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:2021/08/02 19:49
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:陳麗閔
研究生(外文):Li Min Chen
論文名稱:語義集群成效:在不同教學情境下之英文字根習得
論文名稱(外文):THE EFFECTS OF SEMANTIC SETS: ACQUISITION OF ENGLISH WORD-ROOTS UNDER DIFFERENT INSTRUCTION CONDITIONS
指導教授:石素錦石素錦引用關係
指導教授(外文):Su Chin Shih
學位類別:博士
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:2015
畢業學年度:103
語文別:英文
論文頁數:162
中文關鍵詞:語義集群語素意識詞彙推理字根字根習得順序英文外語學習者
外文關鍵詞:Semantic setsMorphological awarenessLexical inferenceWord rootWord root acquisition orderEFL learner
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:254
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:44
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
作為語義集群與字根知識習得應用於英語外語高職生之先峰研究,本研究在探索語義集群對於字根知識習得、單字習得及語義推理能力之成效展現了高度企圖心。
  共有88名以中文為母語的高職二年級學生,參與為期二十週的研究。這88名學生來自於一所台灣典型高職學校的二個完整班級。本研究中所有測驗依據的內容及學習教材,為依語義分類及字母順序排列來設計的兩套單字表。這兩套教材包含了完全一樣的內容以及相同數量的單字,唯一的差異是字根的組織方式。根據本研究當中所有可觀察的變項,資料分析結果如下:
1.接受字根教學之前,學生傾向逐字背誦各別單字,極少學生擁有單字構詞知識,因此他們在字根知識測驗前測分數,非常的不理想。
2.在接受一學期清楚明確的字根教學之後,兩大組及不同英文程度的參與者,在字根知識習得與單字學習的部份,都有極大的進步。
3.語義分類字根的應用,對於構詞知識教學並無助益。這個結果顯示,語義分類字根應用於構詞知識教學,於學習過程中,語義相近之字根可能造成構詞複雜的學術單字之間的相互競爭及混淆。但是,語義分類字根應用於構詞知識教學,確能夠有效地幫助高職生辨認出未學過單字內的字根。也就是說,依語義分類的字根知識教學,能夠幫助學生有意識的辨認出構詞複雜的學術新字裏的字根。
4.整體來說,在本研究所有的測驗當中,無論參與者學習的是那一種字根知識教材,高分組的英文學習者都表現得比中分組及低分組的學習者好。換句話說,英文能力比較好的學習者,善於使用任何的教材,在所有的學習任務上,做最好的學習。
5.在台灣高職的教學環境中,語義分類的字根教學,對於高分組的英文學習者幫助最大。
6.語義分類的字根教學跟字母排列的字根教學,相較之下,對於長期記憶並無顯著不同。
7.學生對於教材的投入程度,影響研究成果甚鉅。
8.英語母語學習者所學習的高頻率核心字根與本研究所選的字根習得順序,有高度的相關。這個結果顯示,核心字根於不同的學習環境之下,具有共通性。
9.與某些主題相關的英文字根,在本研究中似乎較容易習得。
  綜合以上結果,本研究提出三點建議:
1.字根知識教學,對於英語外語習得學生的字根知識與單字學習有很大的助益。
2.人腦儲存單字的方式,並未充分反應單字的學習方式。
3.有些字根比其他的字根較容易習得。
  本研究對於與目前語義相關及字根相關之研究有更進一層的剖析。並對於語義集群應用於英語構詞教學感興趣的學者們,提供新的研究領域。

As the first of its kind that applied semantic sets to the word root knowledge acquisition for EFL vocational high young adults, the current study showed the ambition to explore the effects of semantic sets on word root knowledge awareness, general academic vocabulary acquisition, and lexical inferencing ability.
Totally 88 Mandarin-speaking eleventh graders from two intact classes in a typical EFL vocational high school in Taiwan were invited to conduct the 20-week quasi-experimental study. Two word lists, categorized into semantic-related and alphabetic-ordered word-root sets, were constructed as the treatment materials and employed to guide the design of all the criterion tests in the study. Both of the word lists included exactly the same content and amount of words. The only difference was the way of grouping the target words.
Based on the analysis of the data among all observed variables included in this study, the following conclusions could be drawn.
1.Before receiving explicit word root knowledge awareness instruction, the participants in the present study intend to memorize words in isolation, letter by letter, with limited morphological structure and awareness in the mind. Thus, their performance in word root knowledge pretest was far from satisfactory (M of SG = 6.55 out of 24, SD = 3.398; M of AG = 8.36 out of 24, SD = 2.924).
2.After receiving explicit word root knowledge awareness instruction for one semester, positive statistical results were found to exist among the participants of all three English proficiency levels with varied instructional materials in word root knowledge acquisition and academic vocabulary learning.
3.The significant effect of semantic-related sets for word root knowledge awareness and various literacy development was not found in the present study when we compared that with alphabetic-ordered sets except for the target word root identification in the lexical inferencing ability test (F = 4.029, p = .048<.05). The results indicated that semantic sets may cause simultaneous competition and confusion among newly-learnt morphological complex academic words to categorize under semantic-related word root sets, suggested as coactive inference by the researcher in the present study. However, the SG participants’ performance in the lexical inferencing ability test for the target word root identification suggested that presenting morphological complex academic words with semantic-related word root sets can help EFL learners be more consciously aware of the morphemic structure of words and identify the target word roots when those word roots appear in novel words.
4.In general, regardless of the types of word root knowledge awareness instructional materials the participants received, the participants with higher English proficiency (EAP) level performed better than those with middle and lower EAP levels in all the three criterion tests in both SG and AG in the study. In other words, more skilled language learners possess some ability to use whatever instructional material they received for better learning results in various language tasks.
5.Grouping word roots with semantic sets can most benefit the learners with higher EAP level in various language learning tasks in EFL vocational high school context.
6.Grouping word roots with semantic-related sets did not facilitate learners’ performance in the later recall task for better word retention than simply alphabetic-ordered word root sets did.
7.The amount of participants’ involvement in the instructional material merits a primary consideration.
8.The core word roots of high frequency and utility that are taught for native learners match the specific acquisition order of word roots selected in the study, suggesting the generalizability on the core word roots across learning environments.
9.Some English word roots related to certain topics might be easier to learn than others.
Some pedagogical implications in the present study are (1) morphological awareness instructional programs for promoting EFL learners’ vocabulary growth especially general academic words are highly recommended. Nevertheless, the instructional materials should be explicit, systematic and flexible to meet learners’ current need for efficient use of limited instructional time in the EFL settings; (2) the way our mental lexicon organizes words may not fully reflect the way language learners receive words; (3) some word roots may be easier to acquire than others.
Above all, as the first attempt to examine the specific contribution of semantic sets to English word root knowledge awareness and various English learning tasks, the study added the current understanding of semantic-related and morphological-related literature, and, in the meanwhile, opened a new area for researchers who show interest in how the combination of semantic associates and English morphological knowledge awareness instruction might work in the EFL middle school context.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................ i
ABSTRACT (Chinese).............................. ii
ABSTRACT (English).............................. iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS............................... vii
LIST OF ABLES................................... x
LIST OF FIGURES................................. xi

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION....................... 1
Background.................................... 1
Rationales.................................... 2
Purpose of the Study.......................... 6
Research Questions............................ 8
Significance of the Study..................... 9
Definition of Terms........................... 10
Organization of the Study..................... 12

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW.................. 13
Lexicon Development............................. 13
L1 lexicon development........................ 13
L2 lexicon development........................ 13
Summary of lexicon development................ 14
Theories and Empirical Studies on Semantic Sets. 15
Theories for semantic sets.................... 18
Empirical studies for the use of semantic sets 20
Theories against semantic sets................ 21
Empirical studies against the use of semantic
sets.......................................... 22
Summary of semantic sets...................... 31
Teaching English Word Roots in the Classroom.... 32
Teaching English word roots in the L1
classroom..................................... 33
Teaching English word roots in the EFL/ESL
classroom..................................... 37
Summary of teaching English word roots in the
EFL/ESL classroom............................. 40
Morphological Awareness and Lexical Inferencing
Ability....................................... 40
Theories on lexical inferencing ability....... 41
L1 empirical studies on lexical inferencing
ability....................................... 43
EFL/ESL empirical studies on lexical
inferencing ability........................... 44
Incidental Vocabulary Learning and Decontextualized
Vocabulary Learning............................. 46
Morphological Awareness and Word Retention...... 49
Theories and studies on memory and word
retention..................................... 49
Studies on morphological awareness and word
retention..................................... 51

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY...................... 54
Research Design and Framework................... 54
Participants.................................... 55
Instruments..................................... 56
Instructional material........................ 56
The word root knowledge test.................. 61
The word spelling test........................ 66
The lexical inferencing ability test.......... 67
Data Collection and Analysis.................... 68
Data collection............................... 68
Data analysis................................. 70

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULSTS AND DISCUSSION........... 72
Descriptive Statistics.......................... 73
Research Question 1........................... 74
Research Question 2........................... 80
Research Question 3........................... 88
Research Question 4........................... 91
Summary of Chapter Four......................... 95

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS....................... 97
Concluding Remarks.............................. 97
Pedagogical Implications........................ 98
Suggestions for Future Research................. 101

REFERENCES...................................... 104
APPENDIX A: The Fourteen Master Words........... 118
APPENDIX B: Specific Greek and Latin Roots of
High Frequency and Utility at
Primary, Upper Elementary, and Middle
School Levels....................... 119
APPENDIX C: The Semantic-related Word-root List. 122
APPENDIX D: The Alphabetic-ordered Word-root List 123
APPENDIX E: The Target Words in the Semantic-
related Word-root Word list......... 124
APPENDIX F: The Target Words in the Alphabetic-
ordered Word-root Word List......... 129
APPENDIX G: Etymology of the Target Words in the
Word Lists.......................... 134
APPENDIX H: Principal Sources for Etymology of
the Target Words in the Word Lists.. 152
APPENDIX I: Other Sources for Etymology of the
Target Words in the Words Lists..... 154
APPENDIX J: The Level of Difficulty of the Target
Words in the Word Lists............. 159
APPENDIX K: Parts of Speech of the Target Words
in the Word Lists................... 160
APPENDIX L: Word Root Knowledge Test............ 162


LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1. Descriptive statistics of participants’
background information............... 55
Table 3.2. The distribution of the level of
difficulty of the target words in the
word lists........................... 59
Table 3.3. The distribution of parts of speech
of the target words in the word lists 59
Table 3.4. The application of ethical guidelines
for second language vocabulary
research............................. 61
Table 3.5. Revised taxonomy of multiple-choice
item writing guidelines.............. 64
Table 4.1. Descriptive statistics of the scores
of all the tests in the study........ 74
Table 4.2. The performance of SG and AG in the
three tests.......................... 75
Table 4.3. The repeated measures between SG and
AG in the three tests................ 76
Table 4.4. The performance of SG and AG of the
three EAP levels in the three tests.. 81
Table 4.5. Pair samples t test on the performance
of the three EAP levels in the word
root knowledge pretest and immediate
posttest............................. 82
Table 4.6. The repeated measures of the three
EAP levels in the three tests between
groups............................... 83
Table 4.7. The repeated measures of the three
EAP levels in the three tests within
groups............................... 87
Table 4.8. The performance of SG and AG in the
word root knowledge immediate posttest
and delayed posttests................ 89
Table 4.9. The repeated measure of the three EAP
levels between groups in the word root
knowledge delayed posttest........... 89
Table 4.10.The repeated measure of the three EAP
levels within groups in the word root
knowledge delayed posttest........... 90
Table 4.11.The acquisition order of the target
word roots in the word spelling test
for the target word root
identification........................ 92

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1. Example of picture-vocabulary
associations by semantic category in
context.............................. 28
Figure 2.2. The Flow of Information through the
Memory System........................ 50
Figure 3.1. Procedure of data collection......... 69
Figure 4.1. The histograms with normal curve of
the performance of the LEAP participants
in the lexical inferencing ability test
for the word root identification of SG 86
Figure 4.1. The histograms with normal curve of
the performance of the LEAP participants
in the lexical inferencing ability test
for the word root identification of AG 86


REFERENCES

Aitchison, J. (1994). Words in the mind: An introduction to the mental lexicon. Blackwell.

Anglin, J. M., Miller, G. A., & Wakefield, P. C. (1993). Vocabulary development: A morphological analysis. Monographs of the society for research in child development, i-186.

Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. Psychology of learning and motivation, 2, 89-195.

Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Working memory. England: Oxford Uni.

Baumann, J. F., Kame’enui, E. J., & Ash, G. E. (2003). Research on vocabulary instruction: Voltaire redux. Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts, 2, 752-785.

Blachowicz, C. L., Fisher, P. J., Ogle, D., & WATTS‐TAFFE, S. U. S. A. N. (2006). Vocabulary: Questions from the classroom. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(4), 524-539.

Blackowicz, C. Z., & Fisher, P. (2000). Vocabulary instruction. In ML Kamil, P.B..Mosenthal Pearson, P. D., Barr, R., & Kamil, M. L. (2000). Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3. pp.503-524). Mahwah, NJ:Erubaum.

Bolger, P., & Zapata, G. (2011). Semantic categories and context in L2 vocabulary learning. Language Learning, 61(2), 614-646.

Bousfield, W. A. (1953). The occurrence of clustering in the recall of randomly arranged associates. The Journal of General Psychology, 49(2), 229-240.

Brown, T. S., & Perry, F. L. (1991). A comparison of three learning strategies for ESL vocabulary acquisition. Tesol Quarterly, 25(4), 655-670.

Brumfit, C. (1979). Communicative” language teaching: an educational perspective. The communicative approach to language teaching, 183-191.

Carlisle, J. F. (1995). Morphological awareness and early reading achievement. Morphological aspects of language processing, 189-209.

Carlisle, J. F. (2007). Fostering morphological processing, vocabulary development, and reading comprehension. Vocabulary acquisition: Implications for reading comprehension, 78-103.

Carlisle, J. F. (2010). Effects of instruction in morphological awareness on literacy achievement: An integrative review. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(4), 464-487.

Carlisle, J. F., & Fleming, J. (2003). Lexical processing of morphologically complex words in the elementary years. Scientific Studies of Reading, 7(3), 239-253.

Carroll, D. W. (2008). Psychology of language.

Carroll, J. B., & Sapon, S. M. (1959). Modern language aptitude test

Channell, J. (1981). Applying semantic theory to vocabulary teaching. ELT Journal, 35, 115-122.

Chow, P. C., Currie, J. L., & Craik, F. I. (1978). Intentional learning and retention of words following various orienting tasks. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 12(2), 109-112.

Clarke, D. F., & Nation, I. S. P. (1980). Guessing the meanings of words from context: Strategy and techniques. System, 8(3), 211-220.

Conrad, R. (1964). Acoustic confusions in immediate memory. British journal of Psychology, 55(1), 75-84.

Craik, F. I., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671-684.

Craik, F. I., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104(3), 268.

Crothers, E., & Suppes, P.(1967). Experiments in second-language learning.

Erten, İ. H., & Tekin, M. (2008). Effects on vocabulary acquisition of presenting new words in semantic sets versus semantically unrelated sets. System, 36(3), 407-422

Eskey, D. (1988). Holding in the bottom: An interactive approach to the language problems of second language readers. Interactive approaches to second language reading, 6.

Farstrup, A. E., & Samuels, S. J. (Eds.). (2008). What research has to say about vocabulary instruction. International Reading Assoc..

Feldman, L. B., & Basnight-Brown, D. M. (2008). The role of morphology in visual word recognition: Graded semantic influences due to competing senses and semantic richness of the stem. Single-word reading: Behavioral and biological perspectives, ed. EL grigorenko and AJ naples, 85-106.

Finkbeiner, M., & Nicol, J.L. (2003). Semantic category effects in L2 word learning. Applied Psycholinguistics 24 (3), 369-383.

Flanigan, K., Templeton, S., & Hayes, L. (2012). What's in a word? Using content vocabulary to generate growth in general academic vocabulary knowledge. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 56(2), 132-140.

Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35(1), 116-124.

Frantzen, D. (2003). Factors affecting how second language Spanish students derive meaning from context. The Modern Language Journal, 87(2), 168-199.

Freedman, J. L., & Loftus, E. F. (1971). Retrieval of words from long-term memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 10(2), 107-11)( Gairns, R., & Redman, S. (1999). Working with words. Ernst Klett Sprachen.)

Gairns, R., & Redman, S. (1986). Working with words: A guide to teaching and learning vocabulary. Cambridge University Press.

Gough, P. B. (1972). One second of reading. Visible Language.

Graham, S. (1997). Effective language learning: Positive strategies for advanced level language learning (Vol. 6). Multilingual matters.

Graves, M. F., & Watts-Taffe, S. M. (2002). The place of word consciousness in a research-based vocabulary program. What research has to say about reading instruction, 3, 140-165.

Haastrup, K. (1991). Lexical inferencing procedures, or, talking about words: Receptive procedures in foreign language learning with special reference to English (Vol. 14). Gunter Narr Verlag

Haladyna, T. M., Downing, S. M. & Rodriguez, M. C. (2002). A review of multiple-choice item-writing guidelines for classroom assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 15(3),309-334.

Hancin-Bhatt, B., & Nagy, W. (1994). Lexical transfer and second language morphological development. Applied Psycholinguistics, 15(3), 289-310.

Hashemi, M. R., & Gowdasiaei, F. (2005). An attribute-treatment interaction study lexical-set versus semantically-unrelated vocabulary instruction. RELC Journal, 36(3), 341-361.

Hashemi, M., & Aziznezhad, M. (2011). Etymology: A word attack strategy for learning the English vocabulary. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 28, 102-106.

Helman, L. (2009). English words needed: Creating research-based vocabulary instruction for English learners. Essential readings on vocabulary instruction, 124

Henning, G. H. (1973). Remembering foreign language vocabulary: Acoustic and semantic parameters. Language Learning, 23(2), 185-196.

Hiebert, E. H., & Lubliner, S. (2008). The nature, learning, and instruction of general academic vocabulary. What research has to say about vocabulary instruction, 106-129.

Higa, M. (1963). Interference effects of intralist word relationships in verbal learning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2, 170-175

Hulstijn, J. H., & Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the involvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language learning, 51(3), 539-558

Hunt, R.R., & Mitchell, D.B. (1982) Independent effects of semantic and nonsemantic distinctiveness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 8, (1), 81-87.

Jenkins, J. R., Matlock, B., & Slocum, T. A. (1989). Two approaches to vocabulary instruction: The teaching of individual word meanings and practice in deriving word meaning from context. Reading research quarterly, 215-235.

Jeon, E. H. (2011). Contribution of morphological awareness to second‐language reading comprehension. The Modern Language Journal, 95(2), 217-235.

Jiang, N. (2000). Lexical representation and development in a second language. Applied Linguistics, 21(1), 47-77.

Jiménez, R. T., García, G. E., & Pearson, P. D. (1996). The reading strategies of bilingual Latina/o students who are successful English readers: Opportunities and obstacles. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(1), 90-112.

Kamil, M. L., & Hiebert, E. H. (2005). Teaching and learning vocabulary. Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice, 1.

Khoii, R., & Sharififar, S. (2013). Memorization versus semantic mapping in L2 vocabulary acquisition. ELT Journal, 67(2), 199-209.

Kieffer, M. J., & Box, C. D. (2013). Derivational morphological awareness, academic vocabulary, and reading comprehension in linguistically diverse sixth graders. Learning and Individual Differences, 24, 168-175.

Kieffer, M. J., & Lesaux, N. K. (2008). The role of derivational morphology in the reading comprehension of Spanish-speaking English language learners. Reading and Writing, 21(8), 783-804.

Kieffer, M. J., & Lesaux, N. K. (2010). Morphing into adolescents: Active word learning for English‐language learners and their classmates in middle school. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54(1), 47-56.

Kirby, J. R., Deacon, S. H., Bowers, P. N., Izenberg, L., Wade-Woolley, L., & Parrila, R. (2012). Children’s morphological awareness and reading ability. Reading and Writing, 25(2), 389-410.

Ku, Y. M., & Anderson, R. C. (2003). Development of morphological awareness in Chinese and English. Reading and Writing, 16(5), 399-422.

Landsberger, H.A.(1955). Interaction Process Analysis of the Mediation of Labor-Management Disputes. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,51: 552-558

Laufer, B. (1990). Ease and difficulty in vocabulary learning: some teaching implications. Foreign Language Annals, 23, 147–156.

Laufer, B. (1997). What’s in a word that makes it hard or easy? Intralexical factors affecting the difficulty of vocabulary acquisition. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 140–155). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Laufer, B., & Shmueli, K. (1997). Memorizing new words: Does teaching have anything to do with it? RELC Journal, 28(1), 89-108.

Lavie, N., Briggs, S., Raht, C., & Denman, B. (1991). In Contact 2. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.

Lawson, M. J., & Hogben, D. (1996). The vocabulary‐learning strategies of foreign‐language students. Language Learning, 46(1), 101-135.

Lehrer, A. (1974). Semantic fields and lexical structure (Vol. 11). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

Lehrer, A. (1985). The influence of semantic fields on semantic change. Historical semantics. Historical word-formation. Berlin: Mouton, 283-296

Levelt, W. J. (1993). Speaking: From intention to articulation (Vol. 1). MIT press.

Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach (Vol. 1, p. 993). Hove,, UK: Language Teaching Publications.

Lorge, I., & Thorndike, E. L. (1963). The teacher's word book of 30 000 words. Columbia University Press.

Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. vol. 2. Cambridge University Press

Ma, Q. (2009). Second language vocabulary acquisition (Vol. 79). Peter, Lang.

Marzano, R. J., & Marzano, J. S. (1988). A cluster approach to elementary vocabulary instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

McBride-Chang, C., Cheung, H., Chow, B. Y., Chow, C. L., & Choi, L. (2006). Metalinguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge in Chinese (L1) and English (L2). Reading and Writing, 19(7), 695-716.

McGeoch, J. A. (1942). The psychology of human learning. New York: Longman, Green.

Miller, G. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.

Miller, G. A., & Fellbaum, C. (1991). Semantic networks of English. Cognition, 41(1), 197-229.

Mochizuki, M., & Aizawa, K. (2000). An affix acquisition order for EFL learners: An exploratory study. System, 28(2), 291-304.

Nagy, W. E., & Anderson, R. C. (1984). How many words are there in printed school English?. Reading Research Quarterly, 304-330.

Nagy, W. E., García, G. E., Durgunoğlu, A. Y., & Hancin-Bhatt, B. (1993). Spanish-English bilingual students' use of cognates in English reading. Journal of Literacy Research, 25(3), 241-259.

Nagy, W., Berninger, V. W., & Abbott, R. D. (2006). Contributions of morphology beyond phonology to literacy outcomes of upper elementary and middle-school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 134.

Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. Boston: Heinle&Heinle Publishers.

Nation, I. S. P. (2000). Learning vocabulary in lexical sets: Dangers and guidelines. TESOL Journal, 9, 6-10.

Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Nation, I. S. P., & Webb, S. A. (2011). Researching and analyzing vocabulary. Heinle, Cengage Learning.

Nattinger, J. (1988). Some current trends in vocabulary teaching. In Ronald Carter and Michael McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary and language teaching (pp. 62-82). London: Longman.

Newton, R. M., & Newton, E. (2005). A little Latin and... a lot of English. Writing, 6, 12.

Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (2006). Improving literacy by teaching morphemes. London: Routledge.

Oxford, R. L. (1994). Language learning strategies: An update. ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics, Center for Applied Linguistics.

Padak, N., Newton, E., Rasinski, T. V., & Newton, E. (2008). Getting to the root of word study: Teaching Latin and Greek word roots in elementary and middle grades. What research has to say about vocabulary instruction, 6-31.

Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1999). Reading and “incidental” L2 vocabulary acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(02), 195-224

Parry, K. (1993). Too many words: Learning the vocabulary of an academic subject. Second language reading and vocabulary learning, 109-129.

Prior, A., Goldina, A., Shany, M., Geva, E., & Katzir, T. (2014). Lexical inference in L2: predictive roles of vocabulary knowledge and reading skill beyond reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 27(8), 1467-1484.

Rasinski, T. V., Padak, N., Newton, R., & Newton, E. (2007). Building vocabulary from word roots. Huntington beach, CA: Teacher created materials.

Read, J. (2004). Plumbing the depths: How should the construct of vocabulary knowledge be defined. Vocabulary in a second language: Selection, acquisition, and testing, 209-227.

Richards, J. C. (1998). Interchange, 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richards. J. (1976). The role of vocabulary teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 10(1), 77-90.

Rodriguez, M. C. (2005). Three options are optimal for multiple‐choice items: A meta‐analysis of 80 years of research. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24(2), 3-13.

Rumelhart, D. E. (1984). Schemata and the cognitive system. Handbook of social cognition, 1, 161-188.
Salling, A. (1959). What can frequency counts teach the language teacher. Contact, 3, 24-29.

Sandra, D. (1994). The morphology of the mental lexicon: Internal word structure viewed from a psycholinguistic perspective. Language and cognitive processes, 9(3), 227-269.

Saragi, T., Nation, I. S. P., & Meister, G. F. (1978). Vocabulary learning and reading. System, 6(2), 72-78.

Schmitt, N. (1994). Vocabulary testing: questions for test development with six examples of tests of vocabulary size and depth.

Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schmitt, N., & Meara, P. (1997). Researching vocabulary through a word knowledge framework. Studies in second language acquisition, 19(1), 17-36.

Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (1997). How complex simplex words can be. Journal of Memory and Language, 37(1), 118-139.

Scott, J. A., & Nagy, W. E. (1997). Understanding the definitions of unfamiliar verbs. Reading Research Quarterly, 32(2), 184-200.

Seal, B. (1990). American vocabulary builder. NY: Longman

Seal, B. D. (1991). Vocabulary learning and teaching. Teaching English as a second or foreign language, 2, 296-311.

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference.

Snodgrass, J. G., & Vanderwart, M. (1980). A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Journal of experimental psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6(2), 174-215.

Snow, C. (2007). Word generation: An approach to promoting academic language. In Paper presentation at the conference on academic language and content: A focus on English language learners in middle school, Oak Brook, IL.

Solso, R. (1998). Cognitive Psychology, 5th edition.Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Stahl, S. A. (1999). Vocabulary Development (From Reading Research to Practice, V. 2). Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

Stahl, S. A., & Fairbanks, M. M. (1986). The effects of vocabulary instruction: A model-based meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 72-110.

Stevick, E. (1976). Memory, meaning and method. Newbury House: Massachusetts.

Stoller, F., & Grabe, W. (1993). Implications for L2 vocabulary acquisition and instruction from L1 vocabulary research. Second Language Reading and Vocabulary Learning, 24-45.

Taft, M. (2004). Morphological decomposition and the reverse base frequency effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 57(4), 745-765.

Thompson, E. (1958). The " master word" approach to vocabulary training. Journal of Developmental Reading, 62-66.

Tinkham, T. (1993). The effect of semantic clustering on the learning of second language vocabulary. System, 21 (3), 371-380.

Tinkham, T. (1997). The effects of semantic and thematic clustering on the learning of second language vocabulary. Second Language Research, 13(2), 138-163

Tulving, E. (1962). Subject organization in free recall of unrelated words. Psychological Review, 69, 344-354.

Tyler, A., & Nagy, W. (1989). The acquisition of English derivational morphology. Journal of Memory and Language, 28(6), 649-667.

Tyler, S. W., Hertel, P. T., McCallum, M. C., & Ellis, H. C. (1979).Cognitive effort and memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 5,607-617.

Wang, M., Ko, I. Y., & Choi, J. (2009). The importance of morphological awareness in Korean–English biliteracy acquisition. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 132-142.

Waring, R. (1997). The negative effects of learning words in semantic sets: a replication. System, 25 (2), 261-274.

West, M. (1955). Learning to read a foreign language. Longmans, London 2nd ed.

Wilkins, D. A. (1972). Linguistics in language teaching (Vol. 243). London: Edward Arnold.

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

Zhang, D., & Koda, K. (2012). Contribution of morphological awareness and lexical inferencing ability to L2 vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension among advanced EFL learners: testing direct and indirect effects. Reading & Writing, 25(5), 1195-1216.

Zhang, D., & Koda, K. (2013). Morphological awareness and reading comprehension in a foreign language: A study of young Chinese EFL learners. System, 41(4), 901-913.

Zhang, J., Lin, T. J., Wei, J., & Anderson, R. C. (2014). Morphological awareness and learning to read Chinese and English. In Reading development and difficulties in monolingual and bilingual Chinese children (pp. 3-22). Springer Netherlands.

.
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top