發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-01-24 19:40

  本文關(guān)鍵詞： 附帶詞匯習(xí)得 任務(wù)投入量假說 微視頻 接收性詞匯 產(chǎn)出性詞匯　出處：《大連外國語大學(xué)》2016年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：越來越多的研究表明相比于閱讀學(xué)習(xí)者更傾向于借助英文視頻來學(xué)習(xí)英語詞匯,從而達(dá)到提高第二外語水平的目的。因此,本論文選取英語微視頻為實(shí)驗(yàn)材料,檢驗(yàn)“任務(wù)投入量假說”在視聽學(xué)習(xí)環(huán)境中對附帶詞匯習(xí)得效果的影響,并進(jìn)一步探討在即時(shí)與延時(shí)詞匯測試中,學(xué)習(xí)者接受性詞匯和產(chǎn)出性詞匯學(xué)習(xí)效果的差異性表現(xiàn)。基于以上研究目的,本論文主要圍繞以下四個(gè)研究問題展開研究：(1)英語學(xué)習(xí)者能否在不同的學(xué)習(xí)任務(wù)中通過觀看英語微視頻附帶習(xí)得接收性詞匯和產(chǎn)出性詞匯?(2)在即時(shí)與延時(shí)詞匯測試中,投入量大的微視頻觀看任務(wù)是否比投入量小的微視頻觀看任務(wù)更有助于學(xué)習(xí)者習(xí)得附帶詞匯?(3)當(dāng)兩種不同的寫作輸出任務(wù)具有相同的投入量而參與量指數(shù)分配不同時(shí),學(xué)習(xí)者的附帶詞匯習(xí)得效果是否具有差異性?(4)詞匯習(xí)得深度與任務(wù)投入量水平之間具有怎樣的相關(guān)性?研究結(jié)果充分驗(yàn)證了第一研究假設(shè)和第二研究假設(shè)；對于具有相同投入量的兩種寫作輸出任務(wù),作文組的學(xué)習(xí)效果好于造句組；投入量只能提前預(yù)測學(xué)習(xí)者的總體附帶詞匯學(xué)習(xí)效果,而無法進(jìn)一步預(yù)測接收性和產(chǎn)出性詞匯的學(xué)習(xí)效果。因此,本論文僅部分證明了“任務(wù)投入量假說”的有效性,提出投入量不是決定附帶詞匯學(xué)習(xí)效果的唯一因素,而應(yīng)該考慮到“需求”、“搜素”和“評估”的不同作用,從而幫助教師合理設(shè)置學(xué)習(xí)任務(wù)以達(dá)到預(yù)期的教學(xué)目標(biāo)。
[Abstract]:More and more studies have shown that English learners are more inclined to use English video to learn English vocabulary so as to improve their second foreign language proficiency. Therefore, this thesis chooses English microvideo as the experimental material. To test the effect of taskload hypothesis on incidental vocabulary acquisition in audiovisual learning environment, and to further explore the immediate and delayed vocabulary test. The differences in the effects of learners' receptive vocabulary and productive vocabulary learning. This thesis focuses on the following four research questions: 1) can English learners acquire receptive and productive vocabulary by watching English microvideos in different learning tasks? 2) in the instant and delayed vocabulary testing, is it more helpful for learners to acquire incidental vocabulary than micro-video viewing tasks with large involvement load? 3) when the two different writing output tasks have the same input load and different allocation of the participation index, are the learners' incidental vocabulary acquisition effects different? 4) what is the correlation between the depth of vocabulary acquisition and the level of task involvement? The results fully verify the first research hypothesis and the second research hypothesis. For the two kinds of writing output tasks with the same input load, the learning effect of composition group is better than that of sentence making group. The amount of input can only predict the overall incidental vocabulary learning effect of learners in advance, but can not further predict the learning effect of receptive and productive vocabulary. This thesis only partially proves the validity of the taskload hypothesis, and suggests that the involvement load is not the only factor that determines the effect of incidental vocabulary learning, but should take into account the "need". The different roles of "search" and "evaluation" help teachers to set up learning tasks reasonably to achieve the expected teaching goals.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：大連外國語大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：H319.3;G434
，

本文編號：1460864