min Vocational High School were recruited as the subjects in this study. They were further divided into high-achievement (HA) and low-achievement (LA) groups according to their scores in English Proficiency Test. Before CI, the subjects were required to take Test 1, the first collocation test. After CI, they took Test 2 and Test 3 within two weeks. In each collocation test, there were two tasks: fill-in-the-blank (FB) and multiple-choice (MC). The subjects were asked to complete FB task before doing the MC task.
The major findings in this study were summarized as follows:
1. The subjects’ receptive collocation competence was significantly higher than their productive one both before and after CI.
2. HA students had significantly higher collocation competence than LA students both before and after CI.
3. After CI, the subjects’ made more progress in receptive collocation competence than in productive one.
4. After CI, both HA and LA students made progress in productive collocation competence, but only LA students’ progress in FB-3 task reached the significant level.
5. After CI, both HA and LA students made progress in receptive collocation competence. All of their progresses reached the significant level.
6. Though they favored different CI activities, both HA and LA students held positive attitude toward CI.
To sum up, the results of this study indicated that CI had positive and beneficial effects on both HA and LA students’ collocation competence, particularly the growth of receptive one. Therefore, it is suggested that collocation units be included in English textbooks and teachers combine collocation instruction into vocabulary teaching. The more collocation competence EFL students could develop, the higher English proficiency level they would be at.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter One Introduction …………………………………………………….… p. 1
Background ………………………………………….……………………... p. 1
Statement of the Problem ………..………………………….…………… p. 3
Purpose of the Study ………………………….………………………….. p. 4
Research Questions ………………………….…………………………… p. 5
Significance of the Study ………………………….……………………… p. 5
Definition of Terms ………………………….…………………………….. p. 6
Limitation of the Study ………………………….……………………….... p. 8
Chapter Two Review of Literature …………………………………………….. p. 9
Historical Perspective on Vocabulary Teaching and Multi-Word Items ……..………………………………………...………………………. p. 9
The Vocabulary-Grammar Dichotomy ……………………………… p. 9
Word Knowledge and Collocation ……………………………….… p. 11
Multi-word Items …………………………………………………….. p. 13
The Nature of Collocation …………………………………………..….. p. 16
Definition of Collocation ………………………………………….… p. 16
Corpus Evidence for the Behavior of Collocation ……………….. p. 18
Acquisitional and Pedagogical Issues of Collocation ………………... p. 20
The Open-Choice Principle and the Idiom Principle………………p. 21
Chunking, Noticing, and Language Acquisition……………………p. 23
Collocation Techniques and Classroom Activities…………………p. 25
Vocabulary Development and Collocation Competence………………p. 27
Analyses on Collocation Errors…………………………………….. p. 28
The Growth of Collocation Competence………………………….. p. 29
Testing on Collocation Competence …………………….……….. p. 31
Chapter Three Methods and Procedures ………………………….……….. p. 36
Subjects ………………………………………………………………….. p. 36
Instruments……………………………………………………………….. p. 37
English Proficiency Test…………………………………………….. p. 37
Three Collocation Tests…………………………………………….. p. 38
Two Lessons of Collocation Instruction…………………………… p. 41
Questionnaire………………………………………………...……… p. 41
Procedures……………………………………………………………….. p. 41
Data Analysis…………………………………………………………….. p. 45
Chapter Four Results and Discussion.……………………………………….p. 47
The Differences Between HA and LA Students’ Collocation
Competence Before CI………………………………………………….. p. 47
The Subjects’ Performance in Test 1…………………………….….p. 47
The Collocation Errors Made by Most of the Subjects in FB-1 Task……………………………………………………………….…... p. 49
The Collocation Errors Made by Most of the Subjects in MC-1 Task……………………………………………………………….…... p. 52
The Differences Between HA and LA Students’ Collocation
Competence After CI……………………………………………………. p. 55
The Subjects’ Performance in Test 2……………………………….p. 55
The Collocation Errors Made by Most of the Subjects in FB-2 Task……………………………………………………………….…... p. 57
The Collocation Errors Made by Most of the Subjects in MC-2 Task……………………………………………………………….…... p. 61
The Subjects’ Performance in Test 3……………………………….p. 63
The Collocation Errors Made by Most of the Subjects in FB-3 Task……………………………………………………………….…... p. 65
The Collocation Errors Made by Most of the Subjects in MC-3 Task……………………………………………………………….…... p. 68
The Effects of CI on the Subjects’ Collocation Competence…………p. 70
The Development of the Subjects’ Productive Collocation Competence………………..………………………………………….p. 70
The Distribution of the Subjects’ Productive Collocation Errors….p. 73
The Development of the Subjects’ Recognitive Collocation Competence………………..………………………………………….p. 74
The Distribution of the Subjects’ Recognitive Collocation Errors…p. 75
The Subjects’ Perception Toward CI………………...………………….p. 76
The Subjects’ Collocation Learning Strategies Before CI………..p. 76
The Subjects’ Opinions of the Effects of CI………………………..p. 78
Chapter Five Conclusions, Implications, and Siggestions……………….…p. 81
Conclusions……………….…..……………………………………….….p. 81
Pedagogical Implications……………..………………………………….p. 83
Suggestions for Further Research……………..……………………….p. 85
Reference………….……………..………………………………………….….p. 87
Appendix……………..………………………………………………………….p. 95
Appendix A English Proficiency Test……………………………………p. 95
Appendix B The First Collocation Test………………………….….….p. 102
Appendix C The Second Collocation Test………………………….…p. 108
Appendix D The Third Collocation Test………………………….….…p. 114
Appendix E Lesson One on Collocation Activities..………….………p. 119
Appendix F Lesson Two on Collocation Activities..………….………p. 122
Appendix G Questionnaire……………………………………………..p. 125
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 The 15 Target Verb-Noun Collocations in Test 1……………………p. 38
Table 2 The 15 Target Verb-Noun Collocations in Test 2……………………p. 39
Table 3 The 15 Target Verb-Noun Collocations in Test 3……………………p. 40
Table 4 The Subjects’ Performance in Test 1 Before CI…………………….p. 47
Table 5 The Numbers and Percentages of Correct Answers to Each
Item in FB-1……………………………...…………………………….p. 49
Table 6 The Distribution of Each Error Type in the Five Most Difficult
Items in FB-1…………………………...…………………………..….p. 52
Table 7 The Numbers and Percentages of Correct Answers to Each
Item in MC-1…………………………...…………………………...….p. 53
Table 8 The Distribution of Each Error Type in the Five Most Difficult
Items in MC-1…………………………...…………………………..….p. 54
Table 9 The Subjects’ Performance in Test 2 After CI………………………p. 55
Table 10 Paired-Sample t-test on the Equated z Scores of Test 1 and
Test 2……………………...………………………………………….p. 56
Table 11 The Numbers and Percentages of Correct Answers to Each
Item in FB-2…………………………...…………………………….p. 58
Table 12 The Distribution of Each Error Type in the Five Most Difficult
Items in FB-2………………………...…………………………..….p. 60
Table 13 The Numbers and Percentages of Correct Answers to Each
Item in MC-2………………………...…………………………...….p. 61
Table 14 The Distribution of Each Error Type in the Five Most Difficult
Items in MC-2………………………...…………………………..….p. 63
Table 15 The Subjects’ Performance in Test 3 After CI……………………p. 64
Table 16 Paired-Sample t-test on the Equated z Scores of Test 2 and
Test 3……………………...………………………………………….p. 64
Table 17 The Numbers and Percentages of Correct Answers to Each
Item in FB-3…………………………...…………………………….p. 66
Table 18 The Distribution of Each Error Type in the Five Most Difficult
Items in FB-3………………………...…………………………..….p. 68
Table 19 The Numbers and Percentages of Correct Answers to Each
Item in MC-3………………………...…………………………...….p. 69
Table 20 The Distribution of Each Error Type in the Five Most Difficult
Items in MC-3………………………...…………………………..….p. 70
Table 21 Paired-Sample t-test on the Three FB Tasks……………………..p. 71
Table 22 The Total Distributions of Errors in the Most Difficult Items in
FB Tasks……………………...…………………………………...….p. 73
Table 23 Paired-Sample t-test on the Three MC Tasks……………………..p. 74
Table 24 The Total Distributions of Errors in the Most Difficult Items in
MC Tasks……………………...…………………………………..….p. 76
Table 25 The Number of the Positive Answers to Q1 ~ Q4 in the
Questionnaire………………...…………………………………..….p. 77
Table 26 The Number of the Positive Responses to Q5 ~Q9 in the Questionnaire……………...…………………………………..…….p. 78
Table 27 The Frequencies of the Eight Collocation Activities Selected in Question Ten……………....…………………………………..…….p. 80
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Procedures of Conducting this Study………………….………….p. 43
Figure 2 The results of the three FB tasks………………………………….p. 72
Figure 3 The results of the three MC tasks………………………………….p. 75

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter One Introduction …………………………………………………….… p. 1
Background ………………………………………….……………………... p. 1
Statement of the Problem ………..………………………….…………… p. 3
Purpose of the Study ………………………….………………………….. p. 4
Research Questions ………………………….…………………………… p. 5
Significance of the Study ………………………….……………………… p. 5
Definition of Terms ………………………….…………………………….. p. 6
Limitation of the Study ………………………….……………………….... p. 8
Chapter Two Review of Literature …………………………………………….. p. 9
Historical Perspective on Vocabulary Teaching and Multi-Word Items ……..………………………………………...………………………. p. 9
The Vocabulary-Grammar Dichotomy ……………………………… p. 9
Word Knowledge and Collocation ……………………………….… p. 11
Multi-word Items …………………………………………………….. p. 13
The Nature of Collocation …………………………………………..….. p. 16
Definition of Collocation ………………………………………….… p. 16
Corpus Evidence for the Behavior of Collocation ……………….. p. 18
Acquisitional and Pedagogical Issues of Collocation ………………... p. 20
The Open-Choice Principle and the Idiom Principle………………p. 21
Chunking, Noticing, and Language Acquisition……………………p. 23
Collocation Techniques and Classroom Activities…………………p. 25
Vocabulary Development and Collocation Competence………………p. 27
Analyses on Collocation Errors…………………………………….. p. 28
The Growth of Collocation Competence………………………….. p. 29
Testing on Collocation Competence …………………….……….. p. 31
Chapter Three Methods and Procedures ………………………….……….. p. 36
Subjects ………………………………………………………………….. p. 36
Instruments……………………………………………………………….. p. 37
English Proficiency Test…………………………………………….. p. 37
Three Collocation Tests…………………………………………….. p. 38
Two Lessons of Collocation Instruction…………………………… p. 41
Questionnaire………………………………………………...……… p. 41
Procedures……………………………………………………………….. p. 41
Data Analysis…………………………………………………………….. p. 45
Chapter Four Results and Discussion.……………………………………….p. 47
The Differences Between HA and LA Students’ Collocation
Competence Before CI………………………………………………….. p. 47
The Subjects’ Performance in Test 1…………………………….….p. 47
The Collocation Errors Made by Most of the Subjects in FB-1 Task……………………………………………………………….…... p. 49
The Collocation Errors Made by Most of the Subjects in MC-1 Task……………………………………………………………….…... p. 52
The Differences Between HA and LA Students’ Collocation
Competence After CI……………………………………………………. p. 55
The Subjects’ Performance in Test 2……………………………….p. 55
The Collocation Errors Made by Most of the Subjects in FB-2 Task……………………………………………………………….…... p. 57
The Collocation Errors Made by Most of the Subjects in MC-2 Task……………………………………………………………….…... p. 61
The Subjects’ Performance in Test 3……………………………….p. 63
The Collocation Errors Made by Most of the Subjects in FB-3 Task……………………………………………………………….…... p. 65
The Collocation Errors Made by Most of the Subjects in MC-3 Task……………………………………………………………….…... p. 68
The Effects of CI on the Subjects’ Collocation Competence…………p. 70
The Development of the Subjects’ Productive Collocation Competence………………..………………………………………….p. 70
The Distribution of the Subjects’ Productive Collocation Errors….p. 73
The Development of the Subjects’ Recognitive Collocation Competence………………..………………………………………….p. 74
The Distribution of the Subjects’ Recognitive Collocation Errors…p. 75
The Subjects’ Perception Toward CI………………...………………….p. 76
The Subjects’ Collocation Learning Strategies Before CI………..p. 76
The Subjects’ Opinions of the Effects of CI………………………..p. 78
Chapter Five Conclusions, Implications, and Siggestions……………….…p. 81
Conclusions……………….…..……………………………………….….p. 81
Pedagogical Implications……………..………………………………….p. 83
Suggestions for Further Research……………..……………………….p. 85
Reference………….……………..………………………………………….….p. 87
Appendix……………..………………………………………………………….p. 95
Appendix A English Proficiency Test……………………………………p. 95
Appendix B The First Collocation Test………………………….….….p. 102
Appendix C The Second Collocation Test………………………….…p. 108
Appendix D The Third Collocation Test………………………….….…p. 114
Appendix E Lesson One on Collocation Activities..………….………p. 119
Appendix F Lesson Two on Collocation Activities..………….………p. 122
Appendix G Questionnaire……………………………………………..p. 125
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 The 15 Target Verb-Noun Collocations in Test 1……………………p. 38
Table 2 The 15 Target Verb-Noun Collocations in Test 2……………………p. 39
Table 3 The 15 Target Verb-Noun Collocations in Test 3……………………p. 40
Table 4 The Subjects’ Performance in Test 1 Before CI…………………….p. 47
Table 5 The Numbers and Percentages of Correct Answers to Each
Item in FB-1……………………………...…………………………….p. 49
Table 6 The Distribution of Each Error Type in the Five Most Difficult
Items in FB-1…………………………...…………………………..….p. 52
Table 7 The Numbers and Percentages of Correct Answers to Each
Item in MC-1…………………………...…………………………...….p. 53
Table 8 The Distribution of Each Error Type in the Five Most Difficult
Items in MC-1…………………………...…………………………..….p. 54
Table 9 The Subjects’ Performance in Test 2 After CI………………………p. 55
Table 10 Paired-Sample t-test on the Equated z Scores of Test 1 and
Test 2……………………...………………………………………….p. 56
Table 11 The Numbers and Percentages of Correct Answers to Each
Item in FB-2…………………………...…………………………….p. 58
Table 12 The Distribution of Each Error Type in the Five Most Difficult
Items in FB-2………………………...…………………………..….p. 60
Table 13 The Numbers and Percentages of Correct Answers to Each
Item in MC-2………………………...…………………………...….p. 61
Table 14 The Distribution of Each Error Type in the Five Most Difficult
Items in MC-2………………………...…………………………..….p. 63
Table 15 The Subjects’ Performance in Test 3 After CI……………………p. 64
Table 16 Paired-Sample t-test on the Equated z Scores of Test 2 and
Test 3……………………...………………………………………….p. 64
Table 17 The Numbers and Percentages of Correct Answers to Each
Item in FB-3…………………………...…………………………….p. 66
Table 18 The Distribution of Each Error Type in the Five Most Difficult
Items in FB-3………………………...…………………………..….p. 68
Table 19 The Numbers and Percentages of Correct Answers to Each
Item in MC-3………………………...…………………………...….p. 69
Table 20 The Distribution of Each Error Type in the Five Most Difficult
Items in MC-3………………………...…………………………..….p. 70
Table 21 Paired-Sample t-test on the Three FB Tasks……………………..p. 71
Table 22 The Total Distributions of Errors in the Most Difficult Items in
FB Tasks……………………...…………………………………...….p. 73
Table 23 Paired-Sample t-test on the Three MC Tasks……………………..p. 74
Table 24 The Total Distributions of Errors in the Most Difficult Items in
MC Tasks……………………...…………………………………..….p. 76
Table 25 The Number of the Positive Answers to Q1 ~ Q4 in the
Questionnaire………………...…………………………………..….p. 77
Table 26 The Number of the Positive Responses to Q5 ~Q9 in the Questionnaire……………...…………………………………..…….p. 78
Table 27 The Frequencies of the Eight Collocation Activities Selected in Question Ten……………....…………………………………..…….p. 80
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Procedures of Conducting this Study………………….………….p. 43
Figure 2 The results of the three FB tasks………………………………….p. 72
Figure 3 The results of the three MC tasks………………………………….p. 75