1887
Volume 6, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2215-1478
  • E-ISSN: 2215-1486
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The current study explored the extent to which academic vocabulary lists could meet the lexical demands of academic speaking assessments. Indices of word use from lists of academic and general vocabulary were used to predict speaking scores on three TOEFL tasks. The results found weak associations between list-item use and response scores that varied by task. Independent response scores were associated with the use of specialized vocabulary from the first level of the . Integrated campus situation response scores were most strongly associated with the use of unique words from the . Integrated academic course response scores were associated with the use of more sophisticated general vocabulary. Although the findings provide some support for the use of academic vocabulary lists in speaking assessment preparation, the weak effect sizes point to the need to develop lists of academic vocabulary specific to academic speaking and assessment.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ijlcr.20008.smi
2020-12-10
2021-01-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ackermann, K. , & Chen, Y. H.
    (2013) Developing the Academic Collocation List (ACL) – A corpus-driven and expert-judged approach. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(4), 235–247. doi:  10.1016/j.jeap.2013.08.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2013.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  2. Akaike, H.
    (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19, 716–723. 10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705
    https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705 [Google Scholar]
  3. Akbarian, I.
    (2010) The relationship between vocabulary size and depth for ESP/EAP learners. System, 38(3), 391–401. doi:  10.1016/j.system.2010.06.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.06.013 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bauer, L. , & Nation, P.
    (1993) Word families. International Journal of Lexicography, 6(4), 253–279. doi:  10.1093/ijl/6.4.253
    https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/6.4.253 [Google Scholar]
  5. Berman, R. , & Cheng, L.
    (2010) English academic language skills: Perceived difficulties by undergraduate and graduate students, and their academic achievement. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(1), 25–40. doi:  10.1002/wdev.86
    https://doi.org/10.1002/wdev.86 [Google Scholar]
  6. Biber, D. , Conrad, S. , & Reppen, R.
    (1994) Corpus-based approaches to issues in applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 15(2), 169–189. doi:  10.1093/applin/15.2.169
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/15.2.169 [Google Scholar]
  7. Biber, D. , Conrad, S. , & Cortes, V.
    (2004) If you look at ... Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25(3), 371–405. 10.1093/applin/25.3.371
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.3.371 [Google Scholar]
  8. Biber, D. , & Gray, B.
    (2013) Discourse characteristics of writing and speaking task types on the TOEFL iBT test: A lexico-grammatical analysis (TOEFL iBT™ Report No. RR-13-04). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. doi:  10.1002/j.2333‑8504.2013.tb02311.x
    https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.2013.tb02311.x [Google Scholar]
  9. Brezina, V. , & Gablasova, D.
    (2015) Is there a core general vocabulary? Introducing the new general service list. Applied Linguistics, 36(1), 1–22. doi:  10.1093/applin/amt018
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt018 [Google Scholar]
  10. Brooks, L. , & Swain, M.
    (2014) Contextualizing performances: Comparing performances during TOEFL iBT and real-life academic speaking activities. Language Assessment Quarterly, 11(4), 353–373. doi:  10.1080/15434303.2014.947532
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2014.947532 [Google Scholar]
  11. Brown, A. , Iwashita, N. , & McNamara, T.
    (2005) An examination of rater orientations and test-taker performance on English-for-academic-purposes speaking tasks (TOEFL Monograph No. MS-29). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. doi:  10.1002/j.2333‑8504.2005.tb01982.x
    https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.2005.tb01982.x [Google Scholar]
  12. Brown, A. , & Ducasse, A. M.
    (2019) An equal challenge? Comparing TOEFL iBTTM speaking tasks with academic speaking tasks. Language Assessment Quarterly, 16(2), 253–270. doi:  10.1080/15434303.2019.1628240
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2019.1628240 [Google Scholar]
  13. Caplan, N. A. , & Stevens, S. G.
    (2017) “Step Out of the Cycle”: Needs, challenges, and successes of international undergraduates at a U.S. University. English for Specific Purposes, 46, 15–28. doi:  10.1016/j.esp.2016.11.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.11.003 [Google Scholar]
  14. Clark, M. K. , & Ishida, S.
    (2005) Vocabulary knowledge differences between placed and promoted EAP students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(3), 225–238. doi:  10.1016/j.jeap.2004.10.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2004.10.002 [Google Scholar]
  15. Cohen, A. D.
    (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Coxhead, A.
    (2000) A New Academic Word List. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213–238. 10.2307/3587951
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3587951 [Google Scholar]
  17. (2011) The academic word list 10 years on: Research and teaching implications. TESOL Quarterly, 45(2), 355–362. doi:  10.5054/tq.2011.254528
    https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2011.254528 [Google Scholar]
  18. (2012) Academic vocabulary, writing and English for Academic purposes: Perspectives from second language learners. RELC Journal, 43(1), 137–145. doi:  10.1177/0033688212439323
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688212439323 [Google Scholar]
  19. (2018) Vocabulary and English for specific purposes: Quantitative and qualitative perspectives. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Crossley, S. A. , Salsbury, T. , McNamara, D. S. , & Jarvis, S.
    (2011) What is lexical proficiency? Some answers from computational models of speech data. TESOL Quarterly, 45(1), 182–193. doi: 10.5054/tq.201
    https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.201 [Google Scholar]
  21. Crossley, S. A. , & McNamara, D. S.
    (2013) Applications of text analysis tools for spoken response grading. Language Learning & Technology, 17(2), 171–192.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Cumming, A. , Grant, L. , Mulcahy-Ernt, P. , & Powers, D. E.
    (2004) A teacher-verification study of speaking and writing prototype tasks for a new TOEFL. Language Testing, 21(2), 107–145. doi:  10.1191/0265532204lt278oa
    https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532204lt278oa [Google Scholar]
  23. Dang, T. N. Y.
    (2018) A Hard Science Spoken Word List. ITL – International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 169(1), 44–71. 10.1075/itl.00006.dan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.00006.dan [Google Scholar]
  24. (2020) Vietnamese non-English major EFL university students’ receptive knowledge of the most frequent English words. VNU Journal of Foreign Language Studies, 36(3), 1–11. doi:  10.25073/2525‑2445/vnufs.4553
    https://doi.org/10.25073/2525-2445/vnufs.4553 [Google Scholar]
  25. Dang, T. N. Y. , Coxhead, A. , & Webb, S.
    (2017) The academic spoken word list. Language Learning, 67(4), 959–997. doi:  10.1111/lang.12253
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12253 [Google Scholar]
  26. Dang, T. N. Y. , & Webb, S.
    (2014) The lexical profile of academic spoken English. English for Specific Purposes, 33(1), 66–76. doi:  10.1016/j.esp.2013.08.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2013.08.001 [Google Scholar]
  27. (2016) Making an essential word list for beginners. In I. S. P. Nation (Ed.), Making and using word lists for language learning and testing (pp.153–167). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.208.15ch15
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.208.15ch15 [Google Scholar]
  28. Davies, M.
    (2008–) The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): One billion words, 1990–2019. Retrieved fromhttps://www.english-corpora.org/coca/
  29. Durrant, P.
    (2014) Discipline and level specificity in university students’ Written vocabulary. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 328–356. doi:  10.1093/applin/amt016
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt016 [Google Scholar]
  30. (2016) To what extent is the Academic Vocabulary List relevant to university student writing?English for Specific Purposes, 43, 49–61. doi:  10.1016/j.esp.2016.01.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.01.004 [Google Scholar]
  31. Eguchi, M. , & Kyle, K.
    (2020) Continuing to explore the multidimensional nature of lexical sophistication: The case of oral proficiency interviews. Modern Language Journal, 4(2), 381–400. doi:  10.1111/modl.12637
    https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12637 [Google Scholar]
  32. Eldridge, J.
    (2008) “No, there isn’t an ‘academic vocabulary,’ but…”: A reader responds to K. Hyland and P. Tse’s “Is there an ‘academic vocabulary’?”. TESOL Quarterly, 42(1), 109–113. doi:  10.1002/j.1545‑7249.2008.tb00210.x
    https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00210.x [Google Scholar]
  33. Ellis, N. C. , Simpson-Vlach, R. , & Maynard, C.
    (2008) Formulaic language in native and second-language speakers. TESOL Quarterly, 42(3), 375–396. 10.1002/j.1545‑7249.2008.tb00137.x
    https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00137.x [Google Scholar]
  34. Fan, M.
    (2000) How big is the gap and how to narrow it? An investigation into the active and passive vocabulary knowledge of L2 listeners. RELC Journal, 31(2), 105–119. 10.1177/003368820003100205
    https://doi.org/10.1177/003368820003100205 [Google Scholar]
  35. Folse, K.
    (2011) Applying L2 lexical research findings in ESL teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 45(2), 362–369. doi:  10.5054/tq.2010.254529
    https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2010.254529 [Google Scholar]
  36. Gardner, D. , & Davies, M.
    (2014) A new academic vocabulary list. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 305–327. doi:  10.1093/applin/amt015
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt015 [Google Scholar]
  37. Goulden, R. , Nation, P. , & Read, J.
    (1990) How large can a receptive vocabulary be?Applied Linguistics, 11(4), 341–363. 10.1093/applin/11.4.341
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.4.341 [Google Scholar]
  38. Harsch, C. , Ushioda, E. , & Ladroue, C.
    (2017) Investigating the predictive validity of TOEFL iBT test scores and their use in informing policy in a United Kingdom university setting. ETS Research Report Series 2017(1), 1–80. doi:  10.1002/ets2.12167
    https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12167 [Google Scholar]
  39. Higginbotham, G. , & Reid, J.
    (2019) The lexical sophistication of second language learners’ academic essays. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 37, 127–140. doi:  10.1016/j.jeap.2018.12.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.12.002 [Google Scholar]
  40. Hincks, R.
    (2003) Pronouncing the academic word list: Features of L2 student oral presentations. Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 1545–1548.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Huang, L. S.
    (2010) Seeing eye to eye? The academic writing needs of graduate and undergraduate students from students’ and instructors’ perspectives. Language Teaching Research, 14(4), 517–539. doi:  10.1177/1362168810375372
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810375372 [Google Scholar]
  42. Huntley, H.
    (2006) Essential academic vocabulary: Mastering the complete academic word list. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Hyland, K. , & Tse, P.
    (2007) Is there an “academic vocabulary”?TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 235–253. doi:  10.1002/j.1545‑7249.2007.tb00058.x
    https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00058.x [Google Scholar]
  44. Iwashita, N. , Brown, A. , McNamara, T. , & Hagan, S. O.
    (2008) Assessed levels of second language speaking proficiency: How distinct?Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 24–49. doi:  10.1093/applin/amm017
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm017 [Google Scholar]
  45. Jamieson, J. , Eignor, D. , Grabe, W. , & Kunnan, A.
    (2008) Frameworks for a new TOEFL. In C. A. Chapelle , M. K. Enright , & J. M. Jamieson (Eds.), Building a validity argument for the Test of English as a Foreign Language (pp.55–95). Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Kyle, K.
    (2020) The relationship between features of source text use and integrated writing quality. Assessing Writing, 45, 1–12. doi:  10.1016/j.asw.2020.100467
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100467 [Google Scholar]
  47. Kyle, K. , & Crossley, S. A.
    (2015) Automatically assessing lexical sophistication: Indices, tools, findings, and application. TESOL Quarterly, 49(4), 757–786. doi:  10.1002/tesq.194
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.194 [Google Scholar]
  48. Kyle, K. , Crossley, S. A. , & Berger, C.
    (2017) The tool for the automatic analysis of lexical sophistication (TAALES): Version 2.0. Behavior Research Methods, 50(3), 1030–1046. doi:  10.3758/s13428‑017‑0924‑4
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0924-4 [Google Scholar]
  49. Kyle, K. , Crossley, S. A. , & McNamara, D. S.
    (2016) Construct validity in TOEFL iBT speaking tasks: Insights from natural language processing. Language Testing, 33(3), 319–340. doi:  10.1177/0265532215587391
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215587391 [Google Scholar]
  50. Laufer, B.
    (1998) The development of passive and active vocabulary: Same or different?Applied Linguistics, 19 (2), 255–271. 10.1093/applin/19.2.255
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/19.2.255 [Google Scholar]
  51. (2013) Lexical thresholds for reading comprehension: What they are and how they can be used for teaching purposes. TESOL Quarterly, 47(4), 867–872. doi:  10.1002/tesq.140
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.140 [Google Scholar]
  52. Laufer, B. , & Paribakht, T.
    (1998) The relationship between passive and active vocabularies: Effects of language learning context. Language Learning, 48, 365–391. 10.1111/0023‑8333.00046
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00046 [Google Scholar]
  53. Laufer, B. , & Ravenhorst-Kalvoski, G. C.
    (2010) Lexical threshold revisited: Lexical text coverage, learners’ vocabulary size and reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 22(1), 15–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Lessard-Clouston, M.
    (2013) Word lists for vocabulary learning and teaching. The CATESOL Journal, 24(1), 287–304.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Malmström, H. , Pecorari, D. , & Shaw, P.
    (2018) Words for what? Contrasting university students’ receptive and productive academic vocabulary needs. English for Specific Purposes, 50, 28–39. doi:  10.1016/j.esp.2017.11.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2017.11.002 [Google Scholar]
  56. Nagy, W. , & Anderson, R. C.
    (1984) How many words are there in printed school English?Reading Research Quarterly, 19(3), 304–330. doi:  10.2307/747823
    https://doi.org/10.2307/747823 [Google Scholar]
  57. Nation, I. S. P.
    (2001) Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524759
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524759 [Google Scholar]
  58. (2006) How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening?The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne Des Langues Vivantes, 63(1), 59–81. doi:  10.1353/cml.2006.0049
    https://doi.org/10.1353/cml.2006.0049 [Google Scholar]
  59. (2011) Research into practice: Vocabulary. Language Teaching, 44(4), 529–539. doi:  10.1017/S0261444811000267
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444811000267 [Google Scholar]
  60. (2017) The BNC/COCA word family lists (Version 1.0.0) [Data file]. Retrieved fromwww.victoria.ac.nz/lals/staff/paul-nation.aspx
  61. Nation, I. S. P. , & Waring, R.
    (1997) Vocabulary size, text coverage, and word lists. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition, and pedagogy (pp.6–19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Nation, I. S. P. , Coxhead, A. , Chung, T. M. , & Quero, B.
    (2016) Specialized word lists. In I. S. P. Nation (Ed.), Making and using word lists for language learning and testing (pp.145–151). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.208.14ch14
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.208.14ch14 [Google Scholar]
  63. Nesi, H. , & Gardner, R. C.
    (2012) Genres across the disciplines: Student writing in higher education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Nesselhauf, N.
    (2004) Learner corpora and their potential in language teaching. In J. Sinclair (Ed.), How to use corpora in language teaching (pp.125–152). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.12.11nes
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.12.11nes [Google Scholar]
  65. Neufeld, S. , Hancioǧlu, N. , & Eldridge, J.
    (2011) Beware the range in RANGE, and the academic in AWL. System, 39(4), 533–538. doi:  10.1016/j.system.2011.10.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.10.010 [Google Scholar]
  66. Ockey, G. J. , Koyama, D. , Setoguchi, E. , & Sun, A.
    (2015) The extent to which TOEFL iBT speaking scores are associated with performance on oral language tasks and oral ability components for Japanese university students. Language Testing, 32(1), 39–62. doi:  10.1177/0265532214538014
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214538014 [Google Scholar]
  67. Paquot, M.
    (2007) Towards a productively-oriented academic word list. In J. Walinski , K. Kredens , & S. Gozdz-Roszkowski (Eds.), Corpora and ICT in language studies. PALC 2005. Lodz studies in LANGUAGE 13 (pp.127–140). Bern: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Paribakht, T. S. , & Webb, S.
    (2016) The relationship between academic vocabulary coverage and scores on a standardized English proficiency test. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 21, 121–132. doi:  10.1016/j.jeap.2015.05.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.05.009 [Google Scholar]
  69. Plakans, L. , & Gebril, A.
    (2013) Using multiple texts in an integrated writing assessment: Source text use as a predictor of score. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 217–230. doi:  10.1016/j.jslw.2013.02.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2013.02.003 [Google Scholar]
  70. Read, J.
    (2000) Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511732942
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511732942 [Google Scholar]
  71. Römer, U.
    (2009) Corpora and language teaching. In A. Lüdeling & M. Kytö (Eds.), Corpus linguistics: An international handbook (pp.112–131). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Römer, U. , & Donnell, M. B. O.
    (2011) From student hard drive to web corpus (part 1): The design, compilation and genre classification of the Michigan Corpus of Upper-level Student Papers (MICUSP). Corpora, 6(2), 159–177. doi:  10.3366/corp.2011.0011
    https://doi.org/10.3366/corp.2011.0011 [Google Scholar]
  73. RStudio Team
    RStudio Team (2020) RStudio: Integrated Development for R. Boston, MA: RStudio, PBC. Retrieved fromwww.rstudio.com/
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Saito, K. , Webb, S. , Trofimovich, P. , & Isaacs, T.
    (2016) Lexical profiles of comprehensible second language speech: The role of appropriateness, fluency, variation, sophistication, abstractness, and sense relations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(4), 677–701. doi:  10.1017/S0272263115000297
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263115000297 [Google Scholar]
  75. Schmitt, N.
    (2008) Review article: Instructed second language vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 329–363. doi:  10.1177/1362168808089921
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168808089921 [Google Scholar]
  76. Schmitt, N. , & Meara, P.
    (1997) Researching vocabulary through a word knowledge framework. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 17–36. doi:  10.1017/S0272263197001022
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197001022 [Google Scholar]
  77. Schmitt, D. , & Schmitt, N.
    (2011) Mastering the academic word list. London: Pearson Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Schmitt, N. , & Zimmerman, C. B.
    (2002) Derivative word forms: What do learners know?TESOL Quarterly, 36(2), 145–171. doi:  10.2307/3588328
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3588328 [Google Scholar]
  79. Segalowitz, N.
    (2007) Access fluidity, attention control, and the acquisition of fluency in a second language. Tesol Quarterly, 41(1), 181–186. 10.1002/j.1545‑7249.2007.tb00047.x
    https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00047.x [Google Scholar]
  80. Simpson, R. C. , Briggs, S. L. , Ovens, J. , & Swales, J. M.
    (2002) The Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English. Ann Arbor, MI: The Regents of the University of Michigan.
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Simpson-Vlach, R. , & Ellis, N. C.
    (2010) An academic formulas list: New methods in phraseology research. Applied Linguistics, 31(4), 487–512. doi:  10.1093/applin/amp058
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp058 [Google Scholar]
  82. Šišková, Z.
    (2016) The relationship between receptive and productive vocabulary of Slavic EFL learners. Topics in Linguistics, 17(2), 26–40. doi:  10.1515/topling‑2016‑0011
    https://doi.org/10.1515/topling-2016-0011 [Google Scholar]
  83. Stengers, H. , Boers, F. , Housen, A. , & Eyckmans, J.
    (2011) Formulaic sequences and L2 oral proficiency: Does the type of target language influence the association?IRAL – International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 49(4), 321–343. doi:  10.1515/iral.2011.017
    https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2011.017 [Google Scholar]
  84. van Zeeland, H. , & Schmitt, N.
    (2013) Lexical coverage in L1 and L2 listening comprehension: The same or different from reading comprehension?Applied Linguistics, 34(4), 457–479. doi:  10.1093/applin/ams074
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams074 [Google Scholar]
  85. Wang, J. , Liang, S. , & Ge, G.
    (2008) Establishment of a medical academic word list. English for Specific Purposes, 27, 442–458. doi:  10.1016/j.esp.2008.05.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2008.05.003 [Google Scholar]
  86. Webb, S. , & Rodgers, M. P. H.
    (2009a) The lexical coverage of movies. Applied Linguistics, 30(3), 407–427. doi:  10.1093/applin/amp010
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp010 [Google Scholar]
  87. (2009b) Vocabulary demands of television programs. Language Learning, 59(2), 335–366. doi:  10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2009.00509.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00509.x [Google Scholar]
  88. West, M.
    (1953) A general service list of English words. London: Pearson Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Wray, A.
    (2000) Formulaic sequences in second language teaching: Principle and practice. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), 463–489. doi:  10.1093/applin/21.4.463
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.4.463 [Google Scholar]
  90. Xi, X.
    (2008) Investigating the criterion-related validity of the TOEFL speaking scores for screening and setting standards for ITAs (Research Report No. RR-08-02). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. 10.1002/j.2333‑8504.2008.tb02088.x
    https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.2008.tb02088.x [Google Scholar]
  91. Zimmerman, C. B.
    (2008) Inside reading: The academic word list in context. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ijlcr.20008.smi
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ijlcr.20008.smi
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): academic speaking , academic vocabulary , AWL , TOEFL speaking and vocabulary lists
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error