Second Language Vocabulary Learning: The Role of Context versus Translations as a Function of Proficiency
Abstract
A widespread view of vocabulary learning is that it is advisable to make the shift away from learning words with their translations and to rely on second language (L2) context as soon as possible. Such faith in context learning has not always received experimental support, however, nor is it commonly shared by L2 learners. An experiment in which subjects were tested on their recall of newly learned words was conducted to determine the relative advantages and disadvantages of both context learning and translation learning as a function of learner proficiency. Results reveal a superiority of translation learning in terms of quantity, but an inability on the part of weaker learners to transfer their knowledge into L2 contexts. The possible reasons for this are discussed, and it is suggested that alternative learning strategies that combine the advantages of the two techniques should be explored.
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?
Prince found translation-based learning to be more effective than sentence-level contextual learning.
“In another L2 lexical study, Prince (1996) found translation-based learning to be more effective than sentence-level contextual learning”
From Effects of sentence writing in second language lexical acquisition (2004) · cites this paper as Prince (1996)
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 41 · Cited by 341
- Authors
- PRINCE, P.
- Affiliations
- Université de Provence Aix-Marseille I (FR)
- Corresponding author
- PRINCE, PETER
- Venue
- The Modern Language Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1996-12
- Volume
- 80
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 478-493
- ISSN
- 0026-7902 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-4781
- OpenAlex
- W2099696926
- Cited by
- 341
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 17
- FWCI
- 6.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Modern Language Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Keywords
- second language vocabulary acquisition, contextual learning, translation learning, learner proficiency, word recall, vocabulary acquisition strategies, knowledge 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