淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


下載電子全文限經由淡江IP使用) 
系統識別號 U0002-1203201813252700
中文論文名稱 註解對於台灣學生以學習英語為外語者在多媒體環境下非刻意英語字彙學習成效之研究
英文論文名稱 The Effect of Glosses on Incidental Vocabulary Learning for Taiwanese EFL Learners in a Multimedia Context
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 英文學系碩士班
系所名稱(英) Department of English
學年度 106
學期 1
出版年 107
研究生中文姓名 廖虹雯
研究生英文姓名 Hung-Wen Liao
學號 601110413
學位類別 碩士
語文別 英文
口試日期 2018-01-19
論文頁數 133頁
口試委員 指導教授-胡映雪
委員-薛玉政
委員-王藹玲
中文關鍵字 非刻意英語字彙學習  第一語言註解  第二語言註解 
英文關鍵字 incidental vocabulary learning  L1 gloss  L2 gloss 
學科別分類 學科別人文學語言文學
中文摘要 本研究探討在第一語言註解(中文解釋)、第二語言註解(英文解釋)以及沒有註解(無中文解釋、無英文解釋)閱讀情況下對於非刻意英語字彙學習短期記憶與四週後的長期記憶的影響,並探討學習者的英文程度是否會影響其結果。
本研究對象來自北台灣某大學三個理工學院的班級,總共136位的大一學生,研究者根據研究對象的學測英文成績把他們分成高程度組與低程度組,並且研究者把他們分為六組: 高程度中文註解組、低程度中文註解組、高程度英文註解組、低程度英文註解組、高程度沒有註解組以及低程度沒有註解組,研究對象每人在Moodle平台在第一語言註解、第二語言註解或沒有註解的閱讀情況下共閱讀兩篇文章,每次閱讀完一篇文章,立即進行單字測驗(包含填空題、選擇題與配合題),四個禮拜後進行一樣的單字測驗。
透過量化分析,結果顯示在短期記憶的中文註解以及英文註解比沒有註解有顯著幫助並且中文註解與英文註解之間沒有顯著差別,在四週後的單字測驗中,中文註解組、英文註解組與沒有註解組之間沒有顯著差別但三組的單字量比起四週前都有顯著的下降,本次結果也顯示高程度中文註解組、低程度中文註解組、高程度英文註解組以及低程度英文註解組的單字量比起四週前都有顯著的差別但高程度沒有註解組以及低程度沒有註解組沒有顯著的下降。本研究建議在進行閱讀活動時,教師可以提供中文註解或是英文註解給學生,另外學生可以選擇有註解的閱讀資料作為適當的閱讀教材因為註解幫助學生的非刻意英語字彙學習在短期記憶中獲得更多的單字量,然而註解對於非刻意英語字彙學習在長期記憶是沒有顯著幫助,所以老師與學生需要尋求更好的學習策略去增進學生的英文能力。


英文摘要 The study aimed to investigate the effect of different gloss types- L1 gloss (Chinese equivalent), L2 gloss (English explanation), and no-gloss (No Chinese equivalent and no English explanation) on incidental vocabulary learning in short-term retention and a four-week long-term retention. Furthermore, the researcher examined whether the leaners’ proficiency would affect these outcomes.
The participants were one hundred and thirty-six freshmen from three classes of Science and Engineering majors in one of the universities in Northern Taiwan. Based on their English scores of General Scholastic Ability Test, the participants were divided into high level and low level groups. They were categorized into six groups: L1 gloss of high level group, L1 gloss of low level group, L2 gloss of high level group, L2 gloss of low level group, no gloss of high level group and no gloss of low level group. All the participants read two articles with L1 gloss, L2 gloss or no gloss on Moodle platform and after reading they immediately took a vocabulary test (including production test, recognition test and cloze test). After four weeks, they took exactly the same vocabulary tests.
Through a quantitative analysis, the results show that L1 gloss and L2 gloss were more effective than no gloss and there was no difference between L1 gloss and L2 gloss in the incidental vocabulary learning in the short-term retention. The vocabulary gain of L1 gloss, L2 gloss and no gloss dropped dramatically after four weeks of the last treatment; moreover, no significant difference was detected among these three groups in the long-term retention. The results also show that L1 gloss of high level, L1 gloss of low level groups, L2 gloss of high level and L2 gloss of low level groups regressed significantly in long-term retention while no gloss of high level and low level groups did not demonstrate a significant regression. These findings suggest that teachers can provide L1 or L2 glosses when giving reading tasks to students and language learners can choose reading materials with glosses as appropriate materials since L1 gloss and L2 gloss are effective and learners can gain more with the aid of glosses on short term incidental vocabulary learning. However, for long-term vocabulary learning and retention, glosses alone apparently are far from adequate. Teachers as well as learners need to work on better strategies than gloss in order to facilitate deeper learning.
論文目次 Table of Contents
Table of Contents ...VI
List of Tables...X
List of Figures...XIX

Chapter One Introduction...1
1.1 Background of the Study...1
1.2 Statement of the Problems...3
1.3 Purpose of the Study…6
1.4 Significance of the Study.7
1.5 Research Questions...8

Chapter Two Literature Review..10
2.1 Glosses and Incidental Vocabulary Learning...10
2.2 Single Glosses vs. Multiple-choice Glosses in Incidental Vocabulary Learning.12
2.3 L1 Glosses vs. L2 Glosses in Incidental Vocabulary Learning..14
2.4 The Correlation among L1 Glosses, L2 Glosses and Language Proficiency.18
2.5 Paper-based Glosses vs. Computer-based Glosses.21

Chapter Three Methodology..25
3.1 Participants..25
3.2 Treatment materials..30
3.3 Instruments...36
3.4 Research Design...41
3.5 Procedure..46
3.6 Data Analysis...47

Chapter Four Results…48
4.1 The Inter-rater reliability between the two raters in the production test...49
4.2 Results of Research Question 1..51
4.3 Results of Research Question 2..56
4.4 Results of Research Question 3..63
4.4.1 The Comparison between All High Level and All Low Level Participants in Short-term Retention...64
4.4.2 The Comparison between All High Level and All Low Level Participants in Long-term Retention…67
4.4.3 The Comparison between High Level and Low Level Participants in Each Gloss Condition in Short-term Retention…73
4.4.4 The Comparison between High Level and Low Level Participants in Each Gloss Condition in Long-term Retention.81

Chapter Five Discussion…94
5.1 Discussion of Research Question 1.94
5.2 Discussion of Research Question 2…95
5.3 Discussion of Research Question 3.96
5.3.1 The Comparison between All the High Level and All the Low Level Participants in Short-term Retention and Long-term Retention…96
5.3.2 The Comparison between the High Level and the Low Level Participants in Each Gloss Condition in Short-term Retention and Long-term Retention.….97

Chapter Six Conclusion...100
6.1 Summary of the Study...100
6.2 Pedagogical Implications of the Study..101
6.3 Limitations of the Study…101
6.4 Suggestions for Future Research...102

References…104
Appendices….109
Appendix A Article 1 ”How Climate Change is Behind the Surge of Migrants to Europe” and Article 2 “No Victor in Sight as Coup Unfolds in Burundi”...109
Appendix B Target words in L1 glosses (English explanation) and L2 glosses (Chinese translation) of Article 1 and 2..115
Appendix C Word production test, word recognition test and cloze test of Article 1 and 2…121
Appendix D The item difficulty and item discrimination of recognition test in Article 1 and Article 2 and the item difficulty and item discrimination of cloze test in Article 1 and Article 2 ...131
Appendix E The Consent Form for Participants..133


List of Tables
Table 1 The Grade Category of English Examination in the General Scholastic Ability Test of 2015 and 2016..27
Table 2 Selection of Participants in Each Gloss Group by Proficiency Level..28
Table 3 The Overall Difficulty of the Text, the Difficulty of the Sentence Structure, the Difficulty of the Vocabulary, the Difficulty of Reading Comprehension, and the Familiarity of the Content on Article 1: “How Climate Change is Behind the Surge of Migrants to Europe”...33
Table 4 The Overall Difficulty of the Text, the Difficulty of the Sentence Structure, the Difficulty of the Vocabulary, the Difficulty of Reading Comprehension, and the Familiarity of the Content on Article 2: “No Victor in Sight as Coup Unfolds in Burundi” ...34
Table 5 The Overall Difficulty of the Text, the Difficulty of the Sentence Structure, the Difficulty of the Vocabulary, the Difficulty of Reading Comprehension, and the Familiarity of the Content on Article 3: “Who Are the Syrian Turkmen Rebels?”…35
Table 6 The Length, Numbers of Target Words and the Rate of Target Words in the First Pilot Test…36
Table 7 The Number of Participants in Each Class and Its Valid Data for Testing Validity..39
Table 8 The Reliability of Recognition Test in Article 1 and Article 2..40
Table 9 The Reliability of Cloze Test in Article 1 and Article 2..40
Table 10 Examples on Scores for Target Words of Production Test..50
Table 11 Correlation (Reliability) between the Two Raters on the Production Test…50
Table 12 Descriptive Statistics of the Overall Scores of the Vocabulary Immediate Post-test in Relation to Gloss Conditions ….51
Table 13 Descriptive Statistics of the Vocabulary Production Test, Recognition Test and Cloze Test in the Immediate Post-test in Relation to Gloss Conditions...52
Table 14 Post Hoc Comparison of the Overall Scores of Vocabulary Test between Gloss Conditions in Immediate Post-test….53
Table 15 Post Hoc Comparison of the Production Test between Gloss Conditions in Immediate Post-test…54
Table 16 Post Hoc Comparison of the Recognition Test between Gloss Conditions in Immediate Post-test…55
Table 17 Post Hoc Comparison of the Cloze Test between Gloss Conditions in Immediate Post-test..55
Table 18 Paired Sample t-test on the Mean Difference of the Overall Scores between the Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Relation to Gloss Conditions...57
Table 19 Paired Sample t-test on the Mean Difference of the Production Test between the Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Relation to Gloss Conditions...58
Table 20 Paired Sample t-test on the Mean Difference of the Recognition Test between the Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Relation to Gloss Conditions...59
Table 21 Paired Sample t-test on the Mean Difference of the Cloze Test between the Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Relation to Gloss Conditions ...60
Table 22 One-way ANCOVA on the delayed post-test in Relation to Gloss Conditions in the Overall Scores …61
Table 23 One-way ANCOVA on the delayed post-test in Relation to Gloss Conditions in the Production Test…61
Table 24 One-way ANCOVA on the delayed post-test in Relation to gloss Conditions in the Recognition Test...62
Table 25 One-way ANCOVA on the delayed post-test in Relation to gloss Conditions in the Cloze Test..62
Table 26 Independent Sample t-test of the Overall Scores of the High Level and Low Level Groups in the Immediate Post-test………………………………….....65
Table 27 Independent Sample t-test of the Production Test of the High Level and Low Level Groups in the Immediate Post-test………………………………...…..65
Table 28 Independent Sample t-test of the Recognition Test of the High Level and Low Level Groups in the Immediate Post-test…………………………………….65
Table 29 Independent Sample t-test of the Cloze Test of the High Level and Low Level Groups in the Immediate Post-test.66
Table 30 Paired Sample t-test on the Mean Difference of the Overall Scores of High and Low Level Group between the Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test..67
Table 31 Paired Sample t-test on the Mean Difference of the Vocabulary Production Test of High and Low Level Group between the Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test .68
Table 32 Paired Sample t-test on the Mean Difference of the Vocabulary Recognition Test of High and Low Level Group between the Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test ….69
Table 33 Paired Sample t-test on the Mean Difference of the Vocabulary Cloze Test of High and Low Level Group between the Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test .70
Table 34 One-way ANCOVA on the delayed post-test in Relation to the all high level and all low level participants in the Overall Scores...71
Table 35 One-way ANCOVA on the delayed post-test in Relation to the all high level and all low level participants in the Production Test.….71
Table 36 One-way ANCOVA on the delayed post-test in Relation to the all high level and all low level participants in the Recognition Test...72
Table 37 One-way ANCOVA on the delayed post-test in Relation to the all high level and all low level participants in the Cloze Test ...72
Table 38 The Overall Scores of Each Gloss Condition for High and Low Proficiency Level Groups for Article 1 and 2 in the Immediate Post-test ...73
Table 39 The Overall Scores of Each Gloss Condition for High and Low Proficiency Level Groups for Article 1 in the Immediate Post-test ….74
Table 40 The Overall Scores of Each Gloss Condition for High and Low Proficiency Level Groups for Article 2 in the Immediate Post-test .74
Table 41 Vocabulary Learning of Production Test of Each Gloss Condition for High and Low Proficiency Level Groups for Article 1 and 2 in the Immediate Post-test .75
Table 42 Vocabulary Learning of Production Test of Each Gloss Condition for High and Low Proficiency Level Groups for Article 1 in the Immediate Post-test ...76
Table 43 Vocabulary Learning of the Production Test of Each Gloss Condition for High and Low Proficiency Level Groups for Article 2 in the Immediate Post-test ...76
Table 44 Vocabulary Learning of the Recognition Test of Each Gloss Condition for High and Low Proficiency Level Groups for Article 1 and 2 in the Immediate Post-test ….77
Table 45 Vocabulary Learning of the Recognition Test of Each Gloss Condition for High and Low Proficiency Level Groups for Article 1 in the Immediate Post-test ...78
Table 46 Vocabulary Learning of the Recognition Test of Each Gloss Condition for High and Low Proficiency Level Groups for Article 2 in the Immediate Post-test …78
Table 47 Vocabulary Learning of the Cloze Test of Each Gloss Condition for High and Low Proficiency Level Groups for Article 1 and 2 in the Immediate Post-test ...79
Table 48 Vocabulary Learning of the Cloze Test of Each Gloss Condition for High and Low Proficiency Level Groups for Article 1 in the Immediate Post-test..79
Table 49 Vocabulary Learning of the Cloze Test of Each Gloss Condition for High and Low Proficiency Level Groups for Article 2 in the Immediate Post-test ..80
Table 50 Paired Sample t-test of the Mean Difference of the Overall Scores for Article 1 and 2 between Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Six Groups...82
Table 51 Paired Sample t-test of the Mean Difference of the Overall Scores for Article 1 between Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Six Groups…83
Table 52 Paired Sample t-test of the Mean Difference of the Overall Scores for Article 2 between Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Six Groups…83
Table 53 Paired Sample t-test of the Mean Difference of the Production Test for Article 1 and 2 between Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Six Groups…85
Table 54 Paired Sample t-test of the Mean Difference of the Production Test for Article 1 between Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Six Groups..85
Table 55 Paired Sample t-test of the Mean Difference of the Production Test for Article 2 between Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Six Groups…86
Table 56 Paired Sample t-test of the Mean Difference of the Recognition Test for Article 1 and 2 between Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Six Groups....87
Table 57 Paired Sample t-test of the Mean Difference of the Recognition Test for Article 1 between Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Six Groups...87
Table 58 Paired Sample t-test of the Mean Difference of the Recognition Test for Article 2 between Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Six Groups…88
Table 59 Paired Sample t-test of the Mean Difference of the Cloze Test for Article 1 and 2 between Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Six Groups...89
Table 60 Paired Sample t-test of the Mean Difference of the Cloze Test for Article 1 between Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Six Groups...89
Table 61 Paired Sample t-test of the Mean Difference of the Cloze Test for Article 2 between Immediate Post-test and Delayed Post-test in Six Groups..90
Table 62 One-way ANCOVA on the delayed post-test in Relation to the Six Groups in the Overall Scores ...91
Table 63 One-way ANCOVA on the delayed post-test in Relation to the Six Groups in the Production Test..91
Table 64 One-way ANCOVA on the delayed post-test in Relation to the Six Groups in the Recognition Test …91
Table 65 One-way ANCOVA on the delayed post-test in Relation to the Six Groups in the Cloze Test...92


List of Figures
Figure 1. An example of L1 gloss (Chinese equivalent) group in a computer-based setting...43
Figure 2. An example of L2 gloss (English explanation) group in a computer-based setting...43
Figure 3. An example of no gloss (no hint) group in a computer-based setting...44
Figure 4. Procedure of the main study...46
參考文獻 Abraham, L. B. (2008). Computer-mediated Glosses in Second Language Reading Comprehension and Vocabulary Learning: A Meta-analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(3), 199-226.
AbuSeileek, A. F. M. (2008). Hypermedia Annotation Presentation: Learners’
Preferences and Effect on EFL Reading Comprehension and Vocabulary Acquisition. CALICO Journal, 25(2), 260-275.
Benton, S. L., Glover, J. A., & Brunning, R. H. (1983). Levels of Processing: Effect of Number of Decision on Prose Recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(3), 382-290.
Berardo, S. R. (2006). The use of authentic materials in the teaching of reading. The Reading Matrix, 6(2), 60-69.
Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (1988). Vocabulary and Language Teaching. London: Longman.
Cheng, Y. H., & Good, R. L. (2009). L1 Glosses: Effects on EFL Learners’ Reading Comprehension and Vocabulary Retention. Reading in a Foreign Language. 21(2), 119-142.
Cho, K., & Krashen, S. D. (1994). Acquisition Vocabulary from the Sweet Valley Kids Series: Adult ESL Acquisition. Journal of Reading, 37(8), 662-667.
Ek, J., & Trim, J. (1991). Threshold 1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hirsh, D., & Nation, P. (1992). What Vocabulary Size is Needed to Read Unsimplified
Texts for Pleasure? Reading in a Foreign Language, 8(2), 689-696.
Hu, S. M., Vongpumivitch, V., Chang, J. S., & Liou, H. C. (2014). The Effects of L1 and L2 E-gloss on Incidental Vocabulary Learning of Junior High-School English Students. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(1), 80-99.
Hulstijn, J. H. (1992). Retention of Inferred and Given Word Meanings: Experiments in Incidental Learning. In P. J. L. Arnaud, & H. Béjoint (Eds.), Vocabulary and Applied Linguistics (pp. 113-125). Basingstoke: Macmillan.
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.
Jacobs, G. M., Dufon, P., & Hong, F. C. (1994). L1 and L2 Vocabulary Glosses in L2 Reading Passages: Their Effectiveness for Increasing Comprehension and Vocabulary Knowledge. Journal of Research in Reading, 17(1), 19-28.
Jacoby, L. L. Craik, F. I. M., & Begg, I. (1979). Effects of Decision Difficulty on Recognition and Recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18(5), 586-600.
Ko, M. H. (2005). Glosses, Comprehension, and Strategy Use. Reading in a Foreign Language, 17(1), 125-143.
Ko, M. H. (2012). Glossing and Second Language Vocabulary Learning. TESOL Quarterly, 46(1), 56-79.
Kost, C. R., Foss, P., & Lenzini, J. J. (1999). Textual and Pictorial Glosses: Effectiveness in Incidental Vocabulary Growth When Reading in a Foreign Language. Foreign Language Annals, 32(1), 89-113.
Kroll, J. F., & Stewart, E. (1994). Category Interference in Translation and Picture Naming: Evidence for Asymmetric Connections between Bilingual Memory Representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33(2), 149-174.
Laufer, B. (1997). The lexical plight in second language reading: Words you don’t know, words you think you know, and words you can’t guess. In: Cody, J and Huckin, T. (eds.), Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition: A Rationale for Pedagogy, New York: Cambridge University Press, 20-34.
Miyasako, N. (2002). Does Text-glossing Have Any Effects on Incidental Vocabulary Learning through Reading for Japanese Senior High School Students? Language Education & Technolog, 39, 1-20.
Nagata, N. (1999). The Effectiveness of Computer-assisted Interactive Glosses. Foreign Language Annals, 32(4), 469-479.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Nation, I. S. P. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening?
Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(1), 59–82.
Pitts, M., White, H., & Krashen, S. D. (1989). Acquisition from Second Language Vocabulary Through Reading: A Replication of Clockwork Orange Study Using Second Language Acquirers. Reading in a Foreign Language, 5, 271-275.
Qiu, H. Z. (2006). Quantitative Research and Statistical Analysis in Social and Behavioral Sciences. Taipei: Wu Nan.
Read, J. (2000). Accessing Vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rott, S. (2005). Processing glosses: An qualitative exploration of How From-meaning Connections are Established and Strengthened. Reading in a Foreign Language, 17(2), 95-124.
Taylor, A. M. (2006). The Effects of CALL Versus Traditional L1 Glosses on L2 Reading Comprehension. CALICO Journal, 23(2), 309-318.
Taylor, A. M. (2009). CALL-Based Versus Paper-based Glosses: Is There a Difference in Reading Comprehension? CALICO Journal, 27(1), 147-160.
van Ek, J. A & Trim, J. L. M. (1991). Threshold 1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Watanabe, Y. (1997). Input, Intake and Retention: Effects of Increased Processing on Incidental Leaning of Foreign Language Vocabulary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(3), 287-307.
Waring, R., & Nation, P. (2004). Second Language Reading and Incidental Vocabulary Leaning. Angles on the English-speaking World, 4, 11-23.
Yanguas, I. (2009). Multimedia Glosses and Their Effect on L2 Text Comprehension and Vocabulary Learning. Language Learning & Technology, 13(2), 48-67.
Yeh, Y., & Wang, C. W. (2003). Effects of Multimedia Vocabulary Annotations and Learning Styles on Vocabulary Learning. CALICO Journal, 21(1), 131-144.
Yoshii, M., & Flaitz, J. (2002). Second Language Incidental Vocabulary Retention: The Effect of Text and Picture Annotation Types. CALICO Journal, 20(1), 33-58.
Yoshii, M. (2006). L1 and L2 Glosses: their Effects on Incidental Vocabulary Learning. Language Learning & Technology, 10(3), 85-101.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2018-03-12公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2018-03-12起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2486 或 來信