非英语专业学生词汇知识与阅读关系探究

论文摘要

对二语词汇知识的理论探讨和实证研究,是近十多年来词汇研究的新走向。二语词汇知识在阅读中所起的重要作用早已受到研究者的关注,但研究者探讨最多的是词汇量对阅读的影响。随着对词汇知识的理论探讨的深入和测量工具的发展,二语词汇知识和阅读的关系重新引起了研究者的兴趣。本研究以Nation的词汇知识框架和Henriksen的三维度词汇法为理论基础来测量非英语专业大学生的词汇强度知识和深度知识,并探讨它们各自在阅读中所起的作用。词汇强度知识是研究者们为了克服词汇量测试的单一和积极/消极词汇的混淆而提出的（Laufer, 2004）词汇强度知识,侧重于测量词汇的形式和意义间的连接强度,它包含四个样态,分别为:积极回忆,消极回忆,积极识别和消极识别。这四个样态被设想为能依次构成一个难度等级。通过测量学习者在四样态上的词汇量的多少,就可以衡量该学习者的词汇强度知识。而词汇深度知识反映的是学习者所掌握的词汇知识质量。词汇深度知识涉及到诸多方面,本研究侧重于意义和搭配两方面。在前人的研究成果上,本研究自行改编、设计了词汇强度知识测试（汉英双语版）和词汇深度知识测试。由于阅读测试也是一个复杂的课题,本研究不再具体涉及,而采用英语公共等级考试（PETS3）的标准阅读测试题。受试选取的是广西师范大学非英语专业两个自然班75名学生。为挖掘测试数据中包含的信息及回答提出的研究问题,SPSS（13.0）统计软件被用来对收集的69份有效数据进行重复测量分析,t-检验,相关分析及回归分析等。在数据分析的基础上,作者运用二语词汇习得理论,词汇—阅读关系等理论,并与前人研究结果相比较,得出了下述结论:（1）词汇强度知识的四个样态依次构成了一个不平衡的难度等级,积极回忆最难,消极识别则最容易。因此,词汇强度知识的掌握也是循序渐进的。（2）词汇强度知识的四个样态与词汇深度知识均显著相关,因此,词汇的强度知识和深度知识是协调发展,相互促进的。（3）词汇强度知识的四个样态与阅读成绩均显著相关。多元回归分析的结果表明词汇强度知识中的积极回忆和积极识别能在显著程度上预测阅读成绩,其中积极回忆对阅读成绩有最大的预测力。（4）词汇深度知识与阅读成绩显著相关,能在一定的显著程度上预测阅读成绩,其中意义比搭配能更好地预测阅读成绩。（5）不同英语水平的学生在阅读中对词汇深度知识的要求有所不同。对于已具备3000词族英语词汇的学习者,词汇深度知识在阅读中发挥着更大的作用。该研究既用科学的方法评估了英语学习者的词汇知识,也证实了不同维度的词汇知识在阅读理解中的重要作用。本研究结果对二语词汇和阅读教学及研究有一定的启示。

论文目录

• Acknowledgements
• Abstract in Chinese
• Abstract in English
• Abbreviations
• List of Figures and Tables
• Chapter 1 Introduction
• 1.1 The Development of L2 Vocabulary Knowledge Research
• 1.2 The Role of Vocabulary Knowledge in Reading
• 1.3 Research Questions
• 1.4 Organization of the Study
• Chapter 2 Research Theoretical Framework
• 2.1 Vocabulary Knowledge Framework
• 2.1.1 Richard’s Vocabulary Knowledge Framework
• 2.1.2 Nation’s Elaboration
• 2.1.3 Summary
• 2.2 Henriksen’s Three Dimensions Approach of Lexical Competence
• 2.3 Laufer’s Vocabulary Strength Knowledge
• 2.3.1 The Confusion between Active and Passive Vocabulary
• 2.3.2 The Proposition of Vocabulary Strength Knowledge
• 2.4 Relationship between Vocabulary and Reading
• 2.4.1 Four Hypotheses on Relationship between Vocabulary and Reading
• 2.4.2 Three Models of Reading
• 2.4.3 Threshold Vocabulary in L2 Reading
• 2.5 Summary
• Chapter 3 Literature Review
• 3.1 Measurements of Vocabulary Breadth and Strength Knowledge
• 3.1.1 Tests of Vocabulary Size
• 3.1.2 Measurement of Vocabulary Strength Knowledge
• 3.2 Assessments of Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge
• 3.2.1 Developmental approach: Vocabulary Knowledge Scale
• 3.2.2 Dimensional approach: Word Associates Test
• 3.3 Previous Studies on Vocabulary Knowledge and Reading
• 3.3.1 Previous Studies on the Role of Vocabulary Size in Reading
• 3.3.2 Previous Researches on Vocabulary Strength Knowledge and Its Relationship to Reading
• 3.3.3 Previous Investigations on Vocabulary Depth Knowledge and Its role in Reading
• 3.4 Summary
• Chapter 4 Design of the Present Study
• 4.1 Participants
• 4.2 Instruments
• 4.2.1 Vocabulary Strength Knowledge （VSK） Test
• 4.2.2 Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge （DVK） Test
• 4.2.3 Reading Comprehension Test
• 4.3 Procedures of Data Collection
• 4.3.1 A Pilot Study
• 4.3.2 Implementation
• 4.4 Tools for Statistical Analyses
• Chapter 5 Findings and Discussion
• 5.1 Descriptive and Reliability Statistics
• 5.2 Findings Related to Research Questions
• 5.2.1 The Validity of the Hierarchy for Four Modalities of VSK at Each Word Frequency Level
• 5.2.2 The Relationship between Four Modalities of VSK and DVK.
• 5.2.3 The Relationship between Four Modalities of VSK and RC
• 5.2.4 The Relationship between DVK and RC
• 5.3 Discussion
• 5.3.1 The Valid and Unbalanced Hierarchy of VSK Present at Each Word Level
• 5.3.2 The Interconnected Development of Vocabulary Knowledge
• 5.3.3 The Demonstration of the Role of VSK
• 5.3.4 The Recognition of the Importance of DVK
• 5.4 Summary
• Chapter 6 Conclusion
• 6.1 Major Findings of the Present Study
• 6.2 Pedagogical Implications of this Investigation
• 6.3 Limitations and Suggestions for Future Study
• Bibliography
• Appendices
• Appendix A
• Appendix B
• Appendix C
• Publications during the Postgraduate Program