Keywords
aural vocabulary
lexical segmentation
listening comprehension
How to Cite
Number of views: 1765
Number of downloads: 1087
Abstract
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.
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
License
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.