The Development of Passive and Active Vocabulary i

AppliedLinguistic:19/225S-27I©OxfordUniversityPress1998TheDevelopmentofPassiveandActiveVocabularyinaSecondLanguage:SameorDifferent?BATIALAUFERUniversityofHaifaThestudyinvestigatesthegainsmthreetypesofEnglishasaForeignLanguagevocabularyknowledge,passive,'controlledactive'andfreeactive,inoneyearofschoolinstructionItalsoexamineshowtheseaspectsoflexicalknowledgearerelatedtooneanother,andwhatchangesoccurintheserelauonshipsafteroneyearGainsinvocabularyweremeasuredbycomparingtwogroupsoflearnerswithsixandsevenyearsofinstructionRelauonshipsamongthethreeareasofknowledgewereinvesngatedbycomparingthemwithinthesameindividualsTheresultsshowthatpassivevocabularysize(asmeasuredbyVocabularyLevelsTest)progressedverywell,controlledacttvevocabulary(asmeasuredbytheproductiveversionoftheLevelsTest)progressedtoobutlessthanthepassiveFreeacuvevocabulary(asmeasuredbyLexicalFrequencyProfile)didnotprogressatallPassivevocabularysizewaslargerthancontrolledacuveinbothgroupsofsubjects,butthegapbetweenthetwotypesofknowledgeincreasedinthemoreadvancedgroupPassiveandcontrolledacuvesizescorescorrelatedwitheachotherwellFreeactivevocabulary,ontheotherhand,didnotcorrelatewiththeothertwotypesTheresultsraiseseveralquestionsaboutthenatureofvocabularyknowledgeandtheeffectofinstructiononvocabularygrowthBACKGROUNDTheprocessoflearningasecondlanguagehasoftenbeendescribedasthelearner'sprogressalongtheInterlanguagecontinuumfromanon-existentknowledgetowardsnative-likecompetencewithoutnecessarilyreachingitIfthisistheviewwetakeofL2acquisition,thenvocabularylearningshouldinvolveagradualincreaseinthelearner'svocabularysizeasthemoststnkingdifferencebetweenforeignlearnersandnativespeakersisinthequantityofwordseachgrouppossessesForexample,graduatesofIsraelihighschoolsareexpectedtohavelearntabout3,500-4,000wordfamiliesinEnglishasaforeignlanguagewhile18-year-oldnativespeakersofEnglisharereported,accordingtomodestestimates,tohavemastered18,000-20,000wordfamiliesattheendofhighschool(Nation1990)WerealizethatprogressinvocabularylearningisnotonlyaquantitativeissueKnowledgeofwordsmayprogressfromsuperficialtodeepatvariousstagesoflearning(Foradiscussionofthenotionofvocabularydepth,seeforexampleRead1993,256PASSIVEANDACTIVEVOCABULARYWescheandPanbakht1996)YetweconsidervocabularysizeratherthandepthtobeofcrucialimportancetolearnersVocabularysizewasfoundtobeagoodpredictorofreadingcomprehension{AndersonandFreebody198J,Koda1989,Coadyetal1993)andtocorrelatewellwithwritingquality{Linnarud1986,Astika1993)ItisanimportantcomponentoffluencyinspeechandlearnersthemselvesassociateprogressinlanguagelearningwithanincreaseinthenumberofwordstheyknowInvestigatingtheprogressoflearners'vocabularysizecanbeofconsiderablevaluetolanguageresearchandpedagogyForexample,teachersmightwanttoknowhowmuchinstructionisneededbeforestudentshavereachedthevocabularythresholdlevelwhichisnecessaryforthecomprehensionofwrittenauthenticproseForEnglish,athresholdof3,000wordfamilies(5,000lexicalitems)wassuggestedfor'minimalcomprehension'(Laufer1992)and5,000wordfamilies{8,000lexicalitems)forreadingforpleasure(HirshandNation1992)ForDutch,ahigherthresholdisclaimedtobenecessaryforasimilarpopulationofuniversitystudents,10,000-11,000lexicalitems(HazenbergandHulstijn1996)Informationonlearners'vocabularysizeatdifferentstagesofinstructioncanshowhowrealistictheexpectationsofagivenlexicalsyllabusare,orwhatwouldconstituteanoptimalsyllabusAsforresearch,sometopicsrelatedtoincreaseinvocabularysizearetherelationshipbetweenvocabularygrowthanddifferentinputconditions,suchascomprehension-basedversusproduction-orientedinstruction,theeffectoflanguagelearningcontext(secondorforeign)onvocabularygrowth,similaritiesanddifferences'betweenthedevelopmentsofpassiveandactivevocabularyAndyetthereareveryfewquantitativestudieswherevocabularysizeismeasuredatdifferentstagesoflanguagelearningoveralongperiodoftimeYoshida{1978)isacasestudywherethefinalvocabularysizeofthesubjectisonly300activewordsOtherstudiesdealingwithvocabularygrowthmostlymeasuresmallincrementsresultingfromdifferenttestingtasks,learningtasks,teachingmethods,orinputconditions{CohenandAphek1981,Palmberg1987,LupeskuandDay1993,Joe1994,Hulstijnetal1996)ThestudiesusuallyinvestigatetheacquisitionofwordswhichhavespecificallybeenchosenfortheexperimentratherthanchangesintheglobalvocabularysizeThepaucityofstudiesintheareaofL2vocabularysizedevelopmentcouldbeduetothedifficultyresearchershaveexperiencedwithdefiningthenatureoflanguageknowledgeandwithdesigmngvalidandreliabletestswhichmeasurethisknowledgeResearchersdifferintheirdefinitionofvocabularyknowledgeYetinspiteofthedifferences,itisneverthelessagreedbymostthatlexicalknowledgeisnotanall-or-nothingphenomenon,butinvolvesdegreesofknowledge.Thedifferencesamongresearcherslieinthecharactenzationofthesedegreesandconsequentlyinthetypesoftestsrequiredtomeasurethem(See,forexample.Nation1990,Read1993,Hennksen1996,Meara1996,WescheandPanbakht1996)Inmostmodels,however,itisacknowledgedthatthelearningofawordusuallyprogressesBATIALAUFER257fromreceptivetoproductiveknow