acquisition of lexical competence in english as a second language

UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE

FACULTAD DE FILOSOFÍA Y HUMANIDADES

DEPARTAMENTO DE LINGÜÍSTICA

Acquisition of Lexical Competence in English as a Second Language

Informe Final de Seminario de Grado para Optar al Grado de Licenciado en Lengua y Literatura Inglesas

Profesora Guía: Alfonsina Doddis

Tutora: Ximena Tabilo

Alumnos Participantes: Valeria Echeverría

Gregorio Godoy

Carolina Norambuena

Marcela Rivera

Quirian Sani

Eduardo Tapia

Consuelo Toro

Katherine Varas

Javiera Zamora

Santiago, Chile

2007

2

Table of contents

1. Introduction 7

2. Literature review 10

3. The study 20

3.1. Theoretical and descriptive framework 20

3.2. Objectives 29

3.2.1. General objective 29

3.2.2. Specific objectives 29

3.3. Hypotheses 31

3.4. Research questions 31

3.5. Methodology 32

3.5.1. Subjects 32

3.5.2. Elicitation of the data 34

3.5.2.1. Breadth tests 34

3.5.2.1.1. Receptive Breadth test 34

3.5.2.1.2. Productive Breadth test 36

3.5.2.2. Depth 37

3.5.3. Procedure 39

3.5.4. Criteria for the analysis of the data 39

3

4. Discussion of the results 47

4.1. Test results 47

4.1.1. Quantitative results 55

4.1.1.1. Receptive Breadth test results 55

4.1.1.2. Productive Breadth test results 57

4.1.1.3. Depth test results 59

4.1.1.4. Relationship between final marks and correct responses 61

4.1.1.5. Successful and less successful students 63

4.1.2. Qualitative results of the Productive Breadth test 65

5. Conclusions 72

6. Bibliography 78

7. Appendices 84

7.1. Appendix A. Successful and Less successful students 84

7.2. Appendix B. Tests 88

7.2.1. Test 1. Receptive Vocabulary Levels test 88

7.2.2. Test 2. Productive Vocabulary Levels test 93

7.2.3. Test 3. Word Associates test 98

7.3. Appendix C. Correlation Analysis 104

7.4. Appendix D. Test results 106

7.5. Appendix E. Qualitative results 126

7.6. Appendix F. List of Common Mistakes 131

4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

"We would like to deeply thank Professor Alfonsina Doddis for the time and effort spent guiding and reviewing this seminar study. We also would like to express our gratitude to our Tutor Ximena Tabilo, who provided us with useful and helpful assistance. Additionally, we are very grateful to all the participants who collaborated in the development of this research, allowing it to be completed. We acknowledge our professors and classmates for their encouragement, support and patience throughout the duration of this process. We cherish you all”

5

AGRADECIMIENTOS

En primer lugar, quiero agradecer a mi familia, en especial a mis padres por su apoyo, comprensión y cariño, siendo para mí un ejemplo de superación y esfuerzo, ya que sin ellos nada de esto hubiese sido posible. A mis hermanos, por alegrar cada momento con una sonrisa. También quiero agradecer a mis amigos, en especial a Katherine, María José, Daniela y Carolina por estos cuatro años de momentos inolvidables, ya que me han brindado cariño, alegría y apoyo a pesar de todo, tanto en mi vida académica como en mi vida personal. Un profundo agradecimiento a todos aquellos que hicieron este camino mas agradable y feliz.

Valeria Echeverría Santibáñez

Agradezco, en primer lugar, a todos los que aportaron en mi formación académica, en especial a las y los profesores Coty Vivanco, Patricio Novoa, Marco Espinoza y Pascuala Infante por su apoyo y buenos consejos. En segundo lugar agradezco a todos los que ayudaron e hicieron aportes a esta investigación en especial a las profesoras Doddis y Tabilo. Este trabajo y las horas hipotecadas en él, están dedicadas a Beatriz.

Gregorio Godoy Báez

Por sobre todas las cosas quiero agradecer a Dios ya que sin su infinito amor y ayuda nada de esto hubiese sido posible. A mis padres y a mi hermano por ser los pilares fundamentales en mi vida y por brindarme su amor y apoyo incondicional. A mi madre por su dedicación y esfuerzo para ver mis sueños hechos realidad. A Felipe, por su amor y comprensión durante todos estos años y hacer mi vida aún más feliz. Agradezco a mis profesores por entregarme sus conocimientos y formarme como profesional, especialmente a Daniel Muñoz por su buena voluntad y disposición para ayudarme en todo momento. A todas las personas del departamento de Lingüística, en especial a Patricia Osorio por estar siempre dispuesta a ayudarme. A mis amigos y compañeros por entregarme cariño y alegría y hacer de estos años una etapa inolvidable.

Carolina Norambuena Muñoz

Quiero expresar mi gratitud a Dios por ayudarme en todo momento; al igual, agradezco a mi hijo Benjamín, a quien amo infinitamente, por alegrar todos los dias de mi vida; a mis padres y a mi abuela, quienes me infundieron valores, me apoyaron y creyeron siempre en mi y por supuesto a mi esposo Dankan a quien amo profundamente. También a mis profesores, especialmente a Daniel Muñoz, quienes fueron cruciales en esta etapa. Finalmente, pero no menos importante, quiero agradecer a mis amigos y compañeros, ya que sin ellos esta etapa no hubiese sido igual.

6

Marcela Rivera Lazo

Quisiera agradecer a mis padres y amigos por todo el apoyo y comprensión que me han dado en este proceso; a los profesores, en especial a Daniel Muñoz y Pascuala Infante, por su constante apoyo, ánimo y orientación; a la señorita Patricia Osorio por brindarnos su ayuda en el momento apropiado, dándonos palabras de aliento cuando más lo necesitábamos; a todos aquellos que cedieron sus horas de clases para tomar las muestras y a los alumnos que las tomaron seriamente. Este trabajo no hubiera sido lo mismo sin su colaboración.

Quirian Sani Vegas

A mis padres, Nora y Eugenio, por su amor, comprensión y apoyo irrestricto. A mis hermanas por su paciencia y tolerancia. A los Gajardo Ocampo, mi segunda familia. A mis grandes amigos Lucas, Natalia y Giovanna junto con sus respectivas familias, gracias por todos estos años y los que vendrán. A Patricio Novoa, Rosita Rodríguez y Daniel Muñoz por su apoyo más allá de lo académico. A mis compañeros, por haber hecho posible este trabajo. Finalmente, y de manera muy especial, a mi abuela.

Eduardo Tapia Fuentes Quiero, en primer lugar, agradecer a Dios por todo lo que me ha ayudado y escuchado. Tambien quiero agradecer a mi familia por todo su apoyo en esta y en todas las etapas de mi vida, en especial a mi mamá y a mi papá por todo su amor, consejo y comprensión. A David, por su incondicional amor y apoyo que me ha entregado en estos 6 años. Gracias a mis compañeros y amigos con los que pasé tantos momentos inolvidables. Finalmente, a mis profesores, gracias por su tiempo y dedicación. A todos los quiero mucho.

Consuelo Toro Navarro

Gracias a todas las personas que estuvieron conmigo durante estos años. A mi familia por su apoyo y cariño. A mis padres, sobretodo a mi madre por su amor, paciencia y preocupación. A mis amigos por sus consejos, comprensión y compañía, en especial Val, Coté, Dani, Bárbara y Carito. Y a mis profesores por inspirarme y motivarme a lo largo de este proceso, en particular Miss Coty Vivanco y Miss Rosita Rodríguez.

Katherine Varas Armijo

Quisiera agradecer a mi familia, pilar fundamental en mi vida, por su amor, apoyo y comprensión. Especialmente a mis padres por su incondicional apoyo en todos los ámbitos, por su amor y completa dedicación. A mis profesores, especialmente, a Miss Ximena Tabilo, que no solo contribuyeron en mi formación académica y profesional, sino también, personal. A mis amigos y compañeros, en especial, a los chicos de la ex - sección 3: gracias por compartir conmigo su amistad y alegría.

7

A todos ustedes, mi mas profunda gratitud y aprecio…sin todos ustedes no habría llegado adonde estoy.

Javiera Zamora Chandia

1. Introduction

Applied Linguistics developed in Europe in the 1950’s as an interdisciplinary field of

research whose object of study was different aspects of language use. Thus, it focuses on

the relationship among psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic theory, together with social

practice, and the acquisition and use of language in various contexts. Furthermore, it

includes not only Second Language Acquisition (SLA) and fields related to it, but also first

language acquisition and areas such as communication disorders, language and the media,

discourse and conversational analysis, sign language research, etc.

Three aspects of foreign language study are relevant to Applied Linguistics. First and

closely related to stylistics, Applied Linguistics focuses on the acquisition of

communicative competence in a foreign language, in terms of the ability to decode and

understand messages and the value of their respective parts. The second important aspect

has to do with the social problems associated with the use of a foreign language by non-

native speakers in the target country. Finally, the third aspect regards what Pennycock

(1990, 1997) considered 'critical applied linguistics', i.e., a critical attitude towards the

research and practice of language in discourse, pedagogy and education.

Kramsch (1999) defined Applied Linguistics as an interdisciplinary field that

mediates between the theory and the practice of language study, investigating the

8

relationship between language forms and use and between different kinds of discourse. This

discipline includes Second Language Acquisition among its fields of study, which “focuses

on the acquisitional aspect of language learning and teaching, both inside and outside the

classroom” (Kramsch 1999: 314). SLA research has to do with the processes that take place

within learners when acquiring second or more languages, as well as with the ability to

speak and read them in normal everyday situations. The term ‘second language’ (L2)

acquisition generally refers to a language acquired apart from the mother tongue, either in

natural or instructional settings where that language is the official language. In contrast,

‘foreign language’ (FL) acquisition refers to languages learnt only in instructional settings.

Thus, Applied Linguistics includes Second Language and Foreign Language Acquisition

within its field of study. Additionally, “SLA is interested in the nature of [...] learner

languages and their development throughout life, as well as in bilingualism, language

attrition and loss” (Kramsch 1999: 315). Nevertheless, in this study, the terms Foreign and

Second Language Acquisition are used as synonyms.

Depending on the researcher’s point of view, Applied Linguistics can centre on

multiple disciplines such as linguistics, anthropology, psychology, education, or literature,

apart from a variety of social and critical theories. On the other hand, SLA research is

based on psycholinguistics, including sociocultural and sociolinguistic theory. Because of

this, the L2 or FL learner is viewed as a social and cultural being whose psychological

processes are experienced with the interaction with others and then are internalized as

individual cognitive processes.

Among applied linguists, cross-sectional studies have been more frequent than

9

longitudinal ones in the study of learner’s lexical competence because of researchers’ time

restrictions. Therefore, there is scarce research work on the vocabulary acquisition process

and the circumstances in which it develops. In turn, this research study is also a cross-

sectional study that intends to measure the vocabulary knowledge of learners of English as

a second or foreign language. Since this research had to be conducted only in one year, it

was not possible to track the development of the lexical competence of the same subjects

throughout the four years of their academic programme. Thus, to compensate for this

limitation, students from the four different levels of the programme, i.e., Pre-intermediate,

Intermediate, Post- intermediate, and Advanced, were subjects of the study. In order to

assess the subjects’ vocabulary knowledge, three different vocabulary tests were applied:

the Receptive, and Productive Vocabulary Levels Test, and the Word Associates Test. The

assessment results obtained were analysed and described in quantitative terms to prove the

hypotheses that vocabulary knowledge increases together with the level of communicative

competence, and in qualitative terms in order to describe the types of errors made by the

subjects in the production of vocabulary. Finally, conclusions were drawn from the

discussions of the results and limitations of the study were identified.

Concerning its formal arrangement, the present research report has been organised

into seven sections. This first section, introduction, is followed by the literature review,

which is centred on the revision of different proposals on vocabulary acquisition. Thirdly,

the study section is subdivided into the theoretical and descriptive framework of the

research, the objectives, hypotheses, research questions of this report, methodology used to

obtain the corpus, subjects selected, description of the tests applied, procedures followed to

10

obtain the data, and the different criteria for the analysis. Fourthly, the discussion of the

results in quantitative and qualitative terms is presented. Finally, the following section

summarises the conclusions of the study, followed by section 6 and 7, which present

references and appendices, respectively.

2. Literature review

Accurate definitions of the concepts of vocabulary learning and lexical competence are

necessary in order to establish a specific theoretical basis for research on vocabulary

learning. For this purpose, Jiménez (2002) intends to organize and clarify approaches and

definitions of vocabulary acquisition proposed by different authors, and to assess different

approximations to this problem. Richards (1976) was one of the first applied linguists to

propose characterizations of the concepts of vocabulary learning and of lexical competence,

i.e., “knowing a word”. According to Richards, knowing a word implies knowledge of

semantic and grammatical aspects related to a word, such as collocational and syntactic

patterns as well as its different semantic relations.

An account of research on lexical competence can be organized in terms of four main

investigative approaches. First, authors such as Beheydt (1987), Carter (1987), Robinson

(1989), Nation (1990), Laufer (1991), among others, have focused on defining or listing

dimensions centred on different aspects of lexical competence, covering a wide variety of

features, such as psycholinguistics factors that interfere in this process. Secondly, authors

such as Meara (1996a, 1996b) and Henriksen (1999) suggest other possibilities for the

definition of lexical competence, proposing more restricted dimensions of lexical

11

competence, i.e., lexical organization and breadth of lexical competence. The proposals

made by Henriksen are Partial-Precise Knowledge, Depth of Knowledge and Receptive-

Productive vocabulary. Thirdly, authors such as Robinson (1989), Lennon (1990), and

Schmitt (1995) intend to apply definitions and views of lexical competence to vocabulary

teaching. Finally, authors such as Schmitt and Meara (1997), and Wesche and Paribakht

(1996) have made empirical studies related to different aspects of lexical knowledge, like

breadth or size in L1 and L2.

Most definitions of lexical competence are based on a list of dimensions that are not

integrated into a semantic or psycholinguistic theory. In addition, some dimensions related

to lexical competence are not taken into account in most investigations, such as the

semantic dimension, which includes variables like figurative language or idiomatic

expressions. This dimension is essential in order to understand not only the linguistic

knowledge of a word, but also the underlying psycholinguistic processes involved in that

knowledge.

Read (2000) deals with vocabulary assessment and its implications. First, he suggests

three dimensions for vocabulary assessment that constitute the principal framework

proposed by this linguist as a basis for a range of lexical assessment procedures. The first

dimension corresponds to Discrete versus Embedded tests. A Discrete test is considered as

a measure of vocabulary knowledge or use as an independent construct whereas an

Embedded test is a measure that forms part of the assessment of some larger construct. The

second dimension refers to Selective versus Comprehensive tests. Selective tests focus on

the assessment of specific lexical items, whereas Comprehensive tests focus on the whole

12

vocabulary content of the input material. Finally, the third dimension is Context-

Independent versus Context-Dependent tests. The first term refers to a measure in which

there is no context for the test-taker to produce the expected answer. On the contrary, the

second term refers to a measure in which in order to produce the appropriate answer, the

test-taker must consider contextual information.

Secondly, Read intends to elucidate the concept of vocabulary, discussing what

knowledge of a lexical item means and how words interact in larger units. Besides, this

author gives an account of vocabulary acquisition research and of language assessment,

focusing on the problems faced when testing vocabulary. Regarding language testing, Read

revises four vocabulary tests, which contain two vocabulary size tests: the Vocabulary

Levels Test, and the Eurocentres Vocabulary Size Test (EVST). The Vocabulary Levels

Test, first designed by Nation, is divided into five parts that correspond to five levels of

word frequency in English: the first 2000 words, 3000 words, 5000 words, the University

Word level (beyond 5000 words) and 10000 words. The tests involve word-definition

matching. At each level, there are 36 words, selected at random, and 18 definitions. The

Eurocentres Vocabulary Size Test consists of a checklist that calculates the learner’s

vocabulary size through a graded sample of words that represent several frequency levels.

The learner has to indicate whether he knows a series of words belonging to a checklist.

Non-words are also included in this list with the intention of adjusting the test-takers’

scores if they are exaggerating their vocabulary knowledge. As a result, if the student

declares to know some non-words, the final score is reduced.

Concerning depth of vocabulary knowledge, Read examines the Vocabulary Knowledge

13

Scale (VKS), and the reading comprehension section of the Test of English as a Foreign

Language (TOEFL). The Vocabulary Knowledge Test consists of two scales: one for

eliciting responses from the test-takers, and one used for scoring the responses. The first

scale and a list of words are presented to the test-takers, who have to decide for each word

on the list which category adjusts to their knowledge of the word. Category I means that the

word is not familiar at all, in category II, the word is recognized but the person does not

know its meaning. In categories III and IV, the test-takers need to give some attestable

evidence of the knowledge of the word, with a synonym or translation equivalent. In

category V, it is necessary for the test-takers to demonstrate that they can use the word in a

sentence. Finally, the second scale, known as the scoring scale, converts the test-takers’

responses to each word into test scores. Finally, the Test of English as a Foreign Language

measures language proficiency. It consists of one single item: the multiple-choice item. The

main purpose of this test is to assess the level of proficiency in English of students who

want to study in a foreign country where English is the language of instruction.

In addition, Read concentrates on the design of vocabulary tests, taking into account

the goal of the instrument, the definition of design, the characteristics of test input, and

candidates’ responses. He deals with the design of Discrete-point tests, i.e., those that

measure vocabulary knowledge or use as an independent construct, of Comprehensive tests

i.e., those that focus on the whole vocabulary content of the input material.

Finally, the author suggests new directions in the development of vocabulary

assessment, determining future needs of the field. These needs include the use of computer-

based corpus research, the necessity to devise new word lists (scientifically constructed,

14

current, and accessible to the common public), and the inclusion of multiword lexical items

in vocabulary assessment. A further aspect that should be considered by vocabulary

assessors, in future research, is the vocabulary of informal speech, including social and

cultural variables in second language acquisition, in order to assess test-takers from all

extractions.

As regards Second Language Acquisition, Segler (2001) considers vocabulary as an

essential element in the acquisition of a second language; as a result, lexical items have to

be learned with precision in order to understand and be understood in the target language.

Segler draws attention to the fact that lexical errors are the most common ones when

learning a second language; besides, they are the most troublesome ones for native speakers

with respect to interpretation. Considering this, it is necessary to reflect on the importance

of lexical development regarding second language acquisition, and the strategies used by

learners to learn vocabulary.

Vocabulary knowledge has been a matter of research only during the last two decades.

Lafford, Collentine, and Karp (2000) also suggest that the study of L2 vocabulary

knowledge is important because lexical errors are the most frequent ones and, at the same

time, they constitute a serious impediment to communication. Concerning the components

of the L2 lexicon, the authors propose that this is composed of lexical items consisting of

one or more words that correspond(s) to a single meaning unit. In relation to lexical

competence assessment, the authors agree with Meara (1996, in Lafford, Collentine, and

Karp 2000), who proposes that lexical competence is measured by both the size of a

learner’s store of lexical items and the organization of those items. On the one hand,

15

vocabulary size, also known as breadth of vocabulary knowledge, is essential to predict

reading success. On the other hand, the organization of these items has to do with a clear

understanding of several aspects of a word, such as its spoken and written form,

grammatical and collocational patterns, semantic and pragmatic aspects, among others;

these aspects of a word are related to what is known as depth of vocabulary knowledge, an

important aspect in vocabulary assessment.

Concerning research on depth of vocabulary knowledge, Qian (1998) investigates the

relationship among reading comprehension and depth of vocabulary knowledge. In this

research study, Qian applied a series of tests to 74 adult Chinese and Korean speakers with

the purpose of evaluating the influence of depth of vocabulary knowledge on their reading

comprehension proficiency. The results of this research confirm the importance of depth of

vocabulary knowledge in reading comprehension processes, and prove that there is a close

relation between breadth and depth of vocabulary knowledge, and reading comprehension.

Therefore, this study reveals that it is essential to improve the depth of L2 learners’

vocabulary knowledge for reading comprehension purposes. Qian’s work is significant for

the field of vocabulary knowledge research because he has carried out several studies on

the influence of vocabulary size and depth on L2 reading comprehension. In 1999, Qian

studied the relationship between depth and breadth of vocabulary knowledge and reading

comprehension in English as a second language (ESL). In order to examine this

relationship, a group of young adults ESL learners with a minimal vocabulary size of 3000

word families was tested. In this study, depth of vocabulary knowledge for reading

comprehension implies the awareness of word meaning, register, frequency, syntactic

16

properties, pronunciation, spelling, and morphological properties. As regards vocabulary

size for reading comprehension in ESL, the threshold hypothesis suggests that “there is a

threshold level below which the reader will be able to apply his or her reading strategies to

help comprehension and achieve better results” (Qian 1999: 4). The threshold level

corresponds to a minimum vocabulary size of 3000 word families, that is to say, words that

have the same root or base sound.

Qian’s study revealed the strong relationship existing between breadth and depth of

vocabulary knowledge for ESL learners with a minimum vocabulary size of 3000 word

families. Besides, it considers depth of vocabulary knowledge as an essential factor in the

relationship between vocabulary knowledge and academic reading comprehension. This

study is important, since its results have repercussions for second language education and

research. Consequently, in order to improve the reading comprehension of students, it is

necessary to take into account components of vocabulary depth such as syntactic properties

of words, word meaning, etc.

Another proposal on depth of vocabulary knowledge has been developed by Borer

(2004), who elicits the four dimensions of word knowledge proposed by Nation (1990), i.e.,

form (spoken and written), position, function, and conception, which stand for depth of

knowledge of a word. Based on these dimensions, the elements investigated are the

following:

1) Form: pronunciation, spelling, and morphology.

17

2) Position: grammatical and collocational patterns.

3) Function: modes of discourse.

4) Conception: word meaning related to text context and synonymous/antonymous

relations.

These dimensions are essential for learners to understand L2 academic texts, being

necessary not only to know the meaning of a word, but also sets of word forms, sharing a

common meaning i.e., word families. In this way, learners are able to read and understand

texts.

With relation to receptive and productive vocabulary size, Waring (1997) made a

study with the purpose of discovering dissimilarities between receptive and productive

vocabulary. The subjects of this research were 76 female Japanese learners of English, who

were tested in order to measure their knowledge regarding receptive and productive

vocabulary. The tests chosen for this experiment were based on Nation's (1990) Receptive

Vocabulary Levels test, and Laufer and Nation's (1995) Productive Vocabulary Levels test.

The results of the study show that receptive vocabulary is larger than productive

vocabulary, receptive vocabulary being easier to access than productive vocabulary. Crow

(1986) suggests that this occurs because a larger body of knowledge, including meaning,

spelling, pronunciation, etc. is needed for using a word (productive vocabulary). Other

authors such as Blum and Levenston (1978) state that receptive vocabulary is larger than

productive, since even though the words may be recognized receptively, they are not used

18

by learners. Other possible reasons that could explain why receptive vocabulary is larger

than productive vocabulary are that comprehension takes place before production, or that

production is more difficult than reception.

In 1983, the Vocabulary Levels Test was developed as a diagnostic instrument for use

by teachers. It was designed by Paul Nation, and was republished later in 1990. In 1988,

Read started an initial validation work on the test, finding that the scores on the different

frequency levels tended to fall into an implicational scale, that is to say, there was a

tendency in which subjects that knew lower frequency words tended to know higher

frequency ones. In 1993, Schmitt revised the Levels Test (Version A) and created three

additional versions (Versions B, C, D). Although Schmitt was not able to validate these

three new versions properly, they have been used as assessment tests in different

institutions as well as in a considerable number of vocabulary research studies.

In 1999, Laufer and Nation devised a productive levels format of the test, based on tests

A-D. In the same year, Beglar and Hunt started some validation work on the test,

specifically concerning the 2000 and University Word List sections of versions A-D. This

work found a close relation between the scores of the learners´ level sections and their

TOEFL scores.

Messick (1989) suggested that validation of a test should include logical argumentation

and empirical evidence, based on quantitative and qualitative information. Quantitative

procedures such as item analysis, profile analysis, factor analysis, and examination of the

test reliability and equivalence are applied in order to explore the results of a test. The

19

qualitative procedures employed may correspond to interviews with some examinees, in

which they were asked about their opinions on the test and about the steps they follow

when dealing with the items.

In addition, an accepted validation of a test includes an examination of the correlations

of the scores with other measures, taking into account variation of degrees of similarity and

differences with the test. There are convergent and discriminate patterns of relationship.

The convergent evidence should address the same construct. Usually, vocabulary tests are

correlated with proficiency tests, especially with TOEFL. However, it has been pointed out

that the TOEFL measures proficiency rather than vocabulary; therefore, it seems to be an

unsatisfactory procedure. On the contrary, a good and validated criterion of probing

vocabulary knowledge is through a personal interview in order to establish whether the

examinees know the target words; then, the results of the interviews should be compared to

the test results. One of the standard techniques is the comparison of the responses of an

individual item with the scores on the overall test. This procedure may function

appropriately since all the items are related to the same construct in the same way.

However, vocabulary items are Discrete; that is to say, knowledge of the majority of the

words of a level does not imply knowledge of all the words of the same level. Moreover,

the degrees of difficulty are different depending on the L1 of the test-takers.

Strictly speaking, vocabulary items in clusters are not independent, although

independence and non-independence should be seen as a continuum rather than as a

dichotomy. If a test-taker knows the words in a cluster, his answer will be independent, but

if one or more words is (are) not known, the answer will be dependent to varying degrees.

20

This implies that lower vocabulary size test-takers have a tendency towards dependence in

the levels test. Generally, test-takers do not fill in the blanks when they do not know the

answers. It is very difficult to determine the degree of independence precisely, but it can be

suggested that there is some degree of independence within the clusters.

Since vocabulary knowledge is multi-faceted, no currently available format of

vocabulary test is able to assess all forms of lexical knowledge.

3. The study

3.1. Theoretical and descriptive framework

This research study on vocabulary acquisition is based on Henriksen’s proposals

(1999) for the description of vocabulary knowledge, also known as lexical competence.

There have been several attempts to define what vocabulary knowledge precisely involves.

According to Read (2000), in order to assess vocabulary knowledge, it is essential

for SLA research to explore the nature of words and vocabulary. Vocabulary is usually

regarded as a set of individual words with related meanings, just as a dictionary.

Nevertheless, under the development of Applied Linguistics and language teaching, the

nature of vocabulary seems to be much more complex than just a mental dictionary. Thus,

for research purposes, it is crucial to define what a word is and what to know a word means,

although this issue is complex to tackle in practical terms.

21

The term ‘word’ is a difficult concept to define, in spite of the fact that the basic

objective of vocabulary testing is the assessment of the ‘knowledge of a word’. For this

reason, it is important to clarify a basic distinction between ‘tokens’ and ‘types’ in order to

count words in a text. Tokens refer to individual items that are counted each time they

occur. Instead, types refer to different word forms that are counted only once when they

occur many times in a text. The relative proportion of types and tokens (type-token ratio) is

used as a measure of language development of language learners and native speakers.

There is also another important distinction concerning vocabulary, the one between

‘function’ and ‘content’ words. On the one hand, function words are regarded as

grammatical rather than semantic lexical items, such as articles, pronouns, and auxiliary

verbs. This kind of words play a functional role in the language and have little meaning in

isolation. On the other hand, content words are the ones that convey meanings, such as

nouns, full verbs and adjectives. For this reason, content words have been the focus of

vocabulary assessment. A problem that arises at this point is that content words vary in

form. This variation occurs either by the addition of inflections, or by their derived forms

which usually change the word class and add different meanings. Additionally, some words

may or may not belong to the same word family, by being related or not in form and

meaning. This is an important issue in the measurement of vocabulary size, i.e., to

distinguish word forms and word families, because this is the reason for researchers’

different estimations of how many words speakers know.

In addition, when assessing vocabulary, it is not clear whether a whole word family

or just one word is being assessed. Another problem is the existence of homographs, which

22

are single words that have so different meanings that they cannot be regarded as belonging

to the same word family, thus having separate entries in dictionaries.

A further complication is that vocabulary also consists of larger lexical units, more

than just single words. Examples of these expressions are phrasal verbs, compound nouns,

idioms, and lexical phrases; all of them function as a unit in spoken or written discourse. In

spite of their importance in the use of language, the assessment of multi-word items has not

received much attention due to its practical difficulties, besides, multi-word items are likely

to play a role in Embedded, Comprehensive and Context-dependent vocabulary measures.

Consequently, the term ‘word’ refers to a wide variety of lexical units. This is why it is

essential to propose a clear definition of this term for research on size and depth of

vocabulary.

As mentioned above, describing the nature of vocabulary knowledge is not an easy

task. Some applied linguists have worked on the description of lexical competence. For

example, Richards (1976) made a series of assumptions about what lexical competence

involves. The first assumption is that unlike grammatical competence, native speakers’

vocabulary knowledge keeps expanding through adulthood; the second assumption stated

that knowing a word implies to know the degree of probability of finding that word in a

written or oral text. Third, knowing a word means to be aware of the limitations in the use

of the word in relation to variations of function and situation. In turn, the fourth assumption

is related to the knowledge of the syntactic behaviour associated with the word; fifth,

knowing a word entails the knowledge of the base form of a word and the possible

derivations that can be made from that word. The sixth assumption states that knowing a

23

word implies the knowledge of the network of associations of that word with other words in

the language. The seventh assumption is related to the knowledge of the semantic value of a

word. The last assumption deals with the knowledge of the different meanings associated

with a word. These eight assumptions have been treated as a general framework of

vocabulary knowledge.

Nation (1990), based on Richards’ assumptions, proposed a very useful distinction,

that is, receptive and productive vocabulary. According to Nation, it is the difference

between the ability of recognition of a word when it is seen or heard, and the ability to use a

word in a written or spoken situation. Production of a word needs a higher level of

knowledge than reception does. Nation stated that productive knowledge applies not to the

total vocabulary of a native speaker, but just to a small proportion of it. Nation (2001) also

stated that knowing a word involves knowledge of form (spoken, written and word parts),

knowledge of meaning (the form and meaning, concept and referents, and associations),

and knowledge of the use (grammatical functions, collocations, and constraints on use, such

as register and frequency).

Meara (1996) noted the difficulty involved in the creation of a construct that could

measure vocabulary knowledge in depth, an assumption which was supported by Schmitt

and Meara (1997), and Schmitt (1998). An alternative approach is proposed by Dale

(1965), who produced scales in order to represent the different degrees of partial knowledge

of words. Dale defined four stages related to the knowledge of a word. Aditionally, a

similar proposal was made by Paribakht and Wesche (1993).

24

Besides, Meara (1996) made a distinction between assessing the whole state of a

learner’s vocabulary and how well individual words are known; for general proficiency

purposes, the author favour the first one. In turn, Chapelle (1994) proposed a definition of

vocabulary ability (based on a Bachman (1990) construct), which involves language

knowledge and the ability to use it in context, including the following components: the

context of vocabulary use, vocabulary knowledge and fundamental processes, and

metacognitive strategies for vocabulary use. However, applied linguists and second

language teachers have paid more attention to the second component of Chapelle's (1994)

framework of vocabulary ability, which has four dimensions:

a) Vocabulary size: it refers to the total amount of words that a person knows.

b) Knowledge of word characteristics: it has to do with L2 learners’ knowledge of

each word range from vague to precise.

c) Lexicon organization: it deals with the manner in which words are stored in the

mind.

d) Fundamental vocabulary processes: they are used in order to facilitate access to

vocabulary knowledge when writing and/or speaking, which work faster in native

speakers than in L2 learners.

As a summary, it is necessary to bear in mind all the complexities implied in knowing a

lexical item in order to delimit the assesment of vocabulary knowledge. Nation’s (1990)

receptiveness and productiveness proposal, based on Richards’s (1976) eight assumptions

25

of what vocabulary knowledge is, is useful for the purposes of this study. Furthermore, the

difficulties noted in the creation of constructs to measure vocabulary ability, and the

distinction made by Meara (1996) between assessing individual items and assessing the

whole state of a learner’s vocabulary knowledge are also useful for the present study.

In order to give an account of the complexity of vocabulary knowledge, linguists

such as Meara (1996) have proposed a global description of such knowledge, proposing

only two dimensions, size, i.e., the number of words a subject seems to know, and

organization, i.e., how these words are related among them. Other applied linguists have

suggested general characterizations with several separate traits as different aspects of word

knowledge. However, Henriksen (1999) proposed a more specific definition of lexical

competence, which is in the middle of the global and the separate traits proposals. She

suggested the existence of three lexical dimensions, as well as the need for specifying each

one of them and their relationships, and explained how important they are in the word

learning and use processes.

The first dimension, Partial - Precise Knowledge, deals with breadth or size of

vocabulary knowledge. Meara (1996) defined it as precise comprehension, that is to say, to

know the meaning of a word implies the capacity to, for example, translate it into the L1, to

identify its appropriate definition, or to paraphrase it in the target language. For some

researchers, it is a matter of time for learners to go from a partial to a precise

comprehension of vocabulary, even though sometimes it is not necessary to know the exact

meaning of a word as this can be inferred from the immediate context. The transition from

Partial to Precise Knowledge is a long process in which learners gradually move from

26

simple word recognition to a precise comprehension level, after having passed through

several stages of partial knowledge. In this process, the understanding of a lexical item is

changed and increased as a result of personal experiences. At this point, learners have

already created their own hedges when establishing lexical categories and networks.

Wesche (1996) proposed the term ‘mature lexical entry’ for describing the mental

representation that comes after the initial knowledge. This mature lexical entry is gained

through the process of mapping and it refers to a wider knowledge base of the kind adult

native speakers develop.

The second dimension, Depth of Knowledge, is the quality of the learner’s lexical

competence (Read 1993), or as Henriksen (1999) defined it, “the knowledge of a word’s

different sense relations to other words in the lexicon, e.g., paradigmatic (antonymy,

synonymy, hyponymy, gradation) and syntagmatic (collocational restrictions)”. Because of

its complexity, many types of knowledge comprise full understanding or rich meaning

representation of a word. Following Cronbach (1942), rich meaning representation or

knowledge of a word meaning implies (a) extensional relations between concept and

referent; (b) intensional relations to other words in the vocabulary (paradigmatic and

syntagmatic relations); and (c) being aware of the syntactic and morphological limitations

and characteristics of a word, together with levels of accessibility to this knowledge.

However, this characterization does not consider aspects such as spelling, pronunciation,

and collocation since these have always been taken for granted.

Henriksen stated that the semantization process or acquisition of word meaning is a

progression from the mapping process to network building. In the mapping process,

27

signifier and signified are connected and, as a result, extensional links are established by

means of labelling, i.e., linking concept, sign and referent, and packaging, i.e., grouping

together different meanings for the same word. Within network building, also known as

organizational dimension (Meara 1996), intensional links are created and sense relations

between lexical items are developed. According to Beheydt (1987), the process of

semantization of a new word is complete when the learner has identified its morphological,

syntactic, collocational characteristics, and its possible meanings.

The third dimension, Receptive – Productive, is divided into receptive and

productive vocabulary. Receptive vocabulary is defined as the ability to understand a

lexical item; and productive vocabulary, as the ability to use it in production. Henriksen

(1999) proposed that just a limited number of lexical items that are available receptively

would become productive. Therefore, to know a word receptively does not imply to know

how to use it productively; thus, the amount of receptive vocabulary is bigger than the

productive one. According to Nation (1990), productive knowledge contains and expands

receptive knowledge. Furthermore, as mentioned before, it is assumed that both types of

vocabulary are operating on a continuum instead of on a dichotomy, though it is unclear if

there is an evident division between them. Segler (2001), on the contrary, stated a set of

assumptions regarding this division. First, there are overlapping phases when going from

receptive to productive vocabulary knowledge. Second, their relationship is not static.

Third, according to Crow (1986), productive vocabulary entails more information related to

denotations, connotations, derivations, register and syntactic constraints. Fourth, productive

vocabulary usually follows receptive vocabulary. Finally, the distance in size between them

28

would decrease as the learning process develops, but receptive vocabulary would continue

being larger.

Melka (1997) attempted to clarify this difference under the concept of ‘word

familiarity’, by means of which it could be established at what point the existing

knowledge of a word becomes productive. In turn, Meara (1996) thought that attention

should focus on the hidden lexical competence of ‘automaticity’ as this serves to develop

both receptive and productive skills. Following this idea, N. Ellis (1995) added that learners

have to acquire both the input and output features of a lexical item, together with mapping

them to semantic and conceptual meanings (mapping meaning to form).

Concerning the relationship between dimensions 1 and 2, when acquiring the sense

of a word and specifying its field of reference, i.e., labelling and packaging, respectively,

learners use and develop knowledge of paradigmatic relations, i.e., network building,

creating intensional and extensional relations. Thus, dimension 2 is an important factor in

the development of dimension 1. In the process of understanding a word, learners have to

develop a link between sign and referent. Later on, in order to establish differences among

several lexical items, they have to link sign and referent, and, in addition, to rearrange the

intensional relations between the items in the lexical set. For a clear understanding of each

particular item within a lexical set, it is necessary for learners to clearly know the

relationship between lexical items. In turn, Qian (1999) proposed that breadth and depth are

highly interconnected dimensions of vocabulary knowledge, whose development is

interdependent to a considerable extent. This proposal is supported by recent studies on this

29

issue, which have found a high correlation between the word association and the

vocabulary size tests (Nurweni and Read, in press; Schmitt and Meara 1997).

According to Henriksen (1999), these three dimensions should not be seen as

separate, but as a continuum by means of which learners go through in the vocabulary

learning process. The first and second dimensions, Partial - Precise Knowledge and Depth

of Knowledge, respectively, can be considered as a knowledge continuum, related to

acquiring word meaning, and developing and understanding sense relations. The third

dimension, Receptive – Productive, in turn, is a control continuum that refers to use ability.

Therefore, the Depth of Knowledge of a word (dimension 2) is important for an accurate

understanding of a word (dimension 1), being also a relevant element for a word to become

productive (dimension 3). In this way, an increase in the range of accessibility of a lexical

item (dimension 3) is due to the quality of the semantization process (dimensions 1 and 2).

3.2. Objectives

3.2.1. General objective

To describe the vocabulary knowledge of learners of English as a foreign language

at four levels of communicative competence: Pre-intermediate, Intermediate, Post-

intermediate, and Advanced.

3.2.2. Specific objectives

30

a. To assess the receptive breadth of lexical competence of learners of English as a

foreign language at four levels of communicative competence: Pre-intermediate,

Intermediate, Post-intermediate, and Advanced.

b. To assess the productive breadth of lexical competence of learners of English as a

foreign language at four levels of communicative competence: Pre-intermediate,


c. To assess the depth of lexical competence of learners of English as a foreign

language at four levels of communicative competence: Pre-intermediate,


d. To analyse the results of the assessment of depth, and the receptive and productive

breadth of lexical competence of subjects at all levels of competence, in quantitative

terms.

e. To analyse the results of the assessment of the productive breadth of lexical

competence of the subjects, in qualitative terms.

f. To compare the results of the assessment of lexical competence of learners at the

different levels of competence.

g. To identify the relationship between depth and breadth of the lexical competence of

learners, and their general proficiency in the target language.

31

h. To identify the relationship between successful and less successful learners in terms

of their general proficiency at all levels of communicative competence, and their

lexical knowledge.

i. To compare the results of the assessment of lexical competence of successful and

less successful learners in terms of their general proficiency at all levels of

competence, and their lexical knowledge.

3.3. Hypotheses

1. The higher the level of communicative competence, i.e., Pre-intermediate,

Intermediate, Post-intermediate and Advanced, the higher the receptive breadth

of vocabulary knowledge.


Intermediate, Post-intermediate, and Advanced, the higher the productive

breadth of vocabulary knowledge.


Intermediate, Post-intermediate, and Advanced, the higher the depth of

vocabulary knowledge.

4. The more successful a learner is at any level of communicative competence, the

higher the breadth and depth of vocabulary knowledge.

32

3.4. Research questions

Concerning the productive breadth of vocabulary knowledge, the following research

questions were asked:

a. What kinds of word classes were unanswered at each level of competence, i.e.,

Pre-intermediate, Intermediate, Post-intermediate, and Advanced?

b. What kinds of mistakes were committed at each level of competence, i.e., Pre-

intermediate, Intermediate, Post-intermediate, and Advanced?

3.5. Methodology

3.5.1. Subjects

The subjects who provided the data for the present study were students of the

Academic Undergraduate Programme of “Licenciatura en Lengua y Literatura Inglesas” of

the Department of Linguistics, Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades, Universidad de Chile.

This course of studies consists of four years in which students have a wide variety of

courses on general and English linguistics, English literature and English language. Some

of these courses are Structural Linguistics, Generative Linguistics, Sociolinguistics,

Psycholinguistics, English Text Grammar, English Phonology, English Phonetics, Applied

Linguistics, Semantics, Pragmatics, Discourse Analysis, and History of the English

Language. Apart from these, the programme includes four English Language courses (one

33

course per year), in which students learn the language, practise it and interact with each

other, thus developing their linguistic and communicative skills in the target language.

The subjects who took part in this research study were chosen neither at random nor

on purpose. Since these tests were taken by them during their lessons at the university, the

students who actually sat for the tests were those who were present at the time the tests

were given.

The number of subjects who participated in the study was 80; their age ranged from

17 to 25. From these 80 subjects, 19 belonged to the Pre-intermediate level, i.e., first year, 6

males and 13 females; 22, to the Intermediate level, i.e., second year, 7 males and 15

females; 19, to the Post-intermediate level, i.e., third year, 3 males and 16 females; and 20,

to the Advanced level, i.e., fourth year, 4 males and 16 females. The research group

expected to have 20 subjects per level; however, this number eventually varied according to

the availability of the students to sit for the tests.

The subjects belonging to the four levels of communicative competence, i.e., Pre-

intermediate, Intermediate, Post-intermediate, and Advanced, were divided into two

different groups, according to their final marks obtained in their corresponding English

Language courses in the present year. One group consisted of "successful" learners and the

other, of "less successful students" The successful subjects were those who, in a scale

ranging from 1 to 7, attained from 5.1 to 7.0 as their final marks in the course. The less

successful learners were those who obtained marks below 5.1 as their final marks. This

distinction was made with the purpose of comparing these different subjects´ final marks to

34

their performance on the vocabulary tests, by running a statistical correlation test between

these variables (See Appendix A, Tables 1 to 8).

3.5.2. Elicitation of the data

The data for the research study were elicited by applying three tests which intend to

measure the dimensions of the subjects’ vocabulary knowledge: Receptive and Productive

Breadth, and Depth.

3.5.2.1. Breadth tests

The Vocabulary Levels Test, designed by Nation (1983; 1990), was used to measure

breadth vocabulary knowledge. Its both formats, Receptive and Productive, consist of five

sections, which represent five different vocabulary size levels in the English language.

These are: level one, 2000 words, corresponding to basic everyday oral language (Schonell

et al. 1956); level two, 3000 words, related to the words needed to begin reading authentic

texts. In turn, level three, 5000 words, corresponding to what is required for reading

authentic texts; level four, 10000 words, which has to do with the necessary vocabulary to

deal with the challenges of university study in an L2; and finally, University Word Level,

which is associated to academic vocabulary in pedagogical contexts (Schmitt et al. 2001).

In the Receptive and Productive formats, only three word categories are used: nouns, verbs,

and adjectives, which have a different frequency in each format.

35

3.5.2.1.1. Receptive Breadth test

The test used to assess the receptive breadth of the learners’ vocabulary knowledge

was the one developed by Paul Nation (1983; 1990) (see Appendix B, Test 1). In this test,

the test designers took the lexemes for each level of frequency randomly from the

Thorndike and Lorge word frequency list (1944). Concerning the words in the University

Word Level test, the words were selected from the University Word List (Xue and Nation

1984).

The Receptive Breadth format of the Levels Test involves word-definition matching

items, i.e., the test-takers have to match words to short definitions. At each level, there are

36 words and 18 definitions. An example of this test format is quoted below:

1. apply

2. elect ____ choose by voting

3. jump ____ become like water

4. manufacture ____ make

5. melt

6. threaten

As can be observed in this example, all the words in each item belong to the same

word category, with the purpose of, on the one hand, not providing any grammatical

evidence as a clue for the right answer; and, on the other, grouping together words and

definitions with no meaning relations (Read 2000). Regarding word class, there is a

36

consistent number of items belonging to each of them, distributed into a 3 (noun): 2 (verb):

1 (adjective) ratio (Schmitt et al. 2001).

3.5.2.1.2. Productive Breadth test

The Productive Breadth Test used in the research study was the one designed by

Laufer and Nation (1999) as a further development of the Receptive Levels Test (see

Appendix B, Test 2). The same target words of the Receptive Breadth Test are used;

however, each level consists of 18 sentences that have blanks to be filled in with the

missing segment of the target word. In order to elicit the appropriate target word, its initial

letters are provided, ranging from one to five letters. The following example illustrates the

format of this test:

The picture looks nice; the colours bl_______ really well.

In relation to word category distribution, there is no consistent number of words

belonging to each category per frequency level in the different sections of the test.

Nevertheless, there is a tendency for nouns to be more frequent than verbs and, in turn,

verbs are more frequent than adjectives.

37

As regards the validation of the Vocabulary Levels Test, Read (2000) states that a

study for such a purpose has not been properly carried out since there is no other construct

for comparing its effectiveness. However, there have been several attempts to validate the

test. For instance, Read, in 1998, attempted to validate the test and found it reliable on the

basis of an implicational scale, that is to say, it is likely for a subject to know more higher-

frequency words than lower-frequency ones. Besides, this test has been considered as an

appropriate measure of vocabulary size by different L2 researches (e.g. Laufer 1992, 1996;

Laufer and Paribakht 1998; Qian 1998, 1999; Yu, 1996).

3.5.2.2. Depth

Finally, the test used to assess the depth, or quality of vocabulary knowledge, is the

Word Associates Test (See Appendix B, Test 3). This test was originally designed by

Meara (1983), and was afterwards modified by Read (1993). It is based on the concept of

word association, and the task requires the learner to select -among distractors- associates

or words related in meaning to the target word. The associates are related to the target word

in terms of three different relationships:

• Paradigmatic: the words are synonyms or at least similar in meaning.

• Syntagmatic: the two words often occur together in a phrase.

• Analytic: the associate represents one aspect, or component, of the target word.

38

The Word Associates Test, intended to assess the depth of vocabulary knowledge,

consists of 40 adjectives chosen as target words. A set of eight words, associates and

distractors, are presented in a box divided into two groups. In the group on the left side, the

associates are words that have a paradigmatic relation with the target word, that is,

synonyms or words that represent one aspect of its meaning. In the group on the right side,

the associates are words that have a syntagmatic relation with the target word, that is, its

possible collocations. An example is quoted below:

Sudden

X X X X

beautiful quick surprising thirsty change doctor noise school

Thus, the subjects have to select the words that they believe are related to the target

word, in terms of synonyms and collocations. There is no consistent number of correct

answers on the left or on the right side. They have to choose four options, but not

necessarily two on each side.

According to Read (2000), the following characteristics of this format would

provide a complete profile of the learners’ vocabulary knowledge:

a. Its guiding principle is the selection of high-frequency words.

b. It provides verifiable evidence of depth of knowledge.

c. It has a monolingual nature.

39

d. Words are presented in isolation, which allows subjects to cover a higher number of

words to be assessed.

e. It is a recognition task rather than a recalling task.

The Word Associates Test was improved through a repeated piloting process as a

means of validation. With this measure, the reliability obtained reached .93 (N=94; Read

1995). Additionally, Messick (1989) suggested that the best way to validate this test was

by analysing the data not only in quantitative terms but also qualitatively.

3.5.3. Procedure

The data were collected in several sessions, according to the subjects' levels and the

availability of the teachers in giving permission to administer the tests in their classes. The

tests were given to the students in sessions of approximately 40 minutes, depending on the

time provided for this purpose. In this way, the Productive Breadth Tests and the Receptive

Breadth Tests were taken by learners during the same sessions, or, in some cases, the

Receptive Breadth Test was taken a week after the Productive one, depending on the

availability of the subjects. The Depth Test was given approximately three weeks after the

other tests. In several cases, extra sessions had to be held in order to test the subjects that

were not present in one of the previous sessions.

Every session started with the teacher in charge of the course explaining that these

tests had research purposes for seminar students, without informing the subjects of the

40

objectives of this study. Afterwards, the members of the research group gave the subjects

the corresponding instructions for the tests.

3.5.4. Criteria for the analysis of the data

For marking the Productive Breadth Test, the criteria taken into account were the

following:

1. Every correct response counted as 1 point. A correct response meant that the subject

filled in the blank in the sentence with the expected answer. For example, in the

sentence “Lack of rain led to shortage of water in the city”, ‘lack’ is the target word.

Additionally, mistakes regarding grammatical tenses (past or present) or no –s ending in

3rd person singular in present tense were not relevant to the objectives of the study;

therefore, they were not considered as mistakes. For example, in the sentence “The dog

cringed when it saw the snake”, the word ‘cringes’ was accepted as correct, thus

counted as 1 point.

2. A response was worth 0.5 in the following cases:

a. Whenever the subject added or omitted a letter that did not affect the

pronunciation of the target word,

e.g. mortgage* instead of ‘mortgage’ as in “People manage to buy houses by

raising a mortgage from a bank.”

41

b. When the subject pluralized the target word in its adjectival form (negative

transfer from Spanish into English),

e.g. obsoletes* instead of ‘obsolete’ in the sentence “Computers have made

typewriters old-fashioned and obsolete."

c. When there was no grammatical agreement between the target word and the

sentence,

e.g. In the sentence “Since he is unskilled, he earns low wages”, the target

word is ‘wages’ and not wage*.

3. The following responses got 0 points:

a. When another word with a different meaning was the result of a misspelling,

that is to say, another English word was provided as the answer,

e.g. ‘relay’ instead of ‘rely’ in the sentence “He’s irresponsible. You cannot

rely on him for help.”

b. When the misspelling altered the grammatical function of the target word,

since to know a word also means to know its function,

e.g. ‘chilly’ instead of ‘chill’ in the sentence “It was a cold day. There was a

chill in the air.”

42

c. When the misspelling affected the pronunciation of the target word,

e.g. fragant* instead of ‘fragrant’ as in “Many gardens are full of fragrant

flowers.”

d. When the subjects provided a word which is not a lexical item of the English

language,

e.g. vicary* instead of ‘vicar’ as in “The new vicar was appointed by the

bishop.”

e.g. inspectioned* instead of ‘inspected’ as in “They inspected all products

before sending them out to stores.”

e. When the misspelling altered the target word, which is part of an idiomatic

expression,

e.g. aprons* and not ‘apron’ as in “Some people find it hard to be

independent. They prefer to be tied to their mother’s apron strings.”

Whenever the misspelled target word contained two or more of the mistakes stated

in the second criterion, it got 0 point. On the other hand, if a sentence allowed two or more

options as target words, any of the possible answers was counted as correct if they made

sense. For example, in the sentence “The pro_________ of failing the test scared him”, the

blank could be filled in with either 'probability' or 'prospect'; and in the sentence “Despite

43

his physical condition, his int__________ was unaffected”, 'intelligence' or 'intellect' were

considered correct responses.

Thus, the idea of scoring the answers using these criteria was to give an account of

the vocabulary acquisition process by which subjects go through when learning a new

language. Nevertheless, because these criteria proved to be time-consuming, a second

marking was carried out in order to prove if it was worth applying them. Within the new

criteria, only those answers filled in with the target word were considered correct, and

wrong those which contained any kind of mistake, as in the Levels Tests (Nation, 1990.)

By comparing the results of the tests using both criteria, the score of every subject in

the different levels of the test varied in 1% approximately. Therefore, the second criterion

was chosen as it was concluded that there were no considerable differences between them.

Consequently, the wrong answers were classified into unanswered items and

mistakes. The former deals with omitted items, and they were classified according their

grammatical category, i.e., nouns, adjectives, and verbs. The latter is related to the different

kinds of mistakes that were classified as follows:

1. Grammatical mistakes: They were subclassified as follows:

1.1. Grammatical disagreements of number between the subject and the verb:

a. ‘hens’ instead of ‘hen’ as in “The farmer sells the eggs that his hen lays.”

44

b. ‘diapers’ instead of ‘diaper’ as in “The baby is wet. Her diaper needs

changing.”

1.2. Pluralization of adjectives:

c. obsoletes* instead of ‘obsolete’ as in “Computers have made typewriters

old-fashioned and obsolete.”

1.3. Incoherent use of past tense, participle –en and progressive –ing forms

according to the context:

d. ‘stretch’ instead of ‘stretched’ as in “This sweater is too tight. It needs to

be stretched.”

e. ‘hug’ instead of ‘hugging’ as in “The child was holding a doll in her arms

and hugging it.”

2. Spelling mistakes: the addition or elision of one or two letters that led to the use of a non-

existent word in the target language.

e.g. a. squimed* instead of ‘squirmed’ as in “The wounded man squirmed on the

floor in agony.”

b. clim* instead of ‘climb’ as in “They have to climb a steep mountain to

reach the cabin.”

45

c. mes* instead of ‘mess’ as in “The workmen cleaned up the mess before

they left.”

d. lovly* instead of ‘lovely’ as in “The dress you are wearing is lovely.”

e. relly* instead of ‘rely’ as in “He is irresponsible. You cannot rely on him

for help.”

f. mortage* instead of ‘mortgage’ as in “People manage to buy houses by

raising a mortgage from a bank.”

3. Lexical mistakes: they were subdivided into three categories:

3.1. Morphological Creativity: use of L2 morphological rules to create

incomprehensible L2 lexes (Poulisse 1990).

e.g. a) vicary* instead of ‘vicar’ as in “The new vicar was appointed by the

bishop.”

b) fragant* instead of ‘fragrant’ as in “Many gardens are full of fragrant

flowers.”

c) satured* instead of ‘saturated’ as in “The victim’s shirt was saturated with

blood.”

46

d) anomality* instead of ‘anomaly’ as in “The anomaly of his position is that

he is the chairman of the committee, but isn’t allowed to vote.”

3.2. Another existent word in the TL: replacement of the target word by another

existent word in the TL.

e.g. a) ‘impossible’ instead of ‘impeded’ as in “The rescue attempt could not

proceed quickly. It was impeded by bad weather.”

b) ‘messy’ instead of ‘mess’ as in “The workmen cleaned up the mess before

they left.”

c) ‘drawings’ instead of ‘drafts’ as in “Before writing the final version, the

student wrote several drafts.”

d) ‘evening’ instead of ‘Eve’ as in “We decided to celebrate New Year’s Eve

together.”

e) ‘cried’ instead of ‘cringed’ as in “The dog cringed when it saw the snake.”

3.3 Borrowing: the target word is replaced by a word from the L1.

e.g. a) fragil* instead of ‘fragrant’ as in “Many gardens are full of fragrant

flowers”.

47

b) vicario* instead of ‘vicar’ as in “The new vicar was appointed by the

bishop.”

c) diarrea* instead of ‘diaper’ as in “The baby is wet. Her diaper needs

changing.”

d) imposible* instead of ‘impeded’ as in “The rescue attempt could not

proceed quickly. It was impeded by bad weather.”

4. Discussion of results

In this section, we present and discuss the results of the vocabulary tests and analyse

them in quantitative and qualitative terms. Additionally, a statistical analysis is included in

order to validate the study.

4.1 Test results

The results of the Receptive and Productive Breadth Tests, and the Depth Tests per

communicative competence level, and the subjects’ performance at each word frequency

level in the tests are presented in Tables 1, 2, and 3.

A) Receptive Breadth Test results

Table 1. Receptive Breadth Test results per communicative competence level.

48

Table 1 shows the performance of subjects in the Receptive Breadth Test per level

of communicative competence, in which an increase of correct answers in the higher levels

of communicative competence at the different levels of word frequency can be clearly

appreciated (See Figure 1). Additionally, this difference is minimal between the last three

levels of competence, being the Pre-intermediate level the most significant one.

Figure 1. Receptive Breadth Test average results per communicative competence level.

Level

Final

Mark 2000 3000 5000 10000 UWL AVERAGE

Pre-

intermediate 4,7 83,51% 65,96% 62,11% 31,05% 81,23% 64,77%

Intermediate 4,5 93,94% 84,09% 75,91% 41,82% 89,55% 77,06%

Post-

intermediate 4,9 96,49% 86,49% 79,74% 44,04% 94,04% 80,16%

Advanced 5,3 96,96% 89,31% 82,97% 51,30% 97,47% 83,60%

Average 4,8 92,73% 81,46% 75,18% 42,05% 90,57% 76,40%

49

Receptive Breadth Test

0,00%

10,00%

20,00%

30,00%

40,00%

50,00%

60,00%

70,00%

80,00%

90,00%

Communicative Competence Level

Ave

rage

Pre-intermediate Level Intermediate Level

Post-intermediate Level Advanced Level

B) Productive Breadth Test results Table 2. Productive Breadth Test results per communicative competence level.

Concerning Productive Breadth Test results, they show an increase in the amount of

correct answers of students of higher levels of communicative competence. However, the

Level Final Mark 2000 3000 5000 10000 UWL AveragePre-intermediate 4,7 43,27% 22,51% 7,60% 3,80% 11,40% 17,72% Intermediate 4,5 66,92% 37,63% 19,95% 11,11% 26,26% 32,37% Post-intermediate 4,9 76,56% 48,85% 29,82% 9,94% 37,13% 40,46% Advanced 5,3 71,11% 52,78% 31,94% 14,44% 38,44% 41,74% Average 4,8 64,47% 40,44% 22,33% 9,82% 28,31% 33,07%

50

final scores were lower than those of the Receptive Breadth Test. Moreover, this difference

is minimal between the three higher levels of competence, being the Pre-intermediate level

the most significant one. (See Figure 2)

Figure 2. Average results of Productive Breadth Test per communicative competence level.

Productive Breadth Test

0,00%

5,00%

10,00%

15,00%

20,00%

25,00%

30,00%

35,00%

40,00%

45,00%


Ave

rage



Concerning the Breadth Test results, there is a tendency in the production of correct

answers according to the level of word frequency. In this way, 2000 and University word

level obtain the highest scores in Receptive Breadth test in all levels of communicative

competence, followed by 3000, then 5000, and finally 10000 word levels (See Figure 3).

Regarding Productive Breadth tests, the 2000 word level presents the highest score of

correct responses in all levels of communicative competence, followed by 3000, then

University, 5000, and finally 10000 word levels (See Figure 4). This tendency, i.e., lower

51

levels of word frequency present higher scores at all levels of communicative competence,

can be explained by the fact that words specific in register are more problematic than

general ones, since general words are more common than specific lexical items, therefore

more frequent (Segler 2001).

52

Figure 3. Receptive Breadth Test results per frequency level at each level of communicative competence.

Breadth Receptive Test

0,00%

20,00%

40,00%

60,00%

80,00%

100,00%

120,00%

Pre-internediate Level Intermediate Level Post intermediate Level Advanced Level

Aver

age

2000 3000 5000 10000 Academic

Receptive Breadth Test

0,00%

20,00%

40,00%

60,00%

80,00%

100,00%

120,00%

Pre-intermediate Level Intermediate Level Post intermediate Level Advanced Level

Ave

rage

2000 3000 5000 10000 UWL

53

Figure 4. Productive Breadth Test results per word frequency level at each level of communicative competence.

Productive Breadth Test

0,00%

10,00%

20,00%

30,00%

40,00%

50,00%

60,00%

70,00%

80,00%

90,00%

Pre-intermediate Level Intermediate Level Post intermediate Level Advanced Level

Ave

rage

2000 3000 5000 10000 UWL

53

C) Depth test results

Table 3. Depth Test Results per communicative competence level.

Level Final Mark % Pre-intermediate 4,7 55,56%

Intermediate 4,5 66,31%Post intermediate 4,9 66,64%

Advanced 5,3 71,55%Average 4,85 65,02%

Concerning the Depth test results, there is an increase in the amount of correct

answers of students at higher levels of communicative competence, there being a slight

difference between the Intermediate and Post-intermediate levels of communicative

competence (See Figure 5).

Figure 5. Results Depth test per level of communicative competence.

Depth Test

0,00%

10,00%

20,00%

30,00%

40,00%

50,00%

60,00%

70,00%

80,00%


Ave

rage



54

4.1.1. Quantitative results

4.1.1.1. Receptive Breadth Test results

The descriptive results of the Receptive Breadth test are shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Mean and Standard Deviation of the Receptive Breadth test.

As seen in Table 4, from the maximum possible score of 150 correct responses,

the Pre-intermediate level’s mean is 97.16 points (S.D. = 18.44), followed by the

Intermediate level’s mean, which is 115.59 points (S.D. = 12.08); then comes the Post-

intermediate level’s mean, 120.16 points (S.D. = 13.97), and finally, the highest mean

corresponds to the Advanced level, 125.45 (S.D. = 11.11). This shows that there is an

increase in the mean of the receptive vocabulary knowledge test as the subjects reach

higher levels of communicative competence. In general terms, as shown in the standard

deviation, the heterogeneity of the subjects’ scores increases as the level of

communicative competence diminishes. It can be claimed that subjects achieve similar

levels of proficiency due to the academic training received throughout the four years of

language studies.

Additionally, the analysis of variance (see Appendix C, Table 1) shows that the

differences between the means and standard deviations corresponding to the four levels

of communicative competence are statistically significant. This can be demonstrated by

the application of the Tukey HSD test (see Appendix C, Table 2), in which the four

N

Mean Standard Deviation

Pre-intermediate 19 97.16 18.437 Intermediate 22 115.59 12.078 Post-intermediate 19 120.16 13.969 Advanced 20 125.45 11.109 Total 80 114.76 17.350

55

levels are compared in pairs. According to this test, the Pre-intermediate level is

statistically different from the other levels (p<0.05), while the differences between the

other levels are not statistically significant (p>0.05). It can be inferred that subjects

achieve similar levels of proficiency due to the academic training received throughout

the four years of language studies.

Figure 6. Variance analysis of Receptive Breadth Test’s correct responses at the four levels of communicative competence.

Taking into account the statistics results explained above, the first hypothesis,

i.e., receptive breadth of vocabulary knowledge increases together with the level of

communicative competence, is confirmed, since there is a statistically significant

relation between the level of communicative competence of learners of English as a

second language, and the receptive size of lexical competence in the target language.

Communicative competence Level

AdvancedPost-intermediateIntermediatePre-intermediate

130

120

110

100

90

125.4

120.2

115.6

97.2 Rec

eptiv

e c

orre

ct re

spon

ses

mea

n

56

That is to say, higher levels of communicative competence obtain higher scores in the

receptive breadth test of vocabulary knowledge.

4.1.1.2. Productive Breadth test results

The descriptive results of the productive breadth test are shown in Table 5.

Table 5. Mean and Standard Deviation of the Productive Breadth Test.

N Mean Standard Deviation Pre-intermediate 19 15.95 7.849

Intermediate 22 29.14 9.920

Post-intermediate 19 36.05 13.456

Advanced 20 37.75 7.525

Total 80 29.80 12.913


the Pre-intermediate level’s mean is 15.95 points, followed by the Intermediate level’s

mean (29.14 points), the Post-intermediate level’s mean (36.05 points), and finally, the

Advanced level’s mean (37.75 points). This shows that there is an increase in the mean

of the productive vocabulary knowledge as the subjects develop their communicative

competence. However, in contrast to the tendency shown in the receptive test, the

standard deviation illustrates that there is no constant decrease in the heterogeneity

along the levels, since the Post-intermediate level is the most heterogeneous (S.D. =

13.46), followed by the Intermediate (S.D. = 9.92), the Pre-intermediate (S.D. = 7.85),

and finally, the Advanced levels (S.D. = 7.53).

Additionally, the analysis of variance (see Appendix C, Table 3) shows that the

differences between the means and standard deviations corresponding to the four levels

of communicative competence are statistically significant. This can be demonstrated by

57

the application of the Tukey HSD test (see Appendix C, Table 4), in which the four

levels are compared in pairs. According to this test, it can be stated that: the Pre-

intermediate level is statistically different from the other levels (p<0.05); the

Intermediate level is different from the Pre-intermediate and Advanced levels (p<0.05),

but not from the Post-intermediate level (p=0.13). The Advanced level is statistically

different from the Pre-intermediate and Intermediate levels (p<0.05), but not from the

Post-intermediate level (p=0.95). As in the case of the Productive Test, it can be

suggested that similar levels of proficiency are achieved due to the academic training

received throughout the four years of language studies.

Figure 7. Variance analysis of Productive Breadth Test’s correct responses at the four levels of communicative competence.

Taking into account the statistics results mentioned above, the second

hypothesis, i.e., productive breadth of vocabulary knowledge increases together with the

communicative competence Level

Advanced Post-intermediateIntermediatePre-intermediate

40

35

30

25

20

15

37.8 36.1

29.1

15.9

Prod

uctiv

e co

rrec

t res

pons

es m

ean

58

level of communicative competence, is proved, since there is a statistically significant


second language and the productive size of lexical competence in the target language.

That is to say, higher levels of communicative competence obtain higher scores in the

Productive Breadth test of vocabulary knowledge.

4.1.1.3. Depth Test results

The descriptive results of the depth test are shown in Table 6.

Table 6. Mean and Standard Deviation of the Depth Test.

N Mean Standard Deviation Pre-intermediate 19 86.79 24.080 Intermediate 22 106.09 15.748 Post-intermediate 19 106.63 17.849 Advanced 20 114.55 13.109 Total 80 103.75 20.352


the Pre-intermediate level’s mean is 86.79 points (S.D. = 24.08 ), followed by the

Intermediate level’s mean, which is 106.09 points (S.D. = 15.75); then comes the Post-

intermediate level’s mean, 106.63 points (S.D. = 17.85), and finally, the highest mean

corresponds to the Advanced level’s mean, 114.55 (S.D. = 13.11). This shows that there

is an increase in the mean of depth of vocabulary knowledge as the subjects reach

higher levels of communicative competence. Regarding the Standard Deviation, the Pre-

intermediate level is the most heterogeneous, followed by the Post-intermediate,

Intermediate, and Advanced levels.

The analysis of variance (see Appendix C, Table 5) shows that the differences

between the means and standard deviations corresponding to the four levels of

59

communicative competence are statistically significant. This can be demonstrated by the

application of the Tukey HSD test (see Appendix C, Table 6), in which the four levels

are compared in pairs. According to this test, the Pre-intermediate level is statistically

different from the other levels (p<0.05), while there is no such difference among the

three other levels (p>0.05). As mentioned above, this difference can be the result of the

academic training received throughout the first years of language studies, in which the

students tend to acquire new vocabulary items rather than going into them in depth.

Figure 8. Variance analysis of Depth Test’s correct responses at the four levels of communicative competence.

Taking into account the statistics results explained above, the third

hypothesis, i.e., depth of vocabulary knowledge increases together with the level of

communicative competence, is confirmed, since there is a statistically significant

Communicative competence Level

Advanced Post-intermediateIntermediatePre-intermediate

115

110

105

100

95

90

85

114.6

106.6

106.1

86.8

Dep

th c

orre

ct re

spon

ses

mea

n

60


second language and the depth of lexical competence in the target language. That is to

say, higher levels of communicative competence obtain higher scores in the depth of

vocabulary knowledge tests.

4.1.1.4. Relationship between final marks and correct responses

The descriptive results of the relationship between final marks and correct

responses are shown in Table 7.

Table 7. Mean and Standard Deviation of the final marks and vocabulary tests correct responses.

N

Mean Standard Deviation

Final mark 80 4.876 .6833 Depth: correct responses 80 103.75 20.352 Productive: correct responses 80 29.80 12.913 Receptive: correct responses 80 114.76 17.350

As seen in Table 7, all the subjects were included in the statistical analysis, as it

was time-consuming to analyse the results per level. In this way, the Productive correct

responses’ mean is 29.80 points (S.D. = 12.913), followed by the Depth correct

responses’ mean, 103.75 points (S.D. = 20.352); and finally, the Receptive correct

responses’ mean, 114.76 (S.D. = 17.350). Taking into account the Standard Deviation

of each test, the most heterogeneous scores are found in the Depth Test, followed by the

Receptive, and finally, by the Productive Tests.

As seen in Table 8, correlation coefficients vary in a range between 0.31 and

0.84. The final mark correlates at a higher level with Receptive scores (.502), then

comes the Productive ones (.493), and finally, Depth (.311), demonstrating that these

61

dimensions represent a continuum. Concerning the relation among the tests, the

Productive-Receptive tests present a higher correlation coefficient (.842), since both

tests measure the breadth or size of vocabulary knowledge. This relation is followed by

the Depth-Receptive tests correlation coefficient (.646), and finally, Depth-Productive

tests (.543). Taking this into account, it can be inferred that Receptive and Depth tests

have higher correlations due to the fact that target words are provided by the tests, while

the Productive Breadth test presents a lower correlation because subjects have to

produce the target words using the partial information given by the format.

Table 8. Correlations among final marks and test correct responses.

Final mark Depth correct responses

Productive correct responses

Receptive correct responses

Final mark Pearson correlation 1 .311(**) .493(**) .502(**)

Sig. (bilateral) .005 .000 .000 N 80 80 80Depth: correct responses

Pearson correlation 1 .543(**) .646(**)

Sig. (bilateral) .000 .000 N 80 80Productive: correct responses

Pearson correlation 1 .842(**)

Sig. (bilateral) .000 N 80

(**) Correlation is significant at level 0.01 (bilateral)

62

4.1.1.5. Successful and less successful students

The descriptive results of the distinction between successful and less successful

students are shown in Tables 9 to 14.

Table 9. Statistical description of successful students in the Receptive Breadth Test.

Table 10. Statistical description of less successful students in Receptive Breadth Test.

N Minimum Maximum Mean Standard Deviation

Final Mark 43 2.2 5.0 4.412 .5603 Receptive: correct responses 43 64 141 108.88 18.269

Valid N (listwise) 43 Table 11. Statistical description of successful students in the Productive Breadth Test.


Final Mark 37 5.1 6.4 5.416 .3176 Productive: correct responses 37 16 62 35.30 11.289

Valid N (listwise) 37 Table 12. Statistical description of less successful students in the Productive Breadth Test.


Final Mark 43 2.2 5.0 4.412 .5603 Productive: correct responses 43 3 52 25.07 12.445

Valid N (listwise) 43


Final Mark 37 5.1 6.4 5.416 .3176 Receptive: correct responses 37 89 147 121.59 13.488


63

Table 13. Statistical description of successful students in Depth Test.


Final Mark 37 5.1 6.4 5.416 .3176 Depth: correct responses 37 81 134 109.97 15.278

Valid N (listwise) 37 Table 14. Statistical description of less successful students in Depth Test.


Final Mark 43 2.2 5.0 4.412 .5603 Depth: correct responses 43 31 135 98.40 22.705


As presented above, the student who obtained the lowest mark in this group of

successful students attained 89 correct responses out of a total score 150. In the

Receptive Breadth test, 16 correct responses out of a total score of 90, and 81 correct

responses in the Depth test out of a total of 160.

On the other hand, the student who obtained the highest mark in this group of

successful students attained 147 correct responses. In the Receptive Breadth test, 62

correct responses, and 134 correct responses in the Depth test.

Taking into account the statisticals results shown above, the fourth hypothesis,

i.e., successful learners at any level of communicative competence obtain higher scores

either in breadth and depth tests than less successful students, is proved, as the

successful learners’ mean is higher than the less successful learners’ mean in every test.

64

4.1.2. Qualitative results from the Productive Breadth Test

Regarding wrong answers, divided into unanswered items and mistakes, the

following results can be observed (see Appendix D, Tables 1 to 5). Concerning subjects

with higher levels of proficiency, Advanced students present fewer unanswered items

(35.8%) than Post-intermediate learners (43.3%); however, Advanced students made

more mistakes (an average of 30.1%) than Post-intermediate ones did (23%).

Considering subjects with lower levels of competence, Intermediate students present

fewer unanswered items (52.2%) than the Pre-intermediate students do (65.3%).

Additionally, Intermediate learners made fewer mistakes (an average of 22.7%) than

Pre-intermediate ones did (24.2%) (See Figure 9 and 10).

Figure 9. Total percentage of mistakes per level of communicative competence.

0,0%

5,0%

10,0%

15,0%

20,0%

25,0%

30,0%

35,0%

Levels of communicative competence

Mistakes (Total per level)

Pre-intermediate level Intermediate levelPost-intermediate level Advanced level

65

Figure 10. Total percentage of unanswered items per level of communicative competence.

0,0%

10,0%

20,0%

30,0%

40,0%

50,0%

60,0%

70,0%


Unanswered items (total per level)

Pre-intermediate level Intermediate level

Post-intermediate level Advanced level

Concerning unanswered items, word classes were omitted in different

proportions according to the subjects’ levels of proficiency. Pre-intermediate students

mainly omitted nouns (66.2%), and verbs (65.3%) rather than adjectives (55.1%);

Intermediate students mainly omitted adjectives (54.1%), followed by nouns (52.4%),

and finally, verbs (50.8%). Post-intermediate students mainly omitted adjectives

(54.3%), followed by nouns (42.6%), and verbs (37%); and Advanced students mainly

omitted verbs (42.6%), followed by nouns (35.6%), and adjectives (26.1%) (See Figure

11). In general terms, taking into account the unanswered items per word category,

nouns were more frequently omitted than verbs (50.3% versus 48.9%, respectively) and,

in turn, verbs were more frequently omitted than adjectives (48.9% versus 47.1%,

respectively) at all levels of communicative competence (See Figure 12). As seen

above, only Intermediate and Post-intermediate students follow the pattern described by

Segler (2001), in which adjectives present more difficulties than nouns and verbs; and

therefore, they are more likely to be omitted.

66

Figure 11. Unanswered items per word category at any level of communicative competence.

0,0%

10,0%

20,0%

30,0%

40,0%

50,0%

60,0%

70,0%

80,0%

Pre-intermediatelevel

Intermediate level Post-intermediatelevel

Advanced level

Unanswered items per word category

Noun Adjective Verb

Figure 12. Average of unanswered items per word category at all levels of communicative competence.

45,0%

46,0%

47,0%

48,0%

49,0%

50,0%

51,0%

Word category

Average Unanswered items per word category

Nouns Adjectives Verbs

In terms of the occurrence of unanswered items through the different levels of

competence, nouns decrease in percentage from the higher levels of proficiency (36.1%

in the Advanced and 42.6% in the Post-intermediate levels) to the lower levels (52.4%

67

in the Intermediate and 66.2% in the Pre-intermediate levels). Adjectives present a

slight decrease in percentage at the lower levels of competence (55.1% in the Pre-

intermediate and 54.1% in the Intermediate), and a considerable decrease in the

Advanced level (26.3%). However, there is a slight increase concerning unanswered

adjectives in the Post-Intermediate level (54.3%). Finally, verbs present a decrease in

percentage in the three first levels of competence (the Pre-intermediate, 65.3%;

Intermediate, 50.8%; and Post-intermediate, 37%). It is important to highlight that in

the Advanced level there is an increase in the percentage of the omitted verb responses

(42.6%) (See Figures 13, 14, and 15).

Figure 13. Average of occurrence of unanswered nouns per level of communicative competence.

0,0%

20,0%

40,0%

60,0%

80,0%


Unanswered Nouns


68

Figure 14. Average of frequency of occurrence of unanswered adjectives per level of communicative competence.

0,0%10,0%20,0%30,0%40,0%50,0%60,0%


Unanswered Adjectives


Figure 15. Average of frequency of occurrence of unanswered verbs per level of communicative competence.

0,0%

10,0%

20,0%

30,0%

40,0%

50,0%

60,0%

70,0%


Unanswered Verbs

Pre-intermediate level Intermediate level

Post-intermediate level Advanced level

Concerning mistakes, they were divided into different categories, namely,

Grammatical mistakes (Gr), Spelling mistakes (Sp), and Lexical mistakes. The Lexical

Mistakes category was further divided into three subcategories: Another Target

Language Word (ATW), Borrowings (Br), and Morphological Creativity (MC).

69

There is a common tendency in the two lower levels of communicative

competence: the Pre-intermediate and Intermediate levels together present the same

pattern of mistakes, being ATW the most frequent subcategory of mistakes (13.4% and

11.5%, respectively), followed by MC (6% and 4.2%), Sp (2.7% and 3.8%), Gr (2% and

3.1%) and Br (0.3% and 0.1%) in a descending order (See Appendix F, Tables 1 to 24).

On the other hand, the two higher levels of communicative competence, i.e., the

Post-intermediate and Advanced, present a similar mistake pattern with only one

difference concerning the frequency of Sp and MC mistakes. The most frequent

subcategory is also ATW (10.7% and 15.7%), but, in this case, followed by SP (5% and

5.7%), MC (3.7% and 4.8%), Gr (3.5% and 3.4%), and Br (0.2 % and 0.5%) (See

Figure 16).

Figure 16. Categories of mistakes per level of communicative competence.

0,0%

2,0%

4,0%

6,0%

8,0%

10,0%

12,0%

14,0%

16,0%

Grammatical Spelling Another TLword

Borrowing Morphologicalcreativity

Categories of mistakes per level of communicative competence

Pre-intermediate level Intermediate level Post-intermediate level Advanced level

70

The difference between frequency of ocurrance in two mistake categories, Spelling and

Morphological Creativity, by lower level and higher level learners could be explained

by the fact that subjects with lower levels of proficiency make use of Morphological

Creativity in order to compensate for their lack of vocabulary. On the other hand, the

Post-intermediate and Advanced levels are at higher interlanguage stages, and for this

reason, these students were able to provide the target words in the test, although they

committed spelling mistakes as their command in the L2 is not accurate enough.

71

5. Conclusions

In this research study on the acquisition of lexical competence in English as a

second language, the following conclusions can be drawn:

Hypothesis 1, i.e., the higher the level of communicative competence, the higher

the receptive breadth of vocabulary knowledge, is confirmed by the results obtained in

the receptive breadth test and their subsequent analysis. These results show that while

there is an increase in the average of correct answers along the four levels of

communicative competence (Pre-intermediate, 97.16; Intermediate, 115.59; Post-

intermediate, 120.16; and Advanced, 125.45), there is a decrease in the heterogeneity of

the subjects’ scores (Pre-intermediate, 18.437; Intermediate, 12.078; Post-intermediate,

13.969; and Advanced, 11.109).


the productive breadth of vocabulary knowledge, is also confirmed by the results

obtained by the application of the productive breadth test and their further analysis.

Even though the scores obtained in this test are lower than the ones of the receptive

breadth test, the same tendency observed with relation to Hypothesis 1 is present for

higher levels of communicative competence, that of achieving higher scores when

compared to lower levels (the Pre-intermediate level's mean is 15.95, Intermediate,

29.14; Post-intermediate, 36.05; and Advanced, 37.75). In contrast to the heterogeneity

of the four levels regarding the receptive breadth results, these results show that the

Post-intermediate level is the most heterogeneous one (13.456), followed by the

Intermediate (9.92), then, the Pre-intermediate (7.85), and finally, the Advanced level

(7.53). Additionally, the analysis of variance shows that the differences between the

72

means and standard deviations corresponding to the four levels of communicative

competence are statistically significant. The Tukey HSD test proved that the Pre-

intermediate level is statistically different from the other levels (p<0.05); the

Intermediate level is different from the Pre-intermediate and the Advanced level

(p<0.05), but not from the Post-intermediate level (p=0.13); and the Advanced level is

statistically different from the Pre-intermediate and the Intermediate level (p<0.05), but

not from the Post-intermediate level (p=0.95). In this way, it can be suggested that

similar levels of proficiency are achieved due to the academic training received

throughout the four years of language studies.


the depth of vocabulary knowledge, is also proved to be true as the mean along the four

levels of competence increases (Pre-intermediate, 86.79; Intermediate, 106.09; Post-

intermediate, 106.63; and Advanced, 114.55). The difference between the four levels in

terms of their mean and standard deviation was statistically significant, especially the

Pre-intermediate level in relation to the other three levels.

Hypothesis 4, i.e., the more successful a learner is at any level of communicative

competence, the higher the breadth and depth of vocabulary knowledge, is confirmed.

As mentioned above, successful students at any level of proficiency obtained higher

results in breadth and depth tests than less successful students, considering that the

successful students’ mean is higher than the less successful students’ mean in every test.

To sum up, concerning the first three hypotheses, it can be stated that there is an

increase in the vocabulary knowledge of the subjects in terms of receptive and

productive breadth and depth of vocabulary knowlegde. This can be clearly seen in

73

every table and figure presented above, as higher levels of communicative competence

attained higher average of scores in every test, which seems to be a common pattern in

the three dimensions of lexical competence, i.e., breadth, depth, and the receptive-

productive dimensions. The most significant difference between the four levels of

communicative competence is the one between the Pre-intermediate level and the other

three levels. A possible explanation for this phenomenon is the dissimilar level of

communicative competence of the subjects as they come from different educational

backgrounds, either bilingual schools (English/Spanish), schools in which English is

considered as an instrumental language, or schools in which English is not part of the

course of studies. There are also other external factors, such as family background,

personal interests, motivation, etc. Nevertheless, this heterogeneity diminishes at the

higher levels as subjects reach similar levels in their communicative competence

because of the input they receive throughoutthe four years of language study.

Regarding the first research question, referred to the kinds of word classes that

were unanswered at each level of communicative competence, Pre-intermediate students

mainly omitted nouns (66.2%); at the Intermediate level, the majority of omitted items

corresponded to adjectives (54.1%); at the Post-intermediate level, mainly adjectives

were omitted (54.3%); and at the Advanced level, verbs were more frequently omitted

(42.6%). Broadly speaking, nouns were more frequently omitted (50.3%) than verbs

(48.9%), and, in turn, verbs than adjectives (47.1%) at all levels of communicative

competence.

Concerning the second research question, i.e., what kinds of mistakes were

made at each level of communicative competence, the Another Target Word category

was the most frequent mistake made by students at all levels of communicative

74

competence, followed by Morphological Creativity, Spelling, Grammatical, and

Borrowings in a descending order. However, it is important to highlight that the two

higher levels of communicative competence, i.e., the Post-intermediate and Advanced,

show a slightly different frequency pattern as follows: Another Target Word, Spelling,

Morphological Creativity, Grammatical mistakes, and finally, Borrowing, the difference

being that Spelling presents a higher percentage of occurrence than Morphological

Creativity. It could be suggested that this phenomenon occurs due to the fact that Pre-

intermediate and Intermediate subjects have a lower level of proficiency; therefore, they

may have to make use of Morphological Creativity to compensate for their lack of

vocabulary.

Regarding the first and second research questions, Post-intermediate and

Advanced subjects gave a higher number of responses, but at the same time, they made

more mistakes. Possibly, this may occur because when students reach higher levels of

communicative competence, they feel more confident to provide responses, even

running the risk of making mistakes.

Considering subjects with lower levels of competence, Intermediate students

present less unanswered items (52.2%) than Pre-intermediate students (65.3%) do.

Additionally, they make fewer mistakes (an average of 22.7% and 24.2%, respectively).

Firstly, in relation to the limitations of the study, the following can be stated:

since the Vocabulary Levels Test is Discrete in nature, i.e., it focuses on a single

construct, namely, vocabulary knowledge, it is difficult to generalize about the subjects’

actual level of performance in the language only by taking their scores into account. The

fact of being successful in the L2 does not only depend on knowing a large number of

75

words or the grammatical rules of the language, but on the ability to use this knowledge

appropriately in communication.

Secondly, it is important to highlight the problems regarding the design of the

test. For example, in the productive breadth test, more than one English word can be

provided as the target word in some sentences. The next two sentences show this

drawback:

a. “The pro_________ of failing the test scared him” the blank can be filled in with

either ‘probability’ or ‘prospect’, since both words are synonyms. As defined by

Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary Online, ‘prospect’ means “the idea of

something that will or might happen in the future”, while ‘probability’ means “the

likelihood of something happening or being true”;

b. and “Despite his physical condition, his int__________ was unaffected”, with

‘intellect’ or ‘intelligence’. While ‘intellect’ means “the ability to understand and to

think in an intelligent way; or the ability to do these things to a high level”;

‘intelligence’ is described as “the ability to learn, understand and make judgments or

have opinions that are based on reason”.

Thirdly, idiomatic expressions pose problems for learners due to the fact that

they are ambiguous, and culturally based (Segler 2001). One example of this can be

seen in the following sentence, where it would have been less complicated for the

subject to povide the target word if it had not been part of an idiom:

a. “Some people find it hard to be independent. They prefer to be tied to their mother’s

ap____ strings.”

76

Regarding the elicitation of the data, some problems were faced. Firstly, the fact

of having different sessions previosly planned for this objective implied difficulties in

having the same subjects in the three sessions. Secondly, in some instances teachers

could not allow the test takers to collect the data because they did not have enough time

to finish their scheduled activities. Although these problems were faced in the collection

of the data, the objectives of this research study were fulfilled and the results obtained

were statistically supported.

Since this study intends to describe the lexical competence of learners of English

as a second language, it would be desirable, for further research, not only to identify the

phenomenon of frequent mistakes in general terms, but also to give an account of this

phenomenon per word frequency level. This attempt could be made in order to obtain a

more thorough insight into the current level of subjects' proficiency at all levels of

communicative competence, and to recognize the possible sources and processes

involved in learners’ mistakes, such as negative transfer from the L1 and/or from other

L2’s known by the learner, and intralingual problems in interlanguage development.

77

6. Bibliography

BEGLAR, D. 2000. Estimating vocabulary size. Shiken: JALT Testing & Evaluation

SIG Newsletter Vol 4, No. 1: 2-3.

BEGLAR, D., and A. HUNT. 1999. Revising and validating the 2000 word level and

university word level vocabulary tests. Language Testing 16: 131–62.

BEHEYDT, L. 1987. The semantization of vocabulary in foreign language learning.

System 15,1: 55-67.

BLUM, S., and E.A. LEVENSTON. 1978. Lexical simplification in second language

acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2, 2: 43-64.

BORER, L. 2004. Speaking to the self and to others: The role of social and private

speech in the retention of second language vocabulary by adult academic learners.

PhD. Thesis Proposal.

Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (Online) Available at

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/

CARTER, R. 1987. Vocabulary. Applied linguistic perspectives. London: Allen &

Unwin.

CROW, J. 1986. Receptive vocabulary acquisition for reading comprehension. Modern

Language Journal 70, 3: 242 - 250.

78

HENRIKSEN, B. 1999. Three dimensions of vocabulary development. Studies in

Second Language Acquisition 21: 303-317.

JIMÉNEZ, R.M. 2002. El concepto de competencia léxica en los estudios de

aprendizaje y enseñanza de segundas lenguas. Atlantis 24, no. 2: 149-162. Universidad

de La Rioja.

JOYCE, P. 2003. The breadth of vocabulary learning at a Japanese university.

Proceedings of the 11th annual KOTESOL International Conference, Seoul, Korea, Oct.

18-19, 2003. 171-182.

KRAMSCH, C. 2000. Second language acquisition, applied linguistics, and the teaching

of foreign languages. The Modern Language Journal 84 3: 311-326.

LAFFORD, B., J.G. COLLENTINE, and A. KARP. 2000. The acquisition of lexical

meaning by second language learners: An analysis of general research trends with

evidence from Spanish. In B. Lafford and R. Salaberry (Eds.), Studies in Spanish

second language acquisition: The state of the science. 130-159. Washington, DC:

Georgetown University Press.

LAUFER, B. 1991. Knowing a word: What is so difficult about it? English Teachers'

Journal 42: 82-88.

LAUFER, B. 1992. How much lexis is necessary for reading comprehension? In H.

Béjoint and P. Arnaud (Eds), Vocabulary and applied linguistics. London: MacMillan.

126-132.

79

LAUFER, B. 1996. The lexical threshold of second language reading comprehension:

What it is and how it relates to L1 reading ability. In K. Sajavaara & C. Fairweather

(Eds), Approaches to second language acquisition. Jyväskylä, Finland: University of

Jyväskylä. 55-62.

LAUFER, B., and P. NATION. 1995. Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2

written production. Applied Linguistics 16 (3): 307-322.

LAUFER, B., and T.S. PARIBAKHT. 1998. The relationship between passive and

active vocabularies: Effects of language learning context. Language Learning 48, no 3:

365-391.

LAUFER, B., P. NATION. 1999. A vocabulary-size test of controlled productive

ability. Language Testing 16/1:33-51.

LENNON, P. 1990. The bases for vocabulary teaching at the advanced level. I.T.L. 87-

88: 1-22.

MEARA, P. 1983. Word associations in a foreign language: A report on the Birkbeck

Vocabulary Project. Nottingham Linguistic Circular 11, 29–38.

MEARA, P. 1996a. The dimensions of lexical competence. Performance and

competence in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

33-54.

MEARA, P. 1996b. The vocabulary knowledge framework.

www.swan.ac.uk/cals/ulib.html.

80

MESSICK, S.A. 1989. Validity. In R.L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement. 3rd

edition. New York: American Council on Education/Macmillan Publishing Company.

13–103.

NATION, P. 1983. Testing and teaching vocabulary. Guidelines 5 (1983), pp. 12–25.

NATION, P. 1990. What is involved in learning a word? Teaching and learning

vocabulary. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House. 29-50.

NATION. 2001. Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press. (Victoria University of Wellington)

NATION, P., and R. WARING. 1997. Vocabulary size, text coverage and word lists. In

N. Schmitt, and M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and

pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 6-19.

POULISSE, N. 1990. The use of compensatory strategies by Dutch learners of English.

Dordrecht: Foris Publication.

QIAN, D. 1998. Depth of vocabulary knowledge: Assessing its roles in adults’ reading

comprehension in English as a second language. PhD Thesis, University of Toronto.

QIAN, D. 1999. Assessing the roles of depth and breadth of vocabulary knowledge in

reading comprehension. Canadian Modern Language Review 56, 2: 282-307.

QIAN, D. 2002. Investigating the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and

academic reading performance: an assessment perspective. Language Learning 52, 3:

513-536.

81

QIAN, D. 2004. Establishing parameters for assessing vocabulary knowledge.

Language Assessment Quarterly I (1): 57-61.

READ, J. 2000. Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

RICHARDS, J. 1976. The role of vocabulary teaching. TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 10, No

1: 77-89.

ROBINSON, P. 1989. A rich view of lexical competence. ELT Journal 43.4: 274-81.

SCHMITT, N. 1995. A fresh approach to vocabulary: Using a word knowledge

framework. RELC Journal 26.1: 86-94.

SCHMITT, N., and P. MEARA. 1997. Researching vocabulary through a word

knowledge framework. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19: 17-36.

SCHMITT, N., D. SCHMITT, and C. CLAPHAM. 2001. Developing and exploring the

behaviour of two new versions of the vocabulary levels test. Language Testing 18 (1):

55-88.

SCHONELL, F. J., I.G. MEDDLETON, B.A. SHAW. l956. A study of the oral

vocabulary of adults. Brisbane: University of Queensland Press.

SEGLER, T. 2001. Second language vocabulary acquisition and learning strategies in

ICALL environments. PhD. Research Proposal.

82

WARING, R. 1997. A comparison of the receptive and productive vocabulary sizes of

some second language learners. Immaculata Occasional Papers of Notre Dame Seishin

University 1: 53-68.

WESCHE, M., and T.S. PARIBAKHT. 1996: Assessing vocabulary knowledge: Depth

versus breadth. Canadian Modern Language Review 53: 13-40.

XING, P. and G. FULCHER. 2007. Reliability assessment for two versions of

Vocabulary Levels Test. System 35: 182-191.

XUE, G, and P. NATION. 1984. A university word list. Language Learning and

Communication 3: 215-229.

YU. L. 1996. The role of cross-linguistic lexical similarity in the use of motion verbs in

English by Chinese and Japanese learners. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University

of Toronto.

ZAREVA, A. 2005. Models of lexical knowledge assessment of second language

learners of English at higher levels of language proficiency. System 33: 547-562.

83

7. Appendices

7.1. Appendix A. Successful and Less Successful students.

Table 1. Pre-intermediate successful students.

SUBJECT FINAL MARK

9 5,1 11 5,1 14 5,2 2 5,6 15 5,6 5 5,7 12 6,4

Table 2. Intermediate successful students.

SUBJECT FINAL MARK

24 5,2 25 5,2 31 5,3 28 5,6

Table 3. Post-intermediate successful students.

SUBJECT FINAL MARK

46 5,1 45 5,2 47 5,2 60 5,2 44 5,3 55 5,4 59 5,5 57 5,6 54 6,2

84

Table 4. Advanced successful students.

SUBJECT FINAL MARK

62 5,1 63 5,1 72 5,1 73 5,1 61 5,2 68 5,2 64 5,3 69 5,3 71 5,3 70 5,4 75 5,4 67 5,5 74 5,6 78 5,6 79 5,6 77 5,9 65 6

Table 5. Pre-intermediate less successful students.

SUBJECT FINAL MARK

17 3,2 19 3,7 16 3,8 13 4,1 6 4,2 1 4,3 7 4,7 10 4,8 18 4,8 3 4,9 8 4,9 4 5

85

Table 6. Intermediate less successful students.

SUBJECT FINAL MARK

35 3,7 33 3,8 21 3,9 32 3,9 38 4 37 4,2 22 4,3 30 4,3 20 4,4 26 4,5 27 4,5 29 4,5 34 4,5 39 4,5 41 4,5 40 4,8 23 4,9 36 4,9

86

Table 7. Post-intermediate less successful students.

SUBJECT FINAL MARK

51 2,2 52 4 42 4,5 53 4,7 56 4,7 58 4,7 48 4,9 50 4,9 43 5 49 5

Table 8. Advanced less successful students.

SUBJECT FINAL MARK

76 4,7 66 4,9 80 5

87

7.2. Appendix B. Tests. 7.2.1. Test 1. Receptive Vocabulary Levels Test.. Universidad de Chile Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades Departamento de Lingüística Proyecto DI Vocabulary test Language ……………….. Name: ……………………………… Date: ……………………………………… This is a vocabulary test. You must choose the right word to go with each meaning. Write the number of that word next to each meaning. Here is an example:

1. business 2. clock _______6______ part of a house 3. horse _______3______ animal with four legs 4. pencil _______4______ something used for writing 5. shoe 6. wall

A 1 1. copy

2. event 3. motor 4. pity 5. profit 6. tip

______ end or highest point ______ this moves a car ______ thing made to be like another

6 1. blame 2. elect 3. jump 4. threaten 5. melt 6. manufacture

______ make ______ choose by voting ______ become like water

2 1. accident 2. debt 3. fortune 4. pride 5. roar 6. thread

______ loud deep sound ______ something you must pay ______ having a high opinion of yourself

7 1. dozen 2. empire 3. gift 4. tax 5. relief 6. opportunity

______ chance ______ twelve ______ money paid to the government

3 1. coffee 2. disease 3. justice 4. skirt 5. stage 6. wage

______ money for work ______ a piece of clothing ______ using the law in the right way

8 1. ancient 2. curious 3. difficult 4. entire 5. holy 6. social

______ not easy ______ very old ______ related to God

4 1. arrange 2. develop 3. lean 4. owe 5. prefer 6. seize

______ grow ______ put in order ______ like more than something else

9 1. admire 2. complain 3. fix 4. hire 5. introduce 6. stretch

______ make wider or longer ______ bring in for the first time ______ have a high opinion of someone

5 1. clerk 2. frame 3. noise 4. respect 5. theatre 6. wine

______ a drink ______ office worker ______ unwanted sound

10 1. slight 2. bitter 3. lovely 4. merry 5. popular 6. independent

______ beautiful ______ small ______ liked by many people

88

B 1 1. bull

2. champion 3. dignity 4. hell 5. museum 6. solution

______ formal and serious manner ______winner of a sporting event ______building where valuable objects are shown

6 1. atmosphere 2. counsel 3. factor 4. hen 5. lawn 6. muscle

_______advice _______a place covered with grass _______female chicken

2 1. blanket 2. contest 3. generatio

n 4. merit 5. plot 6. vacation

_______holiday _______good quality _______wool covering used on beds

7 1. abandon 2. dwell 3. oblige 4. pursue 5. quote 6. resolve

______ live in a place ______ follow in order to catch ______ leave something permanently.

3 1. comment 2. gown 3. import 4. nerve 5. pasture 6. tradition

______ long formal dress ______ goods from a foreign country ______ part of the body which carries feeling

8 1. assemble 2. attach 3. peer 4. quit 5. scream 6. toss

______ look closely ______ stop doing something ______ cry out loudly in fear

4 1. pond 2. angel 3. frost 4. herd 5. fort 6. administr

ation

______group of animals ______spirit who serves God ______managing business and affairs

9 1. drift 2. endure 3. grasp 4. knit 5. register 6. tumble

______ suffer patiently ______join wool threads together ______ hold firmly with your hands

5 1. brilliant 2. distinct 3. magic 4. naked 5. slender 6. stable

______ thin ______ steady ______ without clothes

10 1. aware 2. blank 3. desperate 4. normal 5. striking 6. supreme

______ usual ______ best or most important ______knowing what is happening

89

C 1 1. analysis

2. curb 3. gravel 4. mortgage 5. scar 6. zeal

______ eagerness ______ loan to buy a house ______ small stones mixed with sand

6 1. artillery 2. creed 3. hydrogen 4. maple 5. pork 6. streak

______ a kind of tree ______ system of belief ______ large gun on wheels

2 1. cavalry 2. Eve 3. ham 4. mound 5. steak 6. switch

______ small hill ______ day or night before a holiday ______ soldiers who fight from horses

7 1. chart 2. forge 3. mansion 4. outfit 5. sample 6. volunteer

______ map ______ large beautiful house ______ place where metals are made and shaped

3 1. circus 2. jungle 3. trumpet 4. sermon 5. stool 6. nomination

______ musical instrument ______ seat without a back or arms ______ speech given by a priest in a church

8 1. revive 2. extract 3. gamble 4. launch 5. provoke 6. contemplate

______ think about deeply ______bring back to health ______ make someone angry

4 1. shatter 2. embarrass 3. heave 4. obscure 5. demonstrate 6. relax

______ have a rest ______ break suddenly into small pieces ______ make someone feel shy or nervous

9 1. decent 2. frail 3. harsh 4. incredible 5. municipal 6. specific

______ weak ______ concerning a city ______ difficult to believe

5 1. correspond 2. embroider 3. lurk 4. penetrate 5. prescribe 6. resent

______ exchange letters ______ hide and wait for someone ______ feel angry about something

10 1. adequate 2. internal 3. mature 4. profound 5. solitary 6. tragic

______enough ______fully grown ______alone away from other things

90

D 1 1. alabaster

2. tentacle 3. dogma 4. keg 5. rasp 6. chandelier

______ small barrel ______ soft white stone ______ tool for shaping

6 1. throttle 2. convoy 3. lien 4. octave 5. stint 6. benevolence

______kindness ______ set of musical notes ______ speed control for an engine

2 1. bourgeois 2. brocade 3. consonant 4. prelude 5. stupor 6. tier

______ middle class people ______ row or level of something ______ cloth with a pattern or gold or silver threads

7 1. scrawl 2. cringe 3. immerse 4. peek 5. contaminate 6. relay

______ write carelessly ______ move back because of fear ______ put something under water

3 1. alcove 2. impetus 3. maggot 4. parole 5. salve 6. vicar

______ priest ______ release from prison early ______ medicine to put on wounds

8 1. blurt 2. dabble 3. dent 4. pacify 5. strangle 6. swagger

______ walk in a proud way ______ kill by squeezing someone’s throat ______ say suddenly without thinking

4 1. alkali 2. banter 3. coop 4. mosaic 5. stealth 6. viscount

______ light joking talk ______ a rank of British nobility ______ picture made of small pieces of glass or stone

9 1. illicit 2. lewd 3. mammoth 4. slick 5. temporal 6. vindictive

______ immense ______ against the law ______ wanting revenge

5 1. dissipate 2. flaunt 3. impede 4. loot 5. squirm 6. vie

______ steal ______scatter or vanish ______ twist the body about uncomfortably

10 1. indolent 2. nocturnal 3. obsolete 4. torrid 5. translucent 6. wily

______lazy ______ no longer used ______ clever and tricky

91

E 1 1. area

2. contract 3. definition 4. evidence 5. method 6. role

______written agreement ______way of doing something ______ reason for believing something is or is not true

6 1. adult 2. vehicle 3. exploitation 4. infrastructure 5. termination 6. schedule

______ end ______ machine used to move people or goods ______ list of things to do at certain times

2 1. debate 2. exposure 3. integration 4. option 5. scheme 6. stability

______ plan ______ choice ______ joining something into a whole

7 1. alter 2. coincide 3. deny 4. devote 5. release 6. specify

______ change ______ say something is not true ______ describe clearly and exactly

3 1. access 2. gender 3. psychology 4. license 5. orientation 6. implementation

______ male or female ______ study of the mind ______entrance or way in

8 1. correspond 2. diminish 3. emerge 4. highlight 5. invoke 6. retain

______ keep ______ match or be in agreement with ______ give special attention to something

4 1. edition 2. accumulation 3. guarantee 4. media 5. motivation 6. phenomenon

______ collecting things over time ______ promise to repair a broken product ______ feeling a strong reason or need to do something

9 1. bond 2. channel 3. estimate 4. identify 5. mediate 6. minimize

______ make smaller ______ guess the number or size of something ______ recognizing and naming a person or thing

5 1. explicit 2. final 3. negative 4. professional 5. rigid 6. sole

______ last ______ stiff ______ meaning ‘no’ or ‘not’

10 1. abstract 2. adjacent 3. neutral 4. global 5. controversial 6. supplementary

______ next to ______ added to ______ concerning the whole world

92

7.2.2. Test 2. Productive Vocabulary Levels Test. Universidad de Chile Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades Departamento de Lingüística Proyecto DI Language: ………………….. Name: ………………………………………………………………………………………. Date:

1. Complete the words. Try to do every part of the test. Here is an example:

He was riding a bicycle

A

1. La_________ of rain led to a shortage of water in the city.

2. The rich man died and left all his we___________to his son.

3. Pup___________must hand in their papers by the end of the week.

4. This sweater is too tight. It needs to be stret___________

5. If you blow up that balloon any more it will bu_________

6. In order to be accepted into the university, he had to impr___________his

grades.

7. The differences were so sl___________ that they went unnoticed.

8. The dress you're wearing is lov_________.

9. It is the de____________ that counts, not the thought.

10. Plants receive water from the soil through their ro___________.

11. The nu____________ was helping the doctor in the operating room.

12. Since he is unskilled, he earns low wa___________.

13. This year long sk_____________ are fashionable again.

14. He is walking on the ti_____________ of his toes.

15. They had to cl_____________ a steep mountain to reach the cabin.

16. She wan_____________ aimlessly in the streets.

17. This work is not up to your usu___________ standard.

18. They sat down to eat even though they were not hu___________.

93

B

1. She wore a beautiful green go________________ to the ball.

2. Many people in England mow the la___________of their houses on Sunday.

3. The farmer sells the eggs that his he______________lays.

4. Sudden noises at night sca_____________ me a lot.

5. Many people are inj___________ in road accidents every year.

6. She sowed off her sle___________figure in a long narrow dress.

7. Suddenly he was thru______________ into the dark room.

8. You must wear a bathing suit on a public beach. You're not allowed to bath

na____________.

9. Before writing the final version, the student wrote several dra_____________.

10. It was a cold day. There was a ch___________ in the air.

11. The cart is pulled by an o__________.

12. His beard was too long. He decided to tr_____________ it.

13. People were whir_____________ around on the dance floor.

14. The pro___________ of failing the test scared him.

15. After two years in the Army, he received the rank of lieu____________.

16. You must be aw____________that very few jobs are available.

17. I won’t tell anybody. My lips are sea____________

18. You'll sn___________ that branch if you bend it too far.

94

C

1. Soldiers usually swear an oa____________ of loyalty to their country.

2. The voter placed the ball___________ in the box.

3. They keep their valuables in a vau_____________ at the bank.

4. The kitten is playing with a ball of ya__________.

5. We decided to celebrate New Year's E__________ together.

6. We could hear the sergeant bel__________ commands to the troops.

7. The boss got angry with the secretary and it took a lot of tact to soo__________

him.

8. Some people find it hard to be independent. They prefer to be tied to their

mother's ap____________ strings.

9. The workmen cleaned up the me_____________ before they left.

10. I saw them sitting on st___________ at the bar drinking beer.

11. People manage to buy houses by raising a mor___________ from a bank.

12. At the bottom of the blackboard there is a le__________ for chalk.

13. After falling off his bicycle, the boy was covered with bru____________.

14. The child was holding a doll in her arms and hu_____________ it.

15. The picture looks nice; the colours bl___________really well.

16. Nuts and vegetables are considered who__________ food.

17. Many gardens are full of fra__________ flowers.

18. Many people feel depressed and gl__________ about the future of mankind.

95

D

1. The baby is wet. Her dia_________ needs changing.

2. Second year university students in the US are called soph____________.

3. The deac___________ helped with the care of the poor of the parish.

4. The hurricane whi___________ along the coast.

5. Some coal was still smol__________ among the ashes.

6. She was sitting on a balcony and bas__________ in the sun.

7. Computers have made typewriters old-fashioned and obs__________.

8. Watch out for his wil___________ tricks.

9. If your lips are sore , try sal____________, not medicine

10. The new vic________ was appointed by the bishop.

11. The actors exchanged bant___________ with the reporters.

12. A thro_________ controls the flow of gas into an engine.

13. Anyone found loo___________ bombed houses and shops will be severely

punished.

14. The wounded man squi___________ on the floor in agony.

15. The approaching storm stam_________ the cattle into running wildly.

16. The rescue attempt could not proceed quickly. It was imp___________ by bad

weather.

17. the problem is beginning to assume mam____________ proportions.

18. The dog cri________________ when it saw the snake.

96

E

1. There has been a recent tr_____________ among prosperous families toward a

smaller number of children.

2. Spending many years together deepened their int_____________.

3. They insp_____________ all products before sending them out to stores.

4. The victim’s shirt was satu____________ with blood.

5. He’s irresponsible. You cannot re____________ on him for help.

6. He finally att______________ a position of power in the company.

7. The story tells about a crime and subs_____________ punishment.

8. In a hom_____________ class all students are of a similar proficiency.

9. The urge to survive is inh______________ in all creatures.

10. The anom______________ of his position is that he is the chairman of the

committee, but isn’t allowed to vote.

11. In their geography class, the children are doing a special pro__________on North

America.

12. The drug was introduced after medical res___________indisputably proved its

effectiveness.

13. The job offer sounded interesting at first, but when he realized what it involved, his

excitement sub_______________.

14. The airport is far away. If you want to en_____________that you catch your plane,

you’ll have to leave early.

15. It’s difficult to ass_____________a person’s true knowledge by one or two tests.

16. The new manager’s new job was to res____________the company to its former

profitability.

17. 17. Even though the student didn’t do well on the midterm exam, he got the highest

mark on the fi____________.

18. Despite his physical condition, his int____________was unaffected.

97

7.2.3. Test 3. Word Associates Test. Instructions for taking Word Associates Test:

This is a test of how well you know the meaning of adjectives that are commonly used in English. Each item looks like this:

Sudden

beautiful quick surprising thirsty change doctor noise school

There are eight words in the two boxes (left & right boxes).

The words here on the left side may help to explain the meaning of "sudden".

The words here on the right side are nouns that may come after "sudden" in a phrase or a sentence.

"Sudden" means "happening quickly and unexpectedly", so the correct answers on the left side are "quick" and "surprising".

We do not normally say "a sudden doctor" or "a sudden school", but we often say "a sudden change" and "a sudden noise", so "change" and "noise" are the correct answers on this side.

From the two boxes, select four words that you think are relevant to the stimulus word (i.e., ‘sudden’ in this example), according to the criteria mentioned above. Check the answers like this:

Sudden

X X X X beautiful quick surprising thirsty change doctor noise school

Note: In this example, there are two correct answers on the left and two on the right, but this is just an example. Do NOT assume there is a consistent number of correct answers on the left or on the right. Just remember: try to find four related words for each item.

98

Word Associates Test - 40 items - choose four per set (both boxes)

1. beautiful enjoyable expensive free loud education face music weather 2. bright clever famous happy shining colour hand poem taste 3. calm open quiet smooth tired cloth day light person 4. natural expected helpful real short foods neighbours parents songs 5. fresh another cool easy raw cotton heat language water 6. general closed different usual whole country idea reader street 7. bare empty heavy uncovered useful cupboard feet school tool 8. acute hidden often rich sharp angle hearing illness stones

99

9. common complete light ordinary shared boundary circle name party 10. complex angry difficult necessary sudden argument passengers patterns problem 11. broad full moving quiet wide night river shoulders smile 12. conscious awake healthy knowing laughing face decision effort student 13. convenient easy fresh near suitable experience sound time vegetable 14. dense crowded hot noisy thick forest handle smoke weather 15. curious helpful interested missing strange accident child computer steel 16. distinct clear famous separate true advantage meanings news parents 17. dull cloudy loud nice secret colour knife place rock

100

18. direct honest main straight wide fence flight heat river 19. favorable helpful legal possible positive habit response teacher weather 20. secure confident enjoyable fixed safe game job meal visitor 21. tight close rough uncomfortable wet bend pants surface wood 22. violent expected smelly strong unlucky anger death rubbish storm 23. chronic continuing local serious unplanned accident examination illness shortage 24. compact effective small solid useful group kitchen medicine string 25. crude clever fair rough valuable behavior drawing oil trade

101

26. domestic home national regular smooth animal movement policy speed 27. profound bright deep exact great effect machine taste thought 28. fertile dark growing private special business egg mind soil 29. formal fast loud organised serious bomb education growth statement 30. independent changed equal important separate child country ideas prices 31. original careful closed first proud condition mind plan sister 32. sensitive feeling interesting sharp thick clothes instrument skin topic 33. professional paid public regular religious advice manner musician transport 34. critical clear dangerous important rough festival illness time water

102

35. synthetic artificial electronic expensive simple drug meal radio sound 36. liberal free moderate plenty valuable crops furniture parents transport 37. dramatic exciting official surprising worried adventure change patient salary 38. conservative cautious hopeful traditional warm clothes estimate meeting signal 39. coherent clear normal recent together crime health speech theory 40. ample heavy large plentiful windy amount climate feelings time

103

7.3. Appendix C. Correlation Analysis. Table 1. Receptive Breadth test’s analysis of Variance.

Sum of squares Degrees of

freedom Mean squares F-statistic p-value Between groups 8741,167 3 2913,722 14,724 ,000Within group 15039,321 76 197,886 Total 23780,488 79

Table 2. Tukey HSD Post-Hoc test of Receptive Breadth test.

Level N Subset for alfa=.05

1 2 1 Pre-intermediate 19 97,16 Intermediate 22 115,59Post-intermediate 19 120,16Advanced 20 125,45p-value 1,000 ,129

Table 3. Productive Breadth test’s analysis of Variance.

Sum of squares Degrees of

freedom Mean squares F-statistic p-value Between groups 5662,564 3 1887,521 19,101 ,000Within group 7510,236 76 98,819 Total 13172,800 79

Table 4. Tukey HSD Post-Hoc test of Productive Breadth test.

Level N Subset for alfa=.05 1 2 3 1 Pre-intermediate 19 15,95 Intermediate 22 29,14 Post-intermediate 19 36,05 36,05Advanced 20 37,75p-value 1,000 ,134 ,949

104

Table 5. Depth test’s analysis of Variance.

Sum of squares Degrees of freedom Mean squares F-statistic p-value Between groups 8076,653 3 2692,218 8,302 ,000

Within group 24644,347 76 324,268 Total 32721,000 79

Table 6. Tukey HSD Post-Hoc test of Depth test.

Level N Subset for alfa=.05

1 2 1 Pre-intermediate 19 86,79 Intermediate 22 106,09Post-intermediate 19 106,63Advanced 20 114,55p-value 1,000 ,453

105

7.4. Appendix D. Test Results. Table 1. Receptive Breadth test results at Pre-intermediate level of communicative competence.

2000 3000 5000 10000 UWL Average (test)

Subject Final Mark

Nº Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

%

1 4.5 23 76.67% 16 53.33% 17 56.67% 11 36.67% 24 80.00% 91 60.67%2 5.9 29 96.67% 20 66.67% 15 50.00% 11 36.67% 26 86.67% 101 67.33%3 5 28 93.33% 22 73.33% 22 73.33% 13 43.33% 24 80.00% 109 72.67%4 5.6 25 83.33% 22 73.33% 25 83.33% 12 40.00% 25 83.33% 109 72.67%5 6.2 29 96.67% 27 90.00% 26 86.67% 13 43.33% 28 93.33% 123 82.00%6 4.5 28 93.33% 21 70.00% 21 70.00% 11 36.67% 24 80.00% 105 70.00%7 5.4 30 100.00% 22 73.33% 18 60.00% 11 36.67% 26 86.67% 107 71.33%8 4.9 28 93.33% 27 90.00% 29 96.67% 17 56.67% 29 96.67% 130 86.67%9 5.6 23 76.67% 21 70.00% 13 43.33% 7 23.33% 25 83.33% 89 59.33%10 4.9 22 73.33% 19 63.33% 18 60.00% 8 26.67% 23 76.67% 90 60.00%11 5.7 26 86.67% 20 66.67% 15 50.00% 9 30.00% 25 83.33% 95 63.33%12 6.3 27 90.00% 22 73.33% 22 73.33% 13 43.33% 28 93.33% 112 74.67%13 4.4 25 83.33% 18 60.00% 24 80.00% 6 20.00% 28 93.33% 101 67.33%14 5.6 28 93.33% 21 70.00% 26 86.67% 8 26.67% 25 83.33% 108 72.00%15 5.7 27 90.00% 22 73.33% 16 53.33% 10 33.33% 25 83.33% 100 66.67%16 4 19 63.33% 12 40.00% 13 43.33% 4 13.33% 17 56.67% 65 43.33%17 3.9 23 76.67% 17 56.67% 12 40.00% 6 20.00% 24 80.00% 82 54.67%18 4.8 19 63.33% 15 50.00% 10 33.33% 2 6.67% 19 63.33% 65 43.33%19 4.1 17 56.67% 12 40.00% 12 40.00% 5 16.67% 18 60.00% 64 42.67%

Average (per levels

of frequency)

5.11 25.05 83.51% 19.79 65.96% 18.63 62.11% 9.31579 31.05% 24.37 81.23% 97.16 64.77%

106

Table 2. Receptive Breadth test results at Intermediate level of communicative competence.

2000 3000 5000 10000 UWL Average (test)

Subject Final Mark

Nº Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

%

20 46 24 80.00% 20 66.67% 21 70.00% 14 46.67% 27 90.00% 106 70.67%21 48 26 86.67% 25 83.33% 21 70.00% 10 33.33% 23 76.67% 105 70.00%22 49 29 96.67% 25 83.33% 22 73.33% 12 40.00% 28 93.33% 116 77.33%23 58 30 100.00% 30 100.00% 28 93.33% 16 53.33% 29 96.67% 133 88.67%24 52 30 100.00% 28 93.33% 23 76.67% 14 46.67% 28 93.33% 123 82.00%25 58 30 100.00% 30 100.00% 27 90.00% 20 66.66% 28 93.33% 135 90.00%26 55 29 96.67% 26 86.67% 21 70.00% 11 36.67% 29 96.67% 116 77.33%27 57 30 100.00% 28 93.33% 24 80.00% 21 70.00% 29 96.67% 132 88.00%28 58 30 100.00% 30 100.00% 25 83.33% 12 40.00% 30 100.00% 127 84.67%29 35 28 93.33% 20 66.67% 22 73.33% 11 36.67% 28 93.33% 109 72.67%30 53 29 96.67% 21 70.00% 19 63.33% 12 40.00% 23 76.67% 104 69.33%31 53 30 100.00% 30 100.00% 24 80.00% 15 50.00% 28 93.33% 127 84.67%32 45 23 76.67% 21 70.00% 19 63.33% 10 33.33% 25 83.33% 98 65.33%33 44 30 100.00% 29 96.66% 21 70.00% 14 46.67% 25 83.33% 119 79.33%34 47 25 83.33% 20 66.67% 19 63.33% 5 16.67% 25 83.33% 94 62.67%35 41 27 90.00% 16 53.33% 21 70.00% 12 40.00% 21 70.00% 97 64.67%36 38 26 86.67% 21 70.00% 22 73.33% 10 33.33% 28 93.33% 107 71.33%37 36 30 100.00% 29 96.67% 23 76.67% 11 36.67% 27 90.00% 120 80.00%38 45 30 100.00% 26 86.67% 26 86.67% 15 50.00% 27 90.00% 124 82.67%39 48 29 96.67% 30 100.00% 25 83.33% 12 40.00% 28 93.33% 124 82.67%40 41 26 86.67% 24 80.00% 22 73.33% 11 36.67% 26 86.67% 109 72.67%41 44 29 96.67% 26 86.67% 26 86.67% 8 26.67% 29 96.67% 118 78.67%

Average (per levels

of frequency)

47.77 28.18 93.94% 25.23 84.09% 22.77 75.91% 12.5455 41.82% 26.86 89.55% 115.59 77.06%

107

Table 3. Receptive Breadth test results at Post-intermediate level of communicative competence.

2000 3000 5000 10000 UWL Average (test)

Subject Final Mark

Nº Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

%

42 3.9 30 100.00% 27 90.00% 19 63.33% 10 33.33% 30 100.00% 116 77.33% 43 3.9 30 100.00% 24 80.00% 19 63.33% 7 23.33% 26 86.67% 106 70.67% 44 4.2 28 93.33% 29 96.67% 30 100.00% 18 60.00% 27 90.00% 132 88.00% 45 4.6 29 96.67% 28 93.33% 28 93.33% 17 56.67% 29 96.67% 131 87.33% 46 3.9 29 96.67% 27 90.00% 20 66.67% 13 43.33% 29 96.67% 118 78.67% 47 4.8 29 96.67% 27 90.00% 18 60.00% 7 23.33% 26 86.67% 107 71.33% 48 4.2 29 96.67% 27 90.00% 22 73.33% 11 36.67% 29 96.67% 118 78.67% 49 4.5 29 96.67% 17 56.67% 24 80.00% 12 40.00% 27 90.00% 109 72.67% 50 4.3 30 100.00% 30 100.00% 26 86.67% 19 63.33% 29 96.67% 134 89.33% 51 4.1 26 86.67% 19 63.33% 18 60.00% 4 13.33% 25 83.33% 92 61.33% 52 4.2 26 86.67% 20 66.67% 17 56.67% 8 26.67% 22 73.33% 93 62.00% 53 4 30 100.00% 29 96.67% 29 96.67% 10 33.33% 30 100.00% 128 85.33% 54 5.8 29 96.67% 29 96.67% 25 83.33% 17 56.67% 30 100.00% 130 86.67% 55 4.7 30 100.00% 27 90.00% 28 93.33% 19 63.33% 29 96.67% 133 88.67% 56 4.1 30 100.00% 29 96.67% 27 90.00% 14 46.67% 30 100.00% 130 86.67% 57 5.5 29 96.67% 26 86.67% 24 80.00% 12 40.00% 29 96.67% 120 80.00% 58 4.3 28 93.33% 22 73.33% 25 83.33% 13 43.33% 30 100.00% 118 78.67% 59 5.2 30 100.00% 30 100.00% 29 96.67% 25 83.33% 30 100.00% 144 96.00% 60 4.6 29 96.67% 26 86.67% 25 83.33% 15 50.00% 29 96.67% 124 82.67%

Average (per levels

of frequency)

4.46 28.95 96.49% 25.95 86.49% 23.84 79.47% 13.21 44.04% 28.21 94.04% 120.16 80.11%

108

Table 4. Receptive Breadth test results at Advanced level of communicative competence.

2000 3000 5000 10000 UWL Average (test)

Subject Final Mark

Nº Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

%

61 4.6 29 96.60% 20 66.60% 21 70.00% 9 30.00% 29 96.60% 108 71.96% 62 4.8 27 90.00% 20 66.60% 17 56.60% 11 36.60% 28 93.30% 103 68.62% 63 4.4 27 90.00% 26 86.60% 21 70.00% 12 40.00% 29 96.60% 115 76.64% 64 5 28 93.00% 25 83.30% 25 83.30% 17 56.60% 30 100.00% 125 83.24% 65 6.1 30 100.00% 28 93.30% 22 73.30% 12 40.00% 29 96.60% 121 80.64% 66 5 29 96.60% 27 90.00% 25 83.30% 11 36.60% 29 96.60% 121 80.62% 67 4.5 30 100.00% 30 100.00% 30 100.00% 27 90.00% 30 100.00% 147 98.00% 68 4 27 90.00% 24 80.00% 23 76.60% 10 33.33% 29 96.60% 113 75.31% 69 4.7 30 100.00% 26 86.60% 24 80.00% 14 46.60% 29 96.60% 123 81.96% 70 5 29 96.60% 25 83.30% 21 70.00% 14 46.60% 30 100.00% 119 79.30% 71 4.6 29 96.60% 30 100.00% 28 93.30% 16 53.30% 29 96.60% 132 87.96% 72 4.5 29 96.60% 30 100.00% 26 86.60% 18 60.00% 30 100.00% 133 88.64% 73 4.4 30 100.00% 30 100.00% 28 93.30% 17 56.60% 29 96.60% 134 89.30% 74 5.6 30 100.00% 29 96.60% 26 86.60% 20 66.60% 30 100.00% 135 89.96% 75 5.6 30 100.00% 29 96.60% 29 96.60% 20 66.60% 30 100.00% 138 91.96% 76 4.5 30 100.00% 30 100.00% 29 96.60% 22 73.30% 30 100.00% 141 93.98% 77 5.9 29 96.60% 24 80.00% 25 83.30% 15 50.00% 26 86.60% 119 79.30% 78 5.6 30 100.00% 27 90.00% 27 90.00% 12 40.00% 30 100.00% 126 84.00% 79 4.6 30 100.00% 28 93.30% 26 86.60% 16 53.30% 29 96.60% 129 85.96% 80 4.2 29 96.60% 28 93.30% 25 83.30% 15 50.00% 30 100.00% 127 84.64%

Average (per levels

of frequency)

4.88 29.10 96.96% 26.80 89.31% 24.90 82.97% 15.40 51.30% 29.25 97.47% 125.45 83.60%

109

Table 5. Productive Breadth test results at Pre-intermediate level of communicative competence.

2000 3000 5000 10000 UWL Average (test)

Subject Final Mark

Nº Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

%

1 4.5 8 44.44% 4 22.22% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 5.56% 2.6 14.44% 2 5.9 9 50.00% 6 33.33% 1 5.56% 0 0.00% 1 5.56% 3.4 18.89% 3 5 8 44.44% 6 33.33% 3 16.67% 2 11.11% 3 16.67% 4.4 24.44% 4 5.6 7 38.89% 1 5.56% 1 5.56% 0 0.00% 2 11.11% 2.2 12.22% 5 6.2 15 83.33% 6 33.33% 2 11.11% 1 5.56% 6 33.33% 6 33.33% 6 4.5 9 50.00% 6 33.33% 3 16.67% 1 5.56% 7 38.89% 5.2 28.89% 7 5.4 6 33.33% 5 27.78% 3 16.67% 1 5.56% 5 27.78% 4 22.22% 8 4.9 7 38.89% 9 50.00% 1 5.56% 3 16.67% 3 16.67% 4.6 25.56% 9 5.6 12 66.67% 3 16.67% 1 5.56% 1 5.56% 0 0.00% 3.4 18.89%

10 4.9 5 27.78% 4 22.22% 0 0.00% 2 11.11% 1 5.56% 2.4 13.33% 11 5.7 7 38.89% 7 38.89% 2 11.11% 0 0.00% 3 16.67% 3.8 21.11% 12 6.3 12 66.67% 7 38.89% 2 11.11% 1 5.56% 3 16.67% 5 27.78% 13 4.4 5 27.78% 1 5.56% 1 5.56% 0 0.00% 1 5.56% 1.6 8.89% 14 5.6 10 55.56% 3 16.67% 2 11.11% 0 0.00% 1 5.56% 3.2 17.78% 15 5.7 11 61.11% 6 33.33% 3 16.67% 1 5.56% 1 5.56% 4.4 24.44% 16 4 3 16.67% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.6 3.33% 17 3.9 3 16.67% 1 5.56% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 5.56% 1 5.56% 18 4.8 8 44.44% 1 5.56% 1 5.56% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 11.11% 19 4.1 3 16.67% 1 5.56% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.8 4.44%

Average (per levels

of frequency)

5.11 7.79 43.27% 4.05 22.51% 1.37 7.60% 0.68 3.80% 2.05 11.40% 3.19 17.72%

110

Table 6. Productive Breadth test results at Intermediate level of communicative competence.

2000 3000 5000 10000 UWL Average (test)

Subject Final Mark

Nº Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

%

20 4.6 9 50.00% 7 38.89% 2 11.11% 2 11.11% 3 16.67% 23 25.56%21 4.8 14 77.78% 6 33.33% 3 16.67% 1 5.56% 1 5.56% 25 27.78%22 4.9 16 88.89% 7 38.89% 3 16.67% 5 27.78% 6 33.33% 37 41.11%23 5.8 14 77.78% 14 77.78% 8 44.44% 4 22.22% 8 44.44% 48 53.33%24 5.2 11 61.11% 7 38.89% 4 22.22% 2 11.11% 6 33.33% 30 33.33%25 5.8 13 72.22% 7 38.89% 4 22.22% 4 22.22% 7 38.89% 35 38.89%26 5.5 13 72.22% 4 22.22% 1 5.56% 1 5.56% 4 22.22% 23 25.56%27 5.7 14 77.78% 9 50.00% 5 27.78% 3 16.67% 5 27.78% 36 40.00%28 5.8 15 83.33% 12 66.67% 10 55.56% 5 27.78% 5 27.78% 47 52.22%29 3.5 10 55.56% 6 33.33% 3 16.67% 1 5.56% 7 38.89% 27 30.00%30 5.3 11 61.11% 4 22.22% 2 11.11% 0 0.00% 3 16.67% 20 22.22%31 5.3 14 77.78% 11 61.11% 8 44.44% 4 22.22% 4 22.22% 41 45.56%32 4.5 9 50.00% 6 33.33% 3 16.67% 0 0.00% 3 16.67% 21 23.33%33 4.4 13 72.22% 7 38.89% 4 22.22% 2 11.11% 7 38.89% 33 36.67%34 4.7 9 50.00% 3 16.67% 1 5.56% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 13 14.44%35 4.1 8 44.44% 1 5.56% 1 5.56% 0 0.00% 1 5.56% 11 12.22%36 3.8 9 50.00% 8 44.44% 3 16.67% 2 11.11% 6 33.33% 28 31.11%37 3.6 15 83.33% 5 27.78% 4 22.22% 1 5.56% 4 22.22% 29 32.22%38 4.5 11 61.11% 5 27.78% 3 16.67% 0 0.00% 9 50.00% 28 31.11%39 4.8 13 72.22% 11 61.11% 5 27.78% 5 27.78% 7 38.89% 41 45.56%40 4.1 10 55.56% 3 16.67% 1 5.56% 0 0.00% 5 27.78% 19 21.11%41 4.4 14 77.78% 6 33.33% 1 5.56% 2 11.11% 3 16.67% 26 28.89%

Average (per levels

of frequency)

4.77 12.05 66.92% 6.77 37.63% 3.59 19.95% 2 11.11% 4.73 26.26% 29.14 32.37%

111

Table 7. Productive Breadth test results at Post-intermediate level of communicative competence.

2000 3000 5000 10000 UWL Average (test)

Subject Final Mark

Nº Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

%

42 3.9 14 77.78% 5 27.78% 3 16.67% 2 11.11% 2 11.11% 26 28.89%43 3.9 11 61.11% 6 33.33% 2 11.11% 0 0.00% 4 22.22% 23 25.56%44 4.2 16 88.89% 15 83.33% 12 66.67% 8 44.44% 11 61.11% 62 68.89%45 4.6 16 88.89% 12 66.67% 5 27.78% 3 16.67% 11 61.11% 47 52.22%46 3.9 13 72.22% 8 44.44% 6 33.33% 2 11.11% 5 27.78% 34 37.78%47 4.8 13 72.22% 5 27.78% 3 16.67% 0 0.00% 4 22.22% 25 27.78%48 4.2 14 77.78% 8 44.44% 3 16.67% 0 0.00% 5 27.78% 30 33.33%49 4.5 14 77.78% 8 44.44% 5 27.78% 0 0.00% 7 38.89% 34 37.78%50 4.3 15 83.33% 11 61.11% 7 38.89% 3 16.67% 7 38.89% 43 47.78%51 4.1 10 55.56% 6 33.33% 3 16.67% 1 5.56% 0 0.00% 20 22.22%52 4.2 8 44.44% 2 11.11% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 11.11% 12 13.33%53 4 17 94.44% 12 66.67% 8 44.44% 2 11.11% 10 55.56% 49 54.44%54 5.8 15 83.33% 11 61.11% 7 38.89% 3 16.67% 10 55.56% 46 51.11%55 4.7 9 50.00% 10 55.56% 6 33.33% 2 11.11% 9 50.00% 36 40.00%56 4.1 15 83.33% 10 55.56% 7 38.89% 1 5.56% 9 50.00% 42 46.67%57 5.5 14 77.78% 6 33.33% 4 22.22% 0 0.00% 1 5.56% 25 27.78%58 4.3 11 61.11% 6 33.33% 4 22.22% 0 0.00% 6 33.33% 27 30.00%59 5.2 15 83.33% 16 88.89% 11 61.11% 4 22.22% 14 77.78% 60 66.67%60 4.6 15 83.33% 10 55.56% 6 33.33% 3 16.67% 10 55.56% 44 48.89%

Average (per levels

of frequency)

4.46 13.42 74.56% 8.79 48.83% 5.37 29.82% 1.78947 9.94% 6.68 37.13% 36.05 40.06%

112

Table 8. Productive Breadth test results at Advanced level of communicative competence.

2000 3000 5000 10000 UWL Average (test)

Subject Final Mark

Nº Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

% Nº

Correct answers

%

61 4.6 10 55.56% 8 44.44% 1 5.56% 1 5.56% 1 5.56% 21 23.33%62 4.8 11 61.11% 5 27.78% 1 5.56% 1 5.56% 6 33.33% 24 26.67%63 4.4 14 77.78% 10 55.56% 6 33.33% 1 5.56% 7 38.89% 38 42.22%64 5 12 66.67% 8 44.44% 3 16.67% 2 11.11% 9 50.00% 34 37.78%65 6.1 16 88.89% 9 50.00% 6 33.33% 4 22.22% 12 66.67% 47 52.22%66 5 14 77.78% 8 44.44% 7 38.89% 2 11.11% 7 38.89% 38 42.22%67 4.5 11 61.11% 11 61.11% 7 38.89% 3 16.67% 6 33.33% 38 42.22%68 4 10 55.56% 13 72.22% 7 38.89% 5 27.78% 6 33.33% 41 45.56%69 4.7 12 66.67% 5 27.78% 4 22.22% 1 5.56% 8 44.44% 30 33.33%70 5 11 61.11% 11 61.11% 5 27.78% 1 5.56% 3 16.67% 31 34.44%71 4.6 16 88.89% 9 50.00% 8 44.44% 6 33.33% 7 38.89% 46 51.11%72 4.5 14 77.78% 8 44.44% 6 33.33% 5 27.78% 7 38.89% 40 44.44%73 4.4 12 66.67% 11 61.11% 5 27.78% 1 5.56% 4 22.22% 33 36.67%74 5.6 13 72.22% 12 66.67% 6 33.33% 1 5.56% 9 50.00% 41 45.56%75 5.6 14 77.78% 9 50.00% 6 33.33% 2 11.11% 8 44.44% 39 43.33%76 4.5 13 72.22% 12 66.67% 10 55.56% 5 27.78% 12 66.67% 52 57.78%77 5.9 11 61.11% 14 77.78% 8 44.44% 2 11.11% 9 50.00% 44 48.89%78 5.6 16 88.89% 9 50.00% 7 38.89% 3 16.67% 9 50.00% 44 48.89%79 4.6 15 83.33% 8 44.44% 6 33.33% 2 11.11% 6 33.33% 37 41.11%80 4.2 11 61.11% 10 55.56% 6 33.33% 4 22.22% 6 33.33% 37 41.11%

Average (per levels

of frequency)

4.88 12.80 71.11% 9.50 52.78% 5.75 31.94% 2.6 14.44% 7.10 39.44% 37.75 41.94%

113

Table 9. Depth test results at Pre-intermediate level of communicative competence.

Subject Final Mark

Nº Correct answers %

1 4.5 31 44.37% 2 5.9 85 53.12% 3 5 85 53.12% 4 5.6 93 58.12% 5 6.2 132 82.50% 6 4.5 91 56.87% 7 5.4 92 57.50% 8 4.9 122 76.25% 9 5.6 82 51.25% 10 4.9 68 42.50% 11 5.7 81 50.62% 12 6.3 106 66.25% 13 4.4 84 52.50% 14 5.6 109 68.12% 15 5.7 106 66.25% 16 4 44 27.50% 17 3.9 93 58.12% 18 4.8 69 43.12% 19 4.1 76 47.50%

Average (test) 5.11 86.79 55.56%

114

Table 10. Depth test results at Intermediate level of communicative competence.

Subject Final Mark


20 4.6 102 63.75% 21 4.8 119 74.37% 22 4.9 106 66.25% 23 5.8 116 72.50% 24 5.2 108 67.50% 25 5.8 134 83.75% 26 5.5 123 76.88% 27 5.7 129 80.62% 28 5.8 97 60.62% 29 3.5 121 75.62% 30 5.3 107 66.87% 31 5.3 105 65.63% 32 4.5 93 58.12% 33 4.4 75 46.87% 34 4.7 88 55.00% 35 4.1 80 50.00% 36 3.8 92 57.50% 37 3.6 101 63.12% 38 4.5 116 72.50% 39 4.8 125 78.12% 40 4.1 105 65.63% 41 4.4 92 57.50%

Average (test) 4.78 106.09 66.31%

115

Table 11. Depth test results at Post-intermediate level of communicative competence.

Subject Final Mark


42 3.9 79 49.37% 43 3.9 127 79.37% 44 4.2 110 68.75% 45 4.6 105 65.62% 46 3.9 122 76.25% 47 4.8 100 62.50% 48 4.2 84 52.50% 49 4.5 124 77.50% 50 4.3 128 80.00% 51 4.1 100 62.50% 52 4.2 96 60.00% 53 4 135 84.37% 54 5.8 85 53.12% 55 4.7 105 65.62% 56 4.1 73 45.62% 57 5.5 109 68.12% 58 4.3 108 67.50% 59 5.2 127 79.37% 60 4.6 109 68.12%

Average (test) 4.46 106.63 66.64%

116

Table 12. Depth test results at Advanced level of communicative competence.

Subject Final Mark


61 4.6 95 59.37% 62 4.8 112 70.00% 63 4.4 115 71.87% 64 5 131 81.87% 65 6.1 94 58.00% 66 5 113 70.62% 67 4.5 127 79.37% 68 4 110 68.75% 69 4.7 91 56.87% 70 5 126 78.75% 71 4.6 122 76.25% 72 4.5 131 81.87% 73 4.4 104 65.00% 74 5.6 109 68.12% 75 5.6 130 81.25% 76 4.5 113 70.62% 77 5.9 100 62.50% 78 5.6 122 76.25% 79 4.6 133 83.12% 80 4.2 113 70.62%

Average (test) 4.88 114.55 72.19%

117

Table 13. Average scores of Receptive Breadth test results at Pre-intermediate level of

communicative competence.

Average score per test Subject Final

Mark Nº of correct answers %

1 4.3 91 60.67%2 5.6 101 67.33%3 4.9 109 72.67%4 5 109 72.67%5 5.7 123 82.00%6 4.2 105 70.00%7 4.7 107 71.33%8 4.9 130 86.67%9 5.1 89 59.33%10 4.8 90 60.00%11 5.1 95 63.33%12 6.4 112 74.67%13 4.1 101 67.33%14 5.2 108 72.00%15 5.6 100 66.67%16 3.8 65 43.33%17 3.2 82 54.67%18 4.8 65 43.33%19 3.7 64 42.67%

Average per level of Comm. Competence 4.79 97.16 64.77%

118

Table 14. Average scores of Receptive Breadth test results at Intermediate level of


Average per test Subject Final

Mark Nº of correct answers %

20 4.4 106 70.67%21 3.9 105 70.00%22 4.3 116 77.33%23 4.9 133 88.67%24 5.2 123 82.00%25 5.2 135 90.00%26 4.5 116 77.33%27 4.5 132 88.00%28 5.6 127 84.67%29 4.5 109 72.67%30 4.3 104 69.33%31 5.3 127 84.67%32 3.9 98 65.33%33 3.8 119 79.33%34 4.5 94 62.67%35 3.7 97 64.67%36 4.9 107 71.33%37 4.2 120 80.00%38 4 124 82.67%39 4.5 124 82.67%40 4.8 109 72.67%41 4.5 118 78.67%


119

Table 15. Average scores of Receptive Breadth test results at Post-intermediate level of



mark Nº of correct answers %

42 4.5 116 77.33% 43 5 106 70.67% 44 5.3 132 88.00% 45 5.2 131 87.33% 46 5.1 118 78.67% 47 5.2 107 71.33% 48 4.9 118 78.67% 49 5 109 72.67% 50 4.9 134 89.33% 51 2.2 92 61.33% 52 4 93 62.00% 53 4.7 128 85.33% 54 6.2 130 86.67% 55 5.4 133 88.67% 56 4.7 130 86.67% 57 5.6 120 80.00% 58 4.7 118 78.67% 59 5.5 144 96.00% 60 5.2 124 82.67%


120

Table 16. Average scores of Receptive Breadth test results at Advanced level of



mark Nº of correct answers %

61 5.2 108 72.00% 62 5.1 103 68.67% 63 5.1 115 76.67% 64 5.3 125 83.33% 65 6 121 80.67% 66 4.9 121 80.67% 67 5.5 147 98.00% 68 5.2 113 75.33% 69 5.3 123 82.00% 70 5.4 119 79.33% 71 5.3 132 88.00% 72 5.1 133 88.67% 73 5.1 134 89.33% 74 5.6 135 90.00% 75 5.4 138 92.00% 76 4.7 141 94.00% 77 5.9 119 79.33% 78 5.6 126 84.00% 79 5.6 129 86.00% 80 5 127 84.67%


121

Table 17. Average scores of Productive Breadth test results at Pre-intermediate level of


Average

Subject Final Mark

Nº of correct answers

%

1 4.3 13 14.44% 2 5.6 17 18.89% 3 4.9 22 24.44% 4 5 11 12.22% 5 5.7 30 33.33% 6 4.2 26 28.89% 7 4.7 20 22.22% 8 4.9 23 25.56% 9 5.1 17 18.89% 10 4.8 12 13.33% 11 5.1 19 21.11% 12 6.4 25 27.78% 13 4.1 8 8.89% 14 5.2 16 17.78% 15 5.6 22 24.44% 16 3.8 3 3.33% 17 3.2 5 5.56% 18 4.8 10 11.11% 19 3.7 4 4.44%


122

Table 18. Average scores of Productive Breadth test results at Intermediate level of


Average

Subject Final Mark


%

20 4.4 23 25.56% 21 3.9 25 27.78% 22 4.3 37 41.11% 23 4.9 48 53.33% 24 5.2 30 33.33% 25 5.2 35 38.89% 26 4.5 23 25.56% 27 4.5 36 40.00% 28 5.6 47 52.22% 29 4.5 27 30.00% 30 4.3 20 22.22% 31 5.3 41 45.56% 32 3.9 21 23.33% 33 3.8 33 36.67% 34 4.5 13 14.44% 35 3.7 11 12.22% 36 4.9 28 31.11% 37 4.2 29 32.22% 38 4 28 31.11% 39 4.5 41 45.56% 40 4.8 19 21.11% 41 4.5 26 28.89%


123

Table 19. Average score of Productive Breadth test results at Post-intermediate level of


Average

Subject Final Mark


%

42 4.5 26 28.89% 43 5 23 25.56% 44 5.3 62 68.89% 45 5.2 47 52.22% 46 5.1 34 37.78% 47 5.2 25 27.78% 48 4.9 30 33.33% 49 5 34 37.78% 50 4.9 43 47.78% 51 2.2 20 22.22% 52 4 12 13.33% 53 4.7 49 54.44% 54 6.2 46 51.11% 55 5.4 36 40.00% 56 4.7 42 46.67% 57 5.6 25 27.78% 58 4.7 27 30.00% 59 5.5 60 66.67% 60 5.2 44 48.89%


124

Table 20. Average score of Productive Breadth test results at Advanced level of


Average

Subject Final Mark


%

61 5.2 21 23.33% 62 5.1 24 26.67% 63 5.1 38 42.22% 64 5.3 34 37.78% 65 6 47 52.22% 66 4.9 38 42.22% 67 5.5 38 42.22% 68 5.2 41 45.56% 69 5.3 30 33.33% 70 5.4 31 34.44% 71 5.3 46 51.11% 72 5.1 40 44.44% 73 5.1 33 36.67% 74 5.6 41 45.56% 75 5.4 39 43.33% 76 4.7 52 57.78% 77 5.9 44 48.89% 78 5.6 44 48.89% 79 5.6 37 41.11% 80 5 37 41.11%


125

7.5. Appendix E. Qualitative Results. Table 1. Qualitative analysis results of Productive Breadth test at Pre-intermediate level of communicative competence.

Unanswered Items Mistakes Lexical Nouns

(Total=42) Adjectives (Total=19)

Verbs (Total =29)

Total unanswered=90Subjects

N° % N° % N° % N° %

Grammar Spelling another TL

word borrowing morphological

creativity Total

1 30 71.43% 10 52.63% 14 48.28% 54 60.00% 2 0 17 1 3 23 2 31 73.81% 14 73.68% 29 100.00% 74 82.22% 0 1 3 0 3 7 3 26 61.90% 5 26.32% 12 41.38% 43 47.78% 1 2 12 0 9 24 4 27 64.29% 10 52.63% 16 55.17% 53 58.89% 0 2 12 0 9 23 5 21 50.00% 7 52.63% 15 51.72% 43 47.78% 1 2 10 0 2 15 6 23 54.76% 8 42.11% 16 55.17% 47 52.22% 2 1 9 0 5 17 7 26 61.90% 8 42.11% 17 58.62% 51 56.67% 2 3 7 0 6 18 8 28 66.67% 10 52.63% 18 62.07% 56 62.22% 1 4 4 0 1 10 9 35 83.33% 12 63.16% 22 75.86% 69 76.67% 0 1 1 0 2 4 10 36 85.71% 14 73.68% 22 75.86% 72 80.00% 2 2 1 0 0 5 11 22 52.38% 7 36.84% 20 68.97% 49 54.44% 1 5 10 0 3 19 12 29 32.22% 11 57.89% 20 68.97% 60 66.67% 0 1 3 0 0 4 13 31 73.81% 10 52.63% 16 55.17% 57 63.33% 0 3 14 1 7 25 14 29 69.05% 9 47.37% 20 68.97% 58 64.44% 4 2 7 0 3 16 15 25 59.52% 7 36.84% 19 65.52% 51 56.67% 1 1 9 0 5 16 16 36 85.71% 14 73.68% 22 75.86% 72 80.00% 2 1 9 0 3 15 17 36 85.71% 10 52.63% 16 55.17% 62 68.89% 2 0 13 0 7 22 18 34 37.78% 14 77.78% 21 72.41% 69 76.67% 1 0 7 1 1 10 19 37 88.10% 15 78.95% 25 86.21% 77 85.56% 1 0 7 0 0 8

Average 29.6 66.22% 10.3 55.06% 18.9 65.34% 58.8 65.32% 1.2 1.6 8.2 0.2 3.6 10.3

126

Table 2. Qualitative analysis results of Productive Breadth test at Intermediate level of communicative competence.

Unanswered Items Mistakes Lexical Nouns (Total

=42) Adjectives (Total =19)

Verbs (Total =29)


N° % N° % N° % N° % Grammar Spelling another

TL word borrowing Morphological creativity

Total

20 22 52.38% 10 52.63% 20 68.97% 52 57.78% 1 4 6 0 2 13 21 27 64.29% 19 100.00% 10 34.48% 56 62.22% 2 0 6 0 1 9 22 16 38.09% 10 52.63% 14 48.27% 40 44.44% 2 3 8 0 2 15 23 13 30.95% 6 31.57% 15 51.72% 34 37.77% 2 1 4 0 1 8 24 24 57.14% 9 47.36% 17 58.62% 50 55.55% 1 2 5 0 2 10 25 19 45.24% 20 105.26% 8 27.59% 47 52.22% 1 1 4 0 1 7 26 23 54.76% 7 36.84% 16 55.17% 46 51.11% 2 3 11 0 4 20 27 19 45.24% 5 26.32% 17 58.62% 41 45.56% 2 2 5 0 4 13 28 12 28.57% 14 73.68% 10 34.48% 36 40.00% 0 2 5 0 1 8 29 13 30.95% 6 31.58% 13 44.83% 32 35.56% 4 5 14 0 8 31 30 30 71.42% 12 63.15% 17 58.62% 59 65.55% 1 1 7 0 1 10 31 19 45.24% 7 36.84% 12 41.38% 38 42.22% 3 0 5 0 3 11 32 28 66.66% 9 47.36% 21 72.41% 58 64.44% 2 2 5 0 1 10 33 21 50.00% 8 42.10% 14 48.27% 43 47.77% 3 3 11 0 2 19 34 31 73.81% 14 73.68% 23 79.31% 68 75.56% 1 2 4 0 2 9 35 34 80.95% 15 78.95% 22 75.86% 71 78.89% 1 4 1 1 1 8 36 21 50.00% 9 47.37% 19 65.52% 49 54.44% 2 4 5 0 1 12 37 19 45.24% 10 52.63% 7 24.14% 36 40.00% 1 3 11 0 6 21 38 28 66.67% 15 78.95% 7 24.14% 50 55.55% 4 3 4 0 0 11 39 16 38.10% 7 36.84% 11 37.93% 34 37.78% 0 1 10 1 4 16 40 25 59.52% 7 36.84% 19 65.52% 51 56.66% 3 0 13 0 6 22 41 24 57.14% 7 36.84% 12 41.38% 43 47.77% 3 4 11 0 3 21

Average 22.0 52.38% 10.3 54.07% 14.7 50.78% 47.0 52.22% 1.9 2.3 7.0 0.1 2.5 13.8

127

Table 3. Qualitative analysis results of Productive Breadth test at Post-intermediate level of communicative competence.


(Total =42) Adjectives (Total =19)

Verbs (Total =29)


N° % N° % N° % N° %

Grammar Spelling another TL

word borrowing morphological

creativity Total

42 23 54.76% 11 57.89% 21 72.41% 55 61.11% 3 2 4 0 0 9 43 20 47.62% 7 36.84% 13 44.83% 40 44.44% 5 3 13 1 4 26 44 3 7.14% 9 47.37% 1 3.45% 13 14.44% 4 1 8 0 0 13 45 11 26.19% 3 15.79% 8 27.59% 22 24.44% 2 3 13 0 0 18 46 18 42.86% 4 21.05% 14 48.28% 36 40.00% 5 4 5 0 4 18 47 28 66.67% 12 63.16% 23 79.31% 63 70.00% 1 3 0 0 2 6 48 24 57.14% 9 47.37% 13 44.83% 46 51.11% 1 2 3 0 0 6 49 17 40.48% 8 42.11% 13 44.83% 38 42.22% 2 8 7 0 0 17 50 16 38.10% 6 31.58% 15 51.72% 37 41.11% 0 5 3 0 0 8 51 27 64.29% 15 78.95% 24 82.76% 66 73.33% 1 0 3 0 2 6 52 30 71.43% 10 52.63% 21 72.41% 61 67.78% 2 1 12 1 0 16 53 9 21.43% 12 63.16% 3 10.34% 24 26.67% 0 3 8 0 5 16 54 18 42.86% 11 57.89% 5 17.24% 34 37.78% 1 0 3 0 6 10 55 13 30.95% 15 78.95% 3 10.34% 31 34.44% 3 5 12 0 2 22 56 11 26.19% 11 57.89% 6 20.69% 28 31.11% 3 3 8 0 5 19 57 23 54.76% 19 100.00% 8 27.59% 50 55.56% 2 6 3 0 5 16 58 26 61.90% 15 78.95% 7 24.14% 48 53.33% 2 3 6 0 3 14 59 8 19.05% 5 26.32% 3 10.34% 16 17.78% 2 1 7 0 4 14 60 15 35.71% 14 73.68% 3 10.34% 32 35.56% 1 5 6 0 1 13

Average 17.9 42.61% 10.3 54.29% 10.7 37.02% 38.9 43.27% 2.11 3.05 6.53 0.11 2.26 14.05

128

Table 4. Qualitative analysis results of Productive Breadth test at Advanced level of communicative competence. Unanswered Items Mistakes

Lexical Nouns (Total=42)

Adjectives (Total=19)

Verbs (Total=29)

Total unans.=90

Subjects

N° % N° % N° % N° % Grammar Spelling

another TL word borrowing morph.

creativity Total 61 27 64.29% 8 42.11% 23 79.31% 58 64.44% 1 3 5 0 2 11 62 22 52.38% 3 15.79% 14 48.28% 39 43.33% 0 7 15 1 4 27 63 14 33.33% 7 36.84% 14 48.28% 35 38.89% 0 3 10 0 4 17 64 18 42.86% 7 36.84% 15 51.72% 40 44.44% 1 1 11 1 0 14 65 13 30.95% 1 5.26% 8 27.59% 22 24.44% 4 0 13 0 4 21 66 16 38.10% 6 31.58% 12 41.38% 34 37.78% 2 5 7 0 2 16 67 18 42.86% 6 31.58% 17 58.62% 41 45.56% 1 0 6 0 3 10 68 11 26.19% 2 10.53% 6 20.69% 19 21.11% 4 8 12 0 4 28 69 21 50.00% 6 31.58% 19 65.52% 46 51.11% 2 3 5 1 2 13 70 22 52.38% 5 26.32% 16 55.17% 43 47.78% 2 1 11 0 0 14 71 15 35.71% 5 26.32% 12 41.38% 32 35.56% 1 1 8 0 2 12 72 15 35.71% 7 36.84% 11 37.93% 33 36.67% 0 3 9 0 4 16 73 17 40.48% 7 36.84% 11 37.93% 35 38.89% 2 3 11 0 2 18 74 12 28.57% 9 47.37% 12 41.38% 33 36.67% 3 6 2 0 3 14 75 12 28.57% 3 15.79% 13 44.83% 28 31.11% 1 9 7 1 4 22 76 6 14.29% 0 0.00% 3 10.34% 9 10.00% 5 8 16 0 6 35 77 7 16.67% 5 26.32% 6 20.69% 18 20.00% 3 2 12 0 3 20 78 11 26.19% 6 31.58% 10 34.48% 27 30.00% 1 2 11 0 3 17 79 15 35.71% 4 21.05% 14 48.28% 33 36.67% 3 2 2 1 2 10 80 7 16.67% 2 10.53% 11 37.93% 20 22.22% 5 3 18 1 5 32

Average 14.95 35.6% 4.95 26.1% 12.3 42.60% 32.2 35.80% 2.1 3.5 9.6 0.3 3 18.4

129

Table 5. Qualitative analysis results of Productive Breadth test at different levels of communicative competence.


(Total=42) Adjectives (Total =19)

Verbs (Total =29)

Total unanswered=90Level

N° % N° % N° % N° % Grammar Spelling another

TL word borrowing morphological creativity

Total

Pre-intermediate 29.6 66.2% 10.3 55.1% 18.9 65.3% 10.3 65.3% 1.2 1.6 8.2 0.2 3.6 10.3 Intermediate 22.0 52.4% 10.3 54.1% 14.7 50.8% 47.0 52.2% 1.9 2.3 7.0 0.1 2.5 13.8

Post-intermediate 17.9 42.6% 10.3 54.3% 10.7 37.0% 38.9 43.3% 2.1 3.1 6.5 0.1 2.3 14.1 Advanced 15.0 35.6% 4.95 26.1% 12.35 42.6% 32.3 35.8% 2.1 3.5 9.6 0.3 3.0 18.4

130

7.6. Appendix F. List of Common Mistakes.

Table 1. Common mistakes in 2000 word frequency level at Pre-intermediate level of


Word frequency level Target word Deviant form

2000 burst burn burst buys climb claim climb climb up hungry hungers hungry human impeded improve impeded impressed roots rotts roots routs slight slowly slight slow stretched stretchs stretched stretch tip tips usual useless usual usually wages wadges wandered wantes wandered wants wandered wants wealth wealthy wealth wells

131




3000 aware awere aware away aware awake aware awesome chill change drafts draw drafts dramas drafts drawings injured injuried injured injurier injured injury lawn land naked nacked ox object probability prophecy scare scary scare scattered scare scars slender sleght slender sleve snap snoke thrust thrught whirled whirper whirled whirling

132




5000 hugging hung apron apple apron apptitude bellowing bellow bellowing belling bellowing beligerate blend blame bruises brush bruises brust bruises brush Eve England fragrant fragant fragrant fragants hugging hurts hugging hug hugging hugs hugging huging mortgage mortage mortgage morose soothe sooner stools stairs whole whohealth

133



Word frequency level

Target word Deviant form

10000 cringed cried cringed cries impeded imposponed impossible imposible intellect internal looting look looting looney obsolete obsolates obsolete obsoletes salve salt sophomore sophrane sophomore sophomor sophomores sophies squirled squies squirmed squive squirmed squirled throttle throught throttle throght vicar vice vicar victory vicar victim vicar vicary whirled whirls whirled whirl wilful wild

134

Table 5. Common mistakes in University Word frequency level at Pre-intermediate

level of communicative competence.


UWL assess associate assess assest assess assk assess asset attained attended attained attempt attained attemped ensure enter ensure encourage finals final finals fill finals file homogeneous homogenic inherent inhereted inspected inspection intellect interrogation intelligence intelligent intelligence inteligence intelligence inteligance intimacy interest intimacy intentions project proyect project program rely repplicate rely request rely repair research rescue research reserchers research responsability restore response restore rescue saturated saturate saturated satured subsequent subsecuent trend travel trend trade trend trait

135

Table 6. Common mistakes in 2000 word frequency level at Intermediate level of


Word frequency level Target word Deviant form2000 burst bust

climb climg deed desition deed decisión deed desire pupils pupiles slight slow stretched stretetch stretched stretch tip tips usual usually usual usuall wages wage wealth welth

136




3000 aware awarness bellowing bells drafts drawings hen hens hen hearse hen hence injured injuried lawn ladder lawn land lieutenant lieutenent oath oat ox operator probability probabity scare scared slender sleve slender sleeve soothe sooth thrust thrusted trim trill Table 8. Common mistakes in 5000 word frequency level at Intermediate level of



5000 fragrant fragance apron aparent bellowing bells blend blank bruises bruisers Eve evening fragrant fragant fragrant fragants hugging hugh hugging huging mortgage morgage oath oar vault vaulue vault vaulvet

137




10000 cringed cried diaper diapers diaper diaps impeded impterrupted impeded imposible impeded impossible obsolete obsolets obsolete obsolet squirmed squizzed stampeded stammed stampeded stamed vicar vicary whirling whiped whirling whilling wilful wild

138

Table 10. Common mistakes in University Word frequency level at Intermediate level

of communicative competence.


UWL anomaly aanomalle assess assume assess assure assess asses attained attempted attained attach attained attempt final file finals final finals exam

finals finnal homogeneous homogene inherent inheriat inspected inspectiont intellect interior intellect intelect intimacy integrity intimacy internt intimacy interest project program rely reach rely require research response research reserch research results restore restitute restore rescue restore restrict saturated sature saturated satured subsequent subsecuent trend trade

139

Table 11. Common mistakes in 2000 word frequency level at Post-intermediate level of


Word frequency level Target word Deviant Form

2000 burst bump climb clim

deed deal deed decision deed depth lovely lovly pupils pupiles

skirts skarfs slight slightly

slight slim stretched strethrend tip tips wages wage

wages waages wages wage wealth welth wealth wealthy

140




3000 anomaly anomalous attained attend aware awed aware awestruck bruises bruxes bruises bruisers chill chilly drafts drawings drafts draws gown gownt hen hence hen hens homogenous homogenious intelligence intestine lawn ladder lawn land lieutenant lieutenient lieutenant lieunent lieutenant lieunant naked nacked ox oax ox oxe probability probabily probability probabilies rely relly scare scared scare scary sealed sealled sealed seald snap snatch thrusted thrown

141




5000 apron apprehensive ballot ballote ballot ballotage bellowing beligerant bruises bruses bruises brusses bruises bruces bruises bruisers fragrant fragant fragrant fragile hugging huging hugging hung mess messy mortgage morgage mortgage mortage soothe soother soothe sooth soothe soothen stools still stools stride

142

Table 14. Common mistakes in 10000 word frequency level at Post-intermediate level

of communicative competence.

Word frequency level Target word Deviant Form10000 diaper diapers

cringed cried diaper diamper diaper diapper diaper diapers diaper diapper impeded impided impeded impossible intelligence integrity looting looking obsolete obsolet obsolete obsoletes salve saliva salve salt smoldering smoling smoldering smolling sophomore sophyear sophomore sophists squirmed squimed stampeded stamped vicar vicary vicar vican whirled whirls wilful wild

143

Table 15. Common mistakes in University Word level at Post-intermediate level of



UWL anomaly anomalous anomaly anomality assess asses assess assest assess assume attained attached cringed cried ensure enssure finals final finals field finals final one homogeneous homogenic homogeneous homologue homogeneous home homogenous homogenious inherent inherited inspected inspectioned inspected inspection intelligence inteligence intelligence integrity intimacy intake intimacy interaction intimacy intercourse project proyect project projects rely relay rely recall researches researchs saturated satured subsequent subsequently subsequent substandard subsequent subsecuent subsequent subsecquent subsided subdued trend tradition

144

Table 16. Common mistakes in 2000 word frequency level at Advanced level of



2000 burst bump burst burn climb claim climb claimb climb climbe deed decision deed depth deed desire deed development hungry humans improve imprint improve impruve lovely loveli lovely lovly pupils pupiles skirts skirsts slight slice slight slightly slight slim streched strechet streched strehened streched streteched streched strethen stretched strech stretched strecht stretched stretch stretched stretched out tip tips usual usuall wages wagages wages wage wages waight wealth wealthy wealth welfare wealth wells wealth welth

145




3000 aware awared aware awkward aware awe chill chilling drafts draws drafts draughts drafts drawings drafts draft gown goan hen hens hen hence hen hester lawn lamb lawn land naked nacked ox operator probability provability probability problem prospect proposition scared scares scared scary sealed sealled sealed seald sealed sear slender sleem slender sleeve snap snear snap snitch snap snatch thrust thruw thrust thruogh thrust thrusted trim trip trim trimm whirling whirring

146

Table 18. Common mistakes in 5000 word frequency level at Advanced level of communicative competence.

Word frequency level Target word Deviant form 5000 apron aparent

apron apple apron aprear apron aprehensive

ballot ballet ballot balloon ballot ballout bellowing belicious bellowing bell bellowing belligerant bellowing belling blend blaze blend blended bruises bruces bruises bruices bruises bruses bruises brushes Eve east Eve eastern Eve evening fragrant fragant fragrant fragants fragrant fragile gloomy glave gloomy gloom hugging hug hugging huge hugging huged hugging hugged hugging hugh hugging hughed hugging huging hugging hush ledge leed ledge left mess mes mortgage morgage mortgage mortage oath oak oath oat

147

Word frequency level Target word Deviant form 5000 soothe sooth

soothe soothen stools stool stools stroat vault valuable whole wholes yarn yard yarn yawn

148


communicative competence

Word frequency level Target word Deviant form 10000 cringed cried out

cringed crisped deacon deacan diaper diapers

diaper diapper impeded importunated impeded imposible impeded imposssible looting loominy mammoth mamcommunal mammoth mamount obsolete obsolet obsolete obstrusive salve saliva salve salt smoldering smoling sophomores sophmore sophomores sophors sophomores sophtmores squirmed squiked squirmed squired squirmed squirred squirmed squised squirmed squized stampeded stammens stampeded stamped throttle throb vicar vica vicar vicario vicar vicarious vicar vicary vicar vicebishop vicar vicur whirled whip whirled whiped whirled whirls whirled whirred whirled whistle whirled whistled wilful wild wilful wildering wilful willing wilful willingful

149

Table 20. Common mistakes in University word frequency level at Advanced level of communicative competence. Word frequency level Target word Deviant form

UWL saturated satured anomaly anomalie anomaly anomally anomaly anomalous

assess assert assess asses assess assume assess assure attained attached attained attainhed attained attatched attained attempted

attained attempts finals figure finals file finals final

finals final one homogeneous homage homogeneous home homogeneous homework homogeneous homogeneus homogeneous homonymous inherent inhentted inherent inhereited inherent inherint inherent inherit inherent inherited inherent inhibited inherent inhinerate inherent inhirent inspected inspectioned inspected inspires intellect integrity intellect intelect intelligence inteligence intellect interior intimacy intensity intimacy interaction intimacy intercourse intimacy interest intimacy interrelation intimacy intimity project program project programs project progress

150

Table 21. Mistakes per subjects at Pre-intermediate level of communicative

competence.

Subject Word

frequency Target word Deviant form 1 2000 stretched stretch

burst burn wandered wants 3000 scare scary injured injury whirled whirling 5000 hugging hung fragrant fragants 10000 whirled whirls vicar vicary looting looney impossible imposible cringed cries UWL trend travel intimacy interest saturated saturate research rescue ensure enter assess associate finals final intelligence intelligent

2 2000 wealth wells 3000 drafts drawings aware awesome 5000 hugging huging 10000 sophomore sophomor UWL saturated satured finals final intellect internal

3 2000 usual useless hungry human 3000 scare scars slender sleve ox object probability prophecy snap snoke 5000 bellowing beligerate apron apptitude mortgage morose bruises brush 10000 whirled whirl

151

wilful wild vicar victory squirmed squirled impeded imposponed cringed cried UWL trend trade rely repplicate attained attended subsequent subsecuent ensure encourage assess assest restore response

4 2000 slight slow roots routs climb climb up 3000 scare scattered slender sleght drafts dramas chill change aware awake 5000 soothe sooner stools stairs bruises brust hugging hugs fragrant fragant 10000 sophomore sophrane vicar vice throttle throught looting look squirmed squive cringed cries UWL intimacy intentions saturated satured attained attempt project proyect restore rescue finals fill intellect interrogation

5 2000 wages wage 3000 drafts drawings chill chilly aware awkward 5000 yarn yard hugging huged fragrant fragant 10000 sophomore sophomors vicar vicarium impeded impossible

152

cringed cried UWL trend trance inherent inherit research researchs assess assure finals fill

6 2000 wages wadges 3000 injured injuried drafts drawings 5000 bruises brush hugging hug fragrant fragants 10000 wilful wild obsolete obsoletes salve salt UWL trend tradition intimacy interest saturated satured project program assess assk finals final

7 2000 wealth well stretched stretech wages wage skirt skimt usual usually 3000 thrust thruw chill chilly sealed sealled 5000 fragrant fragant 10000 smoldering smoling obsolete obsolet vicar vicary looting lookwg cringed cried UWL attained attempt inherent inheritant restore restitu finals final

8 2000 tip tips 3000 injured injuried drafts dramas 5000 mortgage mortage fragrant fragant 10000 cringed cried UWL homogeneous homogenic inherent inhereted assess asset

153

intelligence inteligence 9 2000 wealth wells

roots rotts 3000 naked nacked 5000 hugging hurts

10 2000 stretched strech improve improves 5000 hugging huging 10000 cringed cries UWL inspected inspeted

11 2000 wealth well stretched stretch slight slim roots roats 3000 aware awarned 5000 oath oak fragrant fragant 10000 diaper diapper sophomore sophmores obsolete obsolet wilful wild vicar viceroy UWL intimacy intimate saturated satured rely relay attained attempt homogeneous homework finals final intellect inteligence

12 2000 deed detail 3000 lieutenant lieutenient 10000 cringed cried UWL intellect integrity

13 2000 wealth wear burst built improve impruve slender slower wandered wanted usual usually hungry hungried 3000 injured injuried trim try aware awser 5000 oath oasis ballot baller hugging hunging blend blues 10000 sophomore sophranes

154

obsolete obsolate vicar victim mammoth mamanible cringed cries UWL intimacy intelligent saturated sature attained attendant restore responsible finals files

14 2000 stretched stretch slender slow wages wage 3000 hen hens injured injure thrust thrughtful drafts drawings prospect proper 5000 bruises brues whole wholemeal fragrant fragance 10000 sophomore sophmores cringed cried UWL attained attended subsequent subsecuent project program

15 2000 improve impressed 3000 lawn land aware awere 5000 bellowing belling mortgage mortage hugging hug 10000 obsolete obsolates wilful wild salve salt cringed cried UWL rely request attained attemped project program research reserchers finals final intelligence inteligance

16 2000 stretched stretchs wandered wants usual usually 5000 apron apple blend blame 10000 sophomore sophies obsolete obsoletes

155

vicar victim squirmed squies impeded improve cringed cried UWL saturated satured project proyect research responsability finals file

17 2000 wealth wealthy stretched stretch burst buys slight slowly climb claim wandered wantes usual usually hungry hungers 3000 injured injurier thrust thrught drafts draw whirled whirper aware away 5000 Eve England bellowing bellow whole whohealth 10000 throttle throght impeded improve UWL trend trait inspected inspection saturated saturate rely repair

18 2000 wealth well stretched stretch burst burn slight slow usual usually 10000 sophomore sophmanger impeded impossible cringed cries UWL homogeneous homework restore responsible

19 2000 slight slowly usual usually 3000 injured injure trim try 5000 Eve even mortgage more 10000 cringed cried UWL inspected inspection

156

Table 22. Mistakes per subjects at Intermediate level of communicative competence.

Subjects Word

frequency Target word Deviant form 20 2000 deed desition

3000 drafts drawings lieutenant liutenent 5000 hugging hugged fragrant fragant mortgage morgage apron aprehensive 10000 vicar vicary salve salt cringed cried whirling whiped UWL assess asses subsequent subsecuent

21 2000 wages wage 3000 drafts drawings 5000 fragrant fragance 10000 cringed cried UWL trend trade saturated sature attained attempted research response assess assume

22 2000 deed developing 3000 gown gone lawn land hen hens 5000 yarn yard bellowing belic stools staring bruises bruses hugging huging fragrant fragant 10000 stampeded stambled cringed cried UWL inherent inherited assess assume finals final

23 2000 burst bump wages wage 3000 lawn land

157

5000 fragrant fragant 10000 salve salt vicar vicary impeded impossible UWL finals final

24 2000 wealth welth wages wage 3000 lieutenant liutenent 5000 yarn yawn 10000 vicar vicary looting looking impeded impossible cringed cried

UWL inspected inspectioned assess assert

25 2000 deed desition wages wage 3000 hen hence drafts drawings 5000 mortgage morgage 10000 cringed cried UWL intellect interior

26 2000 improve impress skirts skates 3000 probability problem 5000 bellowing bell apron aprehensive ledge lesson hugging hugged fragrant fragant 10000 obsolete obsolet vicar vicary cringed cried

UWL trend trace intimacy interests inspected inspectioned saturated satured subsequent subsecuent project program research results restore restitute finals final

27 2000 wages wage 3000 scare scared slender sleeve trim trill

158

5000 hugging huging 10000 cringed cried UWL intimacy integrity saturated satured rely reach homogeneous homogene anomaly aanomalle finals final

28 2000 deed desire 3000 hen hearse drafts drawings lieutenant lieutenent 5000 vault vaulvet mortgage morgage 10000 cringed cried UWL final exam

29 2000 wealth welth stretched stretetch deed decisión tip tips usual usuall 3000 hen hens ox operator 5000 vault vaulue bellowing bells apron aparent bruises bruisers hugging hugh blend blank fragrant fragants 10000 diaper diapers whirling whiped obsolete obsolets vicar vicary stampeded stamed impeded impossible cringed cried UWL intimacy internt attained attach subsequent subsecuent homogeneous homogene research reserch assess assure finals finnal intellect interior

30 2000 wealth weapons wages wage 3000 hen hence

159

5000 bellowing belling UWL intimacy interests attained attacked inherent inherit restore rescue intellect intelect

31 2000 wages wage 3000 hen hens thrust thrusted 5000 bellowing bells 10000 wilful wild vicar vicary cringed cried UWL research results restore restitute finals final

32 2000 slight slightly deed desire wages wage 10000 obsolete obsolet cringed cried UWL intimacy interest saturated satured project progress assess assure intellect intelect

33 2000 stretched stretch deed design wages wage 3000 hen hences slender sleeve drafts draughts trim trimm 5000 soothe sooth stools street bruises bruists hugging huged 10000 whirled whipped wilful wild cringed cried UWL trend treatment attained attached inherent inhnate assess assert intellect intellectual

34 2000 stretched stretch burst bust 3000 lawn land

160

injured injuried probability probabity 5000 Eve evening UWL inspected inspectiont inherent inheriat finals final

35 2000 slight slow climb climg 3000 hen hens injured injuried aware awarness 10000 whirling whilling obsolete obsolet impeded imposible

36 2000 wages wage usual usually 5000 oath oar mortgage morgage hugging huging fragrant fragant 10000 obsolete obsolet vicar vicary UWL intimacy interest intellect intelect restore rescue attained attempt assess assume

37 2000 pupils pupiles 3000 lawn ladder hen hens slender sleve oath oat bellowing bells soothe sooth fragrant fragant 5000 diapers diaps vicar vicary squirmed squizzed stampeded stammed impeded impterrupted UWL saturated satured rely require project program assess asses restore restrict finals file

38 2000 pupils puppets slight slightly

161

3000 drafts drawings scare scary whirling whirlling aware awared 5000 blend blow 10000 obsolete obsoletes wilful wild impeded impossible UWL subsequent subsecuent intellect intelect

39 2000 deed developing deed desition 3000 lawn land hen hence probability problem gown gone 5000 bruises bruses yarn yawn fragrant fragant 10000 cringed cried impeded imposible vicar vicary looting looking UWL research response inspected inspectioned rely reach

40 2000 tip tips wages wage improve impress 3000 hen hens lawn land gown gone drafts drawings 5000 yarn yard fragrant fragant bellowing belic ledge lesson apron aprehensive 10000 impeded impossible cringed cried salve salt vicar vicary UWL inspected inspectioned trend trade attained attempted finals final restore restitute saturated sature

162

41 2000 deed desire wages wage wealth welth 3000 drafts drawings hen hens 5000 hugging huging fragrant fragant 10000 vicar vicary obsolete obsolet diaper diapers cringed cried looting looking salve salt UWL trend trade inspected inspectioned intellect interior assess assume trend trace finals final intimacy interests

163

Table 23. Mistakes per subjects at Post-intermediate level of communicative

competence.

Subject Word frequency Target word Deviant Form

42 3000 lawn lap hen hens whirling whirstles prospect proposition sealed sealled 5000 oath oat hugging hugged 10000 impeded impossible UWL finals final project projects

43 2000 slight slightly roots row wages wage 3000 lawn land scare scares whirling whiring 5000 soothe soother mortgage morgage bruises bruses fragrant fragil 10000 diaper diapers whirled whitt impeded imposed cringed cried UWL inspected inspectioned intimacy intention saturated satured rely request attained attached project program intelligence inteligence assess assure

finals final term

exam restore resque subsequent subsequently

44 2000 wages wage deed deal 3000 hen hens scare scared 5000 hugging huging apron apprehensive

164

10000 whirled whirls wilful wild salve saliva cringed cried UWL intimacy intake attained attached subsequent substandard intimacy intake attained attached subsequent substandard

45 2000 deed demonstration 3000 hen hence thrusted thruden snap snatch 5000 ballot ballote bruises bruxes 10000 looting looking squirmed squimed cringed cried UWL trend trial saturated satured homogeneous homeless project proyect finals final

46 2000 wealth welth 3000 probability probabily slender sleeud prospect probabiy hen hens 5000 fragrant fragant bruises brusses 10000 impeded impided obsolete obscured stampeded stamped diaper diapers mammoth mammel cringed cried whirled whirl UWL anomaly anomality intimacy interest research response finals final intelligence interest subsequent subsecuent

47 2000 wages waages skirts skarfs 3000 hen hens sealed seald

165

10000 obsolete obsolet UWL anomaly anomalous

48 2000 wages wage 5000 Eve evening hugging hunging blend blur 10000 diaper diamper cringed cried obsolete obsolet UWL assess asses intimacy intimity

49 2000 climb clim wealth weight deed decision 3000 hen hens prospect problem lieutenant lieutenient 5000 fragrant fragant stools stride 10000 diaper diapers squirmed squirreled cringed cried impeded importunate vicar vicary UWL finals final inspected inspection saturated satured intelligence intention rely relay

50 2000 wealth welth deed detail lovely lovly 3000 drafts drawings 5000 fragrant fragant soothe sooth 10000 vicar vicary impeded impossible diaper diapper UWL saturated satured

51 5000 yarn yard UWL researches researchs

intelligence inteligence trend tradition

52 2000 wealth wealthy wages waves 3000 scare scary aware awesome 5000 apron apartment

166

mess messy ledge lejen 10000 diaper diarrea wilful willing cringed cried UWL saturated satured attained attempt subsequent subsecquent research responses assess assume finals file intellect intestine

53 3000 aware awed snap snatch ox oax 5000 stools still soothe soothen fragrant fragant 10000 sophomores sophists wilful wild salve salt cringed cried intelligence integrity vicar vicary UWL assess assest saturated satured homogeneous homogenic

54 2000 pupils pupiles 3000 aware awestruck 5000 bellowing beligerant fragrant fragant 10000 stampeded stamped vicar vicary diaper diapers UWL inspected inspectioned homogeneous homologue rely recall

55 2000 wages wage tip tips slight slim deed decision 3000 lawn ladder gown gownt drafts drawings aware awestruck 5000 fragrant fragant bruises bruces hugging hung

167

10000 diaper diapers stampeded stamped wilful wild cringed cried vicar vican sophomore sophmores UWL subsequent subsecuent anomaly anomally intimacy interaction homogeneous home finals final

56 2000 tip tips 3000 hen hens lieutenant lieunent

chill chilly lawn land 5000 bruises bruisers fragrant fragant mortgage mortage 10000 salve saliva stampeded stamped sophomore sophyear vicary vicary

obsolete obsolet cringed cried UWL ensure enssure attained attaches inherent inherited assess assume finals field

57 2000 wealth welth skirts skarfs burst bump 3000 bruises bruisers probability probabilies aware awestruck hen hens 5000 fragrant fragant 10000 obsolete obsoletes sophomore sophmores vicar vicary diaper diapper impeded impossible UWL assess asses inspected inspectioned homogenous homogenious

58 2000 stretched strethrend 3000 hen hens

168

ox oxe lieutenant lieunant

drafts draws 5000 fragrant fragile soothe sooth hugging hugged 10000 sophomores sophists squirmed squimed smoldering smoling

stampeded stamped cringed cried UWL anomaly anomalous attained attended intelligence intestine

59 2000 tip tips deed depth 3000 ox oax 5000 stools stride ballot ballotage mortgage mortage 10000 diaper diapers smoldering smolling vicar vicary looting looking UWL cringed cried attained attached subsided subdued finals final one

60 2000 wages wage 3000 naked nacked thrusted thrown 5000 mortgage mortage fragrant fragant 10000 diaper diapper sophomores sophmeat cringed cried whirled whirls UWL trend tradition intimacy intercourse rely relly attained attached homogeneous homogenious intelligence integrity

169

Table 24. Mistakes per subjects at Advanced level of communicative competence.

Subject Word frequency

level Target word Deviant form 61 2000 climb claimb streched streteched 5000 ballot balloon Eve east hugging huging fragrant fragants 10000 vicar vicary cringed cried UWL saturated satured attained attempted inherent inhibited

62 2000 wealth welth climb claim 3000 hen hence slender sleem drafts draws prospect proposition 5000 Eve east soothe sooth mess mes hugging huged fragrant fragant gloomy gloom 10000 smoldering smoling vicar vicary squirmed squized stampeded stamped impeded imposible cringed cried UWL trend tragedy intimacy interest rely refuse attained attached homogeneous homework inherent inherited subsided submited assess asses finals final

63 2000 streched strehened deed depth 5000 ballot ballet soothe soothen mortgage mortage

170

ledge left 10000 wilful wildering salve salt vicar vicebishop stampeded stamped impeded imposible cringed crisped UWL attained attempted project progress research reserches finals final

64 2000 wealth wells wages wage usual usuall 5000 ballot ballet Eve evening bellowing belling apron aprehensive mortgage mortage 10000 whirled whiped vicar vicario impeded impossible cringed cried UWL rely relly inherent inherited finals final intelligence integrity

65 2000 stretched strech deed desire 3000 lawn lamb slender sleeve snap snear 5000 apron aprehensive soothe sooth hugging hugged whole wholes gloomy glave 10000 whirled whirls wilful willing squirmed squized impeded imposssible cringed crisped UWL trend treaty intimacy intercourse project programs subsided subdued restore restrict finals final one

171

66 2000 wages wage 3000 lawn land probability provability 5000 soothe sooth apron aprehensive mortgage mortage hugging hughed 10000 obsolete obsolet cringed cried UWL intimacy interest homogeneous homogeneus anomaly anomalous assess assert restore restablish

67 2000 tip tips 3000 slender sleeve 10000 vicar vicary cringed cried UWL saturated satured attained attempts inherent inhirent project program assess assert finals final intellect intelect

68 2000 wealth welth pupils pupiles streched strechet improve impruve lovely loveli deed desire wages wagages skirts skirsts 3000 thrust thruw drafts draws aware awared 5000 ballot ballout Eve eastern stools stroat ledge leed bruises bruses hugging hug gloomy gloom 10000 wilful wild vicar vica stampeded stamped cringed cried UWL rely relay

172

attained attatched subsequent subsecuent anomaly anomalous homogeneous home inherent inhinerate assess assert finals final

69 2000 deed decision wealth wealthy climb climbe 3000 hen hens probability problem sealed sealled 5000 oath oak bellowing belling fragrant fragant 10000 whirled whistle cringed cried UWL saturated satured finals figure

70 2000 wages wage 3000 ox operator aware awkward 5000 hugging hugged 10000 diaper diapper wilful wild stampeded stamped impeded impossible UWL intimacy interior homogeneous home inherent inherited anomaly anomally assess assume finals final intellect interior

71 2000 deed desire wages wage 5000 yarn yard Eve eastern soothe sooth 10000 salve salt vicar vicary impeded impossible cringed cried out UWL saturated satured homogeneous homage inherent inhereited

72 2000 stretched strethen

173

hungry humans 3000 naked nacked drafts draughts trim trip 5000 bellowing bell soothe sooth blend blaze 10000 diaper diapper mammoth mamcommunal cringed cried UWL intimacy intimity inspected inspectioned attained attempted anomaly anomally assess asses finals file

73 2000 wealth welfare improve impruve deed desire tip tips 3000 hen hens drafts drawings aware awe 5000 soothe sooth apron aprear bruises brushes hugging hush fragrant fragant 10000 diaper diapper whirled whistled cringed cried UWL saturated satured inherent inherited subsided subdued finals final intellect integrity

74 2000 improve imprint wages wage 3000 thrust thruogh trim trimm 5000 mortgage mortage hugging hugh 10000 diaper diapper sophomores sophors deacon deacan vicar vicary cringed cried UWL rely rehy

174

inherent inherint finals final

75 2000 stretched streteched deed development wages waight 3000 hen hester drafts draws 5000 soothe sooth apron aprehensive mortgage morgage bruises bruses hugging huged fragrant fragant 10000 diaper diapper vicar vicary squirmed squised stampeded stamped impeded impossible UWL attained attempted subsequent subsecuent inherent inherit anomaly anomalous assess asses finals final intellect inteligence

76 2000 improve imprint slight slice wages wage 3000 scared scares thrust thrusted whirling whirring snap snitch 5000 yarn yard bellowing belicious gloomy gloom 10000 whirled whirred salve salt vicar vicarious squirmed squirred cringed cried out UWL intimacy interrelation project program subsided subdued intellect interior

77 2000 stretched strecht slight slim lovely lovly wages wage

175

tip tips climb claimb 3000 sealed seald snap snatch 5000 soothe sooth apron apple stools stool bruises bruices hugging huged fragrant fragile 10000 diaper diapers sophomores sophtmores whirled whiped obsolete obstrusive wilful wild salve salt vicar vicur throttle throb looting loominy squirmed squiked stampeded stammens impeded imposible mammoth mamount cringed cried UWL intimacy intensity inspected inspires saturated satured attained attainhed subsequent subslinent homogeneous homogeneus inherent inhentted anomaly anomalous subsided submerged

78 2000 burst bump 3000 scared scary drafts drawings chill chilling trim trip 5000 yarn yawn bellowing belligerant hugging hug fragrant fragant 10000 whirled whip salve saliva impeded importunated UWL attained attempted homogeneous homonymous project program

176

finals final 79 2000 stretched stretch

deed decision 3000 sealed sear 5000 oath oat stools stool 10000 diaper diapers sophomores sophmore obsolete obsolet vicar vicary cringed cried UWL inspected inspectioned saturated satured anomaly anomalie assess assure finals final

80 2000 stretched stretched out burst burn slight slightly deed desire tip tips 3000 gown goan hen hens drafts draft 5000 vault valuable yarn yard bellowing bell apron aparent mortgage morgage bruises bruces hugging huge blend blended fragrant fragile 10000 diaper diapers whirled whip wilful willingful salve saliva squirmed squired stampeded stamped impeded imposible cringed cried UWL intimacy interaction saturated satured rely relay homogeneous homework inherent inherited assess assert intellect intelect

acquisition of lexical competence in english as a second language

Documents