模态对第二语言词汇习得的影响
|
摘要
模态是指人类通过感官(如视觉、听觉等)与外部环境(如人、物件、动物等)之间的互动方式(顾曰国,2007)。作为影响学习者学习的重要因素之一,近年来对模态的研究受到广泛关注。国外有关研究主要结果并没有达成一致的认识,有学者发现了模态效应(modality effect),即信息以视听双模态同时呈现时,工作记忆的容量会得到有效增加,进而提升学习成效。也有学者发现了冗赘效应(redundancy effect),即如果将相同的信息以不同的方式同时呈现时,会发生冗赘效应,学习者可能同时处理所有信息,从而增加了认知负荷,削弱学习效果。
但是上述发现都是基于一般学习(general learning)的研究,能否同样适应于语言学习(language learning),目前尚未可知。语言学习与一般学习有共性,但也存在特殊性。在一般学习中,语言仅仅充当教学的手段或媒介。而语言之于语言学习,不但承载学习内容更是学习的目标。模态对语言学习的效果是否会因语言学习的特殊性而有不同的表现?本研究将以第二语言词汇习得为切入点对此问题进行探究,讨论不同的呈现模态对词汇习得和篇章理解的影响,试图发现:
1)不同的呈现模态是否会影响学生的词汇习得?
2)不同的呈现模态是否会影响学生对文章的理解?
3)篇章理解与词汇习得是否具有相关性?
本研究的研究对象为某大学英语专业二年级本科,探究听觉输入、视觉输入和视听输入对词汇习得产生的影响。我们将英语词汇量、英语水平和实验目标词等方面都具有可比性的被试随机分成三组,分别进行1)阅读短文;2)听短文;3)阅读并同时听短文。我们在实验处理结束后立即通过汉语回忆短文内容来考察被试文章的理解。考察被试对目标词的习得则通过改编后的Paribakht和Wesche(2001)的词汇知识量表(Vocabulary Knowledge Scale)实现。为捕捉实验给词汇习得带来的即时效应和延时效应,我们在实验结束后立即进行了即时后测,两周后进行了延时后测。控制组没有任何实验处理,仅参加了前测和两次后测。
实验结果发现:
1)即时后测中,篇章的不同呈现模态对被试的词汇习得产生了影响。三个实验组的受试在不同的输入模式下均发生了词汇习得,其中视觉输入组和视听输入组的词汇习得显著高于听觉输入组和控制组。听觉输入组习得优于控制组。视觉输入组习得优于视听输入组,但是没有达到显著性差异。延时后测中,视觉输入组显著优于听觉输入组。视听输入组优于听觉输入组,但两者之间无显著性差异。
2)篇章理解受到呈现模态的影响。视觉输入组的理解成绩显著优于另外两个实验组。视听输入组的成绩显著优于听觉输入组。
3)篇章理解与词汇习得在即时后测中呈现弱相关性;然而延时后测的分析显示篇章理解与词汇习得之间无相关性。
通过本研究可以看出篇章的呈现模态对词汇习得和语篇理解均产生影响,视觉输入在所选被试中促成的学习结果最明显;视听双模态的输入方式优于单纯的听觉输入。理解与习得呈现弱相关。
Modality refers to the information-processing channel that a learner uses to process the information (Mayer, 1997, pp. 1-2), such as audio and visual channels. Considerable amounts of studies related with modality have been carried out in general learning. Results from empirical studies are still rather inconclusive. Some researchers find modality effect, namely, enhanced learning occurs when information is presented through both visual and auditory channels. But some find redundancy effect. It occurs when presenting identical information through two channels and the elimination of one source of information is beneficial to learning. However, most of the existing studies took place in general learning and few have investigated how modality influences second language vocabulary learning, especially when comprehension is taken into account. As is clear, major differences exist between general learning and language learning. Language, for general learning, serves as the media and carrier of information. But for language learning, it is more of the object of learning. Therefore, the present study aims to investigate the effect of modality on second language vocabulary learning and comprehension. The research questions of the study are:
1) Will different presentation modalities influence second language vocabulary acquisition?
2) Will different presentation modalities influence second language comprehension?
3) Will comprehension correlate to learner’s vocabulary acquisition?
100 sophomore English majors were recruited for the exploration of the effect from different input modalities (visual, audio, visual-audio) on second language vocabulary learning. Those subjects who were comparable regarding their pretreatment vocabulary size, language proficiency and target words knowledge were randomly divided into four groups. The three experimental groups were presented with three types of treatment respectively: 1) passage reading (visual); 2) passage listening (audio); and
3) simultaneous passage reading and listening (visual and audio). After the treatment, subjects were asked to recall what they have remembered from reading and/or listening in Chinese. Then a modified Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (Paribakht & Wesche, 2001) was used as the immediate vocabulary posttest. Two weeks later, all the subjects took a delayed posttest. The control group only took part in the pretest and two posttests, receiving no treatment. We found that:
1) The three types of treatment all lead to vocabulary acquisition, but with different results. Specifically, subjects with visual presentation and visual plus audio presentation performed significantly better than the audio group and control group. The audio group outperformed the control group,but no significant difference occured. In the delayed posttest, the visual group outperformed the audio group significantly. Although no significant difference was found, The visual plus audio group performed better than the audio group. It also revealed that visual group developed more in vocabulary than the visual-audio group in the immediate as well as the delayed posttest.
2) Presentation modality had an influence on comprehension. It showed that students who read the passage performed significantly better than the other two experimental groups; in addition, students under visual plus audio modality outperformed audio group significantly.
3) Comprehension has a weak positive correlation with vocabulary learning in the immediate posttest and no significant correlation in the delayed posttest.
From the study, we can see that modality exerts influence on vocabulary learning as well as comprehension. Visual modality enjoys superiority over audio or visual plus audio modalities. And visual plus audio modality turns to be effective than audio-alone modality. In addition, it is revealed that comprehension has a weak correlation to acquisition.
但是上述发现都是基于一般学习(general learning)的研究,能否同样适应于语言学习(language learning),目前尚未可知。语言学习与一般学习有共性,但也存在特殊性。在一般学习中,语言仅仅充当教学的手段或媒介。而语言之于语言学习,不但承载学习内容更是学习的目标。模态对语言学习的效果是否会因语言学习的特殊性而有不同的表现?本研究将以第二语言词汇习得为切入点对此问题进行探究,讨论不同的呈现模态对词汇习得和篇章理解的影响,试图发现:
1)不同的呈现模态是否会影响学生的词汇习得?
2)不同的呈现模态是否会影响学生对文章的理解?
3)篇章理解与词汇习得是否具有相关性?
本研究的研究对象为某大学英语专业二年级本科,探究听觉输入、视觉输入和视听输入对词汇习得产生的影响。我们将英语词汇量、英语水平和实验目标词等方面都具有可比性的被试随机分成三组,分别进行1)阅读短文;2)听短文;3)阅读并同时听短文。我们在实验处理结束后立即通过汉语回忆短文内容来考察被试文章的理解。考察被试对目标词的习得则通过改编后的Paribakht和Wesche(2001)的词汇知识量表(Vocabulary Knowledge Scale)实现。为捕捉实验给词汇习得带来的即时效应和延时效应,我们在实验结束后立即进行了即时后测,两周后进行了延时后测。控制组没有任何实验处理,仅参加了前测和两次后测。
实验结果发现:
1)即时后测中,篇章的不同呈现模态对被试的词汇习得产生了影响。三个实验组的受试在不同的输入模式下均发生了词汇习得,其中视觉输入组和视听输入组的词汇习得显著高于听觉输入组和控制组。听觉输入组习得优于控制组。视觉输入组习得优于视听输入组,但是没有达到显著性差异。延时后测中,视觉输入组显著优于听觉输入组。视听输入组优于听觉输入组,但两者之间无显著性差异。
2)篇章理解受到呈现模态的影响。视觉输入组的理解成绩显著优于另外两个实验组。视听输入组的成绩显著优于听觉输入组。
3)篇章理解与词汇习得在即时后测中呈现弱相关性;然而延时后测的分析显示篇章理解与词汇习得之间无相关性。
通过本研究可以看出篇章的呈现模态对词汇习得和语篇理解均产生影响,视觉输入在所选被试中促成的学习结果最明显;视听双模态的输入方式优于单纯的听觉输入。理解与习得呈现弱相关。
Modality refers to the information-processing channel that a learner uses to process the information (Mayer, 1997, pp. 1-2), such as audio and visual channels. Considerable amounts of studies related with modality have been carried out in general learning. Results from empirical studies are still rather inconclusive. Some researchers find modality effect, namely, enhanced learning occurs when information is presented through both visual and auditory channels. But some find redundancy effect. It occurs when presenting identical information through two channels and the elimination of one source of information is beneficial to learning. However, most of the existing studies took place in general learning and few have investigated how modality influences second language vocabulary learning, especially when comprehension is taken into account. As is clear, major differences exist between general learning and language learning. Language, for general learning, serves as the media and carrier of information. But for language learning, it is more of the object of learning. Therefore, the present study aims to investigate the effect of modality on second language vocabulary learning and comprehension. The research questions of the study are:
1) Will different presentation modalities influence second language vocabulary acquisition?
2) Will different presentation modalities influence second language comprehension?
3) Will comprehension correlate to learner’s vocabulary acquisition?
100 sophomore English majors were recruited for the exploration of the effect from different input modalities (visual, audio, visual-audio) on second language vocabulary learning. Those subjects who were comparable regarding their pretreatment vocabulary size, language proficiency and target words knowledge were randomly divided into four groups. The three experimental groups were presented with three types of treatment respectively: 1) passage reading (visual); 2) passage listening (audio); and
3) simultaneous passage reading and listening (visual and audio). After the treatment, subjects were asked to recall what they have remembered from reading and/or listening in Chinese. Then a modified Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (Paribakht & Wesche, 2001) was used as the immediate vocabulary posttest. Two weeks later, all the subjects took a delayed posttest. The control group only took part in the pretest and two posttests, receiving no treatment. We found that:
1) The three types of treatment all lead to vocabulary acquisition, but with different results. Specifically, subjects with visual presentation and visual plus audio presentation performed significantly better than the audio group and control group. The audio group outperformed the control group,but no significant difference occured. In the delayed posttest, the visual group outperformed the audio group significantly. Although no significant difference was found, The visual plus audio group performed better than the audio group. It also revealed that visual group developed more in vocabulary than the visual-audio group in the immediate as well as the delayed posttest.
2) Presentation modality had an influence on comprehension. It showed that students who read the passage performed significantly better than the other two experimental groups; in addition, students under visual plus audio modality outperformed audio group significantly.
3) Comprehension has a weak positive correlation with vocabulary learning in the immediate posttest and no significant correlation in the delayed posttest.
From the study, we can see that modality exerts influence on vocabulary learning as well as comprehension. Visual modality enjoys superiority over audio or visual plus audio modalities. And visual plus audio modality turns to be effective than audio-alone modality. In addition, it is revealed that comprehension has a weak correlation to acquisition.
引文
Allport, D. A., Antonis, B., & Reynolds, P. (1972). On the division of attention: A disproof of the single channel hypothesis. Quarterly journal of experimental psychology, 24, 225-235.
Baddeley, A. (1992). Working memory, Science, 225, 556-559.
Barbe, W. B., & Milone, M. N. (1981). What we know about modality strengths. Educational Leadership, 38, 378-380.
Barbe, W. B., Swassing, R. H., & Milone, M. N. (1979). Teaching through modality strengths: Conceptions and practices. Columbus, OH: Zaner-Bloser.
Berhardt, E. B. (1986). Reading in the foreign language. In B. Wing (Eds.), Listening, reading and writing: Analysis and Application (pp. 93-115), Middlebury: Northeast Conference.
Berne, J. E. (1995). How does varying pre-listening activity affect second language listening comprehension? Hispania, 78, 316-329.
Borras, I., & Lafayette, R. C. (1994). Effects of multimedia courseware subtitling on the speaking performance of college students of French. Modern Language Journal, 78, 61-75.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8 (4), 293-332.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1996). Cognitive load while learning to use a computer program. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 151-170.
Coady, J. (1993). Research on ESL/EFL vocabulary. In T. Huckin, M. Haynes, & J. Coady (Eds.), Second Language reading and vocabulary leaning (pp. 3-23). Norwood, NJ: Ables.
Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., & Driscoll, D. M. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents in multimedia educational environments: Effects of agent properties, pictures features, and redundancy. Journal of educational psychology, 94, 428-434.
Craik, F., & Lockhart, R. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684.
Danks, J. (1980). Comprehension in listening and reading: Same or different? In Danks.J & Pezdek. K. (Eds.) Reading and understanding (pp. 1-39). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Dai, J. [戴劲], 2007,输入方式、输入次数与语篇理解.外语教学与研究(39): 285-292。
Day, R., Omura, C., & Hiramatsu, M. (1991). Incidental EFL vocabulary learning and reading. Reading in a foreign language, 7 (2), 541-551.
Diao, Y. L., & Sweller, J. (2007). Redundancy in foreign language reading comprehension instruction: Concurrent written and spoken presentations. Learning and Instruction, 17, 78-88.
Eller, R. G., Pappas, C. & Brown, E. (1988). The Lexical Development of Kindergarteners: Learning from written context. Journal of Reading Behavior, 20, 5-24.
Elley, W. B. (1989). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories. Reading research quarterly, 24 (2), 174-187.
Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1986). The role of comprehension in second-language learning. Applied Linguistics, 7, 257-274.
Forgus, R. H. (1966). Perception. New York, NY: Mcgraw-Hill.
Garza, T. J. (1991). Evaluating the use of captioned video materials in advanced foreign.
Gass, S. (1999). Incidental vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 319–333.
Ginns, P. (2005). Meta-analysis of the modality effect. Learning and Instruction, 15, 313-331. Hazenberg, S. & Hulstijin, J. (1996). Defining a minimal receptive second-language vocabulary for non-native university students: An empirical investigation. Applied linguistics, 17, 145-163.
Hirai, A. (1999). The relationship between listening and reading rates of Japanese EFL learners. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 367–384.
Huang, L. H. [黄林慧] ,2007,英语阅读中不同任务投入量对词汇附带习得的影响.硕士论文,桂林:广西师范大学。
Hulstijn, J. (1992). Retention of inferred and given word meanings: Experimens inincidental vocabulary learning. In P. Arnaud & H. Bejoint (Ed.), Vocabulary and applied linguistics (pp. 113-125). London: Macmillan.
Hulstijn, J., 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. Modern Language Journal, 80, 327–339.
Jacob, G., Dufon, P., & Fong, C. (1994). L1 and L2 vocabulary glosses in L2 reading passages : Their effectiveness for increasing comprehension and vocabualry knowledge. Journal of Research in Reading, 17, 19-28.
James. C. J. (1987). The teaching and testing of comprehension in foreign language learning. In D. W. Birckbichler (Eds.), Proficiency, policy, and professionalism in foreign language education (pp. 65-81). Lincolnwood: National Textbook.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 351-371.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2004). When redundant on-screen text in multimedia technical instruction can interfere with learning. Human Factors, 46, 567-581.
Kelly, P. (1991). Lexical ignorance: the main obstacle to listening comprehension with advanced foreign acquisition? Applied Linguistics, 19 (3), 357-377.
Kinsella, K. (2002). Understanding and empowering diverse learners in the ESL classroom. In J. M. Reid (Ed.), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL Classroom (pp. 158-169). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman.
Krashen, S. (1991). The input hypothesis: An update. In James, E. (Ed.) Georgetown university round table on language and linguistics (pp. 409-431). Washington, D. C: Georgetown University Press.
Laufer, B. (1986). Possible changes in attitude towards vocabulary acquisition research. International review of applied linguistics, 24 (2), 69-75.
Laufer, B. (1992). How much lexis is necessary for reading comprehension? In Arnaud, P., & H. Bejoint (Eds.). Vocabulary and Applied Linguistics. New York: Macmillan, 126-132.
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 J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language Vocabulary Acquisition (pp. 20-34). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, J. F. (1997). Non-native reading research and theory. In K. Bardovi-Harlig & B. Hartford (Eds.), Beyond methods: Components of second language teacher education (pp. 152-171). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Leung, C. B. (1992). Effects of Word-related Variables on Vocabulary Growth through Repeated Read-aloud Events. In C. K. Kinzer & D. J. Leu (Eds.), Literacy Research, Theory, and Practice: Views from Many Perspectives, pp. 231-239. Chicago: National Reading Conference.
Li, P. [李萍],2008,单项注释对听力附带词汇习得的效果研究.中国英语教学(3):35-41。
Lian, X. P. [连秀萍],2008,不同的输入方式对附带词汇习得的影响.未发表硕士论文,福建:福建师范大学。
Long, D. R. (1989). Second Language Listening comprehension: a schema-theoretic perspective, The Modern Language Journal, 73 (1), 32-44.
Lund, R. J. (1991). A comparison of second language listening and reading comprehension. The modern language journal, 75, 197-204.
Markham, P. L. (1999). Captained videotape and second-language listening word recognition. Foreign language annals, 32, 321-328.
Martin, M. (1980). Attention to words in different modalities: Four-channel presentation with physical and semantic selection, Acta Psychologica, 44, 99-115.
Mayer, R. E. & Anderson, R. B. (1991). Animations need narration: An experimental test of dual-coding hypothesis. Journal of educational psychology, 83, 484-490.
Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right question? Educational Psychologist, 32(1), 1-19.
Mayer, R. E., Heiser, J., & Lonn, S. (2001). Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of educational psychology, 93, 187-198.
Medina, S. L. (2003). Acquiring vocabulary through story-songs. MEXTESOL, 26, 9-73.
Mondria, J., & Wit-de Boer, M. (1991). The effects of contextual richness on theguessability and retention of words in a foreign language. Applied Linguistics, 12, 249–267.
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2002). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 156-163.
Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 317-334.
Nation, P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Nation, I. S. P. (2004). Teaching and learning vocabulary. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
O’Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., & Kupper, L. (1989). Listening comprehension strategies in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 10 (4), 418-437.
Paribakht, T. S., & Wesehe, M. (2001).Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition. In J. Coady and T. Huckin (Ed.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 174-200). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Penny, C. G. (1989). Modality effects and the structure of short-term verbal memory. Memory and Cognition, 17, 398-422.
Pitts, M., White. H. & Krashen. S. (1989). Acquiring second language vocabulary through reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 5 (2), 271-275.
Pulido, D. (2003). Modeling the role of second language proficiency and topic familiarity in second language incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading. Language Learning, 53 (2), 233-284.
Pulido, D. (2007). The relationship between text comprehension and second language incidental vocabulary acquisition: A matter of topic familiarity? Language Learning, 57, 155-199.
Qian, D. D. (1996). ESL vocabulary acquisition: Contextualizatiion and decontextualization. The Canadian modern language review, 53, 120-142.
Rollins, H. A., & Hendricks, R. (1980). Processing of words presented simultaneously to eye and ear. Human perception & performance, 6, 99-109.
Rossi-Le, L. (2002). Learning styles and strategies in adult immigrant ESL students. Learning Styles in the ESL/EFL Classroom. In J. M. Reid (Ed.), Learningstyles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp.108-117). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Rott, S. (1997). The effect of exposure frequency and reading comprehension on incidental vocabulary acquisition and retention through reading for learners of Germans as a foreign language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Urbana: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Saragi, T., Nation. P., & Meister. G. (1978). Vocabulary learning and reading. System, 6, 70-78.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied linguistics, 11, 129-158.
Stroller, F., & Grabe, W. (1993). Implications for L2 vocabulary acquisition and instruction from L1 vocabulary research. In T. Huckin, M. Haynes, & Coady (Eds.), Second language reading and vocabulary learning (pp. 29-45). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Swaffar, J., Arens, K., & Byrnes, H. (1991). Reading for meaning: An integrated approach to language learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285.
Tindall-Ford, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1997). When two sensory modes are better than one. Journal of experimental psychology: Applied, 3, 257-287.
Toya, M. (1992). Form of explanation in modification of listening input in L2 vocabulary learning. Unpublished M.A. in ESL thesis, Department of ESL, University of Hawaii, Honolulu.
Ur, P. (1984). Teaching listening comprehension. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vanpatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction. NY: Ables.
Vidal, K. (2003). Academic listening: A source of vocabulary acquisition? Applied linguistics, 24 (1), 56-89.
Wang, Y. [王艳] ,2002,输入方式与听力词汇习得—一项听力词汇习得实验的报告.国外外语教学(2),38-42。
Wolff, D. (1987). Some assumptions about second language text comprehension. Studies in second language acquisition, 9, 307-326.
Wong, W. (2001). Modality and attention to meaning and form in the input. SSLA, 23, 345-368.
Zahar, R., Cobb, T., & Spada, N. (2001). Acquiring vocabulary through reading: Effects of frequency and contextual richness. The Canadian modern language review. 54, 541-572.
Baddeley, A. (1992). Working memory, Science, 225, 556-559.
Barbe, W. B., & Milone, M. N. (1981). What we know about modality strengths. Educational Leadership, 38, 378-380.
Barbe, W. B., Swassing, R. H., & Milone, M. N. (1979). Teaching through modality strengths: Conceptions and practices. Columbus, OH: Zaner-Bloser.
Berhardt, E. B. (1986). Reading in the foreign language. In B. Wing (Eds.), Listening, reading and writing: Analysis and Application (pp. 93-115), Middlebury: Northeast Conference.
Berne, J. E. (1995). How does varying pre-listening activity affect second language listening comprehension? Hispania, 78, 316-329.
Borras, I., & Lafayette, R. C. (1994). Effects of multimedia courseware subtitling on the speaking performance of college students of French. Modern Language Journal, 78, 61-75.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8 (4), 293-332.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1996). Cognitive load while learning to use a computer program. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 151-170.
Coady, J. (1993). Research on ESL/EFL vocabulary. In T. Huckin, M. Haynes, & J. Coady (Eds.), Second Language reading and vocabulary leaning (pp. 3-23). Norwood, NJ: Ables.
Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., & Driscoll, D. M. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents in multimedia educational environments: Effects of agent properties, pictures features, and redundancy. Journal of educational psychology, 94, 428-434.
Craik, F., & Lockhart, R. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684.
Danks, J. (1980). Comprehension in listening and reading: Same or different? In Danks.J & Pezdek. K. (Eds.) Reading and understanding (pp. 1-39). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Dai, J. [戴劲], 2007,输入方式、输入次数与语篇理解.外语教学与研究(39): 285-292。
Day, R., Omura, C., & Hiramatsu, M. (1991). Incidental EFL vocabulary learning and reading. Reading in a foreign language, 7 (2), 541-551.
Diao, Y. L., & Sweller, J. (2007). Redundancy in foreign language reading comprehension instruction: Concurrent written and spoken presentations. Learning and Instruction, 17, 78-88.
Eller, R. G., Pappas, C. & Brown, E. (1988). The Lexical Development of Kindergarteners: Learning from written context. Journal of Reading Behavior, 20, 5-24.
Elley, W. B. (1989). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories. Reading research quarterly, 24 (2), 174-187.
Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1986). The role of comprehension in second-language learning. Applied Linguistics, 7, 257-274.
Forgus, R. H. (1966). Perception. New York, NY: Mcgraw-Hill.
Garza, T. J. (1991). Evaluating the use of captioned video materials in advanced foreign.
Gass, S. (1999). Incidental vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 319–333.
Ginns, P. (2005). Meta-analysis of the modality effect. Learning and Instruction, 15, 313-331. Hazenberg, S. & Hulstijin, J. (1996). Defining a minimal receptive second-language vocabulary for non-native university students: An empirical investigation. Applied linguistics, 17, 145-163.
Hirai, A. (1999). The relationship between listening and reading rates of Japanese EFL learners. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 367–384.
Huang, L. H. [黄林慧] ,2007,英语阅读中不同任务投入量对词汇附带习得的影响.硕士论文,桂林:广西师范大学。
Hulstijn, J. (1992). Retention of inferred and given word meanings: Experimens inincidental vocabulary learning. In P. Arnaud & H. Bejoint (Ed.), Vocabulary and applied linguistics (pp. 113-125). London: Macmillan.
Hulstijn, J., 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. Modern Language Journal, 80, 327–339.
Jacob, G., Dufon, P., & Fong, C. (1994). L1 and L2 vocabulary glosses in L2 reading passages : Their effectiveness for increasing comprehension and vocabualry knowledge. Journal of Research in Reading, 17, 19-28.
James. C. J. (1987). The teaching and testing of comprehension in foreign language learning. In D. W. Birckbichler (Eds.), Proficiency, policy, and professionalism in foreign language education (pp. 65-81). Lincolnwood: National Textbook.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 351-371.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2004). When redundant on-screen text in multimedia technical instruction can interfere with learning. Human Factors, 46, 567-581.
Kelly, P. (1991). Lexical ignorance: the main obstacle to listening comprehension with advanced foreign acquisition? Applied Linguistics, 19 (3), 357-377.
Kinsella, K. (2002). Understanding and empowering diverse learners in the ESL classroom. In J. M. Reid (Ed.), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL Classroom (pp. 158-169). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman.
Krashen, S. (1991). The input hypothesis: An update. In James, E. (Ed.) Georgetown university round table on language and linguistics (pp. 409-431). Washington, D. C: Georgetown University Press.
Laufer, B. (1986). Possible changes in attitude towards vocabulary acquisition research. International review of applied linguistics, 24 (2), 69-75.
Laufer, B. (1992). How much lexis is necessary for reading comprehension? In Arnaud, P., & H. Bejoint (Eds.). Vocabulary and Applied Linguistics. New York: Macmillan, 126-132.
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 J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language Vocabulary Acquisition (pp. 20-34). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, J. F. (1997). Non-native reading research and theory. In K. Bardovi-Harlig & B. Hartford (Eds.), Beyond methods: Components of second language teacher education (pp. 152-171). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Leung, C. B. (1992). Effects of Word-related Variables on Vocabulary Growth through Repeated Read-aloud Events. In C. K. Kinzer & D. J. Leu (Eds.), Literacy Research, Theory, and Practice: Views from Many Perspectives, pp. 231-239. Chicago: National Reading Conference.
Li, P. [李萍],2008,单项注释对听力附带词汇习得的效果研究.中国英语教学(3):35-41。
Lian, X. P. [连秀萍],2008,不同的输入方式对附带词汇习得的影响.未发表硕士论文,福建:福建师范大学。
Long, D. R. (1989). Second Language Listening comprehension: a schema-theoretic perspective, The Modern Language Journal, 73 (1), 32-44.
Lund, R. J. (1991). A comparison of second language listening and reading comprehension. The modern language journal, 75, 197-204.
Markham, P. L. (1999). Captained videotape and second-language listening word recognition. Foreign language annals, 32, 321-328.
Martin, M. (1980). Attention to words in different modalities: Four-channel presentation with physical and semantic selection, Acta Psychologica, 44, 99-115.
Mayer, R. E. & Anderson, R. B. (1991). Animations need narration: An experimental test of dual-coding hypothesis. Journal of educational psychology, 83, 484-490.
Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right question? Educational Psychologist, 32(1), 1-19.
Mayer, R. E., Heiser, J., & Lonn, S. (2001). Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of educational psychology, 93, 187-198.
Medina, S. L. (2003). Acquiring vocabulary through story-songs. MEXTESOL, 26, 9-73.
Mondria, J., & Wit-de Boer, M. (1991). The effects of contextual richness on theguessability and retention of words in a foreign language. Applied Linguistics, 12, 249–267.
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2002). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 156-163.
Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 317-334.
Nation, P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Nation, I. S. P. (2004). Teaching and learning vocabulary. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
O’Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., & Kupper, L. (1989). Listening comprehension strategies in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 10 (4), 418-437.
Paribakht, T. S., & Wesehe, M. (2001).Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition. In J. Coady and T. Huckin (Ed.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 174-200). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Penny, C. G. (1989). Modality effects and the structure of short-term verbal memory. Memory and Cognition, 17, 398-422.
Pitts, M., White. H. & Krashen. S. (1989). Acquiring second language vocabulary through reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 5 (2), 271-275.
Pulido, D. (2003). Modeling the role of second language proficiency and topic familiarity in second language incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading. Language Learning, 53 (2), 233-284.
Pulido, D. (2007). The relationship between text comprehension and second language incidental vocabulary acquisition: A matter of topic familiarity? Language Learning, 57, 155-199.
Qian, D. D. (1996). ESL vocabulary acquisition: Contextualizatiion and decontextualization. The Canadian modern language review, 53, 120-142.
Rollins, H. A., & Hendricks, R. (1980). Processing of words presented simultaneously to eye and ear. Human perception & performance, 6, 99-109.
Rossi-Le, L. (2002). Learning styles and strategies in adult immigrant ESL students. Learning Styles in the ESL/EFL Classroom. In J. M. Reid (Ed.), Learningstyles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp.108-117). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Rott, S. (1997). The effect of exposure frequency and reading comprehension on incidental vocabulary acquisition and retention through reading for learners of Germans as a foreign language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Urbana: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Saragi, T., Nation. P., & Meister. G. (1978). Vocabulary learning and reading. System, 6, 70-78.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied linguistics, 11, 129-158.
Stroller, F., & Grabe, W. (1993). Implications for L2 vocabulary acquisition and instruction from L1 vocabulary research. In T. Huckin, M. Haynes, & Coady (Eds.), Second language reading and vocabulary learning (pp. 29-45). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Swaffar, J., Arens, K., & Byrnes, H. (1991). Reading for meaning: An integrated approach to language learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285.
Tindall-Ford, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1997). When two sensory modes are better than one. Journal of experimental psychology: Applied, 3, 257-287.
Toya, M. (1992). Form of explanation in modification of listening input in L2 vocabulary learning. Unpublished M.A. in ESL thesis, Department of ESL, University of Hawaii, Honolulu.
Ur, P. (1984). Teaching listening comprehension. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vanpatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction. NY: Ables.
Vidal, K. (2003). Academic listening: A source of vocabulary acquisition? Applied linguistics, 24 (1), 56-89.
Wang, Y. [王艳] ,2002,输入方式与听力词汇习得—一项听力词汇习得实验的报告.国外外语教学(2),38-42。
Wolff, D. (1987). Some assumptions about second language text comprehension. Studies in second language acquisition, 9, 307-326.
Wong, W. (2001). Modality and attention to meaning and form in the input. SSLA, 23, 345-368.
Zahar, R., Cobb, T., & Spada, N. (2001). Acquiring vocabulary through reading: Effects of frequency and contextual richness. The Canadian modern language review. 54, 541-572.