詞彙常被視為語言學習的基石，因此許多語言相關研究常聚焦於詞彙與各項語言能力之間的關聯性。過去曾有多項研究充分證實了英語詞彙量在學術能力上的作用，其中更有許多研究強調了不同詞彙成分之間的密切關聯，例如接收性詞彙被認為是生成性詞彙使用的基礎。此外，接收性詞彙和生成性詞彙之間的高度相關性也表明，增強前者能間接促進後者的發展。在接收性詞彙中，認讀單字與聽力單字扮演著關鍵的角色。認讀單字於書面交流和閱讀理解獨具重要性，而聽力單字則對口語交流和聽力理解至關重要。對以英語作為外語的學習者而言，獲得認讀單字量與聽力單字量的平衡相當重要，但在實踐中要達到兩者平衡卻非常有挑戰性。
這項研究的目的是調查台灣54位以英語作為外語學習者的大學生在認讀單字量與聽力單字量之間潛在的不平衡問題。為了評估受試者的整體英語能力，本研究使用了中高級全民英語能力分級檢定第一階段的閱讀和聽力測試。部分參與者通過了測試，而部分則未通過，但所有結果都用於回答研究問題。為了測量單字量，本研究採用了新版詞彙量測驗。受試者首先通過線上會議完成了聽力版本的詞彙測驗，並於兩週後再次以相同題目但不同順序在線上進行了書面版本的測驗，以減少記憶效應對結果的影響。分析統計數據後，發現英語檢定通過組在高頻詞彙層級(3000、4000、5000和學術詞彙表）中存在認讀單字量較聽力單字量更高的不平衡。然而，這種不平衡在未通過英語檢定的組別中並未出現，因為他們在高頻詞彙層級的認讀和聽力單字測驗的分數普遍較低，顯示這些受試者在學習兩種詞彙形式上均有困難。此外，較高水平的受試者在聽力單字量與聽力能力之間顯示了高度的相關性，而認讀單字量與閱讀能力則只有中度相關性。相對而言，較低水平的受試者則表現了認讀單字量與閱讀能力之間的強烈相關性，但其聽力單字量與聽力能力並無顯示任何統計數據上的關聯性。
本研究旨在為未來研究提供相關見解，特別是針對詞彙不平衡進行有針對性的干預措施，進一步理解台灣以英語作為外語學習者的詞彙知識，並改善其學習。本研究建議，教學者進一步針對閱讀和聽力能力進行較平衡的詞彙教學，才能幫助縮小學習者於聽讀單字量與聽力單字量之間的差距。研究也強調，未來相關研究可以使用定制化的詞彙測試，以更準確地反映學習者的真實語言使用情況，從而為改善以英語作為外語學習的教學和測試方法提供實際建議。

The role of vocabulary size on English as a Foreign Language (EFL) academic competence is well-established, with research highlighting the interconnectedness of various vocabulary components (Schmitt, 2014). Receptive vocabulary is deemed foundational for productive vocabulary use (Ehri, 2014; Perfetti, 1992; Perfetti & Hart, 2002, cited by Nation,2022). Furthermore, a strong correlation between receptive and productive vocabulary suggests that enhancing the former indirectly benefits the latter (Stæhr, 2008). Within receptive vocabulary, orthographic vocabulary knowledge (OVK) and phonological vocabulary knowledge (PVK) play crucial roles. OVK aids written communication and reading comprehension, while PVK is vital for spoken communication and listening comprehension. Balancing OVK and PVK is essential for overall language proficiency (Nation, 2022).
Challenges in achieving a balanced acquisition of OVK and PVK are noted among EFL learners (Chang, 2016; Ellis, 2008; Nation, 2022). Despite these challenges, the interplay between these dimensions significantly influences effective communication and overall language proficiency (Elgort, 2011). This study aims to investigate potential imbalance in orthographic and phonological vocabulary knowledge (OVK & PVK) among 54 Taiwanese EFL college students. Specifically, the reading and listening high-intermediate General English Proficiency Test (GEPT) were administered to assess for their overall English proficiency. Some of the participants passed while others did not, but all results were used to address the research questions. To assess their vocabulary knowledge, the study adopted the New Vocabulary Levels Test (NVLT) (McLean & Kramer, 2015). The participants first completed a listening version of the same vocabulary test (LVLT) via an online Google Meet session. Two weeks later, the same participants took a written version of the test (NVLT) online, using the same items with a different order, to minimize memory effects on the results.
After examining the statistical test scores, an imbalance was found to exist between the participants’ OVK and PVK in higher levels of word frequency (levels 3000, 4000, 5000 and academic word list), with higher OVK than PVK among the GEPT passing group. However, the imbalance did not show in the GEPT failing group because their vocabulary scores were generally low for both OVK and PVK at higher word frequency levels. It indicates that these learners struggle equally with both forms of vocabulary knowledge. Furthermore, the more proficient learners showed a significant relationship between their PVK and listening ability, while their OVK was moderately related to reading ability. In contrast, the less proficient learners showed a strong relationship between their OVK and reading ability, but their PVK did not statistically relate to listening ability.
Ultimately, the study intends to provide insights into future research that wants to include targeted interventions to address vocabulary imbalances and contribute to further understanding of Taiwanese EFL learners’ vocabulary knowledge for improving their acquisition. It suggests that balanced vocabulary instruction targeting both reading and listening skills can help address the gap between learners’ OVK and PVK. It also emphasizes the importance of using tailored vocabulary assessments to more accurately reflect learners' real-world language use, ultimately offering practical recommendations for improving EFL teaching and testing methods.

大學入學考試中心 (College Entrance Exam Center, CEEC). (n.d.). 91參考詞彙表 (High School English Reference Word List). https://www.ceec.edu.tw/SourceUse/ce37/ce37.htm
大學入學考試中心 (College Entrance Exam Center, CEEC). (n.d.). 108參考詞彙表 (Vocabulary Reference List, VRL). https://www.ceec.edu.tw/files/file_pool/1/0k213571061045122620/%E9%AB%98%E4%B8%AD%E8%8B%B1%E6%96%87%E5%8F%83%E8%80%83%E8%A9%9E%E5%BD%99%E8%A1%A8%28111%E5%AD%B8%E5%B9%B4%E5%BA%A6%E8%B5%B7%E9%81%A9%E7%94%A8%29.pdf
語言訓練測驗中心 (Language Training and Testing Center, LTTC). (2000). 全民英檢 (General English Proficiency Test, GEPT). https://www.lttc.ntu.edu.tw
Alhazmi, K., & Milton, J. (2015). Phonological vocabulary size, orthographic vocabulary size, and EFL reading ability among native Arabic speakers. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 30, 26-43.
Bhide, A. (2017). Instructional methods for promoting the development of orthographic and phonological knowledge in second language learners of Indic languages [Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
Binder, K. S., Cote, N. G., Lee, C., Bessette, E., & Vu, H. (2017). Beyond breadth: The contributions of vocabulary depth to reading comprehension among skilled readers. Journal of Research in Reading, 40(3), 333–343.
Campion, M. E., & Elley, W. B. (1971). An academic vocabulary list. New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
Chang, Y. Y. (2016). English vocabulary learning in Taiwan. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics (3rd ed., pp. 171-189). Routledge.
Chang, Y. Y. (2016). English vocabulary learning in Taiwan. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics (3rd ed., pp. 171-189). Routledge.
Chen, L. J. (2011). 應用試題反應理論發展與驗證—單字階層測驗 (Unpublished master's thesis). 臺灣師範大學英語學系, Taiwan.
Cheng, J., & Matthews, J. (2018). The relationship between three measures of L2 vocabulary knowledge and L2 listening and reading. Language Testing, 35(1), 3-25.
Chung, Y. Y. (2015). 聽力單字與認讀單字以及第二語言程度在聽力測驗表現上的影響 (Unpublished master's thesis). 清華大學外國語文學系, Taiwan.
Collins COBUILD Dictionary (2nd ed.). (1995). London: HarperCollins.
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213-238.
Crossley, S. A., Kyle, K., & McNamara, D. S. (2017). The development and use of cohesive devices in L2 writing and their relations to judgments of essay quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 35, 1-16.
Dang, T. N. Y., & Webb, S. (2014). The lexical profile of academic spoken English. English for Specific Purposes, 33, 66–76.
Dang, T. N. Y., Webb, S., & Coxhead, A. (2020). Evaluating lists of high-frequency words: Teachers’ and learners’ perspectives. Language Teaching Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820908423
Ehri, L. C. (2014). Orthographic mapping in the acquisition of sight word reading, spelling memory, and vocabulary learning. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 5-21.
Elgort, I. (2011). Deliberate learning and vocabulary size in a second language. Canadian Modern Language Review, 67(2), 201-224.
Ellis, R. (1997). Second language acquisition. Oxford University Press.
Ghadessy, M. (1979). Frequency counts, word lists and materials preparation: A new approach. English Language Teaching Forum, 17, 24-27.
Hatch, E., & Lazaraton, A. (1991). The research manual: Design and statistics for applied linguistics. Heinle & Heinle.
Heatley, A., & Nation, P. (1996). Range [Computer software]. Victoria University of Wellington. http://www.vuw.ac.nz/lals
Jones, C. (2021). Measuring the orthographic vocabulary size and development of Japanese university students. Bulletin of the Graduate School of International Cultural Studies, Aichi Prefectural University, 22, 61-77.
Kim, M. (2019). Vocabulary size tests of different modality and their relationships with L2 reading and listening comprehension by Korean EFL learners in middle school. 어학연구, 55(1), 203-227.
Laufer, B. (1997). The lexical plight in second language reading: Words you don’t know, words you think you know, and words you can’t guess. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 20-34). Cambridge University Press.
Laufer, B. (1998). The development of passive and active vocabulary: Same or different? Applied Linguistics, 19(2), 255–271.
Laufer, B. (2005). Focus on form in second language vocabulary learning. Eurosla Yearbook, 5(1), 223-250.
Lynn, R. W. (1973). Preparing word-lists: A suggested method. RELC Journal, 4(1), 25-28.
Masrai, A. (2019). Vocabulary and reading comprehension revisited: Evidence for high-, mid-, and low-frequency vocabulary knowledge. SAGE Open, 9(2), 2158244019845182.
Matthews, J. (2021). Aural vocabulary knowledge. In R. Fuchs (Ed.), Research questions in language education and applied linguistics: A reference guide (pp. 439-443). John Benjamins.
Meara, P. (1996). The vocabulary knowledge framework. Vocabulary Acquisition Research Group Virtual Library, 5(2), 1-11.
McLean, S., & Kramer, B. (2015). The creation of a new vocabulary levels test. Shiken, 19(2), 1-11.
McLean, S., Kramer, B., & Beglar, D. (2015). The creation and validation of a listening vocabulary levels test. Language Teaching Research, 19(6), 741-760.
Milton, J., & Hopkins, N. (2006). Comparing phonological and orthographic vocabulary size: Do vocabulary tests underestimate the knowledge of some learners? Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(1), 127-147.
Milton, J., Wade, J., & Hopkins, N. (2010). Aural word recognition and oral competence in English as a foreign language. In R. Chacón-Beltrán et al. (Eds.), Insights into non-native vocabulary teaching and learning (pp. 83-98). Peter Lang.
Mizumoto, A., & Shimamoto, T. (2008). A comparison of aural and written vocabulary size of Japanese EFL university learners. Language Education & Technology, 45, 35-51.
Nagy, W. E., Anderson, R., Schommer, M., Scott, J. A., & Stallman, A. (1989). Morphological families in the internal lexicon. Reading Research Quarterly, 24(3), 263–282.
Nation, I. S. P. (1993a). Using dictionaries to estimate vocabulary size: Essential, but rarely followed, procedures. Language Testing, 10(1), 27–40.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press.
Nation, I. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.63.1.59
Nation, I. S. P. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL reading and writing. Routledge.
Nation, I. S. P. (2013). Teaching vocabulary: Strategies and techniques. Heinle.
Nation, I. S. P. (2016). Making and using word lists for language learning and testing. John Benjamins.
Nation, I. S. P. (2022). Learning vocabulary in another language (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Nation, I. S. P., & Beglar, D. (2007). A vocabulary size test. The Language Teacher, 31, 9–13.
Perfetti, C. A. (1992). The representation problem in reading acquisition. In J. J. Arnett (Ed.), Cognitive and social perspectives on language acquisition (pp. 79–114). Springer.
Perfetti, C. A., & Hart, L. (2002). The lexical quality hypothesis. In L. Verhoeven et al. (Eds.), Precursors of functional literacy (pp. 189–213). John Benjamins.
Pinillos, M. A. (2024). Differences between phonological and orthographic vocabulary knowledge among L1-Spanish learners of English as a foreign language [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. https://digibug.ugr.es/bitstream/handle/10481/92383/16.%2B27594_Aoiz_OK.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Praninskas, J. (1972). American university word list. Longman.
Reynolds, B. L. (2018). The Taiwanese college entrance examination centre's reference word list effects on Taiwanese adolescent learners' English vocabulary acquisition and retention. Language Education Research, 12, 35-48.
Schmitt, N., & Schmitt, D. (2014). A reassessment of frequency and vocabulary size in L2 vocabulary teaching. Language Teaching, 47(4), 484-503.
Schmitt, N., & Schmitt, D. (2020). Vocabulary in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Stæhr, L. S. (2008). Vocabulary size and the skills of listening, reading and writing. Language Learning Journal, 36(2), 139-152.
van de Ven, M., Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2019). Enhanced second language vocabulary learning through phonological specificity training in adolescents. Language Learning, 69(1), 222-250.
Webb, S., & Rodgers, M. P. (2009). Vocabulary demands of television programs. Language Learning, 59(2), 335–366. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00509.x
Webb, S., Sasao, Y., & Ballance, O. (2017). The updated Vocabulary Levels Test: Developing and validating two new forms of the VLT. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 168(1), 34–70. https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.168.1.02web
West, M. (1953). A general service list of English words. Longman, Green & Co.
Xue, G., & Nation, I. S. P. (1984). A university word list. Language Learning and Communication, 3, 215-229.
Yang, C. L. (2015). Phonological variation and L2 word learning: The role of orthography in word recognition and production [Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.