《The Comparison of Korean Students' Vocabulary Learning Strategies.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《The Comparison of Korean Students' Vocabulary Learning Strategies.doc（26页珍藏版）》请在三一办公上搜索。
1、EDSL 617Teaching and Learning Second Language VocabularyProfessor: Dr. Thomas CobbStudent: Seong Man Park (260043746)Due Date: June 27, 2004.The Comparison of Korean Students Vocabulary Learning Strategies (Word Form Analysis, Guessing from the context, Bilingual Dictionary Use with written Repetiti
2、on)McGill UniversityTable of ContentsIntroduction3-5Word Form Analysis (Affixes and Word Roots)5-8Guessing the meaning of new words in the Context8-10Bilingual Dictionary Use (Pocket Electronic Dictionary)10-11Experiment12-17Conclusion17-18References19-20Appendix 1 (Test)21Appendix 2 (Word form anal
3、ysis)22-23Appendix 3 (Guessing)24-25Appendix 4 (Bilingual Dictionary)26IntroductionIt is obvious that vocabulary learning has been regarded as one of the most important parts in a second or foreign language acquisition. Along with the growth of interest in vocabulary acquisition, a lot of researches
4、 have been done in the field of second language acquisition in the last few decades (Schmitt, 1997). However, most researches have been done in the field of the instruction and learning of second language vocabulary without focusing on the vocabulary learning strategies (e.g., Schmitt, 1997; Park, 2
5、001). Even though there have been some researches in the area of vocabulary learning strategies, they could not attract any noticeable attention from the researchers due to the lack of comprehensive researches in this field (Schmitt, 1997). But most teachers and researchers agree with the fact that
6、vocabulary development should be the basis of acquiring good reading, speaking and listening skills in the field of second language learning. In order to enhance learners vocabulary knowledge, our attention should be focused on finding the most effective and necessary ways in the learners vocabulary
7、 development (Chin, 1999). With the above reasons, I am going to focus on finding and exploring the most effective strategies in learners second language learning through this paper. On the basis of the above notion, I am going to explore the Korean students three major learning strategies in their
8、English vocabulary learning through the comparison of these strategies using literature review and a small experiment. Actually English is not a second language in Korea. English is one of the major foreign languages. But the importance of English can not be neglected, because English is given a gre
9、at deal of weight on the university entrance examination and employment entrance examinations all over the country. With this reason, successful learning of English is an indispensable factor in Korea. And for the successful learning of English, English (henceforth English will be referred to L2) vo
10、cabulary knowledge should be a prerequisite factor. However, regardless of the importance of L2 vocabulary learning, very few researches related to L2 vocabulary learning have been done in Korea (Park, 2001). Through Schmitts article (1997) related to vocabulary learning strategies, I found out the
11、fact that there were lots of vocabulary learning strategies in the field of second language learning. But I think that different priorities should be given to those strategies depending on learners different learning situations. Korean learners of English normally can not access to enough resources
12、of English language because English is rarely spoken in Korea. With this reason, it is inevitable that Korean learners of English are placing their main reliance on strategies to overcome this weakness. Through an analysis of the surveys related to their strategy reliance, Park (2001) reveals that K
13、orean learners of English too much depended on learning strategies in their L2 vocabulary learning. All things considered, I came up with the following two questions.1. Which strategies are more effective than others for Korean learners of English?2. Which strategies should be taught in the Korean E
14、FL classrooms?Through this paper, I am going to try to explore the above questions through literature. And I am also planning to do a small experiment with six Korean students to test my findings, even though the result will not be statistically significant due to the small sample size. But I expect
15、 that the result will be able to show me some teaching implications for the Korean students effective development of L2 vocabulary. With regard to the strategies that I am going to compare, Chin (1999) mentions that word form analysis, guessing the meaning of new words from the context, and dictiona
16、ry use are traditional techniques which have been widely used and employed in L2 language classrooms. And these strategies are also commonly used in Korea. So I will do literature review about these three strategies to compare and do a small experiment using these strategies in this paper. Word Form
17、 Analysis (Affixes and Word Roots)It is suggested that Korean learners of English should learn English vocabulary through analyzing affixes and word roots, even though this method is not commonly taught in the English language classrooms. There are lots of vocabulary books using this strategy in Kor
18、ea. I am accustomed to this strategy, because I also learned L2 vocabulary mainly through this strategy. This strategy is normally perceived as a useful way in their L2 vocabulary learning for most Korean learners of English and me as well (Park, 2001). Schmitt and Meara (1997) make the attempt to r
19、eveal the relationship between affix and word size through the empirically study. They conduct a study with the subjects consisted of 95 Japanese students. Through this study, they reveal that “there were weaker, but still significant, correlations between receptive derivative suffix knowledge and v
20、ocabulary size” (Schmitt & Meara, 1997, p. 30). This means that there are interrelationships between affix and vocabulary size in L2 learning. But they just dealt with suffixes without prefixes and word roots in their study. In this respect, their results are limited to the relationships between a v
21、erb and its permissible suffixes neglecting prefixes and word roots. However, their results show that the amount of suffix knowledge can enhance learners overall vocabulary size with the easy access to a new word. Mochizuki and Aizawa (2000) also insist that affix knowledge plays an important role i
22、n enhancing and facilitating learners vocabulary knowledge. They investigate the relationship between learners vocabulary size and their affix knowledge with the subjects consisted of 403 Japanese high-school and university students. The results show that the amount of prefixes and suffixes knowledg
23、e is positively correlated with the amount of learners L2 vocabulary size. This means that learners affix knowledge develops along with the development of their vocabulary knowledge in the EFL context such as Japan and Korea and so on. This result can be matched with the result of Schmitt and Mearas
24、 (1997) empirically study showing the correlation between affix knowledge and vocabulary size. With regard to the use of affix knowledge in learning L2 vocabulary, Mochizuki and Aizawa (2000) mention that “the lexical meaning of a prefix and the syntactic role of a suffix” (p. 302) can facilitate th
25、e development and increase of learners vocabulary size. In spite of the above advantages using affix knowledge in learners L2 vocabulary development, there are also some disadvantages using this strategy. This means that we should be very cautious of using this strategy depending on different learne
26、rs and various situations. Regarding the misuse of this strategy, Chin (1999) warns that word form analysis should not be used for low level students due to the fact that they might make a mistake caused by wrong guessing solely based on form analysis neglecting the meaning of the word in the contex
27、t. This means that low level learners may be under disadvantages with this strategy, because they can not integrate the meaning guessed from analyzing a word form into the contextual meaning of the word. In addition, she also mentions that teachers should not teach students a whole bunch of affixes
28、apart from the relevant contexts. I agree with this idea. I think that affixes should be taught within the contexts, because learners are not likely to use the context to guess the meaning of a new word if they mainly rely on word form analysis. This means that learners might pay attention to the wo
29、rd form itself not to the meaning of the word within the context. Concerning the disadvantages of using word form analysis, Clarke and Nation (1980) provide several reasons. The first reason is similar to my above argument. They argue that the use of word form analysis can make learners guess too qu
30、ickly even before they consider the role of the word within the context they encounter. Based on this quick guess only from the word form analysis, learners might try to interpret the whole context with this initial meaning. The second reason is that some affixes and word roots cannot be easily anal
31、yzed and broken into parts because they have more than one meaning, even though “25%-30% of the vocabulary above the 3,000 word level can be broken into prefixes, roots, and suffixes” (Clarke & Nation, 1980, p. 215). This means that we cannot analyze all words which seem to have familiar affixes and
32、 roots because they may have different meanings. In this respect, they recommend that only 20 or so prefixes should be learned among the most useful and prominent prefixes (p. 215). Notwithstanding the disadvantages mentioned above, Clarke and Nation (1980) say that the ratio of the advantages to di
33、sadvantages of word form analysis strategy is becoming identical in vocabulary learning. In this regard, I think that word form analysis in isolation cannot be regarded as the most effective strategy in vocabulary learning even though this strategy is commonly used and also it plays an important rol
34、e in the Korean EFL context.Guessing the meaning of new words in the ContextWith regard to the importance of context in L2 language learning, Nagy (1997) mentions that L2 language learners will have difficulties in using context due to their low level of L2 language proficiency. However, this also m
35、eans that they are likely to encounter new words more often than native speakers do and they can have more chances to acquire vocabulary through context. Concerning this matter, Chin (1999) also insists that the more often learners are exposed to new words through various contexts, the more vocabula
36、ry they can get through guessing the meanings of new words from contexts. But the successful learning of L2 vocabulary through context, of course, should be based on learners high level of L2 proficiency because of the correlation between two factors (e.g., Nagy, 1997; Chin, 1999). In regard of Kore
37、an students vocabulary learning strategies, Park (2001) conduct a survey with 600 Korean subjects who have different academic backgrounds from elementary school to university students. The results show that Korean learners of English widely use guessing strategy regardless of their age differences.
38、But the one thing to be noted here is that even elementary school students are actively using guessing strategy (Park, 2001). This result is against the general notion that the ability to guess the meaning of a new word through the context is positively correlated with the learners level of L2 profi
39、ciency. With this reason, this strategy has been encouraged for the learners who have a certain level of second language proficiency to use (Park, 2001). But this result can be attributed to the promotion of communicative approach in English education by the Ministry of Education in Korea. According
40、 to Schmitt (1997), the use of guessing the meaning of a new word from context has been encouraged, because this strategy has been regarded as the most comfortable strategy with “the communicative approach than others” (p. 209). One of the most significant English education policy changes in the 6th
41、 and 7th National English Curricula of Korea (1995-) is the adoption of communicative English language teaching in English language education (Kwon, 2000). With the adoption of communicative English language education introduces big changes in the area of English language teaching in Korea. I think
42、that the major change can be found in the length of contexts in the university entrance examination in Korea. The length of contexts in this test has been getting longer with the introduction of communicative approach. So learners cannot rely on the traditional word form analysis in this situation d
43、ue to the lack of time to understand the whole text within the very limited time. For this reason, even elementary school students are utilizing guessing strategy to catch up with this tendency of English learning in Korea. As I mentioned several times above, it is clear that a certain level of seco
44、nd language proficiency level is required for the successful guessing through contexts. So I am not sure that elementary students can have benefits with this strategy in their L2 vocabulary learning. In this respect, Coady (1997) argues that teachers should instruct learners, especially beginners, a
45、 list of highly frequent words so that “at least 3,000 word families” can be acquired for their independent vocabulary learning (p. 235). With regard to the amount of vocabulary knowledge for using guessing strategy, Clarke and Nation (1980) also mention that around 3,000 words would be required for
46、 second language learners to guess 60-70% of the new words in the given context (p. 212). Nagy (1997) also says that a high level of second language proficiency should be acquired before they can correctly guess the meaning of a new word from the context. In addition, Nagy (1997) mentions the knowle
47、dge of the words around a new word encountered is very important to guess the meaning of the new word in the context. This means that learners insufficient knowledge of other words in the context can make learners hard to guess the meaning of a new word because of the interference caused by other wo
48、rds in the context. According to Clarke and Nation (1980), there are some values to use guessing strategy in second language vocabulary learning. The first main value is that guessing strategy can make learners learn vocabulary by themselves without teachers assistance through extensive reading. The
49、 second value is that learners can save time and continue reading without interference, because they do not have to refer to a dictionary through guessing strategy while they are reading. Bilingual Dictionary Use (Pocket Electronic Dictionary)According to Park (2001), Korean learners of English too much depended on the use of bilingual dictionary (English to
