IJSER Home >> Journal >> IJSER
International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research
ISSN Online 2229-5518
ISSN Print: 2229-5518 10    
Website: http://www.ijser.org
scirp IJSER >> Volume 3,Issue 10,October 2012
The Impact of Content Related Information on Iranian EFL Learners' Listening Comprehension
Full Text(PDF, )  PP.187-191  
Author(s)
Nader Assadi Aidinlou,Mahdiyeh Seyed Beheshti Nasab,Seyed Fariborz Pishdadi Motlagh
KEYWORDS
Listening comprehension,content related information, prior information, top down, bottom up
ABSTRACT
The present study investigatesthe effect of content related information on listening comprehension and how far it assists EFL language learners with their performance on post-lecture detailed listening comprehension questions. Subjects took a TOFEL test,
References
[1] Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

[2] Carrell, P. & Eisterhold, J. (1983). Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 553-73.

[3] Celce Murcia, M. (1995). Discourse analysis and teaching of listening. In G. Cook and B. Seidlhofor (Eds.), Principles and Practices in Applied linguistics: Studies in the honor of H.G. Widdoson. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[4] Chang, C. S., and Read J. (2006). The Effects of Listening Support on the Listening Performance of EFL Learners, TESOL Quarterly 40, 375-97.

[5] Chang, C. S., and Read J. (2007). Support for foreign language listeners: Its effectiveness and limitations. RELC, 38(3),375-95.

[6] Chiang, C. C., & Dunkel, P. (1992) The Effect of Speech Modification, Prior Knowledge and Listening Proficiency on EFL Lecture Learning’,TESOL Quarterly 26, 345-74.

[7] Field, J. (2003). Promoting perception: Lexical segmentation in second language listening. ELT Journal, 57, 325–334.

[8] Field, J. (2004). An insight into listeners’ problems: Too much bottom-up or too much top-down? System 32, 363– 377.

[9] Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 258–286). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

[10] Jensen, C., & Hansen, C. (1995). The effect of prior knowledge on EAP listening-test performance. Language Testing,12,99-119.

[11] Keshvarz, M. & Babai, E. (2001). Incompatibility of schema with input in listening comprehension. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics,(1),57-83.

[12] Markham P., and Latham, M.(1987). The influence of religion-specific background knowledge on the listening comprehension of adult secondlanguage students. Language Learning,37,157-70.

[13] Schmidt-Rinehart, B.C. (1994). “The effects of topic familiarity on second language listening comprehension.” The Modem Language Journal, 78(2), 179-189.

[14] Stanovich, K.E. (1980). Toward an interactivecompensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16,32–71.

[15] Vandergrift, L. (2004). Listening to learn or learning to listen? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,24, 3–25.

[16] Wilson, M. (2003). Discover listening: Improving perceptual processing. ELT Journal, 57 4). 335-343.

[17] Wolff, D. (1987). Some assumptions about second language text comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9, 307–326.

Untitled Page