2020 | 10 | 3 | 579-605
Article title

Effects of frequency and idiomaticity on second language reading comprehension in children with English as an additional language

Title variants
Languages of publication
Vocabulary plays an important role in reading comprehension in both the L1 and the L2 (Murphy, 2018). In measuring vocabulary knowledge, however, researchers typically focus on mono-lexical units where vocabulary assessments tend not to take into account multi-word expressions which include phrasal verbs, collocations, and idioms. Omitting these multi-word lexical items can lead to an over-estimation of comprehension skills, particularly in reading. Indeed, adult learners of English comprehend texts containing a larger number of multi-word expressions less well compared to texts containing fewer of these expressions, even when the same words are used in each text (Martinez & Murphy, 2011). To investigate whether children learning English as an additional language (EAL) face a similar challenge, two reading comprehension tests were administered to EAL and monolingual (non-EAL) English-speaking children in primary school. Both tests contained the same common words, but whereas in one test some of the words occurred in multi-word expressions, in the other test they did not. Reading comprehension was significantly reduced for both groups of children when multi-word expressions were included. Monolingual participants generally performed better than children with EAL on both tests further suggesting that children with EAL may face a particular disadvantage in English reading comprehension. These results are discussed within the context of the importance of developing rich vocabulary knowledge in all children, and especially emergent bilingual children, within primary school and beyond.
Physical description
  • Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Anderson, R. C., & Freebody, P. (1979). Vocabulary knowledge. Technical report No. 136. Washington, D.C.
  • Babayiğit, S., & Stainthorp, R. (2014). Correlates of early reading comprehension skills: A componential analysis. Educational Psychology, 34(2), 185-207.
  • Bailey, E. G., & Marsden, E. (2017). Teachers’ views on recognizing and using home languages in predominantly monolingual primary schools. Language and Education, 31(4), 283-306.
  • Beech, J. R., & Keys, A. (1997). Reading, vocabulary and language preference in 7- to 8-year-old bilingual Asian children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(4), 405-414.
  • Bialystok, E., Luk, G., Peets, K. F., & Yang, S. (2010). Receptive vocabulary differences in monolingual and bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13(4), 525-531.
  • Bishop, H. (2004). The effect of typographic salience on the look up and comprehension of unknown formulaic sequences. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences (pp. 227-248). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Burgoyne K., Kelly J. M., Whiteley, H. E., & Spooner A. (2009). The comprehension skills of children learning English as an additional language. British Journal of Educational Pyschology, 79, 735-747.
  • Burgoyne, K., Whiteley, H. E., & Hutchinson, J. M. (2011). The development of comprehension and reading-related skills in children learning English as an additional language and their monolingual, English-speaking peers. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 344-354.
  • Cameron, L. (2002). Measuring vocabulary size in English as an additional language. Language Teaching Research, 6(2), 145-173.
  • Carrol, G., & Conklin, K. (2019). Is all formulaic language created equal? Unpacking the processing advantage for different types of formulaic sequences. Language and Speech, 63(1), 95-122.
  • Cieślicka, A. (2006). Literal salience in on-line processing of idiomatic expressions by second language learners. Second Language Research, 22(2), 115-144.
  • IBM Corp. (2017). IBM SPSS statistics for Windows (Version 25.0). Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
  • DfES (Department for Education and Skills). (2013). Understanding reading comprehension. London: DfES.
  • DfE (Department for Education). (2016). School and college performance measures. Retrieved from
  • DfE (Department for Education). (2018). Schools, pupils and their characteristics: January 2018. Retrieved from
  • Dunn, L. M., Dunn, D. M., & NFER. (2009). British picture vocabulary scales (3rd ed.). Windsor: Granada.
  • Genesee, F. (2009). Early childhood bilingualism: Perils and possibilities. Journal of Applied Research on Learning, 2, 1-21.
  • Gollan, T. H., & Silverberg, N. B. (2001). Tip-of-the-tongue states in Hebrew–English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 63-83.
  • Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., & Werner, G. A. (2002). Semantic and letter fluency in Spanish-English bilinguals. Neuropsychology, 16, 562-576.
  • Goswami, U. (2001). Early phonological development and the acquisition of literacy. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 111-125). New York: Guildford Press.
  • Grant, L., & Bauer, L. (2004). Criteria for re-defining idioms: Are we barking up the wrong tree? Applied Linguistics, 25(1), 38-61.
  • Hessel, A. K., & Murphy, V. A. (2018). Understanding how time flies and what it means to be on cloud nine: English as an additional language (EAL) learners’ metaphor comprehension. Journal of Child Language, 46(2), 265-291.
  • Hessel, A. K., Nation, K., & Murphy, V. A. (in press). Comprehension monitoring during reading: An eye-tracking study with children learning English as an additional language. Scientific Studies of Reading.
  • Hirsh, D., & Nation, P. (1992). What vocabulary size is needed to read unsimplified texts for pleasure? Reading in a Foreign Language, 8(2), 689-696.
  • Hu, M. H., & Nation, P. (2000). Unknown vocabulary density and reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 13, 403-430.
  • Hutchinson, J. (2018). Educational outcomes of children with English as an additional language. Retrieved from
  • Hutchinson, J. M., Whiteley, H. E., Smith, C. D., & Connors, L. (2003). The developmental progression of comprehension-related skills in children learning EAL. Journal of Research in Reading, 16(1), 19-32.
  • Joseph, H., & Nation, K. (2018). Examining incidental word learning during reading in children: The role of context. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 166, 190-211.
  • Laufer, B. (1992). How much lexis is necessary for reading comprehension? In P. J. L. Arnaud & H. Béjoint (Eds.), Vocabulary and applied linguistics (pp. 126-132). London: Macmillan.
  • Laufer, B., & Ravenhorst-Kalovski, G. C. (2010). Lexical threshold revisited: Lexical text coverage, learners’ vocabulary size and reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 22(1), 15-30.
  • Mahon, M., & Crutchley, A. (2006). Performance of typically-developing school-age children with English as an additional language on the British Picture Vocabulary Scales II. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 22(3), 333-351.
  • Martinez, R. (2008). The effect of frequency and idiomaticity on second language reading comprehension (Unpublished MSc thesis). University of Oxford, Oxford.
  • Martinez, R., & Murphy, V. (2011). Effect of frequency and idiomaticity on second language reading comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 45(2), 267-290.
  • McKendry, M., & Murphy, V. A. (2011). A comparative study of listening comprehension measures in English as an additional language and native English-speaking primary school children. Evaluation and Research in Education, 24, 17-40.
  • Murphy, V. A. (2014). Second language learning in the early school years: Trends and contexts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Murphy, V. A. (2018). Literacy development in linguistically diverse pupils. In L. Miller, D., Bayram, F., Rothman, J., & Serratrice, L. (Eds.), Bilingual cognition and language: The state of the science across its subfields (Studies in Bilingualism, 54) (pp. 312-323). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Murphy, V. A., & Unthiah, A. (2015). A systematic review of intervention research examining English language and literacy development in children with English as an additional language (EAL), (January). Retrieved from
  • Nation, P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Nattinger, J. R., & DeCarrico, J. S. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • OECD. (2012). Percentage of immigrant children and their outcomes.
  • Oxley, E., & De Cat, C. (2018). A systematic review of language and literacy interventions in children and adolescents with English as an additional language. Retrieved from
  • Özoflu, D. (2012). The effect of frequency and idiomaticity on the English L2 reading comprehension of Turkish university students (Unpublished MSc thesis). The University of Oxford, Oxford.
  • Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1999). Reading and “incidental” L2 vocabulary acquisition: An introspective study of lexical inferencing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(2), 195–224.
  • Pawley, A., & Syder, F. H. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 191-225). London: Longman.
  • Pearson, B. Z., Fernández, S. C., & Oller, D. K. (1993). Lexical development in bilingual infants and toddlers: Comparison to monolingual norms. Language Learning, 43(1), 93-120.
  • Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Martinez, R. (2015). The idiom principle revisited. Applied Linguistics, 36(5), 549-569.
  • Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Pellicer-Sánchez, A. (2018). Formulaic language: Setting the scene. In A. Siyanova-Chanturia & A. Pellicer-Sánchez (Eds.), Understanding formulaic language: A second language acquisition perspective (pp. 1-15). London, New York: Routledge.
  • Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Van Lancker Sidtis, D. (2018). What on-line processing tells us about formulaic language. In A. Siyanova-Chanturia & A. Pellicer-Sánchez (Eds.) Understanding formulaic language: A second language acquisition perspective (pp. 38-61). London, New York: Routledge.
  • Smith, S. A., & Murphy, V. A. (2015). Measuring productive elements of multi-word phrase vocabulary knowledge among children with English as an additional or only language. Reading and Writing, 28, 347-369.
  • Spottl, C., & McCarthy, M. (2004). Comparing knowledge of formulaic sequences across L1, L2, L3, and L4. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences (pp. 191-225). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Strand, S., & Demie, F. (2005). English language acquisition and educational attainment at the end of primary school. Educational Studies, 31, 275-291.
  • Strand, S., & Hessel, A. (2018). English as an additional language, proficiency in English and pupils’ educational achievement: An analysis of local authority data. Retrieved from
  • Vermeer, A. (1992). Exploring the second language learner lexicon. In De Jong, Verhoeven (Eds.), The construct of language proficiency: Applications of psychological models to language assessment (pp. 147-162). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Wechsler, D. (2011). Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (2nd ed.) (WASI-II). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Whiteside, K. E., Gooch, D., & Norbury, C. F. (2016). English language proficiency and early school attainment among children learning English as an additional language. Child Development.
  • Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.