The relationship between students vocabulary and writing style

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction

Chapter 1. Theoretical positions in methodology of teaching vocabulary and writing

1.1 Vocabulary and Writing

1.2 Principles of Vocabulary Development

1.3 Teaching vocabulary at 6^th and 9^th grade

Chapter 2. Vocabulary acquisition and writing

2.1 The Influence of Age on Vocabulary Acquisition of English as a Foreign Language

2.2 The Phrasicon of EFL learners in comparison to native speakers

2.3 The Development of Passive and Active Vocabulary in a Second Language

Conclusion

List of references

Summary

INTRODUCTION

There has been a revival of interest in vocabulary teaching in recent years. This is purely due to the recent availability of computerized databases of words, and partly due to the development of new approaches to language teaching. However, not a lot of research is done on the topic of vocabulary for compositions for pupils, so we considered the theme of the paper actual enough for investigation.

The relationship between the age of initiation of the process of learning a foreign language and the level of proficiency attained is one of the crucial issues in current course paper. Furthermore, although we are nowadays far away from the notion that learning a language means learning a collection of words, the lexical component is still thought to be core in the process of language acquisition. As the title of the course paper suggests the aspect of the individual's linguistic development, namely the written production should be looked upon.

The object of the paper is vocabulary acquisition and the influence of age on it.

The tasks and aims of the paper:

- To view the connection between vocabulary and writing;

- To view the influence of age on vocabulary acquisition by 6^th and 9^th grade learners;

- To describe views of different linguists on the problem of teaching vocabulary in compositions by 6^th and 9^th grade.

Practical value of the paper reflects modern trends in linguistics, lies in the fact that it will serve as a good manual for those who want to master modern English language.

We consider the topicality of the paper consists in the use of actual materials on vocabulary acquisition, which were mostly published in the Internet. Quite a large number of scholars made a groundbreaking research in the field of vocabulary acquisition. In the course paper we used the works by S. Granger, J. Cenoz, D. Lasagabaster, B. Laufer, J. Harmer. C. Corona, S. Spangenberger and I. Venet made an Action Research Project on the theme “Improving Students Writing through a Language Rich Environment”, I. Miralpeix wrote a PhD Thesis on Vocabulary Acquisition. The results of these works and some other were included into the current investigation.

The methods used in our paper are the methods of comparative analysis and the method of statistical research.

The paper consists of: introduction, two chapters, conclusion and the list of references. The introduction presents brief description of the paper, its object, subject, actuality, practical significance and fields of amplification.

Chapter 1 describes general principles of teaching vocabulary at 6^th and 9^th grade at the English lessons. Focus is made on the connection between vocabulary acquisition and writing.

Chapter 2 deals with maturational constraints on foreign language written production. It demonstrates the influence of age on vocabulary acquisition and shows the way an automated approach to phrasicon works for EFL learners.

Conclusion presents the results of the research received in the process of teaching. List of references covers nearly 20 sources of theoretical materials.

CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL POSITIONS IN METHODOLOGY OF TEACHING VOCABULARY AND WRITING

1.1 Vocabulary and Writing

In some ways, the ability to write effectively hinges upon having an adequate vocabulary even more than does the ability to read. Once students have learned to decode words, they may be able to read and pronounce many words that are unfamiliar to them. They may even be able to determine accurate meanings of unfamiliar words simply by examining the context in which those words are used. During the writing process, however, a student does not have the luxury of examining the context in which a word is used; he or she is creating the context. Therefore, the writer must be able to spontaneously recall words that are known not only by sight, but that are understood well enough to use correctly. "Mayher and Brause (1986) have stated that writing is dependent upon the ability to draw upon words to describe an event" [3, 18].

The breadth and depth of a student's vocabulary will have a direct influence upon the descriptiveness, accuracy, and quality of his or her writing. As Ediger (1999) notes, "variety in selecting words to convey accurate meanings is necessary in speaking and writing, the outgoes of the language arts" (5). Corona, Spangenberger, and Venet (1998) concur: "At any level, written communication is more effective when a depth of vocabulary and command of language is evident" [3, 26].

Dale D. Johnson in the article “Just the Right Word: Vocabulary and Writing” indicates that Flower and Hayes (1994) have articulated a cognitive process theory of writing. [10] In their model they refer to three writing processes: planning, which includes goal settling and organizing; translating; and reviewing. Word selection comes into play during any of the three of writing processes, and each word chosen is important. “As composing proceeds, a new element enters the task environment which places even more constraints upon what the writer can say. Just as a title constraints the content of a paper and a topic sentence shapes the options of a paragraph, each word in the growing text determines and limits the choices of what comes next” [6, 934]

Another research was done by Duin and Graves (1986, 1987, 1988). It conducted a series of studies designed to investigate the effect of teaching vocabulary during prewriting on students' use of the words in their writing and on the quality of that writing. In a “Reading Research Quarterly” article (1987), Duin and Graves reported teaching 13 carefully selected words related to the theme “Space” to seventh graders. In Treatment 1, 13 words were given varied and deep instruction, which included questioning, discussing, recording, reading passages, using words in memos, noting words, keeping log books, and more for 6 days. Activity included both vocabulary and writing tasks. Treatment 2 was identical to Treatment 1, but omitted writing activities. Treatment 3 incorporated vocabulary instruction using worksheets. Results showed that Treatment 1subjects did best, followed by Treatment 2. Treatment 3 did least well on posttests of vocabulary, judgments of writing quality, and measures of attitude toward the unit. The researchers concluded, “The central implication is that teaching a related set of words to students before they write an essay in which the words might be used can improve the quality of their assays”. [10]

One writes for a purpose and with a particular audience in mind, both of which influence word selection. One of the ways to accurately choose a word is with the help of thesaurus. Most modern thesauri are organized alphabetically, and for each entry word, the meanings, synonyms, related words, contrasting words, and antonyms often are included. Writers use thesauri to help them choose words of similar meaning, words stronger or weaker in force, words that are more formal or folksier than the one in mind, idiomatic expressions that convey the same idea, or words that contrast or are opposite in meanings. A writer uses a thesaurus to avoid using the same word repetitively. A thesaurus is used when one is trying to find the exact word or one is trying to recall a word buried frustratingly in the back of one's mind. The thesaurus is an essential tool and constant companion of professional writers, and perhaps it ought to be essential for writers at all stages of development.

The following guidelines are offered by Johnson to those interested in helping young writers expand their vocabularies and use the right words in their writing:

1. Involve students in rich oral language activities including conversations, discussions, debates, participating in and attending plays, listening to speeches, watching quality films and television programs.

2. Promote and enable wide reading, daily, of many genres of print, and have students engage in discussions of their current and previous readings.

3. Provide direct instruction with important words that might otherwise become stumbling blocks to students' writing. Strategies that include a combination of concept-associational, contextual, and definitional attention to the words hold the most promise.

4. When students engage in the writing process, encourage them to be active seekers of just the right words, especially during prewriting, composing, and revising. Encourage students to search their own mental lexicons and to use words they do not ordinarily use in their speaking or writing.

5. Teach students why, when, and how to use a thesaurus. Ideally each writer should have his or her own thesaurus. Familiarize students with larger thesauri and the variety of other word-finder books and resources available in the library, on CD-ROMs, and at pertinent Web sites. Encourage the regular use of the thesaurus when writing. [10]

Words are both the windows through which we see the world, and the symbols that enable us to be understood by others. All humans are judged by the words they use.

1.2 Principles of Vocabulary Development

Because words are the writer's most important tools, vocabulary development must be an important and ongoing part of classroom learning. That is why Renee L.Donohue in the work “A Case and Strategies for Vocabulary Instruction” (2000) offers several key principles by Laflamme (1997) that should guide the creation and implementation of a comprehensive vocabulary development program.

1. Teacher enthusiasm - teachers convey their belief in the effectiveness of learning strategies.

2. Direct instruction - teachers must offer direct instruction of techniques or procedures for developing a broad and varied vocabulary. This instruction can be provided both formally through the language arts program, and informally through various classroom interactions-such as story time-with students.

3. Integration - new vocabulary terms must be connected to students' previous knowledge and experiences. If students are unable to contextualize new words by attaching them to words and concepts they already understand, the words will likely have little meaning to them. And as Ediger (1999) points out, "if meaning is lacking, the chances are pupils will memorize terms and concepts for testing purposes only or largely". [5]

4. Intensive practice - students should be able to contextualize the vocabulary terms they have learned and use them in society [5]. In order for students to do this successfully, they must first learn to become comfortable using these words in the classroom. Students should be required or encouraged to incorporate new vocabulary terms into their oral and written reports and presentations.

5. Repetition is an important method by which students can become familiar with new words and understand how they may be used correctly. Students should be frequently exposed to the same words through practice exercises, classroom use, and testing.

6. Learner involvement - teachers should model an enthusiasm for and curiosity about new words through their own behaviors and attitudes. Teachers who are enthusiastic about vocabulary development will automatically look for "teachable moments" throughout the day, pointing out interesting words as they crop up in texts, stories, or conversation; asking students to explore alternative ways of expressing concepts; and helping identify colorful, descriptive ways of speaking and writing.

7. Long-term commitment - schools, teachers, and students must be committed to vocabulary development over the long term. The teaching of vocabulary must be an interdisciplinary project, integrated into the curriculum at every level. [11]

While improved vocabulary can enhance students' writing skills, there is no guarantee that it will do so automatically. Improvement in vocabulary will result in improved writing skills only if the teacher is able to create a classroom that takes writing seriously. "In such a classroom, process and environment are closely intertwined and interdependent. The process does not come alive unless the environment is conducive to it" [3, 24]. The following are techniques teachers can use to create a writing-centered classroom.

1. Helping students become aware of and look for interesting words. There are many different forms this can take. For example, students could pair up and look through books for words that catch their attention, then write down common words that the author could have used instead. Other methods include having students: create a word bank through words-of-the day that are taken from classroom literature [3, 25]; record or act out energetic verbs; or write unfamiliar words in "literature-response journals" for later exploration [14].

2. Offering a variety of writing opportunities. "A writer-centered classroom emphasizes using written expression to communicate ideas. Writing is an important part of all areas of the curriculum" [3, 29]. The authors go on to note that students have a greater investment in their writing when they are given choices about their assignments. Such choices may include journal or diary entries, weekly logs summarizing journal entries, book reports, outlines, poetry, autobiographies, short stories, or any number of variations on the above.

3. Providing ample time for students to fully experience the writing process [3]. The teaching of writing should be approached as a process that must be studied in depth, and substantial blocks of time should be devoted to writing.

4. Allowing students to conference with teachers and fellow students [3]. When writing topics are chosen, students should meet with their teacher to discuss ideas and answer questions. The teacher's role is to encourage, build on existing strengths, and help the student expand his or her abilities. Conferencing with fellow students gives the budding writer the opportunity to share ideas, brainstorm, and rework his or her project.

Carl Smith in the work “Vocabulary: Word Choice in Writing” (2003) indicates that there are many ways to teach good word choice when teaching writing. He presents a variety of mini-lessons for word choice, offered by Sloan (1996):

Interesting word research: Pairs of students look through a book, recording interesting words the find. Next to the interesting word, students write the common word the author could have used.

Act out words: To illustrate the power of words, students dramatize several words that differ by shades of meaning. The class guesses which word has being portrayed. We put these “word cousins” on a chart for students to use.

Energetic verbs: I read Mem Fox's (1998) Night Noises to show a good author's use of lively language. We record the energetic verbs Fox uses to help her story come alive. I encourage students to write like Fox.

Alphabet books: Some alphabet books are sources for interesting words. After reading several ABC books, students pick a theme such as “Animals and Movement” and write their own alphabet books.

Nice-o-nyms: Students brainstorm a list of synonym for the word. We post the list in the classroom. We do the same with sad, happy, big and other overused words.

Poetry: we talk about the words poets use. Students paint with water colours while I read the lyrics of Elizabeth Coatsworth, create with clay when I recite Jack Prelutsky's “The Dragons Are Singing Tonight” (1993), and draw cartoons to illustrate Karla Kuskin's “A Bug Sat in a Silver Flower” (1980). I continue to encourage students to give the interesting words life as they recite poems individually and orally. [17]

Through increased vocabulary awareness and by studying words in the context in which they are used students can become better writers. When a student understands how the English language can be manipulated, many word choice opportunities are created. It is also important for a student to understand what is expected of them. When given examples they are able to revise their own writing to meet the higher standards placed upon them.

1.3 Teaching vocabulary at 6^th and 9^th grade

The age of our pupils is a major factor in our decisions about how and what to teach. People of different ages have different needs, competences, and cognitive skills; we might expect children of primary age to acquire much of a foreign language through play, for example, whereas for adults we can reasonably expect a greater use of abstract thought. [9, 36]

Teaching vocabulary is a long process pupils go through during their learning English at school. It has its peculiarities at different levels and is conducted in different ways.6^th grade is included into elementary level of a secondary school. A. D. Klymentenko distinguishes two stages of teaching vocabulary at an elementary level:

1) Introduction of new lexical units;

2) Usage of words for receiving and transferring information.

Introduction of new words includes:

1) Introduction of its sounds and graphical form;

2) Presenting the meaning;

3) Demonstration of their use in typical combinations with other lexical units. [1, 112]

At this stage pupils have to pronounce a new word. At first the teacher pronounces it, and learners repeat in chorus. The aim of the second stage is to teach how to use language material in speech.

It is recommended to write the word on the blackboard so that the pupils see its graphical form as they do not have enough practice in reading.

There are different ways of presenting the meaning of new words. G. V. Rogova suggests two methods of conveying the meaning of words: direct method and translation. [16, 123] There are various techniques for the use of direct method. G. V. Rogova groups them into (1) visual and (2) verbal. She also points out, that at 6^th grade prevail visual presentation and translation. [16, 127]

To convey the meaning of unfamiliar words the following visual aids can be used: objects, or pictures showing objects or situations; the teacher may use movements and gestures.

At this stage presentation of new lexical units in typical combinations can be carried out. Pupils must be familiar with the situations words are used in. Some practice training exercises are designed for this purpose.

The second stage of mastering vocabulary is the use of concrete lexical material in communication. In the process of it lexical habits are formed. Developing lexical habits needs special conditions which lead to acquiring operations with lexical material. Substitution exercises are intended to provide automatical skills of mastering vocabulary. Such exercises develop pupils' memory, independence, and necessity of oral speech. They provoke pupils to express their thoughts and communicate on the given topic or situation.

Teaching vocabulary at elementary level involves a lot of chorus work. Teacher demonstrates the object and children repeat in chorus. After this work the pupils rear the words themselves.

9^th grade is included into secondary level of a secondary school. At this stage the pupils have already achieved a lot. Jeremy Harmer emphasizes that “success is not so easy to perceive here”. [8, 13] The tasks given should be more challenging and such which could get the pupils to analyze language more thoroughly.

The number of training exercises at 9^th grade is to be limited, as the pupils do a lot of pre-communicative tasks. As soon as pre-communicative exercises have been completed they are given reading and translating tasks. According to G. V. Rogova, translation is the best way of language acquisition at this level. [16, 127] Writing exercises are done at home.

To attain the desired end pupils must first of all perform various exercises to fix the words in their memory. G. V. Rogova suggests constant use of a new word as the best way of learning it. It is also good to group words for better retention of vocabulary. Researchers think that vocabulary knowledge is largely a question of accumulating individual items. The general rule seems to be a question of memory. And during the process of teaching and learning vocabulary an important problem occurs: How does memory work? Researchers into the workings of memory distinguish between the following systems. [18]

? short- term store

- working memory

- long- term memory

Short - term store

Short-term store is the brain capacity to hold a limited number of items of information for periods of time up to a few seconds. It is the kind of memory that is involved in repeating a word that you have just heard the teacher modeling. But successful vocabulary learning involves more than holding words for a few seconds. To integrate words into long - term memory they need to be subjected to different kinds of operations.

Working memory

Working memory means focusing on word long enough to perform operations on them. It means the information is manipulated via the senses from external sources and/or can be downloaded from the long- term memory.

Material remains in working memory for about twenty seconds. The existence of articulator loop enables this new material processing. It works a bit like audiotape going round around again. It assures the short-term store to be kept refreshed. The ability to hold a word in working memory is a good predictor of language learning aptitude. The better ability to hold words in working memory the smoother the process of learning foreign languages is.

Long -term memory

Long-term memory can be seen as kind of filling system. Unlike working memory, which has a limited capacity and no permanent content, this kind of memory has an enormous capacity and its contents are durable over time.

However, to ensure moving new materials into permanent long-term memory requires number of principles to be followed, described by Thornbury, 2002:

* Repetition - repetition of encounters with a word is very important, useful and effective. If the word is met several times over space interval during reading activities, students have a very good chance to remember it for a long time.

* Retrieval - another kind of repetition. Activities, which require retrieval, such as using the new items in written tasks, help students to be able to recall it again in the future.

* Spacing - it is useful to split memory work over a period of time rather than to mass it together in a single block.

* Pacing - to respect different learning styles and pace, students should be ideally given the opportunity to do memory work individually.

* Use - putting words to use, preferably in an interesting way, is the best way of ensuring they are added to long - term memory. This is so called “Use it or lose it” principle.

* Cognitive depth - the more decisions students make about the word and the more cognitively demanding these decisions are, the better the word is remembered.

* Personal organizing - personalization significantly increased the probability that students will remember new items. It is achieved mainly through conversation and role-playing activities.

* Imaging - easily visualized words are better memorable than those that do not evoke with any pictures. Even abstract words can be associated with some mental image.

* Mnemonics - tricks to help retrieve items or rules that are stored in memory. The best kinds of mnemonics are visuals and keyword techniques.

* Motivation - strong motivation itself does not ensure that words will be remembered. Even unmotivated students remember words if they have to face appropriate tasks.

* Attention - it is not possible to improve vocabulary without a certain degree of conscious attention.

It is important to follow the stages of teaching vocabulary, while the systematic process of acquiring new knowledge works better in this way. In the course of teaching and learning vocabulary a student have to memorize a lot. For this reason scholars represent a range of techniques to ensure moving new materials into permanent long-term memory.

CHAPTER 2. VOCABULARY ACQUISITION AND WRITING

2.1 The Influence of Age on Vocabulary Acquisition of English as a Foreign Language

The relationship between the age of initiation of the process of learning a foreign language and the level of proficiency attained is one of the crucial issues in current course paper. Furthermore, although we are nowadays far away from the notion that learning a language means learning a collection of words, the lexical component is still thought to be core in the process of language acquisition. That is why vocabulary should also be included as object of study in research on age effects and language acquisition. As the title of the course paper suggests the aspect of the individual's linguistic development, namely the written production should be looked upon.

Immaculada Miralpeix Pujol, the Doctor of English Philology in Barcelona University, made a research concerning the influence of age on vocabulary acquisition in English as a foreign language. The study analyzed the productive vocabulary of two groups of students who started English at different ages in primary education (age 8 vs. age 11). It aimed to see whether an early start conferred any advantage on the productive vocabulary knowledge of the students towards the end of second education. That is, both groups were tested at different time periods with the objective of analyzing their productive vocabulary development and especially assessing it after 726 hours of exposure to the language (ES and LS) and after 800 hours (ES). [15]

Students performed three oral and one written task and filled in a background questionnaire and English cloze.

Students wrote a composition in class about themselves, the maximum time allowed for them to write was 15 minutes. The title they were given was: `Me, my past and my future' and they were not allowed to use any dictionary or textbook or ask for any kind of help. Example:

@Participants: SAR

@Grade: 12

@Filename: 0745

@Group: B3

When I was a child I didn't go to a kindergarten before to go at primary school. When I went to the primary school, Capmany, I learnt to write and I learnt to read. Before the end the PS I knew that I like very much to write poems. Perhaps I hope to become a famous writer but it will be very difficult. I like very much too to sing, and I would be a glamorous sing star, but when I started HS I had not any time for to sing. Nowadays I have the best boyfriend in the world and me hope to be married one day, and to live together.

For the analysis of the written production, the same conventions adopted for the oral data were followed as regards contractions, non-words in L2, inconsistencies in spelling and compound nouns. Spelling mistakes that allowed us to understand the word were corrected (e.g. `nouse' - `nose'). [15]

When the exposure was kept constant (726 hours) and significant differences were found, those were usually in favor of the LS group (who started learning English at the age of 11), who were a year older than ES (that started at 8) (16.3 vs. 17.9). Furthermore, differences between the two groups were also found in the short and mid term in favor of SL when exposure was kept constant.

When the exposure in the long term was carried out between ES who had received 800 hours of instruction and LS who had received 726 hours, and AT was kept constant, significant differences were not usually found. In spite of having started earlier and received more exposure ES does not outperform LS.

Another study was investigated by research group at the University of the Basque Country, which decided to conduct a study in order to analyze the effect of the age of introduction of English as a third language on general proficiency in English and on attitudes and motivation towards learning English. [2, 81]

All the participants in this research learned Spanish and English as school subjects, but the main language of communication at school was Basque. They had received 600 hours of instruction in English but instruction had started at different ages: in kindergarten (4 years old), in grade 3 (8years old), and in grade 6 (11 years old). The following tests and questionnaires were administered: background questionnaire, tests of English proficiency, second story, listening comprehension, cloze test, reading comprehension/grammar test.

Apart from all these tests the participants were asked to write a composition with a maximum length of 250 words. In the composition, students were asked to write a letter to an English family telling them about their own family, their school and their hobbies. The maximum score for the composition is 100 points.

The composition was graded according to the holistic approach proposed by Jacob's et al.'s [2, 84].

The scores obtained by the second year of secondary and the fifth year of secondary school are included in the five dimensions below:

vocabulary writing english development

The results of the T-tests analyses indicate that there are significant differences in four of the five measures: content (T = -4.4, S= 0.00), organization (T = -3.9, S = 0.00), vocabulary (T = -4.0, S = 0.00) and grammar (T = -4.5, S = 0.00). The older group (fifth year of secondary school) obtained significantly higher scores than the younger group (second year of secondary school) in these four scales. There were no significant differences when the means corresponding to the mechanics of writing were compared (T = -1.2, S = 0.20). J. Cenoz explained that it can be due to fossilization in the case of pronunciation and to the control that both groups have of the basic elements of punctuation and orthography. He also notices that the mechanics of writing only accounts for 5% of the composition. [2, 86,89]

A profound research work was done in the field of maturational constraints on foreign-language written production by David Lasagabaster and Ainzane Doiz. They proposed their own hypotheses concerning an aspect of the acquisition of English. Lasagabaster and Doiz pointed out that the age factor would determine the degree of competence achieved as revealed by the holistic evaluation of the participants' written production. They say that the older the students are, the better the results obtained in fluency, complexity and accuracy will be. The age of the students will influence the kind of errors made by the participants.

The students who took part in their study belonged in three age groups. The first group was made up of 31 students of sixth grade of primary school (11-12 year-olds) who had started their English lessons when they were 4/5 years old; at the time in which the study was conducted, they had had a total of 704 hours of tuition in English. The second group had 18 fourth graders of secondary education (15-16 year olds) and had received their first English lessons at the age of 8/9 with a total of 792 hours. The third group, 13 students of second grade in high school (17-18 years old) had started learning English at the age of 11/12 with a total of 693 hours of tuition in English.

The topic of the assignment was very general in nature and did not pose a problem for any of the groups. The task was carried out in class, and no time limit was given. Each of the letters was analyzed according to the holistic, quantitative and descriptive evaluating systems.

In the first type of analysis, the so-called holistic approach, the effect of the age factor becomes evident. The older the students are, the more developed communicative ability is displayed in their texts, so much so that the differences between the three age groups happen to be significant as regards both the five scales (content, organization, vocabulary, use of language and mechanics) and the overall score, always in favor of the older group.

The results obtained in the second type of analysis lead to the same conclusion, since the older the students are: (1) the more extended their texts are, made up of longer sentences (fluency); (2) the greater lexical, syntactical and discoursal complexity is shown in their texts; and (3) the lower the number of errors encountered by the evaluators is, as the older studentsґ texts are more accurate.

The last type of evaluation focused on the variability of the nature of the errors depending on the studentsґ age. Three main trends stood out. In the first trend the younger students (11/12 year olds) made a higher number of what Lasagabaster and Doiz define as basic errors such as spelling mistakes, omission of the verb or misformation of number and/or gender. However, in the second trend it is the older students (17/18 year olds) who committed the largest number of errors, with the omission of the infinitive particle `to', misordering of the constituents within the sentence and misformation of the word at the semantic level. Finally, in the third trend it is the intermediate group (16/17 year olds) who made more errors such as the omission of the article or the incorrect use of a particular verb tense, which, on the one hand, stem from their poorer linguistic competence when compared with the oldest students and, on the other hand, from the inexistence of this kind of errors among the youngest students due to their lack of linguistic competence.

Consequently, these three trends are based on two basic parameters: degree of competence and complexity of the utilized structures, parameters on which the age factor has once again a great impact. [12, 155]

2.2 The Phrasicon of EFL learners in comparison to native speakers

The article “An Automated approach to the phrasicon of EFL learners” by Sylvie De Cock, Sylviane Granger, Geoffrey Leech and Tony McEnery is a first step towards a corpus-based study of the spoken phrasicon of adult advanced EEL learners of French mother tongue. It will, amongst other things, try to test the validity of Kjellmer's hypothesis [7, 67] that learners' foreign-soundingness may be due to the fact that “their building material is individual bricks rather than prefabricated sections”. The approach adopted here is contrastive: the analysis of the phraseological competence of learners will be based on a comparison of a corpus of non-native speaker (NNS) and a corpus of native speaker (NS) speech. The focus will be on only one of its subsets: formulae or formulaic expressions, i.e. frequently used multi-word units that perform pragmatic or discourse structuring functions.

Two comparable corpora were used in the analysis: (i) a 62,975-wordcorpus of 25 informal interviews with advanced EFL learners of French mother tongue; (ii) @-word corpus of 25 informal interviews with native speakers of British English. Both NS and NNS informants are young adult university students and are aged between 19 and 25. The proportion of males to females is the same in both corpora: 6 males to 19 females.

The most important statistics the scholars incorporated were chi-square as a measure of significance in differences, and a slightly modified version of Juilland's numeric dispersion measure as an indication of how well a particular word combination is spread throughout the corpus. This dispersion measure ranges from 1 and 0.

Two programs were developed for studying word-combinations in the NS and NNS corpora: Tuples and Combinator. Tuplesextracts word combinations from corpus texts. The output from the Tuples program is a frequency-ordered list of word combinations. The program was instructed to extract three-word combinations which occurred more than forty times in interviewee data only:

85 I don't know

77 a lot of

47 and it was

Combinator is capable of comparing the use of word combinations across a range of files.

The observations made draw the following conclusion with regard to learners and the idiom principle: “contrary to Kjellmer's hypothesis, learners do use prefabs. Nevertheless, they seem, to differ from NSs in that they show a tendency to repeat some prefabs more often. In other words, learners appear to make a more routine use of prefabs, at least of longer ones, than NSs”. [7, 72]

The scholars also focused on a series of formulaic expressions that have been dealt with under the heading of “vagueness tags” [7, 74].

Table 1: Absolute frequencies of `actual' vagueness tags in NSC and NNSC:

Vagueness tags NSC NNSC

and all 0 0

and everything 21 4

and so on 2 18

and stuff 12 0

and stuff like that 15 0

and that 2 0

and that sort of thing 3 0

and things 31 1

and things like that 14 3

or anything 14 0

or something 30 4

or something like that 8 8

or whatever 11 1

something like that 1 5

sort of thing 5 0

stuff like that 4 0

that sort of thing 1 0

things like that 7 4

Total 187 47

The scholars indicate that the figures in Table 1 reveal, from a statistical point of view, a highly significant underuse of vagueness tags by NNSs: even accepting that the NS corpus is slightly larger than the NNS corpus, NSs use almost four times as many vagueness tags as learners. That said, learners also overuse some vagueness tags. The figures for and so on are particularly striking; it is used almost ten times as often by NNSs as by NSs. [7, 77]

To sum up, these first results show that advanced learners use prefabs, and in some cases even more prefabs than NSs. Consequently, they can be said to apply the idiom principle, but the chunks they use (I) are not necessarily the same as those used by NSs, (2) are not used with the same frequency, (3) have different syntactic uses, and (4) fulfill different pragmatic functions.

2.3 The Development of Passive and Active Vocabulary in a Second Language

Nowadays vocabulary size rather than depth is considered to be of crucial importance to learners. It was found to be a good predictor of reading comprehension (Anderson and Freebody 198J, Koda 1989, Coady et al 1993) and to correlate well with writing quality (Linnarud 1986, Astika 1993). It is an important component of fluency in speech and learners themselves associate progress in language learning with an increase in the number of words they know. [13]

Investigating the progress of learners' vocabulary size can be of considerable value to language research and pedagogy. For example, teachers might want to know how much instruction is needed before students have reached the vocabulary threshold level which is necessary for the comprehension of written authentic prose for English.

And yet there are very few quantitative studies where vocabulary size is measured at different stages of language learning over a long period of time. Still one was recently done by Professor Batia Laufer, University of Haifa.

In her paper “The Development of Passive and Active Vocabulary in a Second Language: Same or Different?”(1998) Batia Laufer investigated the development of three components of word knowledge: the basic receptive (passive) knowledge, i.e. understanding the most frequent and core meaning of a word, e g “solution” as in “solution of a problem” rather than “chemical solution”, and two types of productive knowledge controlled and free. The first type entails producing words when prompted by a task. An example is to complete the word 'fragrant' in “the garden was full of fra____ flowers”. Free productive knowledge, on the other hand, has to do with the use of words at one's free will, without any specific prompts for particular words, as is the case of free composition. The distinction between controlled and free active vocabulary is necessary as not all learners who use infrequent vocabulary when forced to do so will also use it when left to their own selection of words.

The purpose of the study was twofold, first, to examine the development of three types of vocabulary knowledge passive, controlled active, and free active over one year of school instruction and second, to examine the relationship among these three types of knowledge at different stages of vocabulary learning.

The subjects were two groups of learners in a typical comprehensive high school in Israel Group. One consisted of twenty-six 16-year-old 10th graders who studied English for six years in school Group. Two consisted of twenty-two 17-year-old 11th graders who studied English for seven years. The two groups were studying English in the `5 point stream', i.e. the advanced curriculum in the Israeli school system (as opposed to 3 and 4 point streams) [13].

All the subjects were native speakers of Hebrew. None had English-speaking parents and none had lived outside Israel. All schools followed a syllabus of the Ministry of Education and used materials that were authorized by it. At the end of high school instruction, i.e. at the end of grade 12, all students took a government exam in English. Exposure to English outside the classroom consisted mainly of English-speaking TV programs with Hebrew subtitles and of computer games. Occasionally, teenagers were able to communicate with English-speaking tourists.

Three instruments were used to measure three dimensions of the subjects' vocabulary knowledge: (1) The Vocabulary Levels Test (Nation 1983, 1990) for passive vocabulary size, (2) the productive version of the levels test (Laufer and Nation, in press) for controlled active vocabulary size, and (3) The Lexical Frequency Profile (Laufer and Nation 1995) for lexical richness in free written expression. [13]

The differences between the two groups of learners were presented in terms of t-test results.

Comparison of passive vocabulary size showed that the passive vocabulary had grown considerably in one year. If the raw scores were expressed in terms of numbers of vocabulary families, the total of 24 15 represented roughly 1,900 word families and 48 09 represented 3,500. The passive vocabulary sizes of the two groups have increased by 84 per cent in one year of study.

Comparison of controlled active vocabulary showed that the controlled active vocabulary had increased too. Converted into numbers of word families, the growth was from the total of 1,700 in the 10th grade to 2,550 in the 11th grade, i.e. about 50 per cent.

B. Laufer observed that, looking at the two results, it can be seen that the growth of the two types of vocabulary knowledge was not identical. In one year learners added about 1,600 word families to their passive vocabulary and 850 word families to controlled active lexis. In percentages, there was 84 per cent growth in the passive vocabulary and 50 per cent in the controlled active.

Comparison of lexical profiles showed that there was no significant progress in the free active vocabulary of the learners. Even though their passive and controlled active vocabularies had improved, they used the same proportion of frequent and non-frequent vocabulary in a free writing activity.

With regard to the relationship between the three types of vocabulary, the Professor also noticed that the passive vocabulary was larger than the controlled active, but the ratio between the two was different in the two groups. In the 10th grade it is 89 per cent while a year later it decreased to 73 per cent. This meant that the gap between the two types of lexical knowledge had widened at a higher level of language proficiency (The higher the ratio between two figures, the closer the figures are).

Spearman correlations among individual test scores (10^th, 11^th graders) showed that there was a high and significant correlation between the two. This meant that the learners who had a higher passive vocabulary size were also those who had a higher controlled active vocabulary size. Bearing in mind the lower ratio of the more advanced group, the results of comparison of passive-controlled active ratios suggested that the higher one's passive vocabulary size, the wider the gap between it and the controlled active vocabulary. The following conclusions were made:

- a large number of words can indeed be learnt even when the learning context is not 'natural', i.e. when learners are not exposed to the new words in the language speaking environment. These results underscore the fact that classroom instruction can provide an optimal setting for vocabulary learning.

- even though about 1,600 words were learnt passively and 850 actively in one year, in the 11th grade, this does not imply that in the preceding 6 years the same amount of words could have been learnt each year. However, more time and effort could be spent on helping students increase the size and control of their L2 lexicon. Consequently, a larger target vocabulary for 10th graders could have been aimed for.

- an increase in one's passive vocabulary will, on the one hand, lead to an increase in one's controlled active vocabulary, but at the same time lead to a larger gap between the two. These findings are not unreasonable. When one's passive vocabulary is low, it consists of the most frequent useful words that cannot be avoided in expression. Repeated use of these words reinforces their active knowledge. But as the passive vocabulary size expands, less frequent words are learnt. The learner can often convey meaning without using these words. If not 'pushed' to use them, they may never be activated and therefore remain in passive vocabulary only. The higher the passive vocabulary size, the higher the number of words that may not enter the active lexis and hence the lower ratio between the two.

CONCLUSION

The paper makes up the part of the research devoted to the special stratum of methodology of vocabulary acquisition at 6^th and 9^th grade EFL learners. Focus is made on the role and advantages of vocabulary acquisition, connection between vocabulary and writing including the influence of age on the pupils' learning.

The investigation of vocabulary teaching process and its effective use in writing has become a popular and requisite material recently. A range of the advantages of learning the written production through vocabulary are presented.

Taking into consideration the analysis of the research investigated, the role and the influence of age on vocabulary acquisition, we may present the following results:

- There were no significant differences found when analyzing the influence of age on vocabulary acquisition;

- The main principles of vocabulary development were presented;

- The techniques of teaching vocabulary at 6^th and 9^th grade EFL learners were introduced;

- The main maturational constraints on foreign language written production were defined;

- The question of the development of passive and active vocabulary in a second language was examined;

- We compared the phrasicon of EFL learners to native speakers.

Because words are the writer's most important tools, vocabulary development must be an important and ongoing part of classroom learning. The breadth and depth of a student's vocabulary will have a direct influence upon the descriptiveness, accuracy, and quality of his or her writing.

After conducting different researches I came to the conclusion that it cannot be exactly said how the age influences the acquisition of vocabulary.

The investigation by Immaculada Miralpeix showed that when the exposure was carried out between ES who had received 800 hours of instruction and LS who had received 726 hours, and AT was kept constant, significant differences were not usually found. In spite of having started earlier and received more exposure ES does not outperform LS.

However, the results of the investigation made by Jasone Cenoz turned out to be slightly different: the older group (fifth year of secondary school) obtained significantly higher scores than the younger group (second year of secondary school) in the four scales: content, organization, vocabulary and grammar. There were no significant differences when the means corresponding to the mechanics of writing were compared.

In addition in the research by David Lasagabaster and Ainzane Doiz the results obtained appeared to be in favor of the older group, since the older the students are: (1) the more extended their texts are, made up of longer sentences (fluency); (2) the greater lexical, syntactical and discoursal complexity is shown in their texts; and (3) the lower the number of errors encountered by the evaluators is, as the older studentsґ texts are more accurate.

LIST OF REFERENCES

1. Климентенко, А. Д. Обучение лексике в 5 - 7 классах//Иностранные языки. - 1974. - №6.

2. Cenoz, J. Age and the Acquisition of English as a Foreign Language. - The Influence of Age on the acquisition of English: General Proficiency, Attitudes and Code-mixing. London: Multilingual Matters, 2003.

3. Corona, C., Spangenberger, S. & Venet, I. Improving Students Writing through a Language Rich Environment. Dissertations/Theses, 1989.

4. Donohue, R. L. A Case And Strategies for Vocabulary Instruction. Biola University, 2000.

5. Ediger, M. Reading And Vocabulary Development. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 26(1), 1999.

6. Flower, L. & Hayes, J. R. A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. Newark, DE: International Reading Association, 1994.

7. Granger, S. Learner English On Computer. London: Longman, 1998.

8. Harmer, J. How to Teach English, Longman, 1998.

9. Harmer, J. The Practice of English Language Teaching, Longman, 1993.