您可以在百度里搜索“元认知策略研究：二语听力理解与附带词汇习得（英文版） 艾草文学(www.321553.xyz)”查找最新章节！

　　2.4.2 Incidental Vocabulary Acquisition through ListeningMost work on second language incidental vocabulary acquisition has focused on how such learning occurs during interactions with written texts or discourse, i. e., how such learning occurs in reading (e. g., Hirsh & Nation 1992; Laufer 1997). Considerably less work has looked at incidental vocabulary acquisition through listening. Nevertheless, many L2 learners, like L1 learners, rely on aural input as the primary source of information about the target language. Through listening they learn to identify the forms and meanings of new words, which they then remember and in due course come to use themselves. This section first briefly reviews studies in incidental vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories in L1, and then reports studies that investigated incidental vocabulary acquisition from L2 listening.

　　2.4.2.1 Incidental Vocabulary Acquisition from Listening to Stories in L1

　　There is some evidence that children can pick up their L1 vocabulary as they are being read to (e. g., Elley, 1989; Fondas, 1992; Penno, Wilkinson, & Moore, 2002).

　　In New Zealand, two studies by Elley (1989) investigated the effects on vocabulary acquisition of reading a storybook to some 7-8-year-old pupils. In the first study, twenty target words were selected from a book thought by the researcher to be unfamiliar to students of this age group. A multiple-choice pre-test was given to the students prior to the treatment. The test included ten picture vocabulary items where the teacher read aloud the target word and asked the students to select which of the four pictures best matched its meaning. Another twenty words were pre-tested using word synonyms. Duringthe treatment, students heard the story read aloud three times over the course of one week. Results indicated a mean increase of 15.4% overall with children scoring higher on most target words on the posttest than on the pre-test.

　　In his second experiment, Elley (1989) sought further confirmation of the incidental learning measured in the first experiment. In addition, this study considered permanence of learning and introduced teacher explanation of vocabulary as a treatment variable. The experiment followed a pre-test/posttest design to compare the effects of reading two stories aloud, with and without explanation of the target words. As in the first experiment, the students heard the stories read three times over the course of one week. Three months after the reading of the stories, a delayed posttest was given without warning to the students. Analysis for the story read without teacher explanation was nearly identical to the findings in the first experiment. The mean gain in vocabulary was 14.8%. However, for the group of students who heard an explanation of the vocabulary, the overall gain was 39.9%. The results of the delayed posttests of the target words revealed a decline of only 2-3%, which the researcher considered negligible. In an attempt to study word-related variables that affect vocabulary gain, he found the most readily learned words were those with a helpful surrounding context, more than once occurrence, and illustrated by pictures. Elley thus concluded that “stories read aloud in this way appear to offer a potential source for ready vocabulary acquisition... [and] repeated exposure and helpful context are significant factors in vocabulary acquisition” (p.180).

　　Brett, Rothlein & Hurley (1996) examined the effects of 3 listening conditions (story only, story with word explanation, and no story) on 175 fourth-graders and found that the story-with-word-explanation group made significantly more progress in vocabulary from the pre-tests to the posttests than the story-only group and the no-story control group. Unlike Elley's studies, the students in this study heard the stories only once, but “the findings indicated that repeated readings of the same story are not necessary for vocabulary acquisition if new words are explained as they are encountered in the story” (p.419).

　　Penno, Wilkinson & Moore (2002) evaluated the effects of repeated exposure to a story and the additive effects of target word meaning explanation on children's vocabulary acquisition. Two stories were read to forty-seven 5-6-year-old children on three occasions, each one week apart. One story was read with explanations of the target words, but the other was read without explanations. Two multiple-choice vocabulary tests were given to ensure that no children already knew the target words in the study. All the children were asked to individually retell the story to the examiner and the retelling was audiotaped for later transcription and coding. The same multiple-choice test was given to the children at the beginning and the end of the study (week 1 and week 9) as well as the interval of the two stories (week 5). Results showed both of the factors under study (repeated exposure and explanation) contributed significantly to vocabulary growth. The children who received explanations scored significantly higher on the multiple-choice vocabulary test than those who did not. A single exposure to the story resulted in words being learned, and the second and third readings to them resulted in children being able to use words with increasing accuracy in the retelling task, suggesting a more comprehensive understanding of the word meaning.

　　These studies point out some factors that encourage incidental vocabulary acquisition for children listening to stories in L1, namely repetition of the story and explanation of the target words. As noted by Nation (2001), there are several conditions that make learning vocabulary from listening to stories more likely:

　　1. interest in the content of the story;

　　2. comprehension of the story;

　　3. understanding of the unknown words and retrieval of the meaning of those not yet strongly established;

　　4. decontextualization of the target words;

　　5. thoughtful generative processing of the target vocabulary. (p.118)

　　The preceding review suggests that listening to stories being read has the potential to be a major contributor to growth in children's L1 word banks because it is a common occurrence in the classroom of primary schools. Significant benefits are derived by children when teachers read stories aloud to them. Among these benefits are increased listening skills, reading comprehension, and vocabulary gains. However, the research in this area has mainly focused on children, i. e., the beginning stages of first language vocabulary learning. Since vocabulary learning does not necessarily occur in similar ways at different stages of proficiency (Meara, 1984), the vocabulary acquisition of more proficient students deserves further exploring.

　　2.4.2.2 Incidental Vocabulary Acquisition through L2 Listening Comprehension

　　Apart from positive findings with L1 children, research with L2 learners has also provided evidence of incidental vocabulary acquisition from listening (e. g., Vidal, 2003; Brown, Waring, & Donkaewbua, 2008).

　　Vidal's (2003) study involved 122 Spanish first-year university students to explore the effects of EFL proficiency and lecture comprehension on vocabulary acquisition. The participants were pre-tested on their knowledge of the target words, and were presented with a series of three 15-minute videotaped academic lectures with some true-or-false comprehension questions. The participants were tested on their knowledge of the target words immediately after the lectures and were tested again one month later for their retention of the same vocabulary items. Each target word was measured on a modified version of the Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (VKS) originally designed by Paribakht & Wesche (1997). The main effect of time (i. e., before listening, immediately after listening, and one month after listening) was found to be statistically significant, and the interaction effect between lecture listening and proficiency was also found to be statistically significant. Vidal thus concluded that listening to academic lectures can be a source of EFL vocabulary acquisition. The findings of her study also indicated that the students with a higher level of English proficiency acquired more vocabulary knowledge. Moreover, the study showed that some words were retained over a period of one month.

　　Smidt & Hegelheimer (2004) investigated the effects of online lectures on vocabulary acquisition of 24 university ESL learners in USA. The participants completed a pre-test, a post-test and a delayed post-test on vocabulary, and a computer-assisted language learning (CALL) activity including an academic lecture. The three vocabulary tests were constructed using 20 of the most difficult vocabulary items in the academic lecture. The CALL task consisted of three components, an authentic academic lecture, ten multiple-choice comprehension questions, and access to an online dictionary. The CALL activity was administered the day after the vocabulary pre-test, and the vocabulary post-test and delayed post-test were separately conducted two weeks and four weeks after the pre-test. Results showed a statistically significant difference between the pre-test and the post-test, and between the pre-test and the delay post-test, while the decrease of the mean vocabulary retention from the post-test to the delayed post-test was not statistically significant. The research suggested that incidental vocabulary acquisition occurred through the use of authentic online videos of academic lectures in the CALL activity.

　　Brown, Waring & Donkaewbua (2008) examined vocabulary acquisition of 35 pre-intermediate to intermediate-level students of English in a private Japanese university, who were divided by various conditions into a reading-only group, a reading-while-listening group, and a listening-only group. Three 5, 500-word-long graded groups of readers were employed with a total of 28 substitute words embedded within each reading text. Full texts of all the three stories were printed with short written story introductions and delivered to the participants in the reading-only and reading-while-listening groups. However, only the story introductions were given to the listening-only group, with full stories read and recorded at a mean speech rate of 93 words per minute. The reading and listening activities took place during three regular classes at intervals of two weeks. Two tests, a meaning-translation test and a multiple choice test, were given to assess various levels of word knowledge. These tests were administered immediately after the story reading or listening, and, to examine retention of word knowledge, the same tests with a different item order were delivered again one week after and three months after the treatments.

　　Results of the immediate multiple choice test indicated some impressive vocabulary gains of 48%and 45%from the pre-test for the reading-while-listening group and reading-only group, and for the listening-only group, there was a 29% vocabulary gain. Nevertheless, the meaning-translation test revealed fewer word gains, only 16%, 15%and 2%for the three groups in the above order. Brown and his colleagues attributed the comparatively minimal vocabulary acquisition rates of the listening-only group to the fact that Japanese language has a different syllable structure to English and the learners were “incapable of processing the phonological information as fast as the stream of speech, ”and thus “failed to recognize many of the spoken forms of words that they already knew in their written forms” (p.148), and they concluded at this stage that the “inaccurate perception of the pronunciation of words and phrases is potentially a greater barrier in listening than in reading” (p.157). Another reason they gave was that the coverage rate of already known words, i. e., 95% was too low for the listening-only group, which made the task of inferring the meaning of the 28 target words too challenging.

　　Kazuya (2009) investigated the effects of explanation from listening on vocabulary acquisition of 116 second-year Japanese high school students. Nine listening passages were used, with 45 vocabulary items embedded. In the first group, the students were provided with a spoken Japanese translation for each target word; in the second group, the students were provided with a spoken English definition of each target word; and in the control group, no vocabulary explanation was given. Approximately 30 minutes after each listening session, an immediate recognition posttest and a multiple-choice posttest were given. Two weeks after the instruction, the same tests were administered again as the delayed posttests. Results showed that there was a statistically significant difference between the three groups in both the immediate and delayed recognition posttests. The L1 translation condition was more effective than the L2 definition condition, and the control condition was the least effective one. However, as for the immediate and delayed multiple-choice posttests, no statistically significant difference between the L1 and L2 conditions was found.

　　The reviewed studies demonstrate that learners acquire meaning of new words through listening in L2. Van Patten (1990) administered a study in 202 university students of Spanish to determine whether learners of different competence levels were ableto consciously attend to both vocabulary form and meaning while processing input from listening. The students were asked to perform various tasks while listening to a passage for meaning to test the following research hypotheses: ①If learners have difficulty in directing attention toward both content and form, then a task involving conscious attention to non-communicative grammatical-morphological forms in the input will negatively affect comprehension of content. ②If these same learners are basically going for meaning first, a task involving conscious attention to important lexical items will not affect comprehension of content. ③More advanced learners will not exhibit the same patterns of performance on the tasks as the early stage learners, i. e., more advanced learners will be more able to direct attention to form since they are better equipped to attend to content.

　　The participants were put in three different classes according to their language levels. Each class listened to two passages. The first passage served as a warm-up and the second passage, a 3-minute long recorded segment on inflation in Latin America, was used as the real source of data. The classes were randomly assigned to complete one of four listening tasks. Task 1, the control task, consisted of listening to the passage for content only. Task 2 consisted of listening to the passage for content and simultaneously noting a key lexical item (inflación). Task 3 consisted of listening to the passage for content and simultaneously noting a definite article (la). Task 4 consisted of listening to the passage for content and simultaneously noting a verb morpheme (-n). Each item occurred 11 or 12 times in the passage. The participants were asked to place a check mark anywhere on their paper each time they heard the item. For all tasks, the participants were instructed to listen for meaning and were told that their comprehension of the passage would be assessed afterward. The participants were told about the topic of the passage and some related information before listening to the passage, so that they might activate relevant background knowledge to assist in their comprehension. The comprehension assessment consisted of free written recalls in English. Immediately after the participants heard the passage, they were required to write down anything and everything that they could remember from the passage. These recall protocols were considered as a general indication of comprehension and would reflect the relative degree of attention that the participants could pay to the content. The recall protocols were subsequently scored independently and the interrater reliability was 0.98.

　　Concerning the first two research hypotheses, the results revealed a significant drop in recall scores when the participants were asked to simultaneously listen for content and note a grammatical morpheme of little referential meaning. Meanwhile, there was no evidence that the simultaneous tasks of listening for content and noting a lexical item result in a significant drop in recall scores. In other words, conscious attention to important lexical items did not affect comprehension of the content, while conscious attention to non-communicative grammatical-morphological forms in the input negatively affected comprehension of the content. With empirical support for research hypotheses 1 and 2 from the study, the researcher thus suggested that “the communicatively loaded items in input receive conscious attention from early stage learners and become available as intake of the developing language system, while grammatical morphemes of little meaning may be left unattended since they‘escape' attention directed toward meaning or information content” (p.294).

　　Regarding the third hypothesis, mixed results were received from the study. While Level III students had significantly different recall scores from Level I and Level II students on the content only task (i. e., Level III could recall much more), they performed about the same on the verb inflection task. This finding showed that for lower level students, there may be no difference between bound and free morphemes, but that for higher level students there is. The results do not suggest that early stage learners are completely incapable of focusing on form in the input, but the results do suggest that a focus on form is probably not continuous in the real world of input processing where there is a primary focus on meaning. As Van Patten noted, “simultaneous conscious attention to informational content and‘meaningless' form in the input is difficult for the early stage and the intermediate stage learner” (p.296).

　　The findings that learners had difficulty in attending to form which did not contribute substantially to the meaning of the input regardless of type of input led Van Patten to conclude that conscious attention to form in the input competes with conscious attention to meaning, and only when the input is easily understood can learners attend to form of important lexical items as part of the intake process. In other words, students cannot concentrate on both form and meaning simultaneously.

　　Viewed retrospectively, it can be concluded from the studies reviewed so far that:

　　(a) incidental vocabulary acquisition occurs through listening in L2;

　　(b) meaning of the lexical items that are important to the content is more likely to be acquired than non-communicative items such as an article or a morpheme; and

　　(c) only when the input is easy enough for learners to understand can they also attend to the form of the important words. 元认知策略研究：二语听力理解与附带词汇习得（英文版）