论文总字数：52525字

摘 要

本文旨在研究学习英语学习者输出型词汇习得研究。作为语言的核心，词汇在交流与获取知识方面起到独一无二的作用。因此词汇习得也是二语习得中最基本的步骤。过去的几十年，尽管语言学词汇习得研究获得了很多令人瞩目的成就，但在二语词汇习得方面仍然有很多疑问有待解答。多数的研究关注任务类型以及其他因素对二语词汇习得的影响，且都建立在三大基础理论上：投入量假设，输入假设以及输出假设。但鲜有研究考虑到综合因素，尤其是词性对二语输出型词汇习得的影响。

本篇论文主要解决以下几个问题：

问题一, 任务类型对二语学习者输出型词汇习得是否有主效应？

问题二, 词性对二语学习者输出型词汇习得是否有主效应？

问题三，任务类型和词性是否有交互作用？

本实验的主体是南京工业大学大一新生，他们来自学校的不同学院且都是非英语专业的中国学生，英语基础相差不大。所有参与者的年龄都在19岁至22岁之间，平均年龄为20岁。

本实验的数据收集分为两个阶段。第一阶段中，所有参与者被随机分配为两组，第一组样本容量为50，做输入实验。剩下的50人做输出实验。输入实验组在规定时间内要完成一份试卷，包含两个部分。第一部分是单项选择，共有十八句话，每句话包含一个目标词。参与者根据自己对句子的了解程度进行选择。第二部分是语义连线测试。试卷的左边为目标词，右边为释义，参与者用连线的方式找出与目标词相匹配的单词释义。输出实验组同样要在规定时间内完成一份试卷，包含两个部分。第一部分与输入实验组相同，第二部分参与者要根据英文释义写出目标词。第二阶段为词汇的即时测试。即时测试是为了了解参与者对第一阶段出现过的目标词的熟悉和掌握情况。目标词共分为三种词性，分别为名词，动词和形容词。各词性中包含六个目标词。参与者的成绩根据词汇的掌握情况被分为四个评判等级。本实验采用一种双向方差分析分析这些数据，回答实验问题。

主要研究发现如下：

第一，任务类型对二语学习者输出型词汇习得没有主效应。在本实验中，参与者提交的试卷会被归总并评分，评分表中会有很多考量因素。例如语法的运用，句子的结构以及词汇的搭配等等。除此以外，还有很多其他的原因。譬如说，目标词出现在单句中，语境不够丰富，从而导致两种任务类型对词汇习得无差异，等等。

第二，词性对二语学习者输出型词汇习得有主效应。数据显示在输入任务类型中，二语习得者名词和动词的习得好于形容词的习得。在输出任务类型中三种词性之间则没有显著性差异。可能是由于在输出型任务中，语境和词义的变化影响更大。

第三，任务类型和词类没有交互作用。数据显示词类在于任务类型不相关的情况下对二语学习者输出型词汇习得有主效应。

尽管本研究中还存在很多不足，但是实验结果首次证实了词性的重要性以及它对二语习得者输出性词汇习得的影响，必然会对未来的二语教学研究与学习产生影响和启示。

关键词： 任务类型 词性 二语习得 输出型词汇习得

1. Introduction

Vocabulary acquisition plays a vital role in the process of EFL Learners’ learning, which is also an important research field in linguistics. Many researchers (Sun Huachun, 2012; Wang Tongshun, 2012) have done a great number of studies about task types and their effects on vocabulary acquisition during last few years. Most of these studies are based on three main theories: Involvement load hypothesis, Input hypothesis and Output hypothesis. However, there are fewer studies focuses on some other important factors that may have impact on EFL vocabulary acquisition such as the part of speech. Accordingly, effects of task type and part of speech on EFL learners’ vocabulary acquisition are the research focuses of the current study.

• 1. Need for the study

As a core in a language, vocabulary serves as a unique tool for communication and acquiring knowledge. Vocabulary acquisition is the basic step in the process of EFL learning. Studying on different factors and their effects on vocabulary acquisition can not only benefit EFL Learners in their studying but also EFL teachers in their instructions.

During the development of linguistics, vocabulary acquisition has always been one of the most attractive issues among researchers. Most studies have been carried out to investigate various factors that may have effects on vocabulary acquisition both at home and abroad. All of these studies are based on three main theories: Involvement load hypothesis (Lauferamp;Hulstijn, 2001), Input hypothesis (Krashen, 1980) and Output hypothesis (Swain, 1980). Earlier studies concentrated on task types and their effects on EFL learners’ vocabulary acquisition, some of them verified the rationality of these hypotheses (Sun Huachun, 2012; Hamid R. Kargozari, 2011). But much fewer studies have been conducted on some new factors, especially the part of speech and its effect on EFL learners’ vocabulary acquisition. Despite all the achievements in the former studies, more researchers have realized that there should be more factors and aspects taken into consideration so that a better way of vocabulary acquisition can be found. Since there are fewer findings yielded in analysis of factors in vocabulary acquisition, researchers should further the studies with more considerations. As a matter of fact, more and more complete researches should be done in vocabulary acquisition so that EFL learners could have improved their learning in a more efficient and scientific way.

Besides, the study will not only provide a better way of learning a second language but also show a new direction for researchers and teachers in their instruction or teaching. Many students nowadays pay more attention to their scores due to the ferocious competitions. Efficient and scientific vocabulary acquisitions seems especially important for them since they have to acquire more words within short time. Through studies on different factors and their effects on vocabulary acquisition, classroom teaching could be more specific and effective. Although many studies have been done on task types, few studies concentrate on part of speech, which is an indispensable factor in the practical learning. Factors like the part of speech is vital to learning a second language and acquiring the basic knowledge. To find a better way of learning and teaching, we are eager to study on the effect of task types and part of speech on EFL learners’ vocabulary acquisition, especially the productive vocabulary acquisition.

1.2 Research purpose

The present study intends to investigate the effects of task types and part of speech on EFL learners’ productive vocabulary acquisition. To be more specific, the purpose of this study can be divided into three parts: firstly, to find out the main effect of task types on EFL learners’ productive vocabulary acquisition; secondly, to find out the main effect of part of speech on EFL learners’ productive vocabulary acquisition; thirdly, to find out whether there is an interaction between task types and part of speech.

2. Literature review

Recently, more and more EFL learners and EFL teachers have been trying to figure out a more scientific and efficient way of vocabulary acquisition. It has been long verified the interaction between task type and its effects on EFL learners’ vocabulary acquisition. In this study, task type and part of speech, along with their effects on EFL learners’ productive vocabulary acquisition will be further analyzed. In this chapter, literature is reviewed in three parts. First of all, literature review will focus on the current research achievements on EFL learners’ vocabulary acquisition, second on the task type (input-output hypothesis) and its effects on EFL learners’ vocabulary acquisition, third on the problems in the previous studies.

2.1 Current research on EFL vocabulary acquisition

As the basic unit in a language, vocabulary is vital to acquiring or improving their language skills, especially for those EFL learners. Therefore, EFL vocabulary acquisition has drawn many attention of researchers and has become one of the most popular research questions in linguistics. Based on the three main hypothesis, which are input-output hypothesis and involvement load hypothesis, the research results has further analyzed different factors and their effects on EFL vocabulary acquisition.

In this paragraph, involvement load hypothesis will be introduced while input-output hypothesis will be introduced in the next part. Schmidt (2009) states that deeper engagement with new vocabulary as induced by tasks will increase the chances of their being learned. Later, Laufer and Hulstijn come up with a motivational-cognitive construct of involvement which contains three basic components: need, research and evaluation (Dr. B. Yaqubi, 2010). According to them, the combination of these three components with their degrees of prominence make up the involvement load. However, there is a question that bothers the researchers. That is, researchers cannot evaluate the demand on a task and compare the demands with each other, in other words, there is not a standard to judge the demands imposed on learners in tasks. Later, Laufer and Hulstijn try to make the depth of learning process easy to operate. They proposed the “involvement index”, which means they try to make the standard specific and practical. Haratmeh, M. S. (2012) states in one of his article that involvement load is not the only determining factor in task effectiveness, but input/output-orientation of tasks is also a decisive parameter in task effectiveness.

In the process of researches in EFL vocabulary acquisition, many researchers and scholars have made progress and achievements in this filed through unremitting efforts. In terms of the depth of research, many researchers realize that the amount of vocabulary is not a complete standard to represent learners’ learning ability. Thus, the depth of acquiring vocabulary has become one of the most popular researching aims lately. Wu Xudong and Chen Xiaoqing (2000) draw a conclusion through research that a learner’s receptive vocabulary is always larger than his or her productive vocabulary. Lv Changhong (2004) points out that there is a weak interaction between the amount of vocabulary and the depth of the vocabulary knowledge. In terms of different ways of acquiring vocabulary, Zhang Xian (2009) puts forward a conception that incidental vocabulary acquisition is different from intended acquisition. The former one refers to acquiring the vocabulary incidentally through reading or practicing, while the latter refers to acquiring the vocabulary intendedly and consciously. Eysenck, M. W. (1982) holds the opinion that consideration of ecological validity strongly suggest that the incidental- learning paradigm should be the source of especially important and realistic data in terms of the normal functioning of memory processes. Since then, many researchers start to investigate the incidental vocabulary acquisition and some factors that might effect them. Sun Huachun (2012) does a research based on involvement load hypothesis by Laufer and Hulstijn and the results shows that learners could acquire lexical knowledge through incidental learning. Besides, the factor of time-on-task has been successfully proven to have effective effects on incidental vocabulary acquisition. As for learning conditions, Rott (1999) thinks that vocabulary can be acquired incidentally in two conditions, enhanced condition and natural condition. Further more, Wang Gaiyan (2008) focus on the natural condition and intends to explore learners’ mental mechanism involved in incidental vocabulary acquisition in the process of natural reading. Some learners come up with the idea that vocabulary varies a lot in dimensions and levels, including pronunciation, spelling, meaning and grammar characteristics, etc. (Nation 2001; Read (2000). Hulstijn, J. amp; B. Laufer (2001) hold the opinion that retention is the highest in the composition task, lower in reading flus fill-in, and lowest in reading after a series of experiments. Other researchers (Min, H., 2008) conclude that reading plus focused vocabulary exercises are more effective and efficient than the narrow reading in enhance target vocabulary acquisition and retention for EFL students through the experimental study.

2.2 The task type and its effects on EFL vocabulary acquisition

2.2.1 The input hypothesis and its effects on EFL vocabulary acquisition

It has been widely recognized that there are two basic research theories. Krashen’s (1985) first put up with the idea input hypothesis, which gives priority to the effects of input and the comprehensible input that EFL learners are exposed to. Krashen points out there is only one way of acquiring vocabulary, that is comprehensible input, which is the key of acquiring a second language. The comprehensible input should firstly contain the known language knowledge (i), at the same time, the way and function of input language should contain some knowledge that is a little bit harder than the previous knowledge (i 1). Krashen, S. D. (1989) holds the opinion that the input hypothesis assumes that we acquire language by understanding messages. According to some researchers (Zhang Xiuyan, 1990), effective language input should have the following four characteristics, which are comprehensive, interesting and relevant , not grammatical sequenced and i 1. Input hypothesis is an important progress in implied linguistics and emphasize the importance of classroom for the first learners. In other words, it helps redefine the significance of class teaching (Jia Guanjie, 1997; Xu Haiming, 1998). Folse, K. S. (2006) used a within-subjects design to test the effects of types of written exercises on EFL vocabulary retention. The findings show that the important feature of a given EFL vocabulary exercises is the number of words retrievals rather than the depth of words processing. However, with the development and research of linguistics, people realize that there are some problems. For example, it is difficult to tell acquisition or learning in a short period of time. Besides, there is not a definition about comprehensible language input. Nevertheless, the input hypothesis urge researchers to have a deeper thinking about foreign language teaching and set up a more complete theory (Zeng Zelin, 2009).

2.2.2 The output hypothesis and its effects on EFL vocabulary acquisition

Although input hypothesis has played an indispensable role in the development of linguistics, we have long neglected the fact that language is for communication. Swain (1995) first come up with a new hypothesis: output hypothesis. Swain, M. (1993) thinks that every EFL student wants to better use the second language and tries to take the responsibility for their own language. It might be difficult for EFL learners to express their feelings with the exact words or phrases. In other words, EFL learners cannot acquire the way of communication only because they lack of a kind of output ability. Swain (1995) points out three main functions of the output hypothesis. Firstly, output could encourage EFL learners to notice the distance of the words they want to say and the words they could say. Once they realize the gap, they will try to learn consciously and intendedly. Second, output is a good standard to judge learners’ understanding and language formality. Thirdly, output can make EFL learners monitor themselves and make the language knowledge absorbed. Some researchers (Zhang Xiuhong, 1990) draw a conclusion that input is the precondition while output is the purpose of input. Output hypothesis indicates that EFL learners could really acquire a second language through practice and build a concrete foundation for their further study. It is vital to combining and keeping the balance of input and output. Zhang Xiuhong (1990) says that the teachers should emphasize the input, and strengthen the output ability, only then will the students improve their comprehensive ability in a better and faster way. Ellis, R. and X, He (1999) once reported an experimental study of the differential effects of premodified input, interactionally modified input, and modified output. Some researchers (Toth, P. D., 2006) try to prove that output plays an indispensable role in EFL learning in his study. The results show that the modified output group achieved higher comprehension and vocabulary acquisition scores than either of the input groups.

2.3 Problems in the previous studies

Although researchers have already contributed a lot to the EFL vocabulary acquisition and promote the development of implied linguistics, there are still some problems which are not solved yet.

Firstly, many researchers have verified the the importance of task type in EFL vocabulary acquisition, but there is still lack of data to show the relevance between task type and EFL productive vocabulary acquisition. In other words, the conclusion are not objective enough.

Secondly, researchers have paid great attention to different factors and the potential effects on EFL vocabulary acquisition. However, there are not sufficient studies and data on part of speech and its effects on EFL productive vocabulary acquisition. The results of the research will surely make a difference in learning and teaching.

Thirdly, whether there is an interaction between task type and part of speech still remans unknown, which needed to be proven by data and statistics.

To sum up, there are still many insufficiencies in the previous studies, more projects should be further studied in this paper.

3. Methodology

3.1 Research questions

The present study investigates the effects of task type and part of speech on EFL learners’ productive vocabulary acquisition. Here are the specific research questions:

1. Is there a main effect of task type on EFL learners’ productive vocabulary acquisition?

2. Is there a main effect of part of speech on EFL learners’ productive vocabulary acquisition?

3. Is there any interaction between task type and part of speech?

3.2 Research design

3.2.1 Output task and input task

This study adopted a factorial design, which has two factors: task types and part of speech. In this study, task type was divided into input and output while part of speech includes three levels: none, verb and adjective. EFL learners’ productive vocabulary acquisition was the only dependent variable.

Participants were divided into two groups who were required to finish some exercises. There are all together eighteen target words in the exercises, six of them are nouns, six are verbs, and the left six are adjectives. The first group had to finish an exam (input) which contained two parts within limited time. In part one, there were eighteen sentences which contained the eighteen target words. After each sentence, the Chinese explanation and part of speech would be listed in the bracket. After reading all these sentences, participants should choose one from the four options: A, B, C and D according to their understanding about the sentences. (A=understanding sentence completely, B=understanding sentence partly, C=not understanding sentence very well, D=not understanding the sentence at all.) For example, She alleged that there was much drug use among the members of the group. In part 2, participants had to finish a semantic matching task. Target words were listed on the left, while definitions were listed on the right. Participants were required to finish the match and find out the best definitions for each target words. For example:

1. The second group was required to finish an exam (output) which contained two parts within limited time. The part one was the same as the group one did, while in the part two, participants were required to write out the target words according to the given english definitions. For example: candid ：honest and direct.

3.2.2 Test of vocabulary acquisition

The test of vocabulary acquisition consists of eighteen target words that we have mentioned above. For each target word, there were four ranks: (1) not knowing the word; (2) remember the word but not knowing its meaning; (3) knowing the word and its meaning; (4) can make a sentence with the target word. Eg.____________. If the participants choose (1) or (2), then they do not have to choose the left options, while if they choose (3), then they have to complete (4). Since the study focuses on the EFL learners’ productive vocabulary acquisition, the results of (4) was analyzed. Here are detailed judging criterion:1. If the meanings of the target words are not matched with the meaning of the sentences, or if the meanings are matched but the grammar is wrongly used, there will be no score. The misuse of grammar are listed as follow: nouns are used as adjectives or verbs; the confusion of single or plural forms; the original form of verbs are used directly after the prep., etc. 2. If the meanings of the target words are matched with the meaning of the sentences and the grammar are correctly used, even if there might be some other mistakes, there will be 1 score.

3.3 Data collection

The subjects in this study were 100 freshmen, coming from different schools in Nanjing Tech University. As non-english majors, they were all native Chinese speakers and had the same English education background. Their average age was approximately 20 years old, ranging from 19 to 22 years old. The participants (N=100) all agreed to follow the rules and cooperate with our work.

All the participants were gathered into classrooms and required to finish the input and output task within 30 minutes. 50 of them were required to finish input task while other 50 participants were required to finish the output task. The division was done randomly. No electronic devices or dictionaries were available. As long as they finish the task, they should hand in the paper. Delayed hand-in was not acceptable. After the input and output task test, there was an immediate vocabulary acquisition test. Time was 25 minutes. Delayed hand-in was not acceptable, either.

3.4 Data analysis

Analysis of the the data will use a mixed ANOVA. The 2 × 3 factorial design was implied. Statistical analysis of the collected data was accomplished by SPSS V13.0. Mixed ANOVA was conducted to answer the research questions.

1. Results and discussion

Chapter four is divided into two parts. The first part will report the results about the problems raised in chapter three, the second part will discuss the findings and significance.

4.1 Results

请支付后下载全文，论文总字数：52525字