Effects of Graded Texts on EFL College Students' Incidental ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

minimized by learning high frequent words before less frequent words, several word lists such as Thorndike and Lorge’s list and Kucera and Francis’s list have been developed using the method <strong>of</strong> recording frequency counts <strong>of</strong> lexical items in actual samples <strong>of</strong> language (Ghadessy, 1979). Among the word lists, the General Service List (GSL, West, 1953) has remained as the most prominent word list today published. Containing around 2000 word families, the GSL typically covers around 80% <strong>of</strong> the running words in any text (Nation, 2001). Recent research on constructing word lists as pedagogical material has progressed beyond formulating a basic vocabulary list into two major aspects: empirical testing on using word lists to facilitate vocabulary learning and development <strong>of</strong> word lists for higher level learners <strong>of</strong> various learning needs. Positive evidence for using word lists to accelerate vocabulary growth was found in empirical studies, followed by further detailed course designs based on word lists (Cobb & Horst, 2001; Flowerdew, 1993; Worthington & Nation, 1996). Cobb and Horst (2001) recruited 58 ESL university students <strong>of</strong> intermediate level to study a word list roughly equivalent to the GSL, the 2,387-word Cambridge Lexicon, with the help <strong>of</strong> a concordancer, PET。2000. The results showed that learners were able to successfully acquire a gain <strong>of</strong> 180 words within two months, or 1,080 words if learning continued for a year. Word counts in concordancers were suggested by Flowerdew (1993) as a tool for course design. He maintained that by using a corpus <strong>of</strong> written and/or spoken text from the target communicative situation with words appearing at different frequencies, each level <strong>of</strong> frequency in the concordancer <strong>of</strong>fers a potential cut-<strong>of</strong>f point for selection and grading <strong>of</strong> items. A robust lexical syllabus accompanied with precise word counts is therefore available for classroom use. The second research direction on word list vocabulary learning concentrates on 11
inging learners who are competent <strong>of</strong> basic general vocabulary further across higher lexical thresholds. The University Word List (UWL) developed by Xue and Nation (1984) with words that frequently occur in academic disciplines is <strong>of</strong>ten employed by instructors for learners with basic word knowledge pursuing an academic career. Worthington and Nation (1996) investigated the issue <strong>of</strong> how academic words in the University Word List could be sequenced for learners to meet a manageable portion <strong>of</strong> words in authentic texts at appropriate intervals. With 134 academic texts <strong>of</strong> various fields as corpora, it was reasoned that it is not likely to meeting all or most <strong>of</strong> the words in UWL within a period <strong>of</strong> a school semester. Moreover, learners without academic background would be expected to encounter a disproportionate large number <strong>of</strong> new words in their first few texts. Therefore, pedagogical suggestions <strong>of</strong> explicit instruction or gloss help for high frequency words were proposed for learners in the initial introductory stage. Nation and Kyongho (1995) proposed a dividing line between a general service list and a special purpose vocabulary by using the Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen corpus (LOB) and the Brown corpus. In their study, a general service word list which served as a prerequisite for moving learners from general high frequency words to a specialized vocabulary was first determined by identifying words in GSL and high frequency words appearing more than ten times in LOB and Brown corpora. Two cut-<strong>of</strong>f points were then determined based on two criteria: words that appeared in all three sources (LOB, Brown, and GSL), and words that appeared in either two <strong>of</strong> the three sources (LOB & Brown, LOB & GSL, and GSL & Brown). These words together provided an 83.4% coverage in the corpora and were therefore, judged as words making up the general service list. Next, the words appearing only in one <strong>of</strong> the three sources were compared with words in the University Word List in terms <strong>of</strong> percentage in the coverage <strong>of</strong> corpora. The coverage figure for UWL is up to 8.5%, almost as high as words appearing in two <strong>of</strong> 12
Page 1 and 2: 國立清華大學碩士論文英
Page 3 and 4: Abstract Incidental vocabulary lear
Page 5 and 6: implicit learning for learners’ q
Page 7 and 8: 4.3. Discussion 70 4.3.1. The Feasi
Page 9 and 10: List of Figure Fig
Page 11 and 12: competence (Elley, 1991; Hafiz & Tu
Page 13 and 14: EFL classes, and determining the am
Page 15 and 16: consultation for second language le
Page 17 and 18: vastly reinforced with the ease and
Page 19: learning to occur. 2. Word meaning
Page 23 and 24: (1993) suggested a required 5,000 w
Page 25 and 26: words in this set of</stron
Page 27 and 28: Besides the above potential limitat
Page 29 and 30: immediately after reading, one week
Page 31 and 32: 2.6. Measuring Incidental Vocabular
Page 33 and 34: 2.7. Summary We incorporated the em
Page 35 and 36: 3.1. Overview Chapter Three METHODO
Page 37 and 38: The Sinorama magazine is dedicated
Page 39 and 40: Word List (鄭恆雄, 2002; 2003),
Page 41 and 42: for the cut off po
Page 43 and 44: TextLadder; instead, our program pu
Page 45 and 46: target words within each text. Afte
Page 47 and 48: Table 3.2 Target word rate and targ
Page 49 and 50: 7. into the Exposed Word List Selec
Page 51 and 52: Table 3. 5. A comparison between Gh
Page 53 and 54: 3.3.4 Glossing of
Page 55 and 56: participants were required put a ch
Page 57 and 58: score of 2. If a t
Page 59 and 60: Table 3.9 Instruments used in the s
Page 61 and 62: had finished all sixteen texts. The
Page 63 and 64: technical feasibility of</s
Page 65 and 66: a result, valid subjects dropped fr
Page 67 and 68: Table 4.2 Learners’ perspectives
Page 69 and 70: estimation of lear
Page 71 and 72:
words from known words. The provisi
Page 73 and 74:
vocabulary level, on the other hand
Page 75 and 76:
4.2.4 The results of</stron
Page 77 and 78:
Table 4.11 shows learners’ respon
Page 79 and 80:
4.3 Discussion 4.3.1. The feasibili
Page 81 and 82:
direct phonetic translations <stron
Page 83 and 84:
on gloss suggested that they still
Page 85 and 86:
measurement tool for its function <
Page 87 and 88:
learners’ processing of</
Page 89 and 90:
not be untangled without considerin
Page 91 and 92:
5.1. Overview Chapter Five Conclusi
Page 93 and 94:
with the same group of</str
Page 95 and 96:
also accelerate sequencing time wit
Page 97 and 98:
esponsible for connecting the two b
Page 99 and 100:
REFERENCES Berman, R.A. (1984 ). Sy
Page 101 and 102:
Hulstijn, J. H., Hollander, M., & G
Page 103 and 104:
Rationale for Pedagogy (pp. 174-200
Page 105 and 106:
第 1-6 題電腦方面 Appendix A
Page 107 and 108:
Student Post□ 其他□__________
Page 109 and 110:
26. optimistic 27. consumption 28.
Page 111 and 112:
1. entrepreneur: VI. 我對這個
Page 113 and 114:
21.calligraphy: I. 我對這個字
Page 115 and 116:
41.insufficient: I. 我對這個字
Page 117 and 118:
3 points entrepreneur: (item three
Page 119 and 120:
Appendix F The In-class Evaluation
Page 121 and 122:
Appendix H The Introductory Page on
Page 123 and 124:
Appendix J A Search Example <strong
Page 125 and 126:
Appendix L Student Reading Process
Page 127 and 128:
第 1-6 題電腦方面 Appendix N
Page 129 and 130:
13(2). 英文雜誌 41.7% (28/67) (
Page 131 and 132:
Appendix P Results of</stro
show all

Effects of Graded Texts on EFL College Students' Incidental ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?