Andi Wirantaka. 2015. The Correlation between Vocabulary Size and
Morphological Awareness of the First Semester Students, English Education Department, Muhammadiyah University, Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: English
Language Studies, Graduate Program, Sanata Dharma University.
This current study aims at finding out the correlation between vocabulary size and morphological awareness. Vocabulary is believed to be the important factor for L2 learners to identify the structure of the words. In addition, vocabulary is also important for L2 learners to construct new words especially complex words. It is also believed that the ability to break down and identify complex words has correlation to the ability to construct new words. Since morphological awareness comprises two aspects, morpheme identification and morphological structure, this study specifically focuses on three correlations. The first is correlation between vocabulary size and morpheme identification. The second is correlation between vocabulary size and morphological structure. The third is correlation between morpheme identification and morphological structure.
This study was quantitative in nature. The data of the research was interval. The data were taken from three tests i.e. the vocabulary size test, morpheme identification awareness test, and morphological structure awareness test. The subjects of the research were 66 students of the English Education Department of Muhammadiyah University of Yogyakarta. This study employed SPSS version 21 to do the analysis. The statistical analysis used was Correlation of Pearson Product Moment. The result of the statistical analysis was r coefficient correlation that was used to determine the p-value.
The findings showed that there was a significant correlation between vocabulary size and morpheme identification as p-value (0.03) < (0.05). There was also a significant correlation between vocabulary size and morphological structure as p-value (0.001) < (0.05). The last finding showed that there was a significant correlation between morpheme identification and morphological structure as p-value (0.023) < (0.05). The findings implied that vocabulary size
had its role to the L2 learners’ ability to identify the components of the words.
Vocabulary size also had its role in the L2 learners’ ability to construct new
Andi Wirantaka. 2015. The Correlation between Vocabulary Size and
Morphological Awareness of the First Semester Students of English Education Department of Muhammadiyah University of Yogyakarta.
Yogyakarta: English Language Studies, Graduate Program, Sanata Dharma University.
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menemukan hubungan antara jumlah kosa kata dengan kesadaran morfologis. Jumlah kosa kata dipercaya merupakan faktor penting bagi pelajar bahasa Inggris sebagai bahasa kedua untuk mengidentifikasi struktur kata. Selain itu, jumlah kosa kata juga merupakan factor penting bagi pelajar bahasa Inggris sebagai bahasa ke dua untuk membentuk kata baru terutama kata-kata yang komplek. Ini juga diyakini bahwa kemampuan untuk memecah sekaligus mengidentifikasi kata berhubungan dengan kemampuan membentuk kata baru. Karena kesadara morfologis terdiri dari dua aspek, yaitu kesadaran pengidentifikasian morfem dan kesadaran struktur morfologi, penelitian ini memfokuskan pada tiga jenis hubungan. Yang pertama adalah hubungan antara jumlah kosa kata dan kesadaran pengidentifikasian morfem. Yang ke dua adalah hubungan antara jumlah kosa kata dan kesadaran struktur morfologi. Yang ketiga adalah hubungan antara kesadaran pengidentifikasian morfem dan kesadaran struktur morfologi.
Penelitian ini adalah penelitian kuantitatif. Data dalam penelitian ini adalah data interval. Data didapatkan dari tiga macam test yaitu tes jumlah kosa kata, tes kesadaran pengidentifikasian morfem, dan tes kesadaran struktur morfologi.. Subjek dalam penelitian ini berjumlah 66 mahasiswa jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta. Penelitian ini menggunakan program SPSS versi 21 dalam melakukan analisis. Analisa statistik dalam penelitian ini adalah korelas Pearson Product Moment. Hasil dari analisis statistic adalah koefisien korelasi yang digunakan untuk menentukan p-value.
MORPHOLOGICAL AWARENESS OF THE FIRST SEMESTER STUDENTS , ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERISTY OF YOGYAKARTA
A THESIS
Presented as a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Magister Humaniora (M.Hum.) Degree
in English Language Studies
by
Andi Wirantaka Student Number : 126332025
The Graduate Program of English Studies
Sanata Dharma University
Alhamdulillah… All praise be to Allah SWT, the Almighty, the Merciful, the Beneficial, the Ever Precious for the abundant blessing and ease given to me in accomplishing this thesis.
First of all, I would like to express the greatest gratitude to my consultant, FX. Mukarto, Ph.D, who has been willing to spare his valuable time not only for reading, correcting and improving my thesis but also for encouraging me to finish this thesis. I am deeply grateful for his significant suggestion, intelligent advice, support, and patience during the completion of this thesis. My gratitude also goes to the lecturers of Graduate Programe Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta who have guided and taught me very well.
My sincere gratitude goes to my beloved mother, Ibu Sumiyem, S.Pd. and my great father, Bapak Rosidig, S.Pd. for their support, care, prayer and endless love. I thank them for every sacrifice they have done to make me what I am now. My deepest thanks are also addressed to my brothers, Ade Irawan and Arbi Triyanto. My special thank is also for my fiancé, Ririn Indrayati.
COVER OF THESIS ... i
APPROVAL SHEET ... ii
DEFENSE APPROVAL SHEET ... iii
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY ... iv
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ... v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ... vi
B. The Place of the Current Study……….… 1
C. Statement of the Problem……….. 6
D. Research Questions………. 7
E. Scope and Limitation of the Study………. 9
F. Significance of the Study………10
G. Definition of Key Terms……… 11
CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL REVIEW AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK A. Theoretical Review ... 15
1. Vocabulary... 15
a. Definition of Vocabulary ... 16
b. Knowing a Word ... 17
c. Importance of Vocabulary ... 19
d. Kinds of Vocabulary ... 19
e. Number of Words ... 21
f. Vocabulary Size ... 23
g. Words to Count……… 25
h. Choosing Words to Test……….. 25
i. Receptive and Productive Vocabulary……… 26
2. Morpheme ... 27
3. Morphological Awareness ... 28
a. Concept of Morphological Awareness………. 29
b. Two aspects of Morphological Awareness……….. 32
A. Type of the Study ... 39
B. Setting ... 39
C. Research Subjects ... 40
D. Data of the Research ... 41
E. Data Collection Techniques... 41
F. Research Instruments……….. 42
G. Validity and Reliabilityof the Instruments ……… 44
H. Data Analysis ... 45
CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION A. Findings ... 47
B. Discussion ... 55
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS A. Conclusions ... 62
B. Implications ... 63
C. Suggestions... 64
REFERENCES ... 67
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Data Distribution of the Tests ... 48 Table 2.1 The Result of Linearity Test between Vocabulary Size and
Morpheme Identification Awareness ... 49 Table 2.2 The Result of Linearity Test between Vocabulary Size and
Morphological Structure Awareness... 49 Table 2.3 The Result of Linearity Test between Morpheme Identification
Awareness and Morphological Structure Awareness ... 50 Table 3.1 The Result of Correlation between Vocabulary Size and
Morpheme Identification Awareness ... 51 Table 3.2 The Result of Correlation between between Vocabulary Size
and Morphological Structure Awareness... 53 Table 3.3 The Result of Correlation between Morpheme Identification
Appendix 1 The Result of Normality Test ... 70
Appendix 2 The Result of Linearity Test... 71
Appendix 3 The Result of Correlation of Pearson Product Moment ... 72
Appendix 4 The Data of the Research ... 74
Appendix 5 Vocabulary Size Test... 76
Andi Wirantaka. 2015. The Correlation between Vocabulary Size and
Morphological Awareness of the First Semester Students, English Education Department, Muhammadiyah University, Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: English
Language Studies, Graduate Program, Sanata Dharma University.
This current study aims at finding out the correlation between vocabulary size and morphological awareness. Vocabulary is believed to be the important factor for L2 learners to identify the structure of the words. In addition, vocabulary is also important for L2 learners to construct new words especially complex words. It is also believed that the ability to break down and identify complex words has correlation to the ability to construct new words. Since morphological awareness comprises two aspects, morpheme identification and morphological structure, this study specifically focuses on three correlations. The first is correlation between vocabulary size and morpheme identification. The second is correlation between vocabulary size and morphological structure. The third is correlation between morpheme identification and morphological structure.
This study was quantitative in nature. The data of the research was interval. The data were taken from three tests i.e. the vocabulary size test, morpheme identification awareness test, and morphological structure awareness test. The subjects of the research were 66 students of the English Education Department of Muhammadiyah University of Yogyakarta. This study employed SPSS version 21 to do the analysis. The statistical analysis used was Correlation of Pearson Product Moment. The result of the statistical analysis was r coefficient correlation that was used to determine the p-value.
The findings showed that there was a significant correlation between vocabulary size and morpheme identification as p-value (0.03) < (0.05). There was also a significant correlation between vocabulary size and morphological structure as p-value (0.001) < (0.05). The last finding showed that there was a significant correlation between morpheme identification and morphological structure as p-value (0.023) < (0.05). The findings implied that vocabulary size
had its role to the L2 learners’ ability to identify the components of the words.
Vocabulary size also had its role in the L2 learners’ ability to construct new
Andi Wirantaka. 2015. The Correlation between Vocabulary Size and
Morphological Awareness of the First Semester Students of English Education Department of Muhammadiyah University of Yogyakarta.
Yogyakarta: English Language Studies, Graduate Program, Sanata Dharma University.
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menemukan hubungan antara jumlah kosa kata dengan kesadaran morfologis. Jumlah kosa kata dipercaya merupakan faktor penting bagi pelajar bahasa Inggris sebagai bahasa kedua untuk mengidentifikasi struktur kata. Selain itu, jumlah kosa kata juga merupakan factor penting bagi pelajar bahasa Inggris sebagai bahasa ke dua untuk membentuk kata baru terutama kata-kata yang komplek. Ini juga diyakini bahwa kemampuan untuk memecah sekaligus mengidentifikasi kata berhubungan dengan kemampuan membentuk kata baru. Karena kesadara morfologis terdiri dari dua aspek, yaitu kesadaran pengidentifikasian morfem dan kesadaran struktur morfologi, penelitian ini memfokuskan pada tiga jenis hubungan. Yang pertama adalah hubungan antara jumlah kosa kata dan kesadaran pengidentifikasian morfem. Yang ke dua adalah hubungan antara jumlah kosa kata dan kesadaran struktur morfologi. Yang ketiga adalah hubungan antara kesadaran pengidentifikasian morfem dan kesadaran struktur morfologi.
Penelitian ini adalah penelitian kuantitatif. Data dalam penelitian ini adalah data interval. Data didapatkan dari tiga macam test yaitu tes jumlah kosa kata, tes kesadaran pengidentifikasian morfem, dan tes kesadaran struktur morfologi.. Subjek dalam penelitian ini berjumlah 66 mahasiswa jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta. Penelitian ini menggunakan program SPSS versi 21 dalam melakukan analisis. Analisa statistik dalam penelitian ini adalah korelas Pearson Product Moment. Hasil dari analisis statistic adalah koefisien korelasi yang digunakan untuk menentukan p-value.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
A. Introduction
The study will investigate the relationship between vocabulary size and morphological awareness of English department students in their language acquisition. The understanding of the relation can be utilized to place each variable as the factor which influences the language acquisition, and also to consider the role of each variable in language acquisition.
This chapter discusses the place of the current study in the context of vocabulary knowledge, the research of vocabulary acquisition, and morphological awareness. It focuses on the relationship between morphological awareness and vocabulary size in the language acquisition first semester students of English Education Department of Muhammadiyah University of Yogyakarta. Three research questions are formulated and then the scope and significance of the current study will be presented.
B. The Place of the Current Study
has important role in language acquisition. Hence, vocabulary learning is still relevant in whatever curriculum or trends of language teaching and learning.
One of the strategies that can be used by the language learners to improve the vocabulary acquisition is by using word part clues or morphemes. Morpheme is the name for meaningful word parts that readers can identify and put together to determine the meaning of an unfamiliar word. Knowing morphemes or word structure plays a valuable role in word learning from context as readers can use such knowledge to examine unfamiliar words and figure out the meanings. Morin (2003) proposed the strategy of using morphological knowledge in inferring word meanings, and with it, the need to develop morphological awareness in the L2 would become more realized. She characterizes morphological awareness as the ability to reflect on and manipulate morphemes and word formation rules in a language (Morin, 2003).
awareness test assesses the ability to create literal compounds, inflected, and derived words.
In order to investigate the role of morphological awareness in developing vocabulary for L2 learners, Morin (2003) studied Spanish classes to examine the acquisition of derivational morphology. She studied the use of suffixes that can change the part of speech and the causes of the variations in meaning by native English-speaking learners of Spanish. In addition, Bertram, Laine and Virkkala (2000) examined the role that morphology in vocabulary acquisition of L1 Finnish. Systematically, they investigated the role of affixes frequency and productivity that influenced the development of the children’s knowledge of words. The results showed that the Finnish elementary school children benefit significantly in determining words meaning by using morphology. In contrast to the research done on morphological awareness in L1, there were only a few studies that focused on the morphological awareness in L2.
Another study by Tabatabei in 2011 of the using of instructional approach of morpheme or root word families in teaching vocabulary for ESL learners showed that the learners could develop their vocabulary better when vocabulary were taught by morphological analyses rather than through more traditional class instruction methods. However, these findings were not clear about EFL learners and were asked for deeper investigation. This paper built on this body of research by examining the relationship between the English vocabulary size of EFL mathematics high school students in Iran and their morphological awareness. The study attempted to evaluate and possibly extend findings from the previous studies to the context of EFL learning in Iran.
Zhang and Koda in 2011 investigated the contribution of morphological awareness and lexical inferring ability to L2 vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension among advanced EFL learners. The study revealed that morphological awareness contributed to L2 vocabulary knowledge directly and
indirectly through the mediation of learners’ lexical inferring ability. It was also observed that morphological awareness made no significant unique or direct contribution to reading comprehension after adjusting for vocabulary knowledge. Its indirect effects on reading comprehension were significant both through the mediation of vocabulary knowledge alone and the multiple mediations of lexical inferring ability.
studies, they revealed that methods for learning vocabulary were important parts of language learning. Learners and teachers could adopt various strategies for
teaching and learning vocabulary. Specifically, the studies found that the learners’
vocabulary size was one of the keys of language proficiency. Hence, any efforts to enhance the vocabulary size may be very beneficial to improve the learners’
language proficiency. Moreover, few studies (Morin, 2003; Chang et al., 2005; and Schiff & Calif, 2007) had examined the role of morphological awareness in L2 vocabulary development. The findings suggested that different aspects of morphological awareness were useful for vocabulary building.
Gu and Johnson (1996) in Zhang and Koda (2011) found that Chinese college EFL readers’ rating on their use of strategy in paying attention of word formation was positively and significantly correlated with their vocabulary size. The word formation knowledge had significant relationship to the vocabulary size the learners had. It can be inferred that the higher vocabulary level a learner has, the better morphological awareness a learner may develop.
that Chinese and Korean immigrants’ ESL morphological awareness significantly predicted their English reading comprehension. Similarly, Prince (2007) reported a study which indicated that a learner understood how a word was formed by combining prefixes, suffixes, and roots to have larger vocabulary and better reading comprehension.
Unlike the previous studies, Qian’sstudy (1999) showed that there was no unique contribution of the morphological awareness to the reading comprehension over and above vocabulary knowledge among the Chinese and Korean ESL readers in Canadian universities. This study was different from the previous study as there were some factors which influenced the result of the study. It made the study did not confirm the previous studies.
To sum up, there is not yet a comprehensive picture of the contribution of the morphological awareness to vocabulary knowledge especially in EFL learning in Indonesian context. The studies conducted have not given the clear understanding to the scope of this area. Hence, further study is needed to model the complex relations between the variables within an integrated framework. This study will specifically investigate the correlation between vocabulary size and morphological awareness in EFL context of Indonesia.
C. Statement of the Problem
on the L1 acquisition done by children in their first language acquisition. There were only few studies which talked about the relationship between the morphological awareness and vocabulary knowledge in L2, more specifically to adult learners.
In addition, some researchers (Morin, 2003; Chang, et al., 2005; and Schiff & Calif, 2007) have focused considerable attention on the value of teaching roots, prefixes, and suffixes for purpose of vocabulary development. Only few research discussed the advantages of the morphological awareness and the vocabulary size. By doing this research, it is hoped that the current study can reveal the correlation between morphological awareness and vocabulary size.
Thus, there should be an effort to find out the relationship between morphological awareness and vocabulary size. It will be beneficial to uncover the relationship of variables especially toward the adult learners in order to improve the language proficiency.
D. Research Questions
An attempt will be made in this study to seek appropriate answers to the following three questions:
1. Is there a significant correlation between students’ vocabulary size and morpheme identification awareness?
3. Is there a significant correlation between students’ morpheme identification awareness and morphological structure awareness?
Research question 1 concerns the relationship between English department students’ vocabulary size and morpheme identification awareness. It will try to reveal the correlation between the two variables and determine the strength of the relationship between them. The result will give the information about the relationship between the number of words the learners know and the ability to break down and recognize the elements of complex words.
Research question 2 concerns the relationship between the English department students’ vocabulary sizeand morphological structure awareness. This study wants to figure out the relationship between the two variables. The information about the relationship will be useful to comprehend the influence of the number of the vocabulary and the ability to construct new words.
This study will try to test the null hypothesis. The result of the statistical analysis will be used to reject or not to reject the null hypothesis. The hypotheses of the current study are as follows.
1. There is no correlation between students’ vocabulary size and morpheme identification awareness.
2. There is no correlation between students’ vocabulary size and morphological structure awareness.
3. There is no correlation between students’ morpheme identification awareness and morphological structure awareness.
E. Scope and Limitation of the Study
As the language proficiency covers many aspects of macro and micro skills of the language acquisition, the current study limits the scope of the study by focusing on the vocabulary size and morphological awareness (morpheme identification awareness and morphological structure awareness). This study will cover the area of the vocabulary acquisition where the morphological awareness and vocabulary size lay. By having focused to the area of the research, the current study will have specific concern to investigate.
Second, this current study used two classes which were occupied by relatively homogenous students. This study did not take into account the influence of gender, social background, educational background, and learning motives of the language learning. They were some factors which might influence the result of the research.
Third, the instruments of morphological awareness, i.e morpheme identification awareness test and morphological structure awareness test, did not cope all morphemes in English. They only included some morphemes in the tests which might represent the general knowledge of morphemes.
F. Significance of the Study
Theoretically, the study is expected to contribute to the better understanding of vocabulary size and its relation to morphological awareness (morpheme identification awareness and morphological structure awareness). The results of the study are also expected to be the input for further research by other researchers who are interested in conducting research within the area of vocabulary acquisition.
G. Definition of Key Terms
This current study has operational definition of the key terms. The key terms in this current study are morphological awareness, morpheme identification awareness, morphological structure awareness, and vocabulary size.
1. Morphological Awareness
Morphological awareness is the ability to reflect upon and manipulate morphemes and morphological structure of words (Carlisle, 2003; Kuo & Anderson, 2006). They define morphological awareness as the ability to recognize the structure of the words as well as to construct new words based on the knowledge they have known. In addition McBridge (2005) defines morphological
awareness as “an awareness of and access to the meaning and structure of morphemes in relation to words”. It means that morphological awareness is the ability to know the meaning of the words elements or morphemes and relate its knowledge to form new words. However, in this study, the morphological awareness refers to the students’ ability to breakdown and recognize the morphemes of complex words and manipulate the morphemes to construct new words especially in their way to improve vocabulary acquisition. Since morphological awareness covers two aspects, analytic and syntactic aspect, it comprises the morpheme identification awareness and morphological structure awareness.
2. Morpheme Identification Awareness
meanings across homophones. For example, a learner has morpheme identification awareness if she/he understands that flower in flowerpot is represented by a plant with petals as opposed to a sack of white powder (flour). Based on the definition, the morpheme identification awareness refers to the
students’ ability to differentiate the meaning of the words which have the same
way in pronouncing. However, this current study uses another operational definition of morpheme identification awareness. The previous definition is related to definition of morpheme as sounds, while this study defines morpheme as smallest meaningful unit of language in the form of word. Hence, morpheme identification awareness in this current study is the ability to breakdown the words and recognize the meaning of the word components.
3. Morphological Structure Awareness
Morphological structure awareness requires learners to make use of linguistic knowledge to derive new meaning (Chang, C. M., Wagner, R. K., Muse, A., & Chow, H. S., 2005). Here, in this current study, the morphological structure awareness deals with the students’ ability to develop the words meaning by
utilizing their knowledge of the words’ structures they have known. It requires the students’ ability to construct morphemes into complex words.
4. Vocabulary Size
families the students have for written receptive use as estimated by Nation (2001). The vocabulary size is counted in the level of word family. For instance, when the students know the meaning of the word play, plays, played and playing, then they have known one word family as those words are in one word family
CHAPTER II
THEORETICAL REVIEW AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Theories of vocabulary, morpheme, and morphological awareness will be presented in this chapter to achieve a comprehensive understanding of the area of the research. Moreover, the conceptual framework will be constructed to get the pre-understanding of the research.
However, the previous studies will be presented first before the theoretical review to give a brief understanding about this current study regarding to the previous studies in the same area. Morin in 2003 conducted a study and she proposed the strategy of using morphological knowledge in inferring word meanings. She suggested that there was an urgent need for the teacher to develop morphological awareness for the L2 learners especially for guessing meaning from the context. Morphological knowledge was essential for L2 learners to develop their skills in guessing. Moreover, Zhang and Koda in 2011 investigated the contribution of morphological awareness and lexical inferring ability to L2 vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension among advanced EFL learners. They found that morphological awareness contributed to L2 vocabulary
knowledge directly and indirectly through the mediation of learners’ lexical
by Tabatabei in 2011.The study revealed that the L2 learners can develop their vocabulary better when vocabulary was taught by morphological analyses rather than through more traditional class instruction methods. The studies above showed that there was a contribution of the morphological awareness to vocabulary knowledge. However, they did not detailed picture in this area. Hence, further study is urgent to model the complex relations between the variables within an integrated framework.
A. Theoretical Review
The theoretical review covers the theories of the study. The first theory is about the vocabulary. It will cover some sub-chapters that will discuss definition of vocabulary, knowing a word, importance of vocabulary, kinds of vocabulary, number of words, vocabulary size, words to count, choosing words to test, as well as receptive and productive vocabulary. The second theory is about morpheme. It covers the sub-chapters of morpheme definition, morpheme identification awareness, and morphological structure awareness.
1. Vocabulary
a. Definition of Vocabulary
Nation (2001) defines vocabulary as a number of words which have low or high frequency in the utilization that is adapted bearing on situation or condition. It means that context essentially affects the meaning of a word. Context is seen to be the main factor to consider in determining the meaning of a word. In addition, there is a differentiation between low frequency words and high frequency words stated by Nation which allows the learner to choose which words should be learned. This infers that words have dichotomy as high or low frequency words. It implies that a language learner should know the kind of the words to learn based
on the differentiation. I can be summed up from Nation’s definition that
vocabulary is seen as a number of often-used and rarely-used words which are inevitably influenced by context in determining the meaning.
Hornby in Bahri (2009) states that vocabulary is the total number of words which (with rules for combining them) make up a language. This definition explicitly states that language consists of words. Those words are combined with the language rule to make them be used as means of communication. The grammar of the language is the rule to use vocabulary. The vocabulary should follow such rule to be used correctly. In other word, vocabulary is the total number of words which has fixed regulation of the composition to construct language.
Vocabulary is defined as the major element which will greatly influence the language learners in mastering the speaking, listening, reading, and writing skill.
The definitions share similar aspect in general. Nation and Hornby state that vocabulary is a number of words while Richards states that vocabulary is the core of language proficiency. However, they also specify the definition in certain aspects. Nation puts emphasis on context while Hornby concerns on the rule of the words to construct the language. The third definition is more specifically about the role of vocabulary for four macro-skills. Hence, it can be summarized that vocabulary is a total number of words in which the meanings of the words are based on the context, and each word represents different meaning based on the context it is used in reading, writing, listening, and speaking.
b. Knowing a Word
One may assume to know a word by knowing its form and meaning but knowing a word is not merely limited to its extent. Knowing a word may have broader area. It includes some more aspects to know. There are some perspectives about knowing a word.
Meanwhile, Thornbury (2002) states that knowing a word involves knowing its form and its meaning (grammatical function, collocations, and connotation which includes register and cultural assertion). Differently with Cameron, Thornbury does not include knowing the use as the part of knowing a word.
Nation (2001) gives a more detailed description of knowing a word differently for both language knowledge (productive and receptive). From
Nation’s points of view of receptive knowledge, knowing a word involves, firstly, being familiar to recognize the word when it is heard. Secondly, it is about knowing a word involves being familiar with its written form so that it is recognized when it is met in reading. Thirdly, it also involves recognizing its word structure and being able to relate the parts to its meaning. Fourthly, Nation suggests that one should know what the word means in the particular context in which it has just occurred. Fifthly, one has to know the concept behind the word which will allow the understanding in variety of context. Sixthly, knowing a word covers knowing the related words. Seventhly, one is required to be able to recognize whether the word has been used correctly in the sentence in which it occurs. The last ability in receptive knowledge of knowing a word is to be able to recognize the word’s collocates.
it can be concluded that knowing a word involves knowing its form, its meaning and its use. In relation to the four macro skills, one who knows a word should be able to use it while reading, listening, writing and speaking. In other word, one should be able to use the word receptively and productively.
c. Importance of Vocabulary
“Without grammar very little can be conveyed, without vocabulary
nothingcan be conveyed” is what Wilkin in Thornbury (2001) has stated on how important vocabulary is. This is how Wilkin views the importance of vocabulary. Knowing little grammar of the language will cause many problems, but knowing nothing about the language vocabulary will cause all problems of the language.
The definition means that the English learners will not improve their English considerably if the spend too much time on grammar instead learning more words. In addition, vocabulary is important to master since the ability to understand the target language greatly depends on one’s knowledge of
vocabulary.
d. Kinds of Vocabulary
vocabulary is the words obtained by the process of comprehending of words where speakers have to come with a way of conveying information to someone else. They must plan what to say, choose the right words, determine appropriate speech act, and finally produce their utterances.
Jennings (1980) in Bahri (2009) uses two terms of vocabulary which are a bit different from Clark and Clark’s terms. Those are active vocabulary and recognition vocabulary. Active vocabulary is vocabulary which constitutes the words used in speaking and writing. Moreover, recognition vocabulary is vocabulary which is composed by the words which are heard and read, but not ordinarily used in speaking and writing.
Wallace (1982), Bright and Mc Gregor (1970) in Bahri (2009) use the terms receptive and productive vocabulary which refers to active and recognition vocabulary. They make a distinction between receptive and productive vocabulary but they do not give explanatory definition.
type of association between words. Productive vocabulary can be activated by other words because it has many incoming and outgoing links with other words.
e. Number of Words
The English language is said to contain around 54,000 word families when these are counted in a large dictionary (Nation and Waring in Cameron, 2001). WhereasWebster’s Third New Dictionary, the largest non-historical dictionary of English, contains around 114,000 words families excluding proper names.
However, there is a minimum level of vocabulary that should be mastered as stated by Cameron (2001). He states that the core vocabulary around 2,000 is sufficient for learner to serve in most situations. It is the number of words in daily conversation of native speakers. In addition, 2,000 more frequent words will provide the learner a better understanding to the written texts where it is estimated that the learner will know nine out of every ten words in most written texts. Most researchers recommend a basic vocabulary of at least 3,000 word families, while for more specialized need, over 5,000 word families are desirable. By the various amounts of the words explained above, it can be assumed that a second language learner can achieve a level where he can communicate and comprehend the written text well if he/she can acquire up to 5000 word families.
f. Vocabulary Size
There is a totally ambitious goal for EFL learner to know all words in the language. It is almost impossible for a language learner especially who learn L2 or foreign language to know all words in the target language. Even a native speaker does not know all words in the language. There are, what Nation called,
‘specialized vocabulary” that only a small group of people in the area who know
the words. To have better understanding of this area, Nation differentiates the word counted that fall into four categories. They are tokens, types, lemmas, and word families.
Tokens are the running words in the sentence, clause, paragraph, or text. Whatever words occur, it is counted as tokens. The way is simply to count the words occur even if they are the same words. For example, the sentence ‘ I have to go to the market’ has seven tokens, even though it occurs twice in the sentence.
Types are rather different from tokens. If we see the same word again, we do not count it again. So in the sentence ‘ I have to go to the market’, there are six types
language. If lemmas only focus on inflectional forms, word families deal with both inflectional and derivational forms. This includes the affixes like–ment, -ly, -ness, pre-, un-, etc. The major problem in counting the words by using word
families is to decide what should be included in the word family and what should not. It is inevitably truethat the learner’s knowledge of affixes develop as he gains more experience of the language. What a learner may be familiar to certain word families may not happen to the other learners. It is necessary to set up the scale of the word families from the elementary level or the simplest one to the less obvious possibilities.
The vocabulary size of the second and foreign learners aims at knowing to the number of vocabulary a learner has in a certain time of his language acquisition. If the native speakers grow their vocabulary through direct teaching and accidental learning in their growth, second and foreign learners tend to have merely direct teaching and limited accidental learning.
Nation (2001) proposes two methods of measuring vocabulary size. They are based on sampling from a dictionary and a corpus or frequency list derived from corpus. The dictionary-based method involves choosing a dictionary that is large enough to contain all the words the learners might know. Whereas the corpus-based method can be applied in two ways: to collect corpus in a language used by a person or group of people and see how many words it consists of.
addition, this current study more specifically focuses on the written receptive vocabulary size, that is the number of words required for reading.
g. Words to Count
This question may result more fundamental question about what involves in knowing a word. Another crucial issue related to the question is about what is included to be in a word. It may involve the issue of the proper noun such as Tim, Davis, or Cathrine to be as a word, or we can also involve foreign word like perestroika, Latin term, or Sanskrit to be included as a word as well. This should be a decision about the issues of the question as it will affect to the counting of the word size.
However, by referring to the British National Corpus frequency list, the ideal unit of counting the words is based on the word family. Word family is chosen, rather than the word type or lemma, firstly because research has shown that word families are psychologically real. Secondly, knowing one members of word family and having control of the most common and regular word-building process make it possible to work out the meaning of previously unmet member of family (Nagy, Anderson, Schommer, Scott & Stallman, 1989; Bertram, Laine, and Virkkala, 2000).
h. Choosing Words to Test
weaknesses of this method. The source of the problem is that in a dictionary, high frequency words have more entries per word and each entry takes more space than low-frequency words. If the sample contains too many high frequency words, the
learners’ vocabulary size will be overestimated as high-frequency words are more known than low-frequency words. It does not cover up both high and low frequency words equally.
To select the words to test, there should be some considerations to maintain the balance of the number of low and high frequency words. The teacher should determine the appropriate words to test and consider the level of difficulty of each word.
i. Receptive and Productive Vocabulary Size
j. Types of Language Test
Nation (2011) states that there is a variety of purposes of the language test. The first purpose of the language test is to find out where the learners are experiencing difficulty so that something can be done about it. It is kind of diagnostic test where the result of the test is used to improve or fix something. The second purpose is to see whether a recently studied group of words has been learned. It will be best fitted to achieve the result by having short term achievement test. The third purpose is to see whether a course has been successful in teaching particular words. Unlike the previous objective, this will be best fitted to achieve the result by having a long term achievement test. The fourth purpose is to see how much vocabulary the learners know. It can be achieved by having proficiency test done toward the learners. In this current study, proficiency test is the kind of test that will be done to know the estimated vocabulary the learners know.
From the four purposes of the language test proposed by Nation, the last purpose is what the current study wants to figure out. Through the proficiency test done by the learners, it will result the estimated number of vocabulary the learners know.
2. Morpheme
inflectional morphemes. Free morphemes are morphemes which can stand alone such as in word book, car, and boy. Bound morphemes are morphemes which must be attached to other morphemes like pre-, dis-, and poly-. Derivational morphemes are morphemes which create new words by changing the part of speech meaning, e.g. develop / development. Inflectional morphemes are morphemes which add a grammatical element to the word without changing its meaning or part of speech, e.g. play/plays. However, in English, the same morpheme–s can be both.
Morpheme also can be seen as a combination of sounds that have a meaning. A morpheme does not necessarily have to be a word. Example: the word cats has two morphemes. Cat is a morpheme, and -s is a morpheme. Every morpheme is either a base or an affix. An affix can be either a prefix or a suffix.
Cat is the base morpheme, and -s is a suffix
Morphemes can be classified as free and bound morphemes. Free morphemes are those that can exist in their own or stand alone (e.g. car), whereas bound morphemes cannot (e.g. –s in cars). The word reformation can be broken
down into three morphemes: re-, form, and –tion. Form is called the root. The
root is the core of the word where other morphological units are attached.
3. Morphological Awareness
morphological awareness. In addition, it is also important to present the scope of the morphological awareness in which the learners may experience in their language acquisition. The importance of the morphological awareness related to previous studies is then presented to give understanding on its significance to language acquisition.
a. Concept of Morphological Awareness
Morphological awareness refers to the learners’knowledge of morphemes and morphemic structure, allowing them to reflect and manipulate morphological structure of words (Carlisle & Stone, 2003). Awareness of inflectional form is gained earlier than awareness of derivational forms. It can be assumed that language learners can more easily master the inflectional forms as inflectional forms do not change the part of speech and are relatively few. In other hand, the language learners master derivational form latter as derivations change the part of speech and there is significant number of derivational forms in English.
McBridge (2005) defines morphological awareness as “an awareness of access to the meaning and structure of morphemes in relation to words”. In other
words, he defines morphological awareness as the conscious thought and the ability to form new meaning and structure in its relation to the words construction. The language learners should be critical to notice what words can be formed together into larger unit and what a unit may consist of.
ability to reflect on and manipulate that structure”. In this definition, Carlisle is focusing on children’s abilities to distinguish and manipulate morphemes at the word level. She concerns on the early stage of the language acquisition experienced by the children especially in constructing and manipulating the words.
Kuo and Anderson (2006) state that morphological awareness is the understanding of complex words as the combinations of meaningful smaller units which are including prefixes, suffixes, and roots. They focus on the elements of words in term of morphemes. Morphological awareness means that the students are able to know the meaning of complex words together with their language properties such as the base and suffixes. They also need to be able to construct and combine the elements together with the meaning they carry to form new words.
Based on the definitions above, it can be concluded that there are two main definitions of morphological awareness. The first definition deals with the young learners‘ ability to differentiate the words within homophones. It is closely
related to early acquisition of the language that the young learners acquire. The second definitions are related to the adult learners’ ability to know the words
construction both in breaking down the elements or constructing the elements of the words.
awareness among adult learners. Most studies of morphological awareness among
young learners talked about the children’s ability to recognize the sound.
Meanwhile most of the studies of morphological awareness among adult learners talked about the learners’ ability to recognize the form and meaning.
Tabatabei (2011) found that the instructional approach of morpheme or root word families in teaching vocabulary for ESL learners showed that the learners can develop their vocabulary better when vocabulary is taught by morphological analyses rather than through more traditional class instruction methods. Another study by Zhang and Koda (2011) revealed the contribution of morphological awareness and lexical inferring ability to L2 vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension among advanced EFL learners. The study revealed that morphological awareness contributed to L2 vocabulary knowledge directly and indirectly through the mediation of learners’ lexical inferring ability. Those studies regardedmorphological awareness as the learners’ ability to recognize the form and meaning.
morphological structure in natural speech (Kuo and Anderson, 2006). Thus, morphological awareness falls under the umbrella of morphology acquisition.
Morphological awareness is contrasted with phonological awareness. Phonological awareness refers to the phonological sensitivity to syllable segmentation, rhyming and phoneme segmentation (Carroll et al., 2003). Some studies have explored the relation between morphological awareness, reading comprehension and vocabulary knowledge independently of phonological awareness (e.g. Carlisle, 2000; Fowler and Liberman, 1995; Mahony et al., 2000 ), whereas other studies compared the effect of morphological awareness with the effect of phonological awareness on promoting reading skills and proficiency after controlling for short- term memory and vocabulary (McBride- Chang, 2005; Singson et al., 2000). In this current study, morphological awareness is studied independently of phonological awareness. However, this study puts phonological awareness not to be completely separated from morphological awareness.
In this study, morphological awareness refers the knowledge of morphemes that enables them to recover the meaning of new complex words by means of morpheme identification or decomposition (i.e. analysis), and to recombine morphemes to construct new meaning by means of morphological structure (i.e. synthesis).
b. Two Aspects of Morphological Awareness
synthesis aspect. The syntactic aspect is morpheme identification awareness, while the synthesis aspect is morphological structure awareness.
1) Morpheme Identification Awareness
First aspect of morphological awareness is the morpheme identification awareness. McBridge (2005) defines morpheme identification awareness as “the ability to distinguish different meanings across homophones”. She demonstrated this skill by giving example when a language learner understands that the flower in flowerpot is represented by a plant with petals as opposed to a sack of white powder (flour). Another example is when the language learner can differentiate the sound of the word dead in dead body to the sound of the word debt in a spoken language. Here the emphasis is what the learner can develop for his vocabulary acquisition based on his acquired word in term of homophone, and how the learner can differentiate the homophones.
2) Morphological Structure Awareness
The second aspect of morphological awareness is morphological structure awareness. It is the ability to create new meanings by making use of familiar morphemes (Berko in McBridge, 2005).He studies this ability in which children’s grammatical knowledge illustrates this skill. A child who understands that the famous concept of greater than one wug is represented by the word wugs, involving two morphemes, demonstrates morphological structure awareness skill. This particular example reflects inflectional knowledge of morphology.
Similarly, (Chang, Wagner, Muse & Chow, 2005) define morphological structure awareness as the ability of the learners to make use the linguistic knowledge to derive new meaning. It is similar to the previous definition as the aspects cover the language elements and new meaning. It relates the receptive skills to be performed as productive skills. The learners who are able to know the concept of present participle will recognize that the present participles are derived from present verbs plus –ing. Thus, they can produce new meaning of the words
that are recognized as present verbs to be added –ing to make it as present
participles. In addition, since present participles can transform into adjectives, the learners can also produce new words as adjectives from other present participles e.g. confusing, amazing, boring. Morphological structure awareness requires complete awareness to construct new meaning and to confirm whether the words exist in English. For instance, one may construct new word derived from the words cactus by adding –es to the word. So the word is cactuses. However the
words, the learners should be equipped by sufficient knowledge of the morphemes to be able to construct new words correctly.
To sum up, morphological structure is closely related to the ability to construct new words from the morphemes the learners have learnt. It requires the learners to know affixes (inflections and derivations) together with their meaning and use. The ability requires the learner to perform productive skills from the knowledge they get through receptive language activities e.g. reading and listening.
c. Importance of Morphological Awareness
Fowler and Liberman (1995) showed that word reading was significantly correlated with tasks of morphological awareness, even controlling for age and vocabulary level, among second to fourth graders. Their study focuses on the advantage of morphological awareness in reading especially in elementary level. In addition, a study by Carlisle and Nomanbhoy (1993) also found that a measure of morphological production significantly predicted word reading in first graders, once phonological awareness was statistically controlled. Similarly to the previous result of the research, Carlisle and Nomanbhoy stated that the controlled phonological awareness is useful for elementary language learner as it can be used to predict the word reading. The last study also found that morphological production measured in first grade was significantly related to word recognition and reading comprehension in second grade, with phonological awareness controlled as well (Carlisle, 1995). Those three studies show that the morphological awareness is beneficial for the reading as it has significant relationship and can be the way to predict the word reading, especially for the elementary language level.
B. Conceptual Framework
Vocabulary size is the number of words that have been known by the students after they have learnt the language in certain period of time.
Morphological awareness covers the students’ ability to recognize morphemes of
the words and also the ability to manipulate the words’ structure to find the meaning of new words. Morphological awareness is beneficial to the improvement of the vocabulary size as one of the strategies of the vocabulary development by enhancingthe words’ morphological knowledge of the language learners. Vocabulary size is also essential of the morphological awareness development as the more vocabulary size the learners have, the more morphological awareness they will learn.
It emerges an assumption that the vocabulary is the base of the morphological awareness. The elements of words are used to construct the meaning of the words. In addition, the complex words consist of morphemes which can be understood by examining the elements of the construction. In other hand, morphological awareness enables the learners to create new words by making use the knowledge of the known words and the morphemes.
enables the learners to make use the knowledge of the morpheme to construct new words as a productive performance in writing. Thus, the both abilities are beneficial in reading as well as in writing.
The correlations between the variables are assumed to exist. The vocabulary size is assumed to correlate to morpheme identification awareness as vocabulary has the key factor for morpheme identification. It is also assumed that vocabulary size also has correlation to the morphological structure awareness. The ability to construct new word is also determined by the vocabulary and also morpheme. The last correlation between morpheme identification awareness and morphological structure awareness is assumed to exist as the ability to break down complex words will be in line with the ability to construct new words. Thus, the framework of the concepts will be presented in figure 1.
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework
Vocabulary Size
Morpheme Identification
Awareness
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter subsequently put an emphasis on the research methodology comprising the type of the study, the setting, research subjects, data of the research, procedure of data collection, the research procedure, the data collection technique, the research instruments, and the data analysis technique.
A. Type of the Study
The type of the study is quantitative research. They data obtained were quantitative data from three tests: Vocabulary Level Test, Morpheme Identification Awareness Test, and Morphological Structure Awareness Test.
B. Setting
curriculum which focusedon the students’ competence to use the language in real usage. In addition, the curriculum included the theories of teaching and also teaching training. The purpose of the English Department of Muhammadiyah University was to produce the future English teachers who had good English command and teaching competence suitable with Islamic values. The English Department of Muhammadiyah University of Yogyakarta also highlighted the teaching of hard skills and soft skills. Hard skills were related to cognitive competences of English (reading, listening, writing, and speaking), while soft skills were about the affective competences
The participants of the research were the first semester students of English Education Department of Muhammadiyah University of Yogyakarta. There were two classes that participated to the research consisting of 66 students. Class B consisted of 32 students and class D consisted of 31 students. There were 15 male students and 17 female students in class B. In addition, there were 15 male students and 16 female students in class D. In general, the students of class B and D were highly motivated English learners. They joined the English class enthusiastically. They were eager to learn English although they had low English proficiency. The researcher knew the condition of the classes in general because he was the lecturer of the two classes.
C. Research Subjects
the first semester, the students were regarded to have the same English proficiency as the senior high school students. The students came from different area and had different English proficiency. In general, the students were motivated to learn English. The students had five classes in the first semester, and this current study was conducted is one of the classes that was Academic Reading and Writing. It was because the researcher was also the lecturer of the class.
D. Data of the Research
Data of the study was quantitative in nature. It was the score the students got from three kinds of test. The current study employed three kinds of data taken from three kinds of test, e.g. vocabulary size test, morpheme identification test, and morphological structure test. Thus the data gathered were vocabulary size, morpheme identification awareness score, and morphological structure awareness score. All the data gathered from three kinds of test were interval data.
E. Data Collection Techniques
morpheme identification awareness test. The last test was morphological structure awareness test. The allocation for all tests was 90 minutes.
The tests were scored manually. The data gathered were used as the input data for further data analysis. The score for each test was analyzed to know whether the data was linear and normally distributed. Correlation of Pearson Product Moment was then operated to get the correlation between the variables.
F. Research Instruments
There were three instruments used in this research. They were Vocabulary Size Test, Morpheme Identification Awareness Test, and Morphological Structure Awareness Test.
1. Vocabulary Size Test
Vocabulary Size Test was a test by Nation. This instrument was used to
This test consisted of 140 questions which reflected the 140,000 word families in English used in written receptive. Each correct answer was multiplied by 100 to get the estimation of the rough word family the students had. This test had been widely used to measure the vocabulary size and suitable both for L1 speakers or L2 speakers. This test was also suitable for intermediate level learner such as the first-semester students of English Department of Muhammadiyah University of Yogyakarta.
2. Morphological Awareness Test
The instrument to test the students’ morphological awareness was Morphological Awareness Test by Chang, C. M., Wagner, R. K., Muse, A. & Chow, H. S. (2005). This test consisted of two parts: Morpheme Identification Awareness Test and Morphological Structure Awareness Test.
a. Morpheme Identification Awareness Test
Morpheme Identification Awareness Test was a test to measure the students’ ability to breakdown complex words into elements or morphemes. It was
b. Morphological Structure Awareness Test
The other kind of Morphological Awareness Test used in this research was Morphological Structure Awareness Test. It aimed at measuring the students’ ability of morphological structure awareness. It required the students to make use the linguistic knowledge to derive new meaning. There were ten questions in the test of morphological structure awareness. Each question provided an example sentence as the clue for the question. The students needed to relate the clue of the example sentence to be applied to the questions as the answer. It required the students to produce words or phrases after examining the clue in the example sentence. One point was given for every correct answer. The total score was ten. Correct spelling was important because misspelling might affect the meaning of the words. The questions varied from plural noun, S-V agreement, past verbs, and compound words.
G. Validity and Reliability of the Instruments
All of the instruments used in this current study were instruments which widely used in the language research. Nation was well known for his instruments which measure some aspects of vocabulary. One of the instruments was Vocabulary Size Test. The instrument was proven to be valid and reliable. This current study adopted the instrument to be used to obtain the data of vocabulary size. A pilot project was conducted to get the picture of the data of the tests.
was adapted from the original version of Morphological Awareness Test by Chang, C. M., Wagner, R. K., Muse, A. & Chow, H. S (2005). There were two kinds of test i.e. Morpheme Identification Awareness Test and Morphological Structure Awareness Test.
H. Data Analysis
The data obtained was analyzed by SPSS program. The statistical technique used to analysis the data was Correlation of Pearson Product Moment. The first step the data analysis was about the normality and linearity of the data distribution .It was used to fulfill the requirement for further analysis. Correlation of Pearson Product Moment was used to measure the correlation of the variables. The coefficient correlation was used to find p-value for each analysis. The p-value was used to reject or not to reject the null hypotheses. Null hypothesis was rejected if p-value < (0.05), while null hypothesis was not rejected if p-value > (0.05).
The first data analysis was about the correlation between vocabulary size and morpheme identification awareness. The null hypothesis “ There is no correlation between vocabulary size and morpheme identification” was rejected if
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter subsequently focuses on description of the findings and discussion. The findings are elaborately explained by showing the data and data analysis results as well as the supporting tables. In addition, the discussion is presented to give the interpretation of the findings related to theories in the area of study.
A. Findings
Pre-analysis tests were done before employing Correlation of Pearson Product Moment. These tests included the test of normality and test of linearity. The pre-analysis of the data of vocabulary size test, morpheme identification awareness test, and morphological structure awareness test is presented as follows.
1. Test of Normality
Table (1) Data Distribution of the Tests
Mean Std Dev N KS P-value
Vocabulary_Size_Test 63.83 12.16 66 0.007 > 0.150
Morpheme_Identification_
Awareness_Test 14.53 2.062 66 0.090 > 0.150
Morphological_Sturcture_Aware
ness_Test 6.561 1.746 66 0.031 > 0.150
From the table above, it can be seen that all data distribution of the three kind of tests resulted p-value >0.15. H0 is not rejected as p-value (>0.15)>
(0,05). Thus, the data of the three variables are all normally distributed. In other words, the data taken are from normal population.
2. Test of Linearity
Table (2.1) The Result of Linearity Test between Vocabulary Size and
(Combined) 2282.591 8 285.324 2.220 .039
Linearity 687.133 1 687.133 5.347 .024
Deviation from
rejected. Therefore, vocabulary size and morpheme identification awareness is linearly correlated.
Table (2.2) The Result of Linearity Test between Vocabulary Size and Morphological Structure Awareness
(Combined) 3188.469 8 398.559 3.539 .002
The result shows that p-value (0.000) < (0.05) so that H0 is rejected.
Thus, vocabulary size and morphological structure awareness are linearly correlated.
Table (2.3) The Result of Linearity Test between Morpheme Identification Awareness and Morphological Structure Awareness
Sum of
Squares df
Mean
Square F Sig.
Morpheme_Identifica
tion_Test *
Morphological_Struct
ure_Test
Betwee
n
Groups
(Combined) 38.939 8 4.867 1.168 .334
Linearity 21.560 1 21.560 5.174 .027
Deviation from
Linearity
17.379 7 2.483 .596 .757
Within Groups 237.500 57 4.167
Total 276.439 65
From the data, it can be found that p-value is 0.027. H0 is rejected if p-value
< (0.05). The result shows that p-value (0.027) < (0.05) so that H0 is rejected.
So, morpheme identification awareness and morphological structure awareness are linearly correlated.
1. Correlation between Vocabulary Size and Morpheme Identification Awareness
The first statistical analysis is about the correlation between vocabulary size and morpheme identification awareness. SPSS version 21 was used to compute the data taken from vocabulary size test and morpheme identification awareness test. The result of the statistical analysis by using Correlation of Pearson Product Moment is presented below.
Table (3.1) The Result of Correlation between Vocabulary Size and Morpheme Identification Awareness
Correlations
Morpheme_I dentification
_Test
Vocabulary_ Size Morpheme_Identificati
on_Test
Pearson Correlation
1 .267*
Sig. (2-tailed) .030
N 66 66
Vocabulary_Size Pearson Correlation
.267* 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .030
N 66 66
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
The first result is to test the first hypothesis H0 “ There is no significant
