CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
2.4 Previous studies on vocabulary in the EFL context
The number of studies on vocabulary acquisition had increased during the past ten years when the importance of vocabulary learning was rediscovered and gained significant attention (e.g., González-Fernández & Schmitt, 2019; Nation, 2001, 2013;
Schmitt, 2014; Sukying, 2017, 2018; 2020; Nontasee & Sukying, 2021a, 2021b;
Webb, 2005, 2008; Laufer, 1992).
More recently, Al-Masrai and Milton (2012) studied 92 Saudi Arabia university learners’ vocabulary sizes in their first and fourth years. The findings demonstrated that Saudi Arabia university learners have around 2,000 to 3,000 words when they enter university and graduate with a vocabulary of around 5,000 words. Despite this progress, their vocabularies are not up to the level required by the local curriculum. In addition, the average level of Saudi university learners is slightly below the level of fully fluent EFL learners. This study highlighted the need for teachers to reflect on and respect students’ English level and knowledge in their teaching practice. In the same way, Alqarni (2018) measured forty-five Saudi male students with five years of study as English Language and Translation majors’ productive vocabulary knowledge.
Productive Vocabulary Levels Test: Version A was administered to the subjects during the last two weeks of their final semester. Overall results showed, with no
27
exceptions, poor productive vocabulary sizes under the five frequency bands. It was evident that participants’ performances were highly affected by the word-frequency level in all test bands. Immediate intervention is required to improve learners’
performance and to prevent such poor performance among future students.
Webb (2008) examined the relationship between receptive and productive vocabulary size very recently. The experimental design expanded upon earlier methodologies by using equivalent receptive and productive test formats with different receptive and productive target words to provide more accurate results. The results showed that total receptive vocabulary size was larger than productive vocabulary. When responses were scored for fuller knowledge, receptive vocabulary size was also found to be greater than productive vocabulary size in each of the three-word frequency bands, with the difference between receptive and productive knowledge increasing as the frequency of the words decreased. Also, Laufer and Goldstein (2004) studied 435 L2 learners and investigated whether the hierarchy was valid and which strength modality best correlated with classroom language performance. The study focused on the aspect of word meaning to check a combination of four aspects, including passive recognition, active recognition, passive recall, and active recall. The results showed that passive recall was the best predictor of classroom language performance and that growth in vocabulary knowledge was different for each strength modality. It was also revealed that the four different aspects of knowledge were closely related and can promote learning a word. Therefore, there is a relatively positive relationship between receptive and productive knowledge of a word.
In the Thai EFL context, Mungkonwong & Wudthayagorn (2017) investigated 484 Thai freshmen from four public universities and three private universities across Thailand. This study focused on Thai freshmen who had just finished their 12 years of basic education. The objective of the study was to use a set of Bilingual English-Thai Version of Vocabulary Size Test (VST) to assess their vocabulary size and examine the relationship between vocabulary size and years of study. The results showed that Thai freshmen had enough vocabulary to cope with essential language use. The size was quite impressive because it was larger than the requirement stated in the basic core curriculum and the first recommended threshold of 3,000-word families. This size would be
28
sufficient for Thai first-year students to perform basic language skills encountered at a university. In a similar research background, Pringprom & Obchuae (2011) studied the relationship between vocabulary size and reading comprehension. The subjects were thirty freshmen from a private university. The findings revealed that students did not have a large enough vocabulary size for the university level in which 2,000-word levels were required. A positive correlation between vocabulary size and reading comprehension was reported. In addition, Pringprom (2012) investigated more on students’ vocabulary size. Her subjects were eighty-one freshmen enrolling in the second semester. The result was also similar to the previous study in that students still did not have sufficient vocabulary size to cope with their current education level.
Sukying (2017) studied receptive and productive affix knowledge of 486 8th to 11th- grade students in a public school affiliated with a university in northeastern Thailand.
Three tools (RAK, MPAK, and LPAK) were used to assess EFL learners’ vocabulary knowledge. The results showed that EFL learners’ receptive and productive performance on affix knowledge is positively correlated. That is, the results provide evidence that receptive affix knowledge can promote productive affix knowledge and highlight the importance of affix knowledge in word teaching and learning. In the same way, Sukying (2018b) studied the acquisition of affixes in L2 English learners. This study focuses on productive affix knowledge and 32-word family, the relationship between productive affix knowledge and vocabulary in L2 Learners in the Thai context. The participants were 62 English majors, and two tests were conducted successively: 1) The Vocabulary knowledge Scale and Productive Vocabulary Levels Test, and 2) the Productive Affix Knowledge Task. The results showed that participants could rarely recall all forms of word families. Participants also showed an incomplete understanding of word families, which knowledge seems to be incremental. Overall, the study provides evidence that vocabulary knowledge can facilitate the learnability of words.
Furthermore, Nirattisai and Chiramanee (2014) studied the relationship between vocabulary learning strategies and vocabulary size among 257 Thai university students from six different majors using two tools: vocabulary learning strategies
29
questionnaire and English-Thai bilingual vocabulary test. The study showed that among the 39 vocabulary learning strategies, two advanced strategies, 18 intermediate strategies, and 19 low-level strategies are mainly used by learners. The extent to which participants used the strategies for overall vocabulary learning was related to their vocabulary size. In addition, Komol & Sripetpun (2014) reported the English vocabulary learning strategies used by second-year university students at a public university. The results revealed that determination strategies were the most frequently used strategies, whereas all subjects less often used social strategies. A series of t-tests revealed a significant difference at the 0.01 level between the students with high and low vocabulary size and frequency of use of vocabulary learning strategies.
Correlation analysis showed a relationship between vocabulary learning strategy use and vocabulary size score. The study provided evidence that teachers should recognize the importance of vocabulary learning strategies and encourage learners to apply them to vocabulary learning.
Most recently, Nontasee and Sukying argued the positive relationship between multiple aspects of word knowledge (2021a, 2021b). Their studies focused on three categories of vocabulary, both receptively and productively: word parts, form- meaning links, and collocations. The results revealed an interdependent relationship between all aspects of word knowledge and showed that receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge are essential bases for word knowledge growth. These findings confirm previous research showing that the aspects of vocabulary knowledge are interrelated; in other words, learning vocabulary takes place on a developmental continuum (Nation, 2013; Nontasee & Sukying, 2021a; Schmitt & Meara, 1997;
Sukying, 2017).