臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：線上單字查詢作為台灣大學生英文寫作工具之研究
作者：賴淑麗
作者(外文)：Shu-li Lai
校院名稱：國立臺灣師範大學
系所名稱：英語學系
指導教授：陳浩然
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2010
主題關鍵詞：語料檢索工具；搭配詞檢索系統；查詢行為；刺激回憶訪談；外語寫作；corpus tools；collocation retrieval system；consultation behavior；stimulus recall interview；EFL writing
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:38
許多的研究已經證實語料檢索工具（corpus tools）有助於外語寫作。然而，學生們在寫作過程中，會如何與這些工具互動，所知並不多。為了更了解這些過程，本研究探討台灣大學生使用線上語料檢索工具和字典時的行為，以及他們對這些寫作工具的看法。
有十四位非英語系大學生參與為期十七週的研究。本研究提供學生四種線上語料檢索系統，包含單語、雙語「單字檢索系統」（concordancer）以及單語、雙語「搭配詞檢索系統」（collocation retrieval system），同時也給予線上字典供學生寫作時使用。最初的兩週用來幫助學生熟悉這四個語料庫檢索工具，並提供實際上機練習。接下來的三個月，學生在課堂上寫三次計時寫作。所有的寫作過程，都由螢幕錄影軟體錄下。學生並在每次的寫作活動後，接受一對一的刺激回憶訪談（stimulus recall interviews）和半開放性訪談（semi-structured interviews）。四十二次的回憶訪談是本研究最主要的資料分析來源。其他資料來源包括寫作過程的影像檔，學生的工具使用日誌，作文，及研究者的觀察筆記。
本研究發現，學生最依賴雙語字典。在所提供的四個語料檢索工具中，學生認為雙語單字檢索系統幫助最大。從學生的查詢行為中發現，語料檢索工具和雙語字典的功能不同。當需要查詢字義（word meaning）和字的結構（word form）時，學生偏好雙語字典。當尋找有關字的用法（word usage），搭配詞（collocation information），或文法規則（grammar pattern）時，學生選用語料庫檢索工具的頻率高於雙語字典。此外，當字典提供的字義不清楚時，要查詢的中文是有關台灣當地的人、事、物（local Taiwanese referents）或是字串（word strings）時，以及當學生心中已經有想法，只是要做確認時，學生也會使用語料庫檢索工具查詢字義和字的結構。
研究結果也顯示，學生的語料檢索行為有其策略性，而且是目標導向的。學生在工具的選擇與使用、語料的分析、歸納、以及應用，都使用了策略。此外，學生們均認為作為寫作工具，這些語料檢索工具與傳統雙語字典有互補作用。語料庫檢索工具提供大量的例句，補足了雙語字典這方面的缺失。學生也提到單語檢索工具凸顯關鍵字的表現方式，讓他們有意外的學習（incidental learning）。有了這些工具的幫助，學生們對英文寫作變的比較有信心。
本研究同時也發現學生檢索語料時所遇到的困難，包括無法從索引句子中看出需要的資訊，做了錯誤的分析及歸納，以及錯誤的規則套用。資料顯示，這些問題多源自於語言能力的不足或受到先備知識（prior knowledge）的誤導。
透過實地了解學生的語料檢索行為，以及字典的使用，本研究提供了豐富的實證資料，幫助了解外語寫作者在寫作過程如何與這些工具互動，以及這些工具對外語寫作提供的協助為何。這些發現進而提供了語言教學以及未來相關領域研究的方向。
Many studies have confirmed the benefits of using corpus tools in EFL writing but little is known concerning how EFL writers interact with these tools during the writing process. To better understand this question, this study aimed to investigate Taiwanese college students’ consultation behavior while using the corpus tools and the dictionaries during the writing process, and their perception of these tools as writing references.
Fourteen non-English majors participated in this 17-week study. Four online corpus tools, including monolingual and bilingual concordancers and collocation retrieval systems, were provided along with two online dictionaries. The study began with two tool-training sections. In the following three months, the students performed three timed writing tasks online and received individual stimulus recall interviews after each writing task. The 42 recall interviews served as the main source of data for this study. Other data included video clips of the writing process, student tool logs, student writing samples, and the researcher’s notes.
The results showed that the bilingual dictionary was the most relied-upon tool overall, and students considered the bilingual concordancer as the most helpful corpus tool. As their behaviors indicated, the students used corpus tools and the bilingual dictionary for different purposes. They tended to use a bilingual dictionary when information on word form and word meaning was needed. When searching for information related to word usage, collocation information, and grammar patterns, they chose corpus tools more often than the bilingual dictionary. Furthermore, they turned to corpus tools when the Yahoo dictionary failed to provide clear word meanings, when they needed English equivalents related to local Taiwanese referents or for a string of keywords, and when they needed to confirm an intuition regarding word form and word meaning.
This study also found that the students’ use of corpus tools was goal-oriented and strategic, as could be seen in the process of selecting tools, analyzing concordance lines, generating rules, and transferring rules to the writing context. In general, the students perceived the corpus tools as a complement to a conventional bilingual dictionary. These corpus tools provided rich example sentences that compensated for the lack of such information in bilingual dictionaries. In addition, the students reported incidental learning as a consequence of the salient presentation of word patterns provided by the monolingual concordancer. With the support of corpus tools, the students also reported that they became more confident in their English writing.
Various difficulties were also identified, such as failing to see word patterns in the concordance lines, generating incorrect rules, and making incorrect transfers. These problems were caused mostly by the students’ limited language proficiency and inappropriate prior knowledge of the foreign language.
Overall, by examining the students’ consultation behavior in the three writing tasks, this study provides rich on-site data that helps to better understand how EFL writers interact with corpus tools and how these tools contribute to EFL writing. The findings also provide implications for instruction and direction to go for future research in relevant fields.
Atkins, B. T., & Varantola, K. (1997). Monitoring dictionary use. International Journal of Lexicography, 10, 1-45.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G.., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.
Barlow, M. (1996). Corpora for theory and practice. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 1(1), 1-37.new window
Bernardini, S. (2002). Exploring new directions for discovery learning. In B. Kettemann & G. Marko (eds.), Teaching and learning by doing corpus analysis (pp. 165-182). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Bernardini, S. (2004). Corpora in the classroom. In J. Sinclair (ed.), How to use corpora in language teaching (pp. 15-36). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Biber, D. & Conrad, S. (2001). Quantitative corpus-based research: Much more than bean counting. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 331-336.
Biber, D. Conrad, S. & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Carter, R. (1998). Vocabulary: Applied linguistic perspectives (2ed). New York: Routledge.
Chambers, A. (2005). Integrating corpus consultation in language studies. Language Learning & Technology, 9(2), 111-125.
Chan, T. P., & Liou, H. C. (2005). Effects of web-based concordancing instruction on EFL students’learning of verb-noun collocations. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18, 231-250.
Chapelle, C. A. (1998). Multimedia CALL: Lessons to be learned from research on instructed SLA. Language Learning & Technology, 2(1), 22-34.new window
Chapelle, C. A. (2009). The relationship between second language acquisition theory and computer assisted language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 93,741-753.
Cheng, W., Warren, M., & Xun-feng, Xu. (2003). The language learner as language researcher: Putting corpus linguistics on the timetable. System, 31, 173-186.
Coady, J. (1993). Research on ESL/EFL vocabulary acquisition: Putting it in context. In T. Huckin, M. Haynes, & J. Coady (Eds.). Second language reading and vocabulary learning (pp. 3-23). Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corp.
Christianson, K. (1997). Dictionary use by EFL writers: What really happens? Journal of Second Language Writing, 6, 23-43.
Chujo, K., Utiyama, M., & Miura, S. (2006). Using a Japanese-English parallel corpus for teaching English vocabulary to beginning-level students. English Corpus Studies, 13, 153-172. Retrieved January 4, 2007, from http://muse.doshisha.ac.jp/JAECS/ECS/ECS13/chujo-utiyama-miura.pdf
Chujo, K., Utiyama, M., & Nishigaki, C. (2005). A Japanese-English parallel corpus and CALL: A powerful tool for vocabulary learning. In the Proceedings of FLEAT 5 (pp. 16-19). Utah: Brigham Young University. Retrieved January 4, 2007, from http://fleat5.byu.edu/_files/95Chujo.pdf
Cobb, T. (1997). Is there measurable learning from hands-on concordancing? System, 25(3), 301-315.
Cobb, T. (1999). Breadth and depth of lexical acquisition with hands-on concordancing. Computer Assisted Language Learning. 12, 345-360.
Conrad, S. (2000). Will corpus linguistics revolutionize grammar teaching in the 21st century? TESOL Quarterly, 34, 548-560.
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 32, 213-238.
Daughty, C., & Williams, J. (Eds). (1999). Focus on form in second language acquisition. New York: CUP.
Diab, T. A., & Hamdan, J. M. (1999). Interacting with words and dictionaries: The case of Jordanian EFL learners. System, 12, 281-305.
Dornyei, Z. (2005). Language learning strategies and student self-regulation. In Z. Dornyei. The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition (pp.162-196). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ellis, N. (1997). Vocabulary acquisition: Word structure, collocation, word-class, and meaning. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 122-139). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, R. (1999). The study of second language acuquisition (6ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Engber, C. A. (1995). The relationship of lexical proficiency to the quality of ESL composition. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4, 139-155.
Faerch, C., Hasstrup, K., & Phillipson, R. (1984). Learner language and language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Fan, M., & Xun-feng, Xu. (2002). An evaluation of an online bilingual corpus of the self-learning of legal English. System, 30, 47-63.
Farghal, M., & Obiedat, H. (1995). Collocations: A neglected variable in EFL. IRAL, 33, 315-331.
Ferris, D., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), 161-184.
Fischer, R. A. (1979). The inductive-deductive controversy revisited. The Modern Language Journal, 63, 98-105.
Flowerdew, J. (1996). Concordancing in language learning. In M. C. Pennington (ed.). The Power of CALL (pp. 97-115). Houston: Athelstan Publications
Flowerdew, J. (2002). Ethnographically inspired approaches to the study of academic discourse. In J. Flowerdew (ed.). Academic Discourse. (pp. 235-254). London: Pearson.
Frankenberg-Garcia, A. (2005a). Pedagogical uses of monolingual and parallel concordances. ELT Journal, 59, 189-198.
Frankenberg-Garcia, A. (2005b). A peek into what today’s language learners as researchers actually do. International Journal of Lexicography, 18 (3), 335-355.
Gabel, S. (2001). Over-indulgence and under-representation in interlanguage: Reflections on the utilization of concordancers in self-directed foreign language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 14, 269-288.
Gaskell, D. & Cobb, T. (2004). Can learners use concordance feedback for writing errors? System, 32, 301-319.
Gass, S. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gass, S., & Macky, A. (2000). Stimulated recall methodology in second language research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2007). Data elicitation for second and foreign language research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Granger, S. (2003). The international corpus of learner English: A new resource for foreign language learning and teaching and second language acquisition research. TESOL Quarterly, 37, 538-546.
Granger, S., & Tribble, C. (1998). Learner corpus data in the foreign language classroom: Form-focused instruction and data-driven instruction and data-driven learning. In S. Granger, Learner English on computer (pp. 199-209). New York: Longman.
Hales, T. (1997). Exploring data-driven language awareness. ELT Journal, 51, 217-223.
Harvey, K., & Yuill, D. (1997). A study of the use of a monolingual pedagogical dictionary by learners of English in writing. Applied linguistics, 18, 253-278.
Hill, J. (2001). Revising priorities: from grammatical failure to collocational success. In M. Lewis (Ed.), Teaching collocation: Further development in the lexical approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.
Horst, M., Cobb, T., & Nicolae, I. (2005). Expanding academic vocabulary with an interactive online database. Language Learning & Technology, 9(2), 90-110.
Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge: CUP.
Hunston, S., & Francis G. (2000). Pattern grammar: A corpus-driven approach to the lexical grammar of English. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. New York: CUP.
Johns, T. (1991). From printout to handout: Grammar and vocabulary learning in the context of data driven learning. English Language Research Journal, 4, 27-45.
Johns, T. (2002). Data-driven learning: The perpetual challenge. In B. Kettemann & G. Marko (eds). Teaching and learning by doing corpus analysis: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Teaching and Language Corpora, Graz, 19-24, July, 2000 (pp. 107-117). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Johansson, S. (2009). Some thoughts on corpora and second-language acquisition. In K. Aijmer (ed), Corpora and language teaching (pp. 33-44). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jian, J. Y., Chang, Y. C., & Change, J. S. (2004). Tango: Bilingual collocational concordancer. Proceedings of 42nd Annual Meeting of the Associational Linguistics (pp.166-169). Spain, Association for Computational Linguistics. Retrieved Feb. 8, 2007, from http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/P/P04/P04-3019.pdf
Kaur, J., & Hegelheimer, V. (2005). ESL students’ use of concordance in the transfer of academic word knowledge: An exploratory study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18, 287-310.
Kennedy, C., & Miceli, T. (2001). An evaluation of intermediate students’ approaches to corpus investigation. Language Learning & Technology, 5(3), 77-90.
Kennedy, C., & Miceli, T. (2010). Corpus-assisted creative writing: Introducing intermediate Italian learners to a corpus as a reference resource. Language Learning & Technology, 14(1), 28-44.new window
Kern, R. (2006). Perspectives on technology in learning and teaching languages. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 183-210.
Koo, K. (2006). Effects of using corpora and online reference tools on foreign language writing: A study of Korean learners of English as a second language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa.
Lai, C., & Zhao, Y. (2006). Noticing and text-based chat. Language Learning & Technology, 10(3), 102-120.
Laufer, B., & Hadar, L. (1997). Assessing the effectiveness of monolingual, bilingual, and “bilingualised” dictionaries in the comprehension and production of new words. The Modern Language Journal, 81, 189-196.
Laufer, B., & Hill, M. (2000). What lexical information do L2 learners select in a call dictionary and how does it affect word retention? Language Learning and Technology, 3(2), 58-76.
Laufer, B., & Levitzky-Aviad, T. (2006). Examining the effectiveness of ‘Bilingual Dictionary Plus”: A dictionary for production in a foreign language. International Journal of Lexicography, 19, 135-155.
Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 16, 307-322.
Laufer, B., & Shmueli, K (1997). Memorizing new words: Does teaching have anything to do with it? RELC Journal, 28, 89-108.
Lee, C. H., Lin, S. Y., & Liou, H. C. (2006). Learning product and process of how English learners as researchers actually produce with scaffolds of three web-based referencing tools: research with mixed methods. Proceedings of 2006 International Conference and Workshop on TEFL and Applied Linguistics (pp. 204-212). Taipei: Crane.
Lee, S. H. (2003). ESL learners’ vocabulary use in writing and the effects of explicit vocabulary instruction. System,31, 537-561.
Lee, S. H., & Muncie, J. (2006). From receptive to productive: Improving ESL learners’ use of vocabulary in postreading composition task. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 295-320.
Lewis, M. (2001). There is nothing as practical as a good theory. In M. Lewis (Ed.), Teaching collocation: Further developments in the lexical approach (pp. 10-27), London: LTP.
Lewis, M. (2002). The lexical approach: The state of ELT and a way forward. Boston: Thomson & Heinle.
Li, Y. C. , & Yeh, Y. L. (2005). Online learning units on underused adjectives for college EFL students. Proceedings of the 14th Int’l Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 157-165), 2. Taipei: Crane.
Lin, M. C., & Liou, H. C. (2009). Expansion of EFL Academic Vocabulary for Writing via Web-Enhanced Lexical Instruction. English Teaching & Learning,33(2), 95-146.
Liou, H. C., Chang, J., Chen, H. J., Lin, C. C., Liaw, M. L., Gao, Z. M., Jang, J. S., Yeh, Y., Chuang, T. C., & You, G. N.(2006) Corpora processing and computational scaffolding for an innovative web-based English learning environment: The CANDLE project, CALICO Journal, 24(1), 77-95.new window
Liou, H. C., Chang, J., Yeh, Y., Liaw, M., Lin, C., Chen, H., You, G., Chuang, C., & Gao, Z. (2003). Using corpora and computational scaffolding to construct an advanced digital English learning environment: The CANDALE project. Proceedings of APAMALL 2003 and ROCMELIA 2003 (pp. 62-77). Taipei, Taiwan: The Crane Publishing Co.
Liou, H. C., & Lee, C. H. (2006). Another peek into what today’s English learners as researchers actually do in production with the scaffolding of three web-based referencing tools. Paper presented at CALICO 2006 annual symposium: Online learning, come ride the wave, University of Hawaii at Manoa, May 16-20.
Liu, C. P. (1999). An analysis of collocational errors in EFL writings. Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 483-494). Taipei, Taiwan: The Crane Publishing Co.
Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Long, M., & Robinson, P. (1999). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C.Doughty & J. Williams (Eds), Focus on form in second language acquisition(pp. 15-41). New York, CUP.
Martin-Rutledge, V. (1997). Use of examples in the bilingual dictionary: An empirical study. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Ottawa, Canada.
McCarthy, M. (1996). Vocabulary (5ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Meunier, F. (1998). Computer tools for the analysis of learner corpora. In S. Granger, Learner English on computer (pp. 19-37). New York: Longman.
Michael, L. (2001). Materials and resources for teaching collocation. In M. Lewis (ed.), Teaching collocation: Further developments in the lexical approach (pp. 186-204). Hove: Language Teaching Publications.
Moseley, D. S. (2003). Vocabulary instruction and its effects on writing quality. Unpublished master’s thesis. Louisiana Tech University.
Nation, P. (2003). Learning vocabulary in another language (4ed.). New York: CUP.
Nesi, H., & Haill, R. (2002). A study of dictionary use by international students at a British university. International Journal of Lexicography, 15, 277-305.
Nesi, H., & Meara, P. (1994). Patterns of misinterpretation in the productive use of EFL dictionary definitions. System, 22, 1-15.
Nesselhauf, N. (2003). The use of collocations by advanced learners of English and some applications for teaching. Applied Linguistics, 24, 223-242.
Nesselhauf, N., & Tschichold, C. (2002). Collocation in CALL: An investigation of vocabulary-building software for EFL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15, 251-279.
O’Keeffe, A., McCarthy, M., & Carter, R. (2007). From corpus to classroom: Language use and language teaching. Cambridge: CUP.
Olsen, S. (1999). Errors and compensatory strategies: A study of grammar and vocabulary in texts written by Norwegian learners of English. System, 27, 191-205.
O’Sullivan, I. (2007). Enhancing a process-oriented approach to literacy and language learning: The role of corpus consultation literacy. ReCALL, 19, 269-286.
O’Sullivan, I., & Chambers, A. (2006). Learners’ writing skills in French: Corpus consultation and learner evaluation. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 49-68.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House.
Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 139-158.
Riding, R., & Rayner, S. (1998). Cognitive styles and learning strategies: Understanding style differences in learning and behaviour. London: David Fulton Publishers.
Rundell, M. (1998). Recent trends in English pedagogical lexicography. International Journal of Lexicography, 11, 315-342.
Santos, T. (1988). Professors’ reactions to the academic writing of nonnative-speaking students. TESOL Quarterly, 22, 69–88.
Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge.
Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In R.W. Schmidt (ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning and teaching (pp. 1-62). Honolulu, Ha:University of Honolulu.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P.J. Robinson (ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Scholfield, P. (1997). Vocabulary reference works in foreign language learning. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp.279-302). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shei, C. C., & Pain, H. (2000). An ES writer’s collocational aid. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13(2), 167-182.
Sokmen, A. J. (1997). Current trends in teaching second language vocabulary. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy, (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 237-257). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
St. John, E. (2001). A case for using a parallel corpus and concordancer for beginners of a foreign language. Language Learning & Technology, 5(3), 185-203.
Steven, V. (1995). Concordancing with language learners: Why? When? What? CAELL Journal, 6(2), 2-10. Retrieved January, 8, 2007 http://www.eisu.bham.ac.uk/johnstf/stevens.htm
Sun, Y. C. (1999). Web-based concordancing: Challenges and opportunities for English language teaching. Proceedings for the English International Symposium on English Teaching, 517-524. Taipei: Crane.
Sun, Y. C. (2003). Learning process, strategies and web-based concordancers: A case study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34, 601-613.
Sun, Y. C., & Wang, L. Y. (2003). Concordancers in the EFL classroom: Cognitive approaches and collocation difficulty. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16, 83-94.
Thurstun, J., & Candlin, C. N. (1998). Concordancing and the teaching of vocabulary of academic English. English for Specific Purposes, 17, 267-280.
Tribble, C. (2002). Corpora and corpus analysis: New windows on academic writing. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.). Academic discourse (pp.131-149), Harlow, UK: Longman.
Varantolo, K. (1998). Translators and their use of dictionaries: User needs and user habits. In S. Atkins (Ed.). Using dictionaries: Studies of dictionary use by language learners and translators (pp.179-192), Tubingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Varley, S. (2009). I’ll just look that up in the concordancer: Integrating corpus consultation into the language learning environment. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22, 133-152.
Vinther, J. (2005). Cognitive processes at work in CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18, 251-271.
Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S, & Kim, H. Y. (1998). Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy & complexity. Honolulu: University of Hawaii.
Yoon, H., & Hirvela, A. (2004). ESL student attitudes toward corpus use in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 257-283.

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：967（臺灣：921，外國：46） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2602775 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：68409990
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上