English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 91280/121421 (75%)
Visitors : 25402351      Online Users : 151
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/63627


    Title: 以語料庫為本之近似詞教學成效之研究:以台灣大學生為例
    The Effect of Teaching Near-synonyms to Taiwan EFL University Students: A Corpus-based Approach
    Authors: 陳聖其
    Chen, Sheng Chi
    Contributors: 張郇慧
    Chang, Hsun Huei
    陳聖其
    Chen, Sheng Chi
    Keywords: 資料觀察學習法
    近似詞
    以語料庫為本
    data-driven learning
    near-synonym
    corpus-based approach
    Date: 2013
    Issue Date: 2014-02-10 14:43:48 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 台灣英語教育多以考試取向為主,許多教師進行英語字彙指導時採用填鴨式教學,致使學生無法於新的情境靈活使用字彙。
    本研究旨在於探究以語料庫為本之教學對於台灣大學生在英語近似詞學習成效的影響,以台北市某一所大學86位英語學習背景及能力相似之大一生為研究對象。研究人數均分成兩班進行教學實驗,一班為實驗組,以資料觀察法進行教學,另一班為對照組,以傳統形式教學為主,每週一次五十分鐘,共進行十週。資料蒐集包含近似詞學習成就測驗前、後測,並且依據研究對象於實驗教學結束後接受語料觀察教學法回饋問卷,蒐集研究對象對於語料觀察法之反應與感知,進行量化分析。最後,透過訪談高分組和低分組學生,蒐集其質性資料進行研究探討哪些因素會影響不同英語能力學生對於資料觀察法的意願與需求。本研究發現如下:

    一、近似詞教學有助於提升台灣大學生的英語字彙能力。兩組教學均在後測有
    進步。但就後測成績來說,實驗組顯著優於控制組。資料觀察法之近似詞教學
    均較傳統教學法更能有效提升學生的英語字彙能力。

    二、在不同程度的學生學習成效上,高、低分組學生均在後測成績有進步。對於
    高分組而言,實驗組後測成績顯著優於控制組後測。但對於控制組而言,實驗
    組的與控制組的後測成績未呈顯著差異。

    三、大部分的學生對於運用資料觀察法學習單字均給予正面回饋,也肯定資料觀
    察學習法活動的效益。另外,根據高、低分組學生訪談結果發現,英語程度的
    高低的確會影響學生對於資料觀察法的喜愛和需求。高分組的學生希望先以資
    料觀察學習法為開端,再以傳統講解式方式做總結。但對低分組的學生而言,
    喜歡參與小組討論。由於單字量的不足,低分組學生希望在語料庫為主的教材
    旁能附上中文解釋,降低學習焦慮。

    根據上述研究結果,本研究建議大學英語教師在教學現場能夠融入語料觀察學 習法並依照不同程度的學生進行教材設計,以助提升學生學習英語單字。

    關鍵字:資料觀察學習法、近似詞、語料庫為本
    Corpus Linguistics has progressively become the center in different domains of language research. With such development of large corpora, the potential applications and possibilities of corpora in second language teaching and learning are extended. A discovery-based authentic learning environment is provided as well as created by such corpus-based language learning. Synonym or near-synonym learning is a difficult aspect of vocabulary learning, but a linguistic phenomenon with ubiquity. Hence, this research aims to investigate the effectiveness of the application of data-driven learning (DDL) approach in near-synonyms instruction and compare the teaching effect on the high and low achievers through the near-synonyms instruction.
    Participants of this study were given instruction throughout the eight-week corpus-based teaching with materials compiled by the teacher. This is a quasi-experimental study consisting of comparison between two experimental conditions, with a pre-post test and control-experimental group design, followed by qualitative method of semi-structure interviews and questionnaire provided to the experimental group of EFL university students in Taiwan. Two intact classes of 86 college students participated in this study. The quantitative analysis of the pre- and posttest scores and questionnaire were conducted through descriptive statistics and frequency analysis in order to explain the learning effects and learners’ perceptions.
    The results of the study revealed that: (1) participants in the experimental group made significant improvement in the posttest; (2) EFL high proficiency learners with DDL approach performed better than high achievers who were taught by the traditional method. However, low achievers may not be able to benefit from DDL approach in the form of concordance teaching materials; (3) the majority of the participants had positive feedback on DDL activities. Also, types of preferred DDL activities were strongly influenced by students’ proficiency level. Low achievers preferred activities that should involve Chinese translation as the supplementary note while as for the high achievers, they were looking for the teacher’s explanation of words’ usages and functions in the end.
    This study demonstrates the importance in illuminating the dynamic relationship between DDL approach and second language near-synonyms learning, as well as provides English EFL teachers with a better concept to incorporate corpus or concordance lines into vocabulary instruction.

    Key words: data-driven Learning, near-synonym, corpus-based approach
    Reference: Alex, G. (2009). Using online corpora to develop students’
    writing skills. ELT Journal, 63(4), 363-372.
    Allan, R. (2009). Data-driven learning and vocabulary:
    investigating the use of concordances with advanced learners of English. English Language Teaching
    Journal, 63(1), 23-32.
    Allen, B. (2012). Concordance lines without no fear.
    Proceedings of the 19th International symposium on
    English Teaching, 85-96. Taipei: Crane Publishing Company
    Limited.
    Batstone, R. (1995). Product and process: Grammar in the
    second language classroom. In M. Bygate, A. Tonkyn, & E. William (Eds.), Grammar and the language teacher (pp. 224—
    236). London: Prentice Hall.
    Boulton, A. (2008). DDL: Reaching the parts other teaching
    can’t reach? In A. Frankenberg-Garcia (Ed.), Proceedings
    of the 8th Teaching and Language Corpora Conference (pp.
    38—44). Portugal: Associação de Estudos e de Investigação
    Cientifíca do ISLA-Lisboa.
    Boulton, A. (2009). Data-driven learning: reasonable fears
    and rationale reassurance.Indian Journal of Applied
    Linguistics, 35(1), 81-106.
    Boulton, A. (2010). Data-driven learning: taking the
    computer out of equation.Language Learning, 60(3), 534-
    572.
    Chandrasegaran, A. (1980). Teaching the context clue
    approach to meaning.Guidelines, 3, 61-68.
    Chan, T. P., & Liou, H. C. (2005). Effects of CALL Approach on EFL College Students’ Learning of Verb-Noun Collocations. Computer-Assisted Language Learning, 18(3), 231-250.
    Chang, M. L. (2013). The effects of decodable text instruction on word learning of fourth-grade EFL learners. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taipei University of Education, Taipei, Taiwan.
    Chapelle, C. A. (2001). ELT, technology and change. In A. Pulverness (Ed.), IATEFL: 2001 Brighton conference selections (PP. 9—18). Whitstable: IATEFL
    Chen, H. J. (2004). Developing an English Collocation Retrieval Web Site for ESL
    Learners. The review of existing collocation teaching and learning resources,
    25-34. National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.
    Chen, P. C. (2002). A corpus-based study of the collocaitonal errors in the writings of
    the EFL learners in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan
    Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.
    Chief, L. C., Huang, C. R., Chen, K. J., Tsai, M. C., & Chang, L. L. (2000).What can near synonyms tell us? Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing (1), 47-60.
    Ciezielska-Ciupek, M. (2001). Teaching with the Internet and corpus materials:
    Preparation of the ELT materials using the Internet and corpus resources. In B.
    Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (Ed.), PALC 2001: Practical Applications in
    Language Corpora (pp. 521—531). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
    Cobb, T. (1999). Breadth and depth of vocabulary acquisition with hand-on concordancing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 12 (4), 345-360.
    Cobb, T. (2003). Do Corpus-based Electronic Dictionaries Replace Concordances? In
    B. Morrison, G, Green., & G. Motteram (Eds.), Directions in CALL: Experience,
    experiments, evaluation (pp. 179—206). Polytechnic University: Hong Kong.
    Conrad, S. (2000). Will corpus linguistics revolutionize grammar teaching in the 21th? TESOL Quarterly, 34 (3), 548-560.
    Crail, F.I.M., & Lockart, R.S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684.
    Cummins, J. (2000). Academic language learning, transformative pedagogy, and
    information technology: Toward a critical balance. TESOL Quarterly, 34(3), 537-547.
    Curse, D. A. (1986). Lexical semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Deci, E. L., & Flaste, R. (1995). Why we do what we do. New York: Penguin.
    DeKeyser, R. (1995). Learning second language grammar rules: An experiment with a
    miniature language system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17(3),
    379-410.
    Divjak, D. (2006).Ways of intending: delineating and structuring near-synonyms. In
    S. Th. Grice., & A. Stefanowitsch (Eds.), Corpora in cognitive linguistic: corpus-
    based approaches to syntax and lexis (pp. 19—56). New York : Mouton de
    Gruyter.
    Divjak , D., & Gries, S. (2006). Ways of trying in Russian: clustering behavioral
    profiles. Corpus linguistics and linguistics theory, 2(1), 23-60.
    Dörnyei, Z., & Murphy, T. (2003). Group dynamics in the language classroom.
    Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Doughty, C., & Varella, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty & J.
    Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp.
    85—114).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Edmonds, P., & Hirst, G. (2002). Near synonyms and lexical choice. Computational
    linguistics, 28(2), 105-144.
    Ellis, R. (1991). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Pedagogy.
    Avon: Multilingual Matters.
    Ewa, D. J. (2011). The use of language corpora and concordancing software to
    improve grammatical competence in teaching English as a foreign language. Sino-US English Teaching, 8(12), 754-765.
    Fox, G. (1998). Using corpus data in the classroom. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Material
    development in language teaching (pp. 25—43). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Gaskell, D., & Cobb, T. (2004). Can learners use concordance feedback for writing
    errors? System, 32(3), 301-319.
    Hadley, G. (2004). Sensing the winds of change: An introduction to data-driven learning. Retrieved from April 24, 2013, from http://www.nuis.ac.jp/~hadley/publication/
    /windofchange/windsofchange.htm.
    Haller, C. R., Gallagher, V. J., Weldon, T. L., Weldon, T. L., & Felder, R. M. (2000).
    Dynamics of peer education in cooperative learning workshops. Journal of
    Engineering Education, 89(3), 285-293.
    Halliday, M. A. K. (1976). Lexis as a linguistic level. In C. Bazell, J. Catford, M. A. K., Halliday, & R. Robins (Eds.): in memory of J. R. Firth. London: Longman.
    Higa, M. (1963). Interference effects of intralist word relationships in verbal learning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2(2), 170–175.
    Hill, J. (2000). Revising priorities: From grammatical failure to collocational success. In M. Lewis (Ed.), Teaching collocation: Further development in the lexical approach (pp. 47—69). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Hsieh, W. L. (2008). “See”, “Watch” and “Look at”: Teaching Taiwanese EFL
    students on a corpora-based approach. Unpublished master’s thesis, National
    Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.
    Huang, C. R, Chung, S. F, & Su, I. L. (2008). Durative event: a comparison of 趕 gan3 and 搶 qiang3. Proceedings of the Chinese lexical semantic workshop
    2008 (CLSW), Singapore, 42-50.
    Huston, S., & Francis, G. (1998). Verbs observed: A corpus-driven pedagogical
    grammar. Apply Linguistics, 19(1), 45-72.
    Huston, S. (2002). Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Johns, T. F. (1986). Micro-concord: A language learners’ research tool. System, 14(2), 151-162.
    Johns, T. F. (1991). Should you be persuaded: Two examples of data-driven learning.
    English Language Research Journal, 1-16.
    Johns, T. F. (1994). From printout to handout: Grammar and vocabulary teaching in
    the context of data-driven learning. In Terence Odlin (Ed.), Perspective on pedagogical grammar (pp. 293—313). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Johns, T. F. (1997). Contexts: The background, development and trialling a concordance-based CALL program. In A. Wichman, S. Fligelstone, T. McEnery, & G. Knowles (Eds.), Teaching and language corpora (pp. 100—115). London: Longman.
    Johns, T. F. (2002). Data-driven learning: The perpetual challenge. In B. Kettemann
    & G. Marko (Eds.), Teaching and learning by doing corpus analysis (pp.107—
    117). Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi.
    Kilgarriff, A. (2009). Corpora in the classroom without scaring the students. In Leung,
    Y. N. (Ed.), The Proceedings of the 18th international symposium on English Teaching, 35—45. Taipei: Crane Publishing Company Limited.
    Kennedy, G. D. (1990). Collocations: The missing link in vocabulary acquisition
    Amongst EFL learners. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics, 26, 123-136.
    Kettermann, B. (1995). Concordancing in English language teaching. TELL and
    CALL, 4, 4-15.
    Koosha, M., & Jafarpour, A. A. (2006). Data-driven learning and teaching collocation of prepositions: the case of Iranian EFL adult learners. Asian EFL Journal, 8(4),
    192-209.
    Krashen, S. (1981). The input hypothesis. London: Longman.
    Laufer, B. (1990). Words you know: How they affect the words you learn. In J. Fisiak (Ed.), Further insights into contrastive linguistics (pp. 573—593). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    Leech, G. (1994). Students’ grammar, teachers’ grammar, learners’ grammar. In
    M. Bygate, A. Tonkyn, & E. Williams (Eds.) Grammar and the Language Teacher (pp. 17—30). London: Prentice Hall.
    Lehmann, H. M., Schneider, P., & Hoffmann, S. (2000). BNCweb. In J, Kirk (Ed.),
    Corpora Galore: Analysis and Techniques in Describing English (pp. 259—266). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
    Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach: The state of ELT and away forward. Hove,
    England: Language Teaching Publications.
    Lewis, M. (2000). Teaching collocation: further developments in the lexical approach.
    Hove, England: Language Teaching Publications.
    Li, C. C. (2005). A study of collocational error types in ESL/EFL college learners’
    writing. Unpublished master’s thesis, Ming Chuan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
    Lin, C. C., Chan, H. J., & Hsiao, H. S. (2011). EFL students’ perceptions of learning vocabulary in a computer-supported collaborative environment. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(2), 91-99.
    Lin, Y. P. (2002). The effects of collocation instruction on English vocabulary
    development of senior high students in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis,
    National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
    Liu, C. P. (1999 a). A study of Chinese Culture University freshman’s collocational;
    competence: “Knowledge” as an example. Hwa Kang Journal of English Language & Literature, 5, 81-99.
    Liu, C. P. (1999 b). An analysis of collocational errors in EFL writings. The proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on English Teaching, 483-494. Taipei: Crane.
    Liu, D. (2010). Is it a chief, main, major, primary, or principal concern? A corpus-based behavioral profile study of the near-synonyms. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(1), 56-87.
    Liu, L. E. (2002). A Corpus-based lexical semantic investigation of verb-noun
    miscollocations in Taiwan learners’ English. Unpublished master’s thesis,
    TamkangUniversity, Taipei, Taiwan.
    Long, M. H., & Porter, P. A. (1985). Group work, interlanguage talk, and second language acquisition. TESOL Quartely, 19(2), 207-228.
    Mindt, D. (1997). Corpora and the teaching of English in Germany. In A. Wichmann,
    S. Fligelstone, A. M. McEnery, & G. Knowles (Eds.), Teaching and Language
    Corpora (pp. 40—50). London: Longman.
    Nesselhauf, N. (2003). The use of collocations by advanced learners of English and some implications for teaching. Applied Linguistics, 24 (2), 223-242.
    O’Keefe, A., McCarthy, M., & Carter, R. (2007). From corpus to classroom.
    Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Richards. J.C., & Bohlke. D. (2012). Four Corners Level 4. Cambridge: Cambridge
    University Press.
    Room, A. (1981). Room’s dictionary of distingusihables. Boston: Routhledge &
    Kegan Paul.
    Rutherford, W., & Smith, M. (1988).Consciousness raising and universal grammar.
    In Rutherford, W., & Smith, M (Eds.), Grammar and Second Language Teacher:
    A Book of Readings (pp. 107—116). Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
    Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied
    Linguistics, 11(2), 129-158.
    Schmitt, N. (2012). Researching Vocabulary: A Vocabulary Research Manual.
    Palgrave MacMillan.
    Scott, M., & Tribble, C. (2006). Textual patterns: Key words and corpus analysis in
    language education. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
    Sealey, A., & Thompson, P. (2007). Corpus, concordance, classification: young
    learners in the L1 classroom. Language awareness, 16(3), 208-216.
    Serkan, C. (2011). Developing collocational competence through web-based
    concordance activities. Novitas-ROYAL (Research on Youth and
    Language), 5(2), 273-286.
    Shin, S., & Wang, H. (2006). The relationship between EFL learners’ depth of
    vocabulary knowledge and oral collocation errors. In The 23rd International
    Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, 964-977.
    Taipei, Taiwan: Jaun Tang International Publishing Ltd.
    Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus concordance collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Skehan, P. (2000). A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford
    University Press.
    Stern, H. H. (1986). Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford
    University Press.
    Sun, H. C., & Wang, C. Y. (2003). Concordances in the EFL Classroom: Cognitive
    Approaches and Collocation Difficulty. Computer Assisted Language Learning,
    16(1), 83-94.
    Supatranont, P. (2005). A Comparison of the Effects of the Concordance-Based and the Conventional Teaching Methods on Engineering Students' English Vocabulary
    Learning. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Graduate School Chulalongkorn University, Thailand.
    Swan, M. (1985). A critical look at the communicative approach. ELT Journal, 39(1), 2-12.
    Takač, V. P. (2008). Vocabulary Learning Strategies and Foreign Language
    Acquisition. British: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
    Taylor, J. R. (2003). Near synonym as co-extensive categories: high and tall revised. Language sciences, 25(3), 263-284.
    Taylor, J. R. (2007). Semantic categories of cutting and breaking: Some final thoughts. Cognitive Linguistics, 18(2), 331–337.
    Tian, S. (2005). The impact of learning tasks and learner proficiency on
    the effectiveness of data-driven learning. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of
    Applied Linguistics, 9(2), 263-75.
    Tomlinson, B. (1998). Introduction. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Materials development in
    language teaching (pp. 1—24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Touraj, T., & Zahra, F. (2012). Data-driven learning: A student-centered technique for
    language learning. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(7), 1526-1531.
    Tribble, C., & Jones, G. (1990). Concordances in the classroom: A resource guide for
    teachers. Essex: Longman.
    Tribble, C. (1996). Corpora, concordances and ELT. IATEFL Newsletter, 130, 25-26.
    Tseng, F. P. (2002). A study of effects of collocation instruction on the collocational competence of senior high school students in Taiwan. Master Thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.
    Tsui, A. B. M. (2005). ESL teachers’ questions and corpus evidence. International
    Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 10(3), 335-356.
    Vygotski, L. S. (1963). Learning and mental development at school age. In B.
    Simon & J. Simon (Eds.), Educational psychology (pp. 21—34). London:
    Routledge & Kegan Paul.
    Wang, X. W. (2012). The study of using data-driven learning in English grammar
    teaching in elementary school. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taipei
    University of Education, Taipei, Taiwan.
    Warschaucer, M. (2000). The changing global economy and the future of English
    teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 511-535.
    Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(1), 33-52.
    Willis, D. (1990). The Lexical Syllabus: A New Approach to Language Teaching.
    London: HarperCollins.
    Willis, D., & Willis, J. (1996). Consciousness-raising activities in the language
    classroom. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and Change in Language Teaching (pp. 63—76). Oxford: Heinemann.
    Willis, J. (1998). Concordances in the classroom without a computer: assembling and exploiting concordances of common words. In Brian Tomlinson (Ed.), Material development in language teaching (pp. 44—66). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Woodward, T. (1996). Paradigm shift and the language teaching profession. In J. Willis and D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and Change in Language Teaching (pp. 4—
    9). Oxford: Heinemann.
    Wu, W. S. (1996). Lexical collocations: One way to make passive vocabulary active. Paper from the eleventh conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 461—480). Taipei: Crane.
    Wu, W. S. (2010). The integration of corpus-based data into grammar instruction:
    Using advise, recommend, and suggest as an example. Retrieved from May, 10,
    from http://web.chu. edu.tw/ ~wswu/ publications/papers/journals/07.pdf.
    Xiao, R. Z., & McEnery, A. M. (2006). Collocation, semantic prosody and near synonymy: A cross-linguistic perspective. Applied Linguistics, 27(1), 103-129.
    Yeh, H. Y. (2013). The effect of video production project on freshman learners’ English learning motivation. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taipei
    University of Education, Taipei, Taiwan.
    Yeh,Y. 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.
    Yoon, H. & Hirvela, A. (2004). ESL student attitudes toward
    corpus use in L2.Journal of Second Language Writing,
    13(4), 257-283.
    Young, R., & Perkins, K. (1995). Cognition and conation in
    second language acquisition theory. IRAL 33(2), 142-164.
    Zhang, X. (1993). English collocations and their effect on
    the writing of native and non-native college freshman.
    Publishes doctoral dissertation, Indiana University of
    Pennsylvania, Pennsylvan.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    英國語文學研究所
    100551019
    102
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1005510191
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[英國語文學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    019101.pdf2158KbAdobe PDF335View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback