Aprendizaje de vocabulario con tres tipos de actividadselección de definiciones, selección de ejemplos y escritura de oraciones. Investigación con estudiantes japoneses de español L2

  1. San-Mateo-Valdehíta, Alicia 1
  1. 1 Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED), Departamento de Lengua Española y Lingüística General
Journal:
Cuadernos CANELA: Revista anual de Literatura, Pensamiento e Historia, Metodología de la Enseñanza del Español como Lengua Extranjera y Lingüística de la Confederación Académica Nipona, Española y Latinoamericana

ISSN: 1344-9109

Year of publication: 2023

Issue: 34

Pages: 51-67

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Cuadernos CANELA: Revista anual de Literatura, Pensamiento e Historia, Metodología de la Enseñanza del Español como Lengua Extranjera y Lingüística de la Confederación Académica Nipona, Española y Latinoamericana

Abstract

This article presents the results of a research project on vocabulary learning in Spanish as L2, carried out with 178 B1-B2 level students from ten institutions in the Tokyo metropolitan area. The aim is (1) to determine which of these three vocabulary-learning activities is more effective: definition-choosing, gap-filling or sentence-writing; in order to check the predictability for effective vocabulary-learning activities of two scales: Involvement Load Hypothesis (Hulstijn and Laufer, 2001) and Technique Feature Analysis (Nation and Webb, 2011); and (2) compare these results with those previously obtained with 1,317 informants, from 27 different L1s (San-Mateo and Andión, 2019). The results showed that Japanese learners who performed sentence-writing, the productive activity, which required more cognitive effort according to the two scales, remembered more words and were able to complete receptive and productive activities significantly better than the definition-choosing group. On the contrary, those who performed definition-choosing, which entailed only receptive knowledge of the words and ranked less on both scales, remembered fewer words, and with worse results in productive activity. These results matched those of the multilingual group.

Bibliographic References

  • Agustín, M. P. (2009). The effect of reading only, reading and comprehension, and sentence writing in lexical learning in a foreign language: Some preliminary results. RESLA, 22, 9-33.
  • Alavinia, P. y Rahimi, H. (2019). Task types effects and task involvement load on vocabulary learning of EFL learners. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 1501-1516.
  • Alcaraz, G. y Almela, A. (2013). The Involvement Load Hypothesis: Its effect on vocabulary learning in Primary Education. RESLA, 26, 11-24.
  • Andión, M. A. y San-Mateo, A. (2018). Tres actividades de adquisición léxica. Resultados en aprendices brasileños de español como lengua extranjera. Calidoscópio, 16(3), 437-449.
  • Bao, G. (2022). Effects of sentence output tasks on EFL vocabulary learning from a bayesian perspective. English Language, Literature & Culture, 7(1), 19-29.
  • Browne, C. (2003). Vocabulary Acquisition through Reading, Writing and Tasks: A Comparison. Tesis doctoral. Temple University Japan.
  • Chaharlang, N. y Farvardin, M. T. (2018). Predictive power of Involvement Load Hypothesis and Technique Feature Analysis across L2 vocabulary learning tasks. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 6(24), 127-141.
  • Consejo de Europa (2002). Marco común europeo de referencia para las lenguas: aprendizaje, enseñanza y evaluación (MCER). Madrid: Secretaría General Técnica del ECD-Subdirección General de Información y Publicaciones, y Grupo ANAYA, S. A.
  • Coomber, J. E., Ramstad, D. A. y Sheets, D. A. R. (1986). Elaboration in vocabulary learning: A comparison of three rehearsal methods. Research in the Teaching of English, 20(3), 281-293.
  • Ehsani, M. y Karami, H. (2022). Comparing the predictive power of involvement load hypothesis and technique feature analysis. International Journal of Language Studies, 16(2), 165-188.
  • Folse, K. S. (2006). The effect of type of written exercise on L2 vocabulary retention. TESOL Quarterly, 40(2), 273-293.
  • Gavett, B. E. y Horwitz, J. E. (2012). Immediate list recall as a measure of short-term episodic memory: Insights from the serial position effect and item response theory. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 27(2), 125-135.
  • Gohar, M. J., Rahmanian, M. y Soleimani, H. (2018). Technique Feature Analysis or Involvement Load Hypothesis: Estimating their predictive power in vocabulary learning. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 47(4), 859-869.
  • Hu, H. M. y Nassaji, H. (2016). Effective vocabulary learning tasks: Involvement Load Hypothesis versus Technique Feature Analysis. System, 56, 28-39.
  • Huang, S., Eslami, Z. y Willson, V. (2012). The effects of task involvement load on L2 incidental vocabulary learning: A meta-analytic study. The Modern Language Journal, 96(4), 544-557.
  • Hulstijn, J. H. y Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the Involvement Load Hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51(3), 539-558.
  • IBM Corp. (2020). IBM SPSS Statistics para Windows, Versión 27.0. Nueva York: IBM Corp.Jin, Z., y Webb, S. (2021). Does writing words in notes contribute to vocabulary learning? Language Teaching Research, https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211062184.
  • Keating, G. D. (2008). Task effectiveness and word learning in a second language: The Involvement Load Hypothesis on trial. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 365-386.
  • Khodaparast, S. M. y Keshmirshekan, M. H. (2021). Task-induced Involvement Load, vocabulary learning and reading comprehension among Iranian intermediate English as a foreign language learners. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 4(11), 200-208.
  • Khoshsima, H. y Eskandari, Z. (2017). Task effectiveness predictors: Technique Feature Analysis vs. Involvement Load Hypothesis. Iranian Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(2), 50-69.
  • Kim, Y. (2008). The role of task-induced involvement and learner proficiency in SL vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 58(2), 285-325.
  • Kondo, H. (2007). The effects of semantic elaboration on SL vocabulary learning. Research Journal of Jin-Ai University, 6, 71-78.
  • Laufer, B. (2017). From word parts to full texts: Searching for effective methods of vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research, 21(1), 5-11.
  • Matanzo, G. (1991). Vocabulario y enseñanza: Estudio de la relación existente entre los métodos empleados y la incorporación del léxico nuevo a la competencia lingüística de estudiantes universitarios puertorriqueños. Tesis doctoral. Universidad de Puerto Rico.
  • Minami, Y. (2021). 第二言語における語彙学習・指導のための2つの枠組み: Involvement Load HypothesisとTechnique Feature Analysis/Two frameworks for vocabulary learning and teaching in second language: Involvement Load Hypothesis and Technique Feature Analysis. Research reports of Kobe City College of Technology, 59, 32-38.
  • Nation, P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Nation, P. y Webb, S. (2011). Researching and analyzing vocabulary. Boston: Heinle.
  • Pichette, F., Serres, L. de y Lafontaine, M. (2012). Sentence reading and writing for second language vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 33(1), 66-82.
  • Reyes, M. J. (1995). Enriquecimiento de la competencia léxica: análisis estadístico. Tesis doctoral. Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria.
  • San-Mateo, A. (2005). Aprendizaje de léxico en español como segunda lengua. Investigación sobre tres métodos. Trabajo Final de Máster. UNED.
  • San-Mateo, A. (2012). Aprendizaje de léxico en español como segunda lengua/lengua extranjera: investigación sobre la efectividad de tres tipos de actividades para aprender vocabulario. Tesis doctoral. UNED.
  • San-Mateo, A. y Andión, M. A. (2019). Eficacia de tres actividades de aprendizaje de vocabulario en español LE/L2: la selección de definiciones, la selección de ejemplos y la escritura de oraciones. Verba hispanica, 27, 209-229.
  • San-Mateo, A. y Chacón, C. (2019). Learning word class in a second language through vocabulary learning activities: definition-choosing, gap-filling, and sentence-writing. Journal of Spanish Language Teaching (JSLT), 6(1), 49-63.
  • San-Mateo, A. y Criado, C. (2021). Receptive and productive vocabulary acquisition: effectiveness of three types of tasks. Results from French students of Spanish. Onomazéin: Revista de lingüística, filología y traducción de la Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, 51, 36-56.
  • Silva, B. B., Kutyłowska, K. y Otwinowska, A. (2021). Learning academic words through writing sentences and compositions: Any signs of an increase in cognitive load? Language Teaching Research.
  • Tahmasbi, M. y Farvardin, M. T. (2017). Probing the effects of task types on EFL learners’ receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge: The case of Involvement Load Hypothesis. SAGE Open, 7(3), 1-10.
  • Teng, M. y Xu, J. (2022). Pushing vocabulary knowledge from receptive to productive mastery: Effects of task type and repetition frequency. Language Teaching Research, 1-19.
  • Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(1), 33-52.
  • Webb, S. y Nation, P. (2017). How vocabulary is learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Yanagisawa, A. y Webb, S. (2021). To what extent does the involvement load hypothesis predict incidental l2 vocabulary learning? A meta‐analysis. Language Learning, 71(2), 487-536.
  • Zou, D. (2017). Vocabulary acquisition through cloze exercises, sentence-writing and composition writing: Extending the evaluation component of the Involvement Load Hypothesis. Language Teaching Research, 21(1), 54-75.
  • Zou, D., Wang, F. L., Kwan, R. y Xie, H. (2018). Investigating the effectiveness of vocabulary learning tasks from the perspective of the Technique Feature Analysis: The effects of pictorial annotations. En Cheung, S. et al. (Eds.). Technology in Education. Innovative Solutions and Practices. ICTE 2018. Communications in Computer and Information Science (pp. 3-15). Singapur: Springer.
Data source: Dialnet