Exploring the relationships between L2 vocabulary knowledge, lexical segmentation, and L2 listening comprehension

• Authors: Kriss Lange , Joshua Matthews
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The capacity to perceive and meaningfully process foreign or second language (L2) words from the aural modality is a fundamentally important aspect of successful L2 listening. Despite this, the relationships between L2 listening and learners’ capacity to process aural input at the lexical level has received relatively little research focus. This study explores the relationships between measures of aural vocabulary, lexical segmentation and two measures of L2 listening comprehension (i.e., TOEIC & Eiken Pre-2) among a cohort of 130 tertiary level English as a foreign language (EFL) Japanese learners. Multiple regression modelling indicated that in combination, aural knowledge of vocabulary at the first 1,000-word level and lexical segmentation ability could predict 34% and 38% of total variance observed in TOEIC listening and Eiken Pre-2 listening scores respectively. The findings are used to provide some preliminary recommendations for building the capacity of EFL learners to process aural input at the lexical level.

Keywords

EN

second language listening; aural vocabulary; lexical segmentation; listening comprehension

• Publisher: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
• Journal: Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching
• Year: 2020
• Volume: 10
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 723-749

Dates

published

2020-12-18

Contributors

author

Kriss Lange

• University of Shimane Matsue Campus, Japan

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7201-1751

author

Joshua Matthews

• School of Education, University of New England, Armidale, Australia

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2260-2331

References

• Adolphs, S., & Schmitt, N. (2003). Lexical coverage of spoken discourse. Applied Linguistics, 24(4), 425-438. http://doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.4.425
• Andringa, S., Olsthoorn, N., van Beuningen, C., Schoonen, R., & Hulstijn, J. (2012). Determinants of success in native and non‐native listening comprehension: An individual differences approach. Language Learning, 62, 49-78. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00706.x
• Carney, N. (2020). Diagnosing L2 listeners’ difficulty comprehending known lexis. TESOL Quarterly. Advance online publication. http://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3000
• Cheng, J., & Matthews, J. (2018). The relationship between three measures of L2 vocabulary knowledge and L2 listening and reading. Language Testing, 35(1), 3-25. http://doi.org/10.1177/0265532216676851
• Cobb, T. Compleat Web VP v.2 [computer program]. https://www.lextutor.ca/vp/comp/
• Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159. http:// doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155
• Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98-104. http://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.98
• Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213-238. http://doi.org/10.2307/3587951
• Davison, C., & Leung, C. (2009). Current issues in English language teacher-based assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 43(3), 393-415.
• Educational Testing Service. (2015). Mapping the TOEIC tests on the CEFR. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. https://www.ets.org/s/toeic/pdf/toeic_cef_mapping_flyer.pdf
• Eiken Foundation of Japan (2016). Comparison table. http://www.eiken.or.jp/eiken/en/research/comparison-table.html
• Field, J. (2003). Promoting perception: Lexical segmentation in L2 listening. ELT Journal, 57(4), 325-334. http://doi.org/10.1093/elt/57.4.325
• Field, J. (2008a). Listening in the language classroom. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. http://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511575945
• Field, J. (2008b). Revising segmentation hypotheses in first and second language listening. System, 36, 35-51. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2007.10.003
• Field, J. (2008c). Bricks or mortar: Which parts of the input does a second language listener rely on? TESOL Quarterly, 42(3), 411-432. http://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00139.x
• Green, S. B. (1991). How many subjects does it take to do a regression analysis? Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26(3), 499-510. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2603_7
• Hulstijn, J. H. (2003). Connectionist models of language processing and the training of listening skills with the aid of multimedia software. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16(5), 413-425. http://doi.org/10.1076/call.16.5.413.29488
• Institute for International Business Communication. (2018). TOEIC program data & analysis 2018. Tokyo: IIBC. http://www.iibc-global.org/library/default/toeic/official_data/pdf/DAA.pdf
• Kim, H. (2013). Statistical notes for clinical researchers: Assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics, 38(1), 52-54. http://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2013.38.1.52
• Kobayashi, Y. (2001). The learning of English at academic high schools in Japan: Students caught between exams and internationalization. The Language Learning Journal, 23(1), 67-72. http://doi.org/10.1080/09571730185200111
• Lange, K. (2018). Analyzing difficulties in aural word recognition for Japanese English learners: Identifying function words in connected speech. CASELE Research Bulletin, 48, 63-73.
• Lange, K., & Matthews, J. (2020). Paused Transcription Test (Lange & Matthews, 2020), Mendeley Data, V1. http://doi.org/10.17632/g278w62zpg.1
• Matthews, J. (2018). Vocabulary for listening: Emerging evidence for high and mid-frequency vocabulary knowledge. System, 72, 23-36. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.10.005
• Matthews, J., & Cheng, J. (2015). Recognition of high frequency words from speech as a predictor of L2 listening comprehension. System, 52, 1-13. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.04.015
• Matthews, J., & O’Toole, J. M. (2015). Investigating an innovative computer application to improve L2 word recognition from speech. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28, 364-382. http://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2013.864315
• Matthews, J., O’Toole, J. M., & Chen, S. (2017). The impact of word recognition from speech (WRS) proficiency level on interaction, task success and word learning: Design implications for CALL to develop L2 WRS. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(1-2), 22-43. http://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2015.1129348
• McLean, S., Kramer, B., & Beglar, D. (2015). The creation and validation of a listening vocabulary levels test. Language Teaching Research, 19(9), 741-760. http://doi.org/10.1177/1362168814567889
• Milton, J. (2013). Measuring the contribution of vocabulary knowledge to proficiency in the four skills. In C. Bardel, C. Lindqvist, & B. Laufer (Eds.), L2 vocabulary acquisition, knowledge and use: New perspectives on assessment and corpus analysis (pp. 57-78). European Second Language Association. http://www.eurosla.org/monographs/EM02/EM02home.php
• Mizumoto, A., & Shimamoto, T. (2008). A comparison of aural and written vocabulary size of Japanese EFL university learners. Language Education and Technology, 45, 35-51. http://doi.org/10.24539/let.45.0_35
• Nation, I. S. P. (n.d.). The BNC/COCA headwords lists. [PDF files]. http://www.victoria.ac.nz/lals/about/staff/paul-nation
• Nation, I. S. P., & Beglar, D. (2007). A vocabulary size test. The Language Teacher, 31(7), 9-13.
• Pellegrino, F., Coupé, C., & Marsico, E. (2011). Across-language perspective on speech information rate. Language, 87, 539-558. http://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2011.0057
• Read, J. (1993). The development of a new measure of L2 vocabulary knowledge. Language Testing, 10(3), 355-371. http://doi.org/10.1177/026553229301000308
• Read, J. (1998). Validating a test to measure depth of vocabulary knowledge. In A. Kunnan (Ed.), Validation in language assessment (pp. 41-60). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. http://doi.org/10.4324/9780203053768
• Rost, M. (2002). Teaching and researching listening. Essex: Longman. http://doi.org/10.4324/9781315833705
• Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D., & Clapham, C. (2001). Developing and exploring the behavior of two new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test. Language Testing, 18(1), 55-89. http://doi.org/10.1191/026553201668475857
• Sheppard, B., & Butler, B. (2017). Insights into student listening from paused transcription. CATESOL Journal, 29(2), 81-107.
• Siegel, J. (2016). Listening vocabulary: Embracing forgotten aural features. RELC Journal, 10(3), 377-386. http://doi.org/10.1177/0033688216645477
• Siegel, J., & Siegel, A. (2015). Getting to the bottom of L2 listening instruction: Making a case for bottom-up activities. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 5(4), 637-662. http://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2015.5.4.6
• Stæhr, L. S. (2009). Vocabulary knowledge and advanced listening comprehension in English as a foreign language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31(4), 577-607. http://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263109990039
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education.
• Vandergrift, L., & Baker, S. (2015). Learner variables in second language listening comprehension: An exploratory path analysis. Language Learning, 65(2), 390-416. http://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12105
• Wallace, M. P. (2020). Individual differences in second language listening: Examining the role of knowledge, metacognitive awareness, memory, and attention. Language Learning. Advance online publication. http://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12424
• Webb, S., & Rodgers, P. (2009). The lexical coverage of movies. Applied Linguistics, 30(3), 407-427. http://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp010
• Wong, S. W. L., Mok, P. P. K., Chung, K. K., Leung, V. W. H., Bishop, D. V. M., & Chow, B. W. (2017). Perception of native English reduced forms in Chinese learners: Its role in listening comprehension and its phonological correlates. TESOL Quarterly, 51(1), 7-31. http://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.273

Identifiers

DOI

10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.4.4