Depth and breadth of vocabulary in two languages: Which vocabulary skills transfer?
Abstract
In this study, the authors examined the relationship between paradigmatic and syntagmatic word knowledge. The authors used familiar concrete nouns administered in Spanish and English to 88 bilingual 4th and 5th graders. Students were tested on the ability to provide superordinates, communicatively adequate definitions, and rich object descriptions. Producing superordinates in Spanish was a reliable predictor of the same skill in English, while controlling for breadth of vocabulary knowledge in each language. The relationship between communicative skills in Spanish and English was evident only when English and Spanish breadth of vocabulary knowledge were controlled. Communicative adequacy of definitions and rich descriptions of concrete nouns depended more on specific vocabulary knowledge in English than on transfer.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The lack of LUH prediction of Turkish performance can be explained by an increased amount of competition occurring between L1 and L2 vocabulary development.
“This can be explained by an increased amount of competition occurring between L1 and L2 vocabulary development (Goodrich et al., 2016; Hammer et al., 2012; Ordóñez et al., 2002).”
From Linguistic interdependence of receptive vocabulary skills in emergent bilingual preschool children: Exploring a factor-dependent approach (2019) · cites this paper as Ordóñez et al., 2002
Cites
Linguistic Interdependence and the Educational Development of Bilingual Children
Cummins, J. (1979) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.2307/1169960 · Cited by 3,318 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Melby‐Lervåg, M., & Lervåg, A. (2011) · Journal of Research in Reading · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01477.x · Cited by 371 · see citing works
Nakamoto, J., Lindsey, K. A., & Manis, F. R. (2008) · Scientific Studies of Reading · doi:10.1080/10888430802378526 · Cited by 169 · see citing works
Sierens, S., Slembrouck, S., Van Gorp, K., Agirdag, O., & Van Avermaet, P. (2019) · Applied Psycholinguistics · doi:10.1017/s0142716419000250 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Wagley, N., Marks, R. A., Bedore, L. M., & Kovelman, I. (2022) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/cdev.13748 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ordóñez, C. L., Carlo, M. S., Snow, C. E., & McLaughlin, B.
- Affiliations
- Universidad de Los Andes (CO)
- Harvard University (US)
- University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Educational Psychology
- Published
- 2002-12
- Volume
- 94
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 719-728
- ISSN
- 0022-0663 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2176
- OpenAlex
- W2006473491
- Cited by
- 187
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 3.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Educational Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
- Keywords
- vocabulary knowledge, bilingual children, Spanish-English bilingualism, vocabulary transfer, object description, concrete nouns, language transfer
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
