CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 193

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Lexical Coverage of Movies

Webb, S., Rodgers, M. P. H.·2009·Applied Linguistics
DOI 10.1093/applin/amp010
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The scripts of 318 movies were analyzed in this study to determine the vocabulary size necessary to understand 95% and 98% of the words in movies. The movies consisted of 2,841,887 running words and had a total running time of 601 hours and 33 minutes. The movies were classified as either American or British, and then put into the following genres: action, animation, comedy, suspense/crime, drama, horror, romance, science fiction, war, western, and classic. The results showed that knowledge of the most frequent 3,000 word families plus proper nouns and marginal words provided 95.76% coverage, and knowledge of the most frequent 6,000 word families plus proper nouns and marginal words provided 98.15% coverage of movies. Both American and British movies reached 95% coverage at the 3,000 word level. However, American movies reached 98% coverage at the 6,000 word level while British movies reached 98% coverage at the 7,000 word level. The vocabulary size necessary to reach 95% coverage of the different genres ranged from 3,000 to 4,000 word families plus proper nouns and marginal words, and 5,000 to 10,000 word families plus proper nouns and marginal words to reach 98% coverage. The implications for teaching and learning with movies are discussed in detail.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/applin/amp010

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. Adolphs, 2003, Applied Linguistics, 24, 425, 10.1093/applin/24.4.425 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 1993, International Journal of Lexicography, 64, 253
  3. 1982, Journal of educational psychology, 74, 506, 10.1037/0022-0663.74.4.506 · DOI
  4. 2004, READING RESEARCH QUARTERLY, 39, 188, 10.1598/RRQ.39.2.3 · DOI
  5. 1994, JOURNAL OF READING BEHAVIOR, 26, 413, 10.1080/10862969409547861 · DOI
  6. 2000, SYSTEM, 28, 419, 10.1016/S0346-251X(00)00021-X · DOI
  7. 2007, SYSTEM, 35, 271, 10.1016/j.system.2006.12.005 · DOI
  8. 1999, Journal of psycholinguistic research, 28, 227, 10.1023/A:1023202130625 · DOI
  9. 1989, READING RESEARCH QUARTERLY, 24, 174, 10.2307/747863 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 2005, SYSTEM, 33, 261, 10.1016/j.system.2004.09.015 · DOI
  11. 1995, THE MODERN LANGUAGE JOURNAL, 79, 57, 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1995.tb05416.x · DOI
  12. 1992, READING IN A FOREIGN LANGUAGE, 8, 689
  13. 1998, READING IN A FOREIGN LANGUAGE, 11, 207
  14. 1999, CANADIAN MODERN LANGUAGE REVIEW, 56, 308, 10.3138/cmlr.56.2.308 · DOI
  15. 2000, READING IN A FOREIGN LANGUAGE, 13, 403
  16. Jenkins, 1984, American Educational Research Journal, 21, 767, 10.3102/00028312021004767 · DOI
  17. 1982, READING RESEARCH QUARTERLY, 17, 367, 10.2307/747525 · DOI
  18. 2002, COMPUTER ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING, 15, 509, 10.1076/call.15.5.509.13468 · DOI
  19. 1999, EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, 47, 51, 10.1007/BF02299476 · DOI
  20. 1985, FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS, 18, 405, 10.1111/j.1944-9720.1985.tb00973.x · DOI · Paper page
  21. Liu Na, 1985, RELC Journal, 16, 33, 10.1177/003368828501600103 · DOI · Paper page
  22. 1989, Journal of educational psychology, 81, 204, 10.1037/0022-0663.81.2.204 · DOI
  23. 1985, READING RESEARCH QUARTERLY, 20, 522, 10.2307/747940 · DOI
  24. Mezynski, 1983, Review of Educational Research, 53, 253, 10.3102/00346543053002253 · DOI
  25. 1980, MODERN LANGUAGE JOURNAL, 64, 335, 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1980.tb05202.x · DOI
  26. 2006, THE CANADIAN MODERN LANGUAGE REVIEW, 63, 59, 10.3138/cmlr.63.1.59 · DOI · Paper page
  27. 1992, READING RESEARCH QUARTERLY, 27, 95
  28. 1995, Journal of speech and hearing research, 38, 434, 10.1044/jshr.3802.434 · DOI
  29. Rice, 1988, Child development, 59, 420, 10.2307/1130321 · DOI
  30. 1994, THE MODERN LANGUAGE JOURNAL, 78, 199, 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1994.tb02034.x · DOI
  31. 1991, JOURNAL OF READING BEHAVIOR, 23, 487, 10.1080/10862969109547755 · DOI
  32. 1986, JOURNAL OF READING BEHAVIOR, 18, 309, 10.1080/10862968609547578 · DOI
  33. 1989, READING RESEARCH QUARTERLY, 24, 27, 10.2307/748009 · DOI
  34. 2003, READING IN A FOREIGN LANGUAGE, 15, 1
  35. 2008, READING IN A FOREIGN LANGUAGE, 20, 232

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Webb, S., & Rodgers, M. P. H.
Venue
Applied Linguistics
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2009-03-26
Volume
30
Issue
3
Pages
407-427
ISSN
  • 0142-6001
  • 1477-450X
DOI
10.1093/applin/amp010
Cited by
193
References
5
Language
en

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