Aim of the study
This study investigates the empirical use of lexical chunks among elementary-level Vietnamese students, tracking their spoken usage over five months in Vietnam It explores the relationship between L2 learners' competence in lexical chunks and their language production by analyzing results from two speaking tests, a multiple-choice chunk assessment, and an interview.
Structure of the thesis
Apart from declaration, acknowledgement, abstract, table of content and appendixes, this thesis is structured in three main parts, namely: Introduction, Development, and Conclusion
Part A, INTRODUCTION, presents the rationale, the aims of the study, research questions, structure of the thesis
Part B, DEVELOPMENT, is composed of two chapters:
Chapter 1: Theoretical Background provides a comprehensive overview of speaking and vocabulary acquisition, highlighting the challenges learners face in vocabulary learning It discusses the concept of lexis and the importance of lexical chunks, including their various types and significance in teaching The chapter emphasizes how lexical chunks contribute to language fluency, accuracy, and creative language production.
Chapter 2: Methodology and Data analysis focuses on the continuing education context, participants, research procedure, data collection and analysis, findings, and discussion
In the conclusion of Part C, the study highlights the essential findings and the researcher’s reflections on the impact of the research process It emphasizes the evolution of the teacher's understanding of vocabulary instruction and speaking skills, outlines the benefits gained from conducting the action research, and presents a roadmap for future cycles of improvement.
Literature review
Vocabulary acquistion
Language is traditionally categorized into vocabulary and grammar, with vocabulary viewed as a fixed set of words and grammar seen as a more fundamental and creative generative system Consequently, many believe that language teaching should prioritize grammatical competence Despite increasing emphasis on vocabulary instruction in English classes, most educators continue to focus predominantly on grammar acquisition Linlin Jia (2004) highlights that EFL learners in Vietnam often fall short of expected English proficiency levels after years of traditional teaching methods.
Recent research highlights the growing emphasis on lexis in language teaching, with a focus on the use of lexical chunks as an innovative methodology for vocabulary instruction Scholars like Nattinger and DeCarrico have identified lexical chunks as central to language acquisition, viewing them as essential for the creative formation of language rules These chunks are processed as whole units, which not only improve accuracy and fluency but also significantly accelerate language processing Despite the recognition of lexical chunks' potential benefits for English proficiency, particularly among EFL learners, there remains a lack of empirical studies exploring the connection between EFL learners' competence in lexical chunks and their overall English proficiency.
Vocabulary acquisition is crucial for mastering a foreign language, as understanding new words is frequently highlighted in both educational materials and classroom settings It plays a vital role in language instruction and is essential for learners However, recent studies reveal that vocabulary teaching can be challenging, with many educators lacking confidence in effective practices and often uncertain about how to prioritize word learning in their instruction (Berne & Blachowicz, 2008).
Vocabulary is a crucial component in language acquisition, significantly impacting learners' development (Cameron, 2001) Researchers such as Harmon, Wood, & Keser (2009) and Linse (2005) emphasize that vocabulary growth is essential for overall language proficiency Despite its historical neglect, there has been a growing focus on vocabulary research, with notable contributions from scholars like Carter and McCarthy (1988), Nation (1990), Arnaud and Bejoint (1992), Huckin, Haynes and Coady (1995), Coady and Huckin (1997), and Schmitt (1997, 2000).
Vocabulary knowledge is often viewed as a critical tool for second language learners because a limited vocabulary in a second language impedes successful communication.Underscoring the importance of vocabulary acquisition, Schmitt
(2000) emphasizes that―lexical knowledge is central to communicative competence and to the acquisition of a second language‖ p 55)
According to Nation (2001), vocabulary knowledge and language use are interdependent; a strong understanding of vocabulary facilitates effective language use, while engaging in language use contributes to the expansion of vocabulary knowledge.
The importance of vocabulary is demonstrated daily in and out the school In classroom,the achieving students possess the most sufficient vocabulary
Research by Laufer and Nation (1999), Maximo (2000), Read (2000), Gu (2003), Marion (2008), and Nation (2011) highlights the crucial role of vocabulary acquisition in mastering a second language, significantly impacting both spoken and written communication In the context of English as a Second Language (ESL) and English as a Foreign Language (EFL), vocabulary is fundamental across all language skills, including listening, speaking, reading, and writing (Nation, 2011) Rivers and Nunan (1991) further emphasize that having a sufficient vocabulary is vital for effective second language use, as a limited vocabulary hinders our ability to utilize learned structures and functions for clear communication.
Research indicates that second language (L2) readers face significant challenges due to limited vocabulary knowledge, which is often the primary barrier to comprehension (Huckin, 1995) Effective communication requires a robust vocabulary to express meanings and concepts, as highlighted by Krashen's observation that students prefer dictionaries over grammar books when traveling (Lewis, 1993) Numerous scholars emphasize the critical role of vocabulary in foreign language acquisition, suggesting that curricula should prioritize vocabulary development Wilkins (1972) argues that grammatical accuracy is of little value without the necessary vocabulary to convey thoughts, stating, "without vocabulary nothing can be conveyed" (p 97) Additionally, Richards (1980) and Krashen (1989) note that a large vocabulary is essential for language mastery, as learners often report that insufficient vocabulary is a significant obstacle in their language journey.
Vocabulary is often recognized as the most significant challenge for L2 learners (Meara, 1980), primarily due to the inherent complexity and open-ended nature of vocabulary systems Unlike syntax and phonology, which offer structured rules for acquisition, vocabulary lacks such guidelines, making it more difficult for learners to enhance their language skills effectively.
L2 vocabulary learning lacks clarity regarding applicable rules and the prioritization of vocabulary items According to Oxford (1990), vocabulary is the largest and most challenging component in language learning due to the vast number of meanings Despite these challenges, vocabulary remains a key focus in language examinations (Schmitt, 1999) Many learners perceive second language acquisition as primarily about vocabulary, dedicating significant time to memorizing word lists and utilizing bilingual dictionaries for communication Consequently, language educators and applied linguists acknowledge the critical role of vocabulary learning and are investigating more effective methods to enhance it, particularly through the study of vocabulary learning strategies (VLS).
Challenges of vocabulary learning
To effectively teach vocabulary, it's crucial to first identify the challenges students encounter Thornbury (2004: 27) highlights several factors that contribute to the difficulty of certain words Pronunciation plays a significant role, as research indicates that words that are hard to pronounce are also harder to learn Spelling inconsistencies, particularly sounds-spelling mismatches, can lead to errors in both pronunciation and spelling, complicating the learning process English spelling, while generally consistent, contains irregularities that can confuse learners, especially with words that include silent letters, such as "foreign," "listen," and "honest." Additionally, while longer words are not inherently more difficult to learn than shorter ones, high-frequency words are typically shorter, making them easier for students to grasp.
Learning English presents unique challenges, particularly in grammar, as differences from a learner's first language can complicate understanding For instance, distinguishing whether verbs like "enjoy," "love," or "hope" are followed by an infinitive or an -ing form can be difficult Additionally, overlapping meanings between words, such as "make" and "do," can lead to confusion; you "make" breakfast but "do" housework The range and connotation of words also play a significant role in learnability; verbs with broader applications, like "put," are generally easier than their more specific synonyms Furthermore, connotations can vary significantly between languages, causing misunderstandings—like "propaganda," which has a negative connotation in English, versus its neutral equivalent in other languages Lastly, idiomatic expressions are typically more challenging for learners than transparent phrases, as their meanings are not immediately clear.
Gower, Philips, and Walter (1995) identify several factors influencing the ease or difficulty of vocabulary acquisition Firstly, the similarity of a vocabulary item to a student's first language (L1) significantly impacts its difficulty; words that resemble L1 can be misleading Secondly, familiarity with related English words can facilitate understanding; for instance, if a student knows "friendly," they can infer "unfriendly." Additionally, connotation plays a crucial role, as words like "skinny" and "slim" carry different attitudes despite similar meanings Spelling and pronunciation also pose challenges, especially for students from languages with regular spelling systems, exemplified by the confusion surrounding words like "through" and "thought." Furthermore, multi-word items, such as compound nouns and phrasal verbs, can complicate comprehension Collocation is another area of difficulty; for example, while we say "injured" for people and "damaged" for things, the correct combinations can be tricky Lastly, appropriate usage is essential, as certain expressions are context-specific and carry different levels of formality Understanding these factors is vital for effective vocabulary learning.
To effectively enhance students' reading vocabulary, it's essential to go beyond simply having them consult a dictionary Instead, targeted instruction is necessary to facilitate the acquisition of new vocabulary and to cultivate strategies that deepen their understanding and retention of words over time.
Lexis and lexical chunks
Since Michael Lewis introduced "The Lexical Approach" in 1993, there has been an increasing recognition that language learning often transcends traditional grammar-focused methods This shift emphasizes the importance of lexis, suggesting that language courses should prioritize vocabulary and its practical application rather than solely concentrating on grammatical structures.
Lexis encompasses more than just vocabulary and extensive word lists that necessitate tedious memorization; it involves understanding lexical items, which include individual words, collocations like "shrug your shoulders," and fixed or semi-fixed expressions such as "to and fro" and "without a doubt" (Scrivener, 2005, p 228).
‗ready-made‘ chunks, such as idioms which have non-literal meanings e.g he flew off the handle and I’m all ears
The idea of lexical chunking first was introduced by Firth (1952) and later scholars like Halliday (1966) and Sinclair (1991) developed the notion Soon after Lewis
The lexical approach to language instruction gained prominence in the 1990s, significantly enhancing vocabulary teaching methods, as noted by Nattinger & DeCarrico (1992) in their work on lexical chunking Evert (2004) discusses the theoretical foundations of collocations, highlighting the divergence between structural linguistics, represented by Saussure and Chomsky, which overlooked collocations, and British linguistics, exemplified by Firth, Halliday, and Sinclair, which emphasized the significance of lexical chunks in context This perspective aligns with Firth's contextual theory of meaning, which underscores the importance of social settings and discourse, encapsulated in his famous assertion, "You shall know a word by the company it keeps" (1957).
Researchers often refer to lexical chunks primarily as collocations Building on Lewis's (1993) lexical approach and the Firthian contextual theory of meaning, we distinguish between lexical chunks and collocations, while acknowledging that collocations are inherently part of lexical chunks This study introduces a new classification of lexical chunks into referential and collocational types Referential meaning pertains to the recognizable parts of an expression by learners, aligning with the explicit meaning defined by Paciorek & Williams (2013) and others For instance, "get milk from a cow" exemplifies referential meaning, while "bury the hatchet" represents a collocational or idiomatic expression Additionally, collocational meaning can carry emotive, connotative, metaphorical, and implicit meanings This aligns with Grimly and Patrol's (2002) definition of collocation as combinations of lexical items contributing distinct semantic values Consequently, the distinction between collocational and pragmatic meanings remains ambiguous, indicating that collocational and pragmatic studies are not a coherent field (Crystal, 1997).
Linguists and researchers define lexical chunks differently based on their specific research objectives (Jiang, 2012) Wray (2002) describes lexical chunks as sequences of words or language elements that are prefabricated, either continuous or discontinuous These chunks are stored in memory and retrieved as complete units during use, bypassing the generative processes of language grammar.
Pawley and Syder (1983) define lexical chunks as "sentence stems" that are "institutionalized" or "lexicalized," essential for achieving idiomatic control of a language They describe a lexicalized sentence stem as a unit of clause length or longer, with a largely fixed grammatical form and lexical content Unlike traditional idioms, these lexicalized units represent regular form-meaning pairings, numbering in the hundreds of thousands for native speakers Furthermore, they argue that generative grammar is only a part of the knowledge required for language competence; native speakers rely less on creative syntactic rules Consequently, an utterance sounds native-like when it consists of a lexicalized sentence stem combined with permissible expansions or substitutions.
From a psycholinguistic perspective, Newell (1990) posited that chunking is fundamental to human cognition A chunk is defined as a memory organization unit, created by combining existing chunks into a larger structure This process allows for recursive building of these structures, resulting in a hierarchical memory organization Chunking is a pervasive aspect of human memory and may underpin a widespread principle of practice.
The Lexical Approach (LA), developed by Michael Lewis in the 1990s, emphasizes the significance of understanding and producing lexical chunks as whole units in foreign language acquisition This method posits that these chunks serve as the foundational data through which learners recognize language patterns typically associated with grammar (Lewis, 2002).
Lewis emphasizes that the lexical approach transcends a mere focus on vocabulary over grammar; instead, he argues that language is composed of multi-word prefabricated chunks rather than just traditional grammar and vocabulary.
Chunks, which include collocations, fixed expressions, and idioms, play a vital role in enhancing language fluency Native speakers often store vocabulary not just as single words but as phrases and larger units, allowing for easier retrieval and reduced processing effort In contrast, learners who focus solely on individual words face greater challenges and require significantly more time and effort to communicate effectively.
The LA to language teaching emphasizes lexis—words and word combinations—as the core of language learning and communication, shifting the focus away from grammar and structure (Lewis, 2000) This approach highlights that lexis conveys more meaning than grammatical structures (Lewis, 2002), and prioritizing communication necessitates a greater emphasis on vocabulary Learners often view vocabulary errors as the most serious, as they can lead to misunderstandings and breakdowns in communication, with lexical errors outnumbering grammatical ones significantly (Blass, 1982; Gass and Selinker, 2008) Native speakers also find lexical errors more disruptive than grammatical ones, as the latter typically still convey meaning Therefore, lexical chunks play a crucial role in language teaching Defined by Becker (1975) as multiword phenomena and further described by Nattinger and DeCarrico (1992) as language segments with specific discourse functions, lexical chunks are characterized by their recurrence, as noted by various researchers including Biber and Leech.
Lexical chunks are defined as recurrent expressions that can vary in idiomaticity and structural status According to Wray (2000), these chunks consist of prefabricated sequences of words that are stored and retrieved as a whole from memory during use In summary, lexical chunks are combinations of words that frequently appear in a language, carrying specific meanings and functions.
Types of lexical chunks
Lexical items are socially recognized independent units that can be individual words or complete sentences, known as institutionalized utterances, which convey specific social or pragmatic meanings within a community Their definition highlights the necessity of agreement within a social group, as what constitutes a lexical item can vary between American and British English Furthermore, lexical items can be unique to various social groups, including geographical, professional, or even familial, class, or age-based communities For instance, teenagers often use a range of lexical items that may confuse older generations In addition to words and grammar, native speakers utilize a repertoire of multiword items that function as independent units, which have often been overlooked in linguistic studies.
Richards and Rodgers (2001, p 133) add that many other lexical units also occur in language For example:
• Binomials: clean and tidy, back and froth, prons and cons, up and down
• Trinomials: cool, calm and collected
• Idioms: dead drunk, to run up a bill
• Similes: as old as the hills
These and other types of lexical units are thought to play a central role in learning and in communication
In his paper, Lewis (2002) focused on four fundamental types of lexical item which are:
Type 1: a Word b Polywords Type 2: Collocations Type 3: Institutionalized utterances Type 4: Sentence frames or heads
Analyzing language categories often reveals overlaps, making it beneficial to classify items under multiple categories for various analytical purposes, especially in classroom settings My research on low-level English learners focuses on three key types: polywords, collocations, and institutionalized utterances, emphasizing their importance in effective language instruction.
According to Lewis's research, words are fundamental independent units in language, where altering a single word can change the meaning of an utterance (e.g., "Could you pass my pen/calculator, please?") Words can stand alone in both speech and writing (e.g., "Stop," "Sure!," "Please.") This concept is well-established in language teaching Polywords, a subset of lexical items, refer to short phrases that exhibit a degree of idiomaticity (such as "by the way" or "on the other hand") and are typically included in even basic dictionaries.
Certain word pairs or groups frequently co-occur, often influenced by the type of text This phenomenon is especially common with verb-noun and adjective-noun combinations, such as "to raise capital" and "a short-term strategy." However, it can extend beyond pairs to include larger word groups and various grammatical categories While common verb patterns have long been a focus in language courses, other frequent word combinations, known as collocations, are often overlooked or considered secondary in importance.
Institutionalized utterances are predominantly found in spoken language, conveying pragmatic meanings rather than referential ones These language chunks, which can be complete sentences or sentence heads, are often recalled as whole units in conversation For example, phrases like "I'll get it" or "If I were you, I'd wait" illustrate how certain utterances maintain fixed structures, with the latter revealing a lexical boundary that challenges traditional grammatical analysis This perspective emphasizes that language can be analyzed in various ways—phonemes, syllables, morphemes, or words—each serving different purposes Misidentifying these language chunks has led to significant pedagogical challenges, as traditional grammar may overlook the importance of fully institutionalized utterances, which can be learned and used holistically, forming the foundation of grammatical competence.
Lexical chunks have various definitions and classifications, with no universally accepted system in the linguistic field Different linguists propose their own criteria from diverse perspectives, but the classifications by Nattinger & DeCarrico (1992) and Lewis (1993) are among the most widely recognized Nattinger and DeCarrico's classifications focus primarily on structural criteria, providing a foundational understanding of lexical chunks.
Table 1 Nattinger and DeCarrico‟s classification of lexical chunks
Type of lexical chunks Examples
Poly words are concise, fixed lexical phrases that often include idioms, such as "kick the bucket," and exhibit novariability These expressions serve various functions in communication For instance, "by the way" acts as a topic shifter, while phrases like "all in all" and "above all" function as summarizers, effectively encapsulating key points in a discussion.
Institutional expressions consist of fixed lexical phrases that maintain a consistent length and allow minimal variation, serving as a framework for specific social interactions Examples include polite farewells like "I’m afraid I have to be going now," accepting suggestions with phrases such as "that is a good idea," greetings like "how do you do" or "long time no see," and invitations such as "would you like to…?" These phrases play a crucial role in facilitating effective communication within social contexts.
Sentence builders are essential lexical phrases that form the foundation for complete sentences, incorporating slots for parameters that express entire ideas with significant variation They include structures like "not only but also," which enhance the complexity of statements, and comparators such as "the er the er," which establish relationships Additionally, phrases like "my point is that " help articulate arguments clearly, while topic markers such as "let me start by/with " guide the flow of discussion.
Phrasal constraints involve the use of short to medium-length phrases that permit variations in lexical and phrasal categories, serving multiple functions For instance, timing expressions like "a ago," apologies such as "sorry about ," and parting phrases like "see you then" or "see you later" exemplify these constraints Additionally, the relator "as well as" highlights the interconnectedness of ideas within these phrases.
Nattinger and DeCarrico (1992) highlight that while institutionalized expressions can vary in length, they exhibit similarities to polywords, as both are generally short and straightforward In contrast, sentence builders and phrasal constraints are more complex due to their structural slots, making them distinct from these simpler lexical phrases.
This research combines the overlapping and complementary aspects of the lexical chunk classifications by Nattinger & DeCarrico and Michael Lewis, resulting in a unified classification system.
● Polywords fixed short phrases with no variability
● Collocations—pairs or groups of words that frequently co-occur in a natural text (verb plus noun, noun plus adjective, verb plus adverb/adjective, adverb plus adjective, etc.)
● Institutionalized expressions—mostly with no variability and stand as separate utterances with pragmatic functions
● Phrasal constrains—short and relatively fixed lexical phrases with slots that permit some variation
● Sentence heads or frames/sentence builders—lexical chunks providing the framework of the sentences and containing slots for parameters or arguments for the expression of entire ideas
There is currently no universally accepted standard for classifying lexical chunks, as researchers often establish their own criteria based on specific research objectives It is important to recognize that these lexical chunks exist on a spectrum, ranging from completely fixed to highly flexible forms Consequently, the categorization of lexical chunks is somewhat ambiguous, making it challenging to define clear boundaries between different types.
The significance of teaching lexical chunks
Nyyssonen (1999) asserts that communicative competence encompasses a complex set of skills, including grammatical accuracy, intelligibility, contextual appropriateness, and fluency Research indicates that lexical chunks significantly aid second language (L2) learning by enhancing fluency, accuracy, creativity, and cohesion Additionally, the use of lexical chunks has been shown to greatly boost learners' motivation Thus, examining the role of lexical chunks is essential for effective pedagogy, highlighting their importance in improving both written and spoken language for L2 learners and guiding their application in the teaching process.
In their seminal work, Pawley and Syder (1983) define "native-like fluency" as the capacity of native speakers to produce extended speech beyond their encoding and decoding abilities, emphasizing the ease of linking language units Similarly, Lewis (1997) highlights that fluency stems from acquiring a substantial collection of fixed and semi-fixed prefabricated items, suggesting that lexical chunks serve as readily accessible frameworks for language production, ultimately enhancing fluency.
Native-like fluency in language arises from the ability of native speakers to produce complex utterances effortlessly, despite cognitive limitations that suggest they can only compose 8-10 words at a time (Pawley and Syder, 1983) For instance, sentences such as "It seems that it’s impossible to predict what will happen next" and "It is wise to insure your property against storm damage" are spoken fluently and without hesitation These utterances often consist of fixed or semi-fixed phrases, which are commonly used and easily recalled This reliance on lexical chunks allows native speakers to bypass the intricate processes of word selection and grammatical structuring, thereby simplifying language processing for learners.
According to Lewis (1993), a significant portion of languages is made up of meaningful chunks, which native speakers use to achieve fluency and accuracy in their speech To effectively master a language, learners must understand not only individual words but also how to combine them appropriately Pawley and Syder (1983) highlight that even proficient non-native speakers often struggle with selecting the appropriate expressions commonly used by native speakers They define "native-like selection" as the ability to convey meaning using expressions that are both grammatical and characteristic of native speech Therefore, to develop native-like selection skills, learners need to choose accurate and idiomatic expressions that allow them to communicate ideas like native speakers.
To achieve linguistic accuracy, it is essential to store a substantial number of lexical chunks According to Pawley and Syder, these chunks constitute a significant portion of fluent speech in everyday conversation, requiring minimal encoding effort By focusing on these ready-made chunks, which are prevalent in native speakers' language, learners can enhance their language accuracy effectively.
Nattinger and DeCarrico highlight that the interplay between routine and creativity in language is a significant yet overlooked area of study, with recent research beginning to address this important question (Nattinger & DeCarrico 1992:35).
The increasing focus on lexical chunks highlights their significance not only in enhancing lexical memorization and language fluency but also in fostering creative language production.
Lexical chunks are not solely fixed expressions; they also serve as flexible building blocks for language According to Nattinger and DeCarrico (1992), Hakuta (1974) describes these chunks as sentence segments that can incorporate variable elements, like noun or verb phrases This indicates that lexical chunks are integral to the creative process of language formation, rather than being merely incidental to it.
Pawley and Syder (1983) emphasize that lexical chunks are essential for language production, acting as foundational elements that facilitate novelty and creativity Similarly, Nattinger and DeCarrico (1992) suggest that simple phrases with substantial lexical variation are highly effective pattern generators When these syntactic patterns are straightforward and flexible, they promote consistent growth in creative language use.
According to Nattinger and DeCarrico (1992:60), lexical phrases are essential indicators that guide the flow of both spoken and written discourse This suggests that lexical chunks function as key discourse devices, linking meaning and structure within communication.
Lexical chunks serve as essential tools for guiding overall language production, indicating relationships between ideas They help clarify whether the subsequent information contrasts with, adds to, or exemplifies the preceding content.
Logical connectors: as a result (of X); nevertheless; because (of) X; in spite of X
Temporal connectors: the day/week/month/year before/ after _; and then; after X then/ the next is Y
Utilizing lexical chunks can significantly enhance language production for learners, enabling them to create more cohesive statements, especially when expressing evaluations with phrases like "as far as I" or "there's no doubt that." These chunks not only signal the intended direction of discourse but also improve overall comprehension In summary, the strategic use of appropriate lexical chunks aids in guiding language production and fosters effective understanding.
Motivation plays a crucial role in language learning, with Lightbown and Spada (2006:57) referencing Gardner's assertion that a positive attitude and motivation significantly contribute to success in second language acquisition Research indicates that utilizing lexical chunks can alleviate frustration and enhance motivation in the learning process.
In "Lexical Phrases and Language Teaching," Nattinger and DeCarrico emphasize that lexical chunks enable language learners to use expressions they may not yet be able to create independently By allowing these phrases to be stored and retrieved as complete units, learners can alleviate frustration and enhance their motivation in the language acquisition process.
Hakuta (1976) argues that lexical chunks allow language learners to convey meanings they are not yet able to construct independently He suggests that if learners must wait to fully understand structural rules before they can express themselves, their ability to communicate effectively is significantly restricted, particularly in the early stages of language acquisition Additionally, he points out that using lexical chunks gives L2 learners an advantage, as these chunks can facilitate the expression of various functions even at the initial phases of language development.
Lexical chunks and language fluency
Fluency in writing is a key objective for language learners, enabling them to express themselves freely and coherently Research indicates that the use of lexical chunks significantly enhances language fluency, as noted by Lewis (1997), who emphasizes that fluency relies on acquiring a substantial collection of fixed and semi-fixed phrases Nattinger and DeCarrico (1992) further assert that the ability to utilize lexical phrases is crucial for speaking fluently Lexical chunks are stored and retrieved as complete units, facilitating easier memorization and usage without the complexities of word selection and grammatical rules (Pawley & Syder, 1983) This characteristic not only reduces the cognitive load associated with language processing but also enables learners to produce language that is both patterned and fluent.
Mastering a significant number of lexical chunks allows students to quickly retrieve entire phrases for speaking, reducing the cognitive load associated with language selection This enables them to focus more on the content of their speech, enhancing their fluency Conversely, students lacking sufficient lexical chunks must construct sentences individually based on grammatical rules, which can hinder their speaking fluency.
Selecting the right words requires more time, leading to a decrease in processing speed and less opportunity to focus on the content of the language These factors ultimately impact both the fluency and quality of spoken communication.
Lexicalchunks and accuracy of language
The explicit purpose of accuracy of language is that ―students can get the language
Many learners can communicate fluently, but their expressions often differ from those of native speakers Research indicates that the appropriate use of lexical chunks enhances language accuracy and makes it sound more native-like, as a significant portion of native speech consists of these meaningful phrases High-scoring students in speaking tests frequently utilize a variety of lexical chunks, resulting in more accurate and idiomatic language, which contributes to their success Conversely, many students lack a sufficient repertoire of lexical chunks; while they may construct grammatically correct sentences, these often lack the idiomatic quality and precision found in native speech.
Lexical chunks and creative language production
Research indicates that lexical chunks serve as essential components for creative language production (Pawley & Syder, 1983) Experts Hakuta and Wong-Fillmore assert that the routines and patterns acquired during language learning directly contribute to creative expression (Nattinger & DeCarrico, 1992) By utilizing foundational lexical frames, learners can adapt flexible elements in various contexts Consequently, mastering a sufficient number of semi-fixed lexical chunks enables learners to generate innovative phrases and sentences.
Students who achieve high scores in compositions utilize a significantly greater variety of lexical chunks compared to their lower-scoring peers Among these, sentence builders are the most frequently employed, followed by phrasal constraints, polywords, collocations, and institutional expressions This indicates that high-scoring students rely heavily on sentence builders and phrasal constraints in their spoken language.
According to Nattinger and DeCarrico, sentence builders are flexible lexical phrases that provide a framework for sentences, allowing for significant variation in their components Examples of these sentence builders include phrases like "As far as I am concerned," "it seems to me that," and "not only but also." Similarly, phrasal constraints are semi-fixed phrases that permit some variation in lexical and phrasal categories In contrast, collocations and institutional expressions are more rigid, offering limited variability, while polywords are fixed phrases with no flexibility High scorers in speaking utilize a greater number of these semi-fixed chunks, enabling them to create more complex and creative expressions, which can leave a lasting impression on evaluators and enhance students' performance in speaking tests.
Students with low speaking marks often rely on a limited variety of lexical chunks, leading to compositions that can be monotonous While they can articulate their opinions, the repetitive use of simple expressions such as "I think," "there is/are," and "I believe" results in a lack of sentence structure diversity This overuse of certain lexical chunks contributes to a tedious speaking experience, highlighting the importance of incorporating a broader range of vocabulary to enhance speaking quality.
Methodology and Data analysis
Research questions
The study is conducted to answer to the research question:
1 How does the teaching and learning of lexical chunks change students‘ speaking fluency?
2 What do the students perceive of the benefits of learning lexical chunks to their speaking?
The continuing education context
This study focused on 11th-grade students at a continuing education center in Hanoi, who often struggle with limited speaking abilities and shyness when expressing their ideas The research highlights that elementary-level students significantly benefit from the use of fixed lexical chunks, which help them overcome restrictions in their speaking skills.
This study involves 45 non-English major students from a continuing education center, all of whom are native Vietnamese speakers with similar English learning backgrounds Each participant has studied English for seven years during their elementary and secondary education To ensure the reliability of the experiment, the participants were not informed that they were part of a study.
Official statistics indicate that students in continuing education centers have a low success rate on the university entrance exam Drawing from both the reported data and my extensive teaching experience in these centers, I observe that many graduates often find employment as manual laborers in factories or seek opportunities abroad.
The participants
A study was conducted with 45 non-English major students from a continuing education center in Hanoi, all of whom had completed secondary school and possessed elementary English proficiency Prior to the lexical chunk course, these students undertook two pre-tests, consisting of a multiple-choice chunk test and a speaking test Ultimately, at the conclusion of the study, 20 out of the 45 students were randomly selected to participate in the post-test.
Research procedure
This action research study involves four key stages: diagnosing an issue, proposing solutions, implementing actions, and collecting and analyzing data Teachers focused on enhancing students' speaking fluency by promoting awareness of lexical chunks during their speaking practice To evaluate the effectiveness of these teaching strategies, data was gathered through classroom observations, test scores, and semi-structured interviews, allowing for a comprehensive analysis of the impact on students' speaking proficiency.
In my teaching experience, I noticed that many students were hesitant to speak English and engage in speaking activities, which puzzled me Upon discussing their reluctance, I discovered that their limited vocabulary was a significant barrier I realized that enhancing their vocabulary should be the initial focus, though it would require considerable time Recalling my MA course, I understood the importance of teaching lexical chunks instead of isolated words Motivated by this insight, I sought additional literature on the topic and decided to implement this strategy in my classroom.
To assess the students' lexical competence, I designed a test that provided baseline information The results indicated a moderate awareness of lexical chunks among the learners, coupled with a significant number of pauses in their speaking samples Each student's score on the multiple-choice chunk test served as their initial score The primary challenges identified in their speaking included a relatively slow speaking speed and a high frequency of hesitations and pauses.
Figure 1 : Distribution of the multiple-choice chunk test score
Table 2.1 : Number of pauses in a speaking pre-test
Number of pauses in each sample
After figuring out the subject‘s bottlenecks in speaking fluency, I came up with an appoach, by which I used lexical chunks to support the students doing speaking tasks
The speaking process is divided into three key sections: pre-speaking, while-speaking, and post-speaking Initially, I classified and demonstrated the identification and usage of lexical chunks During the speaking phase, students were encouraged to recognize and memorize these chunks through repetition In the post-speaking stage, I highlighted the lexical chunks in the transcripts and directed the students' attention to them Furthermore, students were tasked with translating these chunks into Vietnamese to enhance their understanding and awareness of lexical chunks.
Enhancing students' awareness of lexical chunks was achieved by focusing on comprehensive output activities, such as summarizing after speaking and outlining before speaking This transition from speaking to writing allowed students to gain a deeper understanding of how lexical chunks are utilized in both forms of communication.
At the conclusion of the study, I randomly selected 20 out of 45 students to assess their speaking fluency To enhance their vocabulary, I focused on helping them memorize commonly used lexical chunks, as the vocabulary for the multiple-choice chunk test and the speaking pre-test differed from that of the speaking post-test This quantitative speaking practice allowed students to effectively apply their knowledge of lexical chunks, transitioning from declarative to procedural knowledge (O'Malley & Chamot, 1990) By cultivating the habit of speaking through the memorization of these chunks, the students experienced improvements in their speaking speed and reduced pauses.
Data collection and Analysis
Data were collected from two main sources: periodical progress tests and students‘ reflections
Each test consists of 20 items aimed at evaluating students' retention and improvements in speaking fluency, specifically focusing on the frequency and duration of pauses and hesitations during English speaking lessons Scoring is based on a point system where each correct answer earns one point, with a maximum total of 30 points The results are categorized into five ranks: A (30-27), B (26-24), C (23-21), D (20-18), and F (17-0).
The multiple-choice chunk test must be completed within 20 minutes in the classroom, where students are tasked with selecting the single best answer to complete each sentence.
1 I am not _ at Math a good b gooder c well d weller
Students are assessed through pre- and post-tests that require them to speak for 1 to 2 minutes (approximately 100-200 words) in the classroom without any reference materials, including dictionaries The scoring for the speaking test focuses on the frequency of pauses during their speech Additionally, a detailed analysis of the test results includes an examination of the usage of lexical chunks in the students' compositions.
The speaking pre-test focuses on students describing their favorite subject, a topic closely connected to their lives This relevance encourages students to share personal insights and information effectively.
The speaking post-test requires students to select their favorite subject and articulate the reasons for their preference This topic mirrors the pre-test, allowing students to revisit their previous ideas while also providing an opportunity to utilize learned lexical chunks, ultimately enhancing their speaking skills.
After the tests, the results of the three tests will be analysed, and the relationship between L2 learners‘ using level of lexical chunks and their language production will be investigated
Students‘ reflection Interview (See Appendix D)
At the conclusion of the treatment focused on using lexical chunks to enhance students' fluency, participants were encouraged to write reflections on the benefits they perceived from learning these chunks for their English speaking skills These reflections were composed in Vietnamese, guided by specific questions to facilitate their thoughts.
1 How does the learning of lexical chunks influence your learning to speak English?
2 How does your speaking fluency change after the learning of lexical chunks in the speaking lessons?
Findings
2.6.1 How does the teaching and learning of lexical chunks change the students’ speaking fluency?
The teaching and learning of lexical chunks did change your students‘ speaking fluency at varying degrees (see Table 2.2 below)
Table 2.2: Number of pauses in a speaking post-test among the tested 20 students
Number of pauses in each sample
The comparison of speaking pre- and post-test results revealed a significant decrease in the number of pauses among students In the pre-test, 84.3% of students (38 total) had fewer than 30 and 20 pauses, whereas this number dropped to just 35% (7 students) in the post-test Additionally, the proportion of students with fewer than 10 and 5 pauses increased from 15.5% (7 students) in the pre-test to approximately 75% (15 students) in the post-test Overall, these findings indicate a marked improvement in speaking speed and fluency as the experiment progressed.
2.6.2 How do the students perceive of the benefits of the learning of lexical chunks to their speaking ability?
The students‘ reflection of 45 students were analyzed by themes quantitatively Below are the results:
Students‘ perceived benefits No of mentions
1 I find it easier to use English in my speaking
2 I feel more confident in speaking
3 I am not afraid of errors while speaking any more
4 I can use English to communicate in a simple way
5 It changes very little my ability to speak
6 I do not see any change in my ability to speak English
2.7 Discussion of the relationship between L2 learners‟ use of lexical chunks and language production
Research shows that learners proficient in language production tend to excel in using lexical chunks, while those adept at utilizing these chunks also demonstrate higher levels of language production This mutual reinforcement underscores a strong positive correlation between the use of lexical chunks and overall language production skills.
Fluency, accuracy, creativity, and cohesion are essential elements of effective language production Research indicates that the use of lexical chunks significantly improves language fluency, enhances accuracy, fosters creative expression, and supports overall language production.
This study investigates the link between L2 learners' use of lexical chunks and their language production The research employs a multiple-choice chunk test, speaking pre- and post-tests, and interviews, revealing that students who utilize more lexical chunks tend to score higher in these assessments The findings indicate that a greater proficiency in lexical chunks positively influences L2 learners' language production skills.
Lexical chunks are commonly used phrases that are either fixed or semi-fixed, allowing language learners to produce them as whole units rather than decoding individual words This automatic retrieval of chunks simplifies language production and reduces stress for L2 learners Research indicates that utilizing lexical chunks can enhance fluency and accuracy, foster creative expression, and guide overall language production Additionally, these chunks can boost motivation among learners by enabling them to communicate ideas that they may not yet be able to construct independently.
Low-level English learners demonstrate inadequate knowledge of lexical chunks and language production, as evidenced by three tests The multiple-choice chunk and speaking pre-test reveal a tendency among students to favor grammatically correct but inappropriate lexical chunks Analysis of interview responses indicates that Vietnamese English teachers prioritize grammatical rules and individual words, neglecting the teaching of lexical chunks However, the speaking post-test shows an improvement in students' speaking production after engaging with lessons focused on lexical chunks This suggests that the low proficiency in language production largely stems from insufficient exposure to lexical chunks Consequently, implementing effective instruction on lexical chunks is essential for enhancing learners' English proficiency.
This study highlights the significance of lexical chunks in language production and offers pedagogical recommendations for English instruction By reshaping Vietnamese learners' understanding of language acquisition, teachers can implement effective teaching methods and activities to significantly enhance learners' mastery of lexical chunks.
Lexical chunks are crucial for L2 learners in acquiring language skills, as they enhance fluency, idiomatic expression, creativity, and overall language production Therefore, it is essential to prioritize and focus on teaching these chunks in English instruction for effective learning outcomes.
2 Reflection 2.1 Changes in the teacher‟s awareness of teaching vocabulary and speaking:
From the perspective of educators, action research allows for objective evaluation of teaching practices and facilitates research on topics relevant to their daily instruction I believe that action research enhances teaching effectiveness by integrating learning theories into practical application Throughout this process, the emphasis transitions from teacher-led demonstrations to fostering learner development.
―atomicity of using lexical chunks in speaking process, with an emphasis on learners‘ major role in learning to speaking more fluently‖(He,2011)
This case study explores the impact of lexical chunk theory on EFL speaking skills, revealing that increased awareness of lexical chunks may enhance speaking fluency However, since the study is based on a single participant, further empirical research is needed to validate these findings.
Increased awareness of lexical chunks significantly enhances reading fluency in EFL learners Explicit instruction is essential for acquiring these chunks (Ellis, 1997), and research supports the notion that speaking fluency is closely linked to language competence (Walzoyk, 1999) When students can automatically recognize and utilize lexical chunks during speaking, their fluency improves Therefore, incorporating explicit teaching methods focused on lexical chunks in speaking classes is beneficial for enhancing students' speaking performance Additionally, action research provides EFL teachers with opportunities to explore and refine their teaching practices (Cheng, 2010; Gao, 2003; Ren, 2006; Liu, 2009).
2.2 Advantages from the process of conducting the action research:
2.2.1 Form of teacher professional development:
Research and reflection empower teachers to develop professionally and enhance their confidence Engaging in action research projects fosters critical thinking, improves self-efficacy, encourages collaboration, and positively influences attitudes toward change Through this process, educators gain insights into their own practices, understand their students better, collaborate effectively with colleagues, and identify ongoing improvement strategies.
2.2.2 Potential to impact school change:
Engaging in action research empowers teachers to focus on school and district-wide issues rather than solely individual concerns This collaborative process fosters enhanced communication and collegiality among educators, leading to valuable contributions to the understanding of teaching and learning Additionally, it helps establish priorities for comprehensive school planning and assessment, driving motivation for meaningful improvements.
Teachers often have limited opportunities for self-evaluation in schools, typically occurring in informal settings Action research provides a structured approach for educators to reflect on their teaching practices While the primary focus is on student outcomes, teachers can also explore the impact of their instruction, collaborate more effectively with colleagues, and identify strategies for overall school improvement This shift in conversation from merely "fixing" issues to fostering understanding can lead to meaningful professional growth.
2.2.4 Focus on school issue, problem, or area of collective interest:
Research conducted with a teacher's own students in a familiar setting enhances the relevance and validity of academic studies Often perceived as disconnected from educators' daily experiences, academic research can actually provide valuable insights that teachers can integrate into their classrooms This approach reassures parents and education administrators that teachers are thoughtfully applying research findings rather than merely following trends, transforming knowledge into meaningful practices.
2.3 Possible limitations in the action research:
Reflection
From a teacher's perspective, action research allows for objective evaluation of their teaching and facilitates research on topics relevant to their daily practice I believe that action research enhances teaching effectiveness by integrating learning theories into practical application Throughout this process, the emphasis transitions from teacher-led demonstrations to fostering student engagement and development.
―atomicity of using lexical chunks in speaking process, with an emphasis on learners‘ major role in learning to speaking more fluently‖(He,2011)
This case study investigates the impact of lexical chunk theory on teaching English as a Foreign Language (EFL) speaking skills The findings indicate that increased awareness of lexical chunks can enhance speaking fluency However, since this study is based on a single student, further empirical research is needed to confirm these results.
Increased awareness of lexical chunks in EFL speaking positively influences reading fluency, as explicit instruction aids in their acquisition (Ellis, 1997) This is supported by Walzoyk (1999), who emphasizes the connection between speaking fluency and language competence When students can automatically identify and use numerous lexical chunks during speaking, their fluency is likely to improve Thus, explicit teaching methods that enhance students' awareness and application of lexical chunks are beneficial for their speaking performance Additionally, action research provides EFL teachers with opportunities to explore their teaching practices and engage in meaningful research (Cheng, 2010; Gao, 2003; Ren, 2006; Liu, 2009).
2.2 Advantages from the process of conducting the action research:
2.2.1 Form of teacher professional development:
Research and reflection empower teachers to enhance their skills and build confidence in their roles Engaging in action research projects fosters critical thinking, boosts self-efficacy, encourages collaboration, and positively shapes attitudes towards change Through this process, educators gain valuable insights about themselves, their students, and their peers, enabling them to identify continuous improvement strategies.
2.2.2 Potential to impact school change:
Engaging in action research empowers teachers to focus on broader school and district issues rather than solely individual concerns This collaborative process fosters enhanced communication and collegiality among educators, leading to valuable contributions to the knowledge base of teaching and learning Additionally, inquiry-driven approaches help establish priorities for school-wide planning and assessment, motivating meaningful change and improvements within the educational environment.
Opportunities for self-evaluation among teachers in schools are often limited and typically occur informally Action research provides a structured approach for educators to critically assess their teaching practices While the primary focus is generally on student outcomes, teachers can also explore the impact of their methods on students, enhance collaboration with colleagues, and identify strategies for overall school improvement This shift in focus encourages conversations that prioritize understanding over mere problem-solving.
2.2.4 Focus on school issue, problem, or area of collective interest:
Research conducted with familiar students enhances the relevance and validity of a disciplined study Academic research is often perceived as detached from educators' daily experiences; however, it can be beneficial for teachers to incorporate insights from academic discussions into their classrooms This approach not only enriches the learning environment but also reassures parents and education administrators that teachers are thoughtfully applying research findings to create meaningful educational experiences.
2.3 Possible limitations in the action research:
Improving learners' use of lexical chunks in speaking can ease the load on working memory, allowing for greater cognitive flexibility and enhanced speaking fluency However, simply increasing awareness of lexical chunks may not lead to significant improvements in advanced speaking skills Therefore, a new action research project will focus on strategies to enhance higher-level speaking abilities.
Plan for the next cycle 41 REFERENCES VII APPENDIX
The study highlights the significance of the lexical chunks approach in enhancing EFL speaking skills for both students and teachers The findings underscore valuable implications for educational practices, though the research acknowledges limitations due to time constraints and a small sample size Future suggestions can be drawn from these limitations to improve the effectiveness of this approach.
The experimental research conducted at a continuing education center in Hanoi involved a small sample size of only 45 participants, all from non-English majors at a single school, which raises concerns about the reliability of the findings As a result, the outcomes cannot be generalized causally across different contexts Future studies should aim to include a larger and more diverse participant pool, encompassing various grades, majors, and schools with differing levels of English proficiency to enhance the validity of the results.
The experiment was conducted over nearly one school year, which limited its duration and impact Extending the study to four or five terms would yield more persuasive and convincing results Future research should focus on planning longer studies to enhance the validity of the findings.
The research emphasizes the importance of exploring various aspects of English language skills, including reading, listening, and vocabulary, to gain a more objective understanding It urges educators and researchers to intensify their efforts in developing effective teaching approaches for lexical chunks, which are crucial for enhancing students' foreign language acquisition The author advocates for increased research on lexical chunk teaching methods in English education, envisioning a promising future that significantly impacts language learning and acquisition.
By the end of the lesson, students will be able to:
- Know more about some kinds of hobbies
- Apply lexical chunks to talk about their hobbies
C Teaching Aids: Textbook, computer, speaker, handouts
- What do people usually collect? seashells
*Lead-in: UNIT 13: HOBBIES – SPEAKING
Writes on their note book
Say which of the following you like/ not like doing and why
- chatting with a friend on the phone
? Which activity would you like to do and why?
? I would like to fish because it is interesting
- …because it is relaxing/ funny/ useful/ boring/ tiring/ dangerous
- …because it makes me relaxed / stronger / happy / bored / tired
- Write down on their notebooks
TASK 2 (Pair work): Practise reading the dialogue
Huong: What is your hobby, Lan ? Lan: Well, I like collecting books
Huong: Could you tell me how you collect your books?
Lan: Well, this must be done regularly Whenever I find a good book which is interesting I buy it immediately
Huong: Where do you buy your books?
Lan: I buy from the bookshop near my house and some others
28mins my mum and dad give me some
Huong: How do you organize your collection?
Lan: I classify them into categories and put each category in one corner of my bookshelf with a name tag on it Huong: What do you plan to do next, Lan?
Lan: I think I‘ll continue to make my collection richer and richer
Now practise talking to us about your hobby
New words 1.regularly / „regjulәli / (adv)
2.classify / „klổsifai / (v) 3.category / „kổtәgәri /(n)
Eg – I classify my books into different categories
Eg – a second-hand book stall
Hand out: Fill in the dialogue with a partner
Huong: Could you tell me ……… ?
Lan: Well, this must be done regularly Whenever I find a good book ………I buy it immediately
Huong: ……… do you buy your books?
Lan: I buy from the bookshop near my house and some others from ….……… Sometimes my friends, my mum and dad give me some
- Go to the answer about collecting stamps
- Choose the hobbies to talk
Lan: I classify them into categories and put each category in one corner of my bookshelf with………
Huong: ………to do next,Lan?
Lan: I think I‘ll continue to………
Where to keep in album buy, exchange, ask sb to give, make pen friends broaden knowledge, know more about …
B:I/ buy from post office, ask / members of my family, friends, postmen make pen friends with people overseas / exchange stamps with others
B:I/classify stamps into categories: animals, plants, birds,landscape about
- Work in groups and give feedback for each other
B: album A: Why / like / collecting stamps?
B: I/ broaden my knowledge: know more about landscape, people, animals
A: What / plan for the future?
- Bettina Dorfmann has the largest Barbie doll collection
- He‟s very famous for his collection of stamps with the map of Vietnam His name is …………
- Read and give the answer quickly
- Go around ask their friends
- Present their results to the whole class
Arnaud, P.J.L, & Béjoint, H (1992) Vocabulary and Applied Linguistics Springer
Berne, J.I & Blachowicz, C.L.Z (2008) What reading teachers say about vocabulary instruction: Voices from the classroom The Reading Teacher
Boers, F (2006) Formulaic sequences and perceived oral proficiency: Putting a lexical approach to the test Language Teaching Research SAGE Journals
Cameron, D (2001) Working with spoken discourse SAGE Publications
Coady, J & Huckin, T (1997) Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition: A
Rationale for Pedagogy Cambridge University Press
Conklin, K & Schmitt, N (2008) Formulaic Sequences: Are They Processed More
Quickly than Nonformulaic Language by Native and Nonnative Speakers?
Crystal, D (1997) English as a Global Language Cambridge University Press
Crystal, D (2005) The Stories of English The Overlook Press, Peter Mayer
Dweik, B.S & Shakra, MM Abu (2011) Problems in Translating Collocations in
Religious Texts from Arabic into English Linguistics Journal
Evert, S (2004) Identifying Morphosyntactic Preferences in Collocations
Language Resources and Evaluation Conference
Foster, C (2001) Environmental perceptions and walking in English adults
Journal of Epidemiol Community Health
Gu, P.Y (2003) Fine Brush and Freehand: The Vocabulary‐Learning Art of Two
Successful Chinese EFL Learners TESOL Quarterly Wiley Online Library
Halliday, M.A.K (1966) Some notes on 'deep' grammar Journal of Linguistics
Krashen, S (1989) We Acquire Vocabulary and Spelling by Reading: Additional
Evidence for the Input Hypothesis The Modern Language Journal Volume
Laufer, B & Nation, P (1999) A vocabulary-size test of controlled productive ability SAGE Journals
Levinson, S.C (1983) Pragmatics (Cambridge textbooks in linguistics) Cambridge
Lewis, M (1993) The Lexical Approach: The State of ELT and a Way Forward
Linse, C (2005) An analysis of predictable picture books: some beginning insights
Books and Young Learners of English Young Learner Special Interest Group Conference
McCarthy, M & Carter, R (2002) Native‐speaker norms and International
English: a classroom view ELT Journal Oxford University Press
McCarthy, M & Carter, R (2006) Ten criteria for a spoken grammar
Explorations in corpus linguistics Cambridge University Press
Meara, P (1980) Vocabulary acquisition: A neglected aspect of language learning
Nation, P (1989) Improving speaking fluency System Vol 7 Pergamon Press
Nation, P (1990) How Large Can a Receptive Vocabulary Be? Applied
Linguistics, Volume 11, Issue 4 Oxford University Press
Nation, P (2011) A Bilingual Vocabulary Size Test of English for Vietnamese
Nattinger, J.R & DeCarrico, J.S (1992) Oxford Applied Linguistics Oxford
Newell, W (1990) Simultaneous Communication: A DESCRIPTION BY DEAF
PROFESSIONALS WORKING IN AN EDUCATIONAL SETTING Gallaudet
Oxford, R (1990) Adult Language Learning Styles and Strategies in an Intensive
Training Setting The Modern Language Journal Volume 74, Issue 3
Pawley, A & Syder, F.H (1983) Two puzzles for linguistic theory: nativelike selection and nativelike fluency Language and Communication Routledge
Read, J (2000) Assessing vocabulary Cambridge University Press
Richards, J.C, & Renandya, W.A (2002) Methodology in Language Teaching: An
Anthology of Current Practice Cambridge University Press
Richards, J.C (1980) Conversation TESOL Quarterly Vol 14, No 4 Teachers of
English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc (TESOL)
Schmitt, N (1999) The relationship between TOEFL vocabulary items and meaning, association, collocation and word-class knowledge SAGE
Schmitt, N (2000) Instructed second language vocabulary learning SAGE
Scrivener, J (2005) Learning Teaching Macmillan Education
Sinclair, J (1991) The Idiom Principle Oxford Journals Oxford University Press Thornbury, S (2004) Big Words, Small Grammar English Teaching Professional
Wilkins, D.A (1972) Grammatical, Situational and Notional Syllabuses Oxford
Willis, J (2006) A flexible framework for task-based learning Challenge and change in language teaching
Multiple-choice chunk test (20 minutes)
Direction: There are 20 incomplete sentences in this part For each sentence there are four choices marked A, B, C and D Choose the ONE answer that best completes the sentence
1 We should use cloth bags of plastic bags
2 Students should be eager in social activities
A participate B to participate C to participating D participated
3 It‘s dangerous in this river
A swim B to swim C swimming D swam
4 We are looking forward you in June
A to seeing B see C saw D be seen
5 Try to the amount of fat in your diet
6 This table is made wood
7 The champagne is made grapes
8 The government ought to do something to prevent people _ throwing trash into the river
9 Solar energy can be changed electricity
10.The amount of solar energy that reaches the earth depends the atmosphere
11 The natural environment consists all natural resources
12 Do you need any help? - _
A Sure B Certainly C No problem D No Thank you
13 She came up Jim‘s car
14 Dave has a good of humor
15 What‘s wrong the engine? It‘s making an awful noise
16 I am afraid that I can‘t agree _you
A with B at C on D in 17.Your friendship should be based on trust
18 The director was critical the way we were doing the work
19 Tony is very disappointed _ the results of the exam
20 (What/ Do/ Would/ Will) you like to come? – I‘d love to
Keys to the multiple-choice chunk test:
Directions: For this part, you are required to speak in 1 to 2 minutes (about 100 –
200 words) to the whole class You are not permitted to bring any reference books, including dictionaries The topic is to describe their friends
Directions: : For this part, you are required to speak in 1 to 2 minutes (about 100 –
200 words) to the whole class You are not permitted to bring any reference books, including dictionaries The topic is to describe their hobbies which they share with their friends
1) What problems do you usually meet in your English speaking?
2) Do you deliberately memorize lexical phrases like proverbs, sentences patterns and so on in the English learning process?
3) Do you think it is necessary to teach knowledge of lexical chunks in class?
Students‘ scores of the multiple-choice chunk test
Number of pauses in the pre-speaking test:
Student No Number of pauses