英语教学论文栏目提供最新英语教学论文格式、英语教学硕士论文范文。

词块教学法对阅读教学中非英语专业大学生自主学习能力的影响探讨

日期:2025年09月14日 编辑:ad201107111759308692 作者:无忧论文网 点击次数:186
论文价格:300元/篇 论文编号:lw202509071605379430 论文字数:65255 所属栏目:英语教学论文
论文地区:中国 论文语种:English 论文用途:硕士毕业论文 Master Thesis
rding its definition, there are varying interpretations among scholars.  

Firth (1957) defined the grouping of words as a situation in which one word was accompanied by another word or words. Bolinger (1975) proposed multiple techniques for word memorization in the learning phase, including the meppmorization of singular morphologic words, clauses, or lexical chunks that demanded extended memory. Furthermore, words were frequently remembered as these pre-arranged segments.

Becker (1975) was one of the first linguists to introduce the concept of prefabricated phrases. He labeled these phrases, that is lexical chunks as prefabricated language, noting that their usage required minimal processing to create grammatically sound sentences and achieve fluency, thereby bridging certain conceptual voids. He was of the opinion that phrases like such as “leave alone” ought to be gathered and perfected during English education. 

Peters (1983) coined the term “speech formula” to describe pre-existing, polymorphemic phrases in a person’s vocabulary, used as pre-made word segments, acquired either through social engagement or personal learning. There were two types of “speech formulas”, one that were frequently used in everyday interactions to draw attention to surprising or delightful matters and the other that were not entirely inflexible in their form and could be varied. 

2.2 Overview of Lexical Approach

2.2.1 Core Theories and Requirements of Lexical Approach

The lexical approach, proposed by Lewis (1993), was a breakthrough teaching method founded on the theory that language consisted of grammaticalized lexis, not lexicalized grammar. It took the steps of lexical chunk identification, memorization, application, consolidation and so on as the core components throughout the entire English teaching process. It emphasized vocabulary acquisition as the crux of language learning, with grammar taking a back seat to vocabulary. This teaching methodology stood in stark contrast to traditional, grammar-centric instructional approaches. 

The lexical approach suggested that various types of lexical chunks served as the fundamental building blocks of sentences. The varying combinations of lexical chunks resulted in sentences that were ultimately assembled into logically structured chapters. 

The relationship between learning lexis and grammar became less and less clear due to the grammatical and bulky nature of lexis. If vocabulary and grammar were taught separately, this would be detrimental to foreign language learners. Therefore, the lexical approach neither opposed grammar teaching nor denied the role of grammar in foreign language learning. Instead, it opposed past practices in which grammar dominated and lexical chunks were neglected (Fu Xiaomi & Fu Xiaoke, 2008).

Chapter 3  Research Methodology .............................. 36

3.1 Research Questions .................................... 36

3.2 Research Design .......................... 36

Chapter 4  Results and Discussion .......................... 56

4.1 Results and Discussion of Questionnaire ................... 56

4.1.1 Reliability and Validity of the Questionnaire .............................. 56

4.1.2 Comparisons of the Scores of the Pre-questionnaire in EC and CC........... 57

Chapter 5  Conclusion .............................. 84

5.1 Main Findings ..................................... 84

5.2 Pedagogical Implications ........................ 87

Chapter 4  Results and Discussion

4.1 Results and Discussion of Questionnaire

This study adopts Questionnaire on English Autonomous Learning Ability in Reading for College Students. The questionnaire includes 25 items and is divided into 5 dimensions: learning motivation (1-5), learning time-management (6-10), learning strategy (11-16), learning process (17-21), and learning result (22-25). The study utilizes SPSS 26.0 to analyze 82 questionnaires obtained during the course of the experiment. Initially, the