Submitted to: Mrs.Kaukab Saba

Submitted by: Ayesha Tariq (930)

Umama Zahir (932)

Ruqayya Mohsin (997)

Wajiha Noor (945)

BS English (F12)

5th semester

Section A

Introduction to Linguistics

Research assignment

INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY ISLAMABAD

Topic:

EFFECTS OF SYNONYMY IN SECOND LANGUAGE VOCABULARY LEARNING.Contents:

1.Abstract2.Significance of present study3.Theoretical review of synonymy4.Method

Participants Design Materials Tasks Dependent measures Results

5.Discussion6.References

EFFECTS OF SYNONYMY IN SECOND LANGUAGE VOCABULARY LEARNINGAbstract:

The topic of this research work is “Effects of Synonymy in English Vocabulary Learning”

We are going to do research on this topic because of two reasons:

1. In our daily life, sometime it’s difficult to memorize a word, hence synonymy plays an important role in such conditions.

2. Sometimes, certain words don’t fit in a sentence or make thesentence strange and their might be a grammatical error so in that case we can use synonymy to make a good sentence structure or a logical and syntactical sense.

So in our research, we are going to examine that how the use of synonyms effect our English vocabulary. And how it expands ones English vocabulary and is it easy to learn synonyms for known words quickly or not?

How to employ this sense relation in learning vocabulary with theapplication of semantic field theory. The study is non-neglect able significance in that it helps to expand learner’s vocabularyby constructing sense relation of new words and to help learner’smastery of vocabulary. So that they can learn English vocabulary more efficiently and systematically.

A. Significance of Present Study:

English language plays a very important role in modern world and is considered as a vital tool of communication. It can be named as “Second Language” of all the languages in the world today English deserves to be regarded as a world language and also a world’s most widely spoken language. One person out of every fouron earth can be reached through English. Randolph Quich points out: “There are now something like 250 million people for whom English is the mother tongue or ‘first language’. If we add to this the number of people who have a working knowledge of Englishas a second or foreign language, we raise the total to about 350 million”.

A very important reason for reading and learning English as a world language is that the world’s knowledge is enshrined in English. It is knowledge of English that helps the countries of Asia and Africa to maintain the high level of their intellectual and scientific training and achievement.

The status of English in Pakistan has become an economic-academicreality. The need for English as a language of “opportunity” and “development” has been pointed out by several educational commissions and experts bodies constituted from time to time to

examine and define the role of English in our country. But unfortunately the status of English in our country has become a controversial one. Besides that a person who does not know English is not considered educated in the true sense of the world. According to the study, Pakistan has the third largest English speaking population in the world, with approximately 49% of the Pakistani population being able to communicate in some form of English.

Vocabulary refers to the words of a language. Recent vocabulary studies draw on an understanding of lexis, the Greek for word, which in English “refers to all the words in a language, the entire vocabulary of a language” (Barcroft, Sunderman & Schmitt, 2011, pg.571). So vocabulary can be defined as the words of a language, including single items and phrases or chunks of severalwords which convey a particular meaning, the way individual wordsdo.

Vocabulary is central to English language teaching because without effectual vocabulary students cannot understand others orexpress their own ideas. Linguist D.A. Williams (1972) wrote that“…without grammar very little can be conveyed, without vocabularynothing can be conveyed”. While according to Lewis (1993) “Lexis is the core or heart of language”.

Students often instinctively recognize the importance of vocabulary to their language learning. As Schmitt (2010) noted “learner’s carry around dictionaries and not grammar book”. Teaching vocabulary helps students understand and communicate with others in English. Because it is a changing, growing, reality, English vocabulary is challenging. As Ur (2012) aptly stated, unlike grammar, “lexical items… are an open set, constantly being added to (and lost, as archaic words gradually go out of use)” (p-3).

Basically, the history of English language can be divided into three periods: Old English, Middle English and Modern English. Through its development, English has gathered a considerable glossary which contains over a million words. However, most of these words are not widely used; many of them are even forgotten or solely banished. The English vocabulary that can be used in daily life is about twenty thousand, which to most English learners is still a large number to remember. In order to learn English more efficiently and gain a vocabulary that can meet the needs of normal communication, we should adopt an effective way to remember English words. Semantic field theory plays a surprisingly by part in learning English vocabulary effectively and systematically.

In recent years, more and more linguistic researchers start to pay close attention to the importance of semantic field theory for developing the language ailities and efficiency. Since semantic field theory studies the relationship between a series of words in a certain group, appropriate use of semantic field theory will make English vocabulary learning much easier.

B. Theoretical Review of Synonymy:

In the research of investigating the effects of synonymy on vocabulary learning, Higa (1963) found that pairs of synonyms took longer to learn than pairs of unrelated words. This investigation suggested that learner’s confuse the words that aresimilar in meaning than words that do not have semantic links. Higa’s research lies on the fact that the closer the semantic relationship between the words is the more difficult it may be tolearn the words. Studies of Tinkham and Waring also indicates thesame result. There studies suggest that learning synonyms together may reduce the likelihood of acquisition (something acquired or gained). Higa’s research suggests that learners are unlikely to learn synonyms together because they may lack the motivation to learn two words that convey similar meaning or

information. Instead, a synonym for a known word may be easier tolearn in the later stages of vocabulary learning. According to Laufer, synonymy is one of seven inter-lexical factors that can reduce the chances of vocabulary acquisition and gave two reasonsthat synonyms may more difficult to learn than other words. Her first argument is that learners often make mistakes using synonyms because some of them may be fitted effectively in some contexts but not in others. For example fast and quick have similar meanings. And in the sentence “the car was very fast” fast fits effectively in the context but if we say that “The car was very “quick”. Then here the word “quick” is not substituting itself with the context. Thus synonyms might be more difficult tolearn than others because synonyms with similar meaning do not always have the same collocates. Certainly, some words are synonyms to a greater degree e.g. “beautiful” and “attractive” while “fast” and “quick” are synonyms to a lesser degree. Second argument states that less advanced learners are unlikely to try to learn words with similar meanings when they have a greater need to learn unknown second language meanings.

But the point which is raised by this research work is that learning words with known synonyms may be easier than learning words without known synonyms because in this way learners may be able to transfer their knowledge of syntax (the ways in which words are put together to form phrases, clauses or sentences) andcollocation from known synonyms to less frequent synonyms. Basically and typically, while learning a non-synonyms, second language learners always use their first language knowledge of the very specific item and information from the context in which it was taken to help learn that word. Sometimes this combination of first language and second language knowledge may be sufficientto use or understand the word quickly, moreover, learning words like this is a slow process that involves repeated encounters of the word in context. While on the other hand, learning the synonyms of known words is may be faster than the previous way

because by this learners may gain substantial second language vocabulary knowledge for known synonyms. This second way may leadlearners to gain second language knowledge of collocation, paradigmatic association, syntagmatic association and grammar from known synonyms that how words having same meanings can be used in different context, hence increasing one’s vocabulary of sentence structure etc. Nations (2001) discussion “of learning burden” also referred to the effort needed to learn a word as itslearning burden. This discussion suggests that learning a synonyms for a particular that is already known is may be easier than a word having no synonym. According to him, the amount of effort required to learn a word varies from word to word and learner to learner. Thus the main view or point of argument of general principle of learning is that the more a word is representing patterns and knowledge that the learners are alreadyfamiliar with, the lighter its learning burden and thus leading towards a good English vocabulary in a shorter time. The particular pattern and knowledge of a specific word mainly comes from the first language, and it can also be from the previous knowledge of the second language. So if a word have same pattern,knowledge and sounds that are in the first language then it is a loan word in the first language with roughly the same meaning, fits into roughly similar grammatical patterns as in the first language with similar collocations and constraints, then the learning burden will be very light.

This concept of learning burden provides a reasonable explanationas to why second language words that have known synonyms may be easier to learn than those that do not have known synonyms and stands in isolation for one’s vocabulary.

The concept of learning burden provides a reasonable explanation as to why L2 words that have known L2 synonyms may be easier to learn than those that do not. Synonyms may represent different aspects of knowledge that have already been acquired. For

example, if learners are faced with learning the low-frequency words revolver and spear, learning revolver may be easier becauseit has a high-frequency synonym (gun) that represents vocabulary knowledge that can be used to learn revolver. The word revolver can be substituted for gun in many sentences, allowing learners to produce sentences such as he held the revolver tightly in his hand, he pointed the revolver and fired, and she took out her revolver and shot him three times in the head. If a newly learnedword can be substituted in a sentence for a known synonym, then collocations and syntagmatic associates might be acquired when meaning and form are learned. Because spear does not have a high-frequency synonym, a greater amount of vocabulary knowledge may need to be acquired, and therefore, it may be more difficult to produce in a sentence. Although the degree of overlap of vocabulary knowledge varies from synonym to synonym, at least partial overlap may help facilitate acquisition.

Further research examining the difficulty of learning isolated words verses words having synonyms would be valuable for three main reasons. First of all, learning a word knowing a synonym would help researcher better in understanding the vocabulary acquisition process because if we gain vocabulary knowledge from knowing different words may facilitate the future learning of their synonyms, hence unknown words may become easier to learn asa person’s vocabulary develops. Secondly, somehow it would provide some support for second language incidental vocabulary learning through reading. Second language research has shown thatthrough reading, learners may incidentally acquire vocabulary through reading and thus this shows that it may play a great rolein second language vocabulary development. When a learner’s vocabulary increases by this way, the number of known words that they learn is also likely to increase. If learning the synonyms of known words is easier than learning words without known synonyms, it would help to explain how some second language learners may incidentally learn great number of words in his

later stages of learning language through reading and listening. . Third, determining whether synonyms are acquired more easily than other words would be very useful for teachers and learners. Knowing which words are easier or more difficult tolearn would allow them to develop more efficient vocabulary teaching and learning strategies.

The present study was designed to investigate the effects of synonymy on vocabulary learning. Three sets of target words—5 words with high frequency synonyms, 5 words with low frequency synonyms and 5 words in isolation—were used to determine whether words with high-frequency synonyms are more easily learned than non-synonyms. The target words were learned in two tasks: learning word pairs and learning glossed sentences. Using L2 target words with high-frequency synonyms allowed the participants the possibility of gaining L2 knowledge from their L1 translations, their L2 synonyms, and the contexts in which they were presented in the glossed learning task. In contrast, using target words without high-frequency synonyms ensured that participants could only gain knowledge of those words from their L1 translations or the glossed sentences. Because synonymy may affect several aspects of vocabulary knowledge, each target word was tested in different ways. The tests were designed to measure Receptive knowledge of orthography, productive knowledge of orthography, productive knowledge of meaning and form, productiveknowledge of grammatical functions, productive knowledge of syntagmatic association, productive knowledge of paradigmatic association and receptive knowledge of grammatical functions.

Specifically, the present study examined the following questions:

Are synonyms for known words easier to learn than words that do not have known synonyms?

How are different aspects of vocabulary knowledge affected by synonymy? If learners can substitute a synonym for a word in a

text, the learners could be expected to score higher on tests measuring knowledge of syntagmatic association, paradigmatic association, and grammatical functions for target words with known synonyms than target words without them.

METHOD:

Participants:

The participants of this research were 50 students of different English courses which were mostly Pakistani and Urdu speaking people. They were the students of 1st semester from InternationalIslamic University Islamabad and their goal was to get the degreeof respected courses which were in English.

Design:

Mainly we took three set of words.

1. 10 Words with high frequency synonyms along with their L1 meanings

2. 10 Words with low frequency synonyms along with their L1 meanings

3. 10 Isolated words without synonyms but only their L1 meanings were mentioned.

L1 meanings were provided so that the learner may get the word easily while relating it to his own language and these meanings were in Urdu as we were working on Pakistani Urdu speaking people.

Then he participants were randomly assigned to two learning conditions. In one condition, the participants faced the target words in glossed sentences (taking the word according to the needof the text in which it is mentioned), and in the other, the

participants encountered the target words in word pairs. In each condition, the participants attempted to learn all words. The participants were given 8 minutes to learn the target words in both conditions. After the conclusion of the treatment, a surprise vocabulary test was administered. Five types of word knowledge—orthography, paradigmatic association, meaning and form, syntagmatic association, and grammatical functions—were isolated and measured in a series of 7 tests. This experiment wasconducted within one hour class period.

Materials:

Target words: Three set of target words were created. First groupconstitutes of words with high frequency synonyms along with their L1 meaning which were

Remedy, condemn, logical, reconciled, embraced,

Second group constitutes of words with low frequency synonyms along with their L1 meanings and the words were

Abducted, descry, concave, perceptual, eulogy

While the third group constitutes of English single words, not their synonyms but their L1 meaning was provided with them. Hencethese words were provided to our learners so that it will make easy to do a better research while talking about words known to learners. These words were provided not only in pair form but also in sentences so that the learner might get the grammatical structure of the word with sentence.

Task:

Word pairs:

Learners were given the words with their synonyms and L1 meaningsto memorize them. As with our first list of words, the first wordwas Remedy whose high frequency synonym was Cure and it L1

meaning is ع�لاج� Just like this all of the 10 words were given with high frequencysynonym and with L1 meaning so that the learner might get the word and he might use his knowledge of L1.

Same list was given for second group of words with low frequency synonyms as for example Abducted was the given word with low

frequency synonym kidnapped while in L1 it means وی م�غLast group, the third group were of L2 words having their L1 meaning. As accord was given with its L1 meaning mentioned as

�دے م�عاہ�Sentence Context:

Besides word pairs, learners were also provided with sentences sothat they learn it and the grammatical structure become clear in their minds. The sentences were of the kind that learner can relate the English word and synonymy with its L1 meaning. For example

Remedy was used in the sentence as mentioned below (synonym= cure)

and L1 meaning was ع�لاج�“Maybe I can remedy some of them of the ills.”

So learners were asked to link the L1 translation and synonym of the particular word with the sentence.

DEPENDENT MEASURES:

Seven tests measuring knowledge of Orthography, Meaning and form, grammatical functions, syntagmatic association and paradigmatic association were administered after treatment. Each test was created to isolate a specific aspect of knowledge. Five of the test measured productive knowledge while two of the tests measured receptive knowledge. The tests were carefully sequenced to avoid earlier tests affecting the participants’ answers on later tests. Each test was on one page. The first test, measuringproductive knowledge of orthography, was administered to all of the participants at one same time because it involved aural cues spaced 12 seconds apart. The learners were given as much time as they needed to complete the rest of the tests. When a participantfinished a test, it was collected, and the next test was handed out.

Test 1: Productive knowledge of orthography.  In this test the learners were dictated some word which were pronounced twice for them and they were given 10 seconds to write down the correct spellings. Words written down with major spelling mistakes were marked as incorrect and word with minor mistakes were considered as correct. On all of the other productive tests, spelling was not a determining factor in the scoring if the response could be clearly understood.

Test 2: Receptive knowledge of orthography. In this test the learners were to circle the correctly spelled word targets which was given with four other incorrectly spelled choices. The distracters were created to resemble the target words both

phonetically and orthographically. The following examples are forthe target words remedy and eulogy

a) Remadi a. ulogy

b) ramady b. ewology

c) remidy c. eulogy

d) remedy d. eulogi

Test 3: Productive knowledge of meaning and form. In this third test, the knowledge of meaning and forms was gained using a translation test. Here the learners were actually given the L1 meanings only and they were asked to write the words used for them in L2. The main purpose of this test was to determine whether the learners could link the L2 forms of the target words with their L1 meanings. For example

_______ ع�لاج� �ی�ں ے ہ� م�ت� ک�رت� م�د ____

Because the aim of the first two tests was to determine whether learners could write the target words correctly and recognize thecorrect spellings of the target words, spelling was not the determining factor for a correct answer on this test. Therefore, spellings that demonstrated that the learners could link an L2 form with its L1 meaning were marked correct. In the example above, close approximations of the target word Remedy (e.g. remedi, remede etc.,) were acceptable responses. Close approximations that were real English words were marked as

incorrect because whether the participants had intended to write the target words could not be ascertained.

Test 4: Productive knowledge of grammatical functions: This test was essentially a sentence forming test. Here learners were cued with the words and were asked to use them in sentences. They werecleared in the beginning that the main aim was to check the grammatical ability of their made sentences. For example for remedy the sentence

“It is to be remedy” was considered incorrect as given by one of the learner, while “It is remedy” and “this remedy is affective” are right sentences.

Test 5: Productive knowledge of syntagmatic association. In this test the learners had to produce the words which came into mind on hearing the target word. E.g. the target word is Stationary, the learners were to write down the word that came into their mind through brainstorming such as pencil, ruler, books etc. word which were less frequently found in context with stationary such as large, hard, wood were marked as incorrect.

Test 6: Productive knowledge of paradigmatic association. This test required learners to write down an associate besides each target word. The association should be based on the words being the superordinate’s, subordinates, antonyms, and synonyms of the targeted words. Eg shirt, blouse, clothes.

Test 7: Receptive knowledge of grammatical functions.  This test was used to measure receptive knowledge of grammatical functions.The learners were presented with three sentences containing each target word and had to choose the correct one. Knowledge of the target word’s part of speech enabled the learners to select the

correct answer. Because the productive test of grammatical functions was perhaps the most demanding test, the receptive testof grammatical functions needed to be sensitive to smaller gains.The learners were to choose the correct option from the given sentences e.g.

a) The eulogy of Annie was heartouching

b) This is an eulogical fact

c) Sara euloged at me

RESULT:

In productive knowledge of orthography, almost 90 percent students were successful in writing the correct spellings of the words, while 6 percent students were almost to the correct spellings with one alphabetical mistake and rest of the 4 percentstudents made big mistakes.

In the second test of receptive knowledge of orthography, 91 percent students choose the right answers and 9 percent students were unable to distinguish the right spellings of the words.

In third test, Productive knowledge of meaning and form, 85 percent students guessed the right words with right spellings while 11 percent students remembered the words but there was spelling mistakes with their words. While 4 percent students failed in the test.

Test four, productive knowledge of grammatical functions, was disappointing as learners had some grammar mistakes but while looking at their level of education, it was not that bad as well.In this test, 64 percent learners were successful while 36 percent students were having problems in their grammar. The main

grammatical problems were seen in the use of active and passive voice.

Fifth test was very much successful as learners were able to recognize the words related to target words. Productive knowledgeof syntagmatic association was very interesting as it varied learner to learner but it was interesting as well and it made thereaders to come forth with many words they knew but don’t use them in normal life. 71 percent of learners gave a very positive response in this test while 29 percent students also gave good response but that was not that much effective.

Sixth, Productive knowledge of paradigmatic association was somehow difficult for the students and so very little contribution was seen in this test as compared to other tests. Here only 45 percent student scored well while 55 percent students only focused on hyponyms.

Receptive knowledge of grammatical functions was our sixth test and it was a bit confusing for learners but besides that they didtheir best. Here 73 percent students scored very well while rest of 27 percent students failed to figure out the correct sentences.

Discussion:

The results indicate that synonymy may facilitate vocabulary learning. The scores were significantly higher for words with known synonyms than those without. Significantly higher scores were found on the productive tests of paradigmatic association and syntagmatic association and the receptive test of orthography.

The scores were higher on the productive test of paradigmatic association is not that much surprising because synonyms were one

of the types of paradigmatic associates that were scored as correct. However, the higher scores on the tests of syntagmatic association and orthography provide evidence that learners may acquire knowledge of synonyms more easily than non-synonyms as what our hypothesis states. There was an overall session of asking questions by the learners in which on asking that which set of words was easy to memorize, their answer was that words with known synonyms were easy to learn as compared to the isolated group of words with their L1 meaning. Hence this sessionalso supported the results and our hypothesis. Furthermore on asking which words were easy to use in sentences, the majority ofparticipants selected the words with known synonyms. Furthermore,on asking them to choose the easiest and the most difficult wordsto mention, they mentioned synonyms to be the easiest and words without known synonyms to be the most difficult words. The lack of a significant difference on the tests of meaning may be attributed to the learning conditions. Because the participants were given the meanings of the target words in the treatments, the scores for synonyms and non-synonyms showed little difference. Investigating the effects of synonymy in an incidental learning task may show that meaning is also affected by synonymy. This would be an interesting and useful follow-up tothis study.

The results on the productive test of syntagmatic association might be attributed to a transfer of L2 knowledge from more to less frequent synonyms. This might occur if learners use L2 knowledge of more frequent synonyms as models for less frequent ones. . In contrast, learners may only be able to use their L1 knowledge of words without known synonyms to produce syntagmatic associates. While L1 knowledge may also lead to correct responses, the combination of L1 and L2 knowledge for words with known synonyms may lead to significantly greater knowledge of syntagmatic association. Therefore, if learners realize that an unknown word has a more frequent synonym, a transfer of knowledge

may help to facilitate learning. . If one considers low-frequencywords such as lane, doze, and sob, thinking of words that would appear with them in context is quite easy despite the fact that they are relatively uncommon. This might be because they can be substituted into some of the common contexts in which their more frequent synonyms, street, sleep, and cry, occur. However, producingsyntagmatic associates may not be quite as easy for low-frequencywords, which do not have high-frequency synonyms, because no morecommon words can be used as models. For learners, overlap betweenL1 and L2 knowledge may contribute to an increase in L2 knowledgefor words without known synonyms; however, the combination of L1 and L2 knowledge of higher-frequency synonyms is likely to lead to increased learning.

The results provide evidence supporting Nation’s (1990, 2001) theory of learning burden. Nation suggested that the more a word represents knowledge that is already known, the more easily it will be learned. My results indicate that the learning burden forsynonyms of known words is less than for non-synonyms because synonyms represent knowledge of syntagmatic association that has already been acquired. This is a very useful finding, suggesting that learning burden might be an important criterion when teaching or learning vocabulary. If teachers are aware that a word’s learning burden may determine how quickly it is acquired, they may be able to produce a much more efficient vocabulary-learning curriculum. For example, spending more time teaching words that do not have known synonyms than those that do may be more effective because words with more frequent synonyms may be learned more easily. Teachers and learners should also be aware that teaching and learning strategies that strengthen the links between synonyms may improve learning. While research has shown that learning synonyms together is not as effective as learning unrelated words (Higa, 1963), learning the synonyms for known words or being aware that two words are synonymous may facilitatelearning.

While the results suggest that words with known synonyms are easier to learn than those without, the results do not necessarily discount Laufer’s (1990) argument that synonyms are more difficult to learn than non-synonyms. The reason for this isthat the present study investigated initial or partial vocabularylearning, while Laufer was referring to gaining full knowledge ofa synonym. Both theories could prove correct. Once learners have acquired knowledge of the meaning of a word with a known synonym,they may instantly gain partial knowledge of its paradigmatic association, grammar, and syntagmatic association if they can link it with its synonym. This is an important gain in knowledge because it may provide learners with enough vocabulary knowledge to use the word. However, this development may soon be impeded iferrors occur when the word is used. Because few synonyms can be substituted in every context, at some point, a newly acquired synonym is likely to be used incorrectly. At this time, learners may be discouraged from using synonyms, and gains in knowledge could be delayed to the point that the acquisition of non-synonyms could progress more quickly. However, the acquisition ofsynonyms could also progress at a normal pace, with learners gaining receptive knowledge through meetings in context and productive knowledge through trial and error. In fact, the same argument can be used for words without known synonyms. Results suggest that learners may also make large initial gains in paradigmatic and syntagmatic association by linking L2 forms to L1 meanings. The degree of overlap of L1 and L2 meanings and syntagmatic association may determine how easily a word is learned. Initial gains in knowledge followed by drops in performance and then a return to target-like use may be quite common in L2 learning and is what Kellerman (1985) referred to as“U-shaped behavior.”

The results demonstrate the importance of measuring different aspects of word knowledge. In most research investigating vocabulary acquisition, only one aspect of vocabulary knowledge,

meaning and form, has been measured. While knowledge of meaning and form is measured for good reason, sometimes it is a poor choice. For example, in the present study, we had reason to believe that knowledge of syntagmatic association and grammaticalfunctions may have been more affected by synonymy than meaning and form. We had little reason to think that the L1 meanings would be easier to link to the L2 forms of synonyms than non-synonyms because both tasks provided that information for all target words. However, intuitively and logically, synonyms are easier to use in sentences than non-synonyms. While measuring many different aspects of vocabulary knowledge may not be practical, researchers should carefully consider the aspects thatare most likely to be affected by an independent variable insteadof simply measuring knowledge of meaning.

Taken as a whole, the results are valuable because they may shed light on the incidental learning process. L1 and L2 research investigating incidental learning through reading suggests that learners gain vocabulary knowledge in small increments and that they build upon their previous gains through repeated exposures. While incidental learning is widely accepted to account for the vast majority of L1 words that are learned, research has done little but show that learners may acquire words extremely slowly through reading. In fact, one of the stronger arguments—the default learning hypothesis (Jenkins, Stein, & Wysocki, 1984)—forincidental learning has simply been that explicit methods cannot account for the gains needed to develop an adult vocabulary. The findings from the present study, which showed that some low-frequency words may be acquired faster than others, may help to explain why research has not been able to show how incidental learning is able to account for the extraordinary number of wordsthat are learned. Transfer of knowledge between synonyms may facilitate learning; however, this transfer is more likely to occur in the later stages of vocabulary development when learnersknow more words and are more likely to be learning the synonyms

of known words. If words with lower learning burdens such as words with known synonyms are acquired more easily than those with higher learning burdens, then words are likely to become easier to learn as a learner’s vocabulary increases. The reason for this is that in the later stages of both L1 and L2 lexical development, there is likely to be less to learn about each unknown word.

In the earliest stages of vocabulary learning, each word may represent more knowledge that needs to be gained to use or understand it than in the later stages of learning. For example, in the earlier stages of vocabulary development, spelling or pronouncing a new word may be difficult. Words that appear together with a new word may still be unknown, so producing an item in context may be difficult. Word parts such as affixes needto be learned, and when, where, and how often a new word should be used might be a mystery. Nation’s (2001) list of the nine different aspects of word knowledge shows how much knowledge is needed to know a word. In the initial stages of lexical development, gaining the knowledge needed to know words may be overwhelming. However, as more and more words are learned, a cumulative gain in vocabulary knowledge may facilitate vocabularyacquisition and make future vocabulary learning less difficult. Familiarity with spelling, pronunciation, word parts, and grammarmay decrease the amount of knowledge that needs to be gained to know a word. The larger a person’s vocabulary, the more likely that unknown words will represent knowledge that has already beengained. This in turn may make it easier to use and understand newwords. The cumulative gains in vocabulary knowledge may explain why adult native speakers and proficient L2 learners may acquire new words relatively quickly. While one reason may be that proficient L1 and L2 learners do not encounter as many unknown words and can therefore devote more energy to learning a new word, they are also likely to be able to learn words more quickly

because they have already acquired knowledge that can be transferred and applied to new words.

Further research examining the effects of synonymy in a conditionof incidental learning through reading would be a useful follow-up to this study. If research could show that words are easier toincidentally learn through reading for learners with larger vocabularies than for learners with smaller vocabularies, it would be a powerful argument for increasing the amount of readingdone by advanced and possibly intermediate L2 learners. Moreover,determining if there is a vocabulary threshold at which words maybe more easily incidentally learned through reading would also beof great benefit. For example, if learners who know the most frequent words are more likely to incidentally acquire unknown items than learners who know fewer words, the vocabulary threshold at which this may occur would be useful to determine. It could determine a point at which teachers of English as a foreign language could move from explicit vocabulary methods to focus more on incidental learning through reading.

References:

Higa, M. (1965). The psycholinguistic concept of “difficulty” and the teaching of foreign language vocabulary. Language Learning, 15, 167–179.

Dupuy, B., & Krashen, S. D. (1993). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in French as a foreign language. Applied Language Learning, 4, 55–63.

Jenkins, J. R., Stein, M. L., & Wysocki, K. (1984). Learning vocabulary through reading. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 767–787.

Kucera, H., & Francis, W. N. (1967). A computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.

Laufer, B. (1997). What's in a word that makes it hard or easy? Intralexical factors affecting the difficulty of vocabulary

acquisition. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 140–155). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Miller, G. A. (1999). On knowing a word. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 1–19.

Nagy, W. E., Anderson, R. C., & Herman, P. A. (1987). Learning word meanings from context during normal reading. American Educational Research Journal, 24, 237–270.

Webb, S. (2007). Learning word pairs and glossed sentences: The effects of a single context on vocabulary knowledge. Language Teaching Research, 11, 63–81.

Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition, 27, 33–52.

englishlanguagelearningforum.blogspot.com/2009/03/elt-in-pakistan.html

Vocabulary and its importance in language learning (chapter 1) by Anonymous

**********