Lexical Elaboration and Typographical Enhancement: Their Discrete and Combined Impact on Incidental Vocabulary Learning

Year 2021, , 1 - 11, 09.04.2021

Amir Hossein Sohbati , Mohsen Boroumand , Farzaneh Khakzad Esfahlan

https://doi.org/10.31458/iejes.757203

Abstract

The present study examined two input modification techniques, namely lexical elaboration (LE) and typographical enhancement (TE), and the combination of these two (LE & TE) to seek the difference among them as far as incidental vocabulary learning through reading is concerned. Ninety-six Iranian EFL students whose reading proficiency was at intermediate level were divided into four groups and respectively read texts which were (a) lexically elaborated, (b) typographically enhanced, (c) both lexically elaborated and typographically enhanced, or (d) unmodified baseline. Right after reading, their incidental vocabulary learning was assessed by means of a modified version of Paribakht and Wesche’s (1997) Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (VKS). Results of the ANOVA demonstrated a significant difference among the four groups. In order to pinpoint where the differences exactly lay, a multiple comparison was done through the application of a post-hoc Scheffe Test. The results suggested that students performed significantly better on a text that had undergone both modification techniques (i.e. double-treatment). However, lexical elaboration alone did not have a statistically significant effect on incidental vocabulary learning through reading. More interestingly, there was no significant difference between the double-treatment and typographical enhancement groups although their mean scores were different. 

Keywords

Input modification, lexical elaboration, typographical enhancement, incidental vocabulary learning

Lexical Elaboration and Typographical Enhancement: Their Discrete and Combined Impact on Incidental Vocabulary Learning

Abstract

The present study examined two input modification techniques, namely lexical elaboration (LE) and typographical enhancement (TE), and the combination of these two (LE & TE) to seek the difference among them as far as incidental vocabulary learning through reading is concerned. Ninety six Iranian EFL students whose reading proficiency was at intermediate level were divided into four groups and respectively read texts which were (a) lexically elaborated, (b) typographically enhanced, (c) both lexically elaborated and typographically enhanced, or (d) unmodified baseline. Right after reading, their incidental vocabulary learning was assessed by means of a modified version of Paribakht and Wesche’s (1997) Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (VKS). Results of the ANOVA demonstrated a significant difference among the four groups. In order to pinpoint where the differences exactly lay, a multiple comparison was done through the application of post-hoc Scheffe Test. The results suggested that students performed significantly different and better on a text that had undergone both modification techniques (i.e. double-treatment). However, lexical elaboration alone did not have a statistically significant effect on incidental vocabulary learning through reading. More interestingly, there was no significant difference between the double-treatment and typographical enhancement groups although their mean scores were highly gapped.

Keywords

Input modification, lexical elaboration, typographical enhancement, Incidental vocabulary leaning

References

• Bishop, H. (2004).The effect of typographic salience on the look up and comprehension of the unknown formulaic sequence. In N. Schmitt (ed.), Formulaic sequence (pp.227-243). Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing Co.
• Brewer, B. (2008). Effects of lexical simplification and elaboration on ESL readers’ local-level perceived comprehension (Master’s thesis). Brigham Young University. Retrieved from https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2664&context=etd
• Choi, S. (2016). Processing and learning of enhanced English collocations: An eye movement study. Language Teaching Research, 21(3), 403-426. doi:10.1177/1362168816653271.
• Folse, K. S. (2006). The effect of type of written exercise on L2 vocabulary retention. TESOL Quaterly, 40(2), 273-293. doi: 10.2307/40264523
• Frantzen, D. (2003). Factors affecting how second language Spanish students derive meaning from context. The Modern Language Journal, 87(2), 168-199. doi: 10.1111/1540-4781.00185
• Gutiérrez, C. H. S., Serrano, M. P., & García, P. R. (2019). The effects of word frequency and typographical enhancement on incidental vocabulary learning in reading. Journal of Spanish Language Teaching, 6(1), 14-31. doi: 10.1080/23247797.2019.1590000
• Hulstijn, J. H. (2013). Incidental learning in second language acquisition. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (Vol. 5, pp. 2632-2640). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
• Hulstijn, J. H. & Laufer, B. (2001).Some empirical evidence for the Involvement Load Hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51(3), 539-58.
• İlter, İ. (2019). The efficacy of context clue strategy instruction on middle grades students’ vocabulary development. RMLE Online, 42(1), 1-15. doi: 10.1080/19404476.2018.1554522
• Kim, Y. (2006). Effects of input elaboration on vocabulary acquisition through reading by Korean learners of English as a foreign language. TESOL Quarterly, 40(2), 341-73.
• Krashen, S. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for input hypothesis. The Modern Language Journal, 73(4), 440-464.
• Krashen, S. D., & Terrel, T. D. (1983). The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. Hayward, CA: Alemany Press.
• Laufer, B. (2003). Vocabulary acquisition in second language: Do learners really acquire most vocabulary by reading? Some empirical evidence. The Canadian Modern Language Review. 59(4), 567-587. doi: 10.3138/cmlr.59.4.567
• Mondria, J. A., & Wit-de Boer, M. (1991). The effects of contextual richness on the guessability and the retention of words in a foreign language, Applied Linguistics, 12(3), 249-267.
• Moradian, M. R., & Adel, M. R. (2011). Explicit lexical elaboration as an autonomy-enhancing tool for acquisition of L2 vocabulary from reading. Journal of Studies in Literature and Language, 3(3), 153-159. doi: 10.3968/j.sll.1923156320110303.143
• Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. New York: Newbury House Publishers.
• Nation, I.S.P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Prs.
• Paribakht, T. S. (2005). The Influence of first language lexicalization on second language lexical inferencing: A study of Farsi-speaking learners of English as a foreign language. Language Learning, 55(4), 701-748. doi: 10.1111/j.0023-8333.2005.00321.x
• Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1993). The relationship between reading comprehension and second language development in a comprehension-based ESL program. TESL Canada Journal, 11(1), 9-29. doi: 10.18806/tesl.v11i1.623
• Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1997). Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 174-200). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Petchko, K. (2011). Input enhancement, noticing and incidental vocabulary acquisition. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 13(4), 228–255.
• Phillips, D. (2005). Longman complete course for the TOEFL test: Preparation for the computer and paper tests. White Plains, NY: Addison-Wesley Longman, Inc.
• Pigada, M., & Schmitt, N. (2006). Vocabulary acquisition from extensive reading: A case study. Reading in a Foreign Language, 18(1), 1-28.
• Ponniah, R. J. (2011). Incidental acquisition of vocabulary by reading. The Reading Matrix, 11(2), 135-139. Pulido, D. (2004). The relationship between text comprehension and second language incidental vocabulary acquisition: A matter of topic familiarity? Language Learning, 54(3), 469-523.
• Richards, J. C. (1976). The role of vocabulary teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 10(1), 77-89.
• Rott, S. & Williams, J. (2003). Making form-meaning connections while reading: A qualitative analysis of the effect of input and output tasks on word learning. Reading in a Foreign Language, 15(1), 45-74.
• Shokouhi, H., & Askari, H. (2010). The effect of guessing vocabulary in reading authentic texts among pre-university students. Journal of Second Language Acquisition and Teaching, 17, 75-89.
• Vidal, K. (2010). A comparison of the effects of reading and listening on incidental vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 61(1), 219-258. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00593.x.
• Webb, S. (2008).The effects of context on incidental vocabulary learning. Reading in a Foreign Language, 20(2), 232-245.
• Wesche, M., & Paribakht, T. S. (1996). Assessing second language vocabulary knowledge: Depth vs. breadth. Canadian Modern Language Review, 53, 13-39.
• Yoshii, M. (2006). L1 and L2 glosses: Their effects on incidental vocabulary learning. Language Learning and Technology, 10(3), 85-101.
• Zahar, R., Cobb, T., & Spada, N. (2001). Acquiring vocabulary through reading: Effects of frequency and textual richness. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(4), 541-572.