英語學習者長年投入大量的時間和精力學習，然而，於寫作或口說時，常遇到不知如何使用所學字彙的窘境。學習者的英語一直無法進階主因之一是停留在單一字詞之記憶。以單字為單位的教與學，常不強調上下文，也容易忽略語用的訊息。因此，許多研究者提倡以片語為重點來學習英語，可有效提升學習者語用能力，進而達到母語人士的流暢度。
片語學習可從兩方面進行：詞彙短語 (formulaic language) 與代換片語 (paraphrases)。詞彙短語包含實詞 (content words) 及虛詞 (function words)，可傳達豐富的語用訊息，也是真實世界中英語的用法。相較於孤立單字的組合，詞彙短語較能貼近母語人士的表達方式。另一方面，代換片語為一組同義，但用法不盡相同的詞彙短語；透過學習代換片語，英語學習者較能全面了解片語的變化，而熟練使用不同的方式表達訊息。
目前關於片語學習的教材及輔助工具仍嫌不足，而電腦科技可以協助補足此一缺憾。因此，本論文結合資訊科技技術與語言學習兩個領域探討電腦輔助片語學習。本論文利用自然語言處理技術〈例如：機器翻譯、原形化、詞性標記、片語抽取等技術〉發展兩個學習輔助系統GRASP 及PREFER，以幫助詞彙短語及代換片語學習。相較於傳統的輔助工具〈例如: 電子字典、同義詞字典〉，此二系統，在功能面，可接受多字輸入，快速有效尋找所查詢的詞彙短語或代換片語。在資料面，系統產生的詞彙短語與代換片語皆包含句型及例句，可提供學習者了解各片語的用法。更重要的是，相較於傳統語料庫關鍵字索引Concordancers，呈現大量語料給使用者自行歸納句型及用法；此兩個系統皆自動歸納所產生的詞彙短語及代換片語相關資訊。這體現了資料導向學習 Data-driven Learning，對學習者提供了更直接有效的幫助。
為進一步了解GRASP與PREFER是否對英語學習者的幫助，我們設計了完成句子測驗及短句改寫測驗題目，並安排兩百位大一學生參與實驗。實驗結果顯示，使用兩系統的學生，在詞彙短語及代換片語測驗，皆有明顯的進步；而且語言程度較弱的學生，進步幅度更大。另外，學生在問卷中也表示對兩系統的肯定。
簡而言之，電腦輔助片語學習對於語言學習是有顯著的幫助。本論文中所開發的輔助工具補足了現有工具在功能及所提供的資訊之不足，可直接並具體協助學習者學習詞彙短語及代換片語。透過電腦輔助片語學習，對於學習並運用真實的英語，可收事半功倍之效。

English learners have difficulties using appropriate word combinations in language production even after they have devoted considerable time to recognizing and memorizing a large inventory of words. Since primarily this is because they have learned words in isolation rather than in context, this study instead promotes the development of phrasal knowledge. Specifically we focus on facilitating learners’ fluent language production in two aspects: formulaic expressions and paraphrases. The lexical items of a formulaic sequence tend to form a fixed pattern to carry out language functions which contribute to language use. Paraphrases are formulaic sequences sharing similar meaning but various usages. Grouping and learning such sequences effectively and systematically facilitates fluent language use. To achieve this goal, we have utilized natural language processing techniques to develop two computer-assisted phrase learning systems: GRASP and PREFER. These were designed to promote formulaic sequence learning and paraphrase learning, aimed at providing immediate and comprehensive assistance to learners and helping them develop productive competence for speaking and writing, instead of passively recognizing text meaning only. With both tools, users can input multi-word querying to find their desired phrases. The systems also provide syntactic patterns, usage information and example sentences to illustrate real world language use. Most importantly, these systems summarize usage information, unlike existing concordancers which display many exeample sentences. In other words, learners do not have to duduce the usages of the formulaic expressions and paraphrases when using GRASP and PREFER. Automatic summarization from language data lends support to the idea of data-driven learning (DDL). In order to evaluate the effectiveness of these two systems, we designed pre-test and post-test assessment to compare participants’ performance on a sentence composition task and a paragraph paraphrasing task. The results indicate that students showed significant improvement using both GRASP and PREFER.

Abasi, A. R., Akbari, N., & Graves, B. (2006). Discourse appropriation, construction of identities, and the complex issue of plagiarism: ESL students writing in graduate school. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 102–117.
Arnaud, P. & Sandra, S. (1997). Rare words, complex lexical units and the advanced learner. In C. James and H. Thomas (Ed.), Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition (pp. 157-173). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Arndt, V. (1987). Six writers in search of texts: A protocol based study of L1 and L2 writing. ELT Journal, 41, 257-267.
Arnon, I. (2009). Starting big – The role of multi-word phrases in language learning and use. PhD dissertation, Dept. of Linguistics, Stanford University.
Bannard, C. & Callion-Burch, C. (2005). Paraphrasing with bilingual parallel corpora. In Proceedings of the 43th Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics, 597-604.
Barks, D., & Watts, P. (2001). Textual borrowing strategies for graduate-level ESL writers. In D. Belcher & A. Hirvela (Eds.), Linking literacies: Perspectives on L2 reading-writing connections (pp. 246-267). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Bashman, C., & Rounds, P. (1984). A discourse analysis approach to summary writing. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 527.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Longman.
Bishop, H. (2004). Noticing formulaic sequences: A problem of measuring the subjective. LSO Working Papers in Linguistics, 4, 15–19.
Boers, F., Eyckmans, J., Kapperl, J., Stengers, H., & Demecheleer, M. (2006). Formulaic sequences and perceived oral proficiency: Putting a lexical approach to the test. Language Teaching Research, 10(3), 245–261.
Bruner, J., Goodnow, J. & Austin, G. (1956). A Study of Thinking. Chapman & Hall, Limited. London.
Burnard, L. (2000). User Reference Guide for the British National Corpus. Technical report, Oxford University Computing Services.
Campbell, C. (1990). Writing with others’ words: Using background reading text in academic compositions. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 211-30). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Chan, T.-P., & Liou, H.-C. (2005). Effects of web-based concordancing instruction on EFL students’ learning of verb-noun collocations. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(3), 231–251.
Chandrasoma, R., Thompson, C., & Pennycook, A. (2004). Beyond plagiarism: Transgressive and nontransgressive intertextuality. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 3, 171–194.
Chang, Y. C., Chang, J. S., Chen, H. J., & Liou, H. C. (2008). An automatic collocation writing assistant for Taiwanese EFL learners: a case of corpus-based NLP technology. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(3), 283–299.
Chen, M. H. (2009). English collocation competence of college students and learner factors. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the R.O.C, 239-244.
Chen, M. H., Huang, C. C., Huang, S. T., & Chang, J. S. (2010). GRASP: Grammar- and Syntax-based Pattern-Finder for Collocation and Phrase Learning. In Proceedings of the 24th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation (PACLIC 2010), pp. 357-364.
Chen, M. H., Huang, S. T., Chang, J. S., & Liou, H. C. (2013). Developing a Corpus-based Paraphrase Tool to Improve EFL Learners' Writing Skills. Computer Asssisted Language Learning, (accepted) (SSCI).
Chen, M. H., Huang, S. T., Hsieh, H. T., Kao, T. H., & Chang, J. S. (2012). FLOW: A First-Language-Oriented Writing Assistant System. In Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
Chen, M. H., & Lin, M. (2011). Factors and Analyses of Common Miscollocations of College Students in Taiwan. Studies in English Language and Literature, 28, 57–72.
Chen, P. C. (2002). A corpus-based study of the collocational errors in the writings of the EFL learners in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Chiang, T. H. (1981). Error analysis: A study of errors made in written English by Chinese learners. Master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.
Chris Callison-Burch, C., Koehn, P., & Osborne, M. (2006). Improved statistical machine translation using paraphrases. In Proceedings of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics Conference, 17–24.
Conklin, K. & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers?” Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 72–89.
Cowie, A. P. (1998). Phraseology: theory, analysis, and applications. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cumming, A. (1989). Writing expertise and second language proficiency. Language Learning, 39, 81-141.
Currie, P. (1998). Staying out of trouble: Apparent plagiarism and academic survival. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 1-18.
Deckert, G. (1993). Perspectives on plagiarism from ESL students in Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2, 131-148.
Donaldson, R.P., &Kötter, M. (1999). Language learning in cyberspace: Teleporting the classroom into the target culture. CALICO Journal, 16, 531-557.
Durrant, P. & Schmitt, N. (2010). Adult learners’ retention of collocations from exposure. Second Language Research, 26(2), 163–188.
Edelsky, C. (1982). Writing in a bilingual program: The relation of L1 and L2 texts. TESOL Quarterly, 16, 211-228.
Ediger, M. (1999). Reading and Vocabulary Development. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 26(1), 7–15.
Erhel, S., & Jamet, E. (2006). Using pop-up windows to improve multimedia learning. Journal ofComputer Assisted Learning, 22, 137–147.
Erman, B. & Warren, B. (2000). The idiom principle and the open choice principle. Text, 20(1), 29–62.
Frodesen, J. (2007). Linguistic Challenges of Summary and Paraphrase. Paper presented at the 2007 symposium on academic language development, San Francisco, CA.
Frodesen, J. (2002). Developing paraphrasing skills: A pre-paraphrasing mini-lesson. Retrieved September 19, 2012 from www.ucop.edu/dws/lounge/dws_ml_pre_paraphrasing.pdf.
Fuchs, C. (1980). Paraphrase et théorie du langage. Contribition à une histoire des theories linguistiques contemporaines et à la construction d’une théorie énonciative de la paraphrase. Thèse de doctorat. Paris: Université Paris VII. (Paraphrase and Theory of language. Contribution to a history of contemporary linguistic theories and to the construction of an enunciative theory of paraphrase. PhD Thesis. Paris: University Paris VII).
Gamon, M. & Leacock, C. (2010). Search right and thou shalt find … using web queries for learner error detection. In Proceedings of NAACL 2010, 37-44.
Goldberg, A. D. (2006). Constructions at work: the nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Greaves, C. (2005). Introduction to ConcGram©,” Proc. Tuscan Word Centre Workshop, 25–29.
Gronlund, N. E. (1998). Assessment of student achievement (6th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Harbusch, K., Itsova, G., Koch, U., & Kühner, C. (2008). The Sentence Fairy: a natural-language generation system to support children's essay writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(4), 339-352.
Harbusch, K., Itsova, G., Koch, U., & Kühner, C. (2009). Computing accurate grammatical feedback in a virtual writing conference for German-speaking elementary-school children: An approach based on natural language generation. CALICO Journal, 26(3), 626-643.
Harbusch, K., & Kempen, G. (2011). Automatic online writing support for L2 learners of German through output monitoring by a natural-language paraphrase generator. In M. Levy, F. Blin, C. Bradin, & O. Takeuchi (Eds.), WorldCALL: International perspectives on computer-assisted language learning (pp. 128-43). New York, NY: Routledge.
Hoey, M. (2005). Lexical priming: A new theory of words and language. London: Routledge.
Holland, M., Maisano, R., Alderks, C., & Martin, J. (1993). Parsers in tutors: What are they good for? CALICO Journal, 11(1), 28-46.
Howarth, P. (1996). Phraseology in academic writing: some implications for language learning and dictionary making. Max Niemeyer Verlag: Tübingen.
Huang, C. C., Chen, M. H., Huang, S. T., Liou, H. C., & Chang, J. S. (2011). GRASP: grammar- and syntaxbased pattern-finder in CALL. In Proceedings of ACL 2011, 26-31.
Jian, J. Y., Chang, Y. C., & Chang, J. S. (2004). TANGO: bilingual collocational concordance. In Proceedings of ACL 2004, 19–23.
Johns, A. M., & Mayes, P. (1990). An analysis of summary protocols of university ESL students. Applied Linguistics, 11, 253-271.
Jones, C.S. & Tetroe, J. (1987). Composing in a second language. In A. Matsuhashi (Ed.), Writing in real time (pp34-57). New York: Addison-Wesley.
Johns, T. (1991). From printout to handout: Grammar and vocabulary teaching in the context of data-driven learning. In Johns, T. & King, P. (Eds.), Classroom concordancing (pp. 27–45). Birmingham: University of Birmingham.
Kauchak, D. & Barzilay, R. (2006). Paraphrasing for automatic evaluation. In Proceedings of HLT/NAACL, 455–462.
Keck, C. (2006). The use of paraphrase in summary writing: A comparison of L1 and L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 261–278.
Kilgarriff, A., Rychly, P., Smrz, P., & Tugwell, D. (2004). The Sketch Engine. In Proceedings of the 11th EURALEX International Congress, 105–116.
Kita, K. & Ogata, H. (1997). Collations in language learning: corpus-based automatic compilation of collocations and bilingual collocation concordance. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 10(3), 229–238.
Kubiszyn, T. & Borich, G. (1996). Educational testing and measurement. New York, NY: Harper Collins College Publishers.
Lambert, W. (1955). Measurement of the Linguistic Dominance of Bilinguals. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 50, 197-200.
Laufer, B. (1991). The development of L2 lexis in the expression of the advanced language learner. Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 440–448.
Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach: The state of ELT and a way forward. Hove, England: Language Teaching Publications.
Lewis, M. (2008). The idiom principle in L2 English: assessing elusive formulaic sequences as indicators of idiomaticity, fluency and proficiency. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Stockholm University.
Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1993). How Languages are Learned, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Liou, H. C.U, Chang, J. S., Chen, H. J., Lin, C. C., Liaw, M. L., Gao, Z. M., Jang, J. S., Yeh, Y. L., Chuang, T. S., & You, G. N. (2006). Corpora processing and computational scaffolding for an innovative web-based English learning environment: The CANDLE project. CALICO Journal, 24(1), 77-95.
Lu, C. F. C. (2001). The acquisition of English articles by Chinese learners. Second Language Studies, 20(1), 43-78.
Madnani, N., Ayan, N. F., Resnik, P., & Dorr, B. J. (2007). Using paraphrases for parameter tuning in statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, 120–127.
Marcus, M. P., Santorini, B., & Marcinkiewicz, M. A. (1993). Building a large annotated corpus of English: the Penn Treebank. Computational Linguistics, 19(2), 313-330.
Martinez, R. & Schmitt, N. (2012). A Phrasal Expressions List. Applied Linguistics, 33(3), 299–320.
Martinot, C. (2003). Pour une linguistique de l’acquisition. La reformulation: du concept descriptif au concept explicatif. Langage et Société, 2(104), 147-151. (For a linguistics of acquisition. Reformulation: from descriptive concept to explicative concept.)
Martinot C. (2009). Reformulations paraphrastiques et stades d'acquisition en français langue maternelle. Cahiers de praxématique, 52, 29-57. (Paraphrastic reformulations and acquisition phases in French as first language.)
McCarthy, P. M., Guess, R., & McNamara, D. S. (2009). The components of paraphrase. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 682–690.
McInnis, L. (2009). Analyzing English L1 and L2 Paraphrasing Strategies through Concurrent Verbal Report and Stimulated Recall Protocols. MA Thesis. Toronto: University of Toronto.
Mel’čuk, I. (1992). Paraphrase et lexique: la théorie Sens-Texte et le Dictionnaire explicatif etcombinatoire. In: Mel’čuk, I. et al., Dictionnaire explicatif et combinatoire du françaiscontemporain. Recherches lexico-sémantiques III. Montréal: Presses de l’Université de Montréal; 9-59. (Paraphrase and lexicon: the Meaning-text theory and the Explanatory Combinatorial Dictionary. In: Mel’čuk, I. et al., Explanatory Combinatorial Dictionary of contemporary French)
Milićević, J. (2008). Paraphrase as a Tool for Achieving Lexical Competence in L2. In: VanDalee, S. et al., eds, Proceedings of the Symposium ‘Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency in Second Language Use, Learning and Teaching’. Brussels: Royal Belgium Academy of Science and Arts; 153-167.
Milićević, J. and Tsedryk, A. (2011). Assessing and Improving Paraphrasing Competence in FSL. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Meaning-Text Theory, 176-185. Barcelona.
Mohan, B. & Lo, W. (1985). Academic writing and Chinese students: Transfer and developmental factors. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 515-534.
Moragne e Silva, M. (1986). First and second language composing processes: A case study. In Preceedings of the 20th Annual TESOL Convention.
Nattinger, J. R. & DeCarrico, J. S. (1992). Lecical phrases and language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nicholls, D. (1999). The Cambridge Learner Corpus–error coding and analysis for writing dictionaries and other books for English Learners. Summer Workshop on Learner Corpora.
Och, F. J. & Ney, H. (2003). A systematic comparison of various statistical alignment models. Computational Linguistics, 29(1), 19–51.
Ohlrogge, A. (2009). Formulaic expressions in intermediate EFL writing assessment. In R. Corrigan, E. A. Moravcsik, H. Ouali, & K. M. Wheatley (Ed.), Formulaic language, Volume 2: Acquisition, loss, psychological reality, and functional explanations (pp. 375–386). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Oosterhof, A. (1994). Classroom applications of educational measurement (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Merrill.
Pawley, A. & Syder, F. H. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Ed.), Language and communication (pp. 191–225). London: Longman.
Pecorari, D. (2003). Good and original: Plagiarism and patch writing in academic second-language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 317–345.
Peters, A. M. (1983). The units of language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Popham, W. J. (2000). Modern educational measurement (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Russo, M. & Pippa, S. (2004). Aptitude to Interpreting: Preliminary Results of a Testing Methodology Based on Paraphrase. META,49(2), 409-432.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 75(2), 129–158.
Schmitt, N. & Carter, R. (2004). Formulaic sequences in action: An introduction. In N. Schmitt, (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing, and use (pp. 1-22). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Schmitt, N. (2008). Instructed second language vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 329–363.
Shea, P. (2000). Leveling the playing field: A study in captioned interactive video for second language learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 22(3), 243 – 263.
Shi, L. (2004). Textual borrowing in second-language writing. Written Communication, 21(2), 171-200.
Shin, D. & Nation, P. (2008). Beyond single words: the most frequent collocations in spoken English. ELT Journal, 62(4), 339–348.
Silva, T. (1993). Toward an Understanding of the Distinct Nature of L2 Writing: The ESL Research and Its Implications. TESOL Quarterly, 27(4): 657– 77.
Simpson, R., Briggs, S., Ovens, J., & Swales, J. M. (2002). The Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English. The Regents of the University of Michigan.
Simpson-Vlach, R. & Ellis, N. C. (2010). An Academic Formulas List: New 2s in Phraseology Research. Applied Linguistics, 31(4), 487–512.
Sinclair, J. M. (1987). Collocation: a progress report. In R. Steele & T. Threadgold (Ed.), Language topics: Essays in honour of Michael Halliday, Vol. 2 (pp. 319-331). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Sinclair, J. M. (1991). Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2011). Adding more fuel to the fire: an eye-tracking study of idiom processing by native and nonnative speakers. Second Language Research, 27(2), 251–272.
Sun, Y. C. (2009). Using a two-tier test in examining Taiwan graduate students’ perspectives on paraphrasing strategies. Asia Pacific Education Review, 10(3), 399-408.
Tsuruoka, Y., Tateishi, Y., Kim, J. D., Ohta, T., McNaught, J., Ananiadou, S., & Tsujii, J. (2005). Developing a robust part-of-speech tagger for biomedical text. Advances in Informatics, 10th Panhellenic Conference on Informatics, 382-392.
Wible, D. & Tsao, N. L. (2010). StringNet as a computational resource for discovering and investigating linguistic constructions. In Proceedings of NAACL 2010, 25-31.
Wolfersberger, M. (2003). L1 to L2 writing process and strategy transfer: a look at lower proficiency writers. TESL-EJ: Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language, 7(2), A6 1-15.
Wood, D. (2002). Formulaic language in acquisition and production: Implications for teaching. TESL Canada Jourmal, 20(1), 1–15.
Wood, D. (2006). Uses and functions of formulaic sequences in second language speech: An exploration of the foundations of fluency. Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(1), 13–33.
Wood, D. (2008). Mandarin Chinese speakers in a study abroad context: Does acquisition of formulaic sequences facilitate fluent speech in English? The East Asian Learner, 3(2), 43–62.
Wood, D. (2009). Effects of focused instruction of formulaic sequences on fluent expression in second language narratives: A case study. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 39-57.
Wray, A. (2000). Formulaic sequences in second language teaching: principle and practice. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), 463–489.
Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
Wray, A. (2008). Formulaic Language: Pushing the Boundaries. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Wray, A. & Fitzpatrick, T. (2008). Why can’t you just leave it alone? Deviations from memorized language as a gauge of nativelike competence. In F.Meunier and S.Granger (Ed.), Phraseology in foreign language learning and teaching (pp. 123–148). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Yeh, Y., Liou, H. C., & Li, Y. H. (2007). Online synonym materials and concordancing for EFL college writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(2), 131–152.
Žolkovskij, A., & Mel’čuk, I. (1967). Osemantičeskom sinteze. Problemy kibernetiki 19, 177-238.