Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T02:28:55.838Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Examining lexical development in second language learners: An approximate replication of Salsbury, Crossley & McNamara (2011)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2017

Scott A. Crossley  and
Stephen Skalicky
Scott A. Crossley
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Linguistics and ESL, Georgia State University, Atlanta, USAscrossley@gsu.edu
Stephen Skalicky
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Linguistics and ESL, Georgia State University, Atlanta, USAsskalicky1@gsu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper reports on an approximate or partial replication of a study by Salsbury, Crossley & McNamara (2011) that examined the longitudinal developmental of a number of core lexical features related to word imageability, concreteness, familiarity, and meaningfulness in a spoken corpus of English second language (L2) learners. Salsbury et al. found no developmental growth patterns for word familiarity but strong growth patterns for word concreteness, imageability, and meaningfulness as a function of time such that L2 learners began to produce more sophisticated words. Salsbury et al. were the first to formally identify this relation between English proficiency and lexical sophistication, and a large number of studies investigating lexical proficiency have cited this article as a foundational study. There were, however, a number of limitations to the Salsbury et al. (2011) study that make it appropriate for replication. First, the sample size was relatively small (six learners sampled six times over the course of a year). In addition, the study did not control for a number of factors important in L2 acquisition studies (e.g., age, proficiency level, gender) and used a statistical technique that averaged group means and did not properly account for individual participant variation. This replication study addresses these areas and the findings from the replication reflect those reported by Salsbury et al., providing support for the notion that developing L2 lexicons move from the production of words with stronger links to core lexical items to words with weaker links to core lexical items over time. Implications for language learning and teaching are discussed.

Type
Replication Research
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 52 , Issue 3 , July 2019 , pp. 385 - 405
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albrechtsen, D., Haastrup, K. & Henriksen, B. (2008). Vocabulary and writing in a first and second language: Processes and development. London: Springer.Google Scholar
Alderson, J. C. (2005). Assessing reading. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bachman, L. F. (2002). Some reflections on task-based language performance assessment. Language Testing 19.4, 453–476.Google Scholar
Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Sergent-Marshall, S. D., Spieler, D. H. & Yap, M. J. (2004). Visual word recognition of single-syllable words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 133.2, 283–316.Google Scholar
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67.1, 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01.Google Scholar
Bell, H. M. (2003). Using frequency lists to assess L2 texts. Doctoral dissertation, University of Wales, Swansea. Retrieved from EThoS.Google Scholar
Bell, N., Skalicky, S. & Salsbury, T. (2014). Multicompetence in L2 language play: A longitudinal case study. Language Learning 64.1, 72–102.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. & Molis, M. (2001). On the evidence for maturational constraints in second language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language 44.2, 235–249.Google Scholar
Boers, F., Eyckmans, J., Kappel, J., Stengers, H. & Demecheleer, M. (2006). Formulaic sequences and perceived oral proficiency: Putting a lexical approach to the test. Language Teaching Research 10.3, 245–261.Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M., Warriner, A. B. & Kuperman, V. (2014). Concreteness ratings for 40 thousand generally known English word lemmas. Behavior Research Methods 46.3, 904–911. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0403-5.Google Scholar
Buchanan, L., Westbury, C. & Burgess, C. (2001). Characterizing semantic space: Neighborhood effects in word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 8.3, 531–544.Google Scholar
Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC psycholinguistic database. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 33.4, 497–505.Google Scholar
Crossley, S. A. & Salsbury, T. (2011). The development of lexical bundle accuracy and production in English second language speakers. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 49.1, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2011.001.Google Scholar
Crossley, S. A., Salsbury, T. & McNamara, D. S. (2009). Measuring L2 lexical growth using hypernymic relationships. Language Learning 59.2, 307–334.Google Scholar
Crossley, S. A., Salsbury, T. & McNamara, D. S. (2010a). The development of polysemy and frequency use in English second language speakers. Language Learning 60.3, 573–605. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00568.xGoogle Scholar
Crossley, S. A., Salsbury, T. & McNamara, D. S. (2010b). The development of semantic relations in second language speakers: A case for Latent Semantic Analysis. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics 7, 55–74.Google Scholar
Crossley, S. A., Salsbury, T., McNamara, D. S. & Jarvis, S. (2011). Predicting lexical proficiency in language learner texts using computational indices. Language Testing 28.4, 561–580. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532210378031.Google Scholar
Crossley, S. A., Salsbury, T., & McNamara, D. S. (2012). Predicting the proficiency level of language learners using lexical indices. Language Testing 29.2, 240–260.Google Scholar
Crossley, S. A., Salsbury, T., Titak, A. & McNamara, D. S. (2014). Frequency effects and second language lexical acquisition: Word types, word tokens, and word production. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 19.3, 301–332.Google Scholar
Daller, H., Van Hout, R. & Treffers‐Daller, J. (2003). Lexical richness in the spontaneous speech of bilinguals. Applied Linguistics 24.2 197–222.Google Scholar
Daller, H. & Xue, H. (2007). Lexical richness and the oral proficiency of Chinese EFL students. In Daller, H., Milton, J. & Treffers‐Daller, J. (eds.), Modelling and assessing vocabulary knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 150–164.Google Scholar
David, A. (2008). A developmental perspective on productive lexical knowledge in L2 oral interlanguage. Journal of French Language Studies 18.3, 315–331.Google Scholar
De Groot, A. & Poot, R. (1997). Word translation at three levels of proficiency in a second language: The ubiquitous involvement of conceptual memory. Language Learning 47.2, 215–264.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22.4, 499–533.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. & Beaton, A. (1993). Psycholinguistic determinants of foreign language vocabulary learning. Language Learning 43.4, 559–617.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, T. (2006). Habits and rabbits: Word associations and the L2 lexicon. EuroSLA Yearbook 6.1, 121–145.Google Scholar
Fox, J. (2003). Effect displays in R for generalised linear models. Journal of Statistical Software 8.15, 1–27.Google Scholar
Gee, N. R., Nelson, D. L. & Krawczyk, D. (1999). Is the concreteness effect a result of underlying network interconnectivity? Journal of Memory and Language 40.4, 479–497.Google Scholar
Gernsbacher, M. A. (1984). Resolving 20 years of inconsistent interactions between lexical familiarity and orthography, concreteness, and polysemy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113.2, 256–281.Google Scholar
Gilhooly, K. J. & Logie, R. H. (1980). Age-of-acquisition, imagery, concreteness, familiarity, and ambiguity measures for 1,944 words. Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation 12.4, 395–427.Google Scholar
Gould, R., Nation, P. & Read, J. (1990). How large can a receptive vocabulary be? Applied Linguistics 11.4, 341–363.Google Scholar
Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M. & Cai, Z. (2004). Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language. Behavior Research Methods 36.2, 193–202.Google Scholar
Haastrup, K. & Henriksen, B. (2000). Vocabulary acquisition: Acquiring depth of knowledge through network building. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 10.2, 221–240.Google Scholar
Henriksen, B. (1999). Three dimensions of vocabulary development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 21.2, 303–317.Google Scholar
Hill, D. R. & Thomas, H. R. (1988a). Survey review: Graded readers (Part 1). ELT Journal 42.1, 44–52.Google Scholar
Hill, D. R. & Thomas, H. R. (1988b). Survey review: Graded readers (Part 2). ELT Journal 42.2, 124–136.Google Scholar
Hill, D. R. & Thomas, H.R. (1989). Survey review: Seven series of graded readers. ELT Journal 43.3, 221–231.Google Scholar
Hothorn, T., Bretz, F. & Westfall, P. (2008). Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biometrical Journal 50.3, 346–363.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H., Van Gelderen, A. & Schoonen, R. (2009). Automatization in second language acquisition: What does the coefficient of variation tell us? Applied Psycholinguistics 30.4, 555–582.Google Scholar
Jarvis, S. (2013). Capturing the diversity in lexical diversity. Language Learning 63.s1, 87–106.Google Scholar
Johnson, J. S. & Newport, E. L. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology 21.2, 60–99.Google Scholar
Kaushanskaya, M. & Rechtzigel, K. (2012). Concreteness effects in bilingual and monolingual word learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 19.5, 935–941.Google Scholar
Kiss, G. R., Armstrong, C., Milroy, R. & Piper, J. (1973). An associative thesaurus of English and its computer analysis. In Aitken, A. J., Bailey, R. W. & Hamilton-Smith, N. (eds.), The computer and literary studies. Edinburgh: Edinburg University Press, 153–165.Google Scholar
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, B. & Christensen, H. B. (2016). lmerTest: Tests in linear mixed effects models. R package version 2.0–32. Retrieved from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lmerTest.Google Scholar
Kyle, K. & Crossley, S. A. (2015). Automatically assessing lexical sophistication: Indices, tools, findings, and application. TESOL Quarterly 49.4, 757–786.Google Scholar
Kyle, K. & Crossley, S. A. (2016). The relationship between lexical sophistication and independent and source-based writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 34, 12–24.Google Scholar
Laufer, B. (1992). Reading in a foreign language: How does L2 lexical knowledge interact with the reader's general academic ability. Journal of Research in Reading 15.2, 95–103.Google Scholar
Laufer, B. (1997). The lexical plight in second language reading: Words you don't know, words you think you know, and words you can't guess. In Huckin, T. & Coady, J. (eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 20–34.Google Scholar
Laufer, B. & Nation, P. (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics 16.3, 307–322.Google Scholar
Laufer, B. & Nation, P. (1999). A vocabulary-size test of controlled productive ability. Language Testing 16.1, 33–51.Google Scholar
Lu, X. (2012). The relationship of lexical richness to the quality of ESL learners’ oral narratives. The Modern Language Journal 96.2, 190–208.Google Scholar
Mackey, A. (2012). Why (or why not), when, and how to replicate research. In Porte, G. K. (ed.), Replication research in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 21–46.Google Scholar
Manchon, R. M., Murphy, L. & de Larios, J. R. (2009). Lexical retrieval processes and strategies in second language writing: A synthesis of empirical research. International Journal of English Studies 7.2, 149–174.Google Scholar
McDonald, J. L. (2000). Grammaticality judgments in a second language: Influences of age of acquisition and native language. Applied Psycholinguistics 21.3, 395–423.Google Scholar
McNamara, T. F. (1996). Measuring second language performance. Addison Wesley Longman.Google Scholar
Meara, P. (1978). Learners’ word associations in French. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin 3.2, 192–211.Google Scholar
Meara, P. (1983). Word associations in a foreign language. Nottingham Linguistics Circular 11.2, 29–38.Google Scholar
Meara, P. (1992). EFL vocabulary tests. ERIC Clearinghouse.Google Scholar
Meara, P. (1996). The dimensions of lexical competence. In Brown, G., Malmkjaer, K. & Williams, J. (eds.), Performance and competence in second language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 35–53.Google Scholar
Meara, P. (2005). Designing vocabulary tests for English, Spanish and other languages. In Butler, C., Gómez-González, M. & Suárez, S. M. D. (eds.), The dynamics of language use: Functional and contrastive perspectives. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, 271–286.Google Scholar
Melka, F. (1997). Receptive vs. productive aspects of vocabulary. In Schmitt, N. & McCarthy, M. (eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition, and pedagogy. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 84–102.Google Scholar
Miller, P. W. & Chiswick, B. R. (2005). Linguistic distance: A quantitative measure of the distance between English and other languages. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 26.1, 1–11.Google Scholar
Milton, J. (2009). Measuring second language vocabulary acquisition. Toronto, ON: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Morris, L & Cobb, T. (2004). Vocabulary profiles as predictors of the academic performance of Teaching English as a Second Language trainees. System 32.1, 75–87.Google Scholar
Nakagawa, S. & Schielzeth, H. (2013). A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed‐effects models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 4.2, 133–142.Google Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching & learning vocabulary. Boston: Heinle Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. & Beglar, D. (2007). A vocabulary size test. The Language Teacher 31.7, 9–13.Google Scholar
Nelson, D. L., Schreiber, T. A. & McEvoy, C. L. (1992). Processing implicit and explicit representations. Psychological Review 99.2, 322–348.Google Scholar
Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L. & Schreiber, T. A. (1998). The University of South Florida word association, rhyme, and word fragment norms [Database]. Retrieved from w3.usf.edu/FreeAssociation.Google Scholar
Paivio, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Paivio, A., Yuille, J. C. & Madigan, S. A. (1968). Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns. Journal of Experimental Psychology 76.1, 1–25.Google Scholar
Pavlenko, A. & Piller, I. (2008). Language education and gender. In Hornberger, N. H. (ed.), Encyclopedia of language and education. Springer, 57–69.Google Scholar
Polio, C. (2001). Research methodology in second language writing research: The case of text-based studies. In Silva, T. & Matsuda, P. K. (eds.), On second language writing. New York: Routledge, 91–115.Google Scholar
Porte, G. K. (2012). Introduction. In Porte, G. K. (ed.), Replication research in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–18.Google Scholar
Porte, G. K. (2013). Who needs replication? CALICO Journal 30.1, 10–15.Google Scholar
Porte, G. K. (2015). Replication research in quantitative research. In Brown, J. D. & Coombe, C. (eds.), The Cambridge guide to research in language teaching and learning. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 140–145.Google Scholar
Porte, G. K. & Richards, K. (2012). Focus article: Replication in second language writing research. Journal of Second Language Writing 21.3, 284–293.Google Scholar
R Core Team (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/.Google Scholar
Read, J. (1998). Validating a test to measure depth of vocabulary knowledge. In Kunnan, A. (ed.), Validation in language assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 41–60.Google Scholar
Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Roquet, H., Llopis, J. & Pérez-Vidal, C. (2016). Does gender have an impact on the potential benefits learners may achieve in two contexts compared: Formal instruction and formal instruction+ content and language integrated learning? International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 19.4, 370–386.Google Scholar
Saito, K., Webb, S., Trofimovich, S. P. & Isaacs, T. (2016). Lexical profiles of comprehensible second language speech: The role of appropriateness, fluency, variation, sophistication, abstractness, and sense relations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 38.4, 677–701.Google Scholar
Salsbury, T., Crossley, S. A. & McNamara, D. S. (2011). Psycholinguistic word information in second language oral discourse. Second Language Research 27.3, 343–360.Google Scholar
Schepens, J., Van der Slik, F. & Van Hout, R. (2013a). Learning complex features: A morphological account of L2 learnability. Language Dynamics and Change 3.2, 218–244.Google Scholar
Schepens, J., Van der Slik, F. & Van Hout, R. (2013b). The effect of linguistic distance across IndoEuropean mother tongues on learning Dutch as a second. In Borin, L. & Saxena, A. (eds.), Approaches to measuring linguistic differences. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 201–233.Google Scholar
Schmitt, N. (1998). Tracking the incremental acquisition of second language vocabulary: A longitudinal study. Language Learning 48.2, 281–317.Google Scholar
Schmitt, N. (2010). Researching vocabulary: A vocabulary research manual. London: Palgrave Macmillian.Google Scholar
Schmitt, N. & Meara, P. (1997). Researching vocabulary through a word knowledge framework. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19.1, 17–36.Google Scholar
Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D. & Clapham, C. (2001). Developing and exploring the behaviour of two new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test. Language Testing 18.1, 55–88.Google Scholar
Schwanenflugel, P. J., Harnishfeger, K. K. & Stowe, R. W. (1988). Context availability and lexical decisions for abstract and concrete words. Journal of Memory and Language 27.5, 499– 520.Google Scholar
Segalowitz, S. J., Segalowitz, N. S. & Wood, A. G. (1998). Assessing the development of automaticity in second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics 19.1, 53–67.Google Scholar
Siyanova, A. & Schmitt, N. (2008). L2 learner production and processing of collocation: A multi-study perspective. Canadian Modern Language Review 64.3, 429–458.Google Scholar
Stadthagen-Gonzalez, H. & Davis, C. J. (2006). The Bristol norms for age of acquisition, imageability, and familiarity. Behavior Research Methods 38.4, 598–605.Google Scholar
Sunderland, J. (2000). Issues of language and gender in second and foreign language education. Language Teaching 33.4, 203–223.Google Scholar
Tickoo, M. L. (1989). Learners’ dictionaries: State of the art. Anthology Series 23. Singapore: ERIC.Google Scholar
Toglia, M. P. & Battig, W. F. (1978). Handbook of semantic word norms. Somerset, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Van der Slik, F. W. (2010). Acquisition of Dutch as a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32.3, 401–432.Google Scholar
Whaley, C. P. (1978). Word–nonword classification time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 17.2, 143–154.Google Scholar
Wilkins, D. A. (1972). Linguistics in language teaching. London: Hodder & Stoughton Educational.Google Scholar
Zareva, A., Schwanenflugel, P. & Nikolova, Y. (2005). Relationship between lexical competence and language proficiency: Variable sensitivity. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27.4, 567–595.Google Scholar
Zareva, A. & Wolter, B. (2012). The ‘promise’ of three methods of word association analysis to L2 lexical research. Second Language Research 28.1, 41–67.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Crossley and Skalicky supplementary material

Figures 1-8

Download Crossley and Skalicky supplementary material(File)
File 242.6 KB