《义务教育英语课程标准（2022年版）》将思维品质纳入核心素养，强调“在语言学习中发展思维，在思维发展中推进语言学习”，这为思维与语言教学的整合提供了指导，为语言深度学习研究的合理性提供了佐证。词汇作为语言的基本要素，其学习过程也应实现与思维的深层融合发展。然而，词汇类别的纷繁性和习得的耗时性导致词汇教学存在形式化、单一化和浅层化问题，成为英语学习者词汇深度习得的阻碍，也为词汇形义用统一的情境式教学提供了机遇。鉴于此，本研究引入形式聚焦教学理论，构建计划形式聚焦词汇教学模式（PFonF模式）、附带形式聚焦词汇教学模式（IFonF模式）和全形式词汇教学模式（FonFs模式），开展实验研究，以探究其对于初中英语学习者词汇深度习得的影响和差异，为当下词汇教学困境提供具体的应对方法。

本研究基于形式聚焦教学理论、信息加工学习理论、投入量假说和词汇深度习得理论，采用教育实验法、访谈法、问卷调查法、教育测量法等研究方法，应用半结构性访谈提纲、接受度调查问卷、语言水平测试卷、词汇量测试、词汇知识量表、词汇知识综合测试等研究工具，以新疆伊宁市Y中学初中三年级101名学生为被试开展了为期三个月的实验研究，期望从两个类型词汇深度习得效果（接受性和产出性）和四个维度（词形、词义、形义对应和词用）探究不同词汇教学模式对被试词汇深度习得效果的影响及其差异。研究问题包括：第一，PFonF模式对被试词汇深度习得效果有何影响？第二，IFonF模式对被试词汇深度习得效果有何影响？第三，FonFs模式对被试词汇深度习得效果有何影响？第四，PFonF、IFonF和FonFs三模式对被试词汇深度习得效果影响有何差异？

研究发现：第一，PFonF模式对被试词汇深度习得效果具有积极影响。被试词汇的即时深度习得水平高，长时保留效果好，即时和延时后测在.05水平上不存在显著差异；被试接受性词汇即时深度习得水平高，长时保留效果好，即时和延时后测在.05水平上不存在显著差异，但词用维度长时保留效果弱，即时和延时后测在.01水平上存在显著差异；被试产出性词汇的即时深度习得水平高，长时保留效果好，即时和延时后测在.05水平上不存在显著差异，但词用维度仅实现中等深度习得水平。第二，IFonF模式对被试词汇深度习得效果影响存在一定差异。被试词汇的即时深度习得水平高，长时保留效果弱，即时和延时后测在.01水平上存在显著差异；被试接受性词汇的即时深度习得水平高，长时保留效果好，即时和延时后测在.05水平上不存在显著差异；被试产出性词汇的即时深度习得水平高，长时保留效果好，即时和延时后测在.05水平上不存在显著差异，但词用维度仅实现中等深度习得水平。第三，FonFs模式对被试词汇深度习得效果具有短时积极影响。被试词汇即时深度习得实现中等水平，但长时保留效果弱，即时和延时后测在.01水平上存在显著差异；被试接受性词汇即时深度习得实现中等水平，但长时保留效果弱，即时和延时后测在.01水平上存在显著差异；被试产出性词汇即时深度习得实现中等水平，但长时保留效果弱，即时和延时后测在.01水平上存在显著差异，而词用维度仅实现低深度习得水平。第四，PFonF、IFonF和FonFs三模式对被试词汇深度习得效果的影响存在差异。在词汇深度习得方面，PFonF模式和IFonF模式促进和保留作用相似且显著优于FonFs模式；在接受性词汇深度习得方面，PFonF模式和IFonF模式促进和保留作用相似且显著优于FonFs模式，但在形义对应维度，三模式促进作用相似，在词义维度，三模式保留作用相似；在产出性词汇深度习得方面，PFonF模式和IFonF模式促进和保留作用相似且显著优于FonFs模式。

总体而言，形式聚焦理论下的PFonF模式和IFonF模式与结构性大纲下的FonFs模式对整体词汇深度习得、接受性词汇和产出性词汇深度习得的影响均存在显著性差异（除接受性词汇形义对应维度和词义维度外），该结果的原因主要包括意义交际情境的引入与否和被试投入量的大小。据此，研究者认为提高词汇教学深度的方式包括：设计多样化的词汇学习任务，提升学习者词汇接触频率；实施情境化的词汇学习活动，提升词汇记忆效果；实施促发投入量的词汇学习活动，确保词汇迁移能力的发展。

The English Curriculum Standards for Compulsory Education (2022 Edition) puts the thinking quality into the core literacy, emphasizing “developing thinking in language learning and promoting language learning in the process of thinking development”, which provides guidance for the integration of thinking and language teaching, also provides evidence for the rationality of language deep learning research. Vocabulary, as a basic element of language, its learning process should also be deeply integrated with thinking . However, the complexity of vocabulary categories and the time-consuming acquisition process lead to the problems of formalization, simplification and superficiality in vocabulary teaching, which hinders English learners’ vocabulary depth acquisition, but also provides opportunities for situational teaching with unified vocabulary form, meaning and use. In view of this, this study introduces the Focus-on-Form Instruction Theory, constructs the planned focus-on-form vocabulary teaching model (PFonF mode), the incidental focus-on-form vocabulary teaching mode (IFonF mode) and the focus-on-forms vocabulary teaching mode (FonFs mode), and carries out experimental research to explore their effects and differences on junior high school English learners’ vocabulary depth acquisition, so as to provide specific solutions to the current vocabulary teaching difficulties.

Based on the Focus-on-Form Instruction Theory, Information Processing Learning Theory, Involvement Load Hypothesis and Vocabulary Depth Acquisition Theory, this study adopts educational experiment method, literature research method, interview method, questionnaire method, educational measurement method and so on as research methods, applies semi-structured interview outline, acceptance questionnaire, language proficiency test, vocabulary level test, vocabulary size test, vocabulary knowledge comprehensive test and so on research tools. A three-month experimental study was conducted with 101 grade three students from Y junior high school of Yining City, Xinjiang as subjects, hoping to explore the effects and differences of different vocabulary teaching model on vocabulary depth acquisition from two types of vocabulary (receptivity and productivity) and four dimensions (vocabulary form, vocabulary meaning, correspondence between form and meaning as well as vocabulary use). The research questions include: What effects do the PFonF mode have on subjects’ vocabulary depth acquisition? What effects do IFonF mode have on subjects’ vocabulary depth acquisition? What effects do the FonFs mode have on subjects’ vocabulary depth acquisition? What are the differences in the effects of PFonF, IFonF and FonFs mode on subjects’ vocabulary depth acquisition?

The findings are as follows: Firstly, the PFonF mode has positive effects on subjects’ vocabulary depth acquisition. Subjects realize high level of instant vocabulary depth acquisition and long-term retention, with no significant difference between instant and delayed post-test at .05 level; Subjects’ receptive vocabulary realizes high level of instant depth acquisition and long-term retention, with no significant difference between instant and delayed post-test at .05 level, but the long-term retention effect of vocabulary use sub-dimension is weak, with a significant difference between immediate and delayed post-test at .01 level; Subjects’ productive vocabulary realizes high level of instant depth acquisition and long-term retention, with no significant difference between instant and delayed post-test at .05 level, but the vocabulary use dimension only achieves a medium level of depth acquisition. Secondly, IFonF mode’s effects on vocabulary depth acquisition have certain differences. Subjects realize high level of instant vocabulary depth acquisition but long-term retention is week, with a significant difference between immediate and delayed post-test at .01 level; Subjects’ receptive vocabulary realizes high level of instant depth acquisition and long-term retention, with no significant difference between instant and delayed post-test at .05 level; Subjects’ productive vocabulary realizes high level of instant depth acquisition and long-term retention, with no significant difference between instant and delayed post-test at .05 level, but the vocabulary use sub-dimension only achieves a medium level of depth acquisition. Thirdly, FonFs mode has short-term positive effects on vocabulary depth acquisition. Subjects’ instant vocabulary depth acquisition achieves a medium level, but the long-term retention is weak, with a significant difference between the instant and delayed post-test at .01 level; Subjects’ instant depth acquisition of receptive vocabulary achieves a medium level, but the long-term retention is weak, with a significant difference between the instant and delayed post-test at .01 level; Subjects’ instant depth acquisition of productive vocabulary achieves a medium level, but the long-term retention is weak, with a significant difference between the instant and delayed post-test at .01 level, but the vocabulary use sub-dimension only achieves a low level of depth acquisition. Fourthly, there are some differences in the effects of PFonF, IFonF and FonFs mode on the vocabulary depth acquisition. In terms of vocabulary depth acquisition, PFonF mode and IFonF mode have similar promotion effects and are significantly better than FonFs mode; In terms of receptive vocabulary depth acquisition, PFonF mode and IFonF mode have similar and better significantly promotion effects than FonFs mode, but in the sub-dimension of form and meaning correspondence, three modes have similar promotion effects, in vocabulary meaning sub-dimension, they have similar retention effect; In terms of productive vocabulary depth acquisition, PFonF mode and IFonF mode have similar promotion effects and are significantly better than FonFs mode.

Generally speaking, there are significant differences between the PFonF mode and IFonF mode under the Focus-on Form Theory and the FonFs mode under the structural syllabus in terms of overall vocabulary depth acquisition, receptive vocabulary and productive vocabulary depth acquisition (except the sub-dimension of correspondence between form and meaning as well as vocabulary meaning of receptive vocabulary). The reasons for this result mainly include the introduction of meaningful communication situations and the size of subjects’ Involvement Load. Based on this, researcher believes that the ways to improve the vocabulary depth teaching include: Design diversified vocabulary learning tasks, Improve learners’ vocabulary contact frequency; Implement situational vocabulary learning activities, promote vocabulary memory effects; Apply high involvement load vocabulary learning activities, Ensure the development of vocabulary transfer ability.

[1]康德.康德著作全集:第4卷:纯粹理性批判(第一版)[M].李秋零,译.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004:9.

[2]洪堡特.论人类语言结构的差异及其对人类精神发展的影响[M].姚小平,译.北京:商务印书馆,1999.

[3]教育部.义务教育英语课程标准(2022年版)[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2022.

[4]陈向明.教育研究方法[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2013.

[5]林琼.聚焦形式教学引论[M].安徽:安徽大学出版社, 2010.

[6]伍新春.高等教育心理学[M].北京:高等教育出版社,1999.

[7]施良方.学习论[M].北京:人民教育出版社,2008.

[8]王有智.学习心理学[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2010.

[9]Joyce,B & Weil,M.教学模式[M].荆建华,等,译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2002.

[10]保罗·内申,顾永琦.英语教师专业素养丛书外语词汇教学的方法[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2019.

[11]郭秀艳,杨治良.实验心理学[M].北京:人民教育出版社,2007:496-497

[12]裴娣娜.教育研究方法导论[M].合肥:安徽教育出版社,2000.

[13]赵新良.教育科学研究方法[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2009.

[14]周家骥.教育科研方法[M].上海:上海教育出版社,1999.

[15]杨钋,林小英.聆听与倾诉—质的研究方法应用论文集[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2001.

[16]萧浩辉.决策科学辞典[M].北京:人民出版社,1995.

[17]王孝玲.教育测量[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2005.

[18]周燕.词汇教学的有效性研究[J].教学与管理,2011(15):98-100.

[19]王艳玲.新课程视域下高中英语词汇教学的问题与对策研究[J].中小学教师培训,2015(07):56-58.

[20]陈新忠,景鹏.高中英语学科核心素养指导下的词汇教学[J].基础教育课程,2019(20):41-46.

[21]朱志敏.英语词汇教学策略研究[J].教学与管理,2010(30):117-118.

[22]李红莉.英语词汇教学存在的问题及其改进策略[J].教学与管理,2013(24):136-138.

[23]杜娟.“形式聚焦”词汇教学:形式与意义的整合[J].教学管理与教育研究,2016,1(17):22-23.

[24]洪炜,王丽婧.Focus on Form和Focus on Forms两种教学法对汉语二语词汇学习的影响[J].世界汉语教学,2016,30(02):264-275.

[25]王中祥.形式聚焦:形式与意义兼顾的词汇教学方案[J].考试与评价(大学英语教研版),2012(02):57-61.

[26]王中祥.基于形式聚焦的二语词汇附带习得研究[J].外语艺术教育研究,2011,(2):57-62.

[27]蔡宝来,白军胜.试论教育研究的科学品性[J].山西大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2015,38(05):89-97.

[28]董哲,高瑛.外语教学中的“关注形式教学”[J].教学研究,2013,36(05):45-48＋63＋124.

[29]高强,李艳.国外语言形式教学新近研究进展述评[J].外语教学,2006(05):53-58.

[30]何莲珍,王敏.交际课堂中的形式教学——国外近期研究综述[J].外语与外语教学,2004(01):23-27.

[31]张一平.“Focus on Form”在第二语言教学中的理论和实践[J].西安外国语学院学报,2006(04):43-47.

[32]高越,郭涛.在意义中聚焦形式:内涵、运用与评述[J].外国语文,2011,27(01):132-134.

[33]陈敏哲,侯芳,李彬.形式聚焦和FonFs模式法对初中英语一般现在时习得的影响研究[J].邵阳学院学报(社会科学版),2020,19(06):94-100.

[34]杨秀丽.对比分析与翻译对二语词汇习得影响的实证研究[J].语言教学与研究,2013(01):1-8.

[35]李茜.任务类型及任务频次对英语学习者口语产出的影响——以任务后语言形式聚焦为情境[J].外语与外语教学,2015,285(06):42-48.

[36]王蓓蕾.大学英语课堂任务后学生互动中的语言形式聚焦探究[J].外语与外语教学,2016,286(01):41-49＋147.

[37]徐锦芬,李昶颖.任务前后语言形式聚焦对英语学习者语法习得影响的对比研究[J].外语教学理论与实践,2018(01):74-80.

[38]徐锦芬,李昶颖.形式聚焦教学时机对不同英语水平学习者语法习得的效果研究[J].外语教学理论与实践,2020,170(02):50-56.

[39]李昶颖,徐锦芬.形式聚焦教学时机对难语法点显性与隐性知识的习得效果研究[J].外语教育研究前沿,2023,6(01):60-66＋94.

[40]张玉姣.二语词汇学习中的形式聚焦和意义聚焦对比研究[J].考试与评价(大学英语教研),2016(05):125-128.

[41]葛现茹.输入强化对中国学习者学习英语关系从句的影响[J].外语电化教学,2010(2):26-30.

[42]邹慧民.交际语言任务中的“形式关注”[J].外语与外语教学,2012,262(01):21-25＋ 57.

[43]施光.英语课堂中的教师纠错与学生接纳[J].外国语言文学,2005(04):242-248.

[44]施光,刘学惠.EFL教学中的纠错——教师与学生的看法与纠错效果的关系[J].外语教学理论与实践,2008,122(02):29-32＋44.

[45]张香存.中国大学英语教师对“Focus-on-Forms”和“Focus-on-Form”教学方法的认知[J].外语教学,2005(03):65-68.

[46]蔡植瑜.交际语言教学中的聚焦于形插曲——英语专业精品课程课堂教学个案研究[J].外语教学理论与实践,2008(03):20-28.

[47]曹丽梦,朱勇.对外汉语教师形式聚焦教学个案研究[J].语言教学与研究,2017(03):18-27.

[48]徐锦芬,李昶颖.初中英语教师形式聚焦教学实证研究[J].外语教学理论与实践,2019,167(03):12-18.

[49]李俊.论词汇的深度和广度与阅读理解的关系[J].外语界,2003(2):21-24.

[50]谭晓晨.英语词汇深度知识习得过程初探——一项基于词义与搭配的研究[J].解放军外国语学院学报,2006(3):50-53.

[51]常乐,王文婷.二语词汇深度知识测量工具及其应用研究[J].外语测试与教学,2015(02):28-37＋45.

[52]马广惠.二语词汇知识理论框架[J].外语与外语教学,2007(04):22-24.

[53]张文忠,吴旭东.课堂环境下二语词汇能力发展的认知心理模式[J].现代外语,2003 (04):373-384.

[54]常乐,王文婷.二语词汇深度知识测量工具及其应用研究[J].外语测试与教学,2015(2):28-37.

[55]吴旭东,陈晓庆.中国英语学生课堂环境下词汇能力的发展[J].现代外语,2000(04):349-360.

[56]赵传海,吴敏,叶艳.基于IRT的大学英语词汇在线自适应测试系统的设计[J].现代教育技术,2008(12):87-90.

[57]干红梅.语境对汉语阅读过程中词汇学习的影响——一项基于眼动技术的实验研究[J].汉语学习,2014,(02):88-96.

[58]陈艳艳,张萍.语义和主题聚类呈现对英语词汇联想反应的影响[J].外语界,2018(06):61-69＋78.

[59]柳燕梅.生词重现率对欧美学生汉语词汇学习的影响[J].语言教学与研究,2002,(5):59-63.

[60]崔靖靖,刘振前.输入间隔与频次对二语词汇习得影响的微变化研究[J].西安外国语大学学报,2016,24(2):56-61.

[61]陈本乐.自然阅读与强化阅读条件下词汇习得影响因素分析[J].淮海工学院学报(人文社会科学版),2014,12(05):48-50.

[62]李辛,雷蕾.输出任务对英语阅读中词汇附带习得的影响——基于国内相关研究的元分析[J].解放军外国语学院学报,2021,44(06):18-26.

[63]黄燕,胡新,王海啸.任务类型对输出启动下二语词汇附带习得的影响[J].现代外语,2017,40(05):642-653 ＋730.

[64]干红梅,何清强.伴随性词汇习得研究发展三十年(1985—2014年)[J].四川师范大学学报(社会科学版),2015,42(03):106-114.

[65]雷蕾.词汇强化条件和语言水平对词汇附带习得的影响研究[J].外语研究,2011(01):75-79.

[66]黄燕.任务聚焦度与二语水平对产出驱动下词汇习得的影响[J].当代外语研究,2019,442(04):37-47.

[67]余清萍.影响词汇附带习得的学习者内部机制研究[J].教学与管理,2012(30):128-129.

[68]温爱英.动机对初中生英语学习的影响[J].课程.教材.教法,2005(12):49-54.

[69]吴建设,郎建国,伏力,陈静.基于阅读强化方式的二语词汇习得研究[J].现代外语,2010,33(03):258-267＋329.

[70]范琳,王庆华.英语词汇学习中的分类组织策略实验研究[J].外语教学与研究,2002 (5):209-216.

[71]李秀萍.词汇学习中的认知与元认知策略培训研究[J].西安外国语大学学报,2008(9): 95-99.

[72]侯香勤.英语专业学生词汇习得认知策略及其训练研究[J].外国语文,2011(2):128-132.

[73]陈绍英.自主学习视域下大学生英语词汇学习策略与词汇量相关性研究[J].黑龙江高教研究,2019,37(11):142-146.

[74]刘晓蛸,王丽荣.学习理论的新发展及对现代教学的启示[J].外国教育研究,2000,27 (4):5.

[75]林小琴.加涅信息加工学习理论与教学设计[J].福建论坛(人文社会科学版),2010(S1):100-101.

[76]盖淑华.英语专业学习者词汇附带习得实证研究[J].外语教学与研究,2003(04):282-286.

[77]吴建设,郎建国,党群.词汇附带习得与“投入量假设”[J].外语教学与研究,2007(05):360-366＋401.

[78]张志勇.对教学模式的若干理论思考[J].中国教育学刊,1996(04):35-38.

[79]林梅,刘学惠,林昕.国外“形式聚焦”理论综述[J].外语教学理论与实践,2008,(04):82-87.

[80]张玉姣.“形式聚焦”词汇教学模式在二语交际课堂中的有效性述评[J].吕梁教育学院学报,2018,35(01):121-123.

[81]张京龙,张智义.高中英语阅读教学中渗透词汇附带习得探究[J].中小学外语教学(中学篇),2022,45(03):8-13.

[82]刘炜.中国高中生英语语境猜词策略使用透视:现状描述与归因分析[J].中小学英语教学与研究,2011(12):15-20.

[83]王同顺,姚禹,许莹莹.听读输入模式下二语词汇附带习得的对比研究[J].外语与外语教学,2012(06):1-5.

[84]彭北萍,常青.解析大学英语四级考试中的选词填空[J].语文学刊:外语教育与教学,2012(11):100-102.

[85]曲连坤,傅荣,王玉霞.第三部分中小学生心理特点与心理健康教育第一讲中小学生的认知和思维发展特点[J].中小学心理健康教育,2002(07):35-37.

[86]双文庭.论大学英语词族教学的三个层面[J].中国大学教学,2016(07):57-62 ＋83.

[87]史一鸿.心理词汇视阈下的大学英语词汇教学[J].云南农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2013,7(03):113-116.

[88]高越,郭涛.在意义中聚焦形式:内涵,运用与评述[J].外国语文(四川外语学院学报),2011,027(001):132-134.

[89]田丽丽.形式教学对二语接受型词汇成绩的影响[J].外语与外语教学,2011,(02):52-56.

[90]冯滢.任务型语言教学下的词汇附带习得[J].安徽师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2009,37(04):491- 494.

[91]宋贝贝,贺媛.文本强化与输入模态对汉语二语动名搭配类语块学习和文本阅读理解的影响[J].世界汉语教学,2024,38(01):126-140.

[92]张学顺,崔广进.英语词汇深度学习的教学策略[J].教学与管理,2020(10):56-59.

[93]王佶旻,何赟.任务复杂度与汉语二语写作词汇的关系研究[J].汉语学习,2022 (04):81-91.

[94]刘凤.英语词汇教学要与阅读教学相结合[J].人民教育,2023(20):80.

[95]杨颖莉,于莹.反馈类型与任务投入量对词汇发展的作用[J].现代外语,2016,39(03):408-417＋439.

[96]王峥.基于移动端的英语词汇深度学习研究[D].上海:上海外国语大学,2018.

[97]王思琪.计划型形式聚焦和偶发型形式聚焦对不同语法能力学习者影响的比较研究[D].四川:四川外国语大学,2020.DOI:10.27348/d.cnki.gscwc.2020.000627.

[98]中华人民共和国教育部国家语言文字工作委员会.中国英语能力等级量表[S].北京:高等教育出版社,2018.

[99]McCarthy,M.Vocabulary[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,1992:105.

[100]Wilkins,D.A.Linguistics in language teaching[M].London:Edward Arnold,1978.

[101]Nation,I.S.P.Learning Vocabulary in Another Language[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2001.

[102]Rivers,W.M.Teaching foreign language skills[M].Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1981.

[103]Chomsky,N.Language and Mind[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2006.

[104]VanPatten,B.Input processing and grammar instruction:The Theory and research[M].Norwood,NJ:Ablex Publishing Corporation,1996.

[105]Nassaji,H.&Fotos,S.S.Teaching Grammar in Second Language Classrooms:Integrating Form-Focused Instruction in Communicative Context[M].New York:Routledge,2011.

[106]Ellis,R.Task-based Language Learning and Teaching[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2003.

[107]Nation,I.S.P.Teaching and learning vocabulary[M].New York:Newbury House,1990.

[108]Nation,I.S.P&Webb,S.Researching and Analyzing Vocabulary[M].Boston:Heinle Cengage Learning,2011.

[109]Ellis,R.&Shintani,N.Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research[M].London and New York:Routledgem,2014.

[110]Faerchk,K.&Phillipson,R.Learner Language and Language Learning[M].Bristol:Multilingual Matters,1984.

[111]Larsen-Freeman,D.Testing Language:From Grammar to Grammaring[M].Boston:Heinle and Heinle,2003.

[112]Asher,R.E.The encyclopedia of language and linguistics[M].Oxford:Pergamon Press,1994.

[113]Read,J.Assessing Vocabulary[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2001.

[114]Piaget,J.The Language and Thought of the Child[M].London:Routledge&KeganPaul,1959.

[115]Selman,R.The Growth of Interpersonal Understanding[M].New York:Academic Press,1980.

[116]Pitts,M.,White,H.&Krashen,S.Acquiring Second Language Vocabulary through Reading:A Replication of the Clockwork Orange Study Using Second Language Acquirers[J].Reading in a Foreign Language,1989(5):271-275.

[117]Ellis,R.Introduction:Investigating Form-Focused Instruction[J].Language Journal,2001(51):1-46.

[118]Ellis R.Does Form-Focused Instruction Affect the Acquisition of Implicit Knowledge? A Review of the Research[J].SSLA,2002(04):223-236.

[119]Laufer,B.Focus on form in second language vocabulary acquisition[J].EUROSLA,2005(05):223-250.

[120]De la Fuente,M.J.Classroom L2 vocabulary acquisition:Investigating the role of pedagogical tasks and form-focused instruction[J].Language Teaching Research,2006,10(3):263-295.

[121]Wesche,M.&Paribakht,T.S.Assessing L2 vocabulary knowledge:Depth versus breadth[J].Canadian Modern Language Review,1996,53(1):13-40.

[122]Bley-Vroman,R.The fundamental character of foreign language learning[J].Linguistic Analysis,1989,20(1):1-65.

[123]Norris,J.M.&L.Ortega.Effectiveness of L2 instruction:A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis[J].Language Learning,2000,50(3):417-528.

[124]Trahey,M.&White,L.Positive Evidence and Preemption in the Second Language Classroom[J].Studies in Second Language Acquisition,1993,15(2):181-204.

[125]Fotos,S.Shifting the Focus from Forms to Form in the EFL Classroom[J].ELT Journal,1998,52(4):301-307.

[126]Schmidt,R.The role of consciousness in second language learning.Applied Linguistics[J].1990(11):129-158.

[127]Spada,N.Form-focused instruction and second language acquisition:A review of classroom and laboratory research[J].Language Teaching,1997,30(02):73-87.

[128]Ellis,R.Does Form-Focused Instruction Affect the Acquisition of Implicit Knowledge? A Review of the Research[J].SSLA,2002(04):223-236.

[129]Poole,A.Focus on Form Instruction:Foundations,Applications,and Criticisms[J].The Reading Matrix,2005(05):47 -56.

[130]Leeman,J.,Arteagoitia,I.,Fridman et al,B.Integrating attention to form with meaning:Focus on form in content-based Spanish instruction[J].In Schmidt,R.(Ed.),Attention and awareness in foreign language learning,1995:217-258.

[131]Fotos,S.Shifting the focus from forms to form in the EFL classroom[J].ELT Journal,1998,52(03):301-307.

[132]Sheen,R.Focus on form–a myth in the making?[J].ELT journal,2003,57(03):225-233.

[133]Laufer,B.Comparing Focus on Form and Focus on Forms in Second Language Vocabulary Learning[J].The Canadian Modern Language Review,2006,63(1):149-166.

[134]Abbasian,G.R.&Pooshaneh,L.Pedagogical Effectiveness and Feasibility of Focus on Form vs.Focus on Meaning in a Reading Class:Compatibility of Teacher-Learner’s Perspectives[J].Online Submission,2015.

[135]Loewen,S.Incidental focus on form and second language learning[J].Studies in Second Language Acquisition,2005,27(03):361-386.

[136]Farrokhi,F.The Effects of Planned Focus on Form on Iranian EFL Learners’ Oral Accuracy[J].World Journal of Education,2012,1(2):70-81.

[137]Noghechara,N.P.&Nikou,F.R.The Effects of Planned and Incidental Focus on Form Instructions on Iranian EFL Learners’ Vocabulary Learning[J].Europe-Revue Literature Mensuelle,2016:373-380.

[138]Stuart,J.&Rutherford,R.J.Medical student concentration during lectures[J].Lancet (London,England),1978,2(8088):514–516.

[139]Jourdenais,R.O.,Mitsuhiko,S.&Stauffer,B.B.et al.Does textual enhancement promote noticing? A think-aloud protocol analysis[J].In R.Schmidt(ed.):Attention and Awareness in Foreign Language Learning,1995(01):183-216.

[140]Robert,M.Awareness and the efficacy of error correction[J].In R.Schmidt (ed.):Attention and Awareness in Foreign Language Learning,1995(1).

[141]Nabei,T&Swain,M.Learner awareness of recasts in classroom interaction:A case study of an adult EFL student’s second language learning[J].Language awareness,2002,11(01):43-63.

[142]Qian,D.D.Assessing the roles of depth and breadth of vocabulary knowledge in reading comprehension[J].Canadian Modern Language Review,1999,56(02):282-307.

[143]Read,J.The development of a new measure of L2 vocabulary knowledge[J].Language Testing,1993(10):355-371.

[144]Cobb,T.Breadth and depth of lexical acquisition with hands-on concordancing[J].Computer Assisted Language Learning,1999,12(04):345-360.

[145]Hastrup,K.&Henriksen,B.Vocabulary acquisition:acquiring depth of knowledge through network building[J].International Journals of Applied Linguistics,2000,10(02):221-240.

[146]Nadarajan,S.Assessing In-Depth Vocabulary Ability of Adult ESL Learners[J].The International journals of Language Society and Culture,2008(26):93-106.

[147]Cronbach,L.J.An analysis of technique for diagnostic vocabulary testing[J].Journal of Educational Research,1942(36):206-217.

[148]Richards,J.C.The role of vocabulary teaching[J].TESOL Quarterly,1976,10(01):77-89.

[149]Read,J.Research in teaching vocabulary[J].Annual Review in Applied Linguistics,2004(24):146-161.

[150]Dale,E.Vocabulary measurement:Techniques and major findings[J].Elementary English,1965(42):895-901.

[151]Paribakht,T.S.&Wesche,M.Assessing L2 vocabulary knowledge:Depth versus breadth[J].Canadian Modern Language Review,1996,53(01):13-40.

[152]Jiang,N.Lexical representation and development in a second language[J].Applied Linguistics,2000(21):47-77.

[153]Webb,S.Learning word pairs and glossed sentences:The effects of a single context on vocabulary knowledge[J].Language Teaching Research,2007,11(01):63-81.

[154]Lee,S.&Pulido,D.The impact of topic interest,L2 proficiency,and gender on EFL incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading[J].Language Teaching Research,2016,21(01):118–135.

[155]Ellis,R.Does form-focused instruction affect the acquisition of implicit knowledge? A review of the research[J].Studies in Second Language Acquisition,2002,24(02):223–236.

[156]Laufer,B.&Girsai,N.Form-focused instruction in second language vocabulary learning:A case for contrastive analysis and translation[J].Applied Linguistics,2008,29(04):694-716.

[157]Williams,J.Learner-generated attention to form[J].Language Learning,1999,49(04):583-625.

[158]Poole,A.The kinds of forms learners attend to during focus on form instruction:A description of an advanced ESL writing class[J].Submitted for Publication,2003a.

[159]Laufer,B&Cirsai,N.Form-Focuses Instruction in SLVL:A Case for Contrastive Analysis and Translation[J].Applied Linguistics,2008,29(04):694-716.

[160]Shintani,N.A comparative study of the effects of input-based and production-based instruction on vocabulary acquisition by young EFL learners[J].Language Teaching Research,2011(15):137-158.

[161]Shinani,N.The Effect of Focus on Form and Focus on Forms Instruction on the Acquisition of Productive Knowledge of L2 Vocabulary by Young Beginning-level Learners [J].TESOL Quarterly,2013,47(01):36-62.

[162]Karimi,M.N.&Jahani,A.L2 Learners’ Vocabulary Learning:Differential Effect(s) of Comprehension-Based vs.Production-Based Proactive / Reactive Focus on Form[J].Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies,2014,6(1):59-88.

[163]Schmidt,R.W.The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Learning[J].Applied Linguistics,1990(11):17–45.

[164]Schmidt,R.W.Deconstructing consciousness:In search of useful definitions for Applied Linguistics[J].AILA Review,1994(11):11-26.

[165]Laufer,B.&Hulstijn,J.H.Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language:The construct of task-induced involvement[J].Applied Linguistics,2001(22):1-26.

[166]Dale,E.Vocabulary measurement:Techniques and major findings[J].Elementary English,1965(42):895-901,948.

[167]Nation,P.Using small corpora to investigate learner needs:Two vocabulary research tools[J].Small corpus studies and ELT,2001(05):31-45.

[168]LaBrozzi,R.M.The Effect of Textual Enhancement Type on L2 Form Recognition and Reading Comprehension in Spanish[J].Language Teaching Research,2014,20(01):1-17.

[169]Laufer,B.&Ravenhorst-Kalovski,G.C.Lexical threshold revisited:Lexical text coverage,learners’ vocabulary size and reading comprehension[J].Reading in a Foreign Language,2010,22(01):15-30.

[170]Long,M.&P.Porter.Group Work,Interlanguage Talk,and Second Language Acquisition[J].TESOL Quarterly,1985(19):207-228.

[171]Laufer,B.&Goldstein,Z.Testing vocabulary knowledge:Size,strength,and computer adaptiveness[J].Language Learning,2004(54):399-436.

[172]Kelley,T.L.The selection of upper and lower groups for the validation of test items[J].Journal of Educational Psychology,1939(30):17-24.

[173]Nation,P.&Beglar,D.A vocabulary size test[J].The Language Teacher,2007,31(07):9-13.

[174]Hirsh,D&Nation,P.What vocabulary size is needed to read unsimplified text for pleasure?[J].Reading in a foreign language,1992,8(02):689-696.

[175]Paribakht,T&Wesche,M.Reading comprehension and second language development in a comprehension-based ESL program[J].TESL Canada Journal,1993(11):9-29.

[176]Saeidi,Mahnaz et al.On the Effects of Focus on Form,Focus on Meaning,and Focus on Forms on Learners’ Vocabulary Learning in ESP Context[J].English Language Teaching,2012(05):72-79.

[177]Pouresmaeil,A.&Vali,M.The effects of incidental focus on form on learning vocabulary,grammar,and pronunciation[J].Language Teaching Research,2023:1-24.

[178]Jahangard,Ali.Form-focused Instruction in Second Language Vocabulary Learning:A Case for Contrastive Analysis and Translation(A Conceptual Replication Study)[J].MEXTESOL Journal,2022,46(01):1-13.

[179]Laufer,B.Comparing Focus on Form and Focus on Forms in Second-Language Vocabulary Learning[J].The Canadian Modern Language Review,2006(63):149-166.

[180]Tomline,R.S.&Villa,V.Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition[J].Studies in Second Language Acquisition,1994(16):183-202.

[181]Long,M.Focus on form:A Design Feature in Language Teaching Methodology[A].In K.de Bot,Ginsberg,R.&C.Kramsch(Eds.),Foreign Language Research in Cross-Cultural Perspective.Amsterdam:John Benjamins,1991.

[182]Doughty,C.&J.Williams.Issues and terminology[A].In C.Doughty&J.Williams(eds.).Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1998:1-11.

[183]Long,M.H.&Robinson,P.Focus on form:Theory,research and practice[A].In Doughty,C.&Williams,J.(eds.).Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1998:15-41.

[184]Long,M.H.The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition[A].In Ritchie,W.C.&Bhatia,T.K.(Eds.),Handbook of second language acquisition.New York:Academic Press,1996:413-468.

[185]Doughty,C.&Varela,E.Communicative focus on form[A].In C.Doughty&J.Williams(Eds.),Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition.1998:114-138.

[186]Meara,P.Towards a new approach to modelling vocabulary acquisition[A].In Schmitt,N.&McCarthy,M(eds).Vocabulary:Description,Acquisition and Pedagogy.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1997:109-121.

[187]Melka,F.Receptive vs.productive aspects of vocabulary[A].In N.Schmitt&M.Mc Carthy(eds).Vocabulary:Description,Acquisition and Pedagogy.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1997,306-327.

[188]Read,J.Vocabulary and testing[A].In Schmitt,N&McCarthy,M.(eds.).Vocabulary:Description,Acquisition And Pedagogy.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1997:303-320.

[189]Swain,M.Communicative competence:Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development[A].In Gass,S.M.&Madden,C(eds.).Input in Second Language Acquisition.Rowley,MA:Newbury House,1985:235-253.

[190]Long,M.&Robinson,P.Focus on form:Theory,research and practice[A].In C.J.Doughty&J.Williams(eds.).Focus on Form in Second Language Acquisition.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1998:15⁃41.

[191]Ehrman,M.An Exploration of Adult Language Learning Motivation:Self-efficacy,and Anxiety[A].In:Oxford.J,L.(Ed.).Language Learning Motivation:Pathways to the New Century.Honolulu:University of Hawaii Press,1996.

[192]Long,M.Input and Second Language Acquisition Theory[A].In Gass,S&Madden,C(Eds.),Input in Second Language Acquisition.Rowley,MA:Newburry House,1985.

[193]Laufer,B.What’s in a word that makes it hard or easy:some intralexical factors that affect the learning of words[A].In Schmitt,N.&McCarthy,M.(eds.).Vocabulary:Description,Acquisition and Pedagogy.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1997:140-155.

[194]Doughty,C.&Williams,J.Issues and terminology[A].In DoughtyC.&J.Williams(eds.).Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1998:1-11.

[195]Wilkins,D.A.Notional Syllabus[A].Oxford:Oxford University Press,1976.

[196]Laufer,B.How much lexis is necessary for reading comprehension?[A].In Arnaud,P.J.T&Bejoint,H(eds.).Vocabulary and Applied Linguistics.London:Macmillan,1992:126-132.

[197]Doughty,C.Cognitive Underpinnings of Focus on Form[C].In P.Robinson(ed.):Cognition and Second Language Instruction.New York:Cambridge University Press,2001.

[198]Swain,M.Communicative competence:Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development[C].In Gass,S&Madden,C(Eds.),Input in second language acquisition.Rowley,MA:Newbury House,1985:235-253.

[199]Doughty,C.Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form[C].In:Robinson,P.(Ed.),Cognition and Second Language Instruction.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2001.

[200]Anderson,R.C.&Freebody,P.Vocabulary knowledge[C].In J.T.Guthrie(Ed.),Comprehension and Teaching:Research Reviews.Newark,DE:International Reading Association,1981.

[201]Wolter,B.A new approach to assessing depth of word knowledge[D].Swansea:University of Wales Swansea,2005.

[202]Waring,R.Scales of Vocabulary Knowledge in Second Language Vocabulary Assessment[D].2002.Retrieved from:http://www.robwaring.org/papers/various/scales.htm.