认知语境对英语词汇习得影响

在二语习得中有这样一个明显的事实:我们能够理解由正确词汇和错误语法组成的话语,却无法理解由错误词汇和正确语法组成的话语。二语学习者普遍意识到词汇习得是二语习得中极需解决的问题。即便是在学习的高级阶段,学习者也会清楚地意识到他们二语词汇知识的局限性。在英语教学中,由于受到传统教学方法(如语法翻译法)的影响,对于词汇的教、学通常是从词汇表入手。这样就无法避免背、背不住,记、记不牢的尴尬局面。语言的形成和演变是以人类的认知为基础的,是与人类的社会生活密切相关的,简单的词汇背后隐含的是人类复杂而广泛的物质与精神生活的种种痕迹。在人类自身语言使用及交际中,语言是具有有限性的,那么为了使语言使用更加有效、成功,人们似乎总会想到具体语境,但就多种因素而言,具体语境并非是理想的。由于辅助语言交际的并非总是具体场合因素,认知因素起着决定性作用。认知语境是语用因素结构化了的产物,它是人对语言使用的有关知识,是与语言使用有关的、已经概念化或图式化了的知识结构状态。这种知识结构在语言使用中起着十分重要的作用。此外,与传统语境相比,认知语境具有动态性、完形性和人本性三个明显特点。本研究以认知语境为依据,在认知加工层次理论及Oxford的记忆策略的基础上,探讨将认知语境引入词汇教学中是否能够对学生的记忆策略、记忆效果和发散性思维产生积极的效果。本研究的数据主要通过调查问卷、词汇测试和有声思维的方式获得。受试者是西安翻译学院外国语学院60名英语专业的学生,其中30名学生组成实验组,另30名学生组成对比组,受试者的选定遵循随机选择的原则。所收集的数据在SPSS软件处理的基础上,做出了描述性和解释性分析。对所收集数据的定性和定量分析结果肯定了本研究的基本假设。研究发现,实验前两组受试者总体上都以为|教育论文网|死记法有助于词汇的学习;实验后对比组的结论基本没有变化,实验组的结论则发生了明显的变化。数据分析结果还表明对死记法持肯定意见和持否定意见的两组受试者在记忆策略的选择、长期记忆及发散思维能力上均有着明显的差异。【关键词】：认知语境认知加工层次理论记忆策略长期记忆发散性思维
【论文提纲】：摘要3-4Abstract4-9Chapter1Introduction9-151.1TheImportanceofVocabularyinEFL91.2BackgroundInformationoftheChineseEFLLearners9-111.2.1SmallVocabularySize9-101.2.2RLPrevailingamongChineseEFLLearners10-111.3MemoryandVocabularyLearning11-121.4DivergentThinkingandVocabularyLearning121.5PurposeofthePresentResearch12-131.6ResearchQuestions131.7ValueofthePresentResearch131.8OverallStructureoftheThesis13-15Chapter2LiteratureReview15-312.1ABriefReviewofContextResearch15-222.1.1OverseasScholars’StudyofContext15-182.1.2ChineseScholars’StudiesofContext18-192.1.3ASurveyofPreviousStudyonCognitiveContext19-212.1.4RelationshipbetweenTraditionalContextandCognitiveContext21-222.2ABriefReviewofVocabularyLearninginVariousTeachingApproaches22-252.2.1TheGrammar-TranslationMethod22-232.2.2TheDirectMethod232.2.3TheSituationalLanguageTeaching232.2.4TheAudio-LingualMethod23-242.2.5TheCommunicativeLanguageTeaching242.2.6TheNaturalApproach24-252.3RoleofMemoryinVocabularyLearning25-282.3.1TypesofMemory25-262.3.2TheRelationshipofMemoryandVocabulary26-272.3.3TheoryofDepthsofProcessing27-282.4DivergentThinkinersusConvergentThinking28-31Chapter3IntroducingCognitiveContextintoTEFL31-453.1TeachingCognitiveContextinTEFL31-373.1.1DefinitionofCognitiveContext31-323.1.2CognitiveContextandDivergentThinking32-373.2TheApplicationofCognitiveContexttoOxfordMemoryStrategies37-453.2.1Oxford’sMemoryStrategies37-403.2.2ModificationofOxford’sTaxonomy40-413.2.3CognitiveContextandtheProposedEFLVocabularyLearningApproach.41-45Chapter4MethodologyoftheResearch45-554.1ResearchQuestionsandHypotheses454.2Subjects45-464.3TeachingProcedures46-474.4Instruments47-484.5DesignoftheResearchInstruments48-494.5.1DesignoftheQuestionnaireonVocabularyLearningStrategies484.5.2DesignoftheVocabularyTests48-494.5.3DesignofThink-AloudInstruments494.6PilotStudy49-504.6.1PilotSubjects504.6.2ResultsofthePilotStudy504.7ProceduresofDataCollection50-524.7.1QuestionnaireProcedure514.7.2VocabularyTestProcedure514.7.3Think-AloudProcedure51-524.8DesignoftheDataAnalysis52-554.8.1DescriptiveAnalysis524.8.2InterpretativeAnalysis52-55Chapter5DataAnalysis55-695.1ResultsoftheQuestionnaire55-615.1.1Questionnaire:Part1(BeliefsaboutMemoryStrategies)55-585.1.2Questionnaire:Part2(i.eMemoryStrategyPreferences)58-615.1.3SummaryofFindingromtheQuestionnaire615.2ResultsofVocabularyTests61-635.2.1ImmediateVocabularyTest61-625.2.2SecondVocabularyTest62-635.3ResultsofThink-AloudProcedure63-645.3.1TheOutputofStatisticalAnalysis63-645.3.2DescriptiveAnalysis645.3.3Conclusion645.4InterpretationoftheResults64-685.4.1AnswertoNullHypothesis165-665.4.2AnswertoNullHypothesis266-675.4.3AnswertoNullHypothesis367-685.4.4ConclusionfromtheFindingsconcerningtheResearchQuestions685.5Summary68-69Chapter6Conclusion69-756.1MajorFindings69-706.2Limitations70-716.2.1LimitationsoftheApplicationofCognitiveContexttoEFL706.2.2LimitationoftheExperiment70-716.edagogicalImplications71-726.4Closing72-75Acknowledgements75-77Bibliography77-82Publication82-83Appendices83-88