學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 臺灣大學生透過電腦輔助軟體學習英語發音的研究
A Passage to being understood and understanding others:作者 蔡碧華
Tsai, Pi Hua貢獻者 殷允美<br>招靜琪
Yin, Yuen Mei<br>Chao, Chin Chi
蔡碧華
Tsai, Pi Hua關鍵詞 電腦輔助語言教學
語音辨識軟體
超音段
語調
時長
學習策略
Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL),
Automatic Speech Recognition System (ASRS)
prosody
intonation
timing
learning strategies
mediation
segmental pronunciation日期 2009 上傳時間 9-May-2016 11:21:27 (UTC+8) 摘要 本研究旨在調查電腦輔助英語發音學習軟體 「MyET」，對學習者在學習英語發音方面的影響。 利用電腦輔助英語發音學習軟體(CAPT)，練習英語的類化效果，也列為調查重點之一。 此外，學生使用CAPT過程中遭遇的困難和挑戰，以及互動過程中發展出來的對策也一一加以探討。 本研究的目的是要把CAPT在英語聲韻教學的領域中做正確的定位，並且探討如何使用其他的中介工具(例如人類)來強化此類軟體的輔助學習效果。 參與本次研究的大學生一共有九十名，分為三組：兩組CAPT組(亦即實驗組，使用CAPT獨自或與同儕一起使用CAPT學習英語發音)、非CAPT組(控制組)一 組。每組三十名。實驗開始，所有學生以十週的時間練習朗讀 從「灰姑娘」(Cinderella) 摘錄的文字，此段文字由發行 MyET 的公司線上免費提供。 實驗前與實驗後，兩組的學生各接受一次測驗。 每週練習結束後，學生必須將學習心得記載於學習日誌上；教師也針對每個學生的學習心得給予指導回饋。 研究結果顯示，兩個CAPT組別(亦即使用CAPT發音學習軟體的組別)的學生在學習英語聲韻的過程中，都有明顯及正面的進步與改變。尤其是語調與速度快慢方面的進步遠勝於發音的進步。再者，實驗組學生以十週的時間利用CAPT學習英語後，在朗讀新的文字時，無論是發音或語調都有類化的效應，但是在速度快慢方面則無顯著進步。然而，實驗結果三組的發音表現，在量化統計上並未達到明顯的差異。 雖然如此，在質化的探究上，經過分析學生的學習心得後得知：所有組別當中，獨自使用CAPT學習英語發音的組別，最能夠自我審視語言學習歷程 (包括模仿和學習樂趣)。至於共同使用CAPT學習的學生自述在英語流暢度、語調及發音方面獲致最大的改善。控制組的學生因為沒有同儕的鷹架教學及回饋，也沒有 MyET提供的練習回饋，練習過程中，學生自述學習困難的頻率最高，學生也認為學習收穫很少。 參與本次研究實驗組的學生認為， CAPT提供練習回饋的機制設計有改進的空間。 有關本研究結果在理論及英語教學上的意涵以及研究限制，於結論當中一一提出加以討論。 關鍵字：電腦輔助語言教學，語音辨識軟體，超音段，語調，時長，學習策略， 中介
This present study investigated the impact of computer-assisted pronunciation training (CAPT) software, i.e., MyET, on students’ learning of English pronunciation. The investigation foci included the generalization of the effect of practice with the CAPT system. Also examined are the difficulties and challenges reported by the students who employed the CAPT system and the strategy scheme they developed from their interaction with the system. This study aimed to position the role of the CAPT system in the arena of instruction on English pronunciation and to investigate how other kinds of mediation, such as that of peer support, could reinforce its efficacy. This study involved 90 Taiwanese college students, divided into two experimental groups and one control group. The two experimental groups practiced English pronunciation by using a computer-assisted pronunciation training (CAPT) program either independently or with peers while the control group only had access to MP3 files in their practice. All the groups practiced for ten weeks texts adopted from a play, Cinderella, provided by MyET free of charge on line. They all received a pretest and a posttest on the texts they had practiced and a novel text. Each week after their practice with the texts, the participants were asked to write down in their learning logs their reflections on the learning process in Chinese. In the same way, the instructor would provide her feedback on the students’ reflections in the logs every week. The results showed that the ten-week practice with the CAPT system resulted in significant and positive changes in the learning of English pronunciation of CAPT groups (i.e., the Self-Access CAPT Group and the Collaborative CAPT Group). The progress of the participants in intonation and timing was always higher than in segmental pronunciation. Moreover, the ten-week practice with the CAPT system was found to be generalized (though the generalization is less than mediocre) to the participants’ performance in the production of segmental pronunciation and intonation but not in the timing component in reading the novel text. However, the improvement of the CAPT groups was not great enough to differentiate themselves from the MP3 Group. Though the quantitative investigation did not reveal significant group differences, the qualitative analysis of the students’ reflections showed that the learning processes all the three groups went through differed. The Self-Access CAPT Group outperformed the other two groups in developing self-monitoring of language learning and production, and in enjoying working with the CAPT system/texts. Among the three groups, the Collaborative CAPT Group outscored the other two groups in reporting their gains and improvement in fluency, intonation and segmental pronunciation, as well as developing strategies to deal with their learning difficulty. Though the students in the MP3 group also made significant progress after the practice, without peers’ scaffolding and the feedback provided by MyET, they reported the highest frequency of difficulties and the least frequency of gains and strategies during the practice. The participants of this study also considered necessary the improvement of the CAPT system’s feedback design. At the end of the study theoretical and pedagogical implications as well as research limitations are presented. Key words: Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL), Automatic Speech Recognition System (ASRS), segmental pronunciation, prosody, intonation, timing, learning strategies, mediation參考文獻 Anderson-Hsieh, J. (1992). Using electronic visual feedback to teach suprasegmentals. System, 20(1), 51-62. Anderson-Hsieh, J. (1994). Interpreting visual feedback on suprasegmentals in computer assisted pronunciation instruction. CALICO Journal, 11(4), 5-22. Antón , M., & Di Camilla, F. (1998). Socio-cognitive functions of L1 collaborative interaction in the L2 classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 54(3), 314-342. Arbib, M. A. (2002) The mirror system, imitation, and the evolution of language, in C. Nehaniv and K. Dautenhahn, (Eds.), Imitation in animals and artifacts. The MIT Press, pp. 229 - 280. Bai, H. B. (1994). The teaching and learning of English stress and intonation in Taiwan junior high schools. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Chengchi University. Taiwan, Republic of China. Bernhard J. (2007). Thinking and learning through technology- mediating tools and insights from philosophy of technology applied to science and engineering education. The Pantaneto Forum Issue 27: July 2007. Retrieved May 18, 2008, from http://www.pantaneto.co.uk/issue27/Bernhard.htm. Broner, M. & E. Tarone. (2001). ‘Is it fun? Language play in a fifth grade Spanish immersion classroom’. The Modern Journal 85: 363-79. Brown, A. (Ed.) (1991). Teaching pronunciation: A book of readings. London & New York: Routledge. Brown, J. D. (1988). Understanding research in second language learning: A teacher`s guide to statistics and research design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Butler-Pascoe, M. E. & Wiburg, K.M. (2003). Technology and teaching English language learners. MA Pearson Education, Inc. Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M. & Goodwin, J. M. (2004). Teaching pronunciation: A reference for teachers of English to speakers of other languages. Cambridge: CUP. Chao, C. C. (2007). Toward an understanding of computer-mediated EFL writing experience through Vygotskian perspectives. Taiwan Journal of TESOL, Monograph Series No.1. Taipei: National Chengchi University. Chapelle, C. A. (1998). Multimedia CALL: Lessons to be learned from research on instructed SLA. Language Learning and Technology, 2(1), 21-39. Chapelle, C. A. (2004). Technology and language learning: Expanding methods and agendas. System, 23(4), 593-601. Chela-Flores, B. (2001). Pronunciation and language learning: An integrative approach. IRAL, 39, 85–101. Chen, C. F. , Fan, C. Y., & Lin, H. P. (1995). A new perspective on teaching English pronunciation: Rhythm. Paper published in The Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 24-41). Taipei: Crane. Nov. 18, 1995. Chen, C. L., & Chiu, S. J. (2005). The effectiveness and analysis of the use of MyET in assisting the English learning of students at Fuzhu Elementary School. Selected papers from the 14th Int’l Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 58-69), Vol. 2. Taipei: Crane. Chen, H. C. (2006). Interlanguage phonetic timing patterns and their effects on native listeners’ perceptions. Unpublished dissertation. National Kaohsiung Normal University. Chen, H. C., & Chung, R. F. (2004). Effects of task formality on consonant cluster simplification for Taiwanese learners with limited English proficiency. English Teaching and Learning, 28, 67-93. Chen, H. J. (2004). Automatic speech recognition and oral proficiency assessment. Proceedings of International Conference on English Language Teaching Instruction and Assessment, 85-102. Taiwan: National Chung Cheng University. Chen, K. T. (2005). An investigation on the impact of ASR software feedback on EFL college students` pronunciation learning. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Normal University. Taiwan: Republic of China. Chen, M. W. (2006). The impact of automatic speech technology on contrastive stress among adult EFL learners. Unpublished M.A. thesis. Dayeh University. Taiwan: Republic of China. Cheng, C. C. (1973). A synchronic phonology of Mandarin Chinese. Paris: The Hague. Cheng, H. C. (2002). Acoustic properties of Taiwanese high school students’ English Intonation. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Kaohsiung Normal University. Taiwan, Republic of China. Chia, H. U. (2007). Exploring Taiwanese college EFL students’ interaction patterns, reading comprehension and reader responses in cooperative learning. Unpublished Dissertation, National Chia-Yi University. Taiwan. Chiu, T. L. (2005). Effects of online conversation materials with the support of speech recognition technology on college EFL learners. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Tsing Hua University. Taiwan: Republic of China. Chun, D. M. (1998). Signal analysis software for teaching discourse intonation. Language Learning & Technology, 2(1), 61-77. Chun, D. M. (2002). Discourse intonation in L2. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Cook, V. (2001). Second language learning and language teaching, 3rd Edition. London: Arnold. Crystal, D. (1981). Clinical linguistics. New York: Harper. Crystal, D. (1997). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics, Ed. Fourth. Blackwell: Boston. Dalton, C. & Seidlhofer, B. (1994). Pronunciation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. de Bot, K. (1983). Visual feedback of intonation I: Effectiveness and induced practice behavior. Language and Speech, 26(4), 331-350. de Bot, K., & Mailfert, K. (1982). The teaching of intonation: Fundamental research and classroom applications. TESOL Quarterly, 16, 71-77. De Guerrero, M. C. M., & Villamil, O. S. (2000). Activating the ZPD : Mutual scaffolding in L2 peer revisions. The Modern Language Journal, 78, 484-496. Derwing, T. M. & Munro, M. J. (2005). Second language accent and pronunciation teaching: A Research-based Approach. TESOL Quarterly, 39(3), 379-397. Derwing, T. M., Munro, M. J., & Wiebe, G. (1998). Evidence in favor of a broad framework for pronunciation instruction. Language Learning, 48(3), 393-410. Di Camilla, F., & Antón, M. (1997). Repetition in the collaborative discourse of L2 learners: A Vygotskian perspective. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 53(4), 609-633. Dickerson, W. (1989). Stress in the stream of speech: The rhythm of spoken English. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Digital Language Lab. (Beacon Computer Inc., 2007). Retrieved October 4, 2008, from http://www.beacontech.com.tw/langlab-c.shtml. Educational Testing Service. (2003). TOEIC® From A to Z. Retrieved October 4, 2008, from http://www.eu.toeic.eu/fileadmin/free_resources/Products%20websites/TOEIC/Europe/TOEIC_A2Z.pdf. Egbert, J. (2004). Review of connected speech. Language Learning & Technology, January, 8(1), 24-28. Engeström, Y., & Miettinen, R. (1999). Introduction. In Y. Engeström & R. Miettinen & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 1-16). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Feuerstein, R., R and, Y., Hoffman, M. B., & Miller, R. (1980). Instrumental enrichment: An intervention program for cognitive modifiability. Glenview, IL: University Park Press. Felix, U. (2005). Analyzing recent CALL effectiveness research --- Toward a common agenda. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18 (1-2), 1-32. Flege, J. E. (1984). The detection of French accent by American listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 76(9), 692-707. Fox, R. (2001). Constructivism examined. Oxford Review of Education, 27, 1, 23–35. Frawley, W. 1997. Vygotsky and cognitive science: Language and the unification of the social and computational mind. Cambridge, Mass. Harvard University Press. Garcia, P., & Asencion, Y. (2001). Interlanguage development of Spanish learners: Comprehension, production, and interaction. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 377-401. Gerlach, J. M. (1994). Is this collaboration? In Bosworth, K. and Hamilton, S. J. (Eds.), Collaborative learning: Underlying processes and effective techniques, new directions for teaching and learning, # 59. Gilbert, J. B. (1987). Pronunciation and listening comprehension. In J. Morley (Ed.), Current perspectives on pronunciation (pp. 29-39). Goodwin, J. (2001). Teaching pronunciation. In M.Celece-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language, 3rd Ed. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers. Hardison, D. M. (2003). Acquisition of second-language speech: Effects of visual cues, context and talker variability. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 495-522. Hardison, D. M. (2004). Generalization of computer assisted prosody training: Quantitative and qualitative findings. Language Learning & Technology, 8 (1), 34-5. Hardison, D. M. (2005). Contextualized computer-based L2 prosody training: Evaluating the effects of discourse context and video input. CALICO Journal, 22(2), 175-190. Hardison, D. M., & Sonchaeng, C. (2005). Theatre voice training and technology in teaching oral skills: Integrating the components of a speech event. System, 33, 593-608. Hirata Y. (2004) Computer assisted pronunciation training for native English speakers learning Japanese pitch and duration contrasts. Computer Assisted Language Learning 17, 357–376. Huong, Le Pham Hoai (2003). The mediational role of language teachers in sociocultural theory. English Teaching Forum Online, 41(3). Retrieved May 18, 2008, from http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol41/no3/p32.htm. Jenkins, J. (1996). Changing priorities. Speak Out. 18, 33-40. Jenkins, J. (1998). Which pronunciation norms and models for English as an international language? In English Language Teaching Journal, 52(2), 119-126. Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jenkins, J. (2002). A socio linguistically based, empirically researched pronunciation syllabus for English as an international language, Applied Linguistics 23(1), 83–103. Jeon-Ellis, G., Debski, R. & Wigglesworth, G. (2005). Oral interaction around computers in the project-oriented CALL classroom. Language Learning & Technology, 9(3), 121-145. Kelly, G. (2000). How to teach pronunciation. Harlow: Longman. Kinginger, C. (2000). Learning the pragmatics of solidarity in the networked foreign language classroom. In J. K. Hall & L. S. Verplaetse (Eds.), Second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction (pp. 23-46). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Klingner, J. K., & Vaughn, S. (2000). The helping behaviors of fifth graders while using collaborative strategic reading during ESL content classes. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 69-98. Koren, S. (1995). Foreign language pronunciation testing: A new approach. System, 23(3), 387-400. Kozulin, A. (1998). Psychological tools: A Sociocultural approach to education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Kuo, F. J. (2004).The relationship between stress teaching and how or low achievers. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Kaohsiung Normal University. Taiwan: Republic of China. Lantolf, J. P. (2000a). Second language learning as a mediated process. Language Teaching, 33, 2, 79–96. Lantolf, J. P. (2000b). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.) Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of L2 development. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Leather, J. (1983). Second-language pronunciation learning and teaching. Language Teaching, 16(3), 198 -219. Lee, W. Y. (2006). English pronunciation problems of Taiwan senior high school students. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Kaohsiung Normal University. Taiwan: Republic of China. Levis, J. M. & Pickering, L. (2004). Teaching intonation in discourse using speech visualization technology. System, 32, 505-524. Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1990). Focus-on-form and corrective feedback in communicative language teaching: Effects on second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12(4), 429–448. Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1999). How languages are learned (Revised Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. New York: Sage. Lively, S. E., Logan, J. S., & Pisoni, D. B. (1993). Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/. II: The role of phonetic environment and talker variability in learning new perceptual categories. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 94, 1242-1255. Luchini, P. (2005). Task-based pronunciation teaching: A state-of-the-art perspective. Asian EFL Journal, 7(4), 191-202. Retrieved October 4, 2008, from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/December05PDF%20issue.pdf Lynch, T., & Maclean, J. (2001). A case of exercising: Effects of immediate task repetition on learner’s performance. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogical tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 141-162). London: Longman. Miettinen, R. (2001). Artefact mediation in Dewey and in cultural-historical activity theory. Mind, Culture & Activity, 8(4), 297-308. Milanovic, M., Saville, N. & Shen, S. (1995). A study of the decision-making behaviour of composition markers. In M. Milanovic & N. Saville (Eds), Performance testing, cognition and assessment: Selected papers from the 15th Language Testing Research Colloquium (LTRC) (pp. 92-114). Cambridge University Press. Mitcham, C. (1994). Thinking through technology: The path between engineering and philosophy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Molholt, G. (1988). Computer-assisted instruction in pronunciation for Chinese speakers of American English. TESOL Quarterly, 22(1), 91-111. Morley, J. (1991). The pronunciation component in teaching English to speakers of other languages. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 481-520. Morley, J. (Ed) (1994). Pronunciation pedagogy and theory: New views, new directions. Alexandria, VA: TESOL Publications Munro, M. J.(1995). Nonsegmental factors in foreign accent: Ratings of filtered speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 17, 17–34. MyET. (LLab, 2007). Retrieved August 20, 2007, from http://www.myet.com/en/Index.htm. Neri, A., Cucchiarini, C., Strik, H., & Boves, L. (2002). The Pedagogy-technology Interface in computer assisted pronunciation training. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15, 441-467. Nyikos, M., & Oxford, R. (1993) A factor analytic study of language-learning strategy use: Interpretations from information-processing theory and social psychology. Modern Language Journal, 77(1), 11-22. Ohta, A. S. (2001). Peer interactive tasks and assisted performance in classroom language learning. In A. S. Ohta, Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese (pp. 73-128). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Pennington, M. C. (1999). Computer-aided pronunciation pedagogy: Promise, limitations and directions. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 12, 427-440. Pennington, M. C., & Esling, J. H. (1996). Computer-assisted development of spoken language skills. In M. C. Pennington (Ed.), The power of CALL (pp. 153-189). Houston, TX: Athelstan. Pennington, M. C., & Richards, J. (1986). Pronunciation revisited. TESOL Quarterly, 20(2), 207-225. Prator, C. H., & Robinett, B. W. (1985). Manual of American English pronunciation. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winson. Reeser, T. W. (2001). CALICO software review: Tell Me More-French. Retrieved August 14, 2008, from http://calico.org/CALICO_Review/review/tmm-fren00.htm Richards, K. (2003). Qualitative inquiry in TESOL. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Rutherford, W. (1987). Second language grammar: Teaching and learning. Harlow: Pearson Educational Trust. Salomon, G. (1991). On the cognitive effects of technology. In L. T. Landsmann (Ed.), Culture schooling and psychological development. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129-158. Seferoglu, G. (2005). Improving students’ pronunciation through accent reduction software. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), 303-316. Sheridan, E. M. (1981). Literacy and language reform in the People`s Republic of China. Reading Teacher, 20, 804-808. Spaai, G. W. G., & Hermes, D. J. (1993). A visual display for the teaching of intonation. CALICO Journal, 10 (3), 19-30. Storch, N. (2000, December). Is pair work conducive to language learning? The nature of assistance in adult ESL pair work and its effect on language development. Paper presented at the conference on Scaffolding and Language Learning in Educational Contexts: Socio-cultural Approaches to Theory and Practice. Center for Language and Literacy, University of Technology, Sydney. Sullivan, K., & Czigler, P. (2002). Maximising the educational affordances of a technology supported learning environment for introductory undergraduate phonetics. British Journal of Educational Technology. 33(3), 333-343. Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & G. Seidhofer (Eds.), Principles and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of H.G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97-114). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Swain, M., Brooks, L., & Tocalli-Beller, A. (2002). Peer–peer dialogue as a means of second-language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 171–185. Swain, M. & S. Lapkin. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 3, 371-391. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 320-337. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2000). Task-based second language learning: The uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research, 4, 251-274. Tang, G. M., & Tithecott, J. (1999). Peer response in ESL writing. TESL Canada Journal, 16, 20-38. Teng, H. Y. (2002). Chinese students` performance in the pronunciation of English tense and lax vowels. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Normal University. Taiwan: Republic of China. Tsai, P. H. (2006). Bridging pedagogy and technology: User evaluation of pronunciation oriented CALL software. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22(3), 375-397. Turnbull, M. (2001). There is a role for the L1 in second and foreign language teaching, but… Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 531- 540. Turnbull, M., & Arnett, K. (2002). Teachers` uses of the target and first language in second and foreign language classroom. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 204-218. Ushakova, T. N. (1994). Inner speech and second language acquisition: An experimental theoretical approach. In Lantolf, J. P. & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 135 – 156). New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Van Lier, L. (1995) The use of L1 in L2 classes. Babylonis, 2, 37-43. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Published originally in Russian in 1930. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Boston: MIT Press. Wang, L. C. (1999). A study on the relationship between Chinese EFL learners` knowledge and performance in suprasegmental discrimination. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Changhua University of Education. Taiwan: Changhua. Wang, Y. T. (2004). An exploration of the effects of reduced forms instruction on EFL college students` listening comprehension. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Tsing Hua University of Education. Taiwan: Xin-chu. Ware, P., & O`Dowd, R. (2008). Peer feedback on language form in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 12(1), 43-63. Warschauer, M. 1997. Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice. The Modern Language journal, 81(4), 470-487. Warschauer, M. (2005). Sociocultural perspectives on CALL in J.L. Egbert and G.M. Petrie (Eds.), (pp. 41–51). CALL Research perspectives. NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: an overview. Language Teaching, 57-71. Wong, R. (1987). Teaching pronunciation: Focus on English rhythm and intonation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prntice Hall. Wood, D., Bruner, J.S., Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring and problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100. Yang, M. N. (2005). Nursing pre-professionals` medical terminology learning strategies. Asian EFL Journal, 7(1), 137-154. Retrieved October 4, 2008, from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/march_05_mny.php. Yang, M. N. (2007). Taiwanese five-year junior college EFL students’ beliefs. Unpublished dissertation. National Chengchi University. Yang, M. N., & Su, S. M.(2003). A study of Taiwanese nursing students` and in-service nursing professionals` English needs. Journal of Chang Gung Institute of Technology, 2, 269-284. Zhao, Y. (2003). Recent developments in technology and language learning: a literature review and meta-analysis. CALICO Journal, 2(1), 7-27. 描述 博士
國立政治大學
英國語文學系
90551505資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0905515053 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 殷允美<br>招靜琪 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Yin, Yuen Mei<br>Chao, Chin Chi en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 蔡碧華 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Tsai, Pi Hua en_US dc.creator (作者) 蔡碧華 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Tsai, Pi Hua en_US dc.date (日期) 2009 en_US dc.date.accessioned 9-May-2016 11:21:27 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 9-May-2016 11:21:27 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 9-May-2016 11:21:27 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0905515053 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/94618 - dc.description (描述) 博士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 英國語文學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 90551505 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本研究旨在調查電腦輔助英語發音學習軟體 「MyET」，對學習者在學習英語發音方面的影響。 利用電腦輔助英語發音學習軟體(CAPT)，練習英語的類化效果，也列為調查重點之一。 此外，學生使用CAPT過程中遭遇的困難和挑戰，以及互動過程中發展出來的對策也一一加以探討。 本研究的目的是要把CAPT在英語聲韻教學的領域中做正確的定位，並且探討如何使用其他的中介工具(例如人類)來強化此類軟體的輔助學習效果。 參與本次研究的大學生一共有九十名，分為三組：兩組CAPT組(亦即實驗組，使用CAPT獨自或與同儕一起使用CAPT學習英語發音)、非CAPT組(控制組)一 組。每組三十名。實驗開始，所有學生以十週的時間練習朗讀 從「灰姑娘」(Cinderella) 摘錄的文字，此段文字由發行 MyET 的公司線上免費提供。 實驗前與實驗後，兩組的學生各接受一次測驗。 每週練習結束後，學生必須將學習心得記載於學習日誌上；教師也針對每個學生的學習心得給予指導回饋。 研究結果顯示，兩個CAPT組別(亦即使用CAPT發音學習軟體的組別)的學生在學習英語聲韻的過程中，都有明顯及正面的進步與改變。尤其是語調與速度快慢方面的進步遠勝於發音的進步。再者，實驗組學生以十週的時間利用CAPT學習英語後，在朗讀新的文字時，無論是發音或語調都有類化的效應，但是在速度快慢方面則無顯著進步。然而，實驗結果三組的發音表現，在量化統計上並未達到明顯的差異。 雖然如此，在質化的探究上，經過分析學生的學習心得後得知：所有組別當中，獨自使用CAPT學習英語發音的組別，最能夠自我審視語言學習歷程 (包括模仿和學習樂趣)。至於共同使用CAPT學習的學生自述在英語流暢度、語調及發音方面獲致最大的改善。控制組的學生因為沒有同儕的鷹架教學及回饋，也沒有 MyET提供的練習回饋，練習過程中，學生自述學習困難的頻率最高，學生也認為學習收穫很少。 參與本次研究實驗組的學生認為， CAPT提供練習回饋的機制設計有改進的空間。 有關本研究結果在理論及英語教學上的意涵以及研究限制，於結論當中一一提出加以討論。 關鍵字：電腦輔助語言教學，語音辨識軟體，超音段，語調，時長，學習策略， 中介 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) This present study investigated the impact of computer-assisted pronunciation training (CAPT) software, i.e., MyET, on students’ learning of English pronunciation. The investigation foci included the generalization of the effect of practice with the CAPT system. Also examined are the difficulties and challenges reported by the students who employed the CAPT system and the strategy scheme they developed from their interaction with the system. This study aimed to position the role of the CAPT system in the arena of instruction on English pronunciation and to investigate how other kinds of mediation, such as that of peer support, could reinforce its efficacy. This study involved 90 Taiwanese college students, divided into two experimental groups and one control group. The two experimental groups practiced English pronunciation by using a computer-assisted pronunciation training (CAPT) program either independently or with peers while the control group only had access to MP3 files in their practice. All the groups practiced for ten weeks texts adopted from a play, Cinderella, provided by MyET free of charge on line. They all received a pretest and a posttest on the texts they had practiced and a novel text. Each week after their practice with the texts, the participants were asked to write down in their learning logs their reflections on the learning process in Chinese. In the same way, the instructor would provide her feedback on the students’ reflections in the logs every week. The results showed that the ten-week practice with the CAPT system resulted in significant and positive changes in the learning of English pronunciation of CAPT groups (i.e., the Self-Access CAPT Group and the Collaborative CAPT Group). The progress of the participants in intonation and timing was always higher than in segmental pronunciation. Moreover, the ten-week practice with the CAPT system was found to be generalized (though the generalization is less than mediocre) to the participants’ performance in the production of segmental pronunciation and intonation but not in the timing component in reading the novel text. However, the improvement of the CAPT groups was not great enough to differentiate themselves from the MP3 Group. Though the quantitative investigation did not reveal significant group differences, the qualitative analysis of the students’ reflections showed that the learning processes all the three groups went through differed. The Self-Access CAPT Group outperformed the other two groups in developing self-monitoring of language learning and production, and in enjoying working with the CAPT system/texts. Among the three groups, the Collaborative CAPT Group outscored the other two groups in reporting their gains and improvement in fluency, intonation and segmental pronunciation, as well as developing strategies to deal with their learning difficulty. Though the students in the MP3 group also made significant progress after the practice, without peers’ scaffolding and the feedback provided by MyET, they reported the highest frequency of difficulties and the least frequency of gains and strategies during the practice. The participants of this study also considered necessary the improvement of the CAPT system’s feedback design. At the end of the study theoretical and pedagogical implications as well as research limitations are presented. Key words: Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL), Automatic Speech Recognition System (ASRS), segmental pronunciation, prosody, intonation, timing, learning strategies, mediation en_US dc.description.tableofcontents Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………… iii Table of Contents……………………………………………………………… v List of Tables………………………………………………………………….. xi List of Figures…………………………………………………………………. xiii Chinese Abstract……………………………………………………………… xiv English Abstract ………………………………………………………………. xvi CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION…………………………………....... 1 Background and Motivation ………………………………………….. 1 Purposes of this Study…………………………………………………. 6 Research Questions…………………………………………………….. 7 Overview of this Study…………………………………………………. 8 Definitions and Abbreviations of Terms………………………………. 8 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………. 11 The Problems of Chinese EFL Learners in Learning English Pronunciation…..………………………………………………………… 11 The History of English Pronunciation Instruction…………………….. 14 Computer-Assisted Pronunciation Training (CAPT) …………………. 17 Related Research in Computer-Assisted Pronunciation Training……. 19 Related Research on English Pronunciation Conducted in Taiwan ………………………………………………………………. 20 Related Research on English Pronunciation without the Use of CAPT Systems …………………………………………………. 21 Related Research on English Pronunciation with the Use of CAPT systems……………………………………………........ 22 Vygotskian Sociocultural Theory……………………………………….. 26 Mediation……………………………………………………………… 27 Internalization ………………………………………………………… 31 Collaborative Learning……………………………………………. 33 Sociocultural Theory and Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL)…………………………………………………………………… 37 Summary of Literature Review……………………………………………. 38 CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH DESIGN………………………………. 40 Participants and Instruments…………………………………………… 40 Participants…………………………………………………………….. 40 Instruments…………………………………………………………….. 42 An Introduction to MyET………………………………………….. 42 DigiStudio Digital Language Lab ………………………………… 44 Reading Texts……………………………………………………… 45 Learning Logs……………………………………………………… 46 Questionnaires……………………………………………………… 47 Experimental Design………………………………………………………. 48 Experimental and Control Groups……………………………………... 48 Experimental Context and General Procedures……………………….. 48 The Experimental Procedures for Each Group………………………... 49 The Self-Access Computer Group and the Collaborative Computer Group……………………………………………………………… 49 The MP3 Group………………………………………………….... 50 Data Analysis ……………………………………………………………… 52 The Evaluation of the Participants’ Recordings………………………… 52 Analysis of Learning Logs……………………………………………… 55 Analysis of the Questionnaire of Practice Evaluation ............................. 56 Summary of Chapter Three…………………………………………............. 57 CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………… 58 Research Question One: The Impact of the CAPT System……………... 58 The Performance of Each Group in Reading the Part I Text………….. 59 Comparison of the Performance of Each Group in Reading the Part I Text…………………………………………………………………….. 61 The Performance of Each Group in Reading the Part II Text…………. 64 Comparison of the Performance of Each Group in Reading the Part II Text……………………………………………………………………. 66 Summary of Research Question One…………………..…………………… 69 Research Question Two: Generalization Effect of Practice with the CAPT System…………………………………………………………….... 70 The Generalization of Practice Effect to Segmental Pronunciation…… 73 The Generalization of Practice Effect to Intonation Production………. 73 The Generalization of Practice Effect to Timing Production………….. 74 Summary of the Generalization of Practice Effect………………......... 75 Summary of the Results and Discussion of Research Questions One and Two……………………………………………………………………. 75 Research Question Three: The Processes of Students’ Learning of English Pronunciation through Variant Mediations…………………… 77 Shared Perceptions…………………………………………………..... 77 Difficulties during the Practice…………………………………… 78 Distribution of Kinds of Difficulty across Groups …………….. 78 Gains………………………………………………………………. 81 Distribution of Kinds of Gain across Groups …………………. 82 Monitoring of Language Learning………………………………. 85 Distribution of Kinds of Reflections on Monitoring of Language Learning across Groups……………………................................ 87 Monitoring Reflections Unique to the Self-Access CAPT Group 89 Strategy Use…………………………………….…........................ 91 Distribution of Kinds of Strategy Use across Groups ……….. 92 Summary of Shared Perceptions…………………………………….. 96 Mediated Learning through the CAPT System………………………….. 97 Positive Impacts……………………………………………………...... 98 Negative Impacts ……………………………………………………… 101 Summary of the Analysis of Mediated Learning through the CAPT System………………………………………………………………………. 103 Mediated Learning through Peer-to-Peer Collaboration……………….. 103 Impact of Collaborative Learning on Participants’ Language Learning…………………………………………................................. 105 The expert-to-novice pattern………………………………………. 105 The collaborative pattern………………………………………...... 107 Impact of Collaborative Learning on Participants’ Psychology…… 112 The expert-to-novice pattern………………………………………. 112 The collaborative pattern…………………………………………... 113 Summary of the Analysis of the Reflections of the Collaborative CAPT Group………………………………………………………………………. 115 Research Question Four: Attitudes toward the Practice of English Pronunciation through Different Mediations…………………………….. 115 CHAPTER FIVE IMPLICATION AND CONCLUSION………………… 121 Summary of this Study…………………………………………………….. 121 Significance of this Study…………………………………………………... 125 Implications .................................................................................................... 126 Theoretical Implication........................................................................... 126 Interpsychological Dimension............................................................. 126 Intrapsychological Dimension............................................................ 127 Internalization ………………………………………………….. 129 Imitation……………………………………………………….... 129 Pedagogical Implication………………………………………………. 131 The Choice of Material for the Practice of English Prosody………... 131 The Need for a Training of Prosodic Features in English…………... 132 Technology and the Role of a Language Teacher…………………… 134 Suggestions for an Integrated and Staged Instruction……………….. 137 Focused Training on English Prosody ……….……………………... 140 L1 as a Mediational Assistance in L2 Instruction…………………… 141 Suggestions for Teachers Who are Interested in Using a CAPT System……………………………………………………………… 142 Limitation of this study…………………………………………………… 142 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………. 145 References …………………………………………………………………….. 147 Appendixes …………………………………………………………………….. 158 A. Screen Captures of MyET ……………………………………………… 158 B. Free Stories for Practice MyET Provides on Line……………………… 162 C. Reading Passage for the Pretest and Posttest…………………………… 163 D. Learning Logs…………………………………………………………... 164 E. Background Information and Needs Analysis of English pronunciation... 169 F. Practice Evaluation Sheet………………….…………………………….. 173 G. Material Used in the Introduction to Some Basic Concepts on English Prosody………………….……………………………………………… 175 H. Snapshot of the Rating Website ………………………………………... 177 I. Snap Shot of the Frequency Analysis of Learning Logs by MP3 Group… 179 J. Coding Schemes for Difficulties……………………………………........ 180 K. Coding Schemes for Gains……………………………………………... 183 L. Coding Schemes for the Reflections on Monitoring of Language and Learning……………………………………………………………….. 186 M. Coding Schemes for Strategy Use……………………………………... 189 Vita……………………………………………………………………………… 191 List of Tables Table 3.1 A Procedure Sketch of the Quantitative Study………………………52 Table 3.2 Definitions of the Rating Categories for the Evaluation of Students’ Production………………………………………………………......53 Table 4.1 The Descriptive Statistics of Each Group’s Performance in Reading Part I of Cinderella in both Tests…………………………………… 59 Table 4.2 Paired Samples Test of Each Group’s Performance in Reading Part I of Cinderella in both Tests………………………….………… 60 Table 4.3 Descriptive Statistics on the Three Groups’ Performance in the Reading of Part I of Cinderella…………………………………….....62 Table 4.4 ANOVA on the Performance of Each Group in Reading Part I of Cinderella……………………………………………………………..63 Table 4.5 The Descriptive Statistics on Each Group’s Performance in Reading Part II of Cinderella in both Tests……………………………………. 64 Table 4.6 Paired Samples Test of Each Group’s Improvement in Reading Part II of Cinderella………………………………………………….65 Table 4.7 The Descriptive Statistics on Each Group’ Performance in Reading Part II of Cinderella………………………………………………....66 Table 4.8 ANOVA for the Variant Mediation on the Learners’ Learning of Linguistic Components in the Reading of Part II of Cinderella……..67 Table 4.9 Multiple Comparisons (LSD) of the Different Learning Effects … Through Different Mediation………………………………………...68 Table 4.10 Summary Table of the Learning Effect the CAPT groups Had in Reading Part I and Part II of Cinderella in the Posttest……………..70 Table 4.11 The Descriptive Statistics of the performance in reading Part I and Part II of Cinderella of the Self-Access CAPT Group and the Collaborative CAPT Group………………………………………… 71 Table 4.12 Paired Samples t-Test of the Reading Performance Part I and Part II of Cinderella of the Self-Access CAPT Group and the Collaborative CAPT Group………………………………………….72 Table 4.13 Correlations between the Segmental Pronunciation Improvement in the Reading of Part I and that of Part II…………………………...73 Table 4.14 Correlations between the Intonation Improvement in the Reading of Part I and that of Part II……………………………………………74 Table 4.15 Correlations between the Timing Improvement in the Reading of Part I and that of Part II………………………………………………74 Table 4.16 Frequency of Difficulties each Group Encountered………………......79 Table 4.17 The Distribution of Gains across Groups……………………………...82 Table 4.18 The Distribution of the Reflections on Monitoring of Language Learning across Groups……………………………………………….87 Table 4.19 The Distribution of Strategy Use across Groups………………………92 Table 4.20 Summary Table for the Frequency of the Theme Categories in the Reflections of Three Groups………………………………………….96 Table 4.21 A Summary Table for the Students’ Evaluation of the Pronunciation Training………………………………………………………………116 List of Figures Figure 1 The Categories of Analysis of the Participants’ Reflections in Their Learning Logs………… …………………………………….. 77 Figure 2 The emerged themes related to the Collaborative Learning ………… 104 zh_TW dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0905515053 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 電腦輔助語言教學 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 語音辨識軟體 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 超音段 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 語調 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 時長 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 學習策略 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL), en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Automatic Speech Recognition System (ASRS) en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) prosody en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) intonation en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) timing en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) learning strategies en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) mediation en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) segmental pronunciation en_US dc.title (題名) 臺灣大學生透過電腦輔助軟體學習英語發音的研究 zh_TW dc.title (題名) A Passage to being understood and understanding others: en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Anderson-Hsieh, J. (1992). Using electronic visual feedback to teach suprasegmentals. System, 20(1), 51-62. Anderson-Hsieh, J. (1994). Interpreting visual feedback on suprasegmentals in computer assisted pronunciation instruction. CALICO Journal, 11(4), 5-22. Antón , M., & Di Camilla, F. (1998). Socio-cognitive functions of L1 collaborative interaction in the L2 classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 54(3), 314-342. Arbib, M. A. (2002) The mirror system, imitation, and the evolution of language, in C. Nehaniv and K. Dautenhahn, (Eds.), Imitation in animals and artifacts. The MIT Press, pp. 229 - 280. Bai, H. B. (1994). The teaching and learning of English stress and intonation in Taiwan junior high schools. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Chengchi University. Taiwan, Republic of China. Bernhard J. (2007). Thinking and learning through technology- mediating tools and insights from philosophy of technology applied to science and engineering education. The Pantaneto Forum Issue 27: July 2007. Retrieved May 18, 2008, from http://www.pantaneto.co.uk/issue27/Bernhard.htm. Broner, M. & E. Tarone. (2001). ‘Is it fun? Language play in a fifth grade Spanish immersion classroom’. The Modern Journal 85: 363-79. Brown, A. (Ed.) (1991). Teaching pronunciation: A book of readings. London & New York: Routledge. Brown, J. D. (1988). Understanding research in second language learning: A teacher`s guide to statistics and research design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Butler-Pascoe, M. E. & Wiburg, K.M. (2003). Technology and teaching English language learners. MA Pearson Education, Inc. Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M. & Goodwin, J. M. (2004). Teaching pronunciation: A reference for teachers of English to speakers of other languages. Cambridge: CUP. Chao, C. C. (2007). Toward an understanding of computer-mediated EFL writing experience through Vygotskian perspectives. Taiwan Journal of TESOL, Monograph Series No.1. Taipei: National Chengchi University. Chapelle, C. A. (1998). Multimedia CALL: Lessons to be learned from research on instructed SLA. Language Learning and Technology, 2(1), 21-39. Chapelle, C. A. (2004). Technology and language learning: Expanding methods and agendas. System, 23(4), 593-601. Chela-Flores, B. (2001). Pronunciation and language learning: An integrative approach. IRAL, 39, 85–101. Chen, C. F. , Fan, C. Y., & Lin, H. P. (1995). A new perspective on teaching English pronunciation: Rhythm. Paper published in The Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 24-41). Taipei: Crane. Nov. 18, 1995. Chen, C. L., & Chiu, S. J. (2005). The effectiveness and analysis of the use of MyET in assisting the English learning of students at Fuzhu Elementary School. Selected papers from the 14th Int’l Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 58-69), Vol. 2. Taipei: Crane. Chen, H. C. (2006). Interlanguage phonetic timing patterns and their effects on native listeners’ perceptions. Unpublished dissertation. National Kaohsiung Normal University. Chen, H. C., & Chung, R. F. (2004). Effects of task formality on consonant cluster simplification for Taiwanese learners with limited English proficiency. English Teaching and Learning, 28, 67-93. Chen, H. J. (2004). Automatic speech recognition and oral proficiency assessment. Proceedings of International Conference on English Language Teaching Instruction and Assessment, 85-102. Taiwan: National Chung Cheng University. Chen, K. T. (2005). An investigation on the impact of ASR software feedback on EFL college students` pronunciation learning. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Normal University. Taiwan: Republic of China. Chen, M. W. (2006). The impact of automatic speech technology on contrastive stress among adult EFL learners. Unpublished M.A. thesis. Dayeh University. Taiwan: Republic of China. Cheng, C. C. (1973). A synchronic phonology of Mandarin Chinese. Paris: The Hague. Cheng, H. C. (2002). Acoustic properties of Taiwanese high school students’ English Intonation. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Kaohsiung Normal University. Taiwan, Republic of China. Chia, H. U. (2007). Exploring Taiwanese college EFL students’ interaction patterns, reading comprehension and reader responses in cooperative learning. Unpublished Dissertation, National Chia-Yi University. Taiwan. Chiu, T. L. (2005). Effects of online conversation materials with the support of speech recognition technology on college EFL learners. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Tsing Hua University. Taiwan: Republic of China. Chun, D. M. (1998). Signal analysis software for teaching discourse intonation. Language Learning & Technology, 2(1), 61-77. Chun, D. M. (2002). Discourse intonation in L2. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Cook, V. (2001). Second language learning and language teaching, 3rd Edition. London: Arnold. Crystal, D. (1981). Clinical linguistics. New York: Harper. Crystal, D. (1997). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics, Ed. Fourth. Blackwell: Boston. Dalton, C. & Seidlhofer, B. (1994). Pronunciation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. de Bot, K. (1983). Visual feedback of intonation I: Effectiveness and induced practice behavior. Language and Speech, 26(4), 331-350. de Bot, K., & Mailfert, K. (1982). The teaching of intonation: Fundamental research and classroom applications. TESOL Quarterly, 16, 71-77. De Guerrero, M. C. M., & Villamil, O. S. (2000). Activating the ZPD : Mutual scaffolding in L2 peer revisions. The Modern Language Journal, 78, 484-496. Derwing, T. M. & Munro, M. J. (2005). Second language accent and pronunciation teaching: A Research-based Approach. TESOL Quarterly, 39(3), 379-397. Derwing, T. M., Munro, M. J., & Wiebe, G. (1998). Evidence in favor of a broad framework for pronunciation instruction. Language Learning, 48(3), 393-410. Di Camilla, F., & Antón, M. (1997). Repetition in the collaborative discourse of L2 learners: A Vygotskian perspective. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 53(4), 609-633. Dickerson, W. (1989). Stress in the stream of speech: The rhythm of spoken English. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Digital Language Lab. (Beacon Computer Inc., 2007). Retrieved October 4, 2008, from http://www.beacontech.com.tw/langlab-c.shtml. Educational Testing Service. (2003). TOEIC® From A to Z. Retrieved October 4, 2008, from http://www.eu.toeic.eu/fileadmin/free_resources/Products%20websites/TOEIC/Europe/TOEIC_A2Z.pdf. Egbert, J. (2004). Review of connected speech. Language Learning & Technology, January, 8(1), 24-28. Engeström, Y., & Miettinen, R. (1999). Introduction. In Y. Engeström & R. Miettinen & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 1-16). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Feuerstein, R., R and, Y., Hoffman, M. B., & Miller, R. (1980). Instrumental enrichment: An intervention program for cognitive modifiability. Glenview, IL: University Park Press. Felix, U. (2005). Analyzing recent CALL effectiveness research --- Toward a common agenda. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18 (1-2), 1-32. Flege, J. E. (1984). The detection of French accent by American listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 76(9), 692-707. Fox, R. (2001). Constructivism examined. Oxford Review of Education, 27, 1, 23–35. Frawley, W. 1997. Vygotsky and cognitive science: Language and the unification of the social and computational mind. Cambridge, Mass. Harvard University Press. Garcia, P., & Asencion, Y. (2001). Interlanguage development of Spanish learners: Comprehension, production, and interaction. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 377-401. Gerlach, J. M. (1994). Is this collaboration? In Bosworth, K. and Hamilton, S. J. (Eds.), Collaborative learning: Underlying processes and effective techniques, new directions for teaching and learning, # 59. Gilbert, J. B. (1987). Pronunciation and listening comprehension. In J. Morley (Ed.), Current perspectives on pronunciation (pp. 29-39). Goodwin, J. (2001). Teaching pronunciation. In M.Celece-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language, 3rd Ed. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers. Hardison, D. M. (2003). Acquisition of second-language speech: Effects of visual cues, context and talker variability. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 495-522. Hardison, D. M. (2004). Generalization of computer assisted prosody training: Quantitative and qualitative findings. Language Learning & Technology, 8 (1), 34-5. Hardison, D. M. (2005). Contextualized computer-based L2 prosody training: Evaluating the effects of discourse context and video input. CALICO Journal, 22(2), 175-190. Hardison, D. M., & Sonchaeng, C. (2005). Theatre voice training and technology in teaching oral skills: Integrating the components of a speech event. System, 33, 593-608. Hirata Y. (2004) Computer assisted pronunciation training for native English speakers learning Japanese pitch and duration contrasts. Computer Assisted Language Learning 17, 357–376. Huong, Le Pham Hoai (2003). The mediational role of language teachers in sociocultural theory. English Teaching Forum Online, 41(3). Retrieved May 18, 2008, from http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol41/no3/p32.htm. Jenkins, J. (1996). Changing priorities. Speak Out. 18, 33-40. Jenkins, J. (1998). Which pronunciation norms and models for English as an international language? In English Language Teaching Journal, 52(2), 119-126. Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jenkins, J. (2002). A socio linguistically based, empirically researched pronunciation syllabus for English as an international language, Applied Linguistics 23(1), 83–103. Jeon-Ellis, G., Debski, R. & Wigglesworth, G. (2005). Oral interaction around computers in the project-oriented CALL classroom. Language Learning & Technology, 9(3), 121-145. Kelly, G. (2000). How to teach pronunciation. Harlow: Longman. Kinginger, C. (2000). Learning the pragmatics of solidarity in the networked foreign language classroom. In J. K. Hall & L. S. Verplaetse (Eds.), Second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction (pp. 23-46). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Klingner, J. K., & Vaughn, S. (2000). The helping behaviors of fifth graders while using collaborative strategic reading during ESL content classes. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 69-98. Koren, S. (1995). Foreign language pronunciation testing: A new approach. System, 23(3), 387-400. Kozulin, A. (1998). Psychological tools: A Sociocultural approach to education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Kuo, F. J. (2004).The relationship between stress teaching and how or low achievers. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Kaohsiung Normal University. Taiwan: Republic of China. Lantolf, J. P. (2000a). Second language learning as a mediated process. Language Teaching, 33, 2, 79–96. Lantolf, J. P. (2000b). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.) Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of L2 development. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Leather, J. (1983). Second-language pronunciation learning and teaching. Language Teaching, 16(3), 198 -219. Lee, W. Y. (2006). English pronunciation problems of Taiwan senior high school students. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Kaohsiung Normal University. Taiwan: Republic of China. Levis, J. M. & Pickering, L. (2004). Teaching intonation in discourse using speech visualization technology. System, 32, 505-524. Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1990). Focus-on-form and corrective feedback in communicative language teaching: Effects on second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12(4), 429–448. Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1999). How languages are learned (Revised Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. New York: Sage. Lively, S. E., Logan, J. S., & Pisoni, D. B. (1993). Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/. II: The role of phonetic environment and talker variability in learning new perceptual categories. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 94, 1242-1255. Luchini, P. (2005). Task-based pronunciation teaching: A state-of-the-art perspective. Asian EFL Journal, 7(4), 191-202. Retrieved October 4, 2008, from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/December05PDF%20issue.pdf Lynch, T., & Maclean, J. (2001). A case of exercising: Effects of immediate task repetition on learner’s performance. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogical tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 141-162). London: Longman. Miettinen, R. (2001). Artefact mediation in Dewey and in cultural-historical activity theory. Mind, Culture & Activity, 8(4), 297-308. Milanovic, M., Saville, N. & Shen, S. (1995). A study of the decision-making behaviour of composition markers. In M. Milanovic & N. Saville (Eds), Performance testing, cognition and assessment: Selected papers from the 15th Language Testing Research Colloquium (LTRC) (pp. 92-114). Cambridge University Press. Mitcham, C. (1994). Thinking through technology: The path between engineering and philosophy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Molholt, G. (1988). Computer-assisted instruction in pronunciation for Chinese speakers of American English. TESOL Quarterly, 22(1), 91-111. Morley, J. (1991). The pronunciation component in teaching English to speakers of other languages. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 481-520. Morley, J. (Ed) (1994). Pronunciation pedagogy and theory: New views, new directions. Alexandria, VA: TESOL Publications Munro, M. J.(1995). Nonsegmental factors in foreign accent: Ratings of filtered speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 17, 17–34. MyET. (LLab, 2007). Retrieved August 20, 2007, from http://www.myet.com/en/Index.htm. Neri, A., Cucchiarini, C., Strik, H., & Boves, L. (2002). The Pedagogy-technology Interface in computer assisted pronunciation training. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15, 441-467. Nyikos, M., & Oxford, R. (1993) A factor analytic study of language-learning strategy use: Interpretations from information-processing theory and social psychology. Modern Language Journal, 77(1), 11-22. Ohta, A. S. (2001). Peer interactive tasks and assisted performance in classroom language learning. In A. S. Ohta, Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese (pp. 73-128). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Pennington, M. C. (1999). Computer-aided pronunciation pedagogy: Promise, limitations and directions. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 12, 427-440. Pennington, M. C., & Esling, J. H. (1996). Computer-assisted development of spoken language skills. In M. C. Pennington (Ed.), The power of CALL (pp. 153-189). Houston, TX: Athelstan. Pennington, M. C., & Richards, J. (1986). Pronunciation revisited. TESOL Quarterly, 20(2), 207-225. Prator, C. H., & Robinett, B. W. (1985). Manual of American English pronunciation. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winson. Reeser, T. W. (2001). CALICO software review: Tell Me More-French. Retrieved August 14, 2008, from http://calico.org/CALICO_Review/review/tmm-fren00.htm Richards, K. (2003). Qualitative inquiry in TESOL. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Rutherford, W. (1987). Second language grammar: Teaching and learning. Harlow: Pearson Educational Trust. Salomon, G. (1991). On the cognitive effects of technology. In L. T. Landsmann (Ed.), Culture schooling and psychological development. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129-158. Seferoglu, G. (2005). Improving students’ pronunciation through accent reduction software. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), 303-316. Sheridan, E. M. (1981). Literacy and language reform in the People`s Republic of China. Reading Teacher, 20, 804-808. Spaai, G. W. G., & Hermes, D. J. (1993). A visual display for the teaching of intonation. CALICO Journal, 10 (3), 19-30. Storch, N. (2000, December). Is pair work conducive to language learning? The nature of assistance in adult ESL pair work and its effect on language development. Paper presented at the conference on Scaffolding and Language Learning in Educational Contexts: Socio-cultural Approaches to Theory and Practice. Center for Language and Literacy, University of Technology, Sydney. Sullivan, K., & Czigler, P. (2002). Maximising the educational affordances of a technology supported learning environment for introductory undergraduate phonetics. British Journal of Educational Technology. 33(3), 333-343. Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & G. Seidhofer (Eds.), Principles and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of H.G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97-114). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Swain, M., Brooks, L., & Tocalli-Beller, A. (2002). Peer–peer dialogue as a means of second-language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 171–185. Swain, M. & S. Lapkin. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 3, 371-391. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 320-337. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2000). Task-based second language learning: The uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research, 4, 251-274. Tang, G. M., & Tithecott, J. (1999). Peer response in ESL writing. TESL Canada Journal, 16, 20-38. Teng, H. Y. (2002). Chinese students` performance in the pronunciation of English tense and lax vowels. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Normal University. Taiwan: Republic of China. Tsai, P. H. (2006). Bridging pedagogy and technology: User evaluation of pronunciation oriented CALL software. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22(3), 375-397. Turnbull, M. (2001). There is a role for the L1 in second and foreign language teaching, but… Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 531- 540. Turnbull, M., & Arnett, K. (2002). Teachers` uses of the target and first language in second and foreign language classroom. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 204-218. Ushakova, T. N. (1994). Inner speech and second language acquisition: An experimental theoretical approach. In Lantolf, J. P. & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 135 – 156). New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Van Lier, L. (1995) The use of L1 in L2 classes. Babylonis, 2, 37-43. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Published originally in Russian in 1930. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Boston: MIT Press. Wang, L. C. (1999). A study on the relationship between Chinese EFL learners` knowledge and performance in suprasegmental discrimination. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Changhua University of Education. Taiwan: Changhua. Wang, Y. T. (2004). An exploration of the effects of reduced forms instruction on EFL college students` listening comprehension. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Tsing Hua University of Education. Taiwan: Xin-chu. Ware, P., & O`Dowd, R. (2008). Peer feedback on language form in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 12(1), 43-63. Warschauer, M. 1997. Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice. The Modern Language journal, 81(4), 470-487. Warschauer, M. (2005). Sociocultural perspectives on CALL in J.L. Egbert and G.M. Petrie (Eds.), (pp. 41–51). CALL Research perspectives. NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: an overview. Language Teaching, 57-71. Wong, R. (1987). Teaching pronunciation: Focus on English rhythm and intonation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prntice Hall. Wood, D., Bruner, J.S., Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring and problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100. Yang, M. N. (2005). Nursing pre-professionals` medical terminology learning strategies. Asian EFL Journal, 7(1), 137-154. Retrieved October 4, 2008, from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/march_05_mny.php. Yang, M. N. (2007). Taiwanese five-year junior college EFL students’ beliefs. Unpublished dissertation. National Chengchi University. Yang, M. N., & Su, S. M.(2003). A study of Taiwanese nursing students` and in-service nursing professionals` English needs. Journal of Chang Gung Institute of Technology, 2, 269-284. Zhao, Y. (2003). Recent developments in technology and language learning: a literature review and meta-analysis. CALICO Journal, 2(1), 7-27. zh_TW
