Article published in:
Approaches to learning, testing, and researching L2 vocabularyEdited by Stuart Webb
[ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics 169:1] 2018
► pp. 95–114
Loanword proportion in vocabulary size tests
Does it make a difference?
Batia Laufer | University of Haifa
Tami Levitzky-Aviad | University of Haifa
We investigated the effect of English-Hebrew loanwords on English vocabulary test scores when the number of loanwords in the test is random and when it is representative of their proportion in the vocabulary lists from which the test items were taken. 303 EFL learners, speakers of Hebrew as L1, at three L2 proficiency levels, received tests with no loanwords, with a representative number of loanwords and with a random number of loanwords in four modalities: word form recall, word meaning recall, word form recognition, word meaning recognition. Though different effects were found for different modalities and different language proficiencies, the score increases from the representative loanword test version to the random loanword version were low and the effect sizes of the differences were very low. We suggest that the inclusion of loanwords in vocabulary tests may not inflate the true vocabulary knowledge score.
Keywords: loanwords, cognates, random number of loanwords, representative number of loanwords, vocabulary size tests, L2 vocabulary testing, loanword effect on vocabulary test
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.The study
- 2.1Research aim and questions
- 2.2Participants
- 2.3Instruments, procedure and data analysis
- The original – the ‘random number of loanwords’ version
- The ‘non loanword’ test version
- The ‘representative number of loanwords’ version
- 3.Results
- 4.Discussion
- 5.Concluding remarks
- Notes
-
References
Published online: 16 April 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.00008.lau
https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.00008.lau
References
Aviad-Levitzky, T., Laufer, B., & Goldstein, Z.
In preparation). A new test of computer adaptive test of size and strength (CATSS): A validation study.
Cobb, T.
Cobb. T. Lextutor
Retrieved from lextutor.ca/vp/ ‘ongoing unpublished development work’
Daulton, F. E.
Elgort, I.
Jordan, E.
Laufer, B., & Nation, P.
Laufer, B., & Goldstein, Z.
Laufer, B., Elder, C., Hill, K., & Congdon, P.
Laufer, B., & McLean, S.
McLean, S., Hogg, N., & Kramer, B.
McLean, S., Kramer, B., & Beglar, D.
McLean, S., & Kramer, B.
Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D. & Clapham, C.
Webb, S., Sasao, Y., & Ballance, O.
(2017) The updated Vocabulary Levels Test: Developing and validating two new forms of the VLT. ITL – International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 168(1), 34–70. Available on http://www.edu.uwo.ca/faculty-profiles/docs/other/webb/NVLT-VERSION-B.pdf.
Cited by
Cited by 7 other publications
Noreillie, Ann-Sophie, Britta Kestemont, Kris Heylen, Piet Desmet & Elke Peters
Noreillie, Ann-Sophie, Britta Kestemont, Kris Heylen, Piet Desmet & Elke Peters
Otwinowska, Agnieszka, Małgorzata Foryś‐Nogala, Weronika Kobosko & Jakub Szewczyk
Peters, Elke
Peters, Elke, Tom Velghe & Tinne Van Rompaey
Silva, Breno B. & Agnieszka Otwinowska
Snoder, Per & Batia Laufer
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.