Cover not available
Article published In:
Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 36:1 (2023) ► pp.307–328

Vocabulary suitability of science TED talks for English for science teaching and learning

ORCID logo | University of Montenegro

With a view to advancing their students’ listening comprehension and vocabulary, English for Science teachers are frequently in search of new and interesting audio and video materials. TED Talks on science topics are a good option for this purpose. But just how suitable, vocabulary-wise, are they for English for Science learners? This study explores the lexical profile of TED Talks on science and compares it against non-science TED Talks and science academic lectures. We use a 5-million-word TED Talk corpus, with a 1.3-million-word science subsection. Of the two categories of TED Talks, it is the science ones that are lexically more similar to science academic lectures. Science TED Talks also feature significantly more technical vocabulary than non-science TED Talks. Reasonable listening comprehension is achieved at 4,000 words for science TED Talks, while ideal comprehension is achieved at 8,000 words for both categories. These results recommend science TED Talks for English for Science listening.

Keywords: lexical profile, word list, coverage, academic vocabulary, technical vocabulary, science TED Talks, TED Talks, English for Science
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical review
    • 2.1Lexical profiling
    • 2.2Reading and listening vocabulary thresholds
    • 2.3Some word lists
    • 2.4Lexical profile of TED Talks
    • 2.5Lexical profile of science academic lectures
  • 3.Research questions
  • 4.Data and method
  • 5.Results and analysis
    • 5.1How many words are needed for reasonable and ideal listening comprehension of science TED Talks (or reading comprehension of their transcripts)?
    • 5.2How accessible are science TED Talks to students with various levels (according to the CEFR) of English as an L2?
    • 5.3How much academic and science vocabulary do science TED Talks contain, especially in comparison with TED Talks on other topics, on the one hand, and science academic lectures, on the other hand?
  • 6.Pedagogical implications
  • 7.Limitations of the study
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 20 March 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/resla.20062.vuk
References
Abdulrahman, T.
(2018) TED Talks as listening teaching strategy in EAP classroom. The Asian ESP Journal, 14 (6), 60–80.Google Scholar
Anthony, L.
(2014) AntWordProfiler (Version 1.4.1) [computer software]. Waseda University.Google Scholar
Bauer, L., & Nation, P.
(1993) Word families. International Journal of Lexicography, 6 (4), 253–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brezina, V., & Gablasova, G.
(2013) Is there a core general vocabulary? Introducing the New General Service List. Applied Linguistics, 36 (1), 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Browne, C., Culligan, B., & Phillips, J.
(2013) The New General Service List. [URL] [Accessed 1 September 2019].
(2014) The new academic world list. [URL] [Accessed 1 September 2019].
Capel, A.
(2015) The English vocabulary profile. English profile in practice, 5 1, 9–27.Google Scholar
Cobb, T.
(2018) Familizer + Lemmatizer v.2.0. [computer software]. [URL] [Accessed 1 May 2018].
Cobb, T., & Horst, M.
(1999) Vocabulary sizes of some city university students. Journal of the Division of Language Studies of City University of Hong Kong, 1 1, 59–68.Google Scholar
Council of Europe
(2001) The common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Coxhead, A.
(2018) Vocabulary and English for specific purposes research: Quantitative and qualitative perspectives. Routledge.Google Scholar
(2000) A New Academic Word List. TESOL, 34 (2), 213–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coxhead, A., Dang, T. N. Y., & Mukai, S.
(2017) Single and multi-word unit vocabulary in university tutorials and laboratories: Evidence from corpora and textbooks. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 30 1, 66–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coxhead, A., & Hirsch, D.
(2007) A pilot science-specific word list. Revue Française de Linguistique Appliquée, 12 (2), 65–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coxhead, A., & Walls, R.
(2012) TED Talks, vocabulary, and listening for EAP. TESOLANZ Journal, 20 (1), 55–67.Google Scholar
Crossley, S. A., Cobb, T., & McNamara, D. S.
(2013) Comparing count-based and band-based indices of word frequency: Implications for active vocabulary research and pedagogical applications. System, 41 (4), 965–981. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dang, T. N. Y.
(2018a) A hard science spoken word list. ITL – International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 169 (1), 44–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018b) The nature of vocabulary in academic speech of hard and soft-sciences. English for Specific Purposes, 51 1, 69–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dang, T. N. Y., Coxhead, A., & Webb, S.
(2017) The academic spoken word list. Language Learning, 67 (4), 959–997. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dang, T. N. Y., & Webb, S.
(2014) The lexical profile of academic spoken English. English for Specific Purposes, 33 1, 66–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Douglas, S. R.
(2015) The relationship between lexical frequency profiling measures and rater judgements of spoken and written general English language proficiency on the CELPIP-General test. TESL Canada Journal, 32 (9), 43–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eldor, T.
(2018, January 27) Data reveals: What makes a TED talk popular? Towards Data Science. [URL]Google Scholar
Fraser, S.
(2007) Providing ESP learners with the vocabulary they need: Corpora and the creation of specialized word lists. Hiroshima Studies in Language and Language Education, 10 1, 127–143.Google Scholar
Gardener, D., & Davies, M.
(2014) A new academic vocabulary list. Applied linguistics, 35 (3), 305–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Green, T. M.
(2015) The Greek & Latin roots of English (5th ed.). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Jin, N. Y., Ling, L. Y., Tong, C. S., Sahiddan, N., Philip, A., Azmi, N. H. N., & Tarmizi, M. A.
(2013) Development of the engineering technology word list for vocational schools in Malaysia. International Education Research, 1 (1), 43–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Khani, R., & Tazik, K.
(2013) Towards the development of an academic word list for applied linguistics research articles. RELC journal, 44 (2), 209–232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kwary, D. A., & Artha, A. F.
(2017) The academic article word list for social sciences. MEXTESOL, 41 (4), 1–11.Google Scholar
Laufer, B.
(1989) What percentage of text lexis is essential for comprehension? In C. Laurén & M. Nordman (Eds.), Special language: From humans thinking to thinking machines (pp. 316–323). Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Laufer, B., & Nation, P.
(1995) Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied linguistics, 16 (3), 307–322. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laufer, B., & Ravenhorst-Kalovski, G. C.
(2010) Lexical threshold revisited: Lexical text coverage, learners’ vocabulary size and reading comprehension. Reading in a foreign language, 22 (1), 15–30.Google Scholar
Lei, L., & Liu, D.
(2016) A new medical academic word list: A corpus-based study with enhanced methodology. English for Academic Purposes, 22 (1), 42–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, X., & Li, L.
(2015) Characteristics of English for science and technology. In X. Du, C. Huang & Y. Zhong (Eds.) Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Humanities and Social Science Research (pp. 161–165). Atlantis-Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindqvist, C., Gudmundson, A., & Bardel, C.
(2013) A new approach to measuring lexical sophistication in L2 oral production. In C. Bardel, C. Lindqvist & B. Laufer (Eds.), L2 vocabulary acquisition, knowledge and use: New perspectives on assessment and corpus analysis (pp. 109–126). EuroSLA.Google Scholar
Liu, C. Y., & Chen, H. H. J.
(2019) Academic spoken vocabulary in TED talks: Implications for academic listening. English Teaching & Learning, 43 (4), 353–368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liu, J. Y., & Han, L.
(2015) A corpus-based environmental academic word list building and its validity test. English for Specific Purposes, 39 1, 1–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, L.
(2014) English for science and technology. In V. Bhatia & S. Bremner (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language and professional communication (pp. 332–468). Routledge.Google Scholar
Milton, J.
(2010) The development of vocabulary breadth across the CEFR levels. In I. Bartning, M. Maisa & I. Vedder (Eds.), Communicative proficiency and linguistic development: Intersections between SLA and language testing research (pp. 211–232). EuroSLA.Google Scholar
Minshall, D. E.
(2013) A computer science word list [MA thesis, Swansea University]. Swansea University. Available at DE Minshall. [URL]
Moini, R., & Islamizadeh, Z.
(2016) Do we need discipline-specific academic word lists? Linguistics Academic Word List (LAWL). Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 35 (3), 65–90.Google Scholar
Morris, L., & Cobb, T.
(2004) Vocabulary profiles as predictors of the academic performance of teaching English as a second language trainees. System, 32 (1), 75–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nation, P.
(1983) Testing and teaching vocabulary. Guidelines, 5 1, 12–25.Google Scholar
(2006) How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review, 63 (1), 59–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) The BNC/COCA word family lists. [URL] [Accessed 1 April 2018].
(2013) Learning vocabulary in another language (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nation, P., & Waring, R.
(1997) Vocabulary size, text coverage and word lists. Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy, 14 1, 6–19.Google Scholar
Nurmukhamedov, U.
(2017) Lexical coverage of TED Talks: Implications for vocabulary instruction. TESOL Journal, 8 (4), 768–790. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parkinson, J.
(2013) English for science and technology. In B. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes (pp. 155–173). Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Read, J., & Nation, P.
(2006) An investigation of the lexical dimension of the IELTS speaking test. IELTS research reports, 61: 207–231.Google Scholar
Schmitt, N., Xiangying, J., & Grabe, W.
(2011) The percentage of words known in a text and reading comprehension. The Modern Language Journal, 95 (1), 26–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Takaesu, A.
(2013) TED Talks as an extensive listening resource for EAP students. Asian-Focused ELT research and practice: Voices from the far edge, 4 1, 150–162.Google Scholar
Valipouri, L., & Nassaji, H.
(2013) A corpus-based study of academic vocabulary in chemistry research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12 (4), 248–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Zeeland, H., & Schmitt, N.
(2012) Lexical coverage in L1 and L2 listening comprehension: The same or different from reading comprehension? Applied Linguistics, 34 (4), 457–479. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vuković-Stamatović, M.
(2020) Vocabulary complexity and reading and listening comprehension of various physics genres. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 16 (3), 487–514. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, J., Liang, S., & Guang-chun, G.
(2008) Establishment of a medical word list. English for Specific Purposes, 27 1, 442–458. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y.
(2012) An exploration of vocabulary knowledge in English short talks: A corpus driven approach. International Journal of English Linguistics, 2 1, 33–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Webb, S. A., & Chang, A. C. S.
(2012) Second language vocabulary growth. RELC Journal, 43 (1), 113–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
West, M.
(1953) A general service list of English words. Longman.Google Scholar
Wingrove, P.
(2017) How suitable are TED Talks for academic listening? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 30 1, 79–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, J. D.
(2015) The TED word list: An analysis of TED Talks to benefit ESL teachers and learners. Royal Roads University (Canada).Google Scholar