帳號:guest(18.191.86.163)          離開系統
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  

詳目顯示

以作者查詢圖書館館藏以作者查詢臺灣博碩士論文系統以作者查詢全國書目
作者(中文):高凰喻
作者(外文):Huang-Yu Kao
論文名稱(中文):以事件相關腦電位探討台灣大學生英語詞彙多義性理解能力與學習策略相關之研究
論文名稱(外文):A study on lexical ambiguity comprehension measured with ERP and learning strategies of college students in Taiwan
指導教授(中文):呂菁菁
指導教授(外文):Ching-Ching Lu
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立新竹教育大學
系所名稱:臺灣語言與語文教育研究所
學號:10025102
出版年(民國):105
畢業學年度:104
語文別:中文
論文頁數:135
中文關鍵詞:詞彙多義性理解能力語言學習策略
外文關鍵詞:lexical ambiguitycomprehensionlanguage learning strategies
相關次數:
  • 推薦推薦:0
  • 點閱點閱:206
  • 評分評分:*****
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏收藏:0

本研究為探討臺灣大學生英語詞彙多義性理解能力與英語學習策略相關之關係。本研究以事件相關腦電位技術來區分非英語系之大學生,一至四年級學習者之英語詞彙多義性之理解能力,以此技術區分受試者為兩組,分別是:對英語詞彙多義性理解能力較高組(H)及對英語詞彙多義性理解能力較低組(L),並且對照這兩組學習者所使用英語詞彙學習策略之差異,來理解學習者策略使用之情形。在此實驗有二十四位受試者。
實驗結果發現:1.對英語詞彙多義性理解能力較高組(H)在三項大策略中:後設認知策略、認知策略及社會策略的使用頻率都比對英語詞彙多義性理解能力較低組(L)高。2.使用獨立樣本T檢定來比較H組及L組的三項大策略之二十五個子策略項,H組及L組的子策略項中具有差異之策略分別為:引導注意(directed attention)、想像(imagery)、自我評估(self-evaluation)、資源使用(resourcing)、聽覺表徵(auditory representation)、關鍵字法(keyword method)、翻譯(translation)。這七個子策略項具有差異。
本研究之研究結果針對英語詞彙多義性理解能力面向與英語學習策略之運用,將提供給教學者及學習者及未來研究者參考。本研究建議教學者應協助學習者理解對於英語詞彙學習任務,英語學習策略如何適當運用;及建議學習者可針對英語詞彙學習缺乏之處,自行進行英語學習策略之調整。


關鍵詞:詞彙多義性,理解能力,語言學習策略
This study was aimed to explore the relationship between the abilities of lexical ambiguity comprehension and language learning strategies used by the college students in Taiwan, a context of learning English as a foreign language. The comprehension abilities of the students were measured with the event-related potentials, due to the precise temporal resolution of electrophysiological recording.
There were 24 college students who participated the ERP experiment and completed the questionnaires about language learning strategies in this study. The participants were divided into two groups, H and L, by their abilities of lexical ambiguity comprehension, measured in the ERP experiment. The results showed that the H group used more cognitive, meta-cognitive and social strategies than the L group. And there were statistically significant differences in the use of these strategies as auditory representation, direct attention, imagery, resourcing, self-evaluation, using keyword, and translation strategies between the two groups.
Based on the findings, this study suggested that educators could help learners be aware of using English learning strategies for comprehending lexical ambiguities properly, and the learners could adjust their own English learning strategies for enhancing their command of lexical ambiguities.

Key words: lexical ambiguity, comprehension, language learning strategies
中文摘要 i
英文摘要 ii
致謝詞 iii
章節目錄 iv
表目錄 vi
圖目錄 vii
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景 2
第二節 研究動機 3
第三節 研究問題 7
第四節 名詞解釋 7
第五節 論文架構 15
第二章 文獻文顧 17
第一節 詞彙量與學習策略之相關研究 17
第二節 詞彙深度與學習策略之相關研究 19
第三節 大腦中的詞彙意義 21
第四節 腦電波的來源及量測 32
第五節 事件相關腦電位 34
第六節 N400成分 35
第七節 語義促發之腦波相關研究 37
第三章 研究方法 41
第一節 實驗設計 41
第二節 實驗對象 45
第三節 ERPs實驗語料 46
第四節 實驗流程 47
第五節 實驗儀器設定 50
第六節 實驗資料處理 51
第四章 結果與討論 53
第一節 研究發現 53
第二節 綜合討論 65
第五章 結論與建議 75
第一節 結論 75
第二節 研究限制 77
第三節 未來研究建議 78
參考文獻 80
附錄一 實驗語料及詞頻 88
附錄二 受試者基本資料 90
附錄三 大學生學習英語詞彙策略問卷調查 91
附錄四 24位受試者之N1P2腦電波圖 96
附錄五 24位受試者情境3減情境1之電極點平均數值 132
附錄六 24位受試者情境3減情境2之電極點平均數值 133
附錄七 實驗參與同意書 134
附錄八 實驗受試者招募單 135

中文部分:
王玉華(2004)。臺灣高中學生英語字彙學習策略之探討(碩士論文)。國立政治大學,臺北市。
王宏均(2006)。英語字彙深度與口語搭配詞錯誤之關聯(碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學,高雄市。
王青、楊玉芳。(2002)。語義啟動模型以及啟動範圍。心理科學進展,10(2),154-161。
王思穎(2009)。高中生字彙自我調控能力、英語字彙學習策略兩項因素與英語學習成就和字彙量關係研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北。
付書偉、 水仁德 (2005)。語音對雙語者心理詞典在詞彙水平相互作用的影響。應用心理學,11(2),166-169。
伍光謙 (1988)。語義學導論。湖南:湖南教育出版社。
何明儒(2011)。學生的字彙深度知識以及閱讀理解能力之間的相關性(碩士論文)。 私立銘傳大學,臺北市。
呂勇、沈德立、杜英春、韓宇義 (2004)。聽覺呈現條件下漢字詞語義和語音啟動的ERP研究。心理科學, 27(1),8-12。
宋娟、呂勇(2006)。語義啟動效應的腦機制研究綜述。心理與行為研究,4(1),75-80。
宋啟六 (2006)。臺灣大學生英語字彙學習策略使用之研究。私立立德管理學院(碩士論文),臺南市。
李素貞(2005)。 彰化縣國中學生英語科學習風格、學習策略與學業成就之關係研究。國立彰化師範大學(碩士論文),彰化縣。
李詩雯 (2012)。字彙量與構詞覺識對大學生閱讀理解的影響。國立雲林科技大學(碩士論文),雲林縣。
李嘉富、劉文健、江漢光 (1994)。腦電圖及電腦化圖譜在精神科的應用。Journal of Medical Sciences,15(1),1-11。
周若雯 (2012)。臺灣學生英文字彙知識深度之探討(碩士論文)。 國立彰化師範大學,彰化縣。
周啟葶 (2007)。高中生英語自我效能、英語學習焦慮、英語學習策略與英語學習成就關係之研究(碩士論文)。 國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
林瑋倫 (2009)。海口國小學童英語字彙學習策略之研究(碩士論文)。私立玄奘大學,新竹市。
洪蘭(譯)(2002) 詞的學問(原作者:George Miller)。臺北市:遠流出版。
馬郁涵 (2012)。閱讀理解能力與字彙知識:字彙量、字彙聯想、搭配字、衍生字之探究(碩士論文)。臺北市立教育大學,臺北市。
馬廣惠、程月芳(2003)。第二語言學習策略理論模式。上海理工大學學報(社會科學版),25(4)。
馬慧 (2010)。英語專業一、二年級學生詞彙知識深度和詞彙學習策略的相關研究。 科技信息,Science &Technology information(29)。
高崇山 (1999)。 探討語義處理模式與事件處理策略對腦側化的影響(碩士論文)。 國立中正大學,嘉義縣。
張葶葶、洪蘭、李俊仁 ( 2005)。從認知神經科學觀點談雙語學習。應用心理研究,28,105-118。
張毓仁 (2014)。成人與小六學童在中文多義詞語意激發和選擇的比較(博士論文)。國立中央大學,桃園市。
曹黛玲 (2002)。高中生英語學習知覺風格偏好與學習策略的使用(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
莊惠文 (2014)。EFL學生單字學習策略的使用、字彙量與閱讀能力之相關研究(碩士論文)。私立大葉大學,彰化縣。
許碧婷(2009)。高中生英文字彙量與閱讀表現之關聯(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
郭桃梅、彭聃齡 (2003)。從語義啟動效應看事件相關電位N400的實質。心理科學,26(4)。
陳紹慶 (2004)。 造成促發效果的時序接近性條件(博士論文)。國立中正大學,嘉義縣。
曾玲 (2014)。基於二語心理詞彙研究的英語動詞學習策略。當代教育理論與實踐,6(12)。
黃鈺琄 (2010)。探究臺灣大學生英文單字策略的使用和其配字能力(碩士論文)。臺北市立教育大學,臺北市。
黃瓊瑩 (2012)。臺灣高職學生英文字彙學習策略用調查(碩士論文)。國立高雄第一科技大學,高雄市。
董佳雯 (2007)。台灣綜合高中學生字彙學習策略之研究(碩士論文)。國立政治大學,臺北市。
湯琬君 (1998)。台灣客家話語用理解及其腦事件相關電位研究(碩士論文)。國立新竹教育大學,新竹市。
趙延年 (2008)。臺灣應用英語系大學生之字彙學習策略之調查與研究-以南臺科技大學生例(碩士論文)。私立南臺科技大學,臺南市。
熊祐琪 (2011)。台灣國中八年級生的英文字彙學習策略使用之研究。(碩士論文)。私立輔仁大學,新北市。
蔣佩珊 (2004)。英語為外國語學習者之字彙量與其閱讀理解能力之關聯(碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學,高雄市。
聶菀妤 (2010)。在選擇式閱讀測驗中的字彙深度與字彙推理研究(碩士論文)。 私立東海大學,臺中市。
羅靜倫 (2005)。測驗形式與文類對聽力理解與策略使用之效應(碩士論文)。國 立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。


英文部分:
Amir Marzban, Razieh Hadipour. (2012). Depth versus breadth of vocabulary knowledge: assessing their roles in Iranian intermediate EFL students’ lexical inferencing success through reading. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 5296-5300.
Becker, Curtis A. (1980). Semantic context effects in visual word recognition: An analysis of semantic strategies. Memory & Congition, 8(6), 493-512.
Beeman, M., Friedman, R. B.,Grafman, J., Perez, E., Diamond, S.,&Lindsay, M. B. (1994). Summation priming and coarse semantic coding in the right hemisphere. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 6, 26-45.
Bert, Weltens. (1987). The attrition of foreign-language skills: a literature review. Applied Linguistics, 8(1), 22-38.
Bialystok, Ellen. (1978). A theoretical model of second language learning Language Learning, 28(1), 69-83. doi: DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1978.tb00305.x
Balota, David A., Black, Sheila R., & Cheney, Marshall. (1992). Automatic and attentional priming in young and older adults: Reevaluation of the two-process model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 88-104.
Brown, Ann L, & Palincsar, Annemarie Sullivan. (1982). Inducing strategic learning from texts informed, self-conrol training. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 2(1), 1-17.
Cameron, Lynne. (2001). Teaching young language learners. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Catalan, Rosa Maria Jimenez. (2003). Sex differences in L2 vocabulary learning strategies. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 55-68.
Chamot, Anna Uhl. (2005). Language learning strategy instruction: current issues and research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 112-130.
Chamot, Anna Uhl, & Kupper, Lisa. (1989). Learning strategies in foreign language instruction. Foreign Language Annuals, 22(1), 13-24.
Collins, Allan M., & Loftus, Elizabeth F. (1975). A spreading- activation theory of semantic processing Psychological Reviews, 82(6), 407-428.
Cumming, Graeme S., cumming, David H. M., & Redman, charles L. (2006). Scale Mismatches in Social-Ecological Systems: Causes, Consequences, and Solutions. Ecology and Society, 11(1), 14.
Den Heyer, K., Briand, K., & Dannenbring, G. L.(1983). Strategic factors in a lexical decision task: Evidence for automatic and attention-driven processes. Memory and Cognition, 11, 374-381.
Fischer, Barbara Bree, & Fishcer, Louis. (1979). Styles in teaching and learning Educaitonal Leadership, 1, 235-236.
Fischler, Ira. (1977). Semantic facilitation without association in a lexical decision task. Memory & Congition, 5(3), 335-339.
Fischler, Ira, & Bloom, Paul A. (1980). Rapid proceesing of the meaning of sentences. Memory and cogniton, 8(3), 216-225.
Franklin, Michael S., Dien, Joseph, Neely, James H., Huber, Elizabeth, & Waterson, Lauren D. (2007). Semantic Priming Modulates the N400, N300, and N400RP. Clinical Neurophysiology, 118, 1053-1068.
Frenck-Mestre, C., & Bueno, S. (1999). Semantic features and semantic categories: differences in rapid activation of the lexicon. Brain and Language, 68, 100-204.
Griffiths, Carol. (2003). Language learning strategy use and proficiency: the relationship between patterns of reproted language strategy (LLS) use by speakers of other languages (SOL) and proficiency with implications for the teaching /learning situation. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Auckland.
Hines, David, Czerwinski, Mary, Sawyer, Patricia K., & Dwyer, Margaret. (1986). Automatic semantic priming: Effects of category exemplar level and word association level. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13(3), 370-379.
Hodgson, James M. (1991). Informational constraints on pre-lexical priming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 6(3), 169-205.
Holcomb, Phillip J. (1993). Semantic priming and stimulus degradation: Implications for the role of the N400 in language processing. Psychophysiology, 30, 47-61.
Holcomb, Phillip J., & Anderson, Jane E. (1993). Cross-modal semantic priming: A timecourse analysis using event-related brain potentials. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8(4), 379-411.
Keefe, Dennis E., & Neely, James H. (1990). Semantic priming in the pronunciation task: The role of prospective prime-generated expectancies. Memory & Congition, 18(3), 289-298.
Kunasaraphan, Kanokrat. (2015). English learning strategy and proficiency level of the first year students. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 1858-1853.
Kutas, Marta, & Federmeier, Kara D. (2000). Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Science, 4(12), 463-470.
Kutas, Marta, & Hillyard, Steven A. (1980). event-related brain potentials to semantically inappropriate and surprisingly large words. Biologica Psychology, 11, 99-116.
Kutas, Marta, & Hillyard, Steven A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association. Nation, 307, 161-163.
Meyer, David E., & Schvaneveldt, Roger W. (1971). Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90(2), 227-234.
Meyer, David E., & Schvaneveldt, Roger W. (1975). “Loci of contextual effects on visual word recogniton”, in Rabbitt, P.; Dornic, S., Attention and performance, London: Academic Press, pp.98-118.
Moss, Helen E., Ostrin, Ruth K., Tyler, Lorraine K., & Marslen-Wilson, Willliam D. (1995). Accessing different types of lexical semantic information:Evidence from priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(4), 863-883.
Nacera, Anber. (2010). Languages learning strategies and the vobabulary size. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 4021-4025.
Namwong, Ong-art. (2012). The study of the undergraduates' English learning strategies. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 1757-1765.
Nassaji, Hossein. (2003). L2 Vocabulary Learning from Context: Strategies, Knowledge Sources, and Their Relationship with Success in L2 Lexical Inferencing.TESOL Quarterly,37(4),645-670.
Nassaji, Hossein. (2004). The relationship between depth of vocabulary knowledge and L2 leaners' lexical inferencing strategy use and success. The Modern Language Journal, 60(1), 388-398.
Neely, James H., Keefe.(1977) Semantic priming and retrieval from lexical memory: roles of inhibitionless spreading activation and limited-capacity attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 106, 226-245.
Neely, James H., Keefe, Dennis E., & Ross, Kent L. (1989). Semantic priming in the lexical decison task: Roles of prospective prime-generated expectancies and retrospective semantic matching. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 15(6), 1003-1019.
Neill, W. T. (1977). Inhibitory and facilitatory processes in selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 444-450.
O'Malley, J. Michael, & Chamot, Anna Uhl. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition.
O'Malley, J. Michael, Chamot, Anna Uhl, Stewner-Manzanares, Gloria, Russc, Rocco P., & Kupper, Lisa. (1985). Learning strategy applications with students of English as a second language. TESOL QUARTERLY, 19(3), 285-296.
Onifer, Willian, & Swinney, David A. (1981). accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Effects of frequency of meaning and contextual bias. Memory & Congition, 9(3), 225-236.
Perea, Manuel, & Gotor, Arcadio. (1997). Associative and semantic priming effects occur at very short stimulus-onset asynchronies in lexical decision and naming. Cognition, 62, 223-240.
Qian, David D. (1999). Assessing the roles of depth and breadth of vocabulary knowledge in reading comprehension. Canadian Modern Language Review, 56(2), 282-307.
Qian, David D. (2002). Investigating the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and academic reading performance: an assessment perspective. Language Learning 52(3), 513-536.
Qian, David D., & Schedl, Mary. (2004). Evaluation of an in-depth vocabulary knowledge measure for assessing reading performance. Language Testing, 21(1), 28-52.
Ramin Rahimy & Kiana Shams.(2012). An investigation of the effectiveness of vocabulary learning strategies on iranian EFL learners’ vocabulary test socre. International Education Studies, 5(5).
Read, John. (1993). The development of a new measure of L2 vocabulary knowledge.Language Testing, 10, 355-371.
Rubin, Joan. (1975). What the "good Language Learner" can teach us. TESOL QUARTERLY, 9(1), 41-51.
Schmitt, N. (1997). Vocabulary learning strategies. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.) Vocabulary:Description, acquisition, and pedagogy(pp. 199-227).
Schvaneveldt, R.W.; Meyer, D.E.(1973). “Retrieval and comparison processes in semantic memory”, in Kornblum, S., Attention and performance IV, New York Academic Press, pp.395-409.
Seidenberg, Mark S., Waters, Gloria S., & Sanders, Michael. (1983). Pre-and postlexical loci of contextual effects on word recogniton. Memory & Congition, 12(4), 315-328.
Seidenberg, Mark S., Waters, Gloria S., Sanders, Michael, & Langer, Pearl. (1984). Pre-and postlexical loci of contextual effects on word recognition. Memory & Congition, 12(4), 315-328.
Silvia Primativo, Pasquale Rinaldi, shaunna O’Brien, Despina Paizi, Lisa. Arduino, Cristina Burani.(2013). Bilingual vocabulary size and lexical reading in Italian. Acta Psychologica,144,554-562.
Simpson, Greg B., & Burgess, Curt. (1985). Activation and Selection Processes in the Recognition of Ambiguous Words. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 11(1), 28-39.
Stolz, Jennifer A., & Neely, James H. (1995). When target degradation does and does not enhance semantic context effects in word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(3), 596-611.
Swinney, David A. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension (re) consideration of context effects Verbal learning and verbal behavior, 18, 645-659.
Tulving, Engde & Schacter, Daniel L.(1990). Priming and Human Memory Systems. Science,247, 301-306.
Tannenbaum, Kendra R., Torgesen, Joseph K., & Wagner, Richard K. (2006). Relationships between word knowledge and reading comprehension in third-grade children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(4), 381-398.
Yang, Nae-Dong. (1999). The relationship between EFL learners' beliefs and learning strategy use. System, 27(4), 515-536.
Zandi, S. Kaivanpanah and H. (2009). The role of depth of vocabulary knowledge in reading comprehension in EFL contexts. Journal of Applied Sciences, 9(4), 698-706.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
* *