Validation of Lexical Frequency Profiles As a Measure of Lexical Richness in Written Discourse

Abbasian, G .R; Shiri Parizad, M.

doi:10.22061/tej.2011.293

Document Type : Original Research Paper

Authors

G .R Abbasian ¹
M. Shiri parizad ²

¹ TEFL Department, Imam Ali University & Islamic Azad University, South Tehran Branch

² TEFL Department, Islamic Azad University,Takestan Branch,Qazvin,Iran

https://doi.org/10.22061/tej.2011.293

Abstract

Technological developments and their utilities in various areas including education have offered great advantages for man. One of the greatest achievements in this trend has been the innovation in computer software like Lexical Frequency Profiles (LFP) and its pedagogical implications either in teaching or measurement. To take the maximum advantages, this study seeks to validate the LFP as a measure of lexical richness in written discourse of Iranian EFL Learners. 50 students majoring in English Translation participated in this study; each of them was encouraged to develop two compositions on general topics in order to establish VocabProfile indexes. To estimate the reliability of the LFP, the VocabProfile indexes of two writings were correlated, but for the validity purpose, first, a productive version of Vocabulary Levels Test (VLT) was administered and second, the students’ compositions were fed into P_Lex software to elicit P_Lex index. After that, VocabProfile indexes were correlated with VLT scores and P_Lex index separately. The findings of the study revealed that students’ VocabProfile indexes written on two different topics correlated significantly with each other. Because of such a significant correlation coefficients, and the LFP indexes are related to VLT active test and P_Lex index, it is conservatively safe to claim that VocabProfile indexes are to some extent reliable and valid measurement instruments but not strong enough to be used as a stand- alone measure for the assessment of lexical richness. Pedagogically speaking, the LPF is suggested as a relatively reliable and valid measure to be used along with other dependable devices in measuring lexical richness in discourses of various types.

Keywords

20.1001.1.20080441.1390.5.2.7.4

Main Subjects

Curriculum Planning

References

[1] Madsen H., Techniques in testing, Oxford University Press, 1983. [2] Bachman L. and Palmer A., Language testing in practice, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1997. [3] Nation P., Teaching and learning vocabulary, New York, Heinle & Heinle, 1990. [4] Laufer B. and Paribakht T.S., The relationship between passive and active vocabularies: Effects of language learning context, Language Learning, Vol.48, No.3, 1998, pp.365-391. [5] Read J., Assessing vocabulary, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2000. [6] Beglar D., Estimating vocabulary size, JALT testing & evaluation, SIG Newsletter, Vol.4, No.1, April, 2000, pp.2-4. [7] Laufer B. and Nation P., Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production, Applied Linguistics, Vol.16, No.3, 1995, pp.307- 322. [8] Schmitt N., Schmitt D. and Clapham C., Developing and exploring the behavior of two new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test, Language Testing,Vol.18,No.1, 2001, pp.55-88. [9] Saville-Troike M., What really matters in second language learning for academic achievement? TESOL Quarterly, Vol.18, No.2, 1984, pp.199- 219. [10] Alderson J.C., Assessing reading, Cambridge, England, Cambridge University Press, 2000. [11] Hermann F., Differential effects of reading and memorization of paired associates on vocabulary acquisition in adult learners of English as a second language, TESL-EJ, Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language, Vol.7,No.1, 2003, pp.1-16. [12] Read J., Measuring the vocabulary knowledge of second language learners, RELC Journal, Vol.19,No.2, 1988, pp.12-25. [13] Zareva A., Models of lexical knowledge assessment of second language learners of English at higher levels of language proficiency, System,Vol.33, No.4, 2005, pp.547-562. [14] Xue G. and Nation I.S.P., A university word list, Language learning and communication, Vol.3, 1984, pp.215-229. [15] Coxhead A., A new academic word list, TESOL Quarterly, Vol.34, No.2, 2000, pp.213–238. [16] Cobb T., Web VP V2.5, Available at: http://www.lextutor.ac/vp, 2009. [17] Meara P. and Bell., P_Lex: A simple and effective way of describing the lexical characteristics of short L2 texts, Prospect, A Journal of Australian TESOL, Vol.16, No.3, 2001, pp. 5-19. [18] Espinosa M.S., Can P_Lex Accurately Measure Lexical Richness in the Written Production of Young Learners of EFL? Porta Linguarum, Vol.4, 2005, pp. 7-21.

Name *

Email Address *

Affiliation *

Comments *

Security Code *

Technology of Education Journal (TEJ)

Validation of Lexical Frequency Profiles As a Measure of Lexical Richness in Written Discourse

References

References

Send comment about this article

Volume 5, Issue 2 - Serial Number 18
April 2011
Pages 125-131

Validation of Lexical Frequency Profiles As a Measure of Lexical Richness in Written Discourse

References

References

Send comment about this article

Volume 5, Issue 2 - Serial Number 18April 2011Pages 125-131

Volume 5, Issue 2 - Serial Number 18
April 2011
Pages 125-131