• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Computer assisted language learning >Dictionaries vs concordancers: actual practice of the two different tools in EFL writing
【24h】

Dictionaries vs concordancers: actual practice of the two different tools in EFL writing

机译：词典与协调员：EFL写作中两种不同工具的实际实践

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

A number of studies have suggested the possible benefits of using concordancers in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing. To date, however, there is still limited understanding of how EFL writers may make use of such tools along with dictionaries when engaging in a writing task. To better understand the question, this study investigated a class of non-English-major college students (N = 14) over a semester. Four online corpus tools, including monolingual and bilingual concordancers and collocation retrieval systems, were provided, along with two online dictionaries. After two tool-training sessions, students performed three timed-writing tasks online during three consecutive months and received individual stimulus recall interviews after each writing task. The recall interviews served as the main source of data; other data included the video clips of the writing process, student writing samples, and the researchers' notes. The result showed that students used corpus tools and the bilingual dictionary for different purposes. They tended to use a bilingual dictionary when information on word form and word meaning was needed. When searching for information related to word usage, collocation information, and grammar patterns, they chose corpus tools more often than a bilingual dictionary. However, they also turned to corpus tools for meaning and form when the bilingual dictionary failed to provide clear word meanings, when they needed to search for word strings, and when they needed to just confirm an intuition regarding either word form or word meaning. This study provides empirical data that help to better understand how corpus tools contribute to EFL writing.
机译：大量研究表明，使用英语的协调员作为外语（EFL）写作可能会带来好处。但是，到目前为止，对于EFL编写者在从事写作任务时如何使用此类工具以及词典仍然知之甚少。为了更好地理解这个问题，本研究调查了一个学期中一类非英语专业的大学生（N = 14）。提供了四个在线语料库工具，包括单语和双语协调员和搭配检索系统，以及两个在线词典。经过两次工具培训课程后，学生在连续三个月中在线执行了三个定时写作任务，并在每个写作任务后接受了单独的刺激回忆访问。召回访谈是数据的主要来源；其他数据包括写作过程的视频剪辑，学生写作样本以及研究人员的笔记。结果表明，学生出于不同目的使用了语料库工具和双语词典。当需要有关单词形式和单词含义的信息时，他们倾向于使用双语词典。在搜索与单词用法，并置信息和语法模式有关的信息时，他们比双语词典更常选择语料库工具。但是，当双语词典未能提供清晰的词义，需要搜索词串以及仅需要确认有关词形或词义的直觉时，他们也转向语料库工具来获取含义和形式。这项研究提供了经验数据，有助于更好地理解语料库工具如何促进EFL写作。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号