PRODUCTIVE VOCABULARY KNOWLEDGE AND EVALUATION OF ESL WRITING IN CORPUS-BASED LANGUAGE LEARNING

Topics: Linguistics, Language education, Language acquisition Pages: 122 (26956 words) Published: October 29, 2013
PRODUCTIVE VOCABULARY KNOWLEDGE AND EVALUATION
OF ESL WRITING IN CORPUS-BASED LANGUAGE LEARNING

Daehyeon Nam

Submitted to the faculty of the University Graduate School
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree
Doctor of Philosophy
in the Department Literacy, Culture, and Language Education
Indiana University
June 2010

UMI Number: 3413659

All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI 3413659
Copyright 2010 by ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

Accepted by the Graduate Faculty, Indiana University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

Doctoral Committee
_____________________________________
Larry Mikulecky, Ph.D., Chair Person

_____________________________________
Martha Nyikos, Ph.D.

_____________________________________
James Damico, Ph.D.

_____________________________________
John Paolillo, Ph.D.

February 17, 2010
ii

© 2010
Daehyeon Nam
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I arrived in Bloomington, Indiana almost ten years ago as a linguistics graduate student. I knew very little about teaching and research in language education when I was accepted into the doctoral program in the Department of Literacy, Culture, and Language Education. I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Larry Mikulecky, for his advice and support over the last five years; his door was always open and he has helped me become a teacher, a researcher, and a scientist. Dr. Mikulecky challenged me to explore a new field of research and always expected a little more from me than I thought I could produce—by repeatedly saying: “push the edge of knowledge and show me the evidence” and “contribute to the body of knowledge”. In addition, he provided innumerable resources and ideas over the years that allowed me to conduct my research effectively and efficiently.

My committee members always asked just the right questions to force me to clarify my thinking and place my work in the broader and overarching contexts of language education and linguistics. Dr. Martha Nyikos taught me how to teach languages through the perspective of theory into practice and make it in my dissertation. She also taught me how to respect students in the classroom. Dr. James Damico taught me how to work with students by example and treated me like a colleague, which meant that I learned how to be one. Dr. John Paolillo introduced me to computational linguistics and corpus linguistics, and provided insightful comments and suggestions in the language education applications of the fields.

iv

I cannot forget my colleagues and friends in Bloomington who made my graduate study an exciting and great experience of my life: my fellow LCLE office staff (Yoko, Lindsay, Gayla, Kathy, Shiau-Jing, Yi-Ching, Janet, Akiko, and Ying-Sin) provided such a fun and wonderful work environment during the years of my graduate school, not to mention my fellow IRAP members (Jim, Jenny, Melissa, and Rani); LCLE graduate students (Malinee, Hatai, Nick, Lenny, Snea, Jaeseok, Jaehan, NamHee, and Jihyun); the colleagues of the math education summer workshop program (Enrique, Jane, Christi, Jean, Rick, Jinsob, and Mi Yeon); and my friends and professors from the Linguistics department (B.J., Hanyong, Dr. Stuart Davis, and Dr. Ken de Jong). I cannot thank Dr. Mary Beth Hines enough who gave me the opportunities to work with the LCLE department office and the IRAP research team. Her generous support and thoughtful...

References: Laufer, 2004; Carter, 1998; Nation, 1990, 2001, 2008; Coady & Huckin, 1997; Schmitt &
McCarthy, 1997; Schmitt, 2000; Zimmerman, 2009)
vocabulary knowledge, research has identified two types of knowledge: receptive
knowledge and productive knowledge.1 Nation (2001) described the dual characteristics
interest in vocabulary research (Laufer, 1998; Lee, 2003; Lee & Muncie, 2006; Melka,
1997; Mondria & Wiersma, 2004).
grammar in the Age of Reasons (Schmitt, 2000) and the Grammar Translation method
that labeled vocabulary as supplements of teaching grammar rule (Zimmerman, 1997a).
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Language Learning Essay
  • Esl Writing Workshop Analysis Essay
  • L2 Language Learning Essay
  • The teaching and learning of writing in English as a Foreign Language Essay
  • Learning Vocabulary Essay
  • Essay about Age problems difficulties in learning English as a foreign language
  • Language Learning vs Language Acquisition Essay
  • The Effects of Anxiety on Language Learning of Esl and Efl University Students Essay

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free