國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
experimental group, including five high proficiency students and five low proficiency students, were interviewed individually. The researcher distributed sheets of interview questions (See Appendix E) to the interviewees right before each individual oral interview and gave each of them fifteen minutes to prepare so that the interviewees had time to think about how to answer the interview questions. During the preparation, students were not allowed to discuss with each other. Due to the limited English
proficiency of the ninth graders in junior high school, these interviews were
conducted in Chinese (See Appendix L). Each interview lasted for approximately ten minutes.
The interviewees were inquired about their views on the instruction of sound symbolism along with what effect the instruction of sound symbolism had on the participants. The results of the interviews were composed of two parts: (1) ways to memorize new words and (2) views on the instruction of sound symbolism28.
Ways to Memorize New Words
The results of the interviewees’ responses to the first part of the interview questions include their reports on (1) the ways to memorize new words and (2) the reasons for vocabulary loss. Based on Schmitt’s (1997) taxonomy of vocabulary learning strategies, the interviewees’ responses were categorized as below (See Table 4.8).
28 See Appendix L for a sample of the interview transcription.
‧
Table 4.8 Interviewees’ Vocabulary Learning Strategies
Note: 1. * The interviewees’ vocabulary learning strategies were based on Schmitt’s (1997) taxonomy which included 58 strategies that were grouped into five categories, namely, Determination Strategies (DET), Social Strategies (SOC), Memory Strategies (MEM), Cognitive Strategies (COG) and Metacognitive Strategies (MET).
The strategies which were not mentioned in the interviewees’ responses were not shown in this Table. See Appendix M for the original version of Schmitt’s (1997) taxonomy of vocabulary learning strategy.
2. ** No. of Mentions means the number of times the interviewees referred to a Interviewees’ Vocabulary
Learning Strategies* 2. Memory Strategies (MEM)
(1) Study word with a pictorial
representation of its meaning 0 1 1 Meaningful
(6) Affixes and roots
(remembering)***** 0 1 1
3. Cognitive Strategies (COG)
★(1) Verbal repetition 5 5 10
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
vocabulary learning strategy in the interviews. As there were ten interviewees, the maximum number of mentions possible for each of the strategies was 10.
3. *** Meaningful learning refers to the process of relating new material to relevant established entities in cognitive structure (Brown, 2000). On the other hand, rote learning is the process of acquiring material as discrete and relatively isolated entities (Brown, 2000, cited from Ausubel, 1968).
4. **** Keyword Method, by definition, is a chain of two links connecting a foreign word to its translation of first language, including the acoustic link and the imagery link (Atkinson, 1975). The imagery link involves mental images (ibid. 821) and,
therefore, Keyword Method was categorized as meaningful learning in this study.
5. *****In comparison with Analyze affixes and roots, Remember affixes and roots focused on memorizing the meaning of affixes and roots rather than the process of analyzing word parts. Consequently, Remember affixes and roots was categorized as rote learning in the present study.
6. ★: the vocabulary learning strategy related to sound
In order to explore the use of vocabulary learning strategies of the interviewees thoroughly, the results were presented from the perspective of meaningful learning versus rote learning. Among the nine vocabulary learning strategies shown in Table 4.8, six of them were rote learning, i.e. Study the spelling of a word, Study the sound
of a word, Say new word aloud when studying, Remember affixes and roots, Verbal
repetition and Written repetition, while only three of the mentioned strategies were
meaningful learning, i.e. Analyze affixes and roots, Study word with a pictorialrepresentation of its meaning, and Use Keyword Method. The strategies which were
subsumed under meaningful learning were mentioned only four times, constituting‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
10% of the total vocabulary learning strategies used by the interviewees in Table 4.829. By contrast, the number of mentions for the strategies which belonged to rote learning was up to 3630 times, which accounted for 90% of the strategy use of the interviewees.
Consequently, the results of Table 4.8 suggest that most of the interviewees memorized the meaning of English vocabulary through rote learning instead of meaningful learning. In addition, among the nine vocabulary learning strategies mentioned in the interviews, four (44%) were sound-related, that is, Use Keyword
Method, Study the sound of a word, Say new word aloud when studying, and Verbal repetition.
In terms of the two proficiency groups, as indicated in Table 4.9, all of the interviewees in the High group used rote learning to memorize English vocabulary and around 80% of the strategies used by the Low group were rote learning as well, suggesting that the use of vocabulary learning strategies of the High group was in accord with that of the Low group. Regarding the aspect of sound, around 60% of the vocabulary learning strategies mentioned in the High group were sound-related, and around 50% of the strategies in the Low group were relevant to sound (See Table 4.10), indicating the consistency of the use of vocabulary learning strategies between the two proficiency groups.
29 See 1-(1), 2-(1) and 2-(2) in Table 4.8.
30 See 2-(3), 2-(4), 2-(5), 2-(6), 3-(1) and 3-(2) in Table 4.8.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Table 4.9 No. of Mentions* of the Vocabulary Learning Strategies in the High and Low Groups: Meaningful Learning vs. Rote Learning
Categories of Vocabulary
Learning Strategies High Group Low Group
Meaningful Learning 0 (0%) 4 (21.05%)
Rote Learning 21 (100%) 15 (78.95%)
Total 21 (100%) 19 (100%)
Note: * No. of Mentions means the number of times the interviewees referred to a vocabulary learning strategy in the interviews.
Table 4.10 No. of Mentions* of the Vocabulary Learning Strategies in the High and Low Groups: Sound-related vs. Non-sound Related
Categories of Vocabulary Learning Strategies
High Group Low Group
Sound-related 12 (57.14%) 9 (47.37%)
Non-sound related 9 (42.86%) 10(52.63%)
Total 21 (100%) 19 (100%)
Note: * No. of Mentions means the number of times the interviewees referred to a vocabulary learning strategy in the interviews.
With regard to the responses to the reasons for vocabulary loss, the results are summarized as follows (See Table 4.11).
‧
Table 4.11 Interviewees’ Reported Reasons for Vocabulary Loss
Note: 1. * No. of Mentions means the number of times the interviewees referred to a reason for vocabulary loss in the interviews. As there were ten interviewees, the maximum number of mentions possible for each of the reasons was 10.
2. ★: the reason for vocabulary loss related to sound 3. HG=High Group; LG=Low Group
As shown in Table 4.11, around 35% of the responses indicated that words which are not used frequently or no longer used may be forgotten most easily. Around 29% of the responses showed that difficult pronunciation was also one of the reasons and around 24% pointed to unfamiliarity. Besides, around 12% of the responses suggested that meaningless learning like rote learning was the main cause of vocabulary loss. It is worth noting that among the four reasons for vocabulary loss mentioned in the interviews, one of them was sound-related.
Concerning the two proficiency groups, the results were as follows (See Table 4.11). In terms of the frequency of the mentioned reasons for vocabulary loss in the
31 Words with difficult pronunciation include the ones that are not easy to pronounce in terms of manner of articulation and the ones with a discrepancy in sound and letter corresponding relationship.
Reasons for Vocabulary Loss No. of Mentions* (Percentage)
HG 4
1. Words which are not used frequently or no longer
used may be forgotten easily. 6 (35.29%)
LG 2
HG 4
★2. Long words or words with difficult pronunciation31
may be forgotten easily. 5 (29.41%)
LG 1 HG 3 3. Unfamiliar words may be forgotten easily. 4 (23.53%)
LG 1 HG 0 4. Words learned by rote learning are not acquired
through meaningful learning, and they may be forgotten easily.
2 (11.76%)
LG 2 Total 17 (100%)
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
High group, the top one was “Words which are not used frequently or no longer used
may be forgotten easily” as well as “Long words or words with difficult pronunciation may be forgotten easily,” which were mentioned four times respectively in Table 4.11.
As for the frequency of the mentioned reasons for vocabulary loss in the Low group,
“Words which are not used frequently or no longer used may be forgotten easily” and
“Words learned by rote learning are not acquired through meaningful learning, and