Cited by 38Second Language Acquisition and LearningReading and Literacy DevelopmentEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning

The Role of Morphological and Contextual Information in L2 Lexical Inference

Hamada, Megumi·2014·The Modern Language Journal

Abstract

This study investigated the role of morphological and contextual information in inferring the meaning of unknown L2 words during reading. Four groups of college‐level ESL students, beginning (n = 34), intermediate (n = 27), high‐intermediate (n = 21), and advanced (n = 25), chose the inferred meanings of 20 pseudo compounds (e.g., rainfime) from multiple choice options. The pseudo compounds were presented in a set of sentences. In the Morphology Reliable condition, the known word part in the pseudo compounds provided semantic information about the meaning of the compounds, which also matched the context of the sentences. In the Morphology Unreliable condition, the known word part did not provide any reliable semantic information nor did it match the context. The critical answer options were the meanings based on morphological information and the meanings based on contextual information. Results indicated significant differences in the choice of answers between the groups only in the Morphology Unreliable condition: The beginning‐level learners relied more on morphological information even though the meanings based on morphology were incorrect. The study discusses the underlying processes in the choice of information used in lexical inference during reading.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/modl.12151

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Studies on adult foreign language learners indicated that learners were most likely to make an accurate guess when they combined morphological and contextual information, but that lower-proficiency learners were likely to rely more on morphology and less on context.

    “Studies on adult foreign language learners indicated that learners where most likely to make an accurate guess when they combined morphological and contextual information (Mori, 2003), but that lower-proficiency learners were likely to rely more on morphology and less on context (Hamada, 2014;Mori & Nagy, 1999).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hamada, M.
Affiliations
Ball State University (US)
Corresponding author
Hamada, Megumi
Venue
The Modern Language Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-11-10
Volume
98
Issue
4
Pages
992-1005
ISSN
  • 0026-7902 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-4781
OpenAlex
W1999391927
Cited by
38
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2
FWCI
4.69
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 › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Keywords
lexical inference, second language reading, morphological data, contextual information, word meaning inference, ESL learners, vocabulary acquisition

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