The Relationship Between Vocabulary Learning Strategies and Breadth and Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge

Abstract

This study investigated the relationship between vocabulary learning strategies and vocabulary breadth and depth knowledge. One hundred and fifty first-year university students in China took the Vocabulary Levels Test, a meaning recall task, and the Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge Test. The first two tests were used to elicit two types of vocabulary breadth knowledge, that is, meaning recognition (passive recognition) and meaning recall (passive recall), while the last test was used to elicit participants' depth of vocabulary knowledge. Participants also filled out a vocabulary learning strategies survey (Schmitt, 1997). Structural equation modeling was employed to assess how vocabulary learning strategies predicted breadth and depth of vocabulary knowledge. Results indicate that strategies that focus on learning the forms and associative meanings of words are significant predictors of both vocabulary breadth and depth knowledge. However, even learning strategies of the same type may have different effects on meaning recognition and meaning recall. Implications of the results for vocabulary teaching and learning are considered.Keywords: individual differences; memory; vocabulary knowledge; vocabulary learning strategies; meaning recognition; meaning recall LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES (LLS) are "specific actions, behaviors, steps or techniques that students use to improve their own progress in developing skills in a second or foreign language" (Oxford, 1999, p. 518). Research on this important individual differences construct (Cohen & Macaro, 2007) dates back to the 1970s when researchers tried to document the types of learning strategies used by successful second language (L2) learners (e.g., Rubin, 1975). The period between the 1980s and 1990s saw a flourishing of studies (e.g., Chamot et al., 1999;Cohen, 1998;O'Malley & Chamot, 1990;Oxford, 1990Oxford, , 1996Wenden, 1991 Rubin, 1987), with the research emphasis shifting toward the classification of LLS. O'Malley and Chamot (1990), for example, proposed three types of strategies: cognitive, metacognitive, and social/affective strategies. At about the same time, Oxford (1990) developed the classical taxonomy that classifies LLS into six categories: cognitive, metacognitive, mnemonic, compensatory, affective, and social strategies.In addition to documenting and classifying LLS that language learners use, another important line of LLS research is concerned with the relationship of LLS to L2 performance. There is some evidence to suggest that LLS can be effectively taught and that improved strategy use can facilitate listening comprehension (Car-

The Roles of Vocabulary Size and Morphological Awareness Affecting Reading Comprehension

“…Also, similar studies on the relation between vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension have been conducted in ESL (Cheng & Matthews, 2018;Li, 2007;Wang, 2014) and EFL contexts (Kang, Kang & Park, 2012;Zhang & Lu, 2015). For example, Kang et al (2012) showed that Korean EFL high school students' reading comprehension was explained by their vocabulary knowledge and pinpointed that vocabulary depth played a significant role in reading comprehension of EFL learners while vocabulary breadth is a relatively less important dimension.…”

Longitudinal Effects of Mediums of Word Explanation on L2 Vocabulary Learning Strategies Among Chinese Grade-7 Students

“…Vocabulary learning strategies pertain to actions that a learner takes to facilitate the completion of learning vocabularies (Gu, 2018). Empirical studies showed that effective VLS would enhance L2 language proficiency (Ajayi, 2015;Zhang and Lu, 2015;Susanto and binti Ab Halim, 2017), such as enlarging vocabulary size (e.g., Hamzah et al, 2009), and further determined second language context comprehension (Vedder and Benigno, 2016;Caro and Mendinueta, 2017). Understanding what kinds of VLS students adopt, and how students adopt them, is helpful for L2 educators to assist learners in internalizing meanings of target vocabulary, particularly receptive vocabulary knowledge (Wang, 2015;Rose et al, 2018).…”

“…Following Krashen's (1989) input-oriented language acquisition theory, researchers found that engaging L2 language learners in extensive reading could develop their VLS, which may facilitate their L2 vocabulary learning (e.g., Nassaji, 2003;Webb, 2008;Zhang and Lu, 2015). That is, when learners are exposed to meaningful L2 inputs, they are usually encouraged to assess word meanings by employing various strategies such as metacognition, memorization, and cognition strategies (Ho et al, 2016;Yeldham, 2016;Barnes and Dickinson, 2017).…”

Introducing “mobile DDL (data-driven learning)” for vocabulary learning: an experiment for academic English

“…how deeply the words are known, may also be enhanced during the process (Li and Kirbt 2015). Although some research results challenge the effectiveness of repetition for vocabulary depth (Zhang and Lu 2015), repetitive word encounters have been advocated practice in pedagogy [National Reading Panel (US) 2000]. In short, repetitive exposure has the potential to help learners build a large reservoir and in-depth understanding of vocabulary.…”