阿娜

【Abstract】Vocabulary is generally recognized as most critical in foreign language learning. Students who get up early in the morning to read out loud word lists have been a popular and encouraging spot on campus. Although there is abundant research about vocabulary.This paper will review the development of FonF and FonFS in the field of ESL， and their relationship with vocabulary learning， exploring the possibilities of comparing FonF and FonFS in terms of their efficiency in vocabulary teaching and learning.

【Key Words】FonF and FonFS； Vocabulary； Teaching and Learning

Introduction

In the early days of second language teaching when linguistic elements such as grammar and sentence structure were taken as priority in class， vocabulary acquisition was just a simple process of remembering words and meanings. Mastery of accurate grammar and knowledge of large amount of vocabulary were the criteria for high second language level.

Recent research shows that in order to achieve unassisted comprehension， an 8，000 to 9，000 word-family vocabulary is needed for comprehension of written text and a vocabulary of 6，000 to 7，000 for spoken text. （Nation， 2006） Therefore， finding an efficient way of learning vocabulary has become not only an essential step for foreign language learners to take， but also a popular researching field that attracts many scholars.

From FonFS to FonF

In the early stage of 1960s， structural linguistic theory was dominating ESL class. Second language learning was seen as a process of mastering a grammar system. Second language learning process was perceived as one of learning each rule of grammar as isolated projects and to make them into comprehensive knowledge for communicative needs. Students were mainly tested on grammar rules and vocabulary rules in exams. This traditional approach was now known as Focus-on-Forms （FonFS）.

Communicative class started to take over ESL classes from FonFS in 1970s， followed by an anti-grammar movement in the 1980s. Stephen Krashen was one of the leading characters in the movement. Since meaning is what is focused on in communicative classes， this approach of ESL is known as Focus-on-Meaning （FonM）.

FonFS and FonF Applied in Vocabulary Teaching and Learning

Students may need to learn ten new words in order to understand a piece of news or to perform a conversation. In this case， looking these words up in a dictionary， paying attention to marginal glosses， or negotiating the meanings with people involved in the conversation will be Focus on Form approach， because they need to understand these ten words to complete the communication. However， the same ten words can also be organized on a decontextualized word list with meanings in students first language after each of them. Students might be required to memorize the words and their meanings and do some exercises afterwards. Such exercises may be matching words in one column to their definitions in another， or filling up a blank in a sentence by choosing the word from A， B， C， D so that the sentence can make best sense. In this case， the ten words are not involved in communication—they are just objects of study， therefore， it is Focus on Forms approach.endprint

Conclusion

This paper has reviewed relevant studies on Focused on form and Focused on forms， reaching a clear understanding of the fundamental difference between the two approaches. Then the author explored the necessity and possibilities of their application in vocabulary teaching and learning in ESL classroom. Since there are few comparative studies on the efficiency of the two approaches in terms of vocabulary teaching and learning in Chinas context， the author of this paper calls for future researches to fill in this gap. In this regard， this paper has tried to lay the theoretical ground for future researches of this area.

【References】

[1]Ellis， R.， Basturkmen， H， Loewen， S， Doing Focus-on-Form [J]. System， 2002 （30）： 419-432.

[2]Laufer， B. （2003）. Vocabulary acquisition in a second language： Do learners really acquire most vocabulary by reading？ Canadian Modern Language Review， 59， 565-585

[3]Laufer， Batia （2006）.Comparing Focus on Form and Focus on FormS in Second-Language Vocabulary Learning. The Canadian Modern Language Review， 63（1）， 150.

[4]黃若妤. “講授型外語學(xué)習(xí)”語境下的“計劃性詞匯教學(xué)”（ PL I）模式構(gòu)架. 外語與外語教學(xué)，2008， 229（4）.

[5]張香存. 中國大學(xué)英語教師對“Focus-on-Forms”和“Focus-on-Form”教學(xué)方法的認(rèn)知. 外語教學(xué)， 2005， 26（3）：65-68.endprint