BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster
Yıl 2015, Cilt: 36 Sayı: 3, 1211 - 1215, 13.05.2015

Öz

Kaynakça

  • Celce-Murcia, M. (2001). Teaching English as a second or foreign Language. (3rd Ed.).
  • Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Cohen, A. D., (1990). Language Learning: Insights for Learners, Teachers, And Researchers. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle
  • Harmer, J. (1991). The Practice of English Language Teaching. New York: Longman.
  • Howarth, P. (1998a). Phraseology and Second Language Proficiency. Applied Linguistics 19(1). 24-44.
  • Lewis, M. (1993). The Lexical Approach. Hove: LTP.
  • McCarthy, M. (1990). Vocabulary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Nation, I.S.P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. New York: Newbury House.
  • Nation, I.S.P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Nattinger, F. (1988). “Some Current Trends in Vocabulary Teaching” in Carter, R. and McCarthy, M. (1988) (Eds.): 62-|82.
  • O’ Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second Language cquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Palmer, F (1976). Semantics. Cambridge: CUP.
  • Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Widdowson, H. G. 1989. “Knowledge of Language and Ability for Use”Applied Linguistics. 10/2: 10 128-137.

The Effect of Cognates on vocabulary retention of Iranian bilingual EFL Students

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 36 Sayı: 3, 1211 - 1215, 13.05.2015

Öz

Abstract. Vocabulary is one of the most important tools in second language learning process. It is important to know a good range of vocabulary in order to have good reading comprehension in a foreign language. In Addition, it is important to know strategies such as cognates, to have better vocabulary retention. For that reason, when people do not know a high range of vocabulary in the second language, or when people do not know the strategies (cognates), they face a problem to vocabulary retention. This fact encouraged the researcher to give implicit instruction on such strategies and on the words that are similar between languages and have the same meaning. The experimental group (n= 35) received cognate method as the treatment, whereas the control group (n= 35) received non-cognate method as the treatment. This study used three instruments, one works as a cognate test, a vocabulary pretest, and a vocabulary posttest. The data from this study indicated that students in experimental group (bilingual) significantly outperformed the students in control group in vocabulary learning.

Kaynakça

  • Celce-Murcia, M. (2001). Teaching English as a second or foreign Language. (3rd Ed.).
  • Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Cohen, A. D., (1990). Language Learning: Insights for Learners, Teachers, And Researchers. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle
  • Harmer, J. (1991). The Practice of English Language Teaching. New York: Longman.
  • Howarth, P. (1998a). Phraseology and Second Language Proficiency. Applied Linguistics 19(1). 24-44.
  • Lewis, M. (1993). The Lexical Approach. Hove: LTP.
  • McCarthy, M. (1990). Vocabulary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Nation, I.S.P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. New York: Newbury House.
  • Nation, I.S.P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Nattinger, F. (1988). “Some Current Trends in Vocabulary Teaching” in Carter, R. and McCarthy, M. (1988) (Eds.): 62-|82.
  • O’ Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second Language cquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Palmer, F (1976). Semantics. Cambridge: CUP.
  • Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Widdowson, H. G. 1989. “Knowledge of Language and Ability for Use”Applied Linguistics. 10/2: 10 128-137.
Toplam 13 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Bölüm Derleme
Yazarlar

Muhammad Oveıdı

Abbas Bayat Bu kişi benim

Yayımlanma Tarihi 13 Mayıs 2015
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2015 Cilt: 36 Sayı: 3

Kaynak Göster

APA Oveıdı, M., & Bayat, A. (2015). The Effect of Cognates on vocabulary retention of Iranian bilingual EFL Students. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 36(3), 1211-1215.
AMA Oveıdı M, Bayat A. The Effect of Cognates on vocabulary retention of Iranian bilingual EFL Students. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi. Mayıs 2015;36(3):1211-1215.
Chicago Oveıdı, Muhammad, ve Abbas Bayat. “The Effect of Cognates on Vocabulary Retention of Iranian Bilingual EFL Students”. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi 36, sy. 3 (Mayıs 2015): 1211-15.
EndNote Oveıdı M, Bayat A (01 Mayıs 2015) The Effect of Cognates on vocabulary retention of Iranian bilingual EFL Students. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi 36 3 1211–1215.
IEEE M. Oveıdı ve A. Bayat, “The Effect of Cognates on vocabulary retention of Iranian bilingual EFL Students”, Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, c. 36, sy. 3, ss. 1211–1215, 2015.
ISNAD Oveıdı, Muhammad - Bayat, Abbas. “The Effect of Cognates on Vocabulary Retention of Iranian Bilingual EFL Students”. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi 36/3 (Mayıs 2015), 1211-1215.
JAMA Oveıdı M, Bayat A. The Effect of Cognates on vocabulary retention of Iranian bilingual EFL Students. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi. 2015;36:1211–1215.
MLA Oveıdı, Muhammad ve Abbas Bayat. “The Effect of Cognates on Vocabulary Retention of Iranian Bilingual EFL Students”. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, c. 36, sy. 3, 2015, ss. 1211-5.
Vancouver Oveıdı M, Bayat A. The Effect of Cognates on vocabulary retention of Iranian bilingual EFL Students. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi. 2015;36(3):1211-5.