No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Vocabulary and Speaking
Abstract
Vocabulary plays an essential role in oral production. In theoretical models of first and second language (L1 and L2, respectively) speaking processes vocabulary is indispensable in producing speech with appropriate meanings as well as in generating syntactic, morphological, and phonological structures.
Empirical studies on vocabulary and speaking proficiency are limited in scope and smaller in number than those on vocabulary and reading proficiency. However, some studies have shown the greater importance of vocabulary in speaking proficiency compared to other linguistic elements such as pronunciation and grammar. Adams examined factors that separated groups of L2 learners belonging to neighboring levels (e.g., Levels 1 vs. 1+) of speaking proficiency assessed on a holistic scale. She found that out of five factors (i.e., accent, comprehension, fluency, grammar, and vocabulary), vocabulary was the only one that affected level differences between learners at novice and intermediate levels. For learners at intermediate levels and above, all the five factors affected level differences, but vocabulary frequently appeared as the discriminatory factor.
Keywords:
vocabulary;
Second Language Acquisition;
Assessment Methods in Applied Linguistics
... Contrastively, very few studies have explored what comprises productive vocabulary knowledge (Koizumi, 2012). On the one hand, word frequency may not necessarily capture the complex nature of L2 productive vocabulary learning, as advanced L2 speakers do not necessarily use more infrequent words while speaking (Crossley et al., 2019). ...
... For example, Crossley and colleagues longitudinally analyzed the lexical richness of ESL learners' L2 speech development over a period of 1 year, finding that within the first 4 months, vocabulary use became more abstract due to the increased use of more hypernymic and less concrete words 2 This literature review focuses on spoken vocabulary research and has deliberately avoided mentioning L2 writing research (which has also used a similar paradigm). Spoken vocabulary is different from written vocabulary as the former does not allow learners to refer to texts for decoding and forces them to resort to other cues (e.g., visuo-gestural; for a comprehensive review on vocabulary research in L2 speaking and writing, see Koizumi, 2012). (Crossley et al., 2009;Salsbury et al., 2011). ...
The current study set out to examine to what degree age of acquisition (AOA), defined as a learner’s first intensive exposure to a second language (L2) environment, mediates the final state of post-pubertal, spoken vocabulary attainment. In Study 1, spontaneous speech samples were elicited from experienced Japanese users of English (n = 41) using story-telling and interview tasks. The samples were analyzed using a range of corpus- and rater-based lexical measures, and compared to the speech of inexperienced Japanese speakers (n = 40) and native speakers of English (n = 10). The results showed that most experienced L2 learners tended to demonstrate nativelike proficiency for relatively easy lexical dimensions of speech (i.e., richness), but that AOA appeared to play a key role in predicting the ultimate attainment of relatively difficult lexical dimensions (i.e., appropriateness). In Study 2, the findings were successfully replicated with experienced L1 Polish users of English (n = 50).
... In the fi eld of SLA, lexical knowledge is central to theoretical views of speaking ability, such as psycholinguistic models of L2 production (De Bot, 1996 ; Kormos, 2006 ), and to practical issues of language learning, with patterns of vocabulary use linked to learners' speaking ability (Schmitt, 2008 ). However, as recently noted by Koizumi (2012, p. 1), " empirical studies on vocabulary and speaking profi ciency are limited in scope. " Indeed, most vocabulary research has exclusively focused on L2 listening (instead of speaking) using frequency-based analyses and examining the percentage of words needed for learners to achieve a certain level of comprehension of oral texts (van Zeeland & Schmitt, 2013 ) or investigating the number of word families that constitute various genres of spoken discourse such as daily conversations (Adolphs & Schmitt, 2003 ) or movies (Webb & Rodgers, 2009 ). ...
... These fi ndings are in line with previous results showing that L2 speakers' lexical usage is tied to measures of speaking (e.g., Crossley et al., 2014 ; Crossley et al., 2011 ). These associations tap into different domains of lexical knowledge such as variation (Crossley et al., 2011 ; Koizumi & In'nami, 2012 ), appropriateness (Iwashita et al., 2008 ), fl uency (Iwashita et al., 2008 ; Lu, 2012 ), sophistication (Lu, 2012 ), abstractness (Crossley et al., 2011 ), and sense relations (Crossley et al., 2009 ). ...
This study examined contributions of lexical factors to native-speaking raters’ assessments of comprehensibility (ease of understanding) of second language (L2) speech. Extemporaneous oral narratives elicited from 40 French speakers of L2 English were evaluated for comprehensibility by 10 raters and analyzed for 12 lexical variables targeting diverse domains of lexical usage (appropriateness, fluency, variation, sophistication, abstractness, and sense relations). Results revealed that L2 comprehensibility was chiefly predicted by measures of lexical appropriateness, fluency, and diversity and that lexical correlates of comprehensibility varied as a function of speakers’ comprehensibility level. For beginner-to-intermediate speakers, comprehensibility was related to basic uses of L2 vocabulary (fluent and accurate use of concrete words). For intermediate-to-advanced speakers, comprehensibility was linked to sophisticated uses of L2 lexis (morphologically accurate use of complex, less familiar, polysemous words). These findings, which highlight complex associations between lexical variables and L2 comprehensibility, suggest that improving comprehensibility requires attention to multiple lexical domains of L2 performance.
... Numerous studies have revealed that the degree to which vocabulary has been grasped is highly related to the development of various language skills. For instance, vocabulary knowledge is strongly correlated with quality listening (Mehrpour & Rahimi, 2010;Zeeland, 2013), speaking (Akbarian, 2018;Koizumi, 2013), reading (Grabe & Stoller, 2018;Li & Kirby, 2015), and writing (Johnson et al., 2016;Laufer, 2013). However, FL vocabulary learners are often confronted with setbacks when learning vocabulary in terms of both breadth and depth (Vu & Peters, 2021). ...
Since ineffective FL vocabulary teaching has been currently shown in the higher education of Mainland China, this study aims to achieve a satisfactory vocabulary teaching outcome through the construction of a systematic computer-based vocabulary teaching mode. Based on constructivism, the mode was established with three essential teaching phases, which were incorporated with systematic cognitive processes of vocabulary learning, supported by appropriate vocabulary teaching strategies, and also facilitated by computer technologies. To illustrate its efficacy, altogether 58 non-English major undergraduate students in two classes were selected randomly from a university in Mainland China. The participants were divided into two groups by class, which were taught target words under the computer-based systematic vocabulary teaching mode and the traditional paper-based one, respectively. Under the traditional mode, the same teacher adopted the teaching methods as they had normally done in the past, such as rote memorization and mechanical practice mainly with paper-based materials. Through the achievement comparisons, it was ultimately revealed that the systematic computer-based vocabulary teaching mode was superior to the traditional with a detectable difference either immediately after or one month after the treatment. The significance was further reinforced by the results from a questionnaire survey conducted among the group taught under the systematic computer-based vocabulary teaching mode.
... Speaking performance is potentially affected by a myriad of factors, including linguistic factors such as lexical knowledge (Koizumi, 2013), pronunciation accuracy (Levis, 2018), and grammatical competence (Hinkel, 2018). Moreover, psychological factors such as motivation levels (Wu, 2022), anxiety (Zheng & Cheng, 2018), and situational variables like time pressure exert a notable influence (De Jong & Perfetti, 2011). ...
Current research shows that self-efficacy plays a crucial role in academic success. Therefore, understanding how learners perceive their self-efficacy can lead to more positive and realistic views on learning foreign languages, especially in improving English-speaking skills. This study focuses on identifying the sources of self-efficacy in English speaking among 203 Vietnamese university students and examining its connection with their speaking performance. Data were gathered using a structured questionnaire for quantitative analysis and a speaking test to assess speaking skills. The results reveal that the students generally had strong self-efficacy in English speaking, with emotional and physical experiences being the main contributors to their self-efficacy. Furthermore, a positive correlation was found between their self-efficacy in speaking English and their actual speaking performance. These findings significantly illuminate how self-efficacy influences speaking performance in the context of language learning.
... and .69). As seen in study, grammar and vocabulary, when conceptualized comprehensively, are typically measured using rating scales (see Koizumi, 2013, for more details about vocabulary and speaking). ...
This edited volume is a collection of theoretical and empirical overviews of second language (L2) proficiency based on four skills: reading, writing, listening, and speaking. Each skill is reviewed in terms of how it has been conceptualized, measured, and studied over the years in relation to relevant (sub-) constructs of the language skill under discussion. This is followed by meta-analyses of correlation coefficients that examine the relationship between the L2 skill in question and its component variables. Unlike most meta-analyses that have a limited range of variables under investigation, our meta-analyses are much larger in scope to better clarify such relationships. By combining theoretical and empirical approaches, the book is helpful in deepening the understanding of how subcomponents or various variables are related to a particular L2 skill.
... and .69). As seen in study, grammar and vocabulary, when conceptualized comprehensively, are typically measured using rating scales (see Koizumi, 2013, for more details about vocabulary and speaking). ...
This edited volume is a collection of theoretical and empirical overviews of second language (L2) proficiency based on four skills: reading, writing, listening, and speaking. Each skill is reviewed in terms of how it has been conceptualized, measured, and studied over the years in relation to relevant (sub-) constructs of the language skill under discussion. This is followed by meta-analyses of correlation coefficients that examine the relationship between the L2 skill in question and its component variables. Unlike most meta-analyses that have a limited range of variables under investigation, our meta-analyses are much larger in scope to better clarify such relationships. By combining theoretical and empirical approaches, the book is helpful in deepening the understanding of how subcomponents or various variables are related to a particular L2 skill.
... Despite the centrality of frequency-based sophistication in L2 research (Bulté & Housen, 2012;Michel, 2017), recent studies have demonstrated that a number of lexical sophistication indices can be used to measure sophistication from multiple angles (Kyle et al., 2017). This is a desirable movement because while useful, frequency measures tend to underrepresent the multifaceted nature of vocabulary knowledge and use (Daller et al., 2007;Koizumi, 2012;Nation, 2013). With the recent proliferation of lexical indices, however, it is becoming even more difficult for L2 researchers to understand the degree to which these indices measure distinct areas of lexical performances (Bulté & Housen, 2012;Norris & Ortega, 2009). ...
Lexical sophistication has been an important indicator of productive lexical proficiency for almost 30 years. Although lexical sophistication has most often been operationalized as the proportion of low frequency words in a text, a growing body of research has indicated that a number of indices such as concreteness, hypernymy, and n‐gram association strengths meaningfully contribute to the construct. While the increase in available indices has expanded our understanding of the multidimensional construct, the sheer number of indices presents a practical barrier for researchers. Although some studies have begun to address this issue, most have been confined to the analysis of argumentative tasks, which are not necessarily representative of the range of tasks learners may encounter. This study therefore investigates the structure of lexical sophistication indices in a large learner corpus of English second language (L2) oral proficiency interviews (OPIs). An exploratory factor analysis identified 10 factors, 7 of which explained approximately 58% of the variance in OPI scores in a follow‐up regression analysis. The results suggest that while some features of lexical sophistication (e.g., concreteness) may be task independent, others (e.g., frequency) may be task specific.
... Extant research emphasizes vocabulary knowledge and other language skills: reading (e.g., Laufer & Aviad-Levitzky, 2017) and listening (e.g., Noreillie et al., 2018), highlighting the lack of research designed to explore the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and productive language skills such as speaking (Koizumi, 2013). Research suggests that relatively strong associations are consistently found between receptive vocabulary size and reading skills (r = .52 ...
The current study investigates the extent to which receptive vocabulary size test scores can predict second language (L2) speaking ability. Forty-six international students with an advanced level of L2 proficiency completed a receptive vocabulary task (Yes/No test; Meara & Miralpeix, 2017) and a spontaneous speaking task (oral picture narrative). Elicited speech samples were submitted to expert rating based on speakers’ vocabulary features as well as lexical sophistication measures. Results indicate that vocabulary size was significantly associated with vocabulary rating. However, learners with large vocabulary sizes did not necessarily produce lexically sophisticated L2 words during speech. A closer examination of the data reveals complexities regarding the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and speaking. Based on these findings, we explore implications for L2 vocabulary assessment in classroom teaching contexts and provide important suggestions for future research on the vocabulary-and-speaking link.
... Although the role of vocabulary in L2 speaking was lightly researched, some researchers have begun to examine this area particularly in the field of language assessment (e.g., Li & Lorenzo-Dus, 2014). Yet, these studies tend to focus on the relationship between speech production and the use of vocabulary derived from the same speech (Koizumi, 2013). Given that vocabulary knowledge and the ability to use it can be different in that all the knowledge is not accessible for use (Chapelle, 1994), it is vital to measure and compare the two constructs (vocabulary and speaking) separately in order to give a deeper insight into the whole picture of the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and oral ability. ...
The current study investigated the extent to which L2 learners' productive vocabulary knowledge could predict multiple dimensions of spontaneous speech production. A total of 39 EFL participants with varying L2 proficiency levels first completed a productive vocabulary knowledge task (Lex30). Their spontaneous speech, elicited via a series of picture description task, was then assessed for comprehensibility (i.e., ease of understanding), accentedness (i.e., linguistic nativelikeness), and fluency (i.e., speech rate). The findings showed that the productive vocabulary scores significantly correlated with L2 fluency, but not with comprehensibility or accentedness. Such results might indicate that more proficient L2 learners, as indicated by their productive vocabulary scores, might be able to speak spontaneously without too many pauses and repetitions, and at a faster tempo. Finally, future research directions will be discussed with a focus on the relationships between vocabulary knowledge and speaking.
... Although the role of vocabulary in L2 speaking was lightly researched, some researchers have begun to examine this area particularly in the field of language assessment (e.g., Li & Lorenzo-Dus, 2014). Yet, these studies tend to focus on the relationship between speech production and the use of vocabulary derived from the same speech (Koizumi, 2013). Given that vocabulary knowledge and the ability to use it can be different in that all the knowledge is not accessible for use (Chapelle, 1994), it is vital to measure and compare the two constructs (vocabulary and speaking) separately in order to give a deeper insight into the whole picture of the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and oral ability. ...
The current study investigated the extent to which L2 learners’ productive vocabulary knowledge could predict multiple dimensions of spontaneous speech production. A total of 39 EFL participants with varying L2 proficiency levels first completed a productive vocabulary knowledge task (Lex30). Their spontaneous speech, elicited via a series of picture description task, was then assessed for comprehensibility (i.e., ease of understanding), accentedness (i.e., linguistic nativelikeness), and fluency (i.e., speech rate). The findings showed that the productive vocabulary scores significantly correlated with L2 fluency, but not with comprehensibility or accentedness. Such results might indicate that more proficient L2 learners, as indicated by their productive vocabulary scores, might be able to speak spontaneously without too many pauses and repetitions, and at a faster tempo. Finally, future research directions will be discussed with a focus on the relationships between vocabulary knowledge and speaking.
... At the same time, native-speaking judges in these previous studies received specific rater training based on L2 proficiency scale descriptors adopted from existing tests such as TOEFL iBT (Iwashita et al., 2008), Test for English Majors (Lu, 2012), or ACTFL oral proficiency guidelines (Crossley et al., , 2014. Because judges (who in some cases were trained assessors highly familiar with specific scales) were explicitly asked to apply existing test descriptors to make holistic judgements of L2 lexical proficiency, the results could have been influenced by the use of pre-existing definitions of L2 lexical proficiency contained in test descriptors (Koizumi, 2012). The current study extended this line of L2 vocabulary and speaking research by examining in depth the relationship between lexical properties of L2 speech and untrained native listeners' intuitive judgements of L2 comprehensibility and accentedness. ...
The current project investigated the extent to which several lexical aspects of second language (L2) speech—appropriateness, fluency, variation, sophistication, abstractness, sense relations—interact to influence native speakers’ judgements of comprehensibility (ease of understanding) and accentedness (linguistic nativelikeness). Extemporaneous speech elicited from 40 French speakers of English with varied L2 proficiency levels was first evaluated by 10 native-speaking raters for comprehensibility and accentedness. Subsequently, the dataset was transcribed and analyzed for 12 lexical factors. Various lexical properties of L2 speech were found to be associated with L2 comprehensibility, and especially lexical accuracy (lemma appropriateness) and complexity (polysemy), indicating that these lexical variables are associated with successful L2 communication. In contrast, native speakers’ accent judgements seemed to be linked to surface-level details of lexical content (abstractness) and form (variation, morphological accuracy) rather than to its conceptual and contextual details (e.g., lemma appropriateness, polysemy).
There is emerging evidence that collocation use plays a primary role in determining various dimensions of L2 oral proficiency assessment and development (e.g., Eguchi & Kyle, 2020; Kyle & Crossley, 2015; Saito, 2020). The current study presents the results of three experiments which examined the relationship between the degree of association in collocation use (operationalized as t and mutual information scores) and the intuitive judgements of L2 comprehensibility (i.e., ease of understanding). The topic was approached from the angles of different task conditions (Study 1), rater background (L1 vs. L2) (Study 2) and cross-sectional vs. longitudinal analyses (Study 3). The findings showed that (a) collocation emerged as a medium-to-strong determinant of L2 comprehensibility in structured (picture description) compared to free (oral interview) oral production tasks; (b) with sufficient immersion experience, L2 raters can demonstrate as much sensitivity to collocation as L1 raters; and (c) conversational experience is associated with more coherent and mutually-exclusive combinations of words in L2 speech, resulting in greater L2 comprehensibility development.
The abstract for this document is available on CSA Illumina.To view the Abstract, click the Abstract button above the document title.
To remedy the paucity of studies on the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and speaking proficiency, we examine the degree to which second language (L2) speaking proficiency can be predicted by the size, depth, and speed of L2 vocabulary among novice to intermediate Japanese learners of English. Studies 1 and 2 administered vocabulary tests and a speaking test to 224 and 87 L2 learners, respectively. Analyses using structural equation modeling demonstrated that a substantial proportion of variance in speaking proficiency can be explained by vocabulary knowledge, size, depth, and speed. These results suggest the centrality of vocabulary knowledge to speaking proficiency.
Complexity, accuracy, and fluency have proved useful measures of second language performance. The present article will re-examine these measures themselves, arguing that fluency needs to be rethought if it is to be measured effectively, and that the three general measures need to be supplemented by measures of lexical use. Building upon this discussion, generalizations are reviewed which focus on inter-relationships between the measures, especially between accuracy and complexity, since positive correlations between these two areas have been less common in the literature. Some examples of accu-racy–complexity correlations are reviewed. The central issue here is how to account for these correlations, and so the discussion explores rival claims from the Cognition and Trade-off Hypotheses. It is argued that such joint raised performance between accuracy and complexity is not a function of task difficulty, as the Cognition Hypothesis would predict, but that instead it reflects the joint operation of separate task and task condition factors. Extending the theoretical discussion, connection is made with the Levelt model of first language speaking, and it is proposed that the results obtained in the task-based performance literature can be linked to this model, modified to take account of differences between first and second language processing, particularly as these stem from differences in the underlying mental lexicons.
Insights from corpus linguistics have come to be seen as having a significant impact in second language pedagogy. Learner corpora, or collections of texts spoken or written by non-native speakers (NNS) of a language, are now being used for the purposes of enhancing language teaching. Specifically, by comparing the corpus of NNS with native speakers (NS) it is possible to identify instances of learners' under- or over-use of spoken vocabulary, as well as to investigate how far, and in what ways learners deviate from NS's norms. This preliminary study compares a small NNS corpus of 43,651 words with an established NS corpus. Results revealed that the Japanese NNS differed markedly in many areas, especially in their underuse of certain lexical items such as discourse markers, modal items, adjectives for specific evaluations, some interactive words, delexical verbs and terms for marking vagueness and hedges. On the other hand, NNS overused some high frequency and auxiliary verbs and some common adjectives. From this data, we suggest that knowledge from learner corpora has important pedagogical implications which include giving higher priority to certain classes of vocabulary including multi-word clusters that appear to be underused among Japanese learners.
Background: Differences in lexical diversity (LD) across different discourse elicitation tasks have been found in neurologically intact adults (NIA) (Fergadiotis, Wright, & Capilouto, 2010) but have not been investigated systematically in people with aphasia (PWA). Measuring lexical diversity in PWA may serve as a useful clinical tool for evaluating the impact of word retrieval difficulties at the discourse level. Aims: The study aims were (a) to explore the differences between the oral language samples of PWA and NIA in terms of LD as measured by dedicated computer software (voc-D), (b) to determine whether PWA are sensitive to discourse elicitation task in terms of LD, and (c) to identify whether differences between PWA and NIA vary in magnitude as a function of discourse task. Method & Procedures: Oral language samples from 25 PWA and 27 NIA were analysed. Participants completed three commonly used discourse elicitation tasks (single pictures, sequential pictures, story telling) and voc-D was used to obtain estimates of their LD. Outcomes & Results: A mixed 2 x 3 ANOVA revealed a significant group x task interaction that was followed by an investigation of simple main effects and tetrad comparisons. Different patterns of LD were uncovered for each group. For the NIA group results were consistent with previous findings in the literature according to which LD varies as a function of elicitation technique. However, for PWA sequential pictures and story telling elicited comparable estimates of LD. Conclusions: Results indicated that LD is one of the microlinguistic indices that are influenced by elicitation task and the presence of aphasia. These findings have important implications for modelling lexical diversity and selecting and interpreting results from different discourse elicitation tasks.
ABSTRACT This study examined the componential structure of second-language (L2) speaking proficiency. Participants—181 L2 and 54 native speakers of Dutch—performed eight speaking tasks and six tasks tapping nine linguistic skills. Performance in the speaking tasks was rated on functional adequacy by a panel of judges and formed the dependent variable in subsequent analyses (structural equation modeling). The following independent variables were assessed separately: linguistic knowledge in two tests (vocabulary and grammar); linguistic processing skills (four reaction time measures obtained in three tasks: picture naming, delayed picture naming, and sentence building); and pronunciation skills (speech sounds, word stress, and intonation). All linguistic skills, with the exception of two articulation measures in the delayed picture naming task, were significantly and substantially related to functional adequacy of speaking, explaining 76% of the variance. This provides substantial evidence for a componential view of L2 speaking proficiency that consists of language-knowledge and language-processing components. The componential structure of speaking proficiency was almost identical for the 40% of participants at the lower and the 40% of participants at the higher end of the functional adequacy distribution (n = 73 each), which does not support Higgs and Clifford’s (1982) relative contribution model, predicting that, although L2 learners become more proficient over time, the relative weight of component skills may change.
This study investigated second language (L2) lexical development in the spontaneous speech of six adult, L2 English learners in a 1-year longitudinal study. One important aspect of lexical development is lexical organization and depth of knowledge. Hypernymic relations, the hierarchical relationships among related words that vary in relation to their semantic specificity (e.g., Golden Retriever vs. dog vs. animal), are an important indicator of both lexical organization and depth of knowledge. Thus, this study used hypernymy values from the WordNet database and a lexical diversity measure to analyze lexical development. Statistical analyses in this study indicated that both hypernymic relations and lexical diversity in L2 learners increase over time. Additionally, lexical diversity and hypernymic values correlated significantly, suggesting that as learners' lexicons grow, learners have access to a wider range of hypernymy levels. These findings are discussed in relation to developing abstractness in language, extending hypernymic knowledge, and the growth of lexical networks.
A group of 21 hard-of-hearing and deaf children attending primary school were trained by their teachers on the production
of selected consonants and on the meanings of selected words. Speech production, vocabulary knowledge, reading aloud, and
speech perception measures were obtained before and after each type of training. The speech production training produced a
small but significant improvement in the percentage of consonants correctly produced in words. The vocabulary training improved
knowledge of word meanings substantially. Performance on speech perception and reading aloud were significantly improved by
both types of training. These results were in accord with the predictions of a mathematical model put forward to describe
the relationships between speech perception, speech production, and language measures in children (Paatsch, Blamey, Sarant, Martin, & Bow, 2004). These training data demonstrate that the relationships between the measures are causal. In other words, improvements in
speech production and vocabulary performance produced by training will carry over into predictable improvements in speech
perception and reading scores. Furthermore, the model will help educators identify the most effective methods of improving
receptive and expressive spoken language for individual children who are deaf or hard of hearing.
Jim Miller and Regina Weinert investigate syntactic structure and the organization of discourse in spontaneous spoken language. Using data from English, German, and Russian, they develop a systematic analysis of spoken English and highlight properties that hold across languages. The authors argue that the differences in syntax and the construction of discourse between spontaneous speech and written language bear on various areas of linguistic theory, apart from having obvious implications for syntactic analysis. In particular, they bear on typology, Chomskyan theories of first language acquisition, and the perennial problem of language in education. In current typological practice written and spontaneous spoken texts are often compared; the authors show convincingly that typological research should compare like with like. The consequences for Chomskyan, and indeed all, theories of first language acquisition flow from the central fact that children acquire spoken language but learn written language.
Over the last 20 years vocabulary research has grown from a Cinderella subject to a position of some importance. Vocabulary is now considered integral to just about every aspect of language knowledge and is a lively and vital area of research and innovation. With this development have come standard and widely-used tests, such as vocabulary size and lexical richness measures, and commonly accepted metaphors, such as the mental lexicon as a web of words. Less widely known outside academic circles, however, is the extensive work on learners' lexis and the utility, reliability and validity of the tests we use to measure and investigate it. This volume brings together contributions from internationally-renowned researchers in this field to explain much of the background to study in this area. It introduces to a wider audience the concerns, the newest approaches and developments in the field of vocabulary research and testing.
This volume presents a framework that expands the traditional concept of a vocabulary test to cover a range of procedures for assessing the vocabulary knowledge of second language learners.
Vocabulary richness, including lexical diversity and use of rare words, has an important role in assessing proficiency, diagnosing progress and testing theory in the study of language development. This book first reviews different methods for quantifying how vocabulary is deployed in spontaneous speech and writing, and then introduces an alternative approach which can assess overall lexical diversity, measure morphology development and compare the development of different word classes. The new approach is illustrated by its application to first and second language learners.
This study was an examination of the relationship of lexical richness to the quality of English as a second language (ESL) learners' oral narratives. A computational system was designed to automate the measurement of 3 dimensions of lexical richness, that is, lexical density, sophistication, and variation, using 25 different metrics proposed in the language acquisition literature. This system was used to analyze large-scale data from the Spoken English Corpus of Chinese Learners (Wen, Wang, & Liang, 2005) together with the vocd utility of the Computerized Language Analysis programs (MacWhinney, 2000), which offers an additional measure of lexical variation, the D measure (Malvern, Richards, Chipere, & Durán, 2004; McKee, Malvern, & Richards, 2000). This comprehensive analysis allowed us to identify measures that correlate strongly with the raters' judgments of the quality of ESL learners' oral narratives, as well as to understand the relationships among these measures. This research provides ESL teachers and researchers with a robust tool for assessing the lexical richness of ESL language samples and insights into how lexical richness measures may be effectively used as indices of the quality of ESL learners' speaking task performance.
How do second language learners whose mother tongue (L1) is rhythmically distinct with reference to the target language (L2) move from one system to the other? A descriptive model elaborated to account for the rhythmic organization of French and English (Wenk and Wioland, 1982) is applied to the speech of French learners of English to identify the particular type of cross-linguistic influence operating therein. The following hypothesis is tested: In moving from the "trailer-timed" rhythmic groups of French to the "leader-timed" rhythmic groups of English, learners pass through a transitional stage characterized by the production of rhythmic groups which, while displaying features of both the L1 and L2 systems, are unique to the learner's "interlanguage." Evidence is presented for the existence of transitional rhythmic groups involving idiosyncratic distribution of articulatory energy as perceived in vowel reduction patterns of the interlanguage. The phenomenon varies according to speech task (increasing progressively from word-repetition to freer speech to imitative readings of complete sentences) and characteristically surfaces in intermediate-level speakers who wrongly identify words containing pre-tonic reduced syllables (e.g., "Japan") with rhythmic groups (or feet).
Despite the importance of lexical diversity (LD) in L2 speaking and writing performance, LD assessment measures are known to be affected by the number of words analyzed in the text. This study aims to identify LD measures that are less affected by text length and can be used for the analysis of short L2 texts (50-200 tokens). We compared the type-token ratio, Guiraud index, Maas, measure of textual lexical diversity (MTLD), D, and HD-D to assess their degree of susceptibility to text length. Spoken texts of 200 tokens from 38 L2 English learners at the lower-intermediate-level were divided into segments of 50-200 tokens and the text length impact was examined. We found that MTLD was less affected by text length across most ranges, but was somewhat affected across 50 to 150 and 50 to 200 tokens. We further observed low correlations between equal-sized texts for up to 100 tokens. These results suggest that MTLD can be used with texts of more than 100 tokens and compared between 100- and 200-token texts. We also showed that D and HD-D produced similar results for texts, thus indicating that D and HD-D are comparable.
The paper starts with a general description of the three published Chinese learner corpora, followed by a survey of the corpus-based studies of Chinese learner English with a focus on two of my own studies on vocabulary. Finally, the advantages and disadvantages of the corpus-based studies are discussed. Up to now there are three published corpora of Chinese Learner English available in the market, that is, Chinese Learner English Corpus (CLEC), Spoken and Written English Corpus of Chinese Learners (SWECCL) and College Learners' Spoken English Corpus (CLOSEC), which have given fresh impetus to corpus-based studies on Chinese Learner English. The corpus-based studies on learner English in China have analyzed various aspects of the learner's interlangauge, such as phonology, morphology, word forms, word combinations, syntax and discourse features, etc. which provide insights to a better understanding of the interlanguage of the Chinese learners. The recent corpus-based studies carried out by myself are on the English vocabulary of Chinese learners. The first one is on the use of top twenty frequency adverbs (TTFAs) in English that attempted to investigate how Chinese tertiary-level English majors use frequency adverbs in their written and spoken English in order to provide empirical evidence for answering two questions: (1) whether English learners tend to overuse or/and underuse high-frequency words; (2) whether they tend to use oral discourse features in their written English or/and use written discourse features in their spoken English. The data used in this study included a written English corpus by English majors from the CLEC, and a spoken English corpus from the SWECCL. With these two corpora combined, the general learner English corpus contained 955,043 words. The reference corpus was the British National Corpus (BNC), which contains 90 million words of written English and 10 million words of spoken English, all by native speakers. Data analysis included a series of comparisons regarding the use of top twenty frequency adverbs (TTFAs), such as the comparison between the general learner corpus and the BNC, the comparison between the learners' spoken corpus and the spoken portion of the BNC, the comparison between the learners' written corpus and the written portion of the BNC. The results showed that the overuse tendency and the underuse tendency co-existed in the use of frequency adverbs by Chinese EFL learners but the former was much stronger than the latter both in their speech and writing. Furthermore, the use of frequency adverbs in speech by Chinese EFL learners deviates more than that in writing from native speakers' use. It also showed that some written-register sensitive frequency adverbs were overused in the learner's spoken corpus while some spoken-register sensitive frequency adverbs were overused in the learner's written corpus. The second study is on the developmental features of speaking vocabulary by English
Winner of the 31st Annual Kenneth W. Mildenberger Prize, by the Modern Language Association of America, (presented January 7, 2012). Citation: In Cognitive Bases of Second Language Fluency, Norman Segalowitz takes a concept that permeates many teachers’ and students’ understanding of what it means to learn another language—the quest for fluency—and investigates it from multiple vantage points to provide a nuanced, interdisciplinary perspective. Using a dynamical-systems-theory approach, he explores fluency not as an absolute trait that speakers possess but as a nonlinear phenomenon involving interrelated factors: speakers’ first and second language skills and experiences as well as their emotional and cognitive states when speaking; speakers’ interactions within various social and communicative contexts; and listeners’ perceptions. Carefully organized and clearly written, this volume is filled with thoughtful reinterpretations of previous research and new insights on every page that will be of interest to teachers and researchers alike.
The main purpose of this study was to examine the validity of the approach to lexical diversity assessment known as the measure of textual lexical diversity (MTLD). The index for this approach is calculated as the mean length of word strings that maintain a criterion level of lexical variation. To validate the MTLD approach, we compared it against the performances of the primary competing indices in the field, which include vocd-D, TTR, Maas, Yule's K, and an HD-D index derived directly from the hypergeometric distribution function. The comparisons involved assessments of convergent validity, divergent validity, internal validity, and incremental validity. The results of our assessments of these indices across two separate corpora suggest three major findings. First, MTLD performs well with respect to all four types of validity and is, in fact, the only index not found to vary as a function of text length. Second, HD-D is a viable alternative to the vocd-D standard. And third, three of the indices--MTLD, vocd-D (or HD-D), and Maas--appear to capture unique lexical information. We conclude by advising researchers to consider using MTLD, vocd-D (or HD-D), and Maas in their studies, rather than any single index, noting that lexical diversity can be assessed in many ways and each approach may be informative as to the construct under investigation.
The study reported in this paper is an investigation of the nature of speaking proficiency in English as a second language in the context of a larger project to develop a rating scale for a new international test of English for Academic Purposes, TOEFL iBT (Brown et al. 2005). We report on a large-scale study of the relationship between detailed features of the spoken language produced by test-takers and holistic scores awarded by raters to these performances. Spoken test performances representing five different tasks and five different proficiency levels (200 performances in all) were analyzed using a range of measures of grammatical accuracy and complexity, vocabulary, pronunciation, and fluency. The results showed that features from each category helped distinguish overall levels of performance, with particular features of vocabulary and fluency having the strongest impact. Overall, the study contributes important insights into the nature of spoken proficiency as it develops and can be measured in rating scales for speaking, and has implications for methodological issues of the appropriateness of the use in language testing research contexts of measures developed in research on second language acquisition.
Measuring spoken language proficiency
- M. L. Adams
How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening?
- I. S. P. Nation
Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy
- M Mccarthy
- R Carter
McCarthy, M., & Carter, R. (1997). Written and spoken vocabulary. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy
(Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 20-39). Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University Press.
Modelling and assessing vocabulary knowledge
- N. Lorenzo-Dus
Lexis in the assessment of speaking and writing: An illustration from Cambridge ESOL's General English tests
- G S Lim
Lim, G. S., & Galaczi, E. D. (2010). Lexis in the assessment of speaking and writing: An illustration
from Cambridge ESOL's General English tests. Research Notes, 41, 14-19. Retrieved June 15,
2013 from http://www.cambridgeesol.org/rs_notes/rs_nts41.pdf
Gramulator (Version 6.0) [Computer software
- P M Mccarthy
McCarthy, P. M. (2012). Gramulator (Version 6.0) [Computer software].
D_Tools (Version 2.0; _lognostics: Tools for vocabulary researchers: Free software from _lognostics)
- P M Meara
- I Miralpeix
Meara, P. M., & Miralpeix, I. (2007). D_Tools (Version 2.0; _lognostics: Tools for vocabulary
researchers: Free software from _lognostics) [Computer software]. University of Wales
Swansea. Retrieved June 15, 2013 from http://www.lognostics.co.uk/tools/index.htm
An empirical study on basic requirements for Japanese EFL learners to achieve oral fluency in English
- S Funato
- H Ito
Funato, S., & Ito, H. (2008). An empirical study on basic requirements for Japanese EFL learners
to achieve oral fluency in English. Annual Review of English Language Education in Japan, 19,
41-50. Retrieved June 15, 2013 from http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110008512344
Assessed levels of second language speaking proficiency: How distinct?
- N Iwashita
- A Brown
- T Mcnamara
- S Hagan
Iwashita, N., Brown, A., McNamara, T., & O'Hagan, S. (2008). Assessed levels of second language
speaking proficiency: How distinct? Applied Linguistics, 29, 24-49.
Developmental aspects of text production in writing and speech(Unpublished PhD dissertation)
- V Johansson
Johansson, V. (2009). Developmental aspects of text production in writing and speech (Unpublished PhD dissertation). Lund University, Sweden. Retrieved June 15, 2013 from
http://internt.ht.lu.se/media/documents/project-503/VictoriaJohanssonFINAL.pdf
The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition
- B Laufer
- I S P Nation
Laufer, B., & Nation, I. S. P. (2012). Vocabulary. In S. M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge
handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 163-76). New York, NY: Routledge.
Modelling and assessing vocabulary knowledge
- H Daller
- J Milton
- Treffers-Daller
Daller, H., Milton, J., & Treffers-Daller, J. (Eds.). (2007). Modelling and assessing vocabulary
knowledge. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.