CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 240Second Language Acquisition and LearningReading and Literacy DevelopmentEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning

L2 Vocabulary Learning From Reading: Explicit and Tacit Lexical Knowledge and the Role of Learner and Item Variables

Open access
Elgort, Irina, Warren, Paul·2014·Language Learning
DOI 10.1111/lang.12052
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This study investigates acquisition of second language (L2) vocabulary from reading a connected authentic text. Advanced and upper‐intermediate L2 (English) participants read a long expository text for general understanding, with embedded critical vocabulary items (pseudowords). Explicit knowledge of the critical items was examined using a meaning generation task, while their tacit knowledge was probed using form and semantic priming in lexical decision tasks. Results revealed a complex landscape of contextual L2 word learning in which individual differences (age, L2 lexical proficiency, first language, gender, learning strategies, levels of enjoyment) and lexical and text characteristics (concreteness, frequency, distribution, and saliency of use) individually and together affect L2 lexical development from reading. Implications of these results for contextual L2 word learning are discussed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/lang.12052

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Previous research on adult foreign language learners has shown L2 lexical inferencing to be dependent on L2 vocabulary knowledge and L2 reading comprehension skills.

    “Previous research on adult foreign language learners has shown L2 lexical inferencing to be dependent on L2 vocabulary knowledge and L2 reading comprehension skills (Elgort, Perfetti, Rickles, & Stafura, 2015;Elgort & Warren, 2014;Nassaji, 2006;Pulido, 2007).”

    From Use of morphological and contextual cues in children’s lexical inferencing in L1 and L2 (2021) · cites this paper as Elgort & Warren, 2014

    In “Factors Affecting Incidental Word Learning From Reading” (page unavailable), the paper reports that L2 vocabulary knowledge and text comprehension are associated with contextual vocabulary learning. It distinguishes inferring a word’s meaning for text understanding from learning that word, however, and does not establish that lexical inferencing itself depends on both skills. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 46

  1. Anderson, J. R. (1989). Human memory: An adaptive perspective. Psychological Review, 96, 703-719.
  2. Andrews, S. (2008). Lexical expertise and reading skill. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 49, pp. 247-281). San Diego, CA: Elsevier.
  3. Andrews, S., & Hersch, J. (2010). Lexical precision in skilled readers: Individual differences in masked neighbor priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139, 299-318.
  4. Andrews, S., & Lo, S. (2012). Not all skilled readers have cracked the code: Individual differences in masked form priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 152-163.
  5. Baayen, R. H., & Milin, P. (2010). Analyzing reaction times. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3, 12-28.
  6. Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255-278.
  7. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & McCaslin, E. S. (1983). Vocabulary: All contexts are not created equal. Elementary School Journal, 83, 177-181.
  8. Bondi, M. (2010). Perspectives on keywords and keyness. In M. Bondi & M. Scott (Eds.), Keyness in Texts (pp. 1-18). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  9. Castles, A., Davis, C., Cavalot, P., & Forster, K. (2007). Tracking the acquisition of orthographic skills in developing readers: Masked priming effects. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 97, 165-182.
  10. Coltheart, M., Davelaar, E., Jonasson, J., & Besner, D. (1977). Access to the internal lexicon. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance VI (pp. 535-555). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  11. Dagenbach, D., Carr, T. H., & Barnhardt, T. M. (1990). Inhibitory semantic priming of lexical decisions due to failure to retrieve weakly activated codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 328-340.
  12. Davis, C. J., & Lupker, S. J. (2006). Masked inhibitory priming in English: Evidence for lexical inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 668-687.
  13. Dijkstra, T., Miwa, K., Brummelhuis, B., Sappelli, M., & Baayen, R. H. (2010). How cross-language similarity and task demands affect cognate recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 62, 284-301.
  14. Dong, Q., Mei, L., Xue, G., Chen, C., Li, T., Xue, F., et al. (2008). Sex-dependent neurofunctional predictors of long-term maintenance of visual word learning. Neuroscience Letters, 430, 87-91.
  15. Ferrel Tekmen, E. A., & Daloglu, A. (2006). An investigation of incidental vocabulary acquisition in relation to learner proficiency level and word frequency. Foreign Language Annals, 39, 220-243.
  16. Forster, K. I., & Vereš, C. (1998). The prime lexicality effect: Form priming as a function of prime awareness, lexical status, and discrimination difficulty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 498-514.
  17. Fukkink, R. G., & de Glopper, K. (1998). Effects of instruction in deriving word meanings from context: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 68, 450-469.
  18. Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  19. Harrell, F. E. (2001). Regression modeling strategies: With applications to linear models, logistic regression, and survival analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag.
  20. Hintzman, D. L. (1986). "Schema abstraction" in a multiple-trace memory model. Psychological Review, 93, 411-428.
  21. Hulstijn, J. H. (2013). Incidental learning in second language acquisition. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 2632-2637). New York: Wiley-Blackwell.
  22. Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 258-286). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  23. Jaeger, T. F., & Kuperman, V. (2009). Issues and solutions in fitting, evaluating, and interpreting regression models. Presentation slides, WOMM'09 at the CUNY Sentence Processing Conference. Retrieved from www.hlp.rochester.edu/resources/WOMM/JaegerKuperman.pdf
  24. Joordens, S., & Becker, S. (1997). The long and short of semantic priming effects in lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 1083-1105.
  25. Kimura, D. (1999). Sex and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  26. Lauren & M. Nordman (Eds.), Special language: From humans thinking to thinking machines (pp. 316-323). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
  27. Laufer, B., & Shmueli, K. (1997). Memorizing new words: Does teaching have anything to do with it? RELC Journal, 28, 89-108.
  28. Levitt, S. D., & Dubner, S. J. (2006). Freakonomics. Camberwell, Australia: Penguin.
  29. Masson, M. E. J. (1995). A distributed memory model of semantic priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 3-23.
  30. McKeown, M. G. (1985). The acquisition of word meaning from context by children of high and low ability. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 482-496.
  31. McRae, K., & Boisvert, S. (1998). Automatic semantic similarity priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 558-572.
  32. Meyer, D. E., & Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1971). Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: Evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90, 227-234.
  33. Nassaji, H. (2003). L2 vocabulary learning from context: Strategies, knowledge sources, and their relationship with success in L2 Lexical Inferencing. TESOL Quarterly, 37, 645-670.
  34. Nation, I. S. P. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review, 63, 59-82.
  35. Neely, J. H. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. In D. Besner & G. W. Humphreys (Eds.), Basic processes in reading (pp. 264-336). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  36. Ozuru, Y., Briner, S., Kurby, C. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2013). Comparing comprehension measured by multiple-choice and open-ended questions. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 215-227.
  37. Perfetti, C. A., & Hart, L. (2001). The lexical bases of comprehension skill. In D. Gorfien (Ed.), On the consequences of meaning selection (pp. 67-86). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  38. Perfetti, C. A., & Hart, L. (2002). The lexical quality hypothesis. In L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro, & P. Reitsma (Eds.), Precursors of functional literacy (Vol. 11, pp. 189-213). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  39. Phillips, N. A., Segalowitz, N., O'Brien, I., & Yamasakia, N. (2004). Semantic priming in a first and second language: Evidence from reaction time variability and event-related brain potentials. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 17, 237-262.
  40. Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  41. Segalowitz, N. (2000). Automaticity and attentional skill in fluent performance. In H. Riggenbach (Ed.), Perspectives on fluency (pp. 200-219). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
  42. Silverberg, S., & Samuel, A. G. (2004). The effect of age of second language acquisition on the representation and processing of second language words. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 381-398.
  43. Wald, A. (1943). Test of statistical hypotheses concerning several parameters when the number of observations is large. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 54, 426-482.
  44. Weber-Fox, C. M., & Neville, H. J. (1999). Functional neural subsystems are differentially affected by delays in second language immersion: ERP and behavioral evidence in bilinguals. In D. Birdsong (Ed.), Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis (pp. 23-38). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  45. Wuillemin, D., & Richardson, B. (1994). Right hemisphere involvement in processing later-learned languages in multilingualism. Brain and Language, 46, 620-636.
  46. Zahar, R., Cobb, T., & Spada, N. (2001). Acquiring vocabulary through reading: Effects of frequency and contextual richness. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 541-572.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Elgort, I., & Warren, P.
Affiliations
Victoria University of Wellington (NZ)
Corresponding author
Elgort, Irina
ORCID
Venue
Language Learning
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-04-28
Volume
64
Issue
2
Pages
365-414
ISSN
  • 0023-8333 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9922
DOI
10.1111/lang.12052
OpenAlex
W1589104508
Cited by
240
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1
FWCI
20.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Language Learning (publishedVersion)
  • Open Access Victoria University of Wellington | Te Herenga Waka (Figshare) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Victoria University of Wellington
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 › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Keywords
second language vocabulary acquisition, critical terminology, pseudowords, priming, lexical decision, individual differences, student learning strategies, word frequency, word concreteness, word distribution, English as a second language

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