Metalinguistic awareness in L2 vocabulary acquisition : which factors influence learners’ motivations of form-meaning connections?

Research has shown that prompting learners to elaborate on the appropriateness of form-meaning links can be an efficient vocabulary learning exercise (Deconinck, Boers & Eyckmans, 2017). In this paper we wish to shed more light on the mental processes that occur during this specific elaborative task by investigating the influence of individual learner variables pertaining to prior linguistic knowledge and a number of word-specific features. To this end fifty Dutch-speaking EFL learners rated the congruency they perceived between the form and meaning of 24 English words on a 6-point Likert scale. The motivation of their scores was elicited by means of a think-aloud protocol, the transcriptions of which were analysed with regard to the type of elaborations made. Vocabulary size tests and a language background questionnaire provided us with additional information about the learners. We identified five types of elaborations: cross-lexical associations, sound-symbolic associations, word-form comparisons, morphological associations, and idiosyncratic associations. The data also reveal that the individual learner variables and word-specific features examined in the present study have an influence on the number of elaborations made by the learners. Pedagogical implications and suggestions for further research are discussed

Contextual word learning with form-focused and meaning-focused elaboration

Contextual L2 word learning may be facilitated by increasing readers’ engagement with form and meaning of novel words. In the present study, two adult L2 populations, Chinese and Dutch speakers, read English sentences that contained novel vocabulary. These contextual exposures were accompanied either by form-focused elaboration (i.e. word-writing) or by meaning-focused elaboration (i.e. actively deriving word meaning from context). Immediate and delayed offline and online measures of word knowledge showed superior learning outcomes for the word-writing treatment. This finding is aligned with the predictions of the lexical quality hypothesis (Perfetti and Hart 2002), highlighting the added value of more precise encoding of a word’s form, in addition to learning its meaning. The key pedagogical implication of this study is that a simple act of copying novel words, while processing meaningful L2 input, may significantly boost quality of lexical knowledge

Comparing the merits of word writing and retrieval practice for L2 vocabulary learning

Previous research has indicated that in the case of contextual word learning, repeatedly writing a word down, i.e. engaging in a structural elaboration activity, results in better knowledge of both word form and word meaning than engaging in a semantic elaboration activity (Candry, Elgort, Deconinck & Eyckmans, 2017; Elgort, Candry, Boutorwick, Eyckmans & Brysbaert, 2016). Focusing on word form and word meaning at the same time may be an even more efficient strategy for acquiring L2 word form and word meaning, and creating form-meaning mappings. Therefore, the present decontextualized word-learning study contrasted word writing with retrieval practice, which prompts the learners to process the form and meaning of a new L2 item simultaneously. 179 native Dutch-speaking EFL-learners in their fifth year of secondary school acquired fifteen new low-frequency English words in one of three conditions: a word writing condition in which the new L2 word was written down repeatedly for 15 seconds, a retrieval practice condition in which the participants were given 15 seconds to retrieve the new L2 word on the basis of its Dutch translation, and a control condition in which the participants were asked to direct their attention to the English-Dutch word pairs for 15 seconds. Form and meaning recall tests were administered immediately after the learning procedure and one week later. The results indicate that retrieval practice leads to better immediate and delayed form and meaning recall than both the word writing condition and the control condition. While the word writing condition yields superior immediate form recall scores than the control condition, the latter takes the upper hand in the delayed form recall test. Meaning recall is consistently better for words learned in the control condition than for words learned through word writing. The pedagogical implications of these results will be discussed

Written repetition vs. oral repetition : which is more conducive to L2 vocabulary learning?

Structural elaboration, i.e. increased attention to word-form, can aid an L2 learner in retrieving the form of a newly learned word (Barcroft, 2002), which is crucial for language production. However, the possibilities for developing meaningful interactions with the form of new words are rather limited. Previous research has proposed word writing as a structural elaboration technique (e.g. Candry, Elgort, Deconinck, & Eyckmans, 2017; Eyckmans, Stengers, & Deconinck, 2017) and has demonstrated that word writing promotes L2 word-form retrieval as compared to a semantically elaborative condition (Candry et al., 2017; Elgort, Candry, Boutorwick, Eyckmans, & Brysbaert, 2016). The advantage of word writing with reference to other structurally elaborative conditions has not been investigated yet. Therefore, the present study compared a written repetition condition with a condition in which learners said the new L2 vocabulary out loud repeatedly. 67 Dutch-speaking learners of German learned 24 unknown German words in one of these two conditions or a control condition. Both immediate and delayed measures of word knowledge were administered. The results showed that immediate form recall is marginally better when words are learned through written repetition than through oral repetition, though this advantage disappeared after one week. When it comes to meaning recall and implicit word knowledge, no differences between the two conditions were observed

Discrete word learning: how L2 learners of different proficiency levels find meaning in the form of new words

Creating a link between the form and meaning of unknown words is the initial step in vocabulary learning, enabling learners to build up receptive and productive knowledge of these new words. Research has shown that prompting learners to elaborate on the appropriateness of form-meaning links can be an efficient vocabulary learning exercise (Deconinck, Boers & Eyckmans 2015). In this paper we wish to shed more light on the mental processes that occur during this specific elaborative task by investigating the influence of vocabulary size on the type and number of elaborations that learners make. To this end fifty Dutch-speaking EFL learners rated the congruency they perceived between the form and meaning of 24 English words on a 6-point Likert scale. The motivation of their scores was elicited by means of a think-aloud protocol whose transcriptions were analysed with regard to the type of elaborations made. Both receptive and productive vocabulary size were measured through the LexTale test (Lemhöfer & Broersma 2012) and the Productive Vocabulary Levels Test (Laufer & Nation 1999). Awareness of the types of elaborations learners produce can help us to unravel the mental processes behind form-meaning mapping. We identify four main types: cross-lexical associations, sound symbolic associations, word form comparisons and lexical decompositions. The research reveals the influence of vocabulary size on the frequency of occurrence of these different types of elaborations

Word writing vs. word voicing : which is a better method for learning L2 vocabulary?

Structural elaboration, i.e. increased attention to word form, can aid an L2 learner in retrieving the form of a newly learned word (Barcroft, 2002). Writing down new vocabulary can be considered a structural elaboration technique. Previous research has demonstrated that word writing promotes L2 word form retrieval as compared to a semantically elaborative condition (Elgort, Candry, Boutorwick, Eyckmans & Brysbaert, 2016). However, the advantage of word writing may not be maintained when the technique is compared to another structurally elaborative condition. Therefore, the present study compared a word writing condition with a condition in which learners said the new L2 vocabulary out loud. 67 Dutch-speaking learners of German learned 24 unknown German words in three conditions. In the word writing condition, learners were given 20 seconds to write the target word down repeatedly. The word voicing condition required the learners to say the target word out loud repeatedly for 20 seconds. In the control condition, learners were given 20 seconds to read a sentence containing the new L2 word. After the learning procedure, the participants completed a lexical decision task, a form recall test and a meaning recall test. These measures of word knowledge were administered again one week after the learning treatment, at which time the learners’ receptive and productive German vocabulary size were also gauged. The data suggest that immediate form recall is better when words are learned in the word writing condition than in the word voicing condition, though this advantage seems to disappear after one week. The pedagogical implications of the results will be discussed

Finding meaning in the form of L2 words: what takes place in the learner’s mind during the meaning-making process?

Creating a link between the form and meaning of unknown words can be considered the initial step in vocabulary learning, allowing for learners to build up receptive and productive knowledge of these new words. Research has shown that prompting learners to elaborate on the appropriateness of form-meaning links can be an efficient vocabulary learning exercise (Deconinck, Boers & Eyckmans 2015). In this paper we wish to shed more light on the mental processes that occur during this specific elaborative task by investigating the influence of vocabulary size and multilingualism on the type and number of elaborations that learners make. To this end fifty Dutch-speaking EFL learners rated the congruency they perceived between the form and meaning of 24 English words on a 6-point Likert scale. The motivation of their scores was elicited by means of a think-aloud protocol whose transcriptions were analysed with regard to the type of elaborations made. Both receptive and productive vocabulary size were measured through the LexTale test (Lemhöfer & Broersma 2012) and the Productive Vocabulary Levels Test (Laufer & Nation 1999). In a pre-test questionnaire, the participants also indicated which languages they are proficient in. The data point to four main types of elaborations: cross-lexical associations, sound symbolic associations, word form comparisons, and lexical decompositions. Awareness of the types of elaborations that learners can produce may help us to unravel the mental processes behind form-meaning mapping. It may also reveal which formal features are salient to learners themselves, and show us the kind of meaning-making they are capable of during deliberate word learning. If we wish to assist learners in expanding their L2 lexicons, this knowledge can be capitalized on in the language classroom. The research will also demonstrate whether L2 vocabulary size and/or knowledge of other background languages make it easier for learners to find meaning in the form of L2 words

Is writing a valuable technique for structural elaboration in L2 vocabulary learning?

Many techniques for L2 vocabulary learning involve semantic elaboration, i.e. the increased attention to a word’s meaning. Studies claim, however, that employing semantic elaboration during L2 vocabulary learning can inhibit word-form learning and it is structural elaboration, i.e. the enhanced attention to the form of a word, which helps learners to acquire the form of the new word (Barcroft 2003). In this psycholinguistic study, we aim to discover whether structural elaboration, in particular the writing of the target vocabulary, promotes English L2 word-form learning. The research design used in this study is a partial replication of Elgort’s contextual word learning study (under review). Her study showed that for Chinese-speaking learners of English, writing new target vocabulary led to more robust lexical knowledge and better form-meaning mapping than guessing the target vocabulary’s meaning from the context. The present study, however, was carried out with participants whose native writing system is similar to English (Roman alphabet). The participants were 50 Dutch speaking EFL speakers who have all had formal English instruction in secondary school. Their proficiency level varied from B2 to C2. Forty-eight new English words, of which 24 were pseudo words and 24 were low-frequency words, were presented in 3 different contexts. During the learning procedure, the participants had to write down half of these words on paper and derive the meaning of the other half from the context given. The two conditions were counterbalanced to avoid order effects. After learning the words, the participants performed a working memory test and an immediate test in which they first listened to the word, then typed the word and subsequently provided its meaning. This test measured the extent of form-meaning mapping that had occurred. One day later, they were subjected to two priming tasks to measure the amount of lexicalization that had taken place. In order to correlate lexical gains with vocabulary size, two vocabulary size tests and a productive gapfill test were administered a day after the treatment. In this last test, the participants were presented with 24 sentences, each of which was missing a newly learned word. This measure of delayed recall allowed us to discover whether the meaning of a new word activates the form of this target word. As such, it is a valuable addition to Elgort’s (under review) immediate form-meaning mapping test, since form recall reflects declarative rather than implicit word knowledge. The results should shed more light on the value of writing as a technique for structural elaboration. A comparison between this study and Elgort’s (under review) should also reveal more about the relative efficacy of writing for English L2 vocabulary acquisition for users of different writing systems