Explore the vast range of titles available.

This study examined how well second language (L2) recall and recognition vocabulary tests correlated with a reading test, how well each vocabulary test discriminated between reading proficiency levels, and how accurate each test was in predicting reading proficiency when compared with corpus studies. A total of 116 college-level learners of English as a foreign language took a reading test and 2 vocabulary size tests: meaning recall and meaning recognition. Participants were divided into 4 reading proficiency levels based on the reading scores. The authors correlated the reading scores with the 2 vocabulary scores, compared the 4 reading groups on each vocabulary test, and compared the vocabulary size of each of the reading proficiency groups with corpus studies. Both vocabulary tests were good predictors of reading, but the recognition test fared slightly better. The authors introduce the notion of 'comprehension vocabulary' and suggest that a recall test is more appropriate for measuring sight vocabulary while a recognition test is more appropriate for measuring comprehension vocabulary. (Verlag, adapt.).

The field of vocabulary studies in first language (L1) and second language (L2) development has seen remarkable growth in recent years, with researchers and practitioners alike recognizing the critical role that lexical knowledge plays in language proficiency [...]

We explore the relationship between second language (L2) learners’ vocabulary size, lexical text coverage that their vocabulary provides and their reading comprehension. We also conceptualize “adequate reading comprehension” and look for the lexical threshold for such reading in terms of coverage and vocabulary size. Vocabulary size was measured by the Levels Test, lexical coverage by the newest version of Vocabulary Profile and reading comprehension by a standardized national test. Results show that small increments of vocabulary knowledge contribute to reading comprehension even though they hardly improve text coverage. We suggest two thresholds: an optimal one, which is the knowledge of 8,000 word families yielding the coverage of 98% (including proper nouns) and a minimal one, which is 4,000–5,000 word families resulting in the coverage of 95% (including proper nouns).

The study investigates whether comprehension of derived words in text context requires a complete understanding of word parts. It explores comprehension of derived words as a function of learner proficiency and contextual clues. Ninety English-as-a-foreign-language learners at three proficiency levels participated in three successive tests representing three clues conditions, absence of clues, availability of syntactic clues, and availability of syntactic and semantic clues. They had to supply the meaning of 22 derived pseudowords constructed with nonword stems and 22 frequent affixes—for example, stacement , gummful. The meanings of the nonword stems were provided. Test scores were compared by 3 (proficiency level) × 3 (clue condition) analysis of variance with repeated measures. The results showed effects of both variables, proficiency and clues. The largest increase in comprehension scores occurred with the addition of syntactic clues. The results imply that derived forms of familiar base words can be understood even when learners’ receptive morphological knowledge is not complete.

This commentary is a response to Stuart Webb's article \"The lemma dilemma: how should words be operationalized in research and pedagogy?\" (same journal issue).

Four papers by Charles Browne, Rachael Ruegg & Cherie Brown, Makoto Yoshii and Junko Yamashita were presented in the morning session of the Third Annual JALT Vocabulary SIG Vocabulary Symposium in Fukuoka, Japan on June 14, 2014. As discussant, it is my pleasure to comment upon each manuscript. These lexical researchers originate from all over Japan: Tokyo, Akita, Kumamoto and Nagoya. Their lexical topics are related to three themes that are central to vocabulary research: selection, acquisition and testing. The papers are concerned with the types of words that should be selected for teaching, with the optimal conditions for vocabulary acquisition and with instruments that measure lexical proficiency, or are used in lexical research. After commenting on each paper in turn, I shall present a few suggestions for their future research.

This paper examines issues pertaining to lexical difficulty of texts, responding to issues in the following paper, among others: McLean, S. (2021). The coverage comprehension model, its importance to pedagogy and research, and threats to the validity with which it is operationalized. Reading in a Foreign Language, 33, 126–140.

It is important in the design of the vocabulary component of a teaching program that teachers are able to discover the state of their learners’ vocabulary knowledge. It is also important that researchers can draw on a variety of vocabulary measures to investigate the nature of vocabulary growth. This study focuses on a controlled production measure of vocabulary consisting of items from five frequency levels, and using a completion item type like the following. The garden was full of fra flowers. The controlled-production vocabulary-levels test was found to be reliable, valid (in that the levels distinguished between different proficiency groups) and practical. There was a satisfactory degree of equivalence between two equivalent forms of the test.