词汇知识及其对阅读理解的影响研究 ——以中国非英语专业学生为例

论文摘要

本文是一项关于词汇广度、词汇深度与阅读理解关系的实证性研究。本研究在Qian(1999,2002,2004)对于词汇知识描述的基础上,试图从词汇广度和深度两个层面,评估中国英语学习者的接受性词汇知识,并探讨了词汇知识,尤其是词汇深度知识在阅读理解中的作用。在调查中,唐山学院121名大学二年级非英语专业学生参加了本项研究,实际有效人数为109人。我们对其进行了三次测试,分别测试他们的词汇广度知识、词汇深度知识和阅读理解能力。学习者的词汇广度知识是通过一份已有效度、信度可靠的词汇等级量表VLT(Vocabulary Levels Test)测量的,而词汇深度知识是通过马忠香(2005)设计的基于词汇联想实验的深度知识测试卷WAT(Word Associate Test)和黄强(2002)设计的一份动名搭配试卷测量的。阅读理解试卷选自大学英语四级考试的阅读理解部分。所有测试都是在课上进行,然后以三次考试成绩为原始数据,采用SPSS 13.0,对变量进行皮尔逊相关分析,一元回归和多元回归分析,得到以下结论:1.同义词、反义词、形名搭配和动名搭配之间,以及它们与词汇深度总体之间存在着不同程度的正相关关系。就总样本来说,词汇广度知识和深度知识显著正相关。这表明大体来说,词汇量的扩大可以引起词汇知识的增加,但对于部分学习者而言,词汇广度知识与词汇深度知识并不是同步增长的。2.词汇广度,词汇深度都与阅读显著正相关,但相比较而言,词汇深度与阅读的关系比词汇广度与阅读的关系更密切。3.对于不同词汇深度水平的学生来说,词汇深度的四个方面所起的作用是不一样的。对于词汇深度水平低组的学生而言,词汇深度的四个方面对阅读理解都不起显著作用。对于词汇深度水平中组的学生而言,同义词和形名搭配对阅读理解有显著影响。对于词汇深度水平高组的学生而言,同义词、反义词和形名搭配都对阅读理解有重要作用。4.就总体样本来言,同义词、反义词、形名搭配和动名搭配都与阅读理解之间存在着不同程度的正相关关系。但是阅读理解与同义词、反义词、形名搭配之间关系比与动名搭配之间的关系相对密切。5.词汇量只能预测阅读理解成绩的27.4%,而词汇深度则能预测阅读理解成绩的56.7%。除了词汇量外,词汇深度能解释阅读理解成绩变异中的30.3%。除了词汇深度以外,词汇量只能解释阅读理解成绩变异中的1%。因此总体上来说,对于阅读理解成绩的预测,词汇深度比词汇量起的作用更大。根据本文的研究结论,词汇学习绝不仅仅是掌握尽可能多的单词,学习者还必须把握词汇各个方面的深度知识。从提高阅读理解的角度出发,至少有两方面的词汇深度知识值得注意。首先,除词汇的主要意义之外,同义关系、反义词关系和一词多义应该予以关注。其次,词汇的句法特征尤其是词汇的搭配,比如形名搭配,动名搭配也应融入词汇学习之中,因为词汇搭配知识与阅读理解关系非常密切。总而言之,词汇学习涉及到词汇广度知识学习和词汇深度知识学习两个方面。教学者在教授词汇知识和学习者在学习词汇知识的过程中,这两个方面的知识都应充分重视,忽视任何一个方面都是偏颇的。

论文目录

• 摘要
• Abstract
• Chapter 1 Introduction
• 1.1 The Importance of Vocabulary Knowledge in L2 Reading
• 1.2 The Need of the Present Research
• 1.3 The Concept of Vocabulary Knowledge
• 1.3.1 The Development of the Concept of Vocabulary Knowledge
• 1.3.2 The Framework of Vocabulary Knowledge in the Present Study
• 1.4 Measurement Issue
• 1.4.1 Estimating Breadth of Vocabulary Knowledge
• 1.4.2 Assessing Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge
• 1.4.2.1 Two Approaches to Describe the Scope of Vocabulary Knowledge
• 1.4.2.2 The Instruments to Test Dimensions of Vocabulary for the Present Study
• 1.5 Previous Studies on Vocabulary Knowledge and Its Role in Reading
• 1.6 Research Questions
• Chapter 2 Research Design and Methodology
• 2.1 Participants
• 2.2 Instruments
• 2.2.1 Vocabulary Size Test
• 2.2.2 Instrument for Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge
• 2.2.2.1 The Test Format of Word Associate Test in the Present Study
• 2.2.2.2 Verb-Noun Collocation Test
• 2.2.3 Reading Comprehension Test
• 2.3 Procedures for Administering the Tests
• 2.4 The Statistical Methods Used in the Present Study
• Chapter 3 Results and Analysis
• 3.1 Reliability
• 3.2 Descriptive Statistics
• 3.2.1 Results of Vocabulary Size Test
• 3.2.2 Results of Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge Test
• 3.2.2.1 Overall Acquisition of Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge
• 3.2.2.2 Description of Four Types of DVK
• 3.2.3 Results of Reading Comprehension
• 3.3 Correlation Analysis
• 3.3.1 Four Types of DVK and Total DVK
• 3.3.2 VS and DVK
• 3.3.3 VS and Four Types of DVK
• 3.3.4 VS,DVK and RC
• 3.3.5 Four Types of DVK and RC
• 3.4 Relationship between DVK and RC for Students of Different Levels of DVK
• 3.5 VS's Predictive Power to Reading Comprehension
• 3.6 DVK's Predictive Power to Reading Comprehension
• 3.7 Comparisonof VS's and DVK's Predictive Power to Reading Comprehension
• Chapter 4 Discussion
• 4.1 Correlations of Different Types of Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge and Total DVK
• 4.2 Correlation between VS and DVK
• 4.3 Breadth of Vocabulary Knowledge and Reading Comprehension
• 4.4 Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge and Reading Comprehension
• 4.4.1 Effect of Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge on Reading
• 4.4.2 Effect of Four Types of DVK on RC
• 4.4.3 Relationship between DVK and RC for Students of Different Levels of DVK
• 4.5 Implications for EFL Teaching
• Chapter 5 Conclusion
• 5.1 Summary of the Study
• 5.2 Limitations of the Present Study
• 5.3 Suggestions for Further Rsearch
• Acknowledgements
• Bibliography
• Appendix Ⅰ Vocabulary Size Test
• Appendix Ⅱ Word Associate Test
• Appendix Ⅲ Verb-Noun Collocation Test
• Appendix Ⅵ Reading Comprehension Test
• Appendix Ⅴ
• Publications While Registered with MA Program