SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics / 2016 / Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 1

The effects of accessing L1 versus L2 definitional glosses on L2 learners' reading comprehension and vocabulary learning

Dilara ARPACI
Pages
15–29
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results indicated that there was a significant difference between glossed and no gloss groups on each test.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study was conducted to investigate the effects of different types of glosses and no-gloss condition on second language vocabulary learning.
📊
Key Findings & Data:There were totally 81 high school students involved in the study, and they were randomly divided into three groups: L1-gloss group, L2-gloss group, and No-gloss group.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results indicated that there was a significant difference between glossed and no gloss groups on each test.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study was conducted to investigate the effects of different types of glosses and no-gloss condition on second language vocabulary learning. There were totally 81 high school students involved in the study, and they were randomly divided into three groups: L1-gloss group, L2-gloss group, and No-gloss group. These three groups were subjected to three main tests: reading comprehension test, immediate vocabulary test, and delayed vocabulary test. They were also asked to complete a student opinion questionnaire to examine their opinions about the use of the glosses and the types of glosses. In order to find out the differences in these test scores for three different groups, a one-way between-groups ANOVA with planned comparisons and a mixed between-within ANOVA were conducted. Secondly, word retention was tested by looking at the difference in the number of words gained between immediate vocabulary test and delayed vocabulary test again through the same mixed between-within ANOVA. Results indicated that there was a significant difference between glossed and no gloss groups on each test. For each condition, L1 gloss group had the highest mean score followed by L2 gloss group. It was also found that there was a significant decrease in the scores for each gloss condition after a two-week time interval. The results of the student opinion questionnaire revealed that students prefer glosses in reading texts by mostly favouring L1 glosses over L2 glosses.

🔖

Cite This Article

ARPACI, D. (2022). The effects of accessing L1 versus L2 definitional glosses on L2 learners' reading comprehension and vocabulary learning. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 1, 15–29. https://ajindex.com/articles/507078

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. AbuSeileek, A. F. (2008). Hypermedia annotation presentation: Learners' preferences and effect on EFL reading comprehension and vocabulary acquisition. CALICO Journal, 25(2), 260-275.
  2. Bhatia, V. K. (1983). Simplification v. easification - the case of legal texts. Applied Linguistics, 4, 42-54.
  3. Bland, S. K., Noblitt, J. S., Armington, S., & Gay, G. (1990). The naive lexical hypothesis: Evidence from computer-assisted language learning. Modern Language Journal, 74, 440- 450. http://doi.org/bwb695
  4. Bowles, M. A. (2004). L2 glossing: To CALL or not CALL. Hispania, 87(3), 541-552.
  5. Chen, J. (2014). Hypertext glosses for foreign language reading comprehension and vocabulary acquisition: effects of assessment methods. Computer Assisted Language Learning. http://doi.org/bfdw
  6. Cheng, Y. H., & Good, R. L. (2009). L1 glosses: Effects on EFL learners' reading comprehension and vocabulary retention. Reading in a Foreign Language, 21(2), 119-142.
  7. Davis, J. N. (1989). Facilitating effects of marginal glosses on foreign language reading. Modern Language Journal, 73, 41-48. http://doi.org/dgpzh9
  8. Ercetin, G. (2003). Exploring ESL learners' use of hypermedia reading glosses. CALICO Journal, 20(2), 261-283.
  9. Falla, T., & Davies, P. A. (2012). Solutions, A2, Students' Book. Oxford University Press.
  10. Gass, S. M. (1988). Second language vocabulary acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 9, 92-106.
  11. Gettys, S., Imhof, L. A., & Kautz, J. O. (2001). Computer-assisted reading: The effect of glossing format on comprehension and vocabulary retention. Foreign Language Journals, 34(2), 91-99.
  12. Grace, C. (1998). Retention of word meanings inferred from context and sentence-level translations: Implications for the design of beginning-level CALL software. The Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 533-544. http://doi.org/dqwtmh
  13. Haynes, M. (1993). Patterns and perils of guessing in second language reading. In T. Huckin, M. Haynes & J. Coady (Eds.), Second language reading and vocabulary learning (pp. 46- 65). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Holley, F., & King, J. (1971). Vocabulary glosses in foreign language reading materials. Language Learning, 21, 213-219. http://doi.org/dmdxms
  14. Hulstijn, J. H. (1992). Retention of inferred and given word meanings: Experiments in incidental vocabulary learning. In P. J. Armaud & H. Bejoint (Eds.), Vocabulary and applied linguistics (pp. 113-125). London: Macmillan. Hulstijn, J., Hollander, M., & Greidanus, T. (1996). Incidental vocabulary learning by advanced foreign la