2015 IJRSLL – Volume 4 Issue 1
Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran (email@example.com)
Alavi, Seyed Mohammed
University of Tehran, Iran (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Najafi Karimi, Shaban*
Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran (email@example.com)
It has been suggested that phrasal verbs create special problems for language learners because of their diversity both in terms of number and in terms of form (Cornell, 1985; Side, 1990). It has been a source of argument for researchers to determine what type of input is more effective in teaching and learning English vocabulary, including phrasal verbs. This study has been conducted to examine the relative effectiveness of three types of input — unenhanced input, typographically enhanced input and lexically elaborated input — on learning English phrasal verbs. To do so, a time series quasi-experimental study was carried out, in which six different texts in three different forms — unenhanced, enhanced and elaborated — were given to 35 Iranian intermediate EFL learners to read. After the participants read each version of the input, a post-test including the target phrasal verbs practiced in each section of the treatment was delivered to answer. Results of related samples Friedman’s two-way ANOVA on the pre-tests and post-tests showed that the participants’ scores on the post-tests were higher after reading the elaborated texts than their scores after reading the unenhanced and enhanced texts. It has been concluded that (a) typographical input enhancement better helps L2 learners learn English phrasal verbs as compared with unenhanced input, (b) lexical input elaboration better facilitates the learning of English phrasal verbs by L2 learners as compared with unenhanced input, and (c) lexical input elaboration is more effective than input enhancement in helping L2 learners to learn English phrasal verbs.
Keywords: input elaboration; input enhancement; input modification; phrasal verbs; unenhanced input