Incidental and Intentional Vocabulary Learning: A Case Study of Meaning-Given, Meaning-Inferred with MC, and Pure Meaning-Inferred Methods on the Retention of L2 Word Meanings in a Chinese University
Education Journal
Volume 2, Issue 4, July 2013, Pages: 138-148
Received: Jun. 8, 2013; Published: Jun. 30, 2013
Views 3790      Downloads 359
Author
Qin LI, College of Foreign Languages, China Three Gorges University, China
Article Tools
PDF
Follow on us
Abstract
This paper reports a case study investigating and comparing three word-learning methods [i.e. Meaning-Given, Meaning-Inferred with Multiple Choices (Meaning-Inferred with MC as below), and Pure Meaning-Inferred] in two modes of learning (i.e. incidental and intentional learning, ICL & ITL respectively as below) in terms of the retention of L2 word meanings in a Chinese University. Findings suggest that the mode of ITL led to significantly higher retention than the mode of ICL did. However, in terms of different word-learning methods, different results appeared. It has been suggested that it is crucial for teachers to balance the use of the two learning modes, input more modifications directing students to process the lexical information more elaborately, and put more emphasis on the functions of rehearsal and reactivation of new lexical information.
Keywords
ICL, ITL, Word-Learning Methods, Retention of L2 Word Meanings
To cite this article
Qin LI, Incidental and Intentional Vocabulary Learning: A Case Study of Meaning-Given, Meaning-Inferred with MC, and Pure Meaning-Inferred Methods on the Retention of L2 Word Meanings in a Chinese University, Education Journal. Vol. 2, No. 4, 2013, pp. 138-148. doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20130204.16
References
[1]
Huckin, T. and Coady, J., Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: A review, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1999, 21:181-193.
[2]
Lewis, M., The Lexical Approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications, 1994.
[3]
Fraser, C. A.., Lexical processing strategy use and vocabulary learning through reading, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1999, 21:225- 241.
[4]
Fukkink, R. G., Blok, H., & de Glopper, K., Deriving word meaning from written context: A multicomponential skill, Language Learning, 2001, 51:477- 496.
[5]
Hulstijn, J. H., Retention of inferred and given word meanings: Experiments in incidental vocabulary learning. In Vocabulary and Applied Linguistics, P. J. L. Arnaud & H. Bejoint, Eds. London: Macmillan, 1992, 113-125.
[6]
Berlyne, D. E., Carey, S. T., Lazare, S. A., Parlow, J., & Tiberius, R., Effects of prior guessing on intentional and incidental paired-associate learning, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1968, 7:15-32.
[7]
Forlano, G., Hoffman, M. N. H., Guessing and telling methods in learning words of a foreign language, Journal of Educational Psychology, 1937, 28:632-636.
[8]
Luppescu, S., & Day, R. R., Reading, dictionaries, and vocabulary learning, Language Learning, 1993, 43:263-287.
[9]
Mondria, J. A., The effects of inferring, verifying, and memorizing on the retention of L2 word meanings, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2003, 25:473-499.
[10]
Craik, F. I. M. & Lockhart, R. S., Levels of processing: A framework for memory research, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1972, 11:671-684.
[11]
Eysenck, M.W., Incidental learning and orienting tasks. In Handbook of Research Methods in Human Memory and Cognition, C. R. Puff, Eds. New York: Academic Press, 1982, 197-228.
[12]
Hulstijn, J. H., Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity. In Cognition and Second Language Instruction, P. Robinson, Eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001, 258-286.
[13]
Nagy, W. On the role of context in first- and second-language vocabulary learning. In Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition and Pedagogy, N. Schmitt & M. McCathy, Eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997, 64-83.
[14]
Herman, P. A., Anderson, R. C., Pearson, P. D., & Nagy, W. E., Incidental acquisition of word meaning from expositions with varied text features, Reading Research Quarterly, 1987, 22:263-284.
[15]
Bialystok, E., Inferencing: Testing the "hypothesis-testing" hypothesis. In Classroom Oriented Research in Second Language Acquisition, H. W. Seliger & M. H. Long, Eds. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 1983, 104-123.
[16]
Watanabe, Y., Input, intake, and retention: Effects of increased processing on incidental learning of foreign language vocabulary, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1997, 19:287-307.
[17]
Mackey, A. & Gass, S. M., Second Language Research: Methodology and Design. Mahwah, NJ: London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2005.
[18]
Laufer, B., How much lexis is necessary for reading comprehension? In Vocabulary and Applied Linguistics, P. J. L. Arnaud & H. Bejoint, Eds. London: Macmillan, 1992, 126-132.
[19]
Krashen, S. D., We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input hypothesis, The Modern Language Journal, 1989, 73:440-464.
[20]
Ellis, R., Factors in the incidental acquisition of second language vocabulary from oral input: A review essay, Applied Language Learning, 1994, 5:1-32.
[21]
Schmidt, R., Attention. In Cognition and Second Language Instruction, P. Robinson, Eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001, 3-32.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-983-5186