{"title":"接受性和自由主动词汇的特质发展","authors":"M. Yıldız","doi":"10.33541/jet.v8i1.3319","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present study seeks to explain the role of different essay types and proficiency level based on receptive vocabulary knowledge on learners’ free active vocabulary. The study includes the works done in a 15-week academic term by 26 EFL students with C1 level English proficiency. At the beginning of the research, the participants are applied Vocabulary Size Test (Nation & Beglar, 2007) to determine their receptive vocabulary knowledge and divided into two groups according to their results from VST: the more proficient group who master 8000 or more word families and the less proficient group who master less than 8000 word families. Throughout the semester, they have written two essays on each of two different essay types: comparison-contrast essay and cause-effect essay. In order to determine the participants’ free active vocabulary, two different scores, i.e., detailed Lexical Frequency Profile (Laufer and Nation, 1995) and condensed Lexical Frequency Profile (Laufer, 1995), are calculated in the writings of the participants. The results indicate that neither essay types nor proficiency based on receptive vocabulary knowledge has any significant effect on learners’ free active productive vocabulary.","PeriodicalId":201732,"journal":{"name":"JET (Journal of English Teaching)","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Idiosyncratic Development of Receptive and Free Active Vocabulary\",\"authors\":\"M. Yıldız\",\"doi\":\"10.33541/jet.v8i1.3319\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The present study seeks to explain the role of different essay types and proficiency level based on receptive vocabulary knowledge on learners’ free active vocabulary. The study includes the works done in a 15-week academic term by 26 EFL students with C1 level English proficiency. At the beginning of the research, the participants are applied Vocabulary Size Test (Nation & Beglar, 2007) to determine their receptive vocabulary knowledge and divided into two groups according to their results from VST: the more proficient group who master 8000 or more word families and the less proficient group who master less than 8000 word families. Throughout the semester, they have written two essays on each of two different essay types: comparison-contrast essay and cause-effect essay. In order to determine the participants’ free active vocabulary, two different scores, i.e., detailed Lexical Frequency Profile (Laufer and Nation, 1995) and condensed Lexical Frequency Profile (Laufer, 1995), are calculated in the writings of the participants. The results indicate that neither essay types nor proficiency based on receptive vocabulary knowledge has any significant effect on learners’ free active productive vocabulary.\",\"PeriodicalId\":201732,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JET (Journal of English Teaching)\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JET (Journal of English Teaching)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33541/jet.v8i1.3319\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JET (Journal of English Teaching)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33541/jet.v8i1.3319","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究旨在解释基于接受性词汇知识的不同作文类型和熟练程度对学习者自由主动词汇的影响。该研究包括26名英语水平达到C1级的学生在15周的学期内完成的工作。在研究开始时,采用词汇量测试(Nation & Beglar, 2007)来确定参与者的接受性词汇知识,并根据VST测试结果将参与者分为两组:掌握8000个或更多单词族的较熟练组和掌握8000个以下单词族的较不熟练组。整个学期,他们写了两篇不同类型的论文:比较对比论文和因果关系论文。为了确定参与者的自由主动词汇量,在参与者的写作中计算了两种不同的分数,即详细词汇频率谱(Laufer and Nation, 1995)和简明词汇频率谱(Laufer, 1995)。结果表明,文章类型和基于接受性词汇知识的熟练程度对学习者的自由主动生产词汇没有显著影响。
Idiosyncratic Development of Receptive and Free Active Vocabulary
The present study seeks to explain the role of different essay types and proficiency level based on receptive vocabulary knowledge on learners’ free active vocabulary. The study includes the works done in a 15-week academic term by 26 EFL students with C1 level English proficiency. At the beginning of the research, the participants are applied Vocabulary Size Test (Nation & Beglar, 2007) to determine their receptive vocabulary knowledge and divided into two groups according to their results from VST: the more proficient group who master 8000 or more word families and the less proficient group who master less than 8000 word families. Throughout the semester, they have written two essays on each of two different essay types: comparison-contrast essay and cause-effect essay. In order to determine the participants’ free active vocabulary, two different scores, i.e., detailed Lexical Frequency Profile (Laufer and Nation, 1995) and condensed Lexical Frequency Profile (Laufer, 1995), are calculated in the writings of the participants. The results indicate that neither essay types nor proficiency based on receptive vocabulary knowledge has any significant effect on learners’ free active productive vocabulary.