(3.236.122.9) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/14 06:47
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:黃淑慧
研究生(外文):Shu-hui Huang
論文名稱:檢視指稱詞理解與專業英文閱讀理解之關係
論文名稱(外文):Assessing the Relationship between Referential Understanding and Academic Reading Comprehension among EFL College Students
指導教授:楊育芬楊育芬引用關係
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立雲林科技大學
系所名稱:應用外語系碩士班
學門:人文學門
學類:外國語文學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2005
畢業學年度:93
語文別:英文
論文頁數:238
中文關鍵詞:專業英文閱讀理解指稱詞理解指稱關係
外文關鍵詞:reference-antecedent relationsESP reading comprehensionreferential understanding
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:144
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
本研究旨在了解指稱詞理解與專業英文閱讀理解之關係。研究對象為中部某科技大學管理學院116位大二學生。研究過程共分為三個階段。在第一階段,依據學生在全民英檢中級英文閱讀測驗成績,從116位受試者中篩選出25位較高成就讀者與25位低成就讀者。在第二階段,為探討指稱詞理解與專業英文閱讀理解之關係,50位高、低成就讀者在閱讀完一篇統計專業文章後,需完成一份閱讀理解測驗與一份指稱詞理解測驗。根據作答結果,從中挑選出5位較高成就讀者與5位低成就讀者參與第三階段研究。在第三階段,為瞭解不同能力讀者在指稱詞理解與閱讀理解過程之差異,施以個別訪談。研究資料主要是採用統計分析、Cirilo (1981)提出的三大類指稱理解過程與Halliday and Hansan (1976)指出的二大類指稱理解關係進行分析。
研究結果發現:(1)指稱詞理解與專業英文閱讀理解有重要關係存在,指稱詞理解可解釋75%專業英文閱讀理解的變異;(2)不同能力讀者在指稱詞理解與專業英文閱讀理解的表現上有顯著差異。例如較高成就讀者在指稱詞理解與專業英文閱讀理解表現較好,且理解過程較為連貫;低成就讀者在指稱詞理解與專業英文閱讀理解表現較差,且理解較為片段與不連貫;(3)較高成就讀者傾向由文章內容理解文章與指稱關係;低成就讀者嘗試藉由圖表、數據來啟動相關專業背景知識以理解文章內容與指稱關係;(4)高成就讀者傾向由意義理解指出指稱關係;低成就讀者大多仰賴文章句子結構思索指稱關係。研究結果建議,除了擴充學生的單字量外,在一般英語文教學,教師應增加閱讀策略教學,例如教授有關指稱詞等的篇章結構連結線索(cohesive ties)與相關單字解析策略,以增進學生閱讀理解。另外,在專業科目教學前,教師應先使學生熟悉各種專業術語,並藉由文章的圖表、數據推敲全文大意與啟動相關專業背景知識。
The purpose of the present study was to investigate the relationship between referential understanding and academic reading comprehension among EFL college students. 116 sophomores were selected from the College of Management in one of technological universities in the central part of Taiwan. There were three phases of data collection in the current study. In the first phase, based on the testing results of the Intermediate Reading Level in General English Proficiency Test (GEPT), among the 116 participants, 25 of them were classified as the more-proficient readers and 25 of them were considered as the less-proficient readers. In the second phase, in order to explore the relationship between referential understanding and reading comprehension, the 25 more-proficient readers and the 25 less-proficient readers took the reading comprehension test and did the reference-identification task after reading a statistical English text. In accordance with the testing results in the reading comprehension test and the reference-identification task, in the third phase, five more-proficient readers and five less-proficient readers were interviewed individually by the researcher. The collected data were analyzed by adopting the statistical analysis, the three referential comprehension processes proposed by Cirilo (1981), and the two referential relations provided by Halliday and Hansan (1976).
There are four major findings in this study. First, significant relationship between referential understanding and academic reading comprehension among EFL college readers was found. 75% of the variation in academic reading comprehension could be explained by referential understanding. Second, there were significant differences among the more-proficient readers and the less-proficient readers in the process of reading comprehension and referential understanding. For instance, the more-proficient readers had more coherent reading comprehension and referential understanding than the less-proficient readers. Third, the more-proficient readers tended to comprehend the text and the referential relations by the information provided in the text; on the other hand, the less-proficient readers relied greatly on the information provided beyond the text, such as figures, tables, and numerical numbers. Fourth, in the process of referential understanding, the more-proficient readers tried to figure out referential relations through meaning-based comprehension; on the contrary, the less-proficient readers tended to identify the referential relations by surface structure-based clues. The results of the present study suggest that in English for General Purpose (EGP) instruction, more vocabulary decoding skills and reading strategies should be taught. Strategies such as recognizing the referential words and cohesive ties should be explicitly introduced. Furthermore, in English for Specific Purpose (ESP) instruction, teachers should help students enlarge their vocabulary size of domain-specific technical terms and train them to activate relevant background knowledge and catch the main idea of the field-related texts through the aid of tables, figures, and numbers in the texts.
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chinese Abstract i
English Abstract iii
Acknowledgement v
Table of Contents vi
List of Tables x
List of Figures xv

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1
Background of the Current Study 1
Purpose of the Current Study 5
Definition of Terms 6
Significance of the Current Study 9
CHAPTER TWO REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 12
An Overview of Reading Comprehension Models 12
Review of ESP Related Studies 15
An Overview of English for Specific Purposes 15
Reading in ESP 18
ESP Related Studies 19
Review of Cohesion Studies 22
Cohesion Theory 22
Cohesion and Reading Comprehension 25
Review of Reference Studies 29
Reference 29
Reference and Reading Comprehension 32
Importance of Reference in Reading 32
Relevant Referential Studies in Reading 34
CHAPTER THREE METHOD 46
Subjects 46
Instruments 48
Reading Text 48
Reading Comprehension Test 51
Reference-Identification Task 54
Procedures of Data Collection 62
Data Analysis 62
The Pilot Study 67
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS 82
Results of Reading Comprehension Test and Referential Identification Task 82
Relationship between Academic Reading Comprehension and Referential Understanding 83
Differences in Academic Reading Comprehension and Referential Understanding 84
Results of Retrospective Interview Data 87
Differences in the Process of Academic Reading Comprehension 87
Decoding 87
Literal Comprehension 95
Inferential Comprehension 96
Comprehension Monitoring 104
Differences in the Process of Referential Understanding 106
Overall Comparison of Referential Understanding 107

Comparison of Reference-Antecedent Resolution Process 108
Text-Based Referential Antecedent Identification 111
Situation-Based Referential Antecedent Identification 113
Failure in Reference-Antecedent Identification 114
Influences of Referential Words on Reference-Antecedent Resolution 114
Repeated Referential Words 115
Meaning of Referential Words 119
Influences of the Numbers of Antecedents on Reference-Antecedent Resolution 125
One Antecedent 126
More than One Antecedent 128
CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 132
Summary of the Findings 132
Discussion 136
In the Process of Academic Reading Comprehension 137
In the Process of Referential Understanding 139
Coherent and Incoherent Referential Comprehension 139
Text-Based and Situation-Based Comprehension 149
Meaning-Based and Structure-Based Comprehension 151
The Relationship between Referential Understanding and Academic Reading Comprehension 154
Coherent Comprehension among the More-Proficient Readers 155
Incoherent Comprehension among the Less-Proficient Readers 156
Text-Based Comprehension among the More-Proficient Readers 156
Situation-Based Comprehension among the Less-Proficient Readers 157
Conclusion 157
Pedagogical Implications of the Current Study 159
Implications for EGP Instruction 159
Implications for ESP Instruction 161
Limitations of the Study 161
Suggestions for Further Studies 163
REFERENCES 164
APPENDIX 173
I. Announcement for Recruiting Students in the Current Study 173
II. Reading Text 174
III. Reading Comprehension Test 175
IV. Five Text Samples Selected from the Six GEPT Reading Tests 179
V. Reading Strategies Classification 183
VI. Reference-Identification Task 185
VII. Statistical Analysis 188
VIII. Referential Comprehension Process 195
VX. Examples of the Subjects’ Protocols 201

List of Tables
Table 3.1 Details of the Six Texts Selected from the Five Statistics Textbooks 49
Table 3.2 Checklist for Text Selection 50
Table 3.3 Descriptions of the Five Texts Selected from GEPT Reading Tests 52
Table 3.4 Classification of Scoring Grid in GEPT Reading Tests and the Corresponding Item Numbers in Reading Comprehension Test 53
Table 3.5 Types, Distribution, and Numbers of Referential Words in the Reference-Identification Task and the Reading Text 55
Table 3.6 Antecedents of the 38 Referential Words in the Reference Identification Task
57
Table 3.7 Scoring Criteria for the Reference-Identification Task 61
Table 3.8 An Example of Analyzing the Protocols in Referential Words Recognition
66
Table 3.9 An Example of Analyzing the Protocols in Antecedent Identification
67
Table 3.10 Item Difficulty and Item Discrimination in Reading Comprehension Test 70
Table 3.11 Distractor Efficiency Analysis for Revising Poor Designed Options in the Reading Comprehension Test 71
Table 3.12 Correlation between Academic Reading Comprehension and Referential Understanding among EFL College Students (SPSS Correlation Analysis) 188
Table 3.13 Correlation between Academic Reading Comprehension and Referential Understanding among More-Proficient Readers (SPSS Correlation Analysis) 188
Table 3.14 Correlation between Academic Reading Comprehension and Referential Understanding among Less-Proficient Readers (SPSS Correlation Analysis) 189
Table 3.15 Differences among EFL College Students with Different Proficiency in Academic Reading Comprehension and Referential Understanding 73

Table 3.16 Differences among EFL College Students with Different Proficiency in Reading Comprehension Test (Excel:t-Test) 189
Table 3.17 Differences among EFL College Students with Different Proficiency in Referential Understanding (Excel:t-Test) 190
Table 3.18 Less-Proficient Reader III’s Protocols in Decoding Words Meaning 74
Table 3.19 Less-Proficient Reader III’s Protocols in Reading Comprehension 75
Table 3.20 Comparisons between More-Proficient Reader I and Less-Proficient Reader III in Referential Understanding 75
Table 3.21 Less-Proficient Reader IV’s Protocols in Comprehending Repeated Referential Words 77
Table 3.22 Differences between the More-Proficient Reader I and the Less-Proficient Reader III in the Processes of Referential Comprehension 79
Table 4.1 Correlation between Academic Reading Comprehension and Referential Understanding among More-Proficient and Less-Proficient Readers (SPSS Correlation Analysis) 191
Table 4.2 Correlation between Academic Reading Comprehension and Referential Understanding among More-Proficient Readers (SPSS Correlation Analysis) 191
Table 4.3 Correlation between Academic Reading Comprehension and Referential Understanding among Less-Proficient Readers (SPSS Correlation Analysis) 192
Table 4.4 Differences among the More-Proficient Readers and the Less-Proficient Readers in Academic Reading Comprehension and Referential Understanding 85
Table 4.5 Differences among the More-Proficient Readers and the Less-Proficient Readers in Referential Understanding (I) 85
Table 4.6 Differences among the More-Proficient Readers and the Less-Proficient Readers in Referential Understanding (II) 86
Table 4.7 Significant Differences among More-Proficient Readers and Less-Proficient Readers in Academic Reading Comprehension (Excel: t-Test) 192
Table 4.8 Significant Differences among More-Proficient Readers and Less-Proficient Readers in Referential Understanding (Excel: t-Test) 193
Table 4.9 Significant Differences among More-Proficient Readers and Less-Proficient Readers in Comprehending Personal Reference (Excel: t-Test) 193
Table 4.10 Significant Differences among More-Proficient Readers and Less-Proficient Readers in Understanding Demonstrative Reference (Excel: t-Test) 194
Table 4.11 Less-Proficient Reader C’s Protocols in the Failure of Decoding Words 88
Table 4.12 More-Proficient Reader F’s Protocols in the Failure of Decoding Words 89
Table 4.13 Less-Proficient Reader B’s Protocols in the Failure of Modifying Words Meaning 89
Table 4.14 More-Proficient Reader G’s Protocols in Modifying Words Meaning 90
Table 4.15 More-Proficient Reader H’s Protocols in Misinterpreting Words Meaning (I) 90
Table 4.16 More-Proficient Reader H’s Protocols in Misinterpreting Words Meaning (II) 91
Table 4.17 Less-Proficient Reader E’s Protocols in Misinterpreting Words Meaning 91
Table 4.18 Less-Proficient Reader D’s Protocols in Decoding Words Meaning from the Structure Analysis of Words 92
Table 4.19 More-Proficient Reader H’s Protocols in Decoding Words Meaning from the Structure Analysis of Words 93
Table 4.20 More-Proficient Reader G’s Protocols in Decoding Words from Sentential Clues 93
Table 4.21 More-Proficient Reader H’s Protocols in Decoding Words by the Application of Background Knowledge (I) 94
Table 4.22 More-Proficient Reader H’s Protocols in Decoding Words by the Application of Background Knowledge (II) 95
Table 4.23 Less-Proficient Reader A’s Protocols in the Failure of Literal Comprehension 96
Table 4.24 Less-Proficient Reader A’s Protocols in Sentence Comprehension 97
Table 4.25 Less-Proficient Reader C’s Protocols in Paragraph Comprehension 98
Table 4.26 Less-Proficient Reader A’s Protocols in Paragraph Comprehension (II) 99
Table 4. 27 More-Proficient Reader I’s Protocols in Paragraph Comprehension 100
Table 4.28 Less-Proficient Reader B’s Protocols in Paragraph Comprehension 101
Table 4.29 More-Proficient Reader J’s Protocols in Paragraph Comprehension 102
Table 4.30 Less-Proficient Reader D’s Protocols in Activating Background Knowledge 103
Table 4.31 Less-Proficient Reader A’s Protocols in Activating Background Knowledge 104
Table 4.32 More-Proficient Reader J’s Protocols in Comprehension Monitoring 105
Table 4.33 Less-Proficient Reader D’s Protocols in Comprehension Monitoring 106
Table 4.34 Overall Comparison of Referential Understanding 108
Table 4.35 More-Proficient Readers’ Referential Understanding Process 109
Table 4.36 Less-Proficient Readers’ Referential Understanding Process 110
Table 4.37 Text-Based Referential Antecedent Identification 111
Table 4.38 Situation-Based Referential Antecedent Identification 113
Table 4.39 Same Word and Similar Antecedents Comprehension among the More-Proficient readers 116
Table 4.40 Same Word and Similar Antecedents Comprehension among the Less-Proficient readers 117

Table 4.41 Same Word and Different Antecedent Comprehension among the More-Proficient Readers 118
Table 4.42 Same Word and Different Antecedent Comprehension among the Less-Proficient Readers 119
Table 4.43 More-Proficient Readers’ Reference-Antecedent Resolution While Recognizing Word Meaning 121
Table 4.44 Less-Proficient Readers’ Reference-Antecedent Resolution While Recognizing Word Meaning 121
Table 4.45 More-Proficient Readers’ Reference-Antecedent Resolution While Misunderstanding Word Meaning 123
Table 4.46 Less-Proficient Readers’ Reference-Antecedent Resolution While Misunderstanding Word Meaning 123
Table 4.47 Less-Proficient Readers’ Reference-Antecedent Resolution While Failing in Recognizing Word Meaning 124
Table 4.48 Comprehension of only One Antecedent among More-Proficient Readers 126
Table 4.49 Comprehension of only One Antecedent among Less-Proficient Readers 127
Table 4.50 Comprehension of More than One Antecedent among More-Proficient Readers 129
Table 4.51 Comprehension of More than One Antecedent among Less-Proficient Readers 130


List of Figures
Figure 2.1 Halliday and Hansan’s (1976) Categorization of Referential Relations 31
Figure 3.1 Correlation between Academic Reading Comprehension and Referential Understanding among EFL College Students 72
Figure 3.2 More-Proficient Reader I’s Referential Comprehension Process (I) 196
Figure 3.3 More-Proficient Reader I’s Referential Comprehension Process (II) 197
Figure 3.4 Less-Proficient Reader III’s Referential Comprehension Process (I) 199
Figure 3.5 Less-Proficient Reader III’s Referential Comprehension Process (II) 200
Figure 4.1 Correlation between Academic Reading Comprehension and Referential Understanding among EFL College Students 83
Figure 5.1 More-Proficient Reader G’s Referential Comprehension Process (I) 145
Figure 5.2 More-Proficient Reader G’s Referential Comprehension Process (II) 146
Figure 5.3 Less-Proficient Reader B’s Referential Comprehension Process (I) 147
Figure 5.4 Less-Proficient Reader B’s Referential Comprehension Process (II) 148
Aebersold, J. A., & Field, M. L. (1997). From reader to reading teaching issues and strategies for second language classrooms. Cambridge University Press.
Al-Jarf, R. S. (2001). Processing of cohesive ties by EFL Arab college students. Foreign language annuals, 34(2), pp. 141-151.
Anderson, D. R., Sweeney, D. J., & Williams, T. A. (2000). Data and Statistics. Essentials of Statistics For Business and Economics (2nd edition). South-Western College Publishing.
Bakken, J. P., & Whedon, C. K. (2002). Teaching text structure to improve reading comprehension. Intervention in school and clinic, 37(4), pp. 229-233.
Broek, P. V. D., & Kremer, K. E. (1998). The mind in action: what it means to comprehend during reading. (pp.1-31). In Taylor, B. M., Graves, M. F., & Broek, P. V. D. (Ed.) Reading for meaning: fostering comprehension in the middle grades. Allyn & Bacon.
Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). The nature of reference in text and in discourse (pp. 190-222). Discourse analysis. Cambridge University Press.
Brown, J. D. (1996). Testing in Language Programs. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents.
Camiciottoli, B. C. (2003). Metadiscourse and ESP reading comprehension: an exploratory study. Reading in a foreign language, 15(1), pp. 28-44.
Carrell, P. L. (1982). Cohesion is not coherence. TESOL Quarterly, 16(4), pp. 479-488.
Carter, R., & Nunan, D. (1995). Introducing reading. Penguin Books Ltd.
Chang, H. O. (張慧). (2001). Solving problems in content textbook reading: a learning-centered approach. Selected Papers from the tenth international symposium on English teaching. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd. pp. 208-218.
Chen, C. F. (陳秋芬). (2003). 科技性文章中的時間序列對國小五年級學生閱讀理解的影響. 國立中正大學碩士論文.
Chen, L. T. (陳俐婷). (2003). 透過篇章結構之教學及有聲思考之作答示範. 國立台灣師範大學碩士論文.
Chen, S. H. (2001). (陳淑惠). Cohesion in children’s L2 narratives and teaching of discourse skills. Selected papers from the tenth international symposium on English teaching. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd. pp. 310-323.
Chen, S. Z., & Dai, H. T. (陳秀珍,戴華亭). (2003). 台灣學生對英文前向照應和關係代名詞閱讀理解分析研究. 第20屆中華名國英語文教學國際研討會, 頁235-258.
Chen, T. Y. (1998). ESP in technology colleges: instruction and investigation. The proceedings of the seventh international symposium on English teaching. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd. pp. 279-288.
Chu, H. C. J., Swaffar, J., & Charney, D. H. (2002). Cultural representation of rhetorical conventions: the effects on reading recall. TESOL Quarterly, 36(4), pp. 511-541.
Chung, J. S. L. (2000). Signals and reading comprehension─theory and practice. System, 28, pp. 247-259.
Cirilo, R. K. (1981). Referential coherence and text structure in story comprehension. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, 20, pp. 358-367.
Cobuild, C. (2003). Advanced Learner’s English Dictionary (4th edition). Harper Collins Publishers.
Demel, M. C. (1990). The relationship between overall reading comprehension and comprehension of coreferential ties for second language readers of English. TESOL Quarterly, 24 (2), pp. 267-292.
Dudley-Evans, T., & St. John, M. J. (1998). Developments in ESP a multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge university press.
Dutka, J. T. (1979). Anaphoric relations, comprehension and readability. ERIC No. ED188246.
Fishman, A. S. (1978). The effect of anaphoric references and noun phrase organizers on paragraph comprehension. Journal of reading behavior, 10(2), pp. 159-170.
Flowerdew, J., & Peacock, M. (2001). Research perspectives on English for academic purposes. Cambridge University Press.
Fortanet*, I. (2004). The use of “we” in university lectures: reference and function. English for specific purposes, 23(1), pp. 45-66.
Gagné, E. D., Yekovich, C. W., & Yekovich, F. R. (1993). Reading (pp. 267-312). The cognitive psychology of school learning. New York: Harjper Collins College Publishers.
Gallini, J. K., & Spires, H. A. (1992). The influence of anaphoric relations and departures from story grammar structure on text processing. Reading psychology: an international quarterly, 13(2), pp. 107-130.
Garrod, S., & Sanford, A. (1977). Interpreting anaphoric relations: the integration of semantic information while reading. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, 16, pp.77-90.
Garrod, S., & Sanford, A. (1990). Referential processes in reading: focusing on roles and invididuals (pp. 140-151). In Balota, D. A., d’Arcais, G. B. F., & Rayner, K. (Ed.) Comprehension process in reading. Lawrence Erlbaum Associations, Inc.
Garrod, S., & Sanford, A. (1999). Referential processes in reading: focusing on roles and invididuals (pp. 140-151). In Balota, D. A., d’Arcais, G. B. F., & Rayner, K. (Ed.) Comprehension process in reading. Lawrence Erlbaum Associations, Inc.
Gee, R. W. (1990). Recognition of a problem / solution text structure by low and high proficient ESL community college students. Published Doctoral Thesis. University of Peensylvania.
Geva, E. (1992). The role of conjunctions in L2 text comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 26 (4), pp. 731-747.
Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., Ledoux, K., & Yang, C. L. (1999). Processing of reference and the structure of language: an analysis of complex noun phrases. Language and cognitive process, 14(4), pp. 353-379.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. Longman Group Ltd.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). Around the clause cohesion and discourse. (pp. 308-339). An introduction to functional grammar (2nd edition). Arnold.
Huang, S. Y. (黃素月). (1997). The ESP components in English programs for non-English majors at universities in Taiwan. Proceedings of the fourteenth conference on English teaching and learning in the republic of China. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd. pp. 367-378.
Hudson, T. (1998). Theoretical perspective on reading. Annual review of applied linguistics, 18, pp. 43-60.
Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes a learning-centered approach. Cambridge University Press.
Hyland, K. (1999). Talking to students: metadiscourse in introductory coursebooks. English for specific purposes, 18(1), pp. 3-26.
Irwin, J. W. (1991). Teaching reading comprehension process. Needham Heights: Allyn and Bacon.
Joe, S. G. (周碩貴). (2000). 科技大學學生閱讀原文書籍理解行為與學習習慣研究. 行政院國家科學委員會專題報告研究成果. 計畫編號:NSC89-2411-H224-003.
Jr, R. F. L., & O’brien, E. J. (1995). Introduction: sources of coherence in reading. (pp. 1-3). In Lorch, R. F., & O’brien E. J. (Ed.) Sources of coherence in reading. Lawrence Erlbaum Associaion, Inc.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter P. A. (1987). Understanding the referent of a text (pp. 195-223). The psychology of reading and reading comprehension. Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Kenneday, C., & Bolitho, R. (1984). English for specific purposes. Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
Kennison, S. M. (2003). Comprehending the pronouns her, him, and his: implications for theories of referential processing. Journal of memory and language, 49 (3), pp. 335-352.
Kintsch, W. (1986). Learning from text. Cognition and instruction, 3(2), pp. 87-108.
Koh, S., & Jr. C. C. (2002). Resolution of the antecedent of a plural pronoun: ontological categories and predicate symmetry. Journal of memory and language, 46, pp. 830-834.
Kong, H. C. (孔慧珠). (1996). Teaching College English: From ESL to ESP. Studies in English Language and Literature, 1, pp. 40-45.
Kubiszyn, T., & Borich, G. (1996). Validity (pp. 309-319). Educational testing and measurement classroom application and practice (5th edition). New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.
Kuo, C. H. (1999). The use of personal pronouns: role relationships in scientific journal articles. English for specific purposes, 18(2), pp. 121-138.
Lai, H. F. (賴慧芬) (2004). 專業知識對較熟練讀者建構大意過程之影響. 國立雲林科技大學碩士論文.
Lavigne-Tompsa, F., & Duboisb, D. (1999). Context effects and associative anaphora in reading. Journal of Pragmatics, 31, pp. 399-415.
Lin, C. H., & Kong, H. C. (林清華,孔慧珠). (2000). An investigation into the academic reading competence of technical college students. Studies in English language and literature, 7, pp. 29-45.
Lind, D. A., Mason, R. D., & Marchal, W. G. (2000). What is Statistics? Basic Statistics for Business and Economics (3rd edition). The McCraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Louise, G. H. (1989). The roles of prior knowledge of text structure and prior knowledge of content in comprehension and recall of expository text. Published Doctoral Thesis. University of Delaware.
Lugsamee, N. (2003). A study of discourse functions of relative clauses from a functional sentence perspective framework. Published Doctoral Thesis. Indiana University of Pennsylvania.
Manzo, A. V., Manzo, U. C., & Estes, T. H. (2001). Content area literacy (3rd edition). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
McClave, J. T., Benson, P. G., & Sincich, T. (2001). Statistics, Data, and Statistical Thinking. Statistics for Business and Economics (8th edition). Prentice Hall International, Inc.
Murray, J. D. (1995). Logical connectives and local coherence (pp. 107-125). In Lorch, R. F., & O’brien, E. J. (Ed.) Sources of coherence in reading. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Nassaji, H. (2003). Higher-level and lower-level text processing skills in advanced ESL reading comprehension. The modern language journal, 87, pp. 261-276.
Paterson, K. B., Sanford, A. J., Moxey, L. M., & Dawydiak, E. (1998). Quantifier polarity and referential focus during reading. Journal of memory and language, 39, pp. 290-306.
Peterson, C. (1993). Identifying referents and linking sentences cohesively in narration. Discourse processes, 16, pp. 507-524.
Pritchard*, R. M. O., & Nasr, A. (2004). Improving reading performance among Egyptian engineering students: principles and practice. English for specific purposes, 23, pp. 425-445.
Richards, J. C., Platt, J., & Platt, H. (1998). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. HK: Longman.
Royo, T. P. (1990). Effects of text organization on reading in ninth-grade good and poor readers and writers. Published Doctoral Thesis. Harvard University.
Ruddell, M. R. (2001). Teaching content reading and writing (3rd edition). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Sharp, A. (2003). Reading comprehension and text organization. U. S.: The Edwin Mellen Press, Ltd.
Steffensen, M. S. (1995). Changes in cohesion in the recall of native and foreign texts. (pp. 140-151). In Carrell, P. L., Devine, J., & Eskey, D. E. (Ed.) Interactive approaches to second language reading. Cambridge University Press.
Sun, S. H. (孫淑惠). (1985). Reinforcing rhetorical devices in the reading class. Papers from the second conference on English teaching and learning in the republic of China. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd. pp. 313-334.
Tang, L. (1989). Comprehension of English expository prose and reading strategies of Chinese EFL readers. Published Doctoral Thesis. New York University.
Tsai, M. J. (蔡明珍). (1999). ESP reading for students with less language proficiency. The proceedings of the eighth international symposium on English teaching. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd. pp. 527-537.
Tsai, M. J. (蔡明珍). (2000). The effect of metacognitive awareness on ESP learning. Selected papers from the ninth international symposium on English Teaching. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd. pp. 99-106.
Ulijn, J. M., & Meyer, F. S. (1998). The professional reader and the text: insights from L2 research. Journal of research in reading, 21(2), pp. 79-95.
Urquhart, A. H., & Weir, C. J. (1998). Reading in a Second language: process, product and practice. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
Wang, S. P., & Shen, Y. S. (王世平,沈吟賢). (1998). 專技英文 (ESP)實證教學初探:─以業界及應用外語專題為例. The proceedings of the seventh international symposium on English teaching. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd. pp. 867-876.
Wang, Y. F. (王萸芳). (1998). Facilitating EFL reading by teaching cohesive ties. The proceedings of the seventh international symposium on English teaching, 2, pp. 855-866.
Wang, Y. F., & Ding, W. Y. (王萸芳,丁玟瑛). (1998). Teaching university students reading through text / discourse analysis. Proceedings of the fifteenth conference on English teaching and learning in the republic of China. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd. pp. 127-148.
Warde, B. A. (1995). A comparison of the reading characteristics of college students poor readers with and without learning difficulties. Published Doctoral Thesis. Florida Atlantic University.
Weiss, N. A. (2002). The Natural of Statistics. Elementary Statistics (5th edition). Pearson Education, Inc.
Yang, C. L., Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., & Wu, J. T. (1999). Comprehension of referring expressions in Chinese. Language and cognitive process, 14 (5/6), pp. 715-743.
Yang, Y. F. (楊育芬). (2002). Diagnostic instruments and procedures to identify TVES college students with English reading difficulties. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Yang, Y. F. (楊育芬). (2004). The pilot study of diagnostic reading assessment. Proceedings of the 21st international conference on English teaching and learning in the R. O. C., pp. 242-254.
Yekovich, F. R., & Walker, C. H. (1978). Identifying and using referents in sentence comprehension. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, 17, pp. 265-277.
Yu, G. K. H. (余光雄). (1993). The effects of textual coherence on EFL reading comprehension. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔