The Korean Association for the Study of English Language and Linguistics

Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 22
[Paper List] [Goto Volume List]

[ Article ]
Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 22, No. 0, pp. 1116-1132
Abbreviation: KASELL
ISSN: 1598-1398 (Print) 2586-7474 (Online)
Received 12 Aug 2022 Revised 16 Oct 2022 Accepted 31 Oct 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15738/kjell.22..202210.1116

Increasing Lexical Awareness through Data-Driven Learning: Polysemy in EFL Pedagogy
Inseul Hwang ; Minyoung Cho
(1st author) Graduate Student, M.A. Dept. of English Language and Literature, Korea University, Tel: 02-3290-1980 (inseul122@korea.ac.kr)
(corresponding author) Associate Professor, Dept. of English Language and Literature, Korea University, Tel: 02-3290-1980 (mycho27@korea.ac.kr)


© 2022 KASELL All rights reserved
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract

Many L2 students struggle to use vocabulary effectively and flexibly in a variety of situations. For learners to recognize words’ different meanings in diverse circumstances, they need to be exposed to diverse contexts that manifest various meanings of the word. Traditional vocabulary learning (TL) tools such as dictionaries and online translators, however, are limited in raising the learner's awareness of meanings beyond the first two or three of polysemy, and data-driven learning (DDL) has been recommended as an alternative teaching method. This study, thus, explores the efficacy of data-driven learning (DDL) using concordance in acquiring polysemous word knowledge. Fifty middle school students were assigned to either DDL or TL condition and had vocabulary learning sessions for the respective condition. The participants’ acquisition of polysemous word knowledge was examined in terms of their explicit and implicit knowledge of the words in the immediate posttest and the delayed posttest. The results indicated that the DDL group outperformed the TL condition in only the implicit knowledge test in the immediate post-test. However, the delayed post-test showed no significant difference in retention of the knowledge. The findings are discussed in light of the use of DDL in vocabulary learning and the use of corpus as a pedagogical tool.

Keywords: polysemy, data-driven learning, concordances
References
1. Abou-Khalil, V., S. Helou, B. Flanagan, M. R. A. Chen and H. Ogata. 2019. Learning isolated polysemous words: identifying the intended meaning of language learners in informal ubiquitous language learning environments. Smart Learning Environments 6(1), 1-18.
2. Asik, A., A. S. Vural and K. D. Akpinar. 2016. Lexical awareness and development through data driven learning: Attitudes and beliefs of EFL learners. Journal of education and training studies 4(3), 67-96.
3. Aston, G. 1996. What corpora for ESP? Paper presented at a conference on ESP at the University of Pavia, November 1996.
4. Baddeley, A. D. 1997. Human Memory: Theory and Practice. Hove: Psychology Press.
5. Balunda, S. 2009. Teaching Academic Vocabulary with Corpora: Student Perceptions of Data-Driven Learning. Master’s thesis, Indianan University.
6. Bernardini, Silvia. 2000. Systematising serendipity: Proposals for concordancing large corpora with language learners. In L. Burnard and T. McEnery, eds., Rethinking Language Pedagogy from a Corpus Perspective, 225-234. Hamburg: Peter Lang.
7. Bernardini, S. 2004. Corpora in the classroom: An overview and some reflections on future developments. In J. Sinclair, ed., How to Use Corpora in Language Teaching, 5-36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
8. Booton, S., A. Hodgkiss, S. Mathers and V. Murphy. 2022. Measuring knowledge of multiple word meanings in children with English as a first and an additional language and the relationship to reading comprehension. Journal of Child Language 49(1), 164-196.
9. Boulton, A. and T. Cobb. 2017. Corpus uses in language learning: A meta-analysis. Language Learning 67(2), 348-393.
10. Boulton, S. De Cock. 2017. Dictionaries as aids for language learning. International Handbook of Modern Lexis and Lexicography, 1–17.
11. Brown, H. D. 2007. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Pearson Longman.
12. Celce-Murcia, M. 2001 Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language, 3rd ed. Heinle & Heinle Publisher, Boston.
13. Conrad, S. 2005. Corpus Linguistics and L2 Teaching. Routledge.
14. Cobb, T. 1999. Breadth and depth of lexical acquisition with hands-on concordancing. Computer Assisted Language Learning 12, 345-360.
15. Cohen, A. 2003. Strategy Training for Second Language Learners. ERIC Digest.
16. Craik, F. I. and R. S. Lockhart. 1972. Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671e684.
17. Cruse, A. 2000. Meaning in Language: An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
18. DeCarrico, J. S. 2001. Vocabulary learning and teaching. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language 3, 285-299.
19. Fang, X. 2014. Conceptual metaphor and vocabulary teaching in the EFL context. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, IV(2).
20. Frankenberg-Garcia, A. 2012. Learners’ use of corpus examples. International Journal of Lexicography 25(3), 273-296.
21. Gabrielatos, C. 2005. Corpora and language teaching: Just a fling, or wedding bells? TESL-EJ 8(4), 1-37.
22. Ittze ́s, I. 1991. Lexical guessing in isolation and context. Journal of Reading 34, 360-366.
23. Jiao, B. 2012. An empirical study on corpus-driven English vocabulary learning in China. English Language Teaching 5/4, 131-137.
24. Jin, L. and E. Deifell. 2013. Foreign language learners’ use and perception of online dictionaries: A survey study. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 9(4), 515-533.
25. Johns, T. 1991. From printout to handout: grammar and vocabulary teaching in the context of data-driven learning. English Language Research Journal 4, 27-45.
26. Kang, H.-W. 1992. How can a mess be fine? polysemy and reading in a foreign language. Mid-Atlantic Journal of Foreign Language Pedagogy 1, 35-49.
27. Kuiper, K., R. Fromont and D. Gerhard. 2017. Polysemy and word frequency: A replication. Journal of Research Design and Statistics in Linguistics and Communication Science 4, 144-155.
28. Li, M. and J. R. Kirby. 2015. The effects of vocabulary breadth and depth on English Reading. Applied Linguistics 36(5), 611-634
29. Liu, D. and P. Jiang. 2009. Using a corpus‐based lexicogrammatical approach to grammar instruction in EFL and ESL contexts. The Modern Language Journal 93(1), 61-78.
30. Liya X. 2021 Using data-driven learning activities to improve lexical awareness in intermediate EFL learners. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2331186X.2021.1996867
31. Lyons, J. 1995. Linguistic Semantics: An Introduction. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
32. McCarthy, M. 1990. Vocabulary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
33. Nagy, W. 1997. On the role of context in first- and second-language vocabulary learning. In N. Schmitt and M. McCarthy, eds., Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition and Pedagogy, 64-83. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
34. Nation, I. S. P. 2001. Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35. Nation, P. 2008. Lexical awareness in second language learning. In N. H. Hornberger, eds., Encyclopedia of Language and Education. Springer, Boston, MA.
36. Nation, P. and T. Chung. 2009. Teaching and testing vocabulary. In M. H. Long and C. J. Doughty, eds., The Handbook of Language Teaching, 543-559. Malden, Ma: Wiley-Blackwell.
37. O’Sullivan, I. 2007. Enhancing a process-oriented approach to literacy and language learning: The role of corpus consultation literacy. ReCALL 19, 269-286.
38. Quan, Z. 2016. Introducing “mobile DDL (data-driven learning)” for vocabulary learning: an experiment for academic English. Journal of Computers in Education 3(3), 273-287.
39. Ravin, Y. and C. Leacock. 2000. Polysemy: Theoretical and Computational Approaches. New York: Oxford University Press.
40. Schmidt, R. 2001. Attention. In P. Robinson, ed., Cognition and Second Language Instruction, 3-32. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
41. Schouten-van Parreren, C. 1985. Woorden leren in het vreemde-taalonderwijs [Learning Words in a Foriegn Language Setting]. Apeldoorn, the Nether- lands: Van Walraven.
42. Stahl, S. A. and W. E. Nagy. 2006. Teaching Word Meanings. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
43. Stevens, V. 1991. Classroom concordancing: Vocabulary materials derived from relevant, authentic text. English for Specific Purposes10, 35-46.
44. Tribble, C. and G. Jones. 1990. Concordances in the Classroom: A Resource Book for Teachers. Essex, U.K.: Longman.
45. Yilmaz, E. and A. Soruç. 2015. The use of concordance for teaching vocabulary: A data-driven learning approach. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 191, 2626-2630.