Abstract

This study explored the differences in receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge in terms of word frequency level and vocabulary size in undergraduate learners of English as a Second Language (ESL). A total of 90 first-year undergraduate engineering students from a semi-urban region in India participated in the study. Two quantitative vocabulary tests, the Receptive Vocabulary Levels Test (Schmitt et al., 2001) and the Productive Vocabulary Levels Test (Laufer and Nation, 1999), were applied sequentially to the students. The first test focused on identifying receptive vocabulary size, while the second test measured productive vocabulary size. Data were analyzed using SPSS software. Results indicate that the students’ receptive word knowledge is higher than their productive word knowledge. Similarly, the students’ receptive vocabulary size is larger than their productive vocabulary size. Furthermore, the difference between their receptive and productive vocabulary size is 27.69%. In order to bridge this gap and increase their vocabulary knowledge and size, we recommend an activity-based, explicit vocabulary teaching approach through self- -learning, group learning and mutual learning in the regular classrooms.Keywords: vocabulary knowledge, word frequency levels, receptive and productive vocabulary size, undergraduate students.

Highlights

  • Successfully learning a language involves, to a large extent, learning its vocabulary

  • The results showed that the overall receptive vocabulary knowledge was broader than the productive knowledge and that the gap between them reduced after one year of instruction

  • The present study aimed to explore the differences in word frequency levels of first–year undergraduate engineering students in a semi–urban region in India and to identify the differences in their receptive and productive vocabulary sizes

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Successfully learning a language involves, to a large extent, learning its vocabulary. In the context of learning English as a second language in India, Dhanavel (2012) suggested the “five S” approach to vocabulary building. “Five S” stands for “sight, sound, source, sense and syntax”. He believes that his “approach offers a practical method for acquiring as large a vocabulary of English for communication as possible” Vasu and Dhanavel (2015) examined the attitude of learners towards vocabulary–building and the choice of sources for vocabulary learning. They stressed the need for raising students’ awareness on the importance of learning adequate vocabulary. Students have to know enough words in a language to communicate effectively

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call