字詞搭配教學對台灣高職學生英語閱讀能力發展之效益研究

中文摘要

一、研究動機

近年來關於搭配詞(collocation)的研究逐漸受到重視，但多數研究將重心放
在學生字詞搭配的錯誤分析上，較少學者探討字詞搭配的實際教學效果。本文旨
在研究台灣高職學生的搭配詞能力及其閱讀能力之間的關係，同時並檢驗字詞搭
配教學應用於高職英語課程的實際效益。
高職英語教學向來不如國、高中英語般受到重視，然而高職學生所學之專業
英語課程(ESP)例如：商用英語、科技英語、餐旅英語等內容卻充滿搭配詞之類
的制式用語(即英文中的 collocations or formulaic language)。缺乏搭配詞的觀念，
學生的英文能力將難以提昇。再者，高職學生普遍英文能力較差、學習意願較低，
字詞搭配教學能否取代傳統字彙分析教學進而提昇學生的英語閱讀能力值得一
探究竟。

二、理論架構

搭配詞並非新觀念，Faith (1957) 將它定義為「經常出現在一起的字」或「字

的朋友」 。英國學者 Lewis (1993, 2000) 提出「字法教學」 （即 The Lexical Approach）
的主張，認為搭配詞教學可以取代傳統二分法的字彙與文法教學。他發現語言當
中充滿各種有意義的字串(meaningful chunks)，例如：成語、搭配詞和日常用語
（如：How are you? Good morning. 等） 。教學時，教師不應刻意分析解釋字串當
中各個單字的意思，相反的，應該教該字串完整的意義與用法。他強調「注意」
(noticing) 是學習搭配詞的先決條件，教師應引導學生注意文章中的搭配詞並加
以記錄、背誦。
Lewis 的搭配詞教學理論受到許多語言學家的支持，例如：McCarthy &
O’Dell (2005), Nattinger & DeCarrico (1992); Nesselhauf (2003), Nation (2001)等
人，學者們認為，搭配詞是一種預先組好的字串(prefabricate chunks)，學習這樣
的字串可以增加字彙量、增進閱讀速度與流暢度，且搭配詞知識愈豐富，閱讀時
愈能正確的預測前後文，進而提昇閱讀理解力。然而，如何教搭配詞？其實際教
學效果又如何？這些問題值得更深入的探討。
為了研究搭配詞教學如何運用於高職英語課程，以及此教學法是否真能提昇
高職學生的英語閱讀能力，本文依據語言教學課程設計大師 van Lier (1996) 所提
出的 3A 教學架構：即語言意識、語言自主和語言真實性（awareness, autonomy,
authenticity）設計了一連串的教學活動。例如在語言意識方面，有畫線、圈詞、
填空等技巧以引起學生留意文章中出現的搭配詞。在語言自主方面：學生必須學

i
會如何使用搭配辭典以及線上檢索軟體（concordancing）工具以主動蒐集並學習
正確的搭配詞用法。而在語言真實性方面：教師透過配對、翻譯、訂正錯誤搭配
詞等活動引導學生使用符合真實情境的搭配詞。
簡言之，本研究主要建立在 Lewis 的搭配詞教學理論以及 van Lier 的 3A 語
言教學架構之上。二位學者的「注意」（noticing）和「語言意識」（awareness）
概念其實殊途同歸，都強調學生必須先注意到搭配詞的存在，才有辦法進一步主
動學習達度語言真實的境界。除了探討學生的搭配詞能力與閱讀能力之間的關
係，本研究更實際將搭配詞技巧長期、有系統地融入高職英語課程中，期盼藉由
這樣的教學實驗瞭解搭配詞教學對學生閱讀能力發展之效益。

三、研究設計與方法

為了探討搭配詞教學的效果，本研究採取實驗組與對照組的設計方式。共有
76 名高職三年級的學生參與本研究。其中 40 名學生為實驗組，另外 36 名則為
對照組。兩組學生有相同的英文老師且使用相同的英文課本。實驗組的學生接受
一個學期（大約五個月）的搭配詞教學，教師於課堂上講授搭配詞的觀念與學習
技巧、不斷提醒課文或單字例句中出現的搭配詞、且提供許多有關於搭配詞的練
習活動，例如：圈詞、翻譯、填空、改錯等。相對的，教師並沒有在對照組的英
文課上特別提醒或加強搭配詞的觀念與學習技巧。
在搭配詞教學開始之前，實驗組和對照組的學生先接受一份搭配詞能力測驗
以及第一次閱讀能力測驗。同時，實驗組的學生必須額外填寫一份有關於英文單
字學習以及搭配詞概念的問卷。經過一學期的搭配詞教學後，兩組學生於學期末
接受第二次閱讀能力測驗，且實驗組學生必須填寫另外一份有關搭配詞教學感想
的問卷。經過一個月的寒假之後，兩組學生再度接受第三次的閱讀能力測驗以追
蹤觀察其閱讀能力之發展。

四、分析與結論

以上問卷及測驗經過統計分析後，結果如下：
1. 接受搭配詞教學之前，大多數學生習慣單獨背誦個別的英文單字，極少學生
有背誦整組字串的習慣。此外，只有極少數學生聽過搭配詞（collocation）的
概念，幾乎沒有學生聽過或用過搭配詞辭典。
2. 學生在搭配詞能力測驗的表現相當低落，平均分數是 19.72 分（滿分 40 分），
也就是說只有 49.3% 的答案是對的。他們在第一次閱讀能力測驗的表現也不
盡理想，平均分數是 20.17 分（滿分 40 分）。
3. 統計結果顯示，學生的搭配詞能力和閱讀能力呈現高度正相關，且相關係數
達到顯著水準。換句話說，搭配詞能力佳的同學，閱讀能力比較強；反之，
搭配詞能力差的同學，閱讀能力也比較弱。

ii
4. 接受整學期有系統、明確的搭配詞教學後，實驗組的學生在第二次及第三次
閱讀能力測驗的進步幅度比對照組要來得大，尤其是在第三次閱讀能力測驗
中，兩組的表現達到顯著差異。此結果驗證了搭配詞教學確實能有效增強學
生的閱讀能力。
5. 過去的研究顯示，搭配詞教學似乎只對低成就的學生有幫助。然而，本研究
發現，長期的搭配詞教學對所有高、中、低成就的學生均有助益。
6. 問卷結果顯示，超過一半以上的學生認為他們學習英文單字的習慣有所改
變。大多數的學生會注意課文或例句裡面出現的搭配詞。記誦單字時，也會
背誦整組字串而非單獨一字。
7. 在搭配詞教學的感想方面，多數學生認為搭配詞教學確實能增進他們的閱讀
能力。有 70％的學生表示，若有機會，他們願意學習更多有關英文搭配詞的
教學活動。

綜合以上的結果，本研究提出以下建議： （1）搭配詞教學應儘速納入高職英
語課程，（2）教師應長期、有系統地教授搭配詞技巧並讓學生反覆練習， （3）教
師可以設計多樣的活動以提醒學生注意搭配詞，（4）並加強有關中英文互不對
應、近似字以及輕動詞（即英文中的 delexicalized verbs；如 do, get, have 等）的
搭配詞教學，（5）鼓勵學生多查詢搭配詞辭典以及檢索工具。
未來的研究可以試著延長教學時間並納入更多不同程度的學生。另外，建議
未來的研究可以著重於某一搭配詞技巧對於學習某些類型搭配詞之效益。例如：
比較畫底線技巧和翻譯技巧何者對於學習中英文互不對應之搭配詞較具成效。亦
或，探討何種教學活動（如：配對、改錯等）對於學習輕動詞的搭配詞效果最佳。

五、關鍵字：搭配詞教學，閱讀能力，高職英語

六、主要參考資料

Firth, J. R. (1957). Modes of meaning. In J. R. Firth, Papers in linguistics, 1934-1951

(pp. 190-215). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach. Hove and London, England: Language

Teaching Publications (LTP).

Lewis, M. (2000). Teaching collocation. Hove, England: Language Teaching

Publications.

McCarthy, M. & O’
Dell, F. (2005). English collocation in use. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

iii
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Nattinger, J. R. & DeCarrico, J. S. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nesselhauf, N. (2003). The use of collocations by advanced learners of English and

some implications for teaching. Applied Linguistics 24(2), 223-242.

Van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy,

and authenticity. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

iv
 The Effects of Collocation Instruction on the Development of Reading
Proficiency of Vocational High School Students in Taiwan

Abstract

I. Motivation

Much attention has been paid to research of collocation in recent years. However
most of the studies merely analyze the collocational errors made by EFL students.
Few investigate the effects of collocation instruction. The purpose of this study is to
examine the relation between EFL learners’collocation competence and their reading
proficiency. It also aims to investigate the effects of explicit collocation instruction on
the development of reading proficiency of vocational high school students in Taiwan.
Vocational high school English education has received less attention than senior
high school English education. Nevertheless, in addition to general English course,
vocational high school students have to learn ESP courses such as business English,
technology English, and tourism English. These courses include numerous
collocations and formulaic languages. Without sufficient collocation competence,
vocational high school students would have difficulty learning ESP courses. Most of
the vocational high school students are low proficiency learners. It is worth
investigating whether collocation instruction could help enhance their English reading
proficiency.

II. Theoretical Frameworks

Collocation is not a new concept. Firth (1957) defines it as ‘ words that frequently
occur t ogether’or ‘the company that words keep.’Lewis (1993, 2000) is one of the
pioneers who emphasize the importance of collocation instruction. In The Lexical
Approach, he proposes using collocation instruction to bridge the gap between
traditional vocabulary and grammar instruction. According to Lewis, language is full
of prefabricate chunks, such as idioms, collocations, and formulaic usages. Teachers
should not analyze these chunks when giving instruction; instead, they should teach
these chunks as a whole. According to Lewis, noticing is the prerequisite technique in
learning collocations. It is the teachers’responsibility to guide students’attention to
the pervasive language chunks.
Lewis’proposal of collocation instruction is supported by many language

v
teaching experts, for example, McCarthy & O’ Dell (2005), Nattinger & DeCarrico
(1992); Nesselhauf (2003), and Nation (2001). These scholars believe that learning
collocations could expand vocabulary repertoire and enhance reading speed and
fluency. What is more, having sufficient collocation competence could help make
accurate predictions and improve reading comprehension. Despite these theoretical
supports, few empirical studies investigate how to teach collocations and what effects
collocation instruction would bring to the development of the students’reading
proficiency.
The purpose of this study is to investigate how to apply collocation instruction
into vocational high school English class and whether collocation instruction would
help students enhance their English reading proficiency. The activities and exercises
of this study are designed based on van Lier’ s (1996) 3A interactive curriculum
principle: awareness, autonomy, and authenticity. For instance, underlining, circling
the collocations, and blank-filling are adopted to raise students’awareness of
collocations. Dictionary-consulting and concordancing are utilized to help students
autonomously learn collocations. Match games, translating, error-corrections are
taught to help students use authentic collocations.
In brief, this study is based on the framework of Lewis’collocation instruction
and van Lier’ s 3A interactive curriculum. Lewis’noticing technique is very similar to
van Lier’ s awarenss principle. Both of them stress that students must notice or be
aware of the existence of collocation before they start to learn it. In addition to
examining the relation between students’collocation competence and their reading
proficiency, this study also aims to explore the effects of explicit and long-term
collocation instruction on the development of the students’reading proficiency.

III. Research Design

Totally 76 third-grade vocational high school students in Taiwan participated in

this study. They were divided into the experimental group (40 students) and the
control group (36 students). The two groups had the same English teacher and used
the same English textbook. The experimental group received explicit and systematic
collocation instruction along with their regular English class for a semester, while the
control groups continued their regular English class without special emphasis and
practice of collocation.
Before collocation instruction was implemented, both the experimental and the
control groups took a pretest of reading proficiency. In addition, the experimental
group also took a collocation competence test and filled out a prestudy questionnaire,
which investigated the students’vocabulary learning habits and their knowledge of

vi
collocation. At the end of the semester when the collocation instruction was
completed, an immediate posttest of reading proficiency was given to both the
experimental and the control groups to measure their development of reading
proficiency. Additionally, the experimental group also filled out a poststudy
questionnaire, which investigated their perception toward the collocation instruction.
Then, one month after the completion of the collocation instruction, a delayed posttest
was given to both groups to follow up their development in reading proficiency.

IV. Results and Discussion

Based on the results of the questionnaires, the collocation competence test, and
the three reading proficiency tests, the following conclusions could be drawn.
1. Before collocation instruction, the students’vocabulary learning habits were
ineffective and their collocation competence was limited.
2. The students’performance in the collocation competence test was far from
satisfactory, with the mean of 19.72 out of 40. That is, only 49.3% of their
attempts in the multiple-choice task were correct. Their performance in the pretest
of reading proficiency was relatively low, too.
3. Statistical analysis indicated that a significant positive correlation exist between
the students’collocation competence and their reading proficiency. In other words,
those who scored higher in the collocation competence test also performed better
in the reading proficiency tests.
4. Having received explicit and systematic collocation instruction for a semester, the
experimental group was found to make significantly greater progress in reading
proficiency than did the control group, who did not receive relevant collocation
instruction. The result suggested that explicit collocation instruction was indeed
beneficial to the development of reading proficiency.
5. Unlike the findings of the previous studies (e.g. Lien, 2003; Lin, 2002), which
showed that collocation instruction was more effective to low-proficiency learners
than to high-proficiency ones, this study revealed that explicit and longitudinal
collocation instruction was effective to students in all proficiency levels. Whether
they were in low, mid, or high-levels, the students had all made significant
improvement in the posttests of reading proficiency.
6. After collocation instruction, more than half of the students said that they had
changed their vocabulary learning habits and become more aware of collocations
in readings. For example, they would notice and memorize chunks in reading texts
rather than memorizing words in isolation.
7. In addition, most students held positive perception toward collocation instruction.

vii
 The majority of them agreed that collocation instruction had helped enhance their
reading proficiency. More than 70% of the students said that they would like to
learn more about collocation if they had a chance.

The pedagogical implications of this study include (1) adding explicit collocation
instruction to English curriculum, (2) providing longitudinal and repetitive practice of
collocation techniques, (3) designing various activities to raise students’awareness of
collocations, (4) teaching L1 non-congruent collocations, collocations of synonyms,
and collocations of delexicalized verbs, and (5) encouraging the use of dictionaries
and concordancers.
It is suggested that future studies lengthen the instructional time and recruit
learners of more proficiency levels. They may also look into the effects of an
individual collocation technique on the acquisition of certain types of collocations, for
example, comparing the effects of underlining and translation techniques on the
acquisition of L1 non-congruent collocations, or, finding which technique (e.g.
collocation grids, match games, error correction) is most effective to the acquisition of
collocations of delexicalized verbs.

V. Key Words:

collocation instruction, reading proficiency, vocational high school English

VI. References

Firth, J. R. (1957). Modes of meaning. In J. R. Firth, Papers in linguistics, 1934-1951

(pp. 190-215). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach. Hove and London, England: Language

Teaching Publications (LTP).

Lewis, M. (2000). Teaching collocation. Hove, England: Language Teaching

Publications.

McCarthy, M. & O’
Dell, F. (2005). English collocation in use. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

viii
Nattinger, J. R. & DeCarrico, J. S. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nesselhauf, N. (2003). The use of collocations by advanced learners of English and

some implications for teaching. Applied Linguistics 24(2), 223-242.

Van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy,

and authenticity. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

ix