hce_cmu
111年
英文
第 43 題
📖 題組：
Repeated reading is a pedagogy originally developed to improve first-language (L1) learners’ reading deficiency problems, in particular issues related to reading fluency and comprehension. In a typical repeated reading session, students are led to attend to both the phonological and visual information of a text by listening to the oral reading of the teacher while the students are comprehending the text. In repeated reading of the same text, unfamiliar vocabulary or grammatical structure is revisited in context. This listening-while-reading technique, according to the dual-modality input theories, can significantly enhance the depth of language learning and foster elaborate memory traces of unfamiliar language forms (such as sound and spelling). In addition, repeated reading of the same text, according to Bill VanPatten’s input processing principle, could endow second language (L2) learners with an optimal processing environment for language forms. Specifically, Bill VanPatten stipulated that there exists a universal tendency for bilinguals to process (language) input mainly for meaning. However, if L2 learners only process language input for meaning without attending to language forms, they will never acquire any new words or novel grammatical structures. VanPatten also noted that L2 learners may attend to unfamiliar or novel language forms, and acquire them if and only after they understand the message(s) that the forms encode. This sequential view of input processing account suggests that in initial reading of a text, it is extremely difficult for L2 learners to perform any form-based processing of new vocabulary or grammar. This suggests that any one-shot pedagogical reading teaching practice cannot effectively serve as the fulcrum for promoting L2 acquisition; only later (in the following exposure to the same text) are readers’ attentional resources freed up for analyzing unfamiliar or novel language forms in comprehensible contexts. The above account offers a possible theoretical foundation for repeated reading. It is important to note that repeated reading pedagogy involves rereading the same text several times and that such a repetitive exposure may dampen learners’ motivation to attend to the language forms. Stephan Krashen (2004), a famous linguist, proposed that optimal form-based processing of novel vocabulary or grammar only occurs when learners are led to read several comprehensible texts revolving around the same topic, and, ideally, texts constructed by the same author. In reading texts of the above nature, readers are led to familiarize themselves with the writing style and expression of a given author while accumulating the background knowledge (meaning) of the topic at focus. Thus, in each subsequent reading, the readers’ background knowledge is enhanced; importantly, readers are given a contextually- and conceptually-constrained context to revisit the form and usage of unfamiliar vocabulary or grammar. Krashen coined the above approach “narrow reading”, which involves deep reading in a given topic. Narrow reading thus diverges from repeated reading in terms of ‘the context’ in which the target vocabulary or structure is (re)visited: same passage vs. different but related passages. Apparently, the major and clearest advantage of narrow reading is that it is, in comparison with repeated reading of the same text, potentially more motivating from the perspective of learners’ reading experience. Krashen even goes so far as to claim that narrow reading—the combination of contextualized deep reading and guided phonological reading—really has a chance of leading learners to go beyond “reading for meaning” and to further achieve “reading for learning.” Granted, whether narrow input is unambiguously effective in all cases warrants further empirical validation. I optimistically believe that the positive effects of the narrow reading approach can be expected.
Repeated reading is a pedagogy originally developed to improve first-language (L1) learners’ reading deficiency problems, in particular issues related to reading fluency and comprehension. In a typical repeated reading session, students are led to attend to both the phonological and visual information of a text by listening to the oral reading of the teacher while the students are comprehending the text. In repeated reading of the same text, unfamiliar vocabulary or grammatical structure is revisited in context. This listening-while-reading technique, according to the dual-modality input theories, can significantly enhance the depth of language learning and foster elaborate memory traces of unfamiliar language forms (such as sound and spelling). In addition, repeated reading of the same text, according to Bill VanPatten’s input processing principle, could endow second language (L2) learners with an optimal processing environment for language forms. Specifically, Bill VanPatten stipulated that there exists a universal tendency for bilinguals to process (language) input mainly for meaning. However, if L2 learners only process language input for meaning without attending to language forms, they will never acquire any new words or novel grammatical structures. VanPatten also noted that L2 learners may attend to unfamiliar or novel language forms, and acquire them if and only after they understand the message(s) that the forms encode. This sequential view of input processing account suggests that in initial reading of a text, it is extremely difficult for L2 learners to perform any form-based processing of new vocabulary or grammar. This suggests that any one-shot pedagogical reading teaching practice cannot effectively serve as the fulcrum for promoting L2 acquisition; only later (in the following exposure to the same text) are readers’ attentional resources freed up for analyzing unfamiliar or novel language forms in comprehensible contexts. The above account offers a possible theoretical foundation for repeated reading. It is important to note that repeated reading pedagogy involves rereading the same text several times and that such a repetitive exposure may dampen learners’ motivation to attend to the language forms. Stephan Krashen (2004), a famous linguist, proposed that optimal form-based processing of novel vocabulary or grammar only occurs when learners are led to read several comprehensible texts revolving around the same topic, and, ideally, texts constructed by the same author. In reading texts of the above nature, readers are led to familiarize themselves with the writing style and expression of a given author while accumulating the background knowledge (meaning) of the topic at focus. Thus, in each subsequent reading, the readers’ background knowledge is enhanced; importantly, readers are given a contextually- and conceptually-constrained context to revisit the form and usage of unfamiliar vocabulary or grammar. Krashen coined the above approach “narrow reading”, which involves deep reading in a given topic. Narrow reading thus diverges from repeated reading in terms of ‘the context’ in which the target vocabulary or structure is (re)visited: same passage vs. different but related passages. Apparently, the major and clearest advantage of narrow reading is that it is, in comparison with repeated reading of the same text, potentially more motivating from the perspective of learners’ reading experience. Krashen even goes so far as to claim that narrow reading—the combination of contextualized deep reading and guided phonological reading—really has a chance of leading learners to go beyond “reading for meaning” and to further achieve “reading for learning.” Granted, whether narrow input is unambiguously effective in all cases warrants further empirical validation. I optimistically believe that the positive effects of the narrow reading approach can be expected.
The word “stipulate” in Paragraph 1 is closest in meaning to:
- A perpetuate
- B staple
- C specify
- D manipulate
思路引導 VIP
請觀察這個單字出現的句子：它是用來引導 Bill VanPatten 這位學者所提出的「輸入處理原則」。當一位學者在解釋他的理論，並接著說出「（語言）輸入主要存在著一種普遍的意義處理傾向」時，你認為這位學者正在對這項「傾向」做什麼樣的動作？是含糊地帶過，還是正在為他的理論框架「定下明確的定義或準則」呢？
🤖
AI 詳解
AI 專屬家教
太棒了！你能準確判斷出 stipulate 在這段學術文章中的意義，顯示你對正式語彙的掌握非常到位。這題的正確答案是 (C) specify。
學術語境下的動詞運用
在文章第一段中，作者引用了 Bill VanPatten 的輸入處理原則。當我們在描述一位學者在其理論框架中「明確規定」或「具體陳述」某項原則、條件或觀察時，stipulate 是一個非常精準的動詞。它帶有一種「約定俗成」或「正式聲明」的語氣，與 specify（明確說明、具體規定）的語義最為貼近。其他的選項如 (A) perpetuate（使永恆）、(B) staple（釘住、分類）或 (D) manipulate（操縱）在語境上都無法對應理論說明的嚴謹性。
▼ 還有更多解析內容