Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/60019| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 葉潔宇 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Yeh, Chieh Yue | en_US |
| dc.contributor.author | 王靜鴻 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | Wang, Ching Hung | en_US |
| dc.creator | 王靜鴻 | zh_TW |
| dc.creator | Wang, Ching Hung | en_US |
| dc.date | 2009 | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2013-09-04T06:54:18Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2013-09-04T06:54:18Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2013-09-04T06:54:18Z | - |
| dc.identifier | G0096951003 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/60019 | - |
| dc.description | 碩士 | zh_TW |
| dc.description | 國立政治大學 | zh_TW |
| dc.description | 英語教學碩士在職專班 | zh_TW |
| dc.description | 96951003 | zh_TW |
| dc.description | 98 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | 語音表義教學雖已被學者提倡使用在字彙學習之領域多年，然而其在課室英語字彙教學的實際成效仍未獲證實。本研究先採用量化研究方法以探究語音表義教學對於國中生英語單字記憶之成效，再採用質性研究方法探討受試者對語音表義教學法之看法。\n 研究對象為台灣北部一所公立國中九年級兩個班的七十二位學生。此均質的兩個班級被隨機指定為實驗組與控制組，實驗組施予語音表義教學法學習八十個標的單字，而控制組則施予傳統翻譯式教學法學習相同的單字。接受歷時十六週的字彙教學後，以兩組學生在認字測驗上的成績以及實驗組學生個別訪談之結果作為資料分析來源。本研究主要發現如下：(1)接受語音表義教學的實驗組學生在認字測驗的表現上顯著優於接受傳統翻譯法的控制組學生。(2)實驗組中，高分群組與低分群組在接受語音表義教學後，在認字測驗的表現上皆呈現出顯著性進步，顯示出語音表義教學對不同程度的學生皆有成效。(3)受試者對語音表義教學持正面態度，且認為語音表義教學特別是在認字方面有助於英語字彙之記憶。研究最後進一步對語音表義教學在實際教學上之應用提供建議，作為教育學者們參考。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | Although the instruction of sound symbolism has been advocated for word learning for years, it is not clear whether it is empirically effective in classroom vocabulary teaching. This study first adopted a quantitative research method to investigate the effectiveness of the instruction of sound symbolism on junior high school students’ English vocabulary memorization, and then a qualitative research method to explore the participants’ perspectives on the instruction of sound symbolism. \n Participants of the study were two classes of 72 ninth-grade students in a public junior high school in northern Taiwan. With homogeneity in terms of English language proficiency, the two classes were randomly assigned as the experimental and control group. The former was instructed 80 target words by the instruction of sound symbolism, while the latter was taught the same target words by the traditional translation-based approach. Vocabulary instruction lasted for 16 weeks, and the data analysis was based on their performances on the word recognition test and the results of the individual interviews. The major findings are as follows. (1)The participants who received the instruction of sound symbolism performed significantly better on the word recognition test than those who were taught the traditional translation-based approach. (2) In the experimental group, both the high and low proficiency learners made significant progress, indicating the instruction of sound symbolism was effective in different proficiency groups. (3) The participants held positive attitude toward the instruction of sound symbolism and felt that the instruction was helpful for vocabulary memorization, especially on the aspect of word recognition. Some pedagogical implications and recommendations for future research were presented at the end of the thesis. | en_US |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vi\nTABLE OF CONTENTS vii\nLIST OF TABLES xi\nLIST OF FIGURES xiii\nABSTRACT xv\nCHAPTER ONE 1\nINTRODUCTION 1\nBackground and Motivation 1\nPurpose of the Study 2\nResearch Questions 2\nSignificance of the Study 3\nDefinition of Terms 3\nKnowing a Word 3\nInstruction of Sound Symbolism 4\nCHAPTER TWO 5\nLITERATURE REVIEW 5\nVocabulary Learning Strategies in Terms of Sounds 5\nSound Symbolism 10\nThe Definition of Sound Symbolism 11\nThe Categories of Sound Symbolism 12\nCorporeal Sound Symbolism 12\nImitative Sound Symbolism 13\nSynesthetic Sound Symbolism 14\nConventional Sound Symbolism 15\nResearch on Sound Symbolism 17\nSound Symbolism and English Vocabulary Teaching 19\nTable 2.1 Related Studies on Sound Symbolism 21\nCHAPTER THREE 22\nMETHODOLOGY 22\nParticipants 22\nTable 3.1 Statistics of Participants’ English Proficiency Test Scores 23\nTable 3.2 Independent Samples t-test on Participants’ English Proficiency Test 23\nInstruments 23\nThe 2009 2nd English Test of the Basic Competence Test (EBCT) 24\nA Test for Word Selection 24\nA Pre- and Post-test in Word Recognition in Relation to Meanings 28\nThink-aloud Method 30\nInterviews 32\nVocabulary Instruction 32\nProcedure 35\nPilot Study 36\nMain Study 38\nData Analysis 38\nCHAPTER FOUR 41\nRESULTS 41\nResults of the Pre-test and Post-test 41\nResults of the Think-aloud Method 44\nResults of the Interviews 54\nWays to Memorize New Words 55\nViews on the Instruction of Sound Symbolism 61\nSummary 73\nCHAPTER FIVE 75\nDISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 75\nAnswers to the Research Questions 75\nDiscussion of the Comparison Between the Present Study and the Previous Studies 77\nConsistent Findings with the Previous Research 77\nInconsistent Findings and New Findings 79\nPedagogical Implications of the Study 85\nLimitations of the Study 86\nRecommendations for Further Research 87\nConclusion 88\nREFERENCES 89\nAppendix A: The 2009 2nd EBCT 97\nAppendix B: Word Selection Test 110\nAppendix C: The Pre-and-Post Test 113\nAppendix D: The Think-aloud Sheet 114\nAppendix E: Interview Questions 116\nAppendix F: Teaching Material 117\nAppendix G: The Pre-and-post Test in the Pilot Study 134\nAppendix H: The Think-aloud Sheet in the Pilot Study 135\nAppendix I: Questionnaire in the Pilot Study 136\nAppendix J: Teaching Material in the Pilot Study 137\nAppendix K: The Results of the Questionnaire in the Pilot Study 139\nAppendix L: A Sample of the Interview Transcription 140\nAppendix M: Schmitt’s Taxonomy of Vocabulary Learning Strategy 142\nAppendix N: 1000-word List Stipulated by MOE (2003) 144\nAppendix O: 1200-word List Stipulated by MOE (2008) 148 | zh_TW |
| dc.format.extent | 4511383 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | - |
| dc.source.uri | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0096951003 | en_US |
| dc.subject | 語音表義教學 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 英語字彙記憶 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Sound Symbolism Instruction | en_US |
| dc.title | 語音表義教學對國中生英語字彙記憶之效益研究 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | The effects of sound symbolism instruction on junior high school students’ English vocabulary memorization | en_US |
| dc.type | thesis | en |
| dc.relation.reference | Ahmed, M. O. (1989). Vocabulary learning strategies. In P. Meara (Ed.), Beyond words (pp.3-14). London: CILT.\nAtkinson, R. C. (1975). Mnemotechnics in second-language learning. American Psychologist, 30, 821-828.\nBerko-Gleason, J. (2005). The development of language. New York: Pearson Education, Inc..\nBloomfield, M. (1895). On assimilation and adaptation in congerneric class of words. American Journal of Philology, 16, 409-434.\nBloomfield, L. (1933). Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart nd Winston.\nBolinger, D. L. (1992). Sound symbolism. In W. Bright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of linguistics, vol.4 (pp.28-30). New York: Oxford University Press.\nBrown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed). New York: Pearson Education, Inc..\nBrown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (2nd ed). New York: Pearson Education, Inc..\nCameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to children. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nCandlin, C. N. (1988). General editor’s preface. In R. Carter & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary and language teaching. New York: Longman.\nChen, C-Y. (2000). On sound symbolism: its implications on English pedagogy. Master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.\nChen, H. J. (1998). Second language vocabulary learning strategies: A preliminary investigation of Chinese EFL learners. The proceedings of the 7th international symposium on Engllish teaching (pp.219-230). Taipei: Crane Publishing Co.\nCheng, M-C. (2006). An investigation into English vocabulary learning strategies used by junior high school students in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.\nChiang, W-C. (2008). A morphological approach via commonly-used roots to French vocabulary teaching: How to help Taiwanese students memorize French vocabulary. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.\nCiccotosto, N. (1991). Sound symbolism in natural language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, Gainsville.\nCook, L. K., & Mayer, R. E. (1983). Reading strategies training for meaningful learning from prose. In M. Pressley, & J. Levin (Eds.), Cognitive strategy research (pp. 14-27). New York: Springer Verlag.\nDe Saussure, F. (1959). Course in general linguistics. New York: McGraw-Hill.\nFan, M. Y. (2003). Frequency of use, perceived usefulness, and actual usefulness of second language vocabulary strategies: A study of Hong Kong learners. The modern language journal, 87(2), 222-241.\nFordyce, J. F. (1988). Studies in sound symbolism: with special reference to English. Doctorial dissertation, University of California.\nGu, Y., & Johnson, R. K. (1996). Vocabulary learning strategies and language learning outcomes. Language Learning, 46(4), 643-679.\nHatch, E., & Brown, C. (1995). Vocabulary, semantics, and language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nHinton, L., Nichols, J., & Ohala, J. J. (Eds.). (1994). Sound symbolism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nHouseholder, F. W. (1946). On the problem of sound and meaning, and English phonestheme. Word, 2, 83-84.\nHsu, K-F. (2004). An iconic-morphological approach via commonly-used roots to English vocabulary teaching: how to help Chinese senior high school students memorize English vocabulary. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.\nHsu, C-F. (2004). A study of the effect of word analysis instruction on vocabulary acquisition in a Taiwanese senior high school. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.\nHuang, T-L. (1999). 英語詞彙形音義三合一教學法. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co.\nHughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press.\nImai, M., Kita, S., Nagumo, M., & Okada, H. (2008). Sound symbolism facilitates early verb learning. Cognition, 109(1), 54-65.\nJakobson, R., & Waugh, L. R. (1987). The sound shape of language. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.\nJespersen, O. (1922). Symbolic value of the vowel i. In O. Jerspersen, Linguistica: Selected papers in English, French, and German. Copenhagen: Levin and Munksgaard.\nJespersen, O. (2007). Language: its nature, development, and origin. London: Allen & Unwin, Ltd.\nJiménez Catalán, R. M. (2003). Sex differences in L2 vocabulary learning strategies. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 54-77.\nKim, Y. (2008). The role of task-induced involvement and learner proficiency in L2 vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 58(2), 285-325. \nKohler, W. (1992). Gestalt psychology: An introduction to new concepts in modern psychology. New York: Liveright.\nKojic-sabo, I., & Lightbown, P. M. (1999). Students’ approaches to vocabulary learning and their relationship to success. The modern language journal, 83(2), 176-192.\nKudo, Y. (1999). L2 vocabulary learning strategies. (NFLRC NetWork#14)(html document). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center, 1999. Retrieved April 4, 2003, from http://www.lll.hawaii.edu/nflrc/Networks/NW14/\nLin, L. (2001). Taiwanese children’s EFL vocabulary learning strategies. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chinhua University, Hsin-chu, Taiwan.\nLu, Angela Yi-chün. (1998). Phonetic motivation: A study of the relationship between form and meaning. München: Hieronymus.\nMarchand, H. (1969). The categories and types of present-day English word-formation (2nd ed). München: Verlagsbuchhandlung.\nMeara, P. (1980). Vocabulary acquisition: A neglected aspect of language learning. In V. Kinsella (Ed.), Language Teaching Surveys (p.100-126). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. \nMo, C-C. (2005). 從語音的觀點談英語詞彙教與學. Sanmin Book Co., Ltd.\nMok, W. E. (2001). Chinese sound symbolism: A phonological perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii.\nNation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. New York: Newbury House.\nNation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.\nNewman, S. S. (1933). Further experiments in phonetic sound symbolism. American Journal of Psychology, 45, 53-75.\nO’Malley, J. (1987). The effects of training in the use of learning strategies on learning English as a second language. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin (Ed.), Learner strategies in language learning (pp.133-144). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.\nO’Malley, J., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.\nO’Malley, J., Chamot, A. U., Stewner-Manzares, G., Kupper, L., & Russo, R. P. (1985). Learning strategies used by beginning and intermediate ESL students. Language Learning, 35(1), 21-46.\nParault, S. J. (2006). Sound symbolic word learning in written context. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31(2), 228-252.\nParault, S. J., & Parkinson, M. (2008). Sound symbolic word learning in the middle grades. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 647-671.\nParault, S. J., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (2006). Sound-symbolism: A piece in the puzzle of word learning. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 35, 329–351.\nReichard, G. A., Jakobson, R., & Werth, E. (1949). Language and synesthesia. Word, 5, 224-233.\nRott, S. (2005). Processing glosses: a qualitative exploration of how form-meaning connections are established and strengthened. Reading in a Foreign Language, 17(2), 95-124.\nSamuels, M. L. (1972). Linguistic evolution: with special reference to English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nSanaoui, R. (1995). Adult learners’ approaches to learning vocabulary in second languages. The modern language journal, 79(1), 15-28.\nSapir, E. (1929). A study in phonetic symbolism. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 225-239.\nSchmitt, N. (1997). Vocabulary learning strategies. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 199-227). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nStoffer, I. (1995). University foreign language students’ choice of vocabulary learning strategies as related to individual difference variables. Unpublished doctorial dissertation, University of Alabama, Alabama.\nTakač, V. P. (2008). Vocabulary learning strategies and foreign language acquisition. Clevedon, U.K. ; Buffalo, N.Y. : Multilingual Matters\nTarte, R. D., & Barritt, L. S. (1971). Phonetic symbolism in adult native speakers of English. Language and Speech, 14, 158-168.\nTung, C-W. (2007). An exploratory study on vocabulary learning strategies by comprehensive high school students in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.\nUltan, R. (1978). Size-sound symbolism. In J. H. Greenberg (Ed.), Universals of human language, vol.2-Phonology (pp. 525-568). Stanford: University Press.\nWang, Y-H. (2004). An investigation into vocabulary learning strategies used by senior high school students in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.\nWesche, M., & Paribakht, T. (1996). Assessing second language vocabulary knowledge: depth versus breadth. Canadian Modern Language Review, 53, 13-40.\nWilkins, D. A. (1972). Linguistics in language teaching. London: Edward Arnold.\nWilliams, R. (1985). Teaching vocabulary recognition strategies in ESP reading. ESP Journal, 4, 121-131.\nWright, E. K. (2000). Sound and meaning in medieval Arabic linguistic theory. Doctorial dissertation, Georgetown University.\nYang, C-M. (2005). The effects of thinking aloud on junior high school students’ lexical inferencing in English reading comprehension. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.\nYashida, H. (2003). Iconicity in language learning: The role of mimetics in word learning tasks. Unpublished doctorial dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.\nZimmerman, C. B. (1997). Do reading and interactive vocabulary instruction make a difference? An empirical study. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1), 121-140. | zh_TW |
| item.fulltext | With Fulltext | - |
| item.grantfulltext | open | - |
| item.openairetype | thesis | - |
| item.openairecristype | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_46ec | - |
| item.languageiso639-1 | en_US | - |
| item.cerifentitytype | Publications | - |
| Appears in Collections: | 學位論文 | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 100301.pdf | 4.41 MB | Adobe PDF2 | View/Open |
Google ScholarTM
Check
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.