#1 Reaction Paper Page 1
#1 Reaction Paper on SLA
Brenda Epifani
Second-language Acquisition
Prof. Marisa Gambardella
January 15, 2015

#1 Reaction Paper Page 2
Introduction
In Definition-based Versus Contextualized Vocabulary Learning (Amirian & Momemi,
2012) L2 vocabulary acquisition is discussed in the context of direct instruction versus incidental vocabulary acquisition . L2 vocabulary acquisition has been abundantly researched, yet there is still no generally accepted theory on how it occurs( Saville-Troike, 2012, p.11) , or how it is done with the most efficacy, due to lack of agreement among experts in the field of Second Language Acquisition
(SLA). Intentional vocabulary learning refers to activities that aim at vocabulary development (Shahrzad & Derakhshan, 2011), and incidental vocabulary acquisition refers to learning something such as vocabulary as a by-product, which in this research study is reading.What is the best method to teach L2 vocabulary? Beyond the different approaches used by linguistics, psychologists, and theorists to explain such an enigma, the single idea of vocabulary acquisition has two major issues embedded within it: acquisition through direct instruction of vocabulary
(intentional, through giving definitions and/or translations) and incidental vocabulary acquisition through exposure to context (Nation, 2001). Nation discusses the acquisition of vocabulary as the biggest challenge L2 learners face. This paper reports on which method of L2 vocabulary acquisition was deemed most efficient and effective, based on a study carried out in Iran, and compares that information with other recent studies and findings.

#1 Reaction Paper Page 3
The Study
The study mentioned above involved 103 first-year high school through preuniversity female students in Iran, girls age 13 to 19, who were randomly assigned to one of two groups: contextualized and decontextualized vocabulary learning.
These two groups were located at different schools. Prior to the experiment, the girls were tested using the Oxford Placement Test and were assessed to be at an elementary level of English. Students at one school were taught how to infer meaning from unknown vocabulary by using the context the word was given in ( contextualized learning). In addition, they were taught word prefixes and suffixes, and cohesive devices such as transition words to aide in their understanding of the discourse as they attempted to determine meaning of unknown vocabulary in texts they were presented with. Students at the other school were taught the definitions of the unknown vocabulary using rote learning memorization techniques(decontextualized0, where the new vocabulary word was presented with a definition or translation. Then, they were given the reading that had the vocabulary words in it, where they could see the words being used in context.
Results showed that the deconceptualized, or definition-based, group outperformed the participants in the contextualized group by a small margin. It must be noted though that the deconceptualized group also outscored, by a small margin, the contextualized group on the pre-test that was given to each group before the experiment began. Nevertheless, this study goes on to suggest that context clues

#1 Reaction Paper Page 4 are not as helpful as definitions when getting learners at an elementary level of
English to understand the right meaning of new lexicon. An interesting aspect from the resulting test scores from the older girls in the study, who scored higher than the younger girls in the study, showed they were somehow better at guessing the definition using context clues, which suggests this skill is stronger in those with greater L1 proficiency; or, that the more words one knows, the better one becomes at understanding words in context.
Analysis Proponents of context-based learning argue that vocabulary learning is more than individual word learning, and that by learning words in context, the learner acquires not only
“linguistic knowledge of a word, such as phonetic, syntactic and semantic rules, but also the knowledge of how to use the word properly in context” (Amirian &
Momemi, 2012). This method produces a depth in vocabulary. In contrast, in definition-based learning, only one definition or synonym or a translation of the word in the native language is provided, resulting in knowledge of the word being rather shallow in nature, and this limited understanding would not increase comprehension of the text containing the new vocabulary words(Amirian & Momemi,
2012), yet this provides breath of vocabulary, as it makes it possible to learn many more words because only one use of a word is initially learned. Vocabulary knowledge is considered to have these two primary dimensions of depth and breadth, and are argued to be interconnected structurally and functionally (Qian, 1999).

#1 Reaction Paper Page 5
Both types of vocabulary acquisition have drawbacks though. The limited information provided in single usage definitions and translation makes it easier to learn more words, because it reduces the amount of information needed to classify a word in one's memory, but it leads to errors between the definition and the meaning the word conveys in context. Contextualized vocabulary learning, on the other hand, leads to errors in defining a word correctly, and therefore impedes understanding of text (Amirian & Momemi, 2012).
In another study on this exact topic, performed in Malaysia (Wei & Attan,
2014), both treatment groups led to significant vocabulary learning, however participants showed better vocabulary gain in the post-test after undergoing the vocab in context treatment. Interview findings indicate that participants preferred the more cognitively-challenging vocab in context approach, in contrast to the definition-based group, whose participants found their studies to be boring and ineffective. Perhaps that is why there is distinct reluctance by educators trained in the communicative paradigm to implement decontextualized word-learning activities such as the study of word and definition pairs (Horst & Cobb, 2006 ).
Could it be that both methods are equally important, and it depends on the learner's need as to which method should be utilized, meaning long-term vs. shortterm vocabulary acquisition? Krashen brings this point up in his video introduction to SLA theory (video , The Power of Reading, 2012). Dr. Steve Krashen, a big

#1 Reaction Paper Page 6 proponent of increasing L2 vocabulary acquisition through reading, states that
Sustained Silent Reading (SSR)- compelling reading on a narrowed subject matter the learner is keenly interested in, done for five to fifteen minutes per day - can increase TOEIC and TOEFL scores by fifteen points a month when reading is done long-term. But long-term is not defined. Krashen bases his statement on studies done by Elley and Mangubhai (1983) where SSR was studied in remote islands in the
Fiji’s. In these studies 234 pupils followed the normal structured English language program, which put little emphasis on reading. After pre-test were given, and SSR implemented, post test results after eight months showed that pupils exposed to many stories via SSR progressed in reading and listening comprehension at twice the normal rate, and confirmed the hypothesis that high-interest story reading had an important role to play in second language learning. Here the time frame of eight months is given, to help gauge the notion of long-term. A definition of short-term has not been defined. While this study is not an exact replica of the study in Iran, where in addition to reading, instruction was given on prefixes, suffixes, and transition words, the results are interesting.
Currently, technological advances have turned what was once a boring but necessary activity in the L2 classroom into something far more motivating and effective. With the advent of new online electronic applications such as Quizlet, electronic flash cards which also incorporate vocabulary quizzes and games for each vocabulary word, new studies need to be performed that take into account the

#1 Reaction Paper Page 7 effects of this new technology on L2 vocabulary acquisition, which compare vocabulary acquisition with new methods versus reading (understanding words through context).
Conclusion Due to the nature of high-stakes testing, where scores from the
SAT, SSAT, and TOEFL can determine a student's future educational possibilities, L2 vocabulary acquisition is perhaps the most important aspect to modern SLA. This significance of vocabulary acquisition by ESL students is illustrated by Wilkins
(1972) in his quote “Without grammar, little can be conveyed, without vocabulary, nothing can be conveyed” (p.
111). Is it L2 input, SSR, interaction, communicative tasks, non-communicative electronic exercises, list learning, repetition or a combination of all of those techniques? Based on conversation with
ESL students while teaching test prep courses, nothing produces as much anxiety as the dreaded vocabulary sections of those all-important tests. Instructing students on vocabulary acquisition techniques and strategies is essential for their success on those tests. The discussed recent studies on the subject attest to this importance of this matter, yet these studies do not incorporate modern technology into the equation when comparing context-learned vocabulary vs. the definition/translation approach. List learning or paired-associate can be effective techniques for learning the large number of words in a short period of time
(Fitzpatrick, Al-Qarni, Meara, 2008), especially when done through electronic platforms. For example, Marzano and Brown (2007) engaged in over 60 studies

#1 Reaction Paper Page 8 conducted that investigated the effect of using online games in the classroom to teach new vocabulary. The results of the study indicated a 20 percentile increase in students achievement. Correlating that result with SSR is the next step in understanding efficacy in L2 vocabulary acquisition. In light of new technology being incorporated into the ESL classroom, it would appear that relying solely on reading to develop English vocabulary is not the most effective way to expand L2 vocabulary. Perhaps the answer is not either/or, as these studies suggested, but both: a direct, definition-based approach using technologic advances, combined with incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading, as a way to maximize vocabulary power and the learning of English.
References
Amirian, S. S., & Momeni, S. M. (2012). Definition-based Versus Contextualized
Vocabulary Learning. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 2(11), 2302-2307. doi:10.4304/tpls.2.11.2302-2307
WONG SZE WEI1, s., & ATTAN, A. (2014). Comparing Intentional Vocabulary Learning
Strategies of Rote-Copying versus Read- Plus. 3L: Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 20(2), 67-79.
Horst, M. & Cobb,T., 2006. Editorial: second language vocabulary acquisition.The
Canadian Modem Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes,
63,1 (September/septembre), 1-12.
Elley, W. & Mangubhai, F., 1983. The impact of reading on second-language learning.
Reading Research Quarterly. Vol. 19, No.1, Autumn, 1983.
Lightbrown, P. & Spada, N. (2013). How Languages are Learned. Print. Oxford
University Press. Oxford, UK.
Saville-Troike, M. (2012). Introducing Second Language Acquisition. Print.

#1 Reaction Paper Page 9
Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK.
Qian, D. D. (1999). Assessing the roles of depth and breadth of vocabulary knowledge in reading comprehension. Canadian Modern Language Review/La revue canadienne des languesvivantes, 56(2), 282-308.
Krashen, Dr. S. (2012). The Power of Reading: “Language and Literacy Development in Bilingual Situations”. [Youtube video]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch v=2Rx_ZJwZCo0#t=289
Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: a reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity
(ed.), In P. Robinson, Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 258-
286). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nation, I. S. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Shahrzad, A., & Derakhshan, A. (2011). The Effect of Instruction in Deriving
Word Meaning on Incidental Vocabulary Learning in EFL Context. World
Journal of English Language. 1(1), 68-79.
Fitzpatrick, T., Al-Qarni, I., &Meara, P. (2008). Intensive vocabulary learning: A case study. Language learning journal, 36(2),239-248.
Wilkins, D. A. (1972). Linguistics in language teaching. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Marzano, Robert J., John L. Brown (2007). The Art and Science of Teaching: A
Comprehensive Framework for Effective Instruction. Published by ASCD.