Context, word, and student predictors in second language vocabulary learning

Abstract

We examined to what extent the variation in vocabulary learning outcomes (vocabulary knowledge, learning gain, and rate of forgetting) in English as a second language (L2) in context can be predicted from semantic contextual support, word characteristics (cognate status, Levenshtein distance, word frequency, and word length), and student characteristics (prior vocabulary knowledge, reading ability, and exposure to English) in 197 Dutch adolescents. Students were taught cognates, false friends, and control words through judging sentences with varying degrees of semantic contextual support using a pretest/posttest between subjects design. Participants were presented with an English target word and its Dutch translation, followed by an English sentence. They were instructed to judge the plausibility of the sentence. Mixed-efffects models indicated that learning gains were higher for sentences with more semantic contextual support and in students with stronger reading comprehension skills. We were the first to show that Levenshtein distance is an important predictor for L2 vocabulary learning outcomes. Furthermore, more accurate as well as faster learning task performance lead to higher learning outcomes. It can thus be concluded that L2 study materials containing semantically supportive contexts and that focus on words with little L1-L2 overlap are most effective for L2 vocabulary learning.

Exploring the Efficiency of Associative Vocabulary Teaching Strategies to Foreign Language Learners

“…Concept mapping is a technique to motivate meaningful learning by explaining that "concepts should be hierarchically arranged with more general concepts placed higher on the map and linked to more specific ones which are placed lower" (Schroeder et al, 2018, p. 56). However, the findings were in contrast with Mulder et al (2019) who claimed that contexts are only useful when all the comprising words are familiar for the learners.…”

“…Context-based instruction has been investigated by many scholars to observe the learners' word enhancement (e.g., Çetinavcı, 2014;Khaghaninejad et al, 2021;Mulder et al, 2019) or to focus on deriving vocabulary meaning from context and its effect on lexical repertoire development (e.g., Baumann et al, 2003;Chao & Hu, 2013), or even to check the context awareness in vocabulary immersion system to boost learners' vocabulary acquisition (e.g., Tipprasert et al, 2017). However, by reviewing the vocabulary learning in context, many English learners realized that it was a challenge to guess and extract the known words meaning from the indigenous contextual input and information (Mulder et al, 2019). Zwier and Boers (2023) affirmed this by stating "inferring word meanings from context requires comprehension of the surrounding lexical clues" (p. 50).…”

Explicit cognate instruction facilitates vocabulary learning by foreign language learners with developmental language disorder

“…Even though these studies were conducted in L2 input-rich settings (in the countries where the target language is spoken), their results also appear relevant to FL learning in limited-input (classroom) settings. If FL learners recognize more words in a new language because these words have cognates in their L1, this will facilitate vocabulary learning, which will also have consequences for other aspects of reading comprehension (Mulder et al, 2019).…”

“…It is well-established that cognates are easier to recognize, learn, and retrieve than noncognates (Costa et al, 2000; Mulder et al, 2019; Rosselli et al, 2014; Sheng et al, 2016). There is also a growing body of evidence demonstrating that knowledge of cognates and cognate awareness are strong predictors of L2 vocabulary and L2 reading comprehension (D’Angelo et al, 2017; Dressler et al, 2011; Hipfner-Boucher et al, 2016).…”

Attitudes of Efl Students Regarding Learner Autonomy in English Vocabulary Acquisition

“…Moreover, without the essential vocabulary, it is hard for a student to converse. Indeed, a number of researchers in the field of vocabulary (e.g., Mulder et al, 2019;Asllani & Paçarizi, 2021;Bartolotti & Marian, 2017) believe that communication without syntax and grammar is feasible, but not without vocabulary. Thus, it cannot be argued that without a vocabulary, learners would be unable to communicate their ideas, emotions, or feelings and will be unable to comprehend written and spoken materials.…”