臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

就非刻意字彙學習對母語和外語學習者而言，閱讀常被認為是單字學習的重要來源。除了單字習得外，只要閱讀內容是可理解，學習者也會加強其文法和改善四項語言技能：聽、說、讀、寫。因此，透過閱讀，學習者也應能獲得「認識」及「應用」的字彙。然而，一些研究者認為除了閱讀之外，語言輸出，例如說或寫，在語言學習過程中也扮演部份角色。一些研究發現學習者會因為單字練習活動的不同而導致「認識」和「應用」字彙發展不對稱。這類研究大部份檢視單字習得順序對字彙學習的影響，及探討學習順序從母語到外語或從外語到母語對單字習得的差異。然而此類研究著重在單字練習，因此不能代表非刻意單字學習的成果。除此之外，大多數這類研究的測驗以翻譯為主，因此很難測出研究對象使用單字的能力。由於研究結果的不一致性及缺乏「應用」字彙的測驗，本實驗因此著重「輸入」和「輸出」活動對非刻意單字學習所造成的影響。
此研究目的在探討兩個研究主題：（一）閱讀（輸入）和寫作（輸出）對「認識」及「應用」單字的立即學習成效，（二）閱讀（輸入）和寫作（輸出）對「認識」及「應用」單字的長期學習成效。為了達到此研究目的，在本實驗中，研究對象分成兩組，一組從事「輸入」練習而另一組強調「輸出」活動。「輸入」練習包含閱讀、字義配對、句子英翻中和閱讀測驗。這些練習完全不需要學習者運用單字在說話及寫作上。對於「輸出」組，主要練習在閱讀及寫作上，研究對象在讀完一篇文章後要用相關字彙寫一篇作文。本實驗有50個字彙而實驗持續八週。67位高中部一年級的學生參與本實驗，雖然他們分佈在2班，為了要隨機分配練習活動，在同一個班級，一半的學生分到「輸入」組，另一半則在「輸出」組。本實驗含有一個前測、五個後測及一個總後測。「認識」單字測驗改編自「字彙知識等級」(Paribakht & Wesche, 1996) 及英翻中。「應用」單字則由造句及中翻英所測量。
本研究主要有三個發現：（一）由於資料分析結果顯示2組學生表現在五個後測及一個總後測中並沒有顯著差異。因此，「認識」和「應用」單字學習並不會受到練習活動的不同而產生學習差異，（二）實驗結果顯示「認識」單字較「應用」單字容易保留，（三）「輸出」活動較「輸入」活動要耗費時間。因此教師在教學上可提供較多輸入練習，如閱讀，因為閱讀不只幫助單字習得，也發展讀寫能力。造句雖然提供學習者機會運用字彙，但並沒有使他們對字彙的用法有更深的體會。對於未來研究方向，更多的研究對象及單字應列入實驗，如此，才能呈現練習活動對單字學習上更完整的成效。

In terms of incidental vocabulary learning, reading is commonly regarded as the major source of vocabulary acquisition for both L1 and L2 learners. Extensive reading then is encouraged as a means of enhancing vocabulary knowledge. Apart from the advantage of vocabulary acquisition, as long as the reading is comprehensible, the learners will also acquire knowledge of grammar and improvement of the four skills, listening, speaking, reading and writing (Krashen, 1989; Cho & Krashen, 1994). Hence, it is suggested that through reading, learners can gain both receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge. Nevertheless, some researchers have argued that reading cannot be the only source of language acquisition; output, such as speaking and writing, should also play some role in the language learning process (Swain, 1985; Swain & Lapkin, 1995).
Some studies have found an asymmetric processing of receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge, based on the types of tasks done by learners. Most of these studies investigated the results of vocabulary gains in view of the learning order of the language, either from L1 to L2 order or from L2 to L1 order. These kinds of tasks did not represent incidental vocabulary acquisition since the main goal of the tasks was vocabulary learning. In addition, most of the instruments used in the studies were translation only. Owing to the inconsistencies in the empirical results and the lack of measurement of productive vocabulary knowledge, this study, therefore, was conducted to explore the effects of input and output tasks on incidental vocabulary acquisition.
There were two groups in this study, one doing only the input task and the other emphasizing output. The input task included reading, word-definition matching, translation, and reading comprehension questions. These exercises did not require learners to produce the English words at all. For the output group, the exercises were reading and compositions. After reading an article, learners needed to write compositions using all the target words. There were 50 target words and the treatments lasted 8 weeks. Sixty-seven EFL first year senior high school students from two classes were recruited to participate in the study. In order to randomly assign the tasks, half the students in each class were in the input task group and the other half in the output task group. A pretest, five immediate and delayed posttests, and final receptive and productive posttests were used as the instruments in this study. Receptive vocabulary knowledge was measured by an adaptation of the Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (Paribakht & Wesche, 1996) and English-Chinese translation. The measures for productive knowledge were sentence writing and Chinese-English translation. The writing tests were scored by two raters, one a Chinese English teacher and the other a native English speaker.
Data analysis yielded the following results. First, there was no significant difference in scores between the input and output task groups on immediate or delayed posttests. Hence, this study suggests that the retention of receptive and productive vocabulary is not greatly affected by the types of tasks used and that both input and output tasks help learners acquire not only receptive vocabulary knowledge but also productive knowledge. Therefore, teaching implications are that teachers should provide more reading tasks because reading can benefit not only vocabulary acquisition but also the development of literacy. Sentence writing did provide learners opportunities to use the words in a productive way, but it did not lead them to the awareness of the proper use of the words. Regarding directions for future research, more subjects and target words should be included in the experiment and the rating scale for productive vocabulary tests should be refined.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
中文摘要i
ABSTRACT iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS viii
LIST OF TABLES xi
LIST OF FIGURES xiii
CHAPTER ONE－INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Research Background of the Study 1
1.2 Motivation for the Study 3
1.3 The Significance of the Study 5
CHAPTER TWO－LITERATURE REVIEW 7
2.1 Overview 7
2.2 Incidental Vocabulary Acquisition from Input Tasks 8
2.3 Incidental Vocabulary Acquisition from Output Tasks 14
2.4 The Retention of Vocabulary 21
2.5 The Asymmetric Processing of Vocabulary Knowledge 25
2.6 Summary 31
CHAPTER THREE－METHODOLOGY 33
3.1 Overview 33
3.2 Subjects 34
3.3 The Input and Output Tasks 35
3.3.1 The Reading Materials 35
3.3.2 The Target Words 38
3.3.3 The Input and Output Tasks 42
3.4 Instruments 45
3.4.1 Pretest 45
3.4.2 The Immediate and Delayed Posttests 46
3.4.3 The Final Receptive and Productive Posttest 52
3.5 Procedure 54
3.6 Data Analysis 56
CHAPTER FOUR－RESEARCH RESULTS 57
4.1 Overview 57
4.2 Results 58
4.2.1 The results of the pretest and the comparison of scores on the entrance exam and first semester grades 58
4.2.2 The agreement of two raters on the productive vocabulary posttest 61
4.2.3 The results of immediate and delayed posttests (exclude students & exclude known words) 62
4.2.4 The results of the final receptive and productive vocabulary tests 68
4.2.5 The distribution of scores on the productive posttest 70
4.3 Summary 76
CHAPTER FIVE－DISCUSSION 78
5.1 Overview 78
5.2 Findings of the Study 79
5.3 Possible Confounding Factors and Limitations of the Study 83
5.4 Implications and Suggestions for Future Research 86
5.4.1 Theoretical Implications 86
5.4.2 Pedagogical Implications 89
5.4.3 Directions for Future Research 90
REFERENCES 92
APPENDIX A. 99
APPENDIX B. 102
APPENDIX C. 103
APPENDIX D. 106
APPENDIX E. 107
APPENDIX F. 108
APPENDIX G. 112
APPENDIX H. 113
APPENDIX I. 114
APPENDIX J. 118
APPENDIX K. 119
APPENDIX L. 120
APPENDIX M. 124
APPENDIX N. 125
APPENDIX O. 126
APPENDIX P. 130
APPENDIX Q. 131
APPENDIX R. 135
APPENDIX S. 137
APPENDIX T. 139
APPENDIX U. 141
APPENDIX V. 143

REFERENCES

Anderson, J. R. (1995). Cognitive psychology and its implications (4th ed.). New York: Freeman.
Aitchison, J. (1987). Words in the mind: An introduction to the mental lexicon. Oxford and New York: Basil Blackwell.
Baddeley, A. (1997). Human memory: Theory and practice. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
Barrow, J., Nakashimi, Y., & Ishino, H. (1999). Assessing Japanese college students’ vocabulary knowledge with a self-checking familiarity survey. System, 37, 662-667.
Bransford, J. D., Franks, J.J., Morris, C. D., & Stein, B. S. (1979). Some general constraints on learning and memory research. In L. S. Cermak and F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Levels of processing in human memory (pp.331-354). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bygate, M. (1996). Effects of task repetition: Appraising the developing language of learners. In J. Willis and M. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 136-146). Oxford: Heinemann.
Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. (1995). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chen, H. J. (2002). Effects of L1 and L2 glosses on reading comprehension and vocabulary retention. The proceedings of the nineteenth international conference on English teaching & learning.
Collins COBUILD English Dictionary (2nd ed.). (1995). London: HarperCollins.
Cho, K.S., & Krashen, S. (1994). Acquisition of vocabulary from the Sweet Valley Kids Series: Adult ESL acquisition. Journal of Reading, 37, 662-667.
Clark, E. V. (1993). The lexicon in acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Collins COBUILD English Dictionary (2nd ed.). (1995). London: HarperCollins.
Craik, F. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684.
Crow, J. T., & Quigley, J. R. (1985). A semantic field approach to passive vocabulary acquisition for reading comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 497-514.
Day, R., Omura, C., & Hiramatsu, M. (1991). Incidental EFL vocabulary learning and reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 7, 541-551.
Dupuy, B., & Krashen, S. (1993). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in French as a foreign language. Applied Language Learning, 4, 55-63.
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.
Eysenck, M. W. (1982). Incidental learning and orienting tasks. In C. R. Puff (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in human memory and cognition (pp. 197-228). New York: Academic Press.
Fraser, C., Bellugi, U., & Brown, R. (1963). Control of grammar in imitation, comprehension and production. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 2, 121-35.
Fuente, M. (2002). Negotiation and oral acquisition of L2 vocabulary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 81-112.
Gass, S. (1988). Integrating research areas: A framework for second language studies. Applied Linguistics, 9, 198-217.
Griffin, G., & Harley, T. A. (1996). List learning of second language vocabulary. Applied Psycholinguistics, 17, 443-460.
Haycraft, J. (1978). Teaching vocabulary. An introduction to English language teaching. London: Longman.
Henriksen, B. (1999). Three dimensions of vocabulary development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 303-317.
Horst, M., Cobb, T., & Meara, P. (1998). Beyond a clockwork orange: Acquiring second language vocabulary through reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 11(2), 207-233.
Huckin, T., & Coady, J. (1999). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: A review. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 181-193.
Hulstijn, J. H. (1992). Retention of inferred and given word meanings: Experiments in incidental vocabulary learning. In P. Arnaud & H. Bejoint (Eds.), Vocabulary and applied linguistics (pp. 113-125). London: MacMillan.
Hulstijn, J. H., & Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the Involvement Load Hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51, 539-558.
Jacobs, G. M. (1994). What lurks in the margin: Use of vocabulary glosses as a strategy in second language reading. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 5, 115-137.
Joe, A. (1995). Text-based tasks and incidental vocabulary learning. Second Language Research, 11, 149-158.
Krashen, S. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input hypothesis. The Modern language Journal, 73, 440-464.
Krashen, S. (1994). The Input Hypothesis and its rivals. In N. C. Ellis (Ed), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 45-77). London: Academic Press.
Laufer, B. (1998). The development of passive and active vocabulary in a second language: Same or different? Applied Linguistics, 19, 255-271.
Laufer, B. (2003). Vocabulary acquisition in a second language: Do learners really acquire most vocabulary by reading? Some empirical evidence. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 59(4), 567-587.
Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22, 1-26
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (3rd ed.). (1995). Harlow: Longman.
Luppescu, S., & Day, R. (1993). Reading, dictionaries, and vocabulary learning. Language Learning, 43, 263-287.
McNamara, T. (2000). Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mondria, J., & Wiersma, B. (2004). Receptive, productive, and receptive + productive L2 vocabulary learning: What difference does it make? In Boggards & Laufer (Eds), Vocabulary in a second language: Selection, acquisition and testing. NJ: Benjamin Publishing.
Nagy, W. E. (1997). On the role of context in first- and second-language vocabulary learning. In N. Schmitt and M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 64-83). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Nagy, W. E., Herman, P. A., & Anderson, P. C. (1985). Learning words from context. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 233-253.
Nation, P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. NY: Newbury House Publisher.
Newton, J. (1995). Task-based interaction and incidental vocabulary learning: a case study. Second Language Research, 11, 159-177.
Nisbet, S. (1941). The scientific investigation of spelling instruction: Two preliminary problems. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 11, 150.
Ormrod, J. (1986). Learning to spell while reading: A follow-up study. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 63, 652-654.
Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1996). Assessing second language vocabulary knowledge: Depth versus breadth. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 53, 13-40.
Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1997). Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 174-200). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pitts, M., White, H., & Krashen, S. (1989). Acquiring second language vocabulary through reading: A replication of the Clockwork Orange study using second language acquirers. Reading in a Second Language, 5, 271-275.
Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Rott, S. (1999). The effect of exposure frequency on intermediate language learners’ incidental vocabulary acquisition and retention through reading. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 589-619
Rott, S., Williams, J., & Cameron, R. (2002). The effect of multiple-choice L1 glosses
and input-output cycles on lexical acquisition and retention. Language Teaching
Research, 6(3), 183-222.
Saragi, T., Nation, I. S. P., & Meister, G. F. (1978). Vocabulary learning and reading. System, 6, 72-78.
Sternberg, R.J. (1987). Most vocabulary is learnt from context. In M.G. McKeown & M. E. Curtis (Eds.), The nature of vocabulary acquisition (pp. 89-105). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Stoddard, G. D. (1929). An experiment in verbal learning. Journal of educational psychology, 20, 452-457.
Sugawara, M. (1992). The effect of productive-use vocabulary exercises on confidence in vocabulary knowledge and receptive and productive vocabulary acquisition. M.A. thesis. Linguistics Department, Brigham Young University.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass and C. Madden (Eds.), Input and second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371-391.
Tulving, E., & Thomson, D. M. (1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review, 80, 352-373.
Tu, H. F. (2004). Effects of task-induced involvement on incidental vocabulary learning in a second language. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan.
Waring, R. (1997). A study of receptive and productive vocabulary learning from word cards. Studies in Foreign Languages and Literature (Notre Dame Seishin University) 21(1), 94-114.
Waring, R. (2002). Scales of vocabulary knowledge in second language vocabulary assessment. Retrieved April 1, 2006, from http://www1.harenet.ne.jp/~waring/papers/scales.htm
Waring, R., & Takaki, M. (2003). At what rate do learners learn and retain vocabulary from reading a graded reader. Reading in a Foreign Language, 15(2).
鄭恆雄 (2002)，大學入學考試中心高中英文參考字彙表，台北：大學入學考試中心。
鄭恆雄 (2003)，大學入學考試中心高中英文參考字彙表之編輯方法及原則。Proceedings the 7th International Conference on Multimedia Language Education. Taipei: Crane.