Can Japanese learners of English comprehend inflectional and derivational forms in listening? Testing the validity of the word family counting unit
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21360123 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Young Ae Kim (0000-0001-7474-019X, Institute of General Education, Kyoto Seika University Kyoto City Japan, corresponding author), Tim Stoeckel (0000-0002-1447-5002, Department of International Studies and Regional Development University of Niigata Prefecture Niigata City Japan), Stuart Mclean (0000-0002-7035-378X, Department of Applied Sociology Kindai University Higashi Osaka Japan) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 107 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 819-846 |
| Publication date | 2023-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Modern Language Journal (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0026-7902 • E-ISSN: 1540-4781 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/modl.12863 |
| OpenAlex | W4386000770 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 48 |
In second language (L2) research, the lexical unit is often defined as a base word plus inflectional and derivational forms through Level 6 of Bauer and Nation's framework (WF6). WF6 use has been justified by the assumption that once a form is known, recognition of other WF6 members requires little extra effort. A more lenient view holds that an incomplete understanding of derivational forms is permissible if words containing the most frequent derivational affixes are known. This study assessed the validity of these views for L2 listening. Participants ( N = 120) provided translations of 27 base words and 43 related affixational forms when listening. When participants knew one form (either the base word or an affixed form) they also knew the other just 25.1% of the time. For target words containing the most frequent derivational affixes, this was just 26.5%. Logistic regression found that learners’ overall vocabulary level, several aspects of word frequency, and base word knowledge were all significant predictors of knowing affixed forms. However, when other variables were held constant, base word knowledge was a weak predictor of affixational form knowledge. These findings support neither the strict assumption nor the more lenient view of WF6 use for L2 listening among study participants
Active listening · Base (topology) · Linguistics · Morpheme · Vocabulary · Word (group theory) · Communication · Mathematics · Natural Language Processing Techniques · Psychology · Second Language Acquisition and Learning · Text Readability and Simplification
Learning Vocabulary in Another Language
Researching Vocabulary
Reading in a Second Language
Making and Using Word Lists for Language Learning and Testing
The creation and validation of a listening vocabulary levels test
The Four Strands
The Distribution of the Flora in the Alpine Zone. 1
The relationship between vocabulary knowledge and L2 reading/listening comprehension
How Large a Vocabulary is Needed For Reading and Listening?
Researching Vocabulary Through a Word Knowledge Framework
The lexical profile of academic spoken English
Lexical Coverage in L1 and L2 Listening Comprehension
Evidence for the Adoption of the Flemma as an Appropriate Word Counting Unit
Validating the Construct of Word in Applied Corpus-based Vocabulary Research
A New Academic Vocabulary List
Is There a Core General Vocabulary? Introducing the New General Service List
How well do learners know derived words in a second language
Limitations of Size and Levels Tests of Written Receptive Vocabulary Knowledge
Predicting L2 reading proficiency with modalities of vocabulary knowledge
The relationship between three measures of L2 vocabulary knowledge and L2 listening and reading
Word Families
Types of words identified as unknown by L2 learners when reading
Suffix knowledge
A New Academic Word List
Narrow Viewing
Roles of Vocabulary Knowledge for Success in English‐Medium Instruction
The Academic Spoken Word List
L2 Reading Comprehension and Its Correlates
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,5 |
| Citation span | 2024 - 2026 (3) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |