Safary Wa-Mbaleka
Northern Arizona University
Fall 2002
Abstract
When people speak of language learning in the field of applied linguistics, they mean learning how to listen, speak, read and write, which Brown (2000) classifies only in two elements: comprehension (listening and reading), and production (speaking and writing). However, one of the challenging topics in language learning in general concerns learning vocabulary. Second language learning (SLA) researchers have recently become interested in vocabulary acquisition. As Decarrico (2001) states, �vocabulary learning is central to language acquisition, whether the language is first, second, or foreign� (p. 285). In fact, according to Coady (1997), today there is a general agreement among vocabulary specialists that the heart of communicative competence is the lexical knowledge. Today, there is a lot of research exploring vocabulary issues. For the purpose of this paper, and due to the time allotted for this work, some, not all, issues related to vocabulary learning will be briefly explored.
Vocabulary learning is one of the major issues being researched in second language acquisition. This paper is based on secondary research, that is, it is a review of research on vocabulary learning. Second language (L2) vocabulary learning is an important topic to many people, because vocabulary is the center of any language acquisition. Personally, I am interested in this topic because I taught in an English as a foreign language (EFL) context where it was very difficult to access English teaching and learning materials. Since my students were interested in learning English words, there was a necessity to provide to them successful learning strategies to learn English words. I know that this problem is not yet solved in the school where I taught. This is the major reason why this topic is of interest to me.
This paper is subdivided into three sections. The first section will explore knowledge of a word and the effect that it has on reading comprehension in L2. In the second section, the emphasis will be on the three current issues of vocabulary learning: implicit vocabulary learning, explicit vocabulary learning, and vocabulary learning through interaction. In the last section vocabulary-learning strategies will be discussed. Below are specific questions to be answered:
- What does it mean to �know� a word, and what makes a text difficult to understand?
- What are the current issues in vocabulary learning?
- What are some learning strategies that a vocabulary learner should know?
- What are the pedagogical implications that can be drawn from this work?
1. How is a Word Learned?
Generally, L2 learners, at least in the academic field, are involved in L2 vocabulary learning in order to be able to read and write academically in the L2. By answering the first question, a relationship will be made between reading comprehension and L2 vocabulary knowledge. The second question will lead to issues related to the �knowledge of a word�.
What Makes a Text Difficult: relationship between vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension level
As it will be discussed below, when L2 learners draw closer to higher levels of proficiency, they learn many words implicitly. This implicit learning occurs very often in reading (Stahl, 1999). That is why a connection is made here between vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension level.
Learning a new word, especially in a second language, is not an easy task. It takes a learner�s effort and time. Nation (2000) calls �learning burden� of a word the amount of effort that a learner puts in learning that word. According to him, �Different words have different learning burdens for learners with different backgrounds and each of the aspects of what it means to know a word can contribute to its learning burden� (p. 23). The pedagogical implication given by Nation (2000) is that teachers should estimate the approximate learning burden of each new word, and they can only do this if they take learner background carefully into account. Teachers should help students reduce their learning burdens by providing them with some systematic learning strategies.
There are many lexical factors that make a text difficult to understand. Laufer (1997: 30) identified 3 major lexical problems that one may encounter in reading: (1) problem of insufficient vocabulary, (2) misinterpretations of deceptively transparent words, and (3) inability to guess unknown words correctly. Moreover, Schmitt (2000) states, �unless a high percentage of words on a page are known, it is very difficult to guess the meaning of any new words� (p. 120). While this statement is more of the quantity of words the L2 learners should know, quality of words should also be considered. As it will be discussed later in this paper, L2 learners should learn frequently used words, and they should learn strategies to guess meaning from the context and derivation.
What Does It Mean to Know a Word?
Many writers have addressed differently this question. Many people believe that knowing a word means knowing its meaning. Cook (2001) states that �a word is more than its meaning� (p.61). For Cook, knowing a word may involve 4 aspects: form of the word (for instance pronunciation and spelling), grammatical properties (example, grammatical category of the word, its possible and impossible structure), lexical properties (for instance, word combinations and appropriateness), and meaning (general meaning and specific meaning). Stahl (1999, p. 15) thinks that there are four levels of word knowledge: (1) word that one never saw, (2) word that one has heard of but does not know what it means, (3) word that one recognizes in context, and can explain that it has something to do with�, (4) word one knows. Ying (2001) describes some types of context clues that may be available to the reader to guess the meaning of unknown words. These are the morphology (for instance, derivation), reference words (such as pronouns), cohesion (for instance, co-occurrence), definitions, synonyms, hyponyms and antonyms (sometimes provided in the same sentence), alternatives, restatement, examples, summary, comparison and contrast, and punctuation. All these clues are good clues in L2 implicit vocabulary learning.
It should be agreed that, �� learners appear to have differing degrees of knowledge of their second language lexicon� (Gass & Selinker 2001, p. 374). There is a list of elements to be considered for a complete knowledge of a word: spoken form, written form, grammatical behavior, collocational behavior, frequency, stylistic register constraints, conceptual meaning, and word associations (Nation, 1990: 31). In addition, Hatch and Brown (1995, p. 374) classify 5 steps to learning new words: encountering new words, getting the word form, getting the word meaning, consolidating word form and meaning in memory, using the word. These steps lead to the conclusion that a learner will reach the receptive comprehension of new words before reaching the production comprehension.
Size of L2 lexicons or mental dictionaries
The vocabulary size of the English language has been estimated by many authors as ranging anywhere between a half million to over two million. The size varies in different dictionaries depending on the new words, borrowings, and scientific and technical words, but words in common use are about 200,000 (Shmitt, 2000). In addition, Nation (2001) states, �educated native speakers of English know about 20,000 word families� (p.9). There is a approximate number of words that one is supposed to know at a certain level of learning English as a second language. According to Stahl (1999), university students know roughly about 17,000 to more than 200,000 words, while first graders know about 2,500 to 26,000 words. This research was based on texts that students read. This was the preferred strategy because no researcher could be able to ask each student how many words they knew, and ask them to define those words.
According to Schmitt (2000), the �mastery of the complete lexicon of English (and probably any other language) is beyond not only second language learners but also native speakers� (p. 3). There is no one who knows all the words of a language. There will be always words that one does not know.
Now the question is �does the L2 learners have to know all these words? If no, what is the minimum size of L2 vocabulary that an L2 learner should know?� Laufer (2000) answers by stating that � The level at which good first language (L1) readers can be expected to transfer their reading strategies to L2 is 3,000 word families, or about 5,000 lexical items. Until they have reached this level, such transfer will be hampered by an insufficient knowledge of vocabulary� (p. 24). Consequently, if this level is not yet achieved, the L2 learners will not be successful in their reading and writing activities.
2. L2 Vocabulary Learning and Current Issues
Depending on what aspect of vocabulary learning one wants to focus on, there are different theories that apply to how and how much new words are learned. The theories that are discussed in this section are not an exhaustive list. For the purpose of this paper and the time allotted to finish it, three vocabulary-learning issues in second language acquisition will be explored: implicit vocabulary learning, explicit vocabulary learning (Decarrico, 2001), and vocabulary learning through interaction (Ellis, 1994, Ellis, Tanaka, & Yamazaki, 1995).
The central debate in the first and second subsections is about whether vocabulary should be taught implicitly (incidental learning, for example through reading) or explicitly (direct learning, for example in class). I base these subsections on Decarrico (2001) because it is one of the most recent discussions written on this topic.
Implicit Vocabulary Learning
Implicit vocabulary learning refers to incidental vocabulary learning. In the 1970s and 1980s, vocabulary learning was based on the communicative approach that naturally promoted the focus on implicit learning. What was important was the context, use of monolingual dictionaries, and textbooks that could confer meaning from context (Decarrico, 2001). In Decarrico�s analysis of former studies, there was a common agreement in vocabulary studies that �we have not been explicitly taught the majority of words that we know, and that beyond a certain level of proficiency in a second language, vocabulary is more likely to be mainly implicit�� (p. 289). According to Decarrico (2001), vocabulary should be learned explicitly at the beginning level L2, and only once a learner has explicitly learned and practiced 2,000 to 3,000 high-frequency words (word families), may most low-frequency words be learned implicitly. Decarrico�s claim, however, may need to be taken with caution, as she did not provide for empirical evidence that this approach is likely to work.
Having multiple exposures may be conceived as a facilitative element of both explicit and implicit vocabulary learning. This may be one of the reasons why the learning process of foreign language vocabulary goes slowly, because there is no or very little exposure to the language that is being learned. If there is a possibility to access many books of the foreign language to be learned, learners should be provided with what Decarrico called �book flood�, that is, they should read a lot in order to get the multiple exposures of different words. But again, at the beginning level, where a learner knows less than enough to understand what s/he reads, discouragement tends to settle in the reading process. Decarrico (2001) encourages intermediate learners to use �narrow reading� for multiple exposure purposes, that is, reading numerous texts about the same topic, and advanced learners to use �wide reading�, that is, a wide variety of texts. The author finds these types of exposure important because �meeting a word in different contexts expands what is known about it, thus improving quality of knowledge�� (p. 290).
In the studies of incidental learning of vocabulary, it has been found that learners learn some previously unknown words during reading activities. As mentioned earlier, there is an incidental vocabulary learning that takes place (Stahl 1999, Grabe & Stoller, 2002). However, this hypothesis has been tested only with post-test taking place immediately after the treatment � the reading session (Read, 2000). If it works only immediately after the reading session, that means the incidental vocabulary learning is processed only in the short-term memory. Read (2000) states that what is called incidental vocabulary learning �does not tell us whether any of the words have been retained by the learners in their mental lexicon and will be remembered when they are encountered again on some future occasion� (p. 46). But as it will be discussed later, multiple exposures of new words that were learned incidentally will help the connection between the short-term memory and long-term memory.
Implicit vocabulary learning through context-based approach has some advantages that Ying (2001, p.34) singles out as follow: it helps readers to learn words and to know how to use them in context, it empowers learners and helps them speed up their reading, it helps learners to make intelligent and meaningful guesses, and it helps learners to develop a holistic approach toward reading. Decarrico (2001) does not reject the implicit learning of vocabulary, but she recommends that it should not be used without explicit learning at the low and intermediate levels.
Explicit Vocabulary Learning
In explicit vocabulary learning, students are involved in activities where they learn directly vocabulary words. The ultimate question in explicit learning is that of knowing what words to teach. There are some principles to be considered in order to know what and how to teach new words. �The principles include the goal of building a large recognition vocabulary, integrating new words with old, providing a number of encounters with a word, promoting a deep level of processing, facilitating imaging, using a variety of techniques, and encouraging independent learning strategies� (Decarrico, 2001, p. 287). As mentioned previously, it is required that learners should be explicitly taught 2,000 to 3,000 high-frequency words. In the English language, there have been many lists of high frequency words. Corpus linguistics has become an interesting field that deals with topics related to word frequency (Donley & Reppen, 2001). According to Decarrico (2001), the most famous list is the one by West (1953) in the General service list of English words, which contains about 2,000 words. This list is said to provide 80% of words in any written text. That is the reason why, even if it is old, it is still cited. A more recent but also well known vocabulary list is Coxhead (2000), who compiled the 570 highest frequency words in academic English texts. Even though it contains only 570 words, it is important for university students because it presents high-frequency academic English words.
When using explicit instruction of vocabulary, Decarrico (2001) suggests that teachers should consider the following: (1) teach high-frequency words, (2) maximize vocabulary learning by teaching word families instead of individual words, (3) consider meaning associations attached to the word. In addition, in a study that Schmitt and Zimmerman (2002) conducted at a U.S university and a British university, results suggested that some specific vocabulary elements should be studied explicitly. That includes presenting to student both a new word and its derivatives, emphasizing affixes, adjectives and adverbs as needed.
In summary of the explicit vocabulary learning and implicit vocabulary learning, it should be remembered that at the beginning level explicit learning seems more important than implicit learning, and the more advanced students become, the more the opposite becomes practical. It is also important to consider what Schmitt (2000) declares, ��for second language learners, at least, both explicit and incidental learning are necessary, and should be seen as complementary� (p. 121). Besides, Stahl (1999) believes that reading is the primary and the reliable way of promoting incidental vocabulary learning. In the first language acquisition, vocabulary learning is preponderantly based on implicit learning. Some people believe that �the perceptual aspects of new words, i.e. acquiring their phonetic and phonological features, are learned implicitly as a result of frequent exposure�, but �the meaning of words is learned explicitly�� (Laufer & Hulstijn, 2001, p. 5).
Interaction and L2 Vocabulary Learning
Even though learning L2 vocabulary through interaction is part of implicit L2 vocabulary learning, this subsection is separated from the subsection about L2 implicit learning. The main reason is that, interaction, in the field of second language acquisition, has become such a big issue that some people talk about it without maybe addressing explicit versus implicit learning.
Ellis (1994), talking about interaction, referred specifically to the classroom interaction, where �interactions of various kinds take place, affording learners opportunities to acquire L2� (p. 565). The classroom interaction is the one emphasized because it is in the classroom that, according to the author, the interaction is live and focused on language learning. This not only applies to grammatical structures, but also to vocabulary knowledge. A learner would have a very hard time interacting in a classroom if they did not know a certain number of words, enough to allow them to communicate.
Reflecting on Ellis�s earlier claims (1990), Ellis, et al (1995) explain the major interaction hypothesis as follows, �When second language (L2) learners experience communication problems and have the opportunities to negotiate solutions to them, they are able to acquire new language� (p. 188). Learning by interaction takes place when the L2 learners are negotiating meaning.
Ellis, et al. (1995) conducted two separate studies, but with the same design, in Saitama and Tokyo (Japan). They found that �comprehending input does not guarantee the acquisition of new word meanings� However, negotiated comprehension may facilitate acquisition because it induces learners to notice unknown items in the input.� (p. 215).
Quoting from Allwright and Bailey (1991), Ellis (1994) agreed that when teachers prepare for class, they do not plan interaction. They plan the syllabus (what to be taught), the methods (how to teach) and the atmosphere (the nature of the social relationship that should be promoted in the class). It is when these plans are acted in the classroom that interaction automatically occurs. Furthermore, the classroom interaction introduce to the learners opportunities to access the input, practice and receptivity (�willingness to encounter language� p. 574).
After analyzing many studies related to the L2 teacher and L2 learner, and the classroom interaction, Ellis (1994) claims that interaction is an important element to be considered in L2 learning for two major reasons. First, the teacher plays an important role in this interaction, that of giving the input. The teacher explains, questions and commands and learners respond. Teachers make longer pauses than native speakers when they talk to L2 learners. Teachers, at university, use significant vocabulary modifications. Teachers use more self-repetitions with L2 low-level learners. These elements, contributing to classroom interaction, are useful in L2 vocabulary learning. Second, the learner plays another role in the interaction. Generally the learner�s role is to respond. Ellis (1994) underlines that studies have showed correlation between learner�s participation in class interaction and many tests. Participation may be quantitative (how much the learner participates in the classroom), and qualitative (the degree of control that the learner has over the learning). This is where Ellis (1994) meets Swain� comprehensible output (1985). In many EFL contexts, input is given much more importance than output. L2 learners are absorbers of what the EFL teacher is teaching. EFL teachers should be aware of the importance of the (comprehensible) output, which is the role of the L2 learner in this context.
In conclusion, Ellis (1994) is convinced that �negotiation and contextual support can aid the acquisition of vocabulary� (p. 604). Interaction is not causative, but facilitative of vocabulary learning.
For teachers who wonder which approach they should follow, one pedagogical implication may be inferred: it is nice to use all the three approaches (implicit, explicit, and interaction) complementarily. Some people may think that interaction would not work at the low level of proficiency. To make it work, it is only a matter of simplifying the interaction activities to the low level. For instance, simple questions like following can be useful at a low level: �What is your name? Where are you from? What time is it?� Even if the interaction level is not high, still there would have been interaction. The more words are learned, the higher the level of interaction should be.
3. Vocabulary Learning Strategies
So many learning and teaching strategies have been written that it seems impossible to know and use all of them. Probably all of them cannot work in all contexts. In fact, good language learners use the very same strategies as bad language learners, but know when to use them and for what purpose (S�kmen, 1997). However, some may work better in EFL context than in ESL (English as second language) context, and vice versa, or with certain vocabulary needs but not others, and with students who need to prepare themselves for academic work but not for those who need English for survival skills. Some may work in both contexts. In this section, vocabulary-learning strategies will be explored. The list is not exhaustive. For a better elaboration of the vocabulary learning strategies, Schmitt�s (2000) listing will be followed. According to Schmitt (2000), there are 5 major groups of vocabulary learning strategies: determination strategies, social strategies, memory strategies, cognitive strategies, and metacognitive strategies.
Determination Strategies
Determination strategies are the ones used by a learner to discover a new word�s meaning without the help of another person. These strategies include analyzing parts of speech, analyzing affixes and roots, checking for L1 cognate, analyzing any available pictures or gestures, guessing meaning from the textual context, using dictionaries. The use of dictionaries is one of the strategies for learner�s autonomy. The use of mono or bilingual dictionaries became also an issue that was disputed in the last decade. People wondered if there should be a preference between the use of mono and bilingual dictionaries.
A number of studies on dictionary use in ESL learning have been conducted with different orientation. Harvey and Yuill (1997), investigating the use of different monolingual dictionaries in writing, found that it is very ideal to use monolingual dictionaries. According to them, monolingual dictionaries provide both the spelling and meaning, two linguistic factors that writers need when they do their work. There are some other researchers who think that the use of either monolingual or bilingual dictionaries does not have a significant effect on writing. Christian (1997) claims in his research that errors can result from any dictionary whose headwords lack sufficient information. Also, other research conducted at University of Hawai�i at Manoa showed that there was no significant difference on vocabulary learning between using monolingual and using bilingual dictionaries (Jacobs, Duton, & Hong, 1994). However, some researchers found that bilingual dictionaries are good to be used at the early ESL level (Tang, 1997). In this case, while bilingual dictionaries are good for ESL beginners, monolingual dictionaries will be some good tools for high-intermediate and advanced level ESL students.
Nation and Meara (2002) suggest that the learner should develop strategies to learn vocabulary from meaning-focused input (that is, listening and reading) and from meaning-focused output (that is, speaking and writing). Moreover, it is recommended that language learners be word collectors (Grabe, and Stoller2002, Martin, Martin & Ying 2002). In ESL classrooms, learners can collect words from assigned reading, small group discussion, personal reading, and from dictionaries.
Social Strategies
These are the ones that a learner uses to interact with other people in order to discover or practice new words. As it was mentioned in the second section of this paper, interaction is an important element in L2 learning. The input alone is not enough if the L2 learner cannot produce an output. As mentioned earlier, it is by this interaction that there is negotiation of meaning, another key element in L2 (vocabulary) learning. According to Schmitt (2000), social strategies include asking the teacher for a synonym, paraphrase, or L1 translation of new words, asking classmates for meaning, studying and practicing meaning in a group, interacting with native speakers.
Memory Strategies
Traditionally called mnemonics, they refer to strategies of retaining new words using some form of imagery or/and grouping. These strategies include connecting word to a previous personal experience, associating the word with its coordinates, connecting the word to its synonyms and antonyms, imaging word form, imaging word meaning, using keyword method, grouping words together to study them, studying the spelling of a word, saying new words aloud when studying, using physical action when learning a word (Schmitt, 2000).
Cognitive Strategies
These are the ones that the learner uses to manipulate or transform the target language. They are more or less similar to memory strategies, but they move beyond the limits of the memory strategies. The cognitive strategies include using verbal repetition, using written repetition, using word lists, putting English labels on physical objects, and keeping a vocabulary notebook (Schmitt, 2000). Vocabulary practice games and puzzles have been found also important in vocabulary learning process (Shaptoshivili, 2002; Eyraud, Gilles, Koenig, & Stoller, 2000). Games may also include memory game, word association, miming, guessing the tool, word recognition, expanding the sentence (Grabe & Stoller, 2002), word puzzles, scrabbles, and word twist.
Stahl (1999) proposes that learning new words may be made easier by three strategies: semantic mapping, semantic feature analysis, and learning word parts. In the semantic mapping process, the teacher presents a central word in a graphic.
Learners associate other related words to the central word. In the semantic feature analysis, a grid is used. On the left side, the teacher writes the key concepts, and on the top row, s/he writes the analysis features. Together with the students, the teacher fills the grid with the features discussed. The learning of word parts includes the learning of prefixes, suffixes, and roots. It is interesting to know that it has been found that only 20 prefixes account for 97 % of prefixed words that appear in print in school English books (Stahl, 1999). It will be important for ESL/EFL teachers to teach those prefixes explicitly in order to accelerate subsequent vocabulary acquisition.
Metacognitive Strategies
Metacognitive strategies involve decisions about planning, monitoring, or/and evaluating the best ways to study a new word. They include for example, using English-language media (songs, movies, newscasts, etc.), using spaced word practice (expansion of rehearsal), testing oneself with word tests, skipping or passing new word, continuing to study a word over time. Cook (2001) suggests 6 language-learning metacognitive strategies that good language learners use, that should be known by vocabulary learners. These are: (1) find a learning style that suits you, (2) involve yourself in the language learning process, (3) develop an awareness of language both as system and as communication, (4) pay constant attention to expanding your language knowledge, (5) develop a second language as a separate system, and (6) take into account the demands that L2 learning imposes. It is good for language teachers to reinforce these strategies in the whole language-learning process.
In addition, Eyraud et al., (2000) suggest the �word wall approach�, an approach good for multiple exposures to the new words. According to them, �most vocabulary growth takes place through incidental learning, that is, through exposure to comprehensible language in reading, listening, discussions, bulletin board displays, videos, and so forth� (p. 2). In the �word wall approach�, the teacher and the students create walls of words, with each panel with one color, representing one curricular objective (for instance, phonology, word class, lexicon, etc). These word walls are built progressively as new words are learned or encountered. The word panels are hung on the classroom walls until students know them. This approach gives access to multiple exposures of new words by the fact that whenever students are in class, they can see these words anytime. It has been found that at least 10 to 12 exposures of new words are needed for a learners to start ranging the meaning and using new lexical items (Coady, 1997). This multiple exposures should be in different contexts, and different activities. As mentioned earlier, incidental learning from reading can sometimes be connected to short-memory process, and the learner maybe unable to recognize or use the word in a future occasion. But, multiple exposures in the incidental learning will create connections between short-term to long-term memory.
Other strategies
In addition to the 5 groups that were followed in the analysis of this section, Nation and Meara (2002) suggest the use of �deliberate vocabulary learning�.
These involve the following principles: retrieving rather than recognizing, using appropriately sized groups of cards, spacing the repetitions, repeating the words aloud or to oneself, processing the words thoughtfully, avoiding interference, avoiding a serial learning effect, and using context where this helps.
In conclusion, there are many vocabulary-learning strategies that could not be exhausted in this paper. Whatever diverse these strategies can be; the L2 learner should place an important role in the vocabulary learning process. Teachers should not be the only ones to exercise force on the learner; the learner should feel responsible for his/her own vocabulary learning progress.
General Conclusion
This paper has addressed the knowledge of words, what makes the words difficult, some issues in vocabulary learning, and vocabulary learning strategies. From what has been presented some implications can be inferred. First, knowing a word is more complex than some people may think. A language learner should try his or her best to learn the different aspects of word knowledge in the vocabulary-learning process before he or she can claim that he or she really knows the word. If word knowledge is so complex, the language teacher is also recommend to uncover most, if not all, the complexity of the new word to be taught. Second, while at higher levels implicit vocabulary learning seems more adequate, explicit vocabulary learning should guide the vocabulary-learning process at lower levels of proficiency in the L2. Third, language teachers and language learners should have an interactive atmosphere in their classroom, because interaction will not only promote incidental learning, but also the rehearsal of or/and multiple exposures to new vocabulary words. Fourth, there is a great diversity of learning strategies and learners are all different. Different learners should be introduced to different learning strategies so that each learner can choose learning strategies that fit him or her the best. Teachers should not be bound to only some vocabulary teaching strategies that they think will work for all the learners and in all learning contexts. With the introduction of vocabulary games, it means suggested that vocabulary should be an enjoyable activity, not only a burden that a teacher places on the back of the learners. And finally, it should be agreed according to Schmitt�s study that a learning strategy is not �equally useful at all stages of one�s lifetime� (1997, p. 225). According to him, some strategies used with young learners are abandoned when they grow older. This is one of the reasons why the teacher should provide as many learning strategies as possible, so that the learner can get some strategies that he/she could use when he/she grows older.
References
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. (3rd ed.). White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
Christian, K. (1997). Dictionary use by EFL writers: What really happens? Journal of second language writing, 6 (1), pp. 23-43. Greenwich, Connecticut: Ablex.
Coady, J. (1997). L2 vocabulary acquisition through extensive reading. In J. Coady & T Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition (pp. 225-237). New York, NY: Cambridge University.
Cook, V. (2001). Second language learning and language teaching. (3rd ed.). Madison Avenue, NY: Oxford University.
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 2: 213-238.
Decarrico, J. S. (2001). Reading for academic purposes: Guidelines for the ESL/EFL teacher. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed., pp. 285-299). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Donley, K. M., & Reppen, R. (2001). Using corpus tools to highlight academic vocabulary in SCLT. TESOL journal, 10 (2/3), pp. 7-12.
Ellis, R. (1990). Instructed second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University.
Ellis, R., Tanaka, Y., & Yamazaki, A. (1995). Classroom interaction, comprehension, and the acquisition of L2 word meaning. In Harley, B. (Ed.), Lexical issues in language learning (pp. 187-228). An Arbor, MI: Research Club in Language Learning.
Eyraud, K., Giles, G., Koenig, S., & Stoller, F. L. (2000). The word wall approach: Promoting L2 vocabulary learning. English teaching Forum, 38, pp. 2-11.
Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L. (2001). Second language acquisition: An introductory course (2nd edition). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. Harlow, England: Longman.
Harvey, K., & Yuill, D. (1997). A study of the use of a monolingual pedagogical dictionary by learners of English engaged in writing. Applied linguistics, 18 (1), pp. 254-271. Oxford: Oxford University.
Hatch, E., & Brown, G. (1995). Vocabulary, semantics, and language education. New York: Cambridge University.
Jacobs, G. M., Duton, P., & Hong, F. C. (1994). L1 and L2 vocabulary glosses in L2 reading passages: Their effectiveness for increasing comprehension and vocabulary knowledge. Journal of research in reading, 17 (1), pp. 19-28. Montreal: TESL Canada journal.
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 J. Coady, & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition (pp. 20-34). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Lauffer, B., & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied linguistics, 22(1), pp. 1-26.
Martin, M., Martin S. H., & Ying, W. (2002). The vocabulary self-collection strategy in the ESL classroom. TESL journal, 11 (2), pp. 34-35.
Nation, I.S.P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. New York: Newbury House.
Nation, I.S.P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Nation, P., & Meara, P. (2002). Vocabulary. In N. Schmitt (Ed.). And introduction to applied linguistics. Madison Avenue, NY: Oxford University.
Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Schmitt, N., & Zimmerman, C. B. (2002). Derivate word forms: What do learners know? TESOL Quarterly, 36 (2), pp. 145-167.
Schmitt, N. (1997). Vocabulary learning strategies. Current trends in teaching second language vocabulary. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 199-227). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge, U.K: Cambridge University.
Shaptoshvili, S. (2002). Vocabulary practice games. English teaching forum, 40 (2), pp. 34-35.
S�kmen, A. J. (1997). Current trends in teaching second language vocabulary. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 237-257). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Stahl, S. A. (1999). Vocabulary Development. Cambridge, MA: Versa.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output and its development. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Tang, G. M. (1997). Pocket electronic dictionaries for second language learning: Help or Hindrance? TESL Canada journal/ La revue TESL du Canada, 15 (1), pp. 39-59.
Ying, Y. S. (2001). Acquiring vocabulary through a context-based approach. English teaching Forum, 39 (1), pp. 18-21, 34.
(Copyright Fall 2002)
