Email this article 
EVALUATING L2 VOCABULARY DEVELOPMENT FEATURES USING LEXICAL DENSITY AND LEXICAL DIVERSITY MEASURES
Abstract
Most of the research on lexical measures was conducted in English and conducted similarly in other languages without accurate adaptations to the language being tested. The first objective of this study is to identify differences between applications of lexical density and lexical diversity when tested as in English and when adapted to the language being tested. The second objective is to inspect the effect of acquisition time on intermediate-level second-language learners' lexical density and diversity. In a test-retest study over one year, Arabic Hebrew bilinguals (n=23) wrote argumentative essays, in which lexical density and diversity were analyzed according to two approaches; a conventional approach as in English and an adapted approach more aligned with Hebrew linguistic features. In both approaches, lexical density was calculated as the number of lexical words in proportion to the total number of words and lexical diversity using the type-token ratio (TTR) and Corrected TTR (CTTR). Findings reveal statistically significant differences between the two approaches and the adapted approach allowed for cross-language and interlanguage comparisons. Although no significant increase in lexical density and diversity over the year was found, various patterns for lexical development were observed; at the second time point, students with the lowest level of lexical diversity substantially improved and more essays fell within the lexical density range of a typically written language.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Abdalla, F., Robb, M. P., & Al-Shatti, T. (2010). Stuttering and lexical category in adult Arabic speakers. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 24(1), 70–81.
Abu-Rabiah, E. (2017). Lexical diversity, lexical density and abstract language as measures of acquisition by Negev Bedouin students (15-25) of Hebrew as L2 to Arabic (Master's thesis). Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Israel. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.25444.12167
Abu-Rabiah, E. (2020a). Lexical measures for testing progress in Hebrew as Arab students’ L2. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 16(3), 1096–1114. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.803551
Abu-Rabiah, E. (2020b). The level of abstractness, lexical diversity and lexical density as measures of progress in the acquisition of Hebrew as a second language for Arabic speakers. Oryanut ve-safa [Literacy and Language], 8, 71–93.
Abu-Rabiah, E. (2022). Acquisition of Hebrew lexicon among Negev Bedouin high school students: An empirical account (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel.
Alqahtani, M. (2015). The importance of vocabulary in language learning and how to be taught. International Journal of Teaching and Education, 3(3), 21–24.
Berman, R. A. (2008). The psycholinguistics of developing text construction. Journal of child language, 35(4), 735–771.
Berman, R., & Verhoeven, L. (2002). Cross-linguistic perspectives on the development of text-production abilities: Speech and writing. Written Language & Literacy, 5(1), 1–43.
Berman, R., Nayditz, R., & Ravid, D. (2011). Linguistic diagnostics of written texts in two school-age populations. Written Language & Literacy, 14(2), 161–187.
Bolozky, S., & Berman, R. A. (2020). Parts of speech categories in the lexicon of Modern Hebrew. In R. A. Berman (Ed.), Usage-based studies in modern Hebrew: Background, morpho-lexicon, and Syntax (pp. 265–330). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cann, R. (2000). Functional versus lexical: A cognitive dichotomy. In R. D. Borsley (Ed.), The nature and function of syntactic categories (pp. 37–78). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Carroll, S.E. (1992). On cognates. Second Language Research, 8(2), 93–119.
Chanturidze, M., Carroll, R., & Ruigendijk, E. (2019). Prepositions as a hybrid between lexical and functional category: Evidence from an ERP study on German sentence processing. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 52(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2019.100857
Corver, N., & Van Riemsdijk, H. (Eds.). (2013). Semi-lexical categories: The function of content words and the content of function words. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Crystal, D. (1982). Profiling linguistic disability. London: Edward Arnold.
Dakhi, S., & Fitria, T. N. (2019). The principles and the teaching of English vocabulary: A review. Journal of English teaching, 5(1), 15–25.
Demir-Vegter, S., Aarts, R., & Kurvers, J. (2014). Lexical richness in maternal input and vocabulary development of Turkish preschoolers in the Netherlands. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 43(2), 149–165.
Dillard, J. P., & Pfau, M. (2002). The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412976046
Engber, C. A. (1995). The relationship of lexical proficiency to the quality of ESL compositions. Journal of second language writing, 4(2), 139–155.
Gius, E., Meister, J. C., Meister, M., Petris, M., Bruck, C., Jacke, J., Schumacher, M., Gerstorfer, D., Flüh, M., & Horstmann, J. (2022, January). Catma. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6046763
Gkalitsiou, Z., Byrd, C. T., Bedore, L. M., & Taliancich-Klinger, C. L. (2017). Stuttering on function words in bilingual children who stutter: A preliminary study. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 31(10), 791–805.
Gordon, B., & Caramazza, A. (1982). Lexical decision for open-and closed-class words: Failure to replicate differential frequency sensitivity. Brain and Language, 15(1), 143–160.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1985). Spoken and written language. Victoria: Deakin University Press.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1989). Spoken and written language (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hess, C. W., Sefton, K. M., & Landry, R. G. (1986). Sample size and type-token ratios for oral language of preschool children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 29(1), 129–134.
Jarvis, S. (2002). Short texts, best-fitting curves and new measures of lexical diversity. Language Testing, 19(1), 57–84.
Jarvis, S. (2012). Lexical challenges in the intersection of applied linguistics and ANLP. In C. Boonthum-Denecke, P.M. McCarthy, & T.A. Lamkin (Eds.), Cross-disciplinary advances in applied natural language processing: Issues and approaches (pp. 50–72). Hershey, PA: IGI Publishing.
Jarvis, S. (2013a). Capturing the diversity in lexical diversity. Language Learning, 63(1), 87–106.
Jarvis, S. (2013b). Defining and measuring lexical diversity. In S. Jarvis & M. Daller (Eds.), Vocabulary knowledge: Human ratings and automated measures (pp. 13–34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jarvis, S., & Hashimoto, B. J. (2021). How operationalizations of word types affect measures of lexical diversity. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 7(1), 163–194.
Johansson, V. (2008). Lexical diversity and lexical density in speech and writing: A developmental perspective. Lund Working Papers in Linguistics, 53, 61–79.
Johnson, W. (1939). Language and speech hygiene: An application of general semantics. New York: Institute of General Semantics.
Kalantari, R., & Gholami, J. (2017). Lexical complexity development from dynamic systems theory perspective: Lexical density, diversity, and sophistication. International Journal of Instruction, 10(4), 1–18.
Kim, M. (2021). Considerations and challenges in longitudinal studies of lexical features in L2 writing. Vocabulary Learning and Instruction, 10(2), 82–90. https://doi.org/10.7820/vli.v10.2.kim
Klein, W., Klein, W. W., & Wolfgang, K. (1986). Second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Koizumi, R. (2012). Relationships between text length and lexical diversity measures: Can we use short texts of less than 100 tokens. Vocabulary Learning and Instruction, 1(1), 60–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.7820/vli.v01.1.koizumi
Krejtz, I., Szarkowska, A., & Łogińska, M. (2016). Reading function and content words in subtitled videos. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 21(2), 222–232.
Laufer, B. (1991). The development of L2 lexis in the expression of the advanced learner. The Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 440–448.
Laurén, U. (2002). Some lexical features of immersion pupils’ oral and written narration. Working Papers in Linguistics, 50, 63–78.
Lieven, E. V. M. (1978). Conversations between mothers and young children: Individual differences and their possible implication for the study of child language learning. In N. Waterson & C. E. Snow (Eds.), The development of communication (pp. 173–187). Chichester: Wiley.
Linnarud, M. (1976). Lexical density and lexical variation: An analysis of the lexical texture of Swedish students’ written work. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia: An International Review of English Studies, 7, 45–52.
Linnarud, M. (1986). Lexis in composition: A performance analysis of Swedish leaners’ written English. Malmo: Liber Forlag.
Malvern, D., Richards, B., Chipere, N. and Durán, P. (2004). Lexical diversity and language development: Quantification and assessment. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
McCarthy, P. M., & Jarvis, S. (2007). Vocd: A theoretical and empirical evaluation. Language Testing, 24(4), 459–488.
McCarthy, P. M., & Jarvis, S. (2010). MTLD, vocd-D, and HD-D: A validation study of sophisticated approaches to lexical diversity assessment. Behavior research methods, 42(2), 381–392.
McKee, G., Malvern, D., & Richards, B. (2000). Measuring vocabulary diversity using dedicated software. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 15, 323–337.
Michel, M. C., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2007). The influence of complexity in monologic versus dialogic tasks in Dutch L2. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(3), 241–259.
Milton, J. (2009). Measuring second language vocabulary acquisition. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Nasseri, M., & Thompson, P. (2021). Lexical density and diversity in dissertation abstracts: Revisiting English L1 vs. L2 text differences. Assessing Writing, 47(2), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100511
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press.
O'Loughlin, K. (1995). Lexical density in candidate output on direct and semi-direct versions of an oral proficiency test. Language testing, 12(2), 217–237.
Ortega, L. (2014). Understanding second language acquisition. New York: Routledge.
Perfetti, C. A. (1969). Lexical density and phrase structure depth as variables in sentence retention. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8(6), 719–724.
Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richels, C., Buhr, A., Conture, E., & Ntourou, K. (2010). Utterance complexity and stuttering on function words in preschool-age children who stutter. Journal of fluency disorders, 35(3), 314–331.
Roche, T., & Harrington, M. (2013). Recognition vocabulary skill as a predictor of academic English performance and academic achievement in English. Language Testing in Asia, 3(12), 133–144.
Sarel, C. (1999). Lexical density in spoken and written discourse. In S. Sharvit (Ed.), Studies in ancient and modern Hebrew language (pp. 401–411). Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University.
Schlesinger, J. (2000). The language of the newspaper: Stylistic characteristics in various sections of the written language of daily newspapers. Beer-Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press.
Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shi, R., Werker, J. F., & Cutler, A. (2006). Recognition and representation of function words in English-learning infants. Infancy, 10(2), 187–198.
Snow, C. E., & Uccelli, P. (2009). The challenge of academic language. In D. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of literacy (pp. 112–133). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stubbs, M. (2002). Words and phrases: Corpus studies of lexical semantics. Oxford: Blackwell.
Torruella, J., & Capsada, R. (2013). Lexical statistics and typological structures: A measure of lexical richness. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 95, 447–454.
Treffers-Daller, J., Parslow, P., & Williams, S. (2018). Back to basics: How measures of lexical diversity can help discriminate between CEFR levels. Applied Linguistics, 39(3), 302–327.
Ure, J. (1971). Lexical density and register differentiation. In G.E. Perren, & J. M. Trim (Eds.), Applications of linguistics (pp. 443–452). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vejdemo, S., & Hörberg, T. (2016). Semantic factors predict the rate of lexical replacement of content words. PloS one, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0147924
Vidal, K., & Jarvis, S. (2020). Effects of English-medium instruction on Spanish students’ proficiency and lexical diversity in English. Language Teaching Research, 24(5), 568–587.
Youmans, G. (1990). Measuring lexical style and competence: The type-token vocabulary curve. Style, 24(4), 584–599.
Yu, G. (2010). Lexical diversity in writing and speaking task performances. Applied linguistics, 31(2), 236–259.
Zareva, A. (2019). Lexical complexity of academic presentations: Similarities despite situational differences. Journal of Second Language Studies, 2(1), 71–92.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v26i1.5841
Article Metrics
Abstract view : 1414 timesPDF view: 469 times
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2023 Eihab Abu-Rabiah
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Indexed and abstracted in:
LLT Journal Sinta 2 Certificate (S2 = Level 2)
We would like to inform you that LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching has been nationally accredited Sinta 2 by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia based on the decree No. Surat Keputusan 158/E/KPT/2021. Validity for 5 years: Vol 23 No 1, 2020 till Vol 27 No 2, 2024
This work is licensed under CC BY-SA.
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/llt, e-ISSN 2579-9533 and p-ISSN 1410-7201, is published twice a year, namely in April and October by the English Language Education Study Programme of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.