本文選題：“投入量假設” + “預設投入量”��； 參考：《南京師范大學》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：“投入量假設”由LauferHulstijn于2001年提出,至今已逾十年。十年間,該假設引起界內廣泛關注,主要原因在于它采用“投入量”的概念將學習者的認知努力量化,使研究者有可能通過實證研究揭示不同閱讀任務對詞匯習得的影響。假設認為,一項閱讀任務引發(fā)的投入量越高,對詞匯學習的促進作用越好。研究者們就此開展了許多實驗,試圖證實這一假說,然而,由于研究設計的差異和“投入量假設”本身缺陷的綜合作用,迄今仍無統(tǒng)一結論。因此,本文旨在探究由閱讀任務引發(fā)的“預設投入量”、學習者完成任務時的“實際投入量”以及二語詞匯學習結果三者之間的關系,從而找出“投入量假設”無法得到驗證的根本原因。具體研究問題如下：(1)“預設投入量”與“實際投入量”一致嗎?(2)“預設投入量”能有效預測詞匯習得結果嗎?(3)“實際投入量”能有效預測詞匯習得結果嗎? 研究結果表明：(1)“預設投入量”與“實際投入量”不一致,前者顯著高于后者,尤其表現(xiàn)在“投入量”認知維度的兩個因素,即“搜索”和“評價”上；(2)“預設投入量”不能有效預測詞匯習得結果,無論在即時詞匯測試還是延時詞匯測試中,完成具有較高“預設投入量”閱讀任務的受試并不一定比完成具有較低“預設投入量”閱讀任務的受試表現(xiàn)更好；(3)“實際投入量”與詞匯習得結果呈顯著正相關,學習者在閱讀任務中的實際投入量越高,其詞匯初始習得效果越好,但這種優(yōu)勢并不能延續(xù)到延時后測中。本研究的發(fā)現(xiàn)對于教學有某些啟示意義。首先,由于學習者在閱讀任務中投入越多、詞匯習得效果越好,有必要設計具有高投入量的閱讀任務,引發(fā)其更多的投入,以促進重要詞匯的習得。其次,在設計任務的基礎上,教師還應對學習者的內部認知活動多加關注,使得“預設投入量”盡可能多地實現(xiàn)。此外,對新習得詞匯進行經常性復習對其長久保持有重要作用。
[Abstract]:The input load hypothesis was proposed by LauferHulstijn in 2001. It has been more than ten years. During the past ten years, the hypothesis has attracted wide attention, mainly because it uses the concept of "involvement load" to quantify learners' cognitive efforts, which makes it possible for researchers to reveal the impact of different reading tasks on vocabulary acquisition through empirical research. Suppose that the higher the amount of input caused by a reading task, the better the promotion of vocabulary learning. Many experiments have been carried out to confirm this hypothesis. However, due to the differences in design and the combined effect of the defects of the "input load hypothesis" itself, there is still no uniform conclusion. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between the "presupposition input" induced by reading tasks, the "actual involvement load" when learners complete the tasks and the results of second language vocabulary learning. Thus, we can find out the fundamental reason why the input load hypothesis can not be verified. The specific research questions are as follows: (1) is "presupposition involvement load" consistent with "actual involvement load"? (2) can "presupposition involvement load" effectively predict vocabulary acquisition results? (3) can "actual involvement load" effectively predict vocabulary acquisition results? The results show that the "presupposition involvement load" is not consistent with the "actual involvement load", and the former is significantly higher than the latter, especially the two factors in the cognitive dimension of "involvement load". In other words, "search" and "evaluation" can not effectively predict the result of vocabulary acquisition, whether in the immediate vocabulary test or in the delayed vocabulary test. (3) there was no significant positive correlation between the "actual involvement load" and the vocabulary acquisition results in the subjects who completed the reading tasks with higher presupposition involvement load than those who completed the reading tasks with the lower presupposition involvement load. (3) there was a significant positive correlation between the actual involvement load and the vocabulary acquisition results of the subjects who completed the reading tasks with a higher presupposition involvement load. The higher the actual involvement load in the reading task, the better the initial vocabulary acquisition effect, but this advantage can not be extended to the delayed post-test. The findings of this study have some implications for teaching. First of all, because the learners invest more in reading tasks, the better the vocabulary acquisition effect is, it is necessary to design the reading tasks with high involvement load to stimulate their more investment in order to promote the acquisition of important vocabulary. Secondly, on the basis of designing tasks, teachers should pay more attention to the learners' internal cognitive activities so as to realize as much as possible. In addition, regular review of newly acquired vocabulary plays an important role in maintaining it for a long time.
【學位授予單位】：南京師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：H09

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 梁端俊;;L2/FL閱讀中詞匯附帶習得研究綜觀[J];國外外語教學;2005年04期

2 周浩;;基于投入量假設的一項實證性研究[J];外語教學理論與實踐;2008年01期

3 李燕;;不同投入量的任務對產出性詞匯知識附帶習得的作用[J];外語教學理論與實踐;2008年02期

4 董燕萍,周彩慶;多義熟詞的理解性和產出性詞匯知識的習得[J];解放軍外國語學院學報;2003年06期

5 顧琦一;宋明珠;;任務預設投入量與詞匯習得策略[J];解放軍外國語學院學報;2010年05期

6 武衛(wèi),許洪;附帶性學習環(huán)境中基于語篇的不同任務對詞匯習得產生的影響[J];山東外語教學;2004年06期

7 蓋淑華;英語專業(yè)學生詞匯附帶習得實證研究[J];外語教學與研究;2003年04期

8 段士平 ,嚴辰松;多項選擇注釋對英語詞匯附帶習得的作用[J];外語教學與研究;2004年03期

9 吳建設;郎建國;黨群;;詞匯附帶習得與“投入量假設”[J];外語教學與研究;2007年05期

10 吳旭東;;學習任務能影響詞匯附帶習得嗎?——“投入量假設”再探[J];外語教學與研究;2010年02期

，

本文編號：1820361