• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Focus—on—Forms, Focus—on—Form, and Their Efficiency in Vocabulary Teaching and Learning

    2014-01-13 04:48阿娜
    教育界·上旬 2014年1期
    關(guān)鍵詞:計劃性中國大學(xué)構(gòu)架

    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

    猜你喜歡
    計劃性中國大學(xué)構(gòu)架
    淺析農(nóng)村小學(xué)語文家庭作業(yè)布置的策略和方法
    老年骨質(zhì)疏松性髖部骨折57例的護理體會構(gòu)架
    銀幕內(nèi)外中的“慕課”
    高職高專園林規(guī)劃設(shè)計課程構(gòu)架的探討
    變電技改大修項目儲備工作的管理探索
    2015年中國大學(xué)最佳專業(yè)排行榜揭曉
    榜單
    一種基于知識管理的政府知識構(gòu)架
    要有計劃性
    黔南| 阜宁县| 湖北省| 潼关县| 武邑县| 外汇| 桐柏县| 邳州市| 常熟市| 安塞县| 东乌珠穆沁旗| 合阳县| 平乐县| 理塘县| 遂宁市| 福海县| 岳普湖县| 大城县| 保德县| 靖江市| 福建省| 尚志市| 武隆县| 乐陵市| 张家界市| 绵阳市| 苍溪县| 石门县| 司法| 瑞丽市| 通海县| 汉阴县| 麻栗坡县| 衡东县| 杭锦旗| 阳城县| 马边| 雷山县| 常山县| 谢通门县| 达孜县|