本研究的目的是探討學生由上下文猜測字義的能力及其與字彙學習、閱讀能力之相關關係。 研究的對象是台中市育英國中68位二年級的學生。研究的主要工具是兩份評估學生字彙及閱讀能力的全民英檢字彙及閱讀測驗，調查學生關於字彙推論技巧的問卷及訪談各一份。研究過程分為三個步驟：(1)前測— 字彙、閱讀能力測驗及問卷，(2)教學實驗— 字彙推論教學，及(3)後測— 字彙、閱讀能力測驗，問卷，及(4)個別訪談，以獲得更詳盡的資料來支持研究結果的分析。 研究結果發現： （1） 學生的字彙能力及閱讀理解能力具有顯著相關。學生的字彙能力越強，越能幫助他們對文章意義的理解，進而相對地提高他們的閱讀理解能力。 （2） 教授字彙推論技巧有助於學生的字彙學習及閱讀理解。接受字彙推論技巧教學的實驗組學生於後測階段，在字彙能力及閱讀理解測驗的表現均明顯優於未接受字彙推論教學的控制組學生。 （3） 字形、句義及文章大意為最常被學生運用來做字彙推論的線索。這一點控制組及實驗組學生均是如此，但實驗組學生使用地較頻繁，而且利用的推論線索也較控制組學生更多且更適當。 根據以上的結果，本研究提出三點建議： （1） 字彙推論教學可以融合於學校課程之中進行，一節課十至十五分鐘讓學生練習推論字義，四個月的教學，學生已能利用各類推論線索對字義做適當的推論。英語教學雜誌及英語郵報上的文章，是提供學生更多練習機會的理想補充教材。 （2） 老師教導字彙推論技巧時，應選擇適合學生程度、符合學生背景知識及具有充分線索供學生推論的教材或文章，避免學生因推論線索不足而胡亂猜測，無法對其閱讀理解有助益。並從較簡單的『單字本身』及『句內上下文』線索教起，再循序進入較難的『跨句上下文』和『背景知識』線索。 （3） 當學生出現閱讀困難時，老師應先確定困難形成的原因，分辨究竟是字彙基本能力不足或不懂得運用策略造成的，才能對症下藥，幫助學生增進字彙學習及培養閱讀理解能力。 / This study investigates the lexical inferencing made by Taiwan EFL students at a junior high school when they encounter unknown words in English texts. The researcher examines the effect of lexical inferencing on their vocabulary learning and reading comprehension, and the types of knowledge sources and contextual cues they use in the process. Sixty-eight students, thirty-four from Class 201 and thirty-four from Class 204, are selected as the participants for this study. These students are at the similar English proficiency level according to their academic proficiency scores last semester. The vocabulary test and reading comprehension test of GEPT, elementary level (LTTC, 2001) are used in the pretest to measure the participants’ vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension ability before treatment. A questionnaire is applied to investigate the varied types of knowledge sources and contextual cues used by the participants in the process of lexical inferencing both in the pretest and the posttest. The treatment—lexical inferencing instruction, lasting for four months, is conducted on the participants in the experimental group. After the treatment, two posttests of vocabulary and reading comprehension are conducted again to assess if there is any significant difference on vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension between the controlled group and the experimental group. The main findings of this study are as follows: 1. There is a significant correlation between students’ vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension. Better vocabulary competence contributes to better reading comprehension. Vocabulary competence can serve as good predictors of reading ability in a foreign language. 2. Lexical inferencing instruction does contribute to better performances in vocabulary and reading comprehension tests. The participants who receive instruction demonstrate significant progress. Lexical inferencing instruction also results in the recognition and employment of varied types of knowledge sources and contextual cues which facilitate the appropriate word meanings inferred. 3. Both groups use similar types of knowledge sources and contextual cues when making inferences. However, students in the experimental group make use of more types of knowledge sources and contextual cues in the process of inferencing and they practice the inferencing strategy more frequently. Sentence level meaning, word morphology, and discourse level meaning are the cues most frequently used by both groups. Pedagogical implications of this study and suggestions for further research are also presented. 1. Instruction of vocabulary inferring can be integrated into regular curriculum. It takes only 10 to 15 minutes per class for students to practice the inference strategy. As shown in our experiment, after four months of instruction, students achieve significant progress in the use of knowledge sources and contextual cues while reading. Articles in English learning magazines or bilingual newspapers are good supplementary reading materials for practice. These materials are usually longer and contain various types of knowledge sources and contextual cues. 2. To teach inferring skills, teachers should choose the reading texts which are familiar to students and contain enough knowledge sources and contextual cues. Students incline to giving wild guesses when they can not find adequate cues to help them do the job. Lexical inference instruction can be conducted by focusing on the word level cues in the first phase, then extending to the sentence level cues, and to the wilder discourse level cues. Equipping students with rich world knowledge is also helpful. 3. Teachers should examine students’ reading difficulties should to figure out what the problems are. Students’ reading problems may result from lack of basic linguistic competence or lexical strategies in reading. With knowledge of these problems, the teacher can help the students overcome their difficulties and become successful readers.

本文旨在探討台灣國中生在英語閱讀時, 運用「放聲思考配對練習法」結合「單字解讀策略」教學的成效及影響, 研究對象是依安置測驗所選出兩班具有高度同質性的國三學生, 隨機分派為一實驗組, 一控制組, 並依其安置測驗結果分為高、低兩組。 實驗組在老師教完單字解讀策略後, 由一高分組學生和一低分組學生隨機配對做為期八週的放聲思考閱讀訓練, 並且在訓練活動前後, 實驗組和控制組所有的學生皆施予單字解讀成就測驗, 閱讀理解成就測驗, 及英語閱讀學習態度量表, 實驗組更多加施予後設認知問卷及對此訓練活動的反應問卷, 同時在實驗組訓練過程中, 隨機抽取一組配對的學生將他們運用「放聲思考配對練習法」作答的過程錄音下來以便分析。 本研究結果顯示: (一)實驗組和控制組在單字解讀成就測驗有顯著差異。亦即, 運用「放聲思考配對練習法」結合「單字解讀策略」的教學有效地增進了學生字彙推測的成績表現, 對低程度的學生效果尤其明顯。(二)在四種單字解讀策略中, 「放聲思考配對練習法」最能增進學生在「往前線索策略」和「背景知識線索策略」的成績表現, 對不同程度的學生而言, 低程度學生的「往前線索策略」成績進步最多。(三)實驗組和控制組在閱讀理解成就測驗並沒有顯著差異。亦即, 此一訓練活動並不能改進學生在閱讀理解的成績表現。(四)實驗組和控制組的英語閱讀學習態度量表有顯著差異。即運用「放聲思考配對練習法」結合「單字解讀策略」的教學有效地增進了學生對英語閱讀的學習態度, 尤其對高程度的學生效果尤其明顯。在四種分項學習態度中, 學生的「免除對英語閱讀的恐懼」學習態度進步最多。(五)在後設認知方面, 實驗組的學生在接受此一閱讀訓練活動後, 對自己在文章大意、文章相關知識及猜字技巧的閱讀困難上有顯著的認知, 並且也認定猜字技巧是有效的英語閱讀策略。(六)從反應問卷中顯示, 接受此一閱讀訓練活動後, 大部分的學生認為運用「放聲思考配對練習法」結合「單字解讀策略」的教學對他們的字彙推測技巧是有幫助的, 且其幫助大於單獨運用「放聲思考配對練習法」或單獨運用「單字解讀策略」, 並且認為此一閱讀訓練活動有助於對自己和對他人閱讀過程的了解。但大多數的學生對運用此一閱讀訓練活動於未來英語課程中仍採保留態度。 根據上述的結果, 本研究建議國中英語教師可以運用「放聲思考配對練習法」結合「單字解讀策略」的教學來增進學生在英語閱讀時字彙推測的技巧和對英語閱讀的學習態度, 以及加強他們對自我閱讀過程的認知。同時, 為了能讓「放聲思考配對練習法」在學生身上發揮最大的學習效果, 教師應考慮學生在語言學習上的個別差異現象以及此一合作學習法時間掌握的問題, 以避免學生心理上的排斥作用和學習上的反效果。 / This thesis explores EFL lexical inferencing abilities and reading behaviors of junior high school students in Taiwan. Thinking Aloud Pair Problem Solving (TAPPS) and instruction of Word-solving Strategies were integrated to see whether they had effects on students’ lexical inferencing abilities, reading comprehension, learning attitude toward and metacognitive awareness of English reading. Two third-grade junior high school classes were selected as one experimental group and one control group, both with high-and low-proficiency levels. Results were found from the statistical analysis of the experiment. First, TAPPS training in word-solving strategies proved quite beneficial in enhancing students’ lexical inferencing abilities, and the low-proficiency students benefited more than the high-proficiency students. Second, TAPPS training in word-solving strategies indeed facilitated students’ use of forward cues and background knowledge cues, and the low-proficiency students improved most in their use of forward cues. Third, TAPPS training in word-solving strategies did not benefit students in their general reading comprehension. Fourth, TAPPS training in word-solving strategies successfully helped the students change their learning attitude toward English reading, especially the high-proficiency students. As to the different learning attitudes, students’ learning attitude of “The freedom from fear of English reading” changed most. Fifth, after receiving this training activity, the students’ metacognitive awareness of English reading was significantly higher. Sixth, the response questionnaire revealed that most of the students considered TAPPS training in word-solving strategies helpful and gave positive responses to this training activity. However, most of the students were conservative about recommending this training activity to future English classes. These aforementioned findings in this study suggested that junior high school English teachers could adopt TAPPS training in word-solving strategies to enhance students’ lexical inferencing abilities, change their learning attitude and reinforce their metacognitive awareness of English reading. However, it should be cautioned here that when teachers try to implement TAPPS training in English reading comprehension, they should consider students’ personal difference in language learning and the disruptive and time-consuming drawback of TAPPS to avoid students’ potential rejection and failure of the whole training activity.