使用參考工具對搭配詞學習之成效:以台灣英語學習者為例

Abstract

隨著語言教學研究發展的精進，越來越多研究結果顯示搭配詞的教學不僅能幫助學習者增進單字量，還可以提升單字運用能力，進而幫助聽說讀寫各方面能力。除一般課堂教學外，學習者如能運用合適的參考工具輔助學習搭配詞，必能收事半功倍之效。因此，探討何種參考工具適合輔助英語學習者學習搭配詞有其必要性。 本篇研究旨在探討台灣高中生透過字典、搭配詞辭典及搭配詞索引，學習英語動詞名詞搭配詞的成效差異。受試者為一百一十位高二普通班學生，英語程度介於中級到中高級之間，分別被指派使用朗文線上字典(Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English)、牛津搭配詞辭典(Oxford Collocation Dictionary of English)、和線上搭配詞索引Webcollocate。測驗工具為一份由研究者設計的三十題搭配詞填空。測驗分為: 前測、後測及在使用搭配詞輔助工具的情況下填寫的測驗。 實驗共為期四週: 第一週—學生分別在未使用任何輔助工具的情況下完成前測。第二週—學生利用參考工具完成測驗，並於測驗完成後，填寫一份問卷，針對學生的搭配詞背景知識，搭配詞學習型態，及使用參考工具後的感想。第四週—為了解受試者在使用搭配詞輔助工具後的學習成效，在隔了一週後，受試者接受後測。 施測者接著將三組受次者的前測、後測及在使用搭配詞輔助工具的情況下填寫的測驗總分分別做比較，發現朗文組在在使用搭配詞輔助工具的情況下填寫的測驗進步最多，分數也最高，至於後測成績，三組無顯著差異，但其中Webcollocate組分數最高。相較於朗文與Webcollocate兩組，牛津組在各測驗的表現皆較不理想。 造成以上結果差異的原因有三: 第一、朗文雖為一般目的字典，但它不僅提供單字定義解釋、足夠的例句顯示該搭配詞的適用情境，還有依該字的慣用搭配詞欄位，讓受試者能快速瀏覽其搭配詞，並透過其簡短解釋與例句，立即判斷該搭配詞的用法。在另一方面，牛津雖為搭配詞辭典，但因目標使用者預設為英語能力中高或高級程度的使用者，所以辭典裡沒有給單字定義解釋，此外，因意義相似的搭配詞皆列在一起，又無充足的例句供使用者分析判斷。至於Webcollocate，雖沒有單字定義解釋，但有字頻及大量的語料例句供使用者閱讀判斷。另外Webcollocate因為需要較長的網路處理時間，並且花時間閱讀一筆筆語料分析決定最適合的搭配詞，對使用者而言，需耗費較多時間查詢搭配詞，因此成效雖沒有陳列明確搭配詞欄位且資料處理快速的朗文佳，但仍比缺乏字義解釋及例句的牛津好。所以於本篇研究中，相較於牛津與Webcollocate，朗文反而較適合英文程度為中級的高中生使用。 在問卷部分，學生們表示平時學習單字及閱讀時皆有注意其搭配詞的運用，但遇到搭配詞問題時，只有30%表示會主動運用線上工具，在透過本次實驗，使用指定的輔助工具後，大多數學生普遍皆有正面回饋，表示如果未來有機會的話，願意透過此輔助工具繼續學習其他類型的搭配詞。希望藉本篇研究結果證實搭配詞參考工具之功效，促使進一步的相關搭配詞工具研究，幫助高中英文老師進行更有效的搭配詞教學，進而增進學生單字運用及聽說讀寫各項能力。ABSTRACT Recently, more and more studies have revealed that collocation learning can enhance not only the learners’ vocabulary bank but also their ability of word use, and thus improve their overall language skills in the long run. Besides the lectures and exercises on collocations given by English teachers in class, appropriate referencing tools can also be applied to helping students learn collocations. Online referencing tools such as general dictionaries, collocation dictionaries, and collocation retrieval tools are considered useful and reachable for learners. Therefore, it is necessary to do research on investigating which type of referencing tool is more effective and how it can be applied to improve students’ collocation learning. The present research is to investigate the effect of using online/electronic dictionary, collocation dictionary, and collocation retrieval tool on Taiwanese senior high school students’ collocation learning. The participants were 110 high school students (3 classes) with intermediate level. Each class was respectively assigned to use one collocation referencing tool—Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (LDCE), Oxford Collocation Dictionary of English (OCDE),and Webcollocate (WEBC)—to take a test containing 30 items of collocation blank-filling. The overall process of the experiment lasted 4 weeks: a pretest was conducted in the first week to check the students’ knowledge of collocation before the treatment. Three classes of participants were asked to take the test without any assistance of collocation referencing tools. In the second week, the participants could use the assigned collocation referencing tool to do a fifty-minute collocation task and a questionnaire on their perceptions of the assigned collocation referencing tool. In the fourth week, the posttest was conducted to check the effect of the referencing tools on the participants’ collocation ability. Results showed the LDCE group got the highest scores in the treatment task. As to the retention, the WEBC group performed the best in the posttest, though not significantly. The OCDE group did not score as well as the other two groups in any of the tests and the task. Six vital factors were found contributing to the success rate of the LDCE group. First, a clear layout, including the bright color and the boldface type for collocations, facilitated the searching process. Second, simple but essential explanations of the collocations seemed necessary for learners of intermediate proficiency level to decide the proper collocates. Third, adequate example sentences helped the participants make sure the right usage of collocations through the context of the example sentences. Fourth, the collocation box covering the most commonly-used collocations made it fast and convenient to search for the right answers. Fifth, the numbers of collocations provided in LDCE were not too large to overwhelm the participants. Only the most frequently used collocations were presented in LDCE. Last but not least, the LDCE’s speed of searching process was high so that the users could receive the answers in a limited of time. Despite the inferior performance of the task, the OCDE group still held a rather positive attitude toward the collocation dictionary. They regarded it as a useful and authoritative dictionary with rich content. In general, most of the participants in the three groups all expressed their willingness to learn different types of collocations with the assistance of the referencing tools.