1
ARTICLE SUMMARY 1
Article Summary 1
How lexicon in L1 and L2 affects listening comprehension
Jelena Sanchez
FL663 – June 2014
University of Southern Mississippi
2
ARTICLE SUMMARY 1
Lexical coverage is an estimation of the quantity of words needed in order to
understand written texts or spoken discourse. Although much research has been done on
how vocabulary knowledge affects reading comprehension, there has been less study
done on how vocabulary knowledge affects listening comprehension in both native
languages and second languages. Typically researchers have assumed that the same
conclusions could be made for both reading and listening
understanding written text or
spoken discourse. This study attempts to establish the relationship between lexical
coverage and listening comprehension in both L1 and L2.
Research has shown a connection between lexical coverage and reading
comprehension in a native language. Vocabulary knowledge also plays an important role
in evaluating whether a written text is easy or difficult. Some studies have established a
threshold at which a minimum amount of lexical coverage allows for successful reading
comprehension. Generally, optimal results are achieved with 98% of vocabulary
knowledge of the text, while 95% lexical coverage results in minimal acceptable
comprehension. That represents knowledge of roughly 4,000 to 5,000 word families for
95% vocabulary knowledge, and about 8,000 word families for 98% vocabulary
knowledge. These numbers are greater for comprehension of written text and lower for
watching television. Studies have shown that vocabulary size has a greater impact on
reading comprehension than listening comprehension. This may be due to the way
listeners process information. There are additional factors, such as non-verbal
information, intonation, and repetition, which assist in listening comprehension.
In this study the authors aimed to establish a relationship between vocabulary
knowledge and listening comprehension, and how it differs from reading comprehension.
ARTICLE SUMMARY 1
3
They considered two groups: native and non-native English speakers. Seventy-six
participants took part in the study, most of which were female, all of which were
university students. Participants listened to four short stories told in first person, each less
than 500 words in a recording about two minutes long. Some vocabulary was replaced
with non-words. Comprehension was measured with a 45-minute, multiple-choice test
after hearing the story twice.
The results show that 100% lexical coverage leads to optimal comprehension for
both native and non-native speakers. Adequate comprehension was proven with 90-95%
vocabulary knowledge, though less successfully with non-native speakers. Results varied
for non-native speakers with lower lexical coverage.
Listening comprehension is certainly influenced by lexical coverage in both the
L1 and the L2. Optimal comprehension is achieved when the listener understands 100%
of the vocabulary. Some non-native speakers have better coping skills than others with
unknown words. Their ability to inference, predict, elaborate and use other cognitive
skills affects their comprehension skills. Reading comprehension requires more lexical
coverage than listening comprehension. Although 95% lexical coverage produces very
good results, even 90% allows for considerable discourse ability, only requiring
knowledge of 750 to 2,000 word families.
In this study a spoken rather than a written test may have produced more accurate
results. Since the listeners heard each story twice, results may be higher than if they had
listened only once to each passage. Also, the passages selected were narrative, suggesting
that scores may have been lower if the listeners were required to understand other genres.
ARTICLE SUMMARY 1
4
I think it is important to understand that emphasis on vocabulary knowledge is
necessary in second language instruction and learning. The depth of understanding of
words increases the level of comfort with using the language. Lexical coverage affects
reading comprehension and listening comprehension differently. An instructor should be
able to expect learners to understand the L2 before expecting them to converse, read or
write effectively, because listening comprehension depends on lower lexical coverage.
Studies have shown that higher vocabulary knowledge results in improved
comprehension. This is relevant for language instructors because more effective
comprehension is more likely to interest and engage learners than when comprehension is
a frustrating task.
I am left with further questions after reading this article. If it is ineffective to
speak in the L2 when lexical coverage is low, how does first grade in French immersion
function as effectively as it does when the teacher speaks 100% French after only a few
weeks of lexical coverage? The young students must be overwhelmed with many words
they never heard before throughout the year, yet manage to understand instructions and
expectations, converse effectively with peers, and read and write in French. Instructors of
core French classes are also expected to speak French 100% of the time, yet rarely is it
the case in reality. Students of these classes lose interest very quickly when both lexical
coverage and comprehension is low. Why does the study presented in this article seem to
apply to one case but not the other?
5
ARTICLE SUMMARY 1
References
Van Zeeland, H., & Schmitt, N. (2013). Lexical coverage in L1 and L2 listening
comprehension: The same or different from reading comprehension. Applied
Linguistics, 34(4), 457-479.