英语论文网

on-Englishmajors in China. To realize the purpose, the present study will rethink about threeseemingly simple questions that are in fact very tricky. Answering these questions willlead to a clearer understanding of the role of lexical knowledge in EFL writing andbenefit both teachers who want to facilitate vocabulary teaching and students whowant to improve their lexical performance in EFL writing.1. Will a large vocabulary size lead to good EFL writing?2. Will “deep” understanding of lexical knowledge lead to good EFL writing?3. Are there any differences of lexical performance between high-achievers andlow-achievers in EFL writing? If so, what are the differences?To begin with, significance of vocabulary knowledge in developing languageproficiency has been intuitively recognized by many language teachers, as is revealedby vocabulary tests that have come into being centuries ago. However, few modernempirical studies to date have been conducted to verify the inter-correlate betweenvocabulary knowledge and language proficiency. Among these countable studies,most focus on the role of vocabulary knowledge in second language reading.Therefore, an inter-correlate study between vocabulary knowledge and secondlanguage writing would be very in time and in need. The present study will orientitself as a comparative study that investigates the inter-correlate between vocabularyknowledge and EFL writing as well as its change among students of different levels oflanguage proficiency.Moreover, in terms of the major approaches that are distinguished in addressingthe correlate between lexical knowledge and linguistic proficiency, both approacheshave their own defects and problems to address. One approach tries to leverage anindependent lexical test and correlates its result to performances of different languagetasks including reading, listening, speaking and writing (e.g. Laufer, 1997). The otherfocuses on the measurement of lexical knowledge through real linguistic production(Qian, 1998). Top one problem facing the first approach is concerned withestablishment of a reliable and valid vocabulary test that can measure lexicalknowledge. The second approach avoids the trouble of establishing such a vocabularytest and deems useful direct measure of lexical use in real linguistic production. Theyleverage a variety of indicators of lexical proficiency including lexical richness/variation, lexical sophistication, and lexical density. However, this leads to thequestion of whether these indicators are reliable enough to reflect the real proficiencyof L2 language learners. This study will adopt the first approach out of practicalpurpose in language teaching and testing. After all, if a vocabulary test can provideinsight into lexical knowledge of L2 learners, it would be very valuable in reflectingstudents’ vocabulary level and help teachers in diagnosing problems facing L2learners in their progress of becoming advanced language learners.To sum up, from the review of past studies, there is obviously a striking lack ofcorrelation study between quality of lexical knowledge and EFL writing. However,research on factors contributing to the quality of EFL writing has revealed that depthof L2 lexical knowledge does play an important role in EFL writing (Ma & Wen, 1999;Sasaki & Hirose, 1996). More studies therefore should be conducted to investigate therelationship between depth of vocabulary knowledge and EFL writing.

　　1.3 Organization of th本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。