A CORPUS ANALYSIS OF VOCABULARY COVERAGE
AND WORD FREQUENCY OF JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
COURSE BOOKS
A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Magister Humaniora (M.Hum.)
in English Language Studies
by
Damasus Desta Herdian Student Number : 136332010
THE GRADUATE PROGRAM IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE STUDIES SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
i
A CORPUS ANALYSIS OF VOCABULARY COVERAGE
AND WORD FREQUENCY OF JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
COURSE BOOKS
A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Magister Humaniora (M.Hum.)
in English Language Studies
by
Damasus Desta Herdian Student Number : 136332010
THE GRADUATE PROGRAM IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE STUDIES SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
ii
A CORPUS ANALYSIS OF VOCABULARY COVERAGE
AND WORD FREQUENCY OF JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL COURSE
BOOKS
A THESIS
by
Damasus Desta Herdian Student Number: 136332010
Approved by,
Dr. J. Bismoko
iii
A THESIS
A CORPUS ANALYSIS OF VOCABULARY COVERAGE
AND WORD FREQUENCY OF JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL COURSE
BOOKS
by:
Damasus Desta Herdian 136332010
Defended before the Thesis Committee and Declared Acceptable
THESIS COMMITTEE
Chairperson : F.X. Mukarto, Ph.D. ________________________
Secretary : Dr. E. Sunarto, M.Hum. ________________________
Members : 1. Dr. B.B. Dwijatmoko, M.A. ________________________
2. Dr. J. Bismoko ________________________
Yogyakarta, June 20, 2017 The Graduate Program Director Sanata Dharma University
iv
“Man shall not live by bread
alone, but by every word
that proceeds out of the
mouth of God.”
Matthew 4:4
This thesis is a symbol of my love, passion and dedication to
Jesus Christ, my best friend ever
My lovely parents and brother
My faithful future wife
My brethren in Christ
v
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY
This is to certify that all the ideas, phrases, and sentences, unless otherwise stated,
are the ideas, phrases, and sentences of the thesis writer. The writer understands
the full consequences including degree cancellation if he took somebody else’s
ideas, phrases, or sentences without a proper reference.
Yogyakarta, June 20, 2017
The Writer
vi
ABSTRACT
Herdian, Damasus Desta. (2017). A Corpus Analysis of Vocabulary Coverage and Word Frequency of Junior High School Course Books. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University
One of the important keys in learning English is through acquiring vocabulary from the course books. One of the ways to validate vocabulary coverage and word frequency in the course book is by comparing the vocabulary with corpus GSL (General Service List). The corpus words were selected to represent the most frequent words of English and were taken from a corpus of written English.
This research was aimed to discover the characteristics of the vocabulary coverage and word frequency in Junior High School course books, grade Eight. With two research questions, which are: (1) What is the vocabulary coverage of Junior High School course books in terms of types, tokens, and word families? (2) How frequent the words are being used in the course books?
The research method was corpus-based survey. The data were obtained from four junior high school course books, published by official/government and private publishers. Two Paul Nation’s concordance programs and a modified program (based on Bauman and Culligan’s wordlists) were used as instruments for data analysis. They were RANGE and FREQUENCY.
The findings showed that the four course books have average 30,463 tokens, and 3,063 types. The course books covered 72.55% tokens from total first 800 words (GSL800) vocabulary which should be mastered as Junior High School learners. The course books covered average 622 out of 800 word families or 77.78% of the total 800 headwords (GSL800) as required for the 2nd grade of Junior High School learners. It is considered not enough and need some improvements. The contents of the course books are accessible enough to students whose vocabulary knowledge is within the range. Unfortunately, they have inadequate number of word families and students will find difficulties in producing speaking and writing (active English) unless they use several supplementary English books or worksheets. The course books do not meet the criteria of incidental learning and text coverage either the learning opportunity to the students is not really high. The average deficit vocabulary is 177 out of 800 headwords. Almost 54% word families from the course books are repeated less than ten times. Thus, it gives small opportunities to students for deepening learning vocabulary.There are 20 functional words and 4 content words in the total 24 most frequent word types from all course books. The words the, to, a, and are four most frequent words appeared in all course books.
The course books have most of the types, tokens, and families listed in the GSL wordlist. However, authors need significant improvement in designing the material to give students a higher opportunity in learning vocabulary. High amount of tokens, types, and word families are also necessary but should be followed with suitable vocabulary needs and high frequency of essential words to help students become more effective and efficient in learning vocabulary.
vii
ABSTRAK
Herdian, Damasus Desta. (2017). A Corpus Analysis of Vocabulary Coverage and Word Frequency of Junior High School Course Books. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University
Salah satu kunci utama dalam belajar Bahasa Inggris adalah penguasaan kosakata lewat buku materi. Salah satu cara untuk validasi cakupan kosakata dan pengulangannya adalah dengan membandingkannya terhadap korpus GSL. Korpus ini mewakili kosakata bahasa Inggris yang paling sering muncul yang diambil dari banyak sumber berbahasa Inggris.
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menemukan karakteristik kosakata dan pengulangan kata di beberapa buku materi SMP kelas delapan. Ada dua permasalahan yang dipecahkan di penelitian ini: (1) Cakupan kosakata di buku pegangan SMP, menemukan jumlah token, type, dan word family (2) Bagaimana kosakata digunakan ulang, untuk menjelaskan bagaimana kata digunakan ulang.
Metode penelitian ini berbasis korpus. Korpus didapatkan dari empat buku materi untuk SMP yang diterbitkan oleh pemerintah maupun penerbit swasta. Dua buah program konkordansi dari Paul Nation dan program modifikasi (berdasar daftar kata dari Bauman dan Culligan) digunakan sebagai instrumen analisis data. Program itu bernaman RANGE dan FREQUENCY Hasil analisis data diinterpretasi untuk menemukan jawaban atas pertanyaan penelitian ini.
Hasil penemuan menunjukkan bahwa empat buku tersebut memiliki rata-rata 30.463 tokens, dan 5.063 types. Ini mencakup 72,55% tokens dari total kosakata GSL800 yang harus dikuasai siswa SMP. Buku mencakup 622 dari 800 word families atau 77,78% dari (GSL800) yang diharapkan siswa SMP mencapainya (daftar kata Bauman dan Culligan).Ini dikategorkan rendah dan perlu peningkatan. Buku mudah dipelajari oleh siswa yang memiliki pengetahuan kosakata sesuai levelnya. Sayangnya sedikitnya varian types dan word families membuat siswa sulit mempelajari bahasa Inggris secara aktif, kecuali ditambah buku penunjang atau buku soal. Buku materi juga tidak menunjang siswa untuk belajar mandiri diluar KBM. Kesempatan untuk mempelajari kosakata yang lebih sulittidak banyak diberikan. Rata-rata kosakata yang kurang adalah 177 dari 800 kata. Hampir sekitar 54% word families dari keseluruhan buku materi digunakan kurang dari 10 kali. Artinya, kecil kemungkinan bagi siswa untuk lebih mendalami kosakata dengan baik. Ada 20 functional words dan 4 content words dari total 24 kata yang paling sering muncul dari seluruh buku materi. Kata the, to, a, and adalah empat functional words yang paling sering muncul.
Dapat disimpulkan bahwa buku materi memiliki sebagian besar tokens, types, dan word families yang terdapat pada daftar kata bahasa Inggris yang sering muncul. Namun, buku tetap membutuhkan peningkatan yang signifikan dalam desain material untuk memberikan kepada siswa sebanyak mungkin kesempatan belajar kosakata. Besarnya tokens, types, dan word families itu perlu, namun harus diikuti oleh kebutuhan kosakata yang sesuai dan pengulangan kosakata untuk membantu siswa lebih efektif dan efisien dalam mempelajari kosakata.
viii
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN
PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS
Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:
Nama : Damasus Desta Herdian
Nomor Mahasiswa : 136332010
Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan
Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:
A CORPUS ANALYSIS OF VOCABULARY COVERAGE AND WORD
FREQUENCY OF JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL COURSE BOOKS
beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan
kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan,
mengalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan
data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di internet atau
media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya
maupun memberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya
sebagai penulis.
Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenarnya.
Dibuat di Yogyakarta
Pada tanggal: 20 Juni 2017
Yang menyatakan,
ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my greatest gratitude to the Almighty God through
His son, Jesus Christ, for always guiding and blessing me. He always gives
everything I need. I believe a bright future is prepared for me. Thanks to Holy
Spirit, who always lead me and strengthen me day by day. I am more than a
conqueror through the Lord that loved me.
First and foremost, I would like to thank my thesis advisor, Dr. J. Bismoko
for his guiding, giving suggestions, caring and patience, and supporting me during
the writing of this thesis. I would like to thank to my thesis reviewer, Dr. B.B.
Dwijatmoko, M.A. and F.X. Mukarto, Ph. D. Thanks to Widya Kiswara, M.Hum
and all lecturers in English Language Studies for never ending inspiration and
support during my hard days in finishing the thesis.
Sincere love and gratitude is also expressed to my parents Bapak Ag. Sanijo
S.Pd. and Ibu M. Rastini for their love, pray, kindness, patience, care, and support.
Thanks to my elder brother and wife who always push me to the limit, to reveal
my true potential. Special gratitude to my partner in love, Elisabeth Berlian
Sugiharto for her patience, love, and caring through happiness and sadness,
strengthen me every day by her kindness. I also owe much to my mentors, Kak
Imelda Gunawan, Kak Budi Prasetya, Kak Budi Abdipatra and Yusak Agustinus.
Thank to my brethren in Christ Atma Troopers Community, SNIPER, and all
x
My appreciation goes to Martinus Rizki, Robby Pranajaya, Christian
Silitonga, Kak Louren, Dwiki, Gabhy and Anika for their willingness to support
me and pray for me. Last, I thank my friends in KBI ’13 : Anindita, Mbak Tuti,
Mbak Nurul, Bundo Wulan, Mas Bay, Mas Ryan, Dian Putri, Mbak Sisca, Ce
Vivi, Aik, Levyn, mbak Dian, Mbak Asti, Amy, Fara, and Mbak Kurni for the
great friendship, support, motivation, and encouragement through amazing years I
spent with all of them.
I consider that my thesis is far from being perfect. For any mistakes or error
that may remain in this work, I sincerely do apologize. The responsibility is
entirely my own.
xi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TITLE PAGE... i
APPROVAL PAGES.………... ii
DEFENSE APPROVAL PAGES………... iii
DEDICATION PAGE.……… iv
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY………...……… v
ABSTRACT.………. vi
ABSTRAK.………..…….. vii
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI.………... viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.……… ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS.……… xi LIST OF TABLES………... xiii LIST OF FIGURES………... xiv CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION A. Background of the Research……… 1
B. Problem Limitation……….. 6
C. Problem Formulation……… 8
D. Research Objectives………. 8
E. Research Benefits………... 9
CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW A. Theoretical Review……….. 12
1. The Nature of Word and Vocabulary Knowledge……….. 12
a. The Concept of Word and Vocabulary………... 12
b. Word Knowledge……… 14
c. Vocabulary Knowledge………... 15
1) Breadth and Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge………... 16
2) Receptive and Productive of Vocabulary Knowledge………... 19
2. Vocabulary Coverage……….. 22
a. Types and Tokens………... 22
b. Word Family………... 23
c. Vocabulary for Junior High School Learners………. 24
3. Word Frequency……….. 25
a. High Frequency Words……….. 27
b. Low Frequency Words……….. 31
c. Academic Words……… 34
d. Technical Words……… 34
4. Course books………... 34
xii
1) Course books as a Basis for Negotiation……… 35
2) Course books as a Flexible Framework……….. 36
3) Course books and Teacher Development……… 36
4) Course books as a Workable Compromise……….. 37
b. Course books related to Curriculum……… 37
c. Advantages and Disadvantages of Course books……… 39
1) Advantages……… 39
2) Disadvantages……… 40
d. The Importance of Evaluating Course books……….. 40
5. Corpus Analysis………... 41
B. Theoretical Framework………. 42
CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY A. Research Method………... 46
B. Research Design………... 48
C. Data Analysis………... 51
CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION A.Vocabulary Coverage of the Course books……… 53
1. Vocabulary Coverage of Official Course book 1………... 53
2. Vocabulary Coverage of Private Course book 1………... 61
3. Vocabulary Coverage of Official Course book 2………... 69
4. Vocabulary Coverage of Private Course book 2………... 78
5. Further Discussion………... 86
B.Word Frequency of the Course books………... 88
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS A. Conclusions………...…………...……… 96
B. Implications...…..………...…………...……...,, 98
REFERENCES………...……. 100
APPENDICES Appendix 1………...…………...………. 108
Appendix 2………...…………...……… 109
Appendix 3………...…………...……… 118
Appendix 4………...…………...………. 123
Appendix 5………...…………...………. 128
Appendix 6………...…………...………. 132
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 Data Analysis Process...…... 52
Table 4.1 Vocabulary Coverage of Official Course book 1...… 54
Table 4.2 RANGE’s Result of Each Chapter in Official Course book 1... 57
Table 4.3 Vocabulary Coverage and Learning Opportunity ... 59
Table 4.4 Vocabulary Coverage of Private Course book 1………...……... 61
Table 4.5 RANGE’s Result of Each Chapter in Private Course book 1...64
Table 4.6 Vocabulary Coverage and Learning Opportunity ……… 66
Table 4.7 Vocabulary Coverage of Official Course book 2... 69
Table 4.8 RANGE’s Result of Each Chapter in Official Course book 2 ... 73
Table 4.9 Vocabulary Coverage and Learning Opportunity ... 75
Table 4.10 Vocabulary Coverage of Private Course book 2... 78
Table 4.11 RANGE’s Result of Each Chapter in Private Course book 2... 81
Table 4.12 Vocabulary Coverage and Learning Opportunity ... 84
Table 4.13 Summary of Vocabulary Coverage from All Course books... 87
Table 4.14 Word Frequency of the Course books...…...88
Table 4.15 Top Words Frequency and its Classes...…... 91
xiv
LIST OF FIGURES
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
This chapter is aimed to justify the research project, relevance and
feasibility of language teaching and learning in the role of vocabulary, and some
previous research on vocabulary. In general, this chapter covers the background of
the research, problem identification, problem limitation, problem formulation,
research goals, and research benefits.
A. BACKGROUND OF THE RESEARCH
Today, teaching English using course books become the most common
method throughout schools and courses in every part of the world. Hutchinson
and Torres (1994: 315) say that a course book is “an almost universal element of
ELT (English Language Teaching)”. Course books become the most powerful device for spreading new ideas in language teaching, besides conferences,
journals, and workshops (Andrew Littlejohn as in Tomlinson, 1998:190). Byrd
(2001) also states that a course book serves as a content and teaching/learning
activities provider, which determines what happens in a classroom. Therefore,
students are required to use English course book as a vital support for their
learning activity.
One of the biggest components of English learning activity is vocabulary. It
means that when learning English, students must know the vocabulary that will be
learning English, vocabulary also become the most essential to the English
learning and the foundation of all English skills.
There are some reasons why vocabulary is important. Wilkins (1972) stated
that vocabulary knowledge is crucial to successful communication because
vocabulary plays an important role in delivering meaning. It means, vocabulary is
needed to make us able to understand the meaning of we are spoken or listen
about. It’s the key of successful communication in using two different language. As Ruply, Logan and Nichols (1999) state, vocabulary is the glue that hold
stories, ideas, and content together and it makes comprehension accessible. The
second reason is students understand the importance of vocabulary and they are
eager to learn new vocabulary items (Leki and Carson, 1994). The last one,
vocabulary acquisition affects language skill’s development. According to Schonell, Meddleton, and Shaw (1956), a vocabulary of around 2,000 word
family needs to be mastered to provide 95% coverage of informal conversations.
In other words, vocabulary is the key element in second language (English) skills.
Due to some reasons of the importance of vocabulary in learning English
skills, vocabulary expansion is essential for learners to gain proficiency in
English. In second language learning and teaching, vocabulary knowledge is
central to communicative competence and to the acquisition of a second language.
Students learn vocabulary through course books; and the size of their vocabulary
determines their language performance. Vocabulary is the most important element
to build their English knowledge and has strong effect on their future language
learning progress. Therefore, knowing vocabulary is considered necessary for
Using English course book, students will be helped to learn more
vocabulary. In other words, learning vocabulary can be from course book.
Indirectly, English course book will influence students’ vocabulary level. Students might be helped by their teachers in selecting many texts to read in language
learning tasks. Those texts can be news articles, short stories, blog entries, and
materials specifically written for students. The appropriate level in selecting texts
is essential for reading tasks to be effective due to students’ proficiency in English will go higher according to the increasing level of difficulty in vocabulary terms.
Some researchers have paid attention to vocabulary. According to Read
(2004), studies on second language vocabulary reached a peak in the 1990s and
2000s. Different issues on vocabulary have been the focus of the studies such as
vocabulary size, learning vocabulary and word repetition. A set of research reports
was given by different researchers. Research on vocabulary coverage and
vocabulary recycled also conducted by Mutiara (2014) and Kusumaningrum
(2014). The difference between this research and both Mutiara’s and Kusumaningrum’s research is that Mutiara analyzed the vocabulary coverage and word recycling in a Junior High School course book curriculum 2013;
Kusumaningrum analyzed the vocabulary coverage and word recycling in a Junior
High School course book curriculum 2006; while this research analyzed the word
frequency distribution throughout several course books provided for Junior High
School in order to find out whether vocabulary coverage in the course books will
significantly increase or not during the development of English learning through
One of the ways to validate vocabulary coverage and its recycling in the
course book is by comparing the vocabulary with English corpus (GSL, BNC,
AWL, etc). The corpus words were selected to represent the most frequent words
of English and were taken from a corpus of written English. As the research
justification, corpus become the most trustworthy reference in order to measure
the suitability between vocabulary being learned and the level of learners.
Matsuoka and Hirsh (2010) also did research toward analysis of an ELT
course book. Their Research findings suggested that it only provided minimal
opportunities for students to develop vocabulary knowledge beyond frequency
and academic words. It shows a need to supplement the course book with an
extensive reading program and other programs with rich input to promote
vocabulary development. Another research on vocabulary coverage by Hsu (2009)
also finds that vocabulary levels of the course books he examined did not seem to
be in line with the one claimed by the publishers. This finding, then, results in
suggestion for teachers to raise their awareness of considering vocabulary level
when choosing an English course book.
Considering some previous research in the field of vocabulary coverage, this
research also discusses vocabulary coverage and how the words are recycled. In
this research, the researcher will discuss vocabulary coverage in random four
Junior High School course books used in Yogyakarta.
From the explanation above, it is clearly seen that vocabulary takes an
important role in studying English especially for students. It is because they
cannot avoid English although they have graduated from Junior High School or
vocabulary. It means that they should always improve their size of vocabulary in
order to follow their English need. If they could not improve their vocabulary
size, they would not be able to follow their English lesson well.
Related to certain problem above, the researcher is going to look at several
vocabularies of English Junior High School course books. This research is based
on a corpus study. This study does not attempt to judge of course book quality,
but to find the vocabulary coverage used in the course book, with the hope that
future studies will improve on the methodology used. This research can also be
used as a way to help in analyzing the overall quality of course books and help to
create better English material for students.
Another area of study relating to vocabulary coverage is the issue of word
frequency. It is often stated that learner should focus on learning the most
common 2,000 or so words of a language since these account for 80% or so of
most contexts. (Nation, 2002). Paul Nation also calculated that learner need 3,000
word families to feel even somewhat comfortable reading, and 5,000 to be
comfortable in most situations. This is based on the assumption that we should be
reading texts with 98% known words. It is considered as the standard of
comfortable reading for students to be achieved in order to make them able to
maximize their vocabulary learning.
Words can be difficult because of factors like frequency (Chen & Truscott,
2010). Therefore, discovering how far the frequency of certain words may occur
in the course book becomes necessary to identify the factors that make words
difficult. It is important because it will estimate the difficulty level of an
B. PROBLEM LIMITATION
The researcher will limit the certain problem in order to be able to explain
well. Actually it is impossible for the researcher to study all parts of vocabulary in
the course books since the limitation of time, finances and ability of the
researcher, the researcher only analyzes one level of Junior High School English
course book in the second grade. As Kusumaningrum (2014) and Mutiara (2014)
have already done with the first grade of Junior High School’s course books, the researcher did the research on the 2nd grade course books instead. The researcher
also limits the scope of course books analysing which are distributed can be
bought in Yogyakarta. It consists of four course books, which each two of them
represent official course books and non-official course books (private publishers).
Particularly, this research will deal with vocabulary coverage (types, tokens, word
families) on certain provided course books. This limitation aims to obtain deeper
investigation and discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of English course
books in Yogyakarta.
Some limitations should also be considered in this research. First, the
interpretation is done by the researcher and it may be subjective, although
literature review is also used. Therefore, triangulation is used in form of expert
check to minimize subjectivity. Second, the scope of this research is only
vocabulary. It does not cover other scopes in course book evaluation such as
learner’s roles, teacher’s roles, learning activities, pictures, and texts.
Masuhara (1998) stated that teachers who conduct the process of course
recommended to be used at school by the government based on the Ministry of
National Decree, or can be called an official course book, and the others
produced by private publishers. This research only focuses on random four course
books to be analyzed. The course books are from both curriculum 2006 and 2013,
therefore some of schools still use these course books. This research tries to
elaborate the vocabulary items used in the course books to help teachers make
decisions in using the course book to support students’ learning activity.
According to Nation in David Aline (2001), the words level for Junior High
School is around 1000 words. Based on Kurikulum 1994, At the Junior High
level, the objective is that by the end of the program, the students will have
developed English language skills of reading, listening, speaking, and writing in
thematic situations in accordance with their individual developmental levels and
interests, using 1000 word-level and appropriate structures (Depdikbud, 1994b),
and the objective at the Senior High level is that by the end of the program, the
students will have developed English language skills of reading, listening,
speaking, and writing in thematic situations in accordance with their individual
developmental levels and interests, using 2500 word-level and appropriate
structures (Depdikbud, 1994a).
As compared, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and
Technology in Japan (2011) introduced a new curriculum in which English
activities became mandatory in Junior High grades, aiming to familiarize students
with sounds or basic conversation in English, and cultivating their knowledge of
other languages and cultures. At the junior high school, the curriculum
order to promote communication skills. For better communication skills,
vocabulary teaching at this level has increased from 900 to 1,200. In high school,
English classes are conducted in English, and vocabulary taught in this level
increased from 1300 to 1800.
Although in recent curriculum, Indonesia government did not clearly
mention the exact size of vocabulary that should be mastered by Junior High
students, the words level for Junior High School is not far from 1000 words.
Therefore, it is assumed that Junior High students in the first grade will acquire at
least 500 words, 300 words in the second grade, and 200 words in the third grade.
C. PROBLEM FORMULATION
Based on the background, there are two problems addressed in this research.
They are:
1. What is the vocabulary coverage of Junior High School course books?
2. How frequent the words are being used in the course books?
D. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
This research deals with vocabulary which is used in Junior High School
course books. It aims to discover the vocabulary coverage and level of word
frequency distribution in the Junior High School course books, as computed with
vocabulary corpora. In particular, this research is intended to reach the subsequent
objectives: (1) to find out the number of types, tokens, and word families in Junior
High School course book and its implication and (2) to find out how frequent the
Therefore, if we learn to find out the vocabulary coverage used in the course
book, we hope that future studies will improve on the analyzing the overall
quality of course books and help to create better English material for students.
Also, discovering how far the frequency of certain words may occur in the course
book becomes necessary to identify the factors that make words difficult and for
better learning of vocabulary acquisition since frequency is also a predictor of L2
word difficulty in the case of ESL learning.
After seeing the vocabulary coverage, range, and frequency of Junior High
School course books, teachers should have enough consideration to the content of
certain English course books, especially the vocabulary. Beside, writers of the
course books will get significant input from the discovery of this research in order
to create better English course books for learner, especially in Yogyakarta. Last,
future researchers also need to continue the research with greater numbers of
course books, curricula, types of publishers, learner’s levels, and many more to
produce better discoveries about vocabulary coverage and word frequency in the
course books.
E. RESEARCH BENEFITS
This research would discover the vocabulary coverage and its level of word
frequency distribution by corpus-based analysing in the English Junior High
School course books in Yogyakarta. It clarifies the number of types, tokens, and
words families in it as well as explains how the frequency words are distributed
and the context. Scientifically, the result of the study may show the characteristics
is become an important and decisive factor in second language learning,
particularly in learning English vocabulary for students in Yogyakarta.
This research is beneficial for English teachers because it will elaborate the
importance of vocabulary in language learning. This research discovery will
necessary for teachers to consider several aspects before they select a course book
for students. This research will also emphasize how important it is for teachers to
adjust the level of vocabulary with students’ background experience. This research is hoped to improve teachers’ awareness in selecting the best course book for their students based on students’ needs. It also gives a detailed picture of vocabulary which is used in a Junior High School course book, so it can be one of
teachers’ considerations in choosing a course book which best meets their students need.
As for English course book’s writer, this research will give significant information about the characteristics of vocabulary coverage from several course
books in Yogyakarta. It is aimed to give important input and evaluation for them
in order to see how far whether course books have already met the demand of
students’ needs based of their level in learning English or not. This research hoped that the results will help the writer to be more efficient and productive in giving
vocabulary coverage to their designed course books and materials to meet the
suitable students’ level of learning.
This research will discover the characteristics of vocabulary coverage,
range, and frequency in course books published by both official and private
publishers. It is used to discover a better option to the teachers to make decision in
materials based on students’ needs. Hopefully, the course book’s quality and its vocabulary characteristics can still support the efficiency and effectivity of
12
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter aimed to discuss the theoretical truth of course book’s vocabulary coverage by corpora-based analysis. It consists of two major parts,
namely theoretical review and theoretical framework. In the first part, the
researcher would like to present and clarify the review of related theories which
include the nature of word and vocabulary knowledge, vocabulary coverage,
course books, word recycling and corpus. By the end of this chapter, the
framework of the theories is presented to give theoretical answer for the research
problems.
A.THEORETICAL REVIEW
This section is aimed to clarify concepts and concept relations. It covers the
discussion about the nature of word and vocabulary knowledge, vocabulary
coverage, word recycling, course books, and corpus.
1. The Nature of Word and Vocabulary Knowledge
In this part, the concept of word and vocabulary, word knowledge,
vocabulary knowledge, vocabulary distribution, word recycling, word form, word
meaning, and word use are clarified.
a. The Concept of Word and Vocabulary
Everyone should know the importance of knowing what a word is when we
are discussing vocabulary. However, many of us might confuse what vocabulary
There are three definitions of a word according to Carter. The first definition
is an arthographic definition (Carter, 1998: 4). The definition is based on its
system of spelling. A word is defined as any sequence of letters including a
limited number of other characteristics such as hyphen and apostrophe, bounded
on other side by a space or punctuation mark. The second definition of a word
which is stated by Carter is the minimum unit of language. According to Carter
(1998: 5), a word is the minimum meaningful unit of language. Although this
definition is more precise, it assumes an overt relation between individual words
and the concept of meaning. The third definition according to Carter is related to
its pronunciation. The definition is that a word will not have more than one
stressed syllable (Carter, 1998: 6).
In the other side, Nunan (1999) stated that vocabulary is target language
words presented in a list. It means that vocabulary consists of a number of words.
Therefore, it is clear how word and vocabulary differ. One word can stand alone
as a word, but vocabulary should consist of more than one word.
Knowing a word, according to Carter (1998: 5), is “knowing the different meanings carried by a single form”. Thus, he clarifies that it is more accurate to define a word as a minimum meaningful unit of language. In other words, words
can be in different form, but it does not mean that they are counted as different
words.
The concept of lexeme may help us in understanding the concept of word
more clearly. Carter defines lexeme as the abstract unit underlying variants (e.g.
contrasting units of vocabulary in a language’. If we search for a meaning in dictionary, we are looking for lexeme rather than words. Then we would find the
word-forms under the lexeme. The terms lexeme and word-forms are important
theoretical concepts used when theoretical distinctions are needed. If not, we can
just use the terms lexical items, vocabulary items, or items to refer to words.
The discussion above then leads to a concept of lexical words. It can also be
called “full words” or “content words”. It includes nouns (chair, cup), adjectives (lazy, happy), verbs (buy, run), and adverbs (heavily, quickly), bringing high
information content. Lexical words are syntactically structured by grammatical
words. Grammatical words include pronouns (I, they), articles (a, the), auxiliary
verbs (can, may), prepositions (in, at), and conjunctions (but, and). According to
Carter, they are also called “functional word” or “empty words”. In the counting process of tokens, types, and word families in this research, content words and
function words are considered the same, for example do as a content word and do
as a functional word. However, they are discussed and treated as having a
different category in the discussion part.
b. Word Knowledge
In order to get clearer insight of a word, it is necessary to know the aspects
of word knowledge. Generally, the discussions of what is meant by knowing a
word emphasize the knowledge of word forms, their meanings, and their
linguistics features, and the ability to use words in different modalities and varied
linguistic settings (Paribakht and Wesche, 1997: 310). Furthermore, word
knowledge has also been described as consisting of some components. Richards
that knowing a word entails: (1) knowing the degree of probability of
encountering that word in speech or print and the sort of words most likely to be
found associated with the word. This assumption suggests that word knowledge
covers the knowledge of the frequency of the word and its collocation, (2)
knowing the limitations imposed on the use of the word according to variations of
function and situation, (3) knowing a word means knowing the syntactic
behaviour associated with the word. This shows that knowledge of word
comprises the understanding of relationships between specific grammatical
features and the word, (4) knowing a word entails knowledge of the underlying
form of a word and the derivations that can be made from it. This feature implies
that knowledge of words involves the knowledge of word inflections and the use
of affixes, (5) knowing a word entails knowledge of the network of associations
between that word and other words in the language. This indicates that lexical
knowledge includes the understanding of the association between the word and
other words, (6) knowing a word means knowing the semantic value of a word,
and (7) knowing a word means knowing many of the different meanings
associated with a word. This covers the understanding of various meaning based
on the context in which the word is used. The seven aspects provide clear points
that must be considered in learning vocabulary.
c. Vocabulary Knowledge
According to Jordan (1997), it is reasonable that vocabulary is related to all
language learning and learners usually want to increase their store of vocabulary,
regarding it as a measure of their language improvement. The learners tend to
that vocabulary knowledge is very important for them to evaluate their progress in
learning second language.
Knowledge of vocabulary can be viewed from different perspectives.
Among the various views, the notion of “breadth and depth of knowledge‟ and “receptive and productive knowledge‟ is a comprehensive discussion of vocabulary knowledge. In order to get clearer description of vocabulary
knowledge, the following subsections present the discussion of various ideas
given by different experts.
1) Breadth and Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge
A term “breadth of vocabulary knowledge‟ usually refers to the learners’ size of vocabulary. Vocabulary size refers to the number of words that a person
knows (Read, 2000: 31). Learners‟ vocabulary size is most likely related to their ability in understanding both written and spoken texts. This implies that the
greater vocabulary size the learners have, the more easily they understand the
texts they read or listen. This also means that vocabulary knowledge mainly deals
with the range of different words and proper understanding of the words.
Nonetheless, it should not be supposed that if a learner has adequate vocabulary
then all aspects in language learning become easy and it should not also be
thought that significant vocabulary knowledge is always a prerequisite to
language skill performance (Nation and Waring, 1997 in Schmitt and McCarthy,
1997: 6). To this extent, knowledge of words is operationalized as the ability to
translate L2 vocabulary into L1, to define the word correctly, or to say the word
comprehension (Henriksen, 1999: 305). This stage of vocabulary knowledge falls
into the “partial-precise knowledge‟ of vocabulary.
Various studies on vocabulary size, lexical growth, and the number of words
gained overtime have been conducted by different researchers. The focus of such
studies is mainly on measuring the number of vocabulary, such as; counting the
number of words recognized by native speakers (D’Anna, Zechmeister and Hall,
1991; Goulden, Nation and Read, 1999), the amount of words required by native
speakers (Hazenberg and Hulsjin, 1996; Laufer, 1992), the number of words
gained from incidental exposure while reading (Huckin and Coady, 1999; Nagy,
Herman and Anderson, 1985), and the amount of words learned by applying
different exercises, techniques and strategies (Avila and Sadoski, 1996; Cohen
and Aphek, 1980). Such research, however, does not lead to sufficient
understanding of vocabulary acquisition and does not explain how individual
words are acquired (Schmitt, 1998: 282). This condition underlies the emerge
depth of knowledge perspective which likely clarifies the issue.
The result of a study conducted by Goulden, Nation, and Read (1990) show
that educated English native speakers knows around 2,000 word families. The
native speakers add 1,000 word families to their vocabulary per year. However, it
is possible for learners of English as a second language (non-native speakers).
According to Schmitt (2000), the first 2,000 most frequent types of English is
referred as the level for the basic initial goal of second language learners.
However, only the first 1,000 most frequent types needs to be recognized by
elementary level students and 2,000 most frequent types needs to be recognized
Henriksen (1999) in his research stated that depth of knowledge, on the
other hand, emphasizes more on the quality of the learners‟ vocabulary knowledge covering the full understanding or rich meaning representation of a
word. The full understanding or rich meaning of a word can be gained by looking
at its relations or associations with other words and its contexts. A depth
knowledge continuum includes knowledge of the word’s syntagmatic and
paradigmatic relations with other words (Laufer and Paribakht, 1998: 367). The
focus of studies on depth of knowledge is different from that of breadth
knowledge. It focuses on individual words rather than on the overall growth of
vocabulary (Schmitt, 1998: 282). It means that the aspect of depth of knowledge
stresses more on the learners’ knowledge of individual words including its referential meanings and its relations to other words. In other words, it most likely
deals with the range of meanings carried by individual words. It also describes
how well the learners understand the appropriate meaning of a word when it is
used in different contexts. Understanding the context in which a word occurs in
particularly needed by advanced learners. It is important for advance learners to
acquire more senses of polysemous words and learn more about possible
collocates, special uses, and so on (Bogaards, 2000: 495). This indicates that they
most likely deal with depth of knowledge vocabulary. By taking into account the
context in which a word occurs, the proper meaning can eventually be found and
understood. For that reason, context constitutes an aspect that is apparently
inseparable from depth of knowledge of vocabulary.
Several researchers (Paribakht and Wesche, 1993, 1997; Read, 1993;
and deeper aspects of lexical knowledge. Using such tests, they assess the aspects
such as; basic understanding, full understanding, correct use, sensitivity to
collocation and word association. Nevertheless, different test models should be
accommodated in order to cover various features of knowledge being tested.
Henriksen (1999: 306) argues the researchers must use the combination of tests
formats tapping distinct aspects of knowledge to describe the learner’s lexical competence related to the aspects of quality or depth of vocabulary knowledge. In
their research, Laufer and Paribakht (1998) classify word knowledge into three
types, namely, passive, controlled active and free active knowledge. Passive
vocabulary knowledge is defined as understanding its most frequent meaning.
Controlled active knowledge is described as a cue recall of the word. And free
active knowledge is referred to spontaneous use of a word in context. The three
aspects show that what they investigate is fairly deeper than merely word
recognition which is the concern of breadth of vocabulary knowledge.
2) Receptive and Productive of Vocabulary Knowledge
Knowledge of essentially needed to support language use. According to
Fromkin, Blair, and Collins (2007), knowledge of a language makes it possible to
understand and produce new sentences. It is the notion of receptive and
productive use of language. It means the term receptive and productive knowledge
of vocabulary become emergence in studying vocabulary.
Laufer and Paribakht (1998) made a clear definition about receptive and
productive of vocabulary knowledge. They stated that receptive and productive of
vocabulary knowledge mainly deals with how well the learner can access and use
Melka (1997) in his research argues that knowing a word is closely related
to the concept of word familiarity or degrees of knowledge. The concept labels
productive knowledge as higher degrees of knowledge. It includes the knowing of
various meanings of a polysemous word and the knowing of collocations or
idioms. The knowledge of phonology, morphology, syntax, lexis and
appropriateness is regarded as very high degrees of familiarity and therefore the
production process needs a more complete set of information (Melka, 1997:
86-87). However, there are various stages of recognition and the boundary of word
recognition is at the stage when the word is stored incompletely or when word
production is still impossible (Melka, 1997: 88). Although in terms of lexicon it is
almost impossible to find a clear and adequate definition of what is meant by
reception and production, Gass and Selinker (2001) made a final remark that
vocabulary knowledge can be best represented as a continuum with the initial
stage being recognition and the final being production. Therefore, reception or
recognition cannot be separated from production but it should be viewed as an
interrelated process.
The two dichotomy can be overtly contradictory to the fact that empirically
the term is commonly used to refer to the passive and active use of language since
vocabulary as the centre of the language, always plays its role in both passive and
active use of language. Laufer and Paribakht (1998) urge to distinguish between
passive/receptive and active/productive vocabulary.
The passive use of language is mostly related to two skills, namely, listening
and reading. This can be seen in that the aim of listening activity is to understand
process of understanding occurs in mind. The language users most likely use their
knowledge of vocabulary to comprehend the meaning of the spoken/written texts.
Researchers agree that word comprehension does not automatically determine the
accuracy of word use and that passive/receptive knowledge generally precedes
active/productive knowledge (Laufer and Paribakht, 1998: 369). At
passive/receptive level, therefore, the language users mostly do not produce any
spoken/written language. That is why it is called the passive use of language.
In contrary, speaking and writing are the other two language skills that is
inseparable from active use of language. In speaking, the speaker actively conveys
messages to the listeners. In this case, spoken language is produced. In addition,
writing activity aims at communicating the researcher’s ideas to the reader. Therefore, written language is produced as a mean of conveying the ideas. It
seems clearer now that in listening/reading the listener/reader uses the language
passively, whereas in speaking and writing the language is used actively.
Nation (1990) discussed comprehensively about the receptive and
productive knowledge of vocabulary. He argues that the receptive dimension of
vocabulary knowledge entails (1) being able to recognize it when it is heard or
when it is seen, (2) having an expectation of what grammatical pattern the word
will occur in, (3) having some expectation of the words which will collocate with
it, (4) knowing its frequency and appropriateness, (5) being able to recall its
meaning, (6) being able to make different associations with other related words
(Nation, 1990: 31-33).
On the other hand, productive knowledge also covers some aspects of
knowledge of vocabulary involves; (a) knowing how to pronounce the word, (b)
how to write and spell it, (c) how to use it in correct grammatical patterns along
with the words usually collocate with, (d) how to avoid using low frequency word
too often and use it in suitable situations, (e) how to use the word to stand for the
meaning it represents, and (f) how to be able to think of suitable replacement of
the word (if there are any).
2. Vocabulary Coverage
This research is about vocabulary coverage and its recycling, which deals
with frequency. In the topic of coverage, types, tokens, and word families are the
important terms. Thus, it is important to define what they are.
a. Types and Tokens
According to Nation and Meara (2002), a token or running word is main
term if we are going to count how long a course book is. Nation and Meara (2002)
also define token as all of the words that occur in the course book. For example, a
sentence He was young the way an actual young person is young contains eleven
tokens. Even though the word, for example young appears three times, it should
still be counted every time it occurs again. The same words are counted as a new
word each time it occurs.
In the other hand, if we are counting types, the same words are only counted
once although it occurs more than once. Any occurrence of the same word is not
counted as a new word, but “as another occurrence of the same type” (Nation, 1983: 10). As example before, the sentence He was young the way an actual
word young appears three times, but only counted as one type. After the first
occurrence, the words young are not counted again.
Based on the definition above, the same words with different meaning are
counted as one type. Due to the reason of counting, which is related to vocabulary
learning, words like I’ll, I’m, and let’s are counted as having two types and two
tokens. Words like student’s and family’s (possession) are also counted as having
two types and two tokens. Numbers and proper nouns are also excluded. The
analysis and interpretation is only limited to English words only in the material
presentation of the book.
b. Word Family
Word family is crucial for systematic approach in vocabulary teaching and
deciding the vocabulary load of texts which will be used (Bauer and Nation,
1993). To be able to count word family, lemma is needed to understand first. A
lemma is a set of related words which have the stem form and inflected forms that
come from the same part of speech (Nation and Meara, 2002). For example do,
does, did, done, doing are under the same lemma because their stems are the
same, and they are all verbs. Furthermore, affixes and suffixes whose the same
stems are also included in word family. Words under the same word family do not
have to be in the same part of speech.
Nation and Meara (2002) also argue that there are some groups of words
which are usually used together such as single words. Some of them are not
analyzed into parts, but learned and used as complete units. Such words are called
multi-word units (MWUs). One criteria of MWU is that no word in the unit can be
meaning is given to an MWU, such as in phrasal verbs (give up), compounds
(freeze-dry), and idioms (burn the midnight oil)’. However, in this research, MWU is counted as separate words.
c. Vocabulary for Junior High School Learners
As the target level of the course books being used in this research is the
second grade of Junior High School students, we need to understand the
requirement number of vocabulary form them. Based on the guidelines of SMP
Curriculum of English, graduates of Junior High School are supported to master
vocabulary in order to be able to communicate whether in spoken or written form.
The graduated students of Junior High School are expected to master 1000 types
/lemma after finishing their study.
Although in recent curriculum, Indonesia government did not clearly
mention the exact size of vocabulary that should be mastered by Junior High
students, according to Nation in David Aline (2001), the words level for Junior
High School is around 1000 words. Based on 1994 curriculum, at the Junior High
level, the objective is that by the end of the program, the students will have
developed English language skills of reading, listening, speaking, and writing in
thematic situations in accordance with their individual developmental levels and
interests, using 1,000 word-level and appropriate structures (Depdikbud, 1994b),
and the objective at the Senior High level is that by the end of the program, the
students will have developed English language skills of reading, listening,
speaking, and writing in thematic situations in accordance with their individual
developmental levels and interests, using 2500 word-level and appropriate
in the first grade will acquire at least 500 words, 300 words in the second grade,
and 200 words in the third grade.
Since the researcher focused on the second grade of Junior High School as
the course book’s user, the vocabulary requirement to be mastered for them are
around 800 words. The researcher has already used sets of West’s General Service List (GSL) which covers first 1,000 words (GSL_1), second 1,000 words (GSL_2)
and academic word lists (AWL) for advanced learners. Each of the words is a
headword representing a word family. Bauman and Culligan (1995) had already
made a version of GSL ranked in frequency order. The researcher used Bauman
and Culligan’s list of frequency order in GSL_1 to figure out how far the course books will deal with suitable vocabulary for Junior High School learners.
3. Word Frequency
In this research, word frequency refers to how many times a word occurs in
a course book and in what context it occurs. In another word, we can call it as
frequency. According to Nation (1983), most frequency count is based on a
sample of text with at least one million words. Frequency itself has its own
purpose. It provides a rational basis for learners vocabulary learning, like what is
stated by Nation and Waring (1997). Frequency information provides a rational
basis for making sure that learners get the best return for their vocabulary learning
effort by ensuring that words studied will be met often (p. 17). Thus, it is very
important to know the frequent words in a course book before teachers use a
certain course book and ensure that the vocabulary learned is useful for the
Other experts also note the role of frequency in vocabulary learning.
According to Coady and Nation (1988), word frequency in a course book has
some effects on some learners. Ten times in minimum is enough to have an effect
on them. There is no exact number of frequencies which contributes to vocabulary
acquisition, but the more the better in subsequent level (Nation and Wang, 1999).
However, Pienemann and Johnston’s model, as stated in Gass and Mackey (2002), suggests that regardless the frequency of input one receives, the acquisition of
communicative value will hardly depend on particular developmental order.
Otherwise, it will be kept and made available when one is ready for processing
and use (Gass, 1997). It means that high frequency input does not necessarily
bring effects on one’s acquisition of the input.
Learners can also learn words from the context in which they occur. It
provides clues for learners to guess the meaning of unfamiliar words. However,
the result of learning words from context is not as great as it is expected. Although
it tends to be low, if hundreds or perhaps thousands of unfamiliar words are met,
it could result in learning a number of words. And frequent words should have
effect on learners (Coady and Nation, 1988). Thus, presenting the same words
frequently in some contexts will provide opportunities for learners to acquire
vocabulary.
According to Thomas, Pfister, and Peterson (2004) words with high
frequency usually includes functional/structural words like in, to, of, and for.
High-frequency words tend not to contain conceptual validity for an individual
word or for the text where the words occur. Words with medium frequency are
al 2004). In this medium-frequency group, some commonly used content words
may be found. He also states that words with low frequency tend to contain higher
informational value than words with higher frequency. The size of group of word
types which occur only once is called ‘hapax legomena’. It indicates word learning and vocabulary richness of a text (Holmes, 1994).
Nation (2002: 6) identifies four criteria of word frequency and range,
namely, high frequency words, academic words, technical words, and low
frequency words.
a. High Frequency Words
The words in this stage are about 2,000 word families and include most of
the 176 function words and content words. In this stage, the words can account for
80% to 95% of the running words in a text. However, it depends on what kind of
text is being counted.
According to Nation (2006), teaching and learning vocabulary with high
frequency can be divided into four strands, namely meaning focused input,
meaning focus output, language focused learning, and fluency development.
1) Meaning-focused Input
Nation and Meara (2002) suggest that meaning focused input is included in
incidental vocabulary learning through reading and listening. In order for this
strategy to occur, non-native speakers should meet three conditions. First, only a
small amount of unknown vocabulary is allowed in a text, around two per cent, or
one unknown word in 50 (Hu and Nation, 2000). Second, the non-native speakers
Third, there should be more deliberate attention to the unknown word to increase
the learning.
In terms of the familiarity of a text, Nation (2006) suggests that teachers can
make use of specially written or simplified material with appropriate language
level, containing around 95% familiar words. Those texts can be used in reading
and listening activities. In class, teachers‟ instruction and interaction with learners are also a good source of listening input. If teachers use high vocabulary words,
then learners have enough opportunities for vocabulary learning.
If an extensive reading program is well-managed, well-designed, it can also
provide opportunities to learn and develop vocabulary knowledge. A good
extensive reading program, based on what Nation and Wang (1999) state, a)
provides interesting materials in which learners know 98% of the running words,
b) inspires learners to read at least one book every two weeks, c) encourages
learners to read at least three books at the same level before reading those at
higher level, d) encourages learners to learn the unknown words in the texts
deliberately, and e) facilitates learners to talk and write about what they read with
enough amount of time, not much.
2) Meaning-focused Output
Learning from meaning-focused output refers to learning through speaking
and writing, from receptive skill to productive skill. According to Nation and
Meara (2002), the use of vocabulary in productive skill can be increased by
designing activities which encourage learners to use new vocabulary, providing
meanings of unknown words, and encouraging learners to use partly known words
in speaking and writing to increase their knowledge of the words.
Negotiation of meaning is a powerful aspect in learning vocabulary through
speaking (Nation, 2006). However, the proportion of negotiation of words learned
through spoken communication activities is still small. Nation adds that to design
speaking tasks which facilitate vocabulary learning, some considerations should
be put into account. Those are: i) the target vocabulary should be included in the
written input, ii) the vocabulary should be used when performing the tasks, iii) it
is necessary to provide various opportunities in the task for learners to use the
vocabulary, iv) learners are required to use the vocabulary in different way from
the one in the written input.
Learning from meaning-focused output can also happen in writing activities.
(Nation, 2006) proposes that useful writing activities require written or spoken
output as a source of information to write about. For example, the Internet is a
good media for learning vocabulary since it provides learners opportunities to
communicate and discuss through writing which includes negotiation of
vocabulary. Besides, synthesizing information from some texts can also be a
useful written input as a source of vocabulary learning.
3) Language-focused Learning
(Nation, 2006) explains that vocabulary learning though language focused
learning occurs in many opportunities, such as giving deliberate attention through
activities like intensive reading, making use of word cards, pre-teaching of
learning is in intensive reading activities. Intensive reading requires teachers and
learners to work together in a text, looking at the language features and content.
From vocabulary perspective, teaching unknown words can be solved by
pre-teaching them, giving the meanings directly, giving training in using strategies
of guessing from context, analyzing word parts, and using dictionary. The
selection of which one to use depends on whether it is high frequency or low
frequency word, whether it is important in the text, the nature of the word, and the
context in the text.
4) Fluency Development
For sure, for fluency development, unknown words are not included.
Learners do not learn new vocabulary, but learn how to make the best use of
vocabulary that they already know or learn before. According to Nation and
Meara (2002), developing vocabulary fluency needs several conditions. It requires
familiar materials in a large number, focuses on the message, and enough pressure
to learn at higher level. Vocabulary fluency development does not focus
specifically on vocabulary or grammar anymore. Above that, it aims to develop
fluency in listening, speaking, reading, or writing.
Nation and Meara add that there are two approaches in developing
vocabulary fluency. The first approach is repetition. It involves repeated practice
on the same material so that learners can perform it fluently. The activities can be
repeated reading, 4/3/2 technique (learners speak for four minutes, three minutes,
and two minutes about the same topic, but to different learners), the best recording
(learners make repeated attempts to record their best-spoken text), and rehearsed
