IATEFL2018: Vocabulary lists: snog, marry, avoid?
At the recent
IATEFL conference in Brighton, I gave a talk as part of the MaWSIG showcase
about the way wordlists are used (and misused), especially in writing ELT
materials and some of the issues that writers need to be aware of.
Below is an
overview of my key points and also links to some of the references and tools I
mentioned. I've embedded links in the post, but also repeated them all at the
end, so if you came to the talk and just want the links, feel free to scroll
down.
What do I mean
by a wordlist?
My talk was
about the kind of standardized wordlists that have been put together according
to some criteria (typically frequency and usefulness for learners) and then
published with the aim of being used as a basis for deciding which vocabulary
to prioritize in teaching. There are loads of wordlists out there, but I
mentioned just a few of the most well-known:
General lists: GeneralService List (GSL), New GSL, Oxford 3000™
Specialist
lists: Academic Word List (AWL), Academic Vocabulary List (AVL), New AWL, discipline specific lists (e.g. for Engineering, Medicine, etc.)
Multi-word
lists: Phrasal Expressions List, Phrasal Verbs List, Academic Collocations List
Vocabulary level
tools: These approach the task from a slightly different perspective. Instead
of providing a limited list of target vocab, they instead classify items from a
learner's dictionary according to the level at which learners are most likely
to start using/need each item. I'm especially familiar with English Vocabulary Profile, EVP (from Cambridge) and there's also the Global Scale of English, GSE, vocab tool (from Pearson). Both online tools allow you to look up an item
and check its suggested level based on the CEFR scale (A1, A2, B1 etc.)
Why are wordlists
popular?
Given the huge
variety of English vocabulary, it's not surprising that anything that gives
teachers and materials writers a starting point and a guide to which items
might be most useful to teach first is popular. Wordlists provide a principled
basis for planning a vocab syllabus, backing up our intuitions about which
words are most frequent and saving us from reinventing the wheel by having to
research the frequency of each word as we go along. For publishers, they also
help to ensure a consistent approach to vocab across a coursebook series,
across different titles or between a group of writers all working on the same
project; they provide a single lexical hymn-sheet for everyone to sing from, if
you like.
Why you need to
understand your list:
Whilst wordlists
have an obvious appeal, especially for writers, I think it's really important
to understand any list you plan to use before you get started. Understanding
how a list was put together, what the aims of the list compilers were, what
criteria they used to select items and what data they used is vital. To take
the academic wordlist (AWL) as an example:
- It aims to identify general academic vocab, so it excludes items that only appear in specific disciplines, such as science or medicine, and focuses on words common across a range of disciplines. So if you're teaching ESP/ESAP, you'll need to supplement it with relevant subject-specific vocab.
- It's based on data from published academic writing, not from student writing. That means it provides a good guide to the vocab students might need to know receptively (i.e. for reading), which might not necessarily be quite the same as what they need productively, for their own writing. See Durrant (2016) for an interesting look at what proportion of an academic wordlist student writers actually need.
- The AWL excludes items on the GSL based on the premise that EAP students will have already 'learnt' this core general vocabulary. That doesn't, however, take into account any gaps in students' general vocab knowledge or that many of those general words are absolutely vital for academic writing and are often used in a way that might not be entirely predictable and students might not have already encountered. That's not necessarily a criticism of the list (you've got to draw the line somewhere), but it does mean that as a writer, you might want to include some of that off-list vocab in your syllabus.
And it's not
just the AWL this applies to, all wordlists have their own quirks and
limitations and unless you understand what these are, you're not going to get
the best out of the list or understand what gaps you might need to fill. See
the links at the bottom of this post for some places you can learn more about
different lists.
User beware:
Issue 1: The
nature of English
One issue with
trying to chivvy words into a nice, neat list is that English is a messy beast
and words are slippery little suckers!
Multiple
meanings: English is a highly polysemous language, that is, many words have multiple
meanings. For example, a table can be
a piece of furniture (very much an elementary word) or it can be a graphic
representation of data in rows and columns (definitely a less frequent sense).
Most lists don't differentiate between senses, leaving the user to guess which
sense is the core one that should be taught and whether they should stretch to
other senses or not. Lists such as EVP and GSE do give levels for different
senses (so EVP has table=furniture as
A1 and table=chart as B1), but if you
put your text through a text-checking tool such as Text Inspector or VocabKitchen, it'll show the level for the basic, most frequent sense only. So in
the phrase "the data in the table
above", table would be
highlighted as A1.
What is a word:
Most lists deal in lemmas, that is a single part of speech and its associated
inflections (so speak, speaks, spoke, spoken, speaking is one lemma). Some
lists, such as the AWL, take the word family as their basic unit, that takes in
all the words from a single root, including different parts of speech and
prefixes (develop, development, developing, developmental, underdeveloped,
etc.). This makes sense in an EAP context where being able to switch between
parts of speech is a key skill for student writers, but deciding which members
of a word family to focus on also requires a bit of common sense. You might,
for example, decide to skip disestablishment
as part of the establish word family!
Chunks: Most
frequency-based wordlists tend to focus on individual words, simply because
even the most common phrases or formulaic expressions (at least, in the first
place, etc.) just don't make it in on frequency criteria alone. However,
language chunks make up somewhere between 30-50% of any text, so they're
clearly a really important part of vocabulary learning. This has two
implications for writers (and teachers); firstly, you may want to supplement
your wordlist with some useful chunks (such as those on the phrasal expressions
list or just collocations to go with your key words) and again, you need to
take chunks into account if you're using text-checkers - the chunk 'in the
first place' will be shown as a sequence of A1 single words rather than being
recognized as a fixed expression (ranked as B2 on EVP).
Issue 2: The
nature of language learning
Similarly,
language learning is a messy, non-linear sort of process, that isn't as simple
as ticking words off a list and declaring them 'learnt'. Wordlists make it all
too easy to fall into this trap though. Many's the time I've been told by an
editor that I can't include a word in a vocab activity because it's already
been 'covered' at a previous level ... and as Dorothy Zemach put it so
brilliantly in her plenary "We can't have a student see a word
twice!". Most research agrees that vocab learning requires repeated
exposures to a word. Of course, I understand where my editors are coming from
and there are other ways of recycling vocabulary without having to have the
same words pop up as the vocab focus time and again, but it's still an
important factor to bear in mind.
There's also the
issue of whether a word is going to be most useful for a student at any
particular stage for receptive purposes (i.e. we just want them to recognize
and understand it when they comes across it) or whether we expect them to be
able to use it productively. A lot of words will start off in a student's
receptive vocab and then gradually shift into their productive repertoire. Some
words will get stuck in reception even though we'd like them to move on. And
others can quite happily stay as receptive only ... I know plenty of words that
I understand but will probably never feel the need to use. Again, understanding
whether a list is suggesting words for receptive or productive use at a
particular level is vital. So, EVP, for example, aims to describe vocab that
students are using productively at certain levels (based in large part on what
students are writing in Cambridge exams). So if a word is labelled B1, then B1
students are already confident enough
to use it in their exam writing. That means they probably became familiar with
it receptively quite some time before. And if I want to include a word in a
reading text in a B1 book, as receptive vocab, choosing an item marked as B2
will be entirely appropriate.
Issue 3: The
nature of learners
Finally,
learners don't form the single homogenous audience that universal wordlists
suggest they might be with an equal number and range of vocab learning gaps to
be filled.
L1 plays an
important role in vocab learning, with learners from L1s that share a history
with English (Romance languages, Greek, Germanic languages) having a head start
when it comes to certain words because they're close cognates in their first
language. For example, a word like diurnal
may seem 'difficult', but if you're an Italian, French, Spanish, Portuguese or
Romanian student of animal behaviour, you'll probably recognize it right away.
Whereas your German-speaking peer will probably have to look it up to find it's
translation (tagaktiv).
Age, interests,
location and language needs will also play a role in exactly which vocab items
are relevant to any given student. Yes, they'll probably all find a common core
useful, but they'll want words to describe the things that are important or
helpful to them and their context too. When I was learning French at school, I
wanted to know all the cool, teenage slang, nowadays I'd be more likely to want
vocab to describe my garden. Anyone using English in an ESP context is likely
to need apparently low-frequency, specialist terms, sometimes quite early on in
the language learning process.
Language level
makes a difference too. Whilst most linguists agree on a common core of the
more frequent couple of thousand words or so which might sustain a learner up
to, say, intermediate level, beyond that, frequency statistics become less
reliable and less useful. As you start to investigate lower frequency words,
the range of similar-frequency items suddenly explodes and exactly which words
you choose to teach will inevitably have to be guided more by usefulness for particular
groups of learners than by simple frequency, making wordlists a much less
reliable guide for higher level learners.
Wordlists: snog,
marry, avoid?
So, if wordlists
are so flawed, should we be bothering with them at all? Well, personally, I'm
not going to be dumping them just yet because they are still undoubtedly an incredibly
useful tool. But they're just that, a tool, to be used like any other reference
resource we might turn to, as just one part of the mix, with full knowledge of
their idiosyncratic quirks, taking into account all the factors I've mentioned
here and always applying a solid dose of common sense.
Photo by Rayi Christian Wicaksono on Unsplash
|
Links:
Wordlists:
These are the most useful links I've found for each list. Most give the background to the list and the list itself.
General Service List (West, 1953)
New GSL (Browne, et. al, 2013)
Oxford 3000™ (OUP)
Academic Word List (Coxhead, 2000)
Academic Vocabulary List (Gardner & Davies, 2013)
New AWL (2013)
Phrasal Expressions List (Martinez &Schmitt, 2012)
Phrasal Verbs List (Garnier & Schmitt, 2015)
Academic Collocations List (Pearson)
English Vocabulary Profile (Cambridge)
Global Scale of English vocab tool (Pearson) - for background to the vocab tool, click on Developing the GSE Vocabulary on the Research & Expertise page
See also Mura Nava's excellent list of wordlists for many more lists and links, including many of the specialist ESP lists.
Text analysis tools:
Text Inspector - a paid tool with several analysis options (including EVP and AWL)
VocabKitchen - a free tool with CEFR and AWL options
Lextutor - a free tool with several analysis options, but not the most user-friendly interface
Other references:
Durrant,
P. (2016)
To what extent is the Academic Vocabulary List relevant to university student
writing? English
for Specific Purposes 43
Working with wordlists - a blog post I wrote for the MaWSIG blog a couple of years ago
Labels: Brighton, IATEFL, MaWSIG, presentation, vocabulary, wordlists