Assessing lexical proficiency in Russian as a second language using indices of lexical sophistication, diversity, and fluency

IF 0.1 3区 文学 0 LITERATURE
Olesya Kisselev, Mihail Kopotev, Anton Vakhranev
{"title":"Assessing lexical proficiency in Russian as a second language using indices of lexical sophistication, diversity, and fluency","authors":"Olesya Kisselev, Mihail Kopotev, Anton Vakhranev","doi":"10.1111/modl.12998","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Lexical proficiency in a second language (L2) has long been effectively assessed through the measurement of various lexical indices, or textual characteristics that act as observable indicators of such conceptual categories as lexical richness, diversity, sophistication, and fluency. While many studies have established links between these lexical characteristics and levels of overall language proficiency, languages other than L2 English rarely feature in such research. The current study addresses this gap by investigating a less commonly studied language, Russian, while paying specific attention to the operationalization of proficiency through an American Council for the Teaching of Foreign Languages Proficiency Guidelines‐based procedure. The study analyzes eight lexical proficiency indices in a corpus of essays written by learners of Russian at different proficiency levels. Our analyses demonstrate that seven indices (i.e., word length in letters, word length in syllables, word length in morphemes, unique tokens per text, unique lemmas per text, and measure of textual lexical diversity for tokens and for lemmas) changed significantly with the increase in proficiency. Only one index—the proportion of content versus function words—did not reliably track the increase in proficiency. The findings confirm the usefulness of lexical proficiency measures in tracking lexical development in L2 Russian and increase the repertoire of these indices for L2 Russian.","PeriodicalId":42049,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF THE MIDWEST MODERN LANGUAGE ASSOCIATION","volume":"134 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF THE MIDWEST MODERN LANGUAGE ASSOCIATION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12998","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Lexical proficiency in a second language (L2) has long been effectively assessed through the measurement of various lexical indices, or textual characteristics that act as observable indicators of such conceptual categories as lexical richness, diversity, sophistication, and fluency. While many studies have established links between these lexical characteristics and levels of overall language proficiency, languages other than L2 English rarely feature in such research. The current study addresses this gap by investigating a less commonly studied language, Russian, while paying specific attention to the operationalization of proficiency through an American Council for the Teaching of Foreign Languages Proficiency Guidelines‐based procedure. The study analyzes eight lexical proficiency indices in a corpus of essays written by learners of Russian at different proficiency levels. Our analyses demonstrate that seven indices (i.e., word length in letters, word length in syllables, word length in morphemes, unique tokens per text, unique lemmas per text, and measure of textual lexical diversity for tokens and for lemmas) changed significantly with the increase in proficiency. Only one index—the proportion of content versus function words—did not reliably track the increase in proficiency. The findings confirm the usefulness of lexical proficiency measures in tracking lexical development in L2 Russian and increase the repertoire of these indices for L2 Russian.
使用词汇复杂度、多样性和流利度指标评估俄语作为第二语言的词汇熟练度
长期以来,通过测量各种词汇指标或文本特征来有效评估第二语言(L2)的词汇熟练程度,这些指标作为词汇丰富性、多样性、复杂性和流利性等概念类别的可观察指标。虽然许多研究已经建立了这些词汇特征与整体语言熟练程度之间的联系,但除了第二语言英语之外的语言很少出现在这类研究中。目前的研究通过调查一种不太常用的语言——俄语来解决这一差距,同时通过美国外语教学委员会基于指南的程序特别关注熟练程度的操作化。本研究分析了不同水平俄语学习者作文语料库中的八个词汇熟练度指标。我们的分析表明,七个指标(即字母的单词长度、音节的单词长度、语素的单词长度、每个文本的唯一标记、每个文本的唯一引理以及标记和引理的文本词汇多样性测量)随着熟练程度的提高而发生显著变化。只有一个指标——实词与虚词的比例——没有可靠地跟踪熟练程度的提高。研究结果证实了词汇熟练度测量在跟踪二语俄语词汇发展方面的有效性,并增加了这些指标在二语俄语中的使用范围。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Midwest Modern Language Association publishes articles on literature, literary theory, pedagogy, and the state of the profession written by M/MLA members. One issue each year is devoted to the informal theme of the recent convention and is guest-edited by the year"s M/MLA president. This issue presents a cluster of essays on a topic of broad interest to scholars of modern literatures and languages. The other issue invites the contributions of members on topics of their choosing and demonstrates the wide range of interests represented in the association. Each issue also includes book reviews written by members on recent scholarship.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信