學詞彙是不是有最好的策略？

Sanaoui (1995)的質化研究中觀察在英屬哥倫比亞學習法語作為二語的學習者，其認為學習者的語言程度和教學方式並不會影響詞彙的學習，真正影響個人詞彙學習是其是否有結構(structured/ unstructured)。

另外，也有研究表明教師是可以訓練學習者注重詞彙學習(Schmitt & Schmitt, 1993; Kojic-Sabo & Lightbown, 1999; Fan, 2003) 。

詞彙學習的策略並不是去認識一個詞。每一個詞彙學習策略都有它的優點。那些成功學習詞彙的人不只有多樣的學習策略，而且是持之以恆地去使用。

References

Fan, M. Y. (2003). Frequency of use, perceived usefulness, and actual usefulness of second language vocabulary strategies: A study of Hong Kong learners. The Modern Language Journal, 87(2), 222-241.
Folse, K. (2002). One Japanese ESL learner’s use of context clues to complete an assignment. Unpublished manuscript, , .
Folse, K. S. (1999). The effect of type of written practice activity on second language vocabulary retention (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from
Folse, K. S. (2004). Myths about teaching and learning second language vocabulary: What recent research says. TESL reporter, 37(2), 1-13.
Folse, K. S. & Briggs, S. J. (2007). Vocabulary Myths: Applying second language research to classroom teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 41(1), 216.
Hulstijn, J. H. (1992). Retention of inferred and given word meanings: Experiments in incidental vocabulary learning. In (), Vocabulary and applied linguistics. Springer.
Kojic-Sabo, I. & Lightbown, P. M. (1999). Students’ approaches to vocabulary learning and their relationship to success. The Modern Language Journal, 83(2), 176-192.
Paribakht, T. S. & Wesche, M. (1996). Enhancing Vocabulary Acquisition Through Reading: A Hierarchy of Text-Related Exercise Types.. Canadian Modern Language Review, 52(2), 155-78.
Sanaoui, R. (1995). Adult learners’ approaches to learning vocabulary in second languages. The Modern Language Journal, 79(1), 15-28.
Schatz, E. K. & Baldwin, R. S. (1986). Context clues are unreliable predictors of word meanings. Reading Research Quarterly, , 439-453.
Schmitt, N. & Schmitt, D. R. (1993). Identifying and Assessing Vocabulary Learning Strategies.. Thai TESOL Bulletin, 5(4), 27-33.

二語學習者能否像母語者一樣，從脈絡猜出詞語的意思？

對於母語者而言，脈絡中有一個不認識的詞語而其它都是認識的詞語是常見的狀況；而二語學習者則可能是在一個段落裡頭就有無數的個不認識的詞語。當段落中有多個不認識的詞語時，就很容易迷路或誤導 (Folse, 2002; Folse & Briggs, 2007)。即是母語者在脈絡下去猜測新詞的詞義，也不見得能夠受益於脈絡(Schatz & Baldwin, 1986)。(Folse, 2004)認為要求二語學習者去從脈絡中猜出新詞的詞義是沒有道理的。

第一語言和第二語言的學習過程是不一樣的。在學習第一語言的時候，大多數的詞語我們並未刻意地去學習，通常會在不同脈絡下接觸到詞語；但是第二語言沒有這樣反覆接觸的機會，人們只有很短的時間就必須達到相當的程度。

在強調溝通或自然的學習方式下，語法、拼字、詞彙、老師的動作或糾錯，都會被認為是比較不適合的過程。好像變魔術一樣，詞彙可以在沒有刻意或系統地學習下就能成長。似乎只要「理解」了，就不必注意不認識的詞了！

但是，二語學習者不可避免的就是有很多詞語必須根據脈絡去猜。這使得詞彙量較少的學習者就會處在劣勢，Folse (1999) 發現當學習者知道的詞語越多去，也就更容易從脈絡中去猜出詞義。

Hulstijn (1992)的研究結論，雖然比起直接給於學習者詞義，由學習者自己推論詞義的方式，比較能夠使詞語的形和義連結起來，但是當學習者沒有任何線索而必須自己去推論詞義時錯誤的理解就常常發生。

Paribakht and Wesche (1996)比較只有閱讀和有閱讀伴隨著指導的兩種詞彙學習，雖然單純閱讀也有學習發生的可能，但是伴隨著指導的學習有更顯著的且深入的詞彙知識。

References

Fan, M. Y. (2003). Frequency of use, perceived usefulness, and actual usefulness of second language vocabulary strategies: A study of Hong Kong learners. The Modern Language Journal, 87(2), 222-241.
Folse, K. (2002). One Japanese ESL learner’s use of context clues to complete an assignment. Unpublished manuscript, , .
Folse, K. S. (1999). The effect of type of written practice activity on second language vocabulary retention (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from
Folse, K. S. (2004). Myths about teaching and learning second language vocabulary: What recent research says. TESL reporter, 37(2), 1-13.
Folse, K. S. & Briggs, S. J. (2007). Vocabulary Myths: Applying second language research to classroom teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 41(1), 216.
Hulstijn, J. H. (1992). Retention of inferred and given word meanings: Experiments in incidental vocabulary learning. In (), Vocabulary and applied linguistics. Springer.
Kojic-Sabo, I. & Lightbown, P. M. (1999). Students’ approaches to vocabulary learning and their relationship to success. The Modern Language Journal, 83(2), 176-192.
Paribakht, T. S. & Wesche, M. (1996). Enhancing Vocabulary Acquisition Through Reading: A Hierarchy of Text-Related Exercise Types.. Canadian Modern Language Review, 52(2), 155-78.
Sanaoui, R. (1995). Adult learners’ approaches to learning vocabulary in second languages. The Modern Language Journal, 79(1), 15-28.
Schatz, E. K. & Baldwin, R. S. (1986). Context clues are unreliable predictors of word meanings. Reading Research Quarterly, , 439-453.
Schmitt, N. & Schmitt, D. R. (1993). Identifying and Assessing Vocabulary Learning Strategies.. Thai TESOL Bulletin, 5(4), 27-33.

學習第二語言的時候，使用翻譯真的不好嗎？

有許多的實證研究都證明第一語言的翻譯在第二語言學習有其價值。

Hulstijn,Hollander and Greidanus (1996)比較閱讀文章旁邊用學生的一語和二語的注釋(marginal gloss)，結果發現以學生的一語比較容易幫助學習，Laufer and Shmueli (1997)也呼應這樣的結果；Lotto and De Groot (1998) 則比較以第一語言和圖片作為示意的情況，結果發現以學生的一語比圖片的呈現，學生對於新詞記得更久(retention)；Grace (1998)則發現英語母語者學法語的時候，學習者認為在能夠有一語的情況下，比較容易確認正確的意思；Prince (1996)發現，透過一語翻譯的情況對於程度較差的學習者而言，比較容易能夠去回想(recall)起新詞。

這並不是說學習二語一定要依靠第一語言翻譯，第一語言之所以有價值，在於其能夠讓學習者將新知識和舊知識連結在一起，去激發已經穩固的詞彙網絡。學習新詞的時候，之所以要激發先前的知識的因為它以經是個連結綿密的資訊網，一但新的詞彙能夠整合到這個資訊網裡頭，只要有一點點連結，學習者就容易喚回詞彙。許多研究都支持這樣子的說法(Stahl, 1983; Stoller & Grabe, 1993; Martin,Martin & Ying, 2002; Schmitt and Schmitt (1995) 。

References

Grace, C. A. (1998). Retention of Word Meanings Inferred from Context and Sentence-Level Translations: Implications for the Design of Beginning-Level CALL Software. The Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 533-544.
Hulstijn, J. H., Hollander, M. & Greidanus, T. (1996). Incidental vocabulary learning by advanced foreign language students: The influence of marginal glosses, dictionary use, and reoccurrence of unknown words. The modern language journal, 80(3), 327-339.
Laufer, B. & Shmueli, K. (1997). Memorizing new words: Does teaching have anything to do with it?. RELC journal, 28(1), 89-108.
Lotto, L. & De Groot, A. (1998). Effects of learning method and word type on acquiring vocabulary in an unfamiliar language. Language learning, 48(1), 31-69.
Martin, M. A., Martin, S. H. & Ying, W. (2002). The Vocabulary Self-Collection Strategy in the ESL Classroom. TESOL Journal, 11(2), 34-35.
Olsen, S. (1999). Errors and compensatory strategies: A study of grammar and vocabulary in texts written by Norwegian learners of English. System, 27(2), 191-205.
Prince, P. (1996). Second language vocabulary learning: The role of context versus translations as a function of proficiency. The modern language journal, 80(4), 478-493.
Schmitt, N. & Schmitt, D. (1995). Vocabulary notebooks: Theoretical underpinnings and practical suggestions. ELT journal, 49(2), 133-143.
Stahl, S. (1983). Differential word knowledge and reading comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(4), 33-50.
Stoller, F. & Grabe, W. (1993). Implications for L2 vocabulary acquisition and instruction from L1 vocabulary research. In (), Second Language Reading and Vocabulary Learning. Ablex.
Tinkham, T. (1993). The effect of semantic clustering on the learning of second language vocabulary. System, 21(3), 371-380.
Tinkham, T. (1997). The effects of semantic and thematic clustering on the learning of second language vocabulary. Second language research, 13(2), 138-163.
Waring, R. (1997). The negative effects of learning words in semantic sets: A replication. System, 25(2), 261-274.

呈現新詞的時候，應該以語義組合還是主題組合？

大多數的課程或教材在呈現詞彙的時候，會以語義組合呈現，例如：家庭成員、動物或星期，比較少課程會以一個主題來包含新詞。關於以主題組合的例子可以見這個網頁。

語言教師呈現詞彙的時候，以語義組合或主題組合來呈現比較好呢？Tinkham (1993)發現，當學習者以語義組合來學習新詞的時候會比較困難。Waring (1997)則發現日語母語者學習英語二語時，學習相關的詞彙組合，比起學習完全不相關的詞彙組合，前者比後者需要多花一半的時間。而Tinkham (1997)則發現語義組合對於學習有負面影響，而主題組合能夠促進學習。Olsen (1999)則發現挪威的英語二語學習者容易被語音相似而混淆，例如sea和see或want和won’t。

References

Grace, C. A. (1998). Retention of Word Meanings Inferred from Context and Sentence-Level Translations: Implications for the Design of Beginning-Level CALL Software. The Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 533-544.
Hulstijn, J. H., Hollander, M. & Greidanus, T. (1996). Incidental vocabulary learning by advanced foreign language students: The influence of marginal glosses, dictionary use, and reoccurrence of unknown words. The modern language journal, 80(3), 327-339.
Laufer, B. & Shmueli, K. (1997). Memorizing new words: Does teaching have anything to do with it?. RELC journal, 28(1), 89-108.
Lotto, L. & De Groot, A. (1998). Effects of learning method and word type on acquiring vocabulary in an unfamiliar language. Language learning, 48(1), 31-69.
Martin, M. A., Martin, S. H. & Ying, W. (2002). The Vocabulary Self-Collection Strategy in the ESL Classroom. TESOL Journal, 11(2), 34-35.
Olsen, S. (1999). Errors and compensatory strategies: A study of grammar and vocabulary in texts written by Norwegian learners of English. System, 27(2), 191-205.
Prince, P. (1996). Second language vocabulary learning: The role of context versus translations as a function of proficiency. The modern language journal, 80(4), 478-493.
Schmitt, N. & Schmitt, D. (1995). Vocabulary notebooks: Theoretical underpinnings and practical suggestions. ELT journal, 49(2), 133-143.
Stahl, S. (1983). Differential word knowledge and reading comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(4), 33-50.
Stoller, F. & Grabe, W. (1993). Implications for L2 vocabulary acquisition and instruction from L1 vocabulary research. In (), Second Language Reading and Vocabulary Learning. Ablex.
Tinkham, T. (1993). The effect of semantic clustering on the learning of second language vocabulary. System, 21(3), 371-380.
Tinkham, T. (1997). The effects of semantic and thematic clustering on the learning of second language vocabulary. Second language research, 13(2), 138-163.
Waring, R. (1997). The negative effects of learning words in semantic sets: A replication. System, 25(2), 261-274.

參加詞彙課程的學生對於詞彙學習方法的態度有什麼樣的改變？

大多數語言研究者和教師對於詞彙的關注較少，因為在封閉的系統下，例如：句法和語音，人們是比較容易進行歸納和演繹(Richards, 1976; Laufer, 1986)。但是，比較大學二語學習者的偏誤比例時，卻發現詞彙的偏誤高於語法的3倍到4倍(Meara, 1984)。學習者的詞彙能力和其學術成就有很大相關，特別影響閱讀的表現(Laufer, 1986; Qian, 2002)。Paribakht and Wesche (1996)指出，在以理解為基礎的上所進行的課程，即能夠對學習者的詞彙能力有大大的提升。

Zimmerman (1997)發現只要在課程中進行詞彙相關的活動，學習者對於詞彙學習方法的態度隨之改變。學習者參加10週的課程，每週上課24-25小時，而且進行自選閱讀材料並記錄。實驗組的學生除了每週24-25的正規課程外，還有額外3個小時的詞彙學習課程。

詞彙學習課程的活動相當多樣。例如：詞彙「consume」會進行課堂討論：「Under what circumstances and by whom would each of the following be consumed: three glasses of water, 6 gallons of beer, a ton of fish, a tree, oil, a book, a town」。或者，讓學生去描述圖表，同時要求學生使用相關詞語：consume/1990, consumption/1930/exceeded, consumers/after World War II, continued to consume/in 1965, consuming/ since 1950。再來，可能透過口頭或書面的方式，讓學生表達「What three foods do you think are the most commonly eaten through the world?」

在10週的課程過後，不論有沒有參加詞彙課程的學生都在清單考試(Checklist，由學習者對目標詞語進行四個程度的評估：一、我不知道這個詞；二、我看過這個詞，但是我不知道它的意思；三、在句子中，我知道他的意思，但是我不知道怎麼使用這個詞；四、我可以將這個詞使用在句子中)上都有進步。此外，一個由學生為六種詞語學習方法排序的問卷也在10週課程前後進行。課程前，兩組學習者都認為課堂上的詞彙活動很重要，課程後只有參加詞彙課程的學生同樣認為重要，但是只有自選閱讀材料的學生則認為閱讀比詞彙課程更重要。

課堂上的詞彙活動會影響學習者對於詞彙學習方法的感受。

References

Laufer, B. (1986). Possible changes in attitude towards vocabulary acquisition research. IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 24(1), 69.
Meara, P. (1984). The study of lexis in interlanguage. In A. Davies, C. Criper & A. P. R. Howatt (Eds.), Interlanguage. Edinburgh University Press.
Paribakht, T. S. & Wesche, M. (1996). Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition: A Rationale for Pedagogy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Qian, D. D. (2002). Investigating the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and academic reading performance: An assessment perspective. Language learning, 52(3), 513-536.
Richards, J. C. (1976). The role of vocabulary teaching. TESOL quarterly, , 77-89.
Zimmerman, C. B. (1997). Do reading and interactive vocabulary instruction make a difference? An empirical study. Tesol Quarterly, 31(1), 121-140.

CLIL是如何增加詞彙知識？

在Xanthou (2010) 回顧過往的研究中，其認為使詞彙知識能夠逐步增加的幾個要點：一、激發先前的知識；二、在脈絡下學習；三、對詞彙進行主動地加工、處理；四、多次、反覆的接觸。

在介紹新的概念的時候，通常我們需要把它和學生既有的知識連結，這就會激發學習者先前的知識。由於CLIL由內容將所有詞彙串連在一起，因此CLIL可以從這個方面對詞彙學習有幫助。

當學科的內容在CLIL下執行的時候，新詞就是被放在脈絡下被呈現。CLIL提供一個以內容為基礎的語言環境，脈絡就是學習者將目標詞彙應用的場閾。

CLIL能夠提供學習者主動去運用新詞的機會，這可以是課堂的討論，也可以是內容相關或語言相關的活動。由於新詞是在使用的脈絡下被運動，學習就更容易發生。

CLIL會針對單一主題進行足夠的教學，因此透過澄清、說明的過程新詞就會反覆地出現在課堂。Robinson (2005) 觀察學科的課堂上(CLIL)，使老師使用新詞的次數，僅僅2分鐘內，就使用了17次的「 friction」。而Xanthou (2010) 在地理課的觀察中也發現，對於「tropical」在2分鐘內，也出現在了7次。

CLIL看起來是能夠增進詞彙知識增加的學習方式。

Xanthou (2010) 比較了三個組別(CLIL：以英語作為二語學習地理、非CLIL：以希臘語(母語)學習地理、詞彙清單：一般的英語課程)，比較了參與課程(5次上課，每次40分鐘)前後、和組間的對於100個地理相關的內容詞彙翻譯(英語翻譯成希臘語)。課程前，三個組別的分數是沒有差異，但是課程後三個組別之間的分數就產生差異了。後測進步最大的CLIL組，而詞彙清單組在後測的分數還退步，非CLIL組的也是退步。對於詞彙的學習，在CLIL的成效確實優於非CLIL和詞彙清單。

References

Coady, J. (1996). L2 vocabulary acquistion: A synthesis of the research. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition: A Rationale for Pedagogy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Martin, M. A., Martin, S. H. & Ying, W. (2002). The Vocabulary Self-Collection Strategy in the ESL Classroom. TESOL Journal, 11(2), 34-35.
Mezynski, K. (1983). Issues concerning the acquisition of knowledge: Effects of vocabulary training on reading comprehension. Review of educational research, 53(2), 253-279.
Nation, I. (2013). Learning words from context. In (), Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge University Press.
Nation, I. S. (1990). Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. Heinle ELT.
Robinson, P. J. (2005). Teaching key vocabulary in geography and science classrooms: An analysis of teachers’ practice with particular reference to EAL pupils’ learning. Language and Education, 19(5), 428-445.
Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge University PRess.
Schmitt, N. & Schmitt, D. (1995). Vocabulary notebooks: Theoretical underpinnings and practical suggestions. ELT journal, 49(2), 133-143.
Stahl, S. (1983). Differential word knowledge and reading comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(4), 33-50.
Stoller, F. & Grabe, W. (1993). Implications for L2 vocabulary acquisition and instruction from L1 vocabulary research. In (), Second Language Reading and Vocabulary Learning. Ablex.
Xanthou, M. (2010). Current trends in L2 vocabulary learning and instruction: Is CLIL the right approach. Advances in Research on Language Acquisition and Teaching: Selected Papers, Thessaloniki, Greece: Greek Applied Linguistics Association (GALA), , 459-471.

詞彙知識是如何逐步增加呢？

在Xanthou (2010) 回顧過往的研究中，其認為使詞彙知識能夠逐步增加的幾個要點：一、激發先前的知識；二、在脈絡下學習；三、對詞彙進行主動地加工、處理；四、多次、反覆的接觸。

學習新詞的時候，之所以要激發先前的知識的因為它以經是個連結綿密的資訊網，一但新的詞彙能夠整合到這個資訊網裡頭，只要有一點點連結，學習者就容易喚回詞彙。許多研究都支持這樣子的說法(Stahl, 1983; Stoller & Grabe, 1993; Martin,Martin & Ying, 2002)，Schmitt and Schmitt (1995) 也將這個作為設計詞彙班時應該強調的原則。

在脈絡下學習詞彙的目的則是因為這促進學習者更容易全面理解一個詞(Nation, 2013)。當學習者在有意義，且容易理解的語言環境下，更容易使學習者掌握詞彙的知識(Coady, 1996)。

當學習者在脈絡下運用新詞的時候，「學習過程」(process of learning)就會啟動(Mezynski, 1983)。

Nation (1990) 從許多研究的結果中歸納，能夠學習新詞的接觸次數範圍在5到16次之間。第一次接觸到新詞的時候，可能是聽到這個語音，可能會記得它有幾個音節。接著，可能在課本上看到它怎麼寫，就會記得它由哪些字母組成。再更多次數的接觸後，屬於這個詞彙的形式、意義就會慢慢被鞏固起來(Schmitt, 2000)。

掌握這幾個要點，就能夠促進我們新詞的學習。

References

Coady, J. (1996). L2 vocabulary acquistion: A synthesis of the research. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition: A Rationale for Pedagogy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Martin, M. A., Martin, S. H. & Ying, W. (2002). The Vocabulary Self-Collection Strategy in the ESL Classroom. TESOL Journal, 11(2), 34-35.
Mezynski, K. (1983). Issues concerning the acquisition of knowledge: Effects of vocabulary training on reading comprehension. Review of educational research, 53(2), 253-279.
Nation, I. (2013). Learning words from context. In (), Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge University Press.
Nation, I. S. (1990). Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. Heinle ELT.
Robinson, P. J. (2005). Teaching key vocabulary in geography and science classrooms: An analysis of teachers’ practice with particular reference to EAL pupils’ learning. Language and Education, 19(5), 428-445.
Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge University PRess.
Schmitt, N. & Schmitt, D. (1995). Vocabulary notebooks: Theoretical underpinnings and practical suggestions. ELT journal, 49(2), 133-143.
Stahl, S. (1983). Differential word knowledge and reading comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(4), 33-50.
Stoller, F. & Grabe, W. (1993). Implications for L2 vocabulary acquisition and instruction from L1 vocabulary research. In (), Second Language Reading and Vocabulary Learning. Ablex.
Xanthou, M. (2010). Current trends in L2 vocabulary learning and instruction: Is CLIL the right approach. Advances in Research on Language Acquisition and Teaching: Selected Papers, Thessaloniki, Greece: Greek Applied Linguistics Association (GALA), , 459-471.

詞彙教學怎麼做？

Schmitt (2008) 認為刻意為之的詞彙學習(intentional learning)有三個原則：一、透過活動使學習者對於目標詞彙的參與程度最大化；二、透過重覆的出現使學習者對於目標詞彙的接觸最大化；三、考量詞彙不同面向的知識。

許多詞彙教學只儘於介紹詞彙的意義，這並不符合詞語學習是一個逐漸增加(incremental)的學習型態。Nation (2001) 認為可以透過四個取徑去平衡學習者在詞語不同面相的注意，它們分別是注重意義的輸入(meaning-focused input)、注重意義的輸出(meaning-focused output)、注重語言的學習(language-focused learning)以及流利度的發展(fluency development)，四個取徑的比重應該是一樣。

注重意義的輸入和閱讀於聽力有很大的關係，其原則類似「非刻意的學習」(incidental learning)。

注重意義的輸出則和任務和活動有關，任務型教學法(task-based methodologies)可以滿足這樣的需求。

注重語言的學習是最接近傳統上的詞彙教學，就是要使學生將注意力放在詞彙上面。

對於詞彙的能力，我們可以粗略地分為掌握(mastery)產出型(productive)的詞彙和接受型(receptive)的詞彙(Nation, 2001; 17) 。學習者的接受型的詞彙總是會大於產出型的詞彙。在5000頻次的詞表中，產出型(一語翻二語)的詞彙大概只有接受型(二語翻一語)的16%；而2000頻次的詞中則是35%(Laufer, 2005) 。另一個研究2000、3000和大學詞語表的則發現比例界於81%到53%，平均為69.2%(Fan, 2000)  。Laufer and Paribakht (1998)則發現以色列和加拿大的英語二語者是分別是77%和62%。這些數據告訴我們，掌握產出型的詞彙比掌握接受型的詞彙更不容易。要使學習者掌握產出型的詞彙，可以透過額外的訓練和作文要求(Lee & Muncie, 2006)。

而流利度的發展主要是學習者即時認讀或產生語言的發展。對於詞彙提取的速度越快，流利度就越高。這可以透過克漏字、翻譯、判斷合適度等方式提高速度(Snellings,Van Gelderen & De Glopper, 2002)。此外，十週的時間的自選分級讀本或課堂文章的閱讀也會使速度變快(Al-Homoud & Schmitt, 2009)。

References

Al-Homoud, F. & Schmitt, N. (2009). Extensive reading in a challenging environment: A comparison of extensive and intensive reading approaches in Saudi Arabia. Language Teaching Research, 13(4), 383-401.
Fan, M. (2000). How big is the gap and how to narrow it? An investigation into the active and passive vocabulary knowledge of L2 learners. RELC Journal, 31(2), 105-119.
Folse, K. (2010). Is explicit vocabulary focus the reading teacher’s job?. Reading in a Foreign Language, 22(1), 139.
Laufer, B. (2005). Focus on Form in Second Language Vocabulary Learning. In (), EUROSLA Yearbook (Vol. 5). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Laufer, B. & Paribakht, T. S. (1998). The relationship between passive and active vocabularies: Effects of languagelearning context. Language learning, 48(3), 365-391.
Lee, S. H. & Muncie, J. (2006). From receptive to productive: Improving ESL learners’ use of vocabulary in a postreading composition task. Tesol Quarterly, 40(2), 295-320.
Nation, I. (2001). Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge University Press.
Rossiter, M. J., Abbott, M. L. & Kushnir, A. (2016). L2 Vocabulary Research and Instructional Practices: Where Are the Gaps?.. TESL-EJ, 20(1), n1.
Schmitt, N. (2008). Instructed second language vocabulary learning. Language teaching research, 12(3), 329-363.
Snellings, P., Van Gelderen, A. & De Glopper, K. (2002). Lexical retrieval: An aspect of fluent second–language production that can be enhanced. Language Learning, 52(4), 723-754.

為什麼需要詞彙教學？

目前，大眾所偏好的語言教學型式是以意義為基礎的學習(meaning-based learning)，在這樣的型式下，學習者是學習「使用語言特徵」(using language features)，而不是學習「語言特徵」(language features)，只有在需要的時候以輔助的方式給予補充。這樣子的語言教學型式為學習者建立聽、說、讀、寫四個基本能力以及語法結構或許有所助益，但是對於詞彙的學習，可能需要有不一樣的取徑才能讓學習者將注意力轉移到詞彙本身。

Laufer (2005) 提出幾個我們之所以應該要重視詞彙教學的原因：一、學習者如果理解整體文章所要傳達的意義之後，就不再注意特定詞語的精確意思；二、從脈絡中去猜詞語的意思有時候不太可靠，尤其當學習者對於論述所使用的詞語有超過2%是不認識時；三、如果詞彙的意義很容易從脈絡中被猜出或理解的話，學習者不會有較多的投入，於是也就容易忘記；四、在一個新的論述中接觸新的詞彙後需要在很短的時間內再一次接觸才不會忘記。如果要透過閱讀，想要在一週內遇到10次同一個詞語的話，通常一週應該要閱讀1到2本分級讀本。這是一般的學習者不會這麼做。雖然，我們有理由好好重視詞彙教學，但是現況是第二語言教師對於詞彙教學的重視很少(Folse, 2010) 或者對於詞彙教學的認識和有證據的研究仍存在落差(Rossiter,Abbott & Kushnir, 2016) 。

References

Al-Homoud, F. & Schmitt, N. (2009). Extensive reading in a challenging environment: A comparison of extensive and intensive reading approaches in Saudi Arabia. Language Teaching Research, 13(4), 383-401.
Fan, M. (2000). How big is the gap and how to narrow it? An investigation into the active and passive vocabulary knowledge of L2 learners. RELC Journal, 31(2), 105-119.
Folse, K. (2010). Is explicit vocabulary focus the reading teacher’s job?. Reading in a Foreign Language, 22(1), 139.
Laufer, B. (2005). Focus on Form in Second Language Vocabulary Learning. In (), EUROSLA Yearbook (Vol. 5). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Laufer, B. & Paribakht, T. S. (1998). The relationship between passive and active vocabularies: Effects of languagelearning context. Language learning, 48(3), 365-391.
Lee, S. H. & Muncie, J. (2006). From receptive to productive: Improving ESL learners’ use of vocabulary in a postreading composition task. Tesol Quarterly, 40(2), 295-320.
Nation, I. (2001). Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge University Press.
Rossiter, M. J., Abbott, M. L. & Kushnir, A. (2016). L2 Vocabulary Research and Instructional Practices: Where Are the Gaps?.. TESL-EJ, 20(1), n1.
Schmitt, N. (2008). Instructed second language vocabulary learning. Language teaching research, 12(3), 329-363.
Snellings, P., Van Gelderen, A. & De Glopper, K. (2002). Lexical retrieval: An aspect of fluent second–language production that can be enhanced. Language Learning, 52(4), 723-754.

一個詞彙從零到精熟是怎麼樣的過程？

Henriksen (1999) 認為詞彙的知識是從零開始，然後有部分的知識，最終到精熟。這意味著，學習詞彙並不是非有即無，而是一個連結的過程。目前沒有任何證據能夠說一個詞彙是如何經歷這樣的過程。Schmitt (2010) 認為一個詞彙的發展可能是這樣：初始階段(剛開始的幾次接觸)，可能對於形式、意義和詞性有點認識；接著，形式、意義和詞性幾乎達到精熟後，詞語脈絡的知識(contextual word knowledge)也開始發展，但是仍不太熟練；最後，詞‭語脈絡的知識也都趨於完備，但是仍不到精熟，畢竟母語者也無法宣稱能夠精熟任何詞語的脈絡知識。

 這裡的形式、意義、詞性和脈絡知識是對應Nation (1990) 的幾個關於詞語的不同面相。形式包括口語和書面，而脈絡知識則包括搭配(collocation)、風格限制(register constraints)、頻率(frequency)和關聯(associations)。

References

Henriksen, B. (1999). Three dimensions of vocabulary development. Studies in second language acquisition, 21(2), 303-317.
Horst, M. & Meara, P. (1999). Test of a model for predicting second language lexical growth through reading. Canadian Modern Language Review, 56(2), 308-328.
Hulstijn, J. H. (1997). Mnemonic methods in foreign language vocabulary learning: Theoretical considerations and pedagogical implications. In (), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy. Cambridge University Press.
Nagy, W. E. (1997). The role of context in first-and second-language vocabulary learning. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Ed.), Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition, and Pedagogy (pp. 64-83). Cambridge University Press.
Nation, I. S. (1990). Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. Heinle ELT.
Paribakht, T. S. & Wesche, M. B. (1993). Reading comprehension and second language development in a comprehension-based ESL program. TESL Canada journal, 11(1), 09-29.
Pigada, M. & Schmitt, N. (2006). Vocabulary acquisition from extensive reading: A case study. Reading in a foreign language, 18(1), 1.
Russell, P. (1979). The Brain Book. Rouledge and Kegan Pau.
Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge University PRess.
Schmitt, N. (2010). Key issues in teaching and learning vocabulary. In (Ed.), Insights into non-native vocabulary teaching and learning (pp. 28-40). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.