{"title":"接受性/正字法词汇、产生性/正字法词汇、产生性/音系词汇和词汇深度在预测读写表现中的作用。","authors":"Rujun Pan","doi":"10.1007/s10936-023-10027-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Vocabulary knowledge greatly affects writing performance (Stæhr in Lang Learn J 36:139-152, 2008; Johnson in Tesol J 7:700-715 2016), but little is known about the relative contribution of different dimensions of vocabulary knowledge to reading-to-write performance. The current study attempted to investigates the contribution of receptive/orthographic (RecOrth) vocabulary knowledge, productive/orthographic knowledge (ProOrth), productive/phonological (ProPhon) vocabulary knowledge and depth of vocabulary knowledge to reading-to-write scores. For this purpose, 154 Chinese English as foreign language (EFL) learners took a battery of vocabulary knowledge tests and a reading-to-write test. The extent to which vocabulary at different word frequencies predicted reading-to-write was also investigated. The results of regression indicated that ProOrth academic level, vocabulary depth, and RecOrth 2, 000 frequency level explained 40.2% of the reading-to-write score variance. Among the high-performing group, ProOrth academic and vocabulary depth were predictive of the reading-to-write score, while only ProOrth academic vocabulary explained the variance in the reading-to-write score for the low-performing group. The findings reveal the important relationship among dimensions of vocabulary knowledge and reading-to-write and stress the need for systematic vocabulary instruction.</p>","PeriodicalId":47689,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psycholinguistic Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Role of Receptive/Orthographic Vocabulary, Productive/Orthographic Vocabulary, Productive/Phonological Vocabulary and Depth of Vocabulary in Predicting Reading-to-Write Performance.\",\"authors\":\"Rujun Pan\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10936-023-10027-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Vocabulary knowledge greatly affects writing performance (Stæhr in Lang Learn J 36:139-152, 2008; Johnson in Tesol J 7:700-715 2016), but little is known about the relative contribution of different dimensions of vocabulary knowledge to reading-to-write performance. The current study attempted to investigates the contribution of receptive/orthographic (RecOrth) vocabulary knowledge, productive/orthographic knowledge (ProOrth), productive/phonological (ProPhon) vocabulary knowledge and depth of vocabulary knowledge to reading-to-write scores. For this purpose, 154 Chinese English as foreign language (EFL) learners took a battery of vocabulary knowledge tests and a reading-to-write test. The extent to which vocabulary at different word frequencies predicted reading-to-write was also investigated. The results of regression indicated that ProOrth academic level, vocabulary depth, and RecOrth 2, 000 frequency level explained 40.2% of the reading-to-write score variance. Among the high-performing group, ProOrth academic and vocabulary depth were predictive of the reading-to-write score, while only ProOrth academic vocabulary explained the variance in the reading-to-write score for the low-performing group. The findings reveal the important relationship among dimensions of vocabulary knowledge and reading-to-write and stress the need for systematic vocabulary instruction.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47689,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Psycholinguistic Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Psycholinguistic Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-023-10027-8\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psycholinguistic Research","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-023-10027-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Role of Receptive/Orthographic Vocabulary, Productive/Orthographic Vocabulary, Productive/Phonological Vocabulary and Depth of Vocabulary in Predicting Reading-to-Write Performance.
Vocabulary knowledge greatly affects writing performance (Stæhr in Lang Learn J 36:139-152, 2008; Johnson in Tesol J 7:700-715 2016), but little is known about the relative contribution of different dimensions of vocabulary knowledge to reading-to-write performance. The current study attempted to investigates the contribution of receptive/orthographic (RecOrth) vocabulary knowledge, productive/orthographic knowledge (ProOrth), productive/phonological (ProPhon) vocabulary knowledge and depth of vocabulary knowledge to reading-to-write scores. For this purpose, 154 Chinese English as foreign language (EFL) learners took a battery of vocabulary knowledge tests and a reading-to-write test. The extent to which vocabulary at different word frequencies predicted reading-to-write was also investigated. The results of regression indicated that ProOrth academic level, vocabulary depth, and RecOrth 2, 000 frequency level explained 40.2% of the reading-to-write score variance. Among the high-performing group, ProOrth academic and vocabulary depth were predictive of the reading-to-write score, while only ProOrth academic vocabulary explained the variance in the reading-to-write score for the low-performing group. The findings reveal the important relationship among dimensions of vocabulary knowledge and reading-to-write and stress the need for systematic vocabulary instruction.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research publishes carefully selected papers from the several disciplines engaged in psycholinguistic research, providing a single, recognized medium for communications among linguists, psychologists, biologists, sociologists, and others. The journal covers a broad range of approaches to the study of the communicative process, including: the social and anthropological bases of communication; development of speech and language; semantics (problems in linguistic meaning); and biological foundations. Papers dealing with the psychopathology of language and cognition, and the neuropsychology of language and cognition, are also included.