跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.236.84.188) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/08/06 12:29
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

: 
twitterline
研究生:何依禪
研究生(外文):Yi-chan Ho
論文名稱:英語系大學生之學術字彙能力與其衍生詞性之關聯
論文名稱(外文):Relationships Between College English Majors' Abilities in Academic Vocabulary and its Derivatives of Word Family
指導教授:楊玲珿
指導教授(外文):Ling-zu Yang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立高雄師範大學
系所名稱:英語學系
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:2009
畢業學年度:97
語文別:英文
論文頁數:107
中文關鍵詞:字彙量學術字彙衍生詞性應用性字彙能力接受性字彙能力
外文關鍵詞:vocabulary sizeacademic vocabularyderivativesproductive vocabulary abilityreceptive vocabulary ability
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:338
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:61
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
本研究旨在探討台灣英語系主修者之學術字彙程度與其四項詞性能力之關係。此外,本研究並探討不同學術字彙程度受試者的詞性學習經驗與其拼寫學術字彙詞性表現的關聯性。
本研究的實驗對象為七十二位國立高雄師範大學英語系之大四與七十位大一學生。所有受試學生皆接受學術字彙程度測驗、拼寫學術字彙詞性測驗、及辨識學術字彙詞性測驗。此外,所有受試學生皆填寫一份關於英語學習背景、學術字彙學習意見、字彙詞性學習經驗、及字彙詞性學習意見之調查問卷。受試學生的學術字彙程度測驗、拼寫學術字彙詞性測驗、辨識學術字彙詞性測驗、及問卷結果皆加以計算。本研究採用統計計量法研究受試學生之學術字彙程度與其四項詞性能力之關聯、及其問卷調查結果。
本研究之主要發現概述如下:
1. 大四與大一學生在學術字彙程度測驗方面有顯著之差異性。大四學生皆通過並達到學術字彙程度,五十四名大一學生通過並達到學術字彙程度,另十六名大一學生未達到學術字彙程度。大四學生之學術字彙成績顯著優於五十四名達到學術字彙程度的大一學生及十六名未達到學術字彙程度的大一學生,五十四名達到學術字彙程度的大一學生亦顯著優於十六名未達到學術字彙程度的大一學生。
2. 三組不同學術字彙成績學生在四項詞性中,副詞能力顯著低於名詞、動詞、及形容詞。另外,大四學生在名詞與形容詞的表現上顯著優於所有大一學生,而大一達到學術字彙程度的學生亦顯著優於大一未達到學術字彙程度的學生。在動詞與副詞的表現上,大四學生的表現顯著優於所有大一學生。
3. 三組受試學生之辨識學術字彙詞性能力顯著優於拼寫學術字彙詞性能力。在拼寫學術字彙詞性測驗方面,三組不同學術字彙程度學生有顯著之差異性。大四學生之拼寫學術字彙詞性能力顯著優於達到及未達到學術字彙程度的大一學生。達到學術字彙程度的大一學生之拼寫學術字彙詞性能力亦顯著優於未達到學術字彙程度的大一學生。在辨識學術字彙詞性測驗方面,大四學生顯著優於達到及未達到學術字彙程度的大一學生。
4. 在拼寫學術字彙詞性測驗中,三組學生寫出四項詞性中的二個為最多。而在辨識學術字彙詞性測驗中,未達到學術字彙程度的大一學生辨認出四項詞性中的三個為最多,而達到學術字彙程度的大一學生及大四學生則辨認出四項詞性中的四個為最多。
5. 受試學生之學術字彙意思知道與否與其拼寫詞性能力有顯著關聯。大四及達到學術字彙程度的大一學生中,知道意思的學術字彙之詞性能力顯著優於受試學生認為不知道意思的學術字彙之詞性能力。
6. 三組不同學術字彙成績學生在不同的詞性學習經驗上,其拼寫學術字彙詞性能力之間並無顯著關聯。
This study aimed to investigate the relationships between college English majors’ academic vocabulary ability and their derivatives ability. The subjects consist of two groups: 72 English-majored seniors and 70 English-majored freshmen at National Kaohsiung Normal University in Taiwan. The instruments are Academic Vocabulary Level Test (developed by Schmitt, Schmitt, & Clapham, 2001), Productive Derivatives Test, Receptive Derivatives Test, and a questionnaire. Except for the Academic Vocabulary Level Test, the other three instruments were developed by the researcher of this study. By ways of descriptive statistics, Pearson Chi-square test, Independent Sample t-test, one-way ANOVA, and Scheffe post-hoc test through the SPSS version 10.0 for Windows, the data of this study were analyzed quantitatively.
The major findings of this study are summarized as follows:
1. The difference between freshmen’s and seniors’ performances on the Academic Vocabulary Level Test reached the significant level. Seniors (SP group) had significantly better performance on the Academic Vocabulary Level Test than the 54 freshmen who passed the Academic Vocabulary Level Test (FP group) did and than the 16 freshmen who failed the Academic Vocabulary Level Test (FF group) did. Besides, the FP group had significantly better performance on the Academic Vocabulary Level Test than the FF group.
2. Among the four word classes, the three groups’ productive performances on adverbs were significantly lower than the other three word classes. Besides, the SP group performed significantly better on producing all the four word classes--nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs. For nouns and adjectives, the SP group performed significantly better than the FP and than the FF groups did, and also the FP group performed significantly better than the FF group did. As for verbs and adverbs, the SP group performed significantly better than the FP group did and than the FF group did.
3. The three subject groups’ productive derivatives ability was significantly better than their receptive derivatives ability. For productive derivatives ability, the SP group performed significantly better than the FP group did and than the FF group did. The FP group also performed significantly better than the FF group did. For receptive derivatives ability, the SP group performed significantly better than the FP group did and than the FF group did.
4. On the Productive Derivatives Test, two derivatives out of the four were produced the most by the subjects. On the Receptive Derivatives Test, three derivatives out of the four were recognized the most by the FF group, and four derivatives out of the four were recognized the most by the FP and the SP groups.
5. Subjects’ knowledge of word meanings was related to their performance on the derivatives on the Productive Derivatives Test. The performance on the derivatives of which the subjects in the SP and FP groups knew the meanings was significantly better than the performance on the derivatives of which the subjects claimed they knew the meanings only in context, and than the performance on the derivatives of which the subjects claimed they did not know the meanings.
6. The relationship between the subjects’ learning experience of four parts of speech and their performance on the Productive Derivatives Test was not found.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................... i
CHINESE ABSTRACT...................................................................................... ii
ENGLISH ABSTRACT...................................................................................... iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................... vii

LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................. x
LIST OF FIGURES............................................................................................ xii

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION........................................................... 1
Background and Motivation....................................................................... 1
Statement of the Problem............................................................................ 4
Purposes of the Study.................................................................................. 5
Research Questions..................................................................................... 6
Significance of the Study ........................................................................... 7
Definition of Terms..................................................................................... 7
Limitations of the Study.............................................................................. 9

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW............................................... 10
The Importance of Vocabulary.................................................................... 10
The Importance of Breadth of Vocabulary Knowledge...................... 12
The Importance of Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge......................... 15
Descriptions of the Nature of Vocabulary knowledge................................. 17
Receptive and Productive Vocabulary Knowledge............................. 19
Word Lists and Word Frequency Counts............................................. 21
Academic Vocabulary.......................................................................... 23
Grammar of Vocabulary ..................................................................... 24
The Insights of Learning Parts of Speech................................... 25
The Insights of Learning Spelling and Developing
Derivational Words.....................................................................
28
The Assessment of Vocabulary Knowledge................................................ 30
Trends of Assessing Lexical Knowledge............................................ 30
Assessment of ESL/EFL Learners’ Vocabulary Size.......................... 32
The Vocabulary Levels Test........................................................ 34
The Eurocentres Vocabulary Size Test........................................ 35
Assessing Productive and Receptive Vocabularies............................. 36
The Vocabulary Knowledge Scale.............................................. 36

CHAPTER THREE METHOD AND PROCEDURE................................ 38
Subjects............................................................................................... 38
Instruments.......................................................................................... 39
Academic Vocabulary Level Test................................................ 39
Coxhead’s Academic Word List.................................................. 40
Derivatives Measures.................................................................. 40
Productive Derivatives Test................................................. 41
Receptive Derivatives Test.................................................. 43
Questionnaire.............................................................................. 43
Procedure............................................................................................ 44
Data Analysis...................................................................................... 45

CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS.................................. 47
EFL Students’ Academic Vocabulary Level........................................ 47
The Distribution of Four Parts of Speech in Subject Groups............. 50
The Three Groups’ Performance of Adverbs.............................. 54
Relationships Between Subjects’ Productive and Receptive Derivatives of Academic Words..........................................................
57
The Numbers of Correct Derivatives in a Word Family...................... 59
The Numbers of Derivatives Rated as Level A With Correct and
Incorrect Meanings, Level B, and Level C on the PDT......................
61
Comparisons of the Average Numbers Between the Four
Levels Within Groups..................................................................
66
Subjects’ Reflections on the Questionnaires........................................ 68
Subjects’ English Learning Background and Perceptions of Academic Words..........................................................................
69
Subjects’ Experience of Learning Four Parts of Speech...................... 71
Subjects’ Opinions of Learning Word Family...................................... 73
Relationships Between Learners’ Experience of Learning the Four
Parts of Speech and Their Performance on the Derivatives Tests.......
74

CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS.............................................................. 78
Summary of Findings.......................................................................... 78
Pedagogical Implications..................................................................... 80
Suggestions for Further Research........................................................ 82
REFERENCES.................................................................................................. 85

APPENDIXES.................................................................................................... 96
Appendix A: The Academic Vocabulary Level Test.................................... 96
Appendix B: Productive Derivatives Test.................................................... 99
Appendix C: Receptive Derivatives Test..................................................... 101
Appendix D: A Questionnaire on the College English Majors’
Background and Opinions on Learning Word Family............
104
Appendix E: Possible Derivatives of the Twenty Target Words................... 106
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1 The Numbers of Freshmen’s and Seniors’ Pass and Failure on Academic Vocabulary Level Test......................................................
48
Table 2 Freshmen’s and Seniors’ Mean Scores on the Academic
Vocabulary Level Test........................................................................
49
Table 3 The FF, FP and SP Groups’ Mean Scores on the Academic
Vocabulary Level Test........................................................................
50
Table 4 Numbers of Four Word Classes Produced on the Productive
Derivatives Test..................................................................................
51
Table 5 Comparisons Among the Mean Scores of Four Derivatives on
the Productive Derivatives Test Within and Between Groups...........
55
Table 6 Percentage of Incorrect Adverbs Considered Non-existing............... 54
Table 7 Comparisons of Overall Scores Between the Productive
Derivatives Test and the Receptive Derivatives Test, and
Between the Three Subject Groups...................................................

57
Table 8 The Numbers and Percentages of Correct Derivative Forms on the
Productive Derivatives Test and the Receptive Derivatives Test......
60
Table 9 The Percentages and Means of Each Level in the Three Groups
on the Productive Derivatives Test.....................................................
62
Table 10 The Numbers of Correctly Produced Derivative Forms in Different Levels on the Productive Derivatives Test.........................................
64
Table 11 Comparisons Between Numbers of Derivatives on the Productive Derivatives Test for Four Levels Within Groups................................
67
Table 12 Years of Learning English.................................................................. 70
Table 13 Subjects’ Perceptions of Academic Words......................................... 71
Table 14 Learners Asked to Memorize Four Parts of Speech in Senior
High School…....................................................................................
72
Table 15 The Frequency of Learners’ Learning Four Parts of Speech of a
New Word…......................................................................................
73
Table 16 Learners’ Opinions of Learning Every Word in a Word Family........ 73
Table 17 The Helpfulness of Learning Family Words to Expand Vocabulary..........................................................................................
74
Table 18 The PDT Scores of the Learners Asked or not Asked to
Memorize the Four Parts of Speech in Senior High School..............
75
Table 19 The PDT Scores of Learners Learning the Four Parts of Speech
by Different Frequency......................................................................
76

LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1 Self-rating Scale................................................................................. 42
Figure 2 The Productive Derivatives Test Item................................................ 42
Figure 3 The Receptive Derivatives Test Item.................................................. 43
Figure 4 Procedure of Conducting This Study.................................................. 45
REFERENCES
Aitchison, J. (1987). Words in the mind: An introduction to the mental lexicon.
Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Allen, V. F. (1983). Techniques in teaching vocabulary. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Babkoff, A. (2005). Old rules, spelling reform, loan words and spelling on the net. In
18th Annual EA Education Conference 2005. Retrieved June 20, 2007, from http://www.englishaustralia.com.au/index.cgi?E=hcatfuncs&PT=sl&X=getdoc&Lev1=pub_c06_07&Lev2=c05_babkof
Bauer, L. (1983). English word-formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Baumann, J. F., Edwards, E. C., Font, G., Tereshinski, C. A., Kame’enui, E. J., &
Olejnik, S. (2002). Teaching morphemic and contextual analysis to fifth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 37(1), 150-173.
Bear, D., Invernizzi, M., Templeton, S., & Johnston, F. (2000). Words their way: Word
study for phonics, vocabulary, and spelling instruction (2nd ed.). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bear, D. R., & Templeton, S. (1998). Explorations in developmental spelling:
Foundations for learning and teaching phonics, spelling, and vocabulary. The Reading Teacher, 52(3), 222-242.
Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (1991). Social studies texts are hard to understand:
Mediating some of the difficulties. Language Arts, 68, 482-490.
Bloodgood, J. W., & Pacifici, L. C. (2004). Bring word study to intermediate
classrooms. The Reading Teacher, 58(3), 250-263.
Brown, T., & Perry, F. (1991). A comparison of three learning strategies for ESL
vocabulary acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 25(4), 655-669.
Cameron, L. (2002). Measuring vocabulary size in English as an additional language. Language Teaching Research, 6(2), 145-173.
Carroll, J. B., Davies, P., & Richman, B. (1971). The American heritage word frequency book. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Carter, R. (1987). Vocabulary: Applied linguistic perspectives. London: Allen & Unwin.
Carter, R. (1998). Vocabulary: Applied linguistic perspectives (2nd ed.). London: Allen & Unwin.
Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (1988). Vocabulary and language teaching. New York: Longman.

Channell, J. (1988) Psycholinguistic considerations in the study of L2 vocabulary
acquisition. In R. Carter & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary and language teaching (pp. 83-96). London: Longman.

Chapelle, C. A. (1994). Are C-tests valid measures for L2 vocabulary research?
Second Language Research, 10, 157-187.

Chen, H. J. (1998). A preliminary investigation on Taiwanese EFL learners’
vocabulary knowledge. In Proceedings of the 15th conference on English
teaching and learning in the Republic of China (pp. 193-212). Taipei: Crane Publishing Corporation.

Chung, M., & Nation, P. (2003). Technical vocabulary in specialized texts. Reading in
a Foreign Language, 15, 103-116.

Coady, J. (1993). Research on ESL/EFL vocabulary acquisition: Putting it in context.
In T. Huckin, M. Haynes, & J. Coady (Eds.), Second language reading vocabulary learning (pp. 3-23). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Cohen, A., Glasman, H., Rosenbaum-Cohen, P. R., Ferrara, J., & Fine, J. (1988).
Reading English for specialized purposes: Discourse analysis and the use of student informants. In P. Carrell, J. Devine & D. E. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading (pp.152-167). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
College Entrance Examination Center. (2002, June, 30). Senior high school vocabulary reference list. Retrieved May 15, 2007, from http://www.ceec.edu.tw/
Research/ResearchSearch.aspx
Cowan, J. R. (1974). Lexical and syntactic research for the design of reading
materials. TESOL Quarterly, 8(4), 389-399.
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213-238.
Cummings, D.W. (1988). American English spelling. New York: Webster Division.

D’Anna, C. A., Zechmeister, E. B., & Hall, J. W. (1991). Toward a meaningful
definition of vocabulary size. Journal of Reading Behavior, 23, 109-122.

Dresher, R. (1934). Training in mathematics vocabulary. Educational Research
Bulletin, 13, 201-204.
Dupuy, H. J. (1974). The rationale, development, and standardization of a basic word
vocabulary test. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Elley, W. (1989). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories. Reading Research
Quarterly, 24(2), 174-187.

Ellis, N. C. (1997). Vocabulary acquisition: Word structure, collocation, word-class, and meaning. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 122-139). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Farrell, P. (1990). Vocabulary in ESP: A lexical analysis of the English of electronics
and a study of semi-technical vocabulary, CLCS Occasional Paper 25, Dublin: Trinity College.
Folse, K. S. (2006). The effect of type of written exercise on L2 vocabulary retention. TESOL Quarterly, 40(2), 273-293.
Gairns, R., & Redman, S. (1986). Working with words: A guide to teaching and learning vocabulary. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gibson, E., & Levin, H. (1975). The psychology of reading. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Goulden, R., Nation, P., & Read, J. (1990). How large can a receptive vocabulary be?
Applied Linguistics, 11(4), 341-363.

Gove, P. B. (Ed.). (1986). Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged. U.S.A. : Merriam-Webster.

Grainger, J. (1993). Visual word recognition in bilinguals. In R. Schreuder & B. Weltens (Eds.), The bilingual lexicon (pp. 11-26). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Greavu, A. (2005). Aspects of sub-technical vocabulary in English and Romanian
economics texts. Retrived April 15, 2008, from http://anale.steconomice.evonet.
ro/arhiva/2005/abordari-ale-limbajului-economic/10.pdf

Greidanus, T., & Nienhuis, L. (2001). Testing the quality of word knowledge in a
second language by means of word associations: Types of distractors and types of associations. The Modern Language Journal, 85(4), 567-577.

Gu, Y. (2003). Fine brush and freehand: The vocabulary-learning art of two
successful Chinese EFL learners. TESOL Quarterly, 37(1), 73-104.

Hauerwas, L. B., & Walker, J. (2004). What can children’s spelling of running and
jumped tell us about their need for spelling instruction? The Reading Teacher, 58(2), 168-176.
Higgins, J. J. (1966). “Hard facts”. ELT Journal, 21, 55-60.
Hinkel, E. (2006). Current perspectives on teaching the four skills. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 109-131.

Hirsh, D., & Nation, P. (1992). What vocabulary size is needed to read unsimplified texts for pleasure? Reading in a Foreign Language, 8(2), 689-696.

Huang, C. C. (2004a). A Comparison of vocabulary knowledge, content knowledge and reading comprehension between senior high and vocational high school students. Journal of Taipei Municipal University of Education, 35(1), 55-74.

Huang, C. C. (2004b). University students’ vocabulary knowledge, content knowledge and reading comprehension. Journal of National Tainan Teachers College, 38(1), 125-153.

Hughes, A. (1989). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hulstijn, J. (1997). Mnemonic methods in foreign language vocabulary learning:
Theoretical considerations and pedagogical implications. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 203-224). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hung, C. C. (2003). Senior high school students’ vocabulary knowledge, content knowledge, and reading comprehension. The Proceeding of the 12th International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 391-402). Taipei: Crane.
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2007). Is there an “academic vocabulary”? TESOL Quarterly,
41(2), 235-253.

Ioroi, T., & Otagaki, M. (2005). Frequency effects on Japanese EFL learners’
perception of morphologically complex words. Asian EFL Journal, 7(2), 24-32.

Jackson, H., & Amvela, E. Z. (2000). Words, meaning, and vocabulary: An
introduction to modern English lexicology. Harrisburg, PA: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Joe, A. (1998). What effect do text-based tasks promoting generation have on incidental vocabulary acquisition? Applied Linguistics, 19, 357-377.
Joshi, R. M., & Aaron, P. G. (2002). Naming speed and word familiarity as confounding factors in decoding. Journal of Research in Reading, 25(2), 160-171.
Laufer, B (1986). Possible changes in attitude towards vocabulary acquisition. IRAL, 24(1), 69-75.
Laufer, B. (1992). Reading in a foreign language: How does L2 lexical knowledge interact with the reader’s general academic ability? Journal of Research in Reading, 15(2), 95-103.
Laufer, B. (1997a). The lexical plight in second language reading. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 20-34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Laufer, B. (1997b). What’s in a word that makes it hard or easy: Some intralexical factors that affect the learning of words. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 140-155). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Laufer, B. (1998). The development of passive and active vocabulary in a second
language: Same or different? Applied Linguistics, 19(2), 255-271.
Laufer, B., Elder, C., Hill, K., & Congdon, P. (2004). Size and strength: Do we need
both to measure vocabulary knowledge? Language Testing, 21(2), 202-226.
Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1999). A vocabulary size test of controlled productive ability. Language Testing, 16, 36-55.
Long, M. H., & Richards, J. C. (Eds.). (1987). Methodology in TESOL: A book of
reading. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Martin, A. V. (1976). Teaching academic vocabulary to foreign graduate students.
TESOL Quarterly, 10(1), 91-97.
McKeown, M. G. (1993). Creating effective definitions for young word learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 16-33.

Meara, P. (1990). A note on passive vocabulary. Second Language Research, 6(2),
150-154.
Meara, P. (1996) The dimensions of lexical competence. In G. Brown, K. Malmkjaer, & J. Williams (Eds.), Performance and competence in second language acquisition (pp. 33-53). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Meara, P., & Buxton, B. (1987). An alternative to multiple choice vocabulary tests. Language Testing, 4, 142-151.
Melka, F. (1997). Receptive vs. productive aspects of vocabulary. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition, and pedagogy (pp. 84-102). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mezynski, K. (1983). Issues concerning the acquisition of knowledge: Effects of vocabulary training on reading comprehension. Review of Educational Research, 53(2), 253-279.

Moats, L. C., & Smith, C. (1992). Derivational morphology: Why it should be
included in language assessment and instruction. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 23, 312-319.
Morris, D., & Templeton, S. (1999). Questions teachers ask about spelling. Reading
Research Quarterly, 34(1), 102-112.
Nagy, W., & Anderson, R. C. (1984). How many words are there in printed school English? Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 304-330.
Nagy, W., Anderson, R. C., Schommer, M., Scott, J. A., & Stallman A. C. (1989). Morphological families in the internal lexicon. Reading Research Quarterly, 24(3), 262-282.
Nagy, W., Diakidoy, I. N., & Anderson, R. C. (1993). The acquisition of morphology: Learning the contribution of suffixes to the meanings of derivatives. Journal of Reading Behavior, 25(2), 155-170.
Nassaji, H. (2003). L2 vocabulary learning from context: Strategies, knowledge sources, and their relationship with success in l2 lexical inferencing. TESOL Quarterly, 37(4), 645-668.
Nation, I. S. P. (1982). Beginning to learn foreign vocabulary: A review of the research. RELC Journal, 13, 14-36.
Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. New York: Newbury House.
Nation, I. S. P. (1993). Vocabulary size, growth, and use. In R. Schreuder & B. Weltens (Eds.), The bilingual lexicon (pp. 115-134). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nation, P., & Waring, R. (1997). Vocabulary size, text coverage and word lists. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 6-19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
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.
Parry, K. (1991). Building a vocabulary through academic reading. TESOL Quarterly, 25(4), 629-653.
Qian, D. D. (1999). Assessing the roles of depth and breadth of vocabulary knowledge in reading comprehension. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 56(2), 282-307.
Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C. (1976). The role of vocabulary teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 10(1), 77-89.
Richards, J. C. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rupley, W. H., Logan, J. W., & Nichols, W. D. (1999). Vocabulary instruction in a balanced reading program. The Reading Teacher, 52(4), 336-346.
Saville-Troike, M. (1984). What really matters in second language learning for
academic achievement? TESOL Quarterly, 18(2), 199-219.

Schmitt, N. (1994). Word building: Word family practice. In P. Nation (Ed.), New
ways in teaching vocabulary (pp. 182-189), Alexandria, VA:TESOL.

Schmitt, N. (1997). Vocabulary learning strategies. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy
(Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 199-227). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schmitt, N. (1998). Tracking the incremental acquisition of second language vocabulary: A longitudinal study. Language Learning, 48(2), 281-317.
Schmitt, N. (1999). The relationship between TOEFL vocabulary items and meaning, association, collocation, and word class knowledge. Language Testing, 16(2), 189-216.
Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schmitt, N., & Meara, P. (1997). Researching vocabulary through a word knowledge framework: Word associations and verbal suffixes. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 17-36.
Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D., & Clapham, C. (2001). Developing and exploring the behaviour of two new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test. Language Testing, 18(1), 55-88.
Schmitt, N., & Zimmerman, C. B. (2002). Derivative word forms: What do learners know? TESOL Quarterly, 36(2), 145-173.
Schoonen, R., & Verhallen, M. (2008). The assessment of deep word knowledge in young first and second language learners. Language Testing, 25(2), 211-236.
Sedita, J. (2005). Effective vocabulary instruction. Insights on Learning Disabilities, 2(1), 33-45.
Shen, W. W. (2003). Current trends of vocabulary teaching and learning strategies for
EFL settings. Feng Chia Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 7, 187-224.
Sousa, D. A. (2005). How the brain learns to read. California: Corwin Press.

Springer, S. (2004). Making the jump: From receptive to productive vocabulary control. Retrieved December 20, 2007, from http://72.14.235.104/search?q=
cache:wvrXe6jSBn8J:www.er.uqam.ca/nobel

Stroller, F. L., Grabe, W. (1993). Implications for L2 vocabulary acquisition and
instruction from L1 vocabulary research. In T. Huckin, M. Haynes, & J. Coady (Eds.), Second language reading vocabulary learning (pp. 24-45). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Su, C. C. (2006). A preliminary study of the 2000 basic English word list in Taiwan. Paper presented at the 23rd International Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the R.O.C, Kaohsiung, R.O.C.

Summers, D. (Ed.). (2003). Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (4th ed.).
England : Longman
Templeton, S. (1991). Teaching and learning the English spelling system: Reconceptualizing method and purpose. The Elementary School Journal, 92(2), 185-201.
Templeton, S., & Morris, D. (1999). Questions teachers ask about spelling. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 102-112.
Tsai, B. Y. (2005). The relationship between receptive English vocabulary sizes and listening comprehension competence of college EFL students. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung.
Twaddell, F. (1973). Vocabulary expansion in the TESOL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 7(1), 61-78.

Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Waring, R. (1996). A comparison of the receptive and productive vocabulary sizes of some second language learners. Notre Dame Seishin University.
Watts, S. (1995). Vocabulary instruction during reading lessons in six classrooms. Journal of Reading Behavior, 27, 399-424.
Webb, S. (2008). Receptive and productive vocabulary sizes of L2 learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 79-95.
Wesche, M., & Paribakht, T. S. (1996). Assessing second language vocabulary knowledge: Depth versus breadth. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 53(1), 13-40.
West, M. (1953). A general service list of English words. London: Longman, Green.
White, T. G., Sowell, J., & Yanagihara, A. (1989). Teaching elementary students to use
word-part clues. The Reading Teacher, 42(4), 302-309.

Widdowson, H. G. (1978). Teaching language as communication. Oxford: OUP.
Wilkins, D. A. (1972). Linguistics in language teaching. London: Edward Arnold.
Worthington, D., & Nation, P. (1996). Using texts to sequence the introduction of
new vocabulary in an EAP course. RELC Journal, 27(2), 1-11.

Wu, S. C. (2005). Measuring word knowledge in vocabulary tests. The Journal of
Hsing Wu College, 29, 261-279.

Wysocki, K., & Jenkins, J. R. (1987). Deriving word meanings through morphological
generalization. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 66-81.

Yang, H. (1986). A new technique for identifying scientific/technical terms and
describing science texts. Literacy and Linguistic Computing, 1, 93-103.
Zimmerman, C. B. (1997a). Do reading and interactive vocabulary instruction make a difference? TESOL Quarterly, 31(1), 121-140.
Zimmerman, C. B. (1997b). Historical trends in second language vocabulary instruction. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 5-19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top