No.6, 495-506 (2005) Word-recognition in Listening to English Sentences for Japanese TOYA Mitsuyo Nihon University, Graduate School of Social and Cultural Studies The present paper reports results and analyses that highlight the way Japanese learners listen to English sentences. Fifty-one university students took dictation, vocabulary, and TOEIC-style listening tests. The participants were divided into three proficiency groups according to TOEIC scores and their dictation data was analyzed in relation to vocabulary knowledge, the degree of accuracy within each sentence according to initial, middle, and end positions, and the function/content words dichotomy. The results revealed the effects of listening proficiency in recognition of words/phrases at the sentence level; the findings are seen to provide a theoretical underpinning for a newly-proposed listening training program. Krashen1985 Natural A Interaction H 1983(Output Hypothesis, Swain, 1985) 1989 1998 1999 2001 17 1980
Toya /l/-/r/ Yamada, Tohkura & Kobayashi, 1997, 2001, 1993 TD BU, 1983;, 2003 TD BU BU /l/-/r/ Kuhl, 1994 Field, 2003; Mattys, Jusczyk, Luce, & Morgan, 1999 (Kuhl, 2004) form-meaning mapping TD, 2004 1995 2005 2005 (1) (2) (3) Cf., 1995;, 1979;, 1987 (4) Listening Comprehension Test 496
TOEIC, TOEFL Item Facility Item Discrimination Oral repetition 51 35 16 150wpm 4 7 2005 32 TOEIC 100 90 1 1520 510 45 5 7 4 1 1 0 62 1 28 1 1 100 Toya, ).902 (p <.001).773 (p <.001) 497
p<.001) t(50) = 22.33, p <.001 51 17 16 18 (F(1, 48) = 559.37, p <.001; F(2, 48) = 41.73, p <.001) F(2, 48) = 4.06, p<.05 Dunnett T3, 1986;, 1979;, 3 F(2, 48) = 4.06, p <.05Dunnett T3 1 r =.546, p<.001 R 2 =.298, p<.001) 2 R 2 =.492, 2 1987 498
. 6 avalanche terrain 2 terrain train 2 5 6 Cf.10 5 must have been 6 heard 2 F(2, 48) = 89.81, p<.001; F(2, 47) = 67.37, p<.001 Dunnett T3 Dunnett T3 primacy effect, I d like to revise my paper recency effect, before submission. I d, to, my, before like, revise, paper, submission 499
Shi & Werker (2001, 2003)6 VanPatten (1989) Ross (1997) 40 10 10 Taniguchi, 1995 *( ) (2) (3) 2 F(2,48)=86.50, p <.001 Dunnett T3 500
5 volatile, avalanche 2 9 r =.869 (p<.001) variety situation submission candidate submission candidate submission mission mission some mission, save Oller mission, to mission mission 1971 3 Mattys et al., 1999 3 3 2 3 approaching 3 approach 501
3 1984 (A), (B), (C1), (C2) (A)a 76.47% 3 I 68.75% 1 I38.89% a 7.84% group 100 of 88.24% candidate a group of avalanche, volatile 76.47% a group of avalanche, volatile a candidate I 2 (B) It was obvious that [S+V] it 3 7 41.18% 1 he 58.82% 81.25% 1 2 2 94.44% It It was obvious 1 1 1 1 obvious 7 25 11.11 Be was it he obvious * He was 502
obvious C1Cathy heard a shrill cry and thought 4 23.53 obvious that A group of merchants didn t expect B It was obvious that the candidate C2Cathy heard a shrill cry and thought that possessed a C1 heard a shrill cry shrill shrill C2 should cry 43.75 heard Cathy cry 76.47% shrill should 0% /hə:rd/ Cathy should cry hard, had 61.11 show cry 94.12 81.25 Cathy show cry 55.56 503
shrill I, he, she short 58.82 Cathy heard a ( ) cry Cf. a Ihe it /ə:r/ heard shrill /ʃ/ Cf. Field, 2003, 2004;, 2003 Vitevitch(1997) neighborhood activation theory shrill /ʃ/ 1 e.g. short, should /ʃr/ 1 e.g. shrink, shrewd /ril/ /il/ thrill, drill, she ll, reel 3 2 frequency effect syntactic probability shrill /ʃ/ Field, 2003, 2004 3 504
1986 2005). JACET8000 1995. 2003 (1994). Kuhl, P.K. (1994). Learning and representation in speech Kuhl, P.K. (2004). Early language acquisition: Cracking P.H. D.A. (1983). Mattys, S.L., Jusczyk, P.W., Luce, P.A., & Morgan, J.L., Field, J. (2003). Psycholinguistics: A resource book for students. Routledge. Field, J. (2004). Psycholinguistics: The key concepts. Routledge. 26., 26, 131158 TOEIC, 44 JACET., 32, 7377. 1979.., 10, 119.. and language. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 4, 812-822. a speech code. Nature Reviews (Neuroscience), 5, 831-843.,. (1999). Phonotactic and prosodic effects on word segmentation in infants. Cognitive Psychology, 38, 465-494.. (2001)... 1987., 11(1), 89105. Oller, J.W. Jr. (1971). Dictation as a device for teaching foreign language proficiency. ELT Journal, 25(3), 254-259. 505
2001). perception: identify- cation of English /r/, /l/, and., 19, 16 /w/ by native speakers of Japanese. In James, A. & Ross, S. (1997). An introspective analysis of listener inferencing on a second language listening test. In G.Kasper & E.Kellerman (Eds.) Communication Strategies: Psycho- linguistic and Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Longman. Shi, R. & Werker, J.F. (2001). Six-month-old infants preference for lexical words. Psychological Science, 12(1), 70-75. Shi, R. & Werker, J.F. (2003). The basis of preference for Leather, J. (Eds.) Second Language Speech: Structure and Process, 103-117. Mouton de Gruyter. 1984 (2005)., 44 JACET lexical words in 6-month-old infants. (1) I d like to revise my paper before submission. Developmental Science, 6(5), 484-488. (2) He should get out of this volatile situation. 2003.. (3) A group of merchants didn t expect to travel in. Taniguchi, N. (1995). Analysis of dictation errors made by Japanese Learners of English. Proceedings of avalanche terrain. (4) It was obvious that the candidate possessed a variety of skills. the 10 th Annual Meetings of Sophia Linguistic (5) Matthew must have been beaten about the head by a Society, 10, 538. stranger., A. 1993. (6) Cathy heard a shrill cry and thought that the danger.. was approaching her. (2004). L2 (7) *Bob snarled at her not to believe him as he caught Form, Meaning, Input. her at the door., 48, 41-60. (2005). (*). JACET, 5973 10 Received: January 10, 2006 Toya, M. (). Role of vocabulary knowledge Issued in in internet Edition: January 31, 2006 recognition of words/phrases for Japanese listeners of English: A preliminary study based on dictation data. FLTA, 10. VanPatten, B. (1989). Can learners attend to form and content while processing input? Hispania, 72, 409-417. Vitevitch, M.S. (1997). The neighborhood characteristics of malapropism. Language and Speech, 40(3), 211-228. Yamada, R.A., Tohkura, Y., & Kobayashi, N. (1997). Effect of word familiarity on non-native phoneme 506