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！

　　2.4.3 Assessing Vocabulary Knowledge from Incidental Vocabulary Acquisition

　　The studies reported in the previous section have used various instruments to measure the vocabulary knowledge of the participants. Table 5 provides a brief summary of the instruments used in the studies.

　　However, as argued by Read (2007), “there is in fact much more to know about words if they are to become functional units in the learner's L2 lexicon: how the word is pronounced and spelled, what its morphological forms are, how it functions syntactically, how frequent it is, how it is used appropriately from a sociolinguistic perspective, and so on” (p.113). Lexical acquisition is indeed a very complex issue and it cannot be assumed that acquisition of a word's basic meaning will imply acquisition of other aspects of the word. This becomes especially important in the context of incidental vocabulary acquisition from listening, which differs from vocabulary acquisition through reading in that it may lead to knowledge of the pronunciation of words.

　　The instruments listed in Table 5 only tested the participants' vocabulary knowledge in one or two aspects. For example, both tests by Kazuya (2009) assessed the participants'knowledge of meaning, but not the spelling, pronunciation, or use of the target words. Therefore these instruments can only partially reveal the vocabulary gains that the learners made through listening.

　　To investigate the effects of listening on vocabulary acquisition, it is important to employ instruments that can specifically test learners' vocabulary knowledge in such aspects as pronunciation of words.

　　Table 5 Instruments Used to Measure Vocabulary Knowledge

　　According to Nation (2001) as well as Webb (2009), all types of knowledge about a word can be divided into receptive and productive knowledge, which is illustrated in Table 6. It is clear that vocabulary assessment requires the use of multiple tests in order to obtain a comprehensive picture of the learners' vocabulary knowledge. Tests are needed to measure learners' receptive and productive knowledge in various aspects of vocabulary. Some instruments that are frequently used to assess vocabulary knowledge in terms of orthography, meaning, and grammatical functions are presented and illustrated in the following sections.

　　Table 6 Definitions of Receptive and Productive Knowledge

　　(Source: Webb, 2009, p.363)

　　(a) Measuring Receptive Knowledge of Meaning

　　The Vocabulary Level Test developed by Nation (1990) is a way of testing receptive vocabulary knowledge of meaning. The format is very simple. Tests takers are given a list of six words in the left column and are required to select from them to match the three definitions in the right column. In a subsequent development, Read (2000) designed “Matching Items”to assess the learners' receptive knowledge by asking them to choose three target words from the left column and properly match their numbers with their synonyms or definitions in the right column. See the following example:

　　1. region

　　2. atlas 5 set of bones in the body

　　3. statue 1 part of a country

　　4. cell 4 smallest part of living things

　　5. skeleton

　　(Source: Read, 2000, p.172)

　　(b) Measuring Receptive Knowledge of Orthographic Form

　　Webb (2005) developed a test to assess the receptive vocabulary knowledge of orthographic form (pronunciation and spelling). In the test, the learners were required to circle the correctly spelled target words, which appeared with three distracters. The distracters were created to resemble the target words both phonetically and orthographically. See the following example:

　　(a) dengie (b) dengy (c) dungie (d) dangy

　　(a) hodet (b) holat (c) halet (d) hedet

　　(Source: Webb, 2005, p.39)

　　(c) Measuring Productive Knowledge of Grammatical Functions

　　Webb (2005) developed a sentence construction test to assess the learners'productive knowledge of grammatical functions, i. e., how the word is used in a sentence. In the test, learners were given the target words and had to write each one in a sentence. It was made clear in the instructions to the participants that the only determining factor for a correct response was using the target words with grammatical accuracy. For example, for the target word “masco” (n. =locomotive) :

　　The masco left the station early. √

　　It is a masco. √

　　The girl mascoed to school. ×

　　(Source: Webb, 2005, p.40)

　　(d) Self-Reporting Vocabulary Knowledge

　　The Vocabulary Knowledge Scale designed by Paribakht & Wesche (1997) presents learners with a list of words and asks them to indicate the level of their knowledge of each word on a five-point scale. Figure 1 describes the different levels.

　　The Vocabulary Knowledge Scale combines self-report with some verifiable evidence of word knowledge in the form of a synonym, L1 translation or sentence. Learners can use the scale to report how well they know each of the target words. It is easy to administer to a large number of students. However, it cannot assess how learners acquire vocabulary knowledge over time and, as Read (2000) pointed out it does not assess learners'knowledge of multiple meanings of the target words. Therefore, it is perhaps best used as a pre-test for learners to self-report their knowledge of certain words so that researchers can get a general idea of the participants' vocabulary knowledge before the treatment.

　　Figure 1 The VKS Elicitation Scale

　　(Source: Paribakht & Wesche, 1997, p.180)

　　In the present study, the vocabulary pre-test is designed in a similar way to the Vocabulary Knowledge Scale by Paribakht & Wesche (1997). In the vocabulary pre-test, the participants are asked to self-report their vocabulary knowledge of a list of forty words (composed of the twenty lexical items for incidental vocabulary acquisition study and twenty distracters) by circling a number on a five-point scale to indicate how well they know the word (e. g.4=I know the word well and can use it correctly; 0=I do not know the word at all).

　　Example:

　　Webb (2005) administered the vocabulary post-test of form design to assess the receptive vocabulary knowledge of orthographic form. The present study uses his design to check if the participants are able to recognize the form/spelling of the target words. Each of the ten target words is put in a word-list with four distracters—words similar in form. Participants are asked to circle the target word from the word-list, and tell how certain they are about their answer by entering a percentage in the box after the word-list.

　　Following the example of Matching Items by Read (2000), the reception test in the present study is designed for the participants to choose three words (one target word along with two distracters) from the left column and properly match their numbers with their synonyms or definitions in the right column.

　　Example:

　　1. complicated

　　2. chemical exceptional; higher

　　3. optimistic difficult and complex

　　4. advanced expecting good things

　　5. stable

　　Similar to Webb's (2005) test to assess the learners'productive knowledge of grammatical functions, the production test of this study involves some original sentences chosen from the listening text and presented with the target lexical items removed. Participants are asked to fill in the blanks to measure their ability to produce the words.

　　Example:

　　But we ended with stronger sales than we expected and I am very for next year. 元认知策略研究：二语听力理解与附带词汇习得（英文版）