Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Lexical knowledge and L2 general language proficiency: collocational competence and vocabulary size as determinants of lexical knowledge

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Cognitive Processing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigates the contribution of receptive collocational competence and receptive vocabulary knowledge to L2 general language proficiency, and how well collocational knowledge develops in relation to knowledge of single-word items. To achieve this aim, measures tapping receptive collocation knowledge, receptive vocabulary knowledge and general language proficiency were administered to 86 Arabic-speaking learners of English at the university level. Results showed positive significant correlations of collocational competence (r = .78) and vocabulary knowledge (r = .70) with general language proficiency. Regression analysis revealed that collocational knowledge predicted the largest variance in general language proficiency, over and above, the prediction value of vocabulary knowledge. The results also showed that collocational knowledge develops as vocabulary knowledge increases, and that learners appear to first acquire collocations of items from more frequent word bands. Furthermore, the results indicated that knowledge of collocations and individual words within the third and fifth frequency levels predicted the largest variance in L2 general language proficiency. The findings of the study have important implications for the teaching and learning of L2 collocations and development of a learner’s vocabulary knowledge, as these two variables appear to be determinant factors of L2 general language proficiency.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alderson C (2005) Diagnosing foreign language proficiency: the interface between learning and assessment. Continuum, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Altenberg B, Granger S (2001) The grammatical and lexical patterning of MAKE in native and non-native student writing. Appl Linguis 22:173–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conklin K, Schmitt N (2008) Formulaic sequences: are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and non-native speakers? Appl Linguis 29:72–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conrad S (2000) Will corpus linguistics revolutionize grammar teaching in the 21st century? TESOL Q 34(3):548–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowie AP (1994) Phraseology. In: Asher RE (ed) The encyclopaedia of language and linguistics. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp 3168–3171

    Google Scholar 

  • Coxhead A (2000) A new academic word list. TESOL Q 34:213–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crossley SA, Salsbury T, Mcnamara DS (2014) Assessing lexical proficiency using analytic ratings: a case for collocation accuracy. Appl Linguis 36(5):570–590

    Google Scholar 

  • Dagnelie P (1992) Principes d’expérimentation. Presses Agronomiques de Gembloux, Gembloux

    Google Scholar 

  • Daller H, van Hout R, Treffers-Daller J (2003) Lexical richness in the spontaneous speech of bilinguals. Appl Linguis 24(2):197–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies M (2008) The corpus of contemporary American English: 520 million words, 1990-present. Retrieved from: http://corpus.byu.edu/coca (June 2020)

  • Goulden R, Nation ISP, Read J (1990) How large can a receptive vocabulary be? Appl Linguis 11(4):341–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granger S (1998) Prefabricated patterns in advanced EFL writing: Collocations and formulae. In: Cowie AP (ed) Phraseology: theory, analysis, and applications. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 145–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Gyllstad H (2007) Testing english collocations: developing receptive tests for use with advanced swedish learners. Ph.D. thesis, Lund University, Sweden

  • Gyllstad H (2009) Designing and evaluating tests of receptive collocation knowledge: COLLEX and COLLOMATCH. In: Barfield A, Gyllstad H (eds) Researching collocations in another language: multiple interpretations. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp 153–170

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Henriksen B (1999) Three dimensions of vocabulary development. Stud Second Lang Acquis 21:303–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosseini S, Akbarian I (2007) Language proficiency and collocational competence. J Asia TEFL 4(4):35–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Howarth P (1996) Phraseology in English academic writing: Some implications for language learning and dictionary making. Max Niemeyer, Tübingen

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hunston S (2002) Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kheirzadeh S, Marand S (2014) Concordancing as a tool in learning collocations: the case of Iranian EFL learners. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 98:940–949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janebi Enayat M, Derakhshan A (2021) Vocabulary size and depth as predictors of second language speaking ability. System 99:1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laufer B (1992) How much lexis is necessary for reading comprehension? In: Bejoint H, Arnaud P (eds) Vocabulary and applied linguistics. Macmillan, London, pp 126–132

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Laufer B, Levitzky-Aviad T (2017) What type of vocabulary knowledge predicts reading comprehension: word meaning recall or word meaning recognition? Mod Lang J 101(4):729–741

    Google Scholar 

  • Laufer B, Waldman T (2011) Verb–noun collocations in second language writing: a corpus analysis of learners’ English. Lang Learn 61:647–672

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lea D, Crowther J, Dignen S (eds) (2002) Oxford collocations dictionary for students of English. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemhöfer K, Broersma M (2012) Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid lexical test for advanced learners of English. Behav Res Methods 44:325–343

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Li J, Schmitt N (2010) The development of collocation use in academic texts by advanced L2 learners: a multiple case study approach. In: Wood D (ed) Perspectives on formulaic language: acquisition and communication. Continuum, New York, pp 22–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin LHF, Morrison B (2010) The impact of the medium of instruction in Hong Kong secondary schools on tertiary students’ vocabulary. J Engl Acad Purp 9(4):255–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masrai A (2022) The Development and validation of a lemma-based yes/no vocabulary size test. SAGE Open 12(1)

  • Masrai A, Milton J (2018) Measuring the contribution of academic and general vocabulary knowledge to learners' academic achievement. J Engl Acad Purp 31:44–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McEnery T, Wilson A (2001) Corpus linguistics: an introduction, 2nd edn. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Milton J (2009) Measuring second language vocabulary acquisition. Multilingual Matters, Bristol

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Milton J, Treffers-Daller J (2013) Vocabulary size revisited: The link between vocabulary size and academic achievement. Appl Linguist Rev 4(1):151–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milton J, Wade J, Hopkins N (2010) Aural word recognition and oral competence in a foreign language. In: Chacón-Beltrán R, Abello-Contesse C, Torreblanca-López M (eds) Further insights into non-native vocabulary teaching and learning. Multilingual Matters, Bristol, pp 83–98

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Miralpeix I, Muñoz C (2018) Receptive vocabulary size and its relationship to EFL language skills. Int Rev Appl Linguist Lang Teach 56(1):1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Namvar F (2012) The relationship between language proficiency and use of collocation by Iranian EFL students. 3L Southeast Asian J English Lang Stud 18(3):41–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Nation ISP (2006) How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canad Mod Lang Rev 63(1):59–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nation ISP (2015) Principles guiding vocabulary learning through extensive reading. Read Foreign Lang 27(1):136–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Nesselhauf N (2003) The use of collocations by advanced learners of English and some implications for teaching. Appl Linguis 24:223–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nesselhauf N (2005) Collocations in a learner corpus. John Benjamins, Amsterdam

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nizonkiza D (2015) Measuring receptive collocational competence across proficiency levels. Stellenbosch Pap Linguist 44:125–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen TMH, Webb S (2017) Examining second language receptive knowledge of collocation and factors that affect learning. Lang Teach Res 21(3):298–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Öksüz D, Brezina V, Rebuschat P (2021) Collocational processing in L1 and L2: the effects of word frequency, collocational frequency, and association. Lang Learn 71(1):55–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pigada M, Schmitt N (2006) Vocabulary acquisition from extensive reading: a case study. Readi Foreign Lang 18:1–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Renandya WA (2007) The power of extensive reading. RELC J 38(2):133–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt N (2004) Formulaic sequences: acquisition, processing and use. John Benjamins, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt N (2010) Researching vocabulary: a vocabulary research manual. Palgrave Macmillan, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt N, Cobb T, Horst M, Schmitt D (2017) How much vocabulary is needed to use English? Replication of van Zeeland and Schmitt (2013), Nation (2006) and Cobb (2007). Lang Teach 50(2):212–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair J (1991) Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Siyanova A, Schmitt N (2008) L2 Learner production and processing of collocation: a multi-study perspective. Can Mod Lang Rev 64(3):429–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stæhr L-S (2008) Vocabulary size and the skills of listening, reading and writing. Lang Learn J 36(2):139–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taşçı S, Turan ÜD (2021) The contribution of lexical breadth, lexical depth, and syntactic knowledge to L2 reading comprehension across different L2 reading proficiency groups. English Teach Learn 45(2):145–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornbury S (2002) How to teach vocabulary. Longman, London

    Google Scholar 

  • van Zeeland H, Schmitt N (2013) Lexical coverage in L1 and L2 listening comprehension: the same or different from reading comprehension? Appl Linguis 34(4):457–479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang Y, Treffers-Daller J (2017) Explaining listening comprehension among L2 learners of English: the contribution of general language proficiency, vocabulary knowledge and metacognitive awareness. System 65:139–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolter B, Gyllstad H (2011) Collocational links in the L2 mental lexicon and the influence of L1 intralexical knowledge. Appl Linguis 32:430–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolter B, Gyllstad H (2013) Frequency of input and L2 collocational processing. Stud Second Lang Acquis 35:451–482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wray A (2002) Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yan H (2010) Study on the causes and countermeasures of the lexical collocation mistakes in college English. Engl Lang Teach 3:162–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zareva A, Schwanenflugel P, Nikolova Y (2005) Relationship between lexical competence and language proficiency: variable sensitivity. Stud Second Lang Acquis 27:567–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The author did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Research and Consulting Services, Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University, Riyadh, 3990, Saudi Arabia

    Ahmed Masrai

Authors
  1. Ahmed Masrai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahmed Masrai.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Editors: Pia Knoeferle (Humboldt University Berlin), Anouschka Foltz (University of Graz); Reviewers: Brent Wolter (Idaho State University), Benjamin Kremmel (University of Innsbruck), Michael Harrington (University of Queensland).

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix A: Summary of post hoc test for collocation frequency bands

 

95% CI

(I) Coll_band

(J) Coll_band

Mean difference (I-J)

Std. Error

p value

Lower bound

Upper Bound

2 K

3 K

0.71*

0.24

 < 0.01

0.23

1.19

 

5 K

1.41*

0.23

 < 0.001

0.95

1.87

 

AWL

1.27*

0.21

 < 0.001

0.84

1.69

3 K

5 K

0.70*

0.25

 < 0.01

0.20

1.20

 

AWL

0.56*

0.20

 < 0.01

0.17

0.95

5 K

AWL

0.14

0.22

0.54

−0.59

0.31

  1. * The mean difference is significant at < 0.01; < 0.001

Appendix B: Summary of post hoc test for single-word items frequency bands

 

95% CI

(I) Fre_band

(J) Fre_band

Mean difference (I-J)

Std. Error

P value

Lower bound

Upper bound

1 K

2 K

2.78*

0.32

 < 0.001

2.15

3.41

 

3 K

6.27*

0.47

 < 0.001

5.34

7.20

 

4 K

7.17*

0.44

 < 0.001

6.30

8.05

 

5 K

8.38*

0.45

 < 0.001

7.49

9.28

 

6 K

10.11*

0.50

 < 0.001

9.12

11.09

2 K

3 K

3.49*

0.36

 < 0.001

2.78

4.19

 

4 K

4.40*

0.36

 < 0.001

3.68

5.11

 

5 K

5.61*

0.39

 < 0.001

4.83

6.38

 

6 K

7.33*

0.48

 < 0.001

6.38

8.27

3 K

4 K

0.91*

0.25

 < 0.01

0.40

1.41

 

5 K

2.12*

0.33

 < 0.001

1.46

2.78

 

6 K

3.84*

0.40

 < 0.001

3.05

4.62

4 K

5 K

1.21*

0.25

 < 0.001

0.71

1.71

 

6 K

2.93*

0.32

 < 0.001

2.30

3.57

5 K

6 K

1.72*

0.26

 < 0.001

1.20

2.24

  1. *The mean difference is significant at
  2. Freq_band = Single-word items frequency bands

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Masrai, A. Lexical knowledge and L2 general language proficiency: collocational competence and vocabulary size as determinants of lexical knowledge. Cogn Process 24, 289–300 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-022-01120-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-022-01120-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation