| Summary: | 本研究旨在分析現行在台灣較為普遍使用的二種英文教科書—遠東版及龍騰版—的字彙量、字彙頻率、字根字首的出現頻率及類型，以協助教師更瞭解教科書中的字彙並進而協助學生習得他們所最需要的字彙。
本研究除了分析比對出現於教科書的所有字彙外，也就每課生字表中的生字作比較分析。在字彙量的統計方面，是先將含有文法語尾變化 (inflection) 的字併為一字及將含有副詞字尾 (-ly) 的副詞與形容詞並併為一字後，再作字數的計算。在字彙頻率的統計方面是以The General Service List (GSL) 和The University Word list (UWL) 作為參照比較的對象。字根字首的出現頻率是以含有同一字根字首的不同字彙為計算標準。
本研究的結果如下：(一)教科書的字彙量大約為5000字。(二)在GSL中的字彙，大約有88%出現在教科書中；而在UWL中的字彙，大約有47%出現在教科書中。(三)在遠東版的生字表中，有64%的字與GSL和UWL兩個字彙表有關連；而在龍騰版的生字表中，有51%的字與GSL和UWL兩個字彙表有關連。(四)以字彙量來看，有部分字根字首的學習是較為有利的。總而言之，本研究可促進教師對課本字彙的瞭解，並啟發教師作更有效能的字彙教學。
=== The purpose of this study is to provide a better understanding of the vocabulary occurring in the two sets of senior high school textbooks—Far East English Reader (FE) and Lungteng English Reader (LT). It is hoped that the results will help teachers know more about the quantity, frequency, and composition of the vocabulary in the textbooks and thus facilitate their vocabulary instruction.
In addition to all the vocabulary occurring in the textbooks, the vocabulary in the word-for-production lists is also analyzed in terms of quantity, frequency, and composition. The quantity of the vocabulary is computed after the lemmatization of the vocabulary; the frequency of it is explored through the comparison with the General Service List (GSL) and the University Word List (UWL); the composition of it is analyzed on the basis of affixation.
The results of this study are summarized as follows: (1) There are about 5000 words in each reader. (2) There are about 88% of the GSL words and 47% of the UWL words appearing in the textbooks. The GSL words generally have a higher frequency of occurrence in the textbooks than the UWL words. (3) About 64% of the words in FE word-for-production list are related to the GSL and the UWL and about 51% of the words in LT word-for-production list are related to the GSL and the UWL. (4) In terms of quantity, some of the affixes occurring in the whole set of textbooks or in the word-for-production lists are more easily to be acquired by learners than the others.
Based on the findings, this study has some pedagogical implications regarding how to teach vocabulary in terms of word family and multiple exposures to supplement the inadequacy of vocabulary in the textbooks.
|
|---|
