1887
Volume 36, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0213-2028
  • E-ISSN: 2254-6774
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

With a view to advancing their students’ listening comprehension and vocabulary, English for Science teachers are frequently in search of new and interesting audio and video materials. TED Talks on science topics are a good option for this purpose. But just how suitable, vocabulary-wise, are they for English for Science learners? This study explores the lexical profile of TED Talks on science and compares it against non-science TED Talks and science academic lectures. We use a 5-million-word TED Talk corpus, with a 1.3-million-word science subsection. Of the two categories of TED Talks, it is the science ones that are lexically more similar to science academic lectures. Science TED Talks also feature significantly more technical vocabulary than non-science TED Talks. Reasonable listening comprehension is achieved at 4,000 words for science TED Talks, while ideal comprehension is achieved at 8,000 words for both categories. These results recommend science TED Talks for English for Science listening.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/resla.20062.vuk
2023-03-20
2024-05-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abdulrahman, T.
    (2018) TED Talks as listening teaching strategy in EAP classroom. The Asian ESP Journal, 14(6), 60–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Anthony, L.
    (2014) AntWordProfiler (Version 1.4.1) [computer software]. Waseda University.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bauer, L., & Nation, P.
    (1993) Word families. International Journal of Lexicography, 6(4), 253–279. 10.1093/ijl/6.4.253
    https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/6.4.253 [Google Scholar]
  4. Brezina, V., & Gablasova, G.
    (2013) Is there a core general vocabulary? Introducing the New General Service List. Applied Linguistics, 36(1), 1–22. 10.1093/applin/amt018
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt018 [Google Scholar]
  5. Browne, C., Culligan, B., & Phillips, J.
    (2013) The New General Service List. www.newgeneralservicelist.org/ [Accessed1 September 2019].
  6. (2014) The new academic world list. www.newgeneralservicelist.org/nawl-new-academic-word-list/ [Accessed1 September 2019].
  7. Capel, A.
    (2015) The English vocabulary profile. English profile in practice, 51, 9–27.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Cobb, T.
    (2018) Familizer + Lemmatizer v.2.0. [computer software]. https://www.lextutor.ca/ [Accessed1 May 2018].
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Cobb, T., & Horst, M.
    (1999) Vocabulary sizes of some city university students. Journal of the Division of Language Studies of City University of Hong Kong, 11, 59–68.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Council of Europe
    Council of Europe (2001) The common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Coxhead, A.
    (2018) Vocabulary and English for specific purposes research: Quantitative and qualitative perspectives. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. (2000) A New Academic Word List. TESOL, 34(2), 213–238. 10.2307/3587951
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3587951 [Google Scholar]
  13. Coxhead, A., Dang, T. N. Y., & Mukai, S.
    (2017) Single and multi-word unit vocabulary in university tutorials and laboratories: Evidence from corpora and textbooks. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 301, 66–78. 10.1016/j.jeap.2017.11.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.11.001 [Google Scholar]
  14. Coxhead, A., & Hirsch, D.
    (2007) A pilot science-specific word list. Revue Française de Linguistique Appliquée, 12(2), 65–78. 10.3917/rfla.122.0065
    https://doi.org/10.3917/rfla.122.0065 [Google Scholar]
  15. Coxhead, A., & Walls, R.
    (2012) TED Talks, vocabulary, and listening for EAP. TESOLANZ Journal, 20(1), 55–67.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Crossley, S. A., Cobb, T., & McNamara, D. S.
    (2013) Comparing count-based and band-based indices of word frequency: Implications for active vocabulary research and pedagogical applications. System, 41(4), 965–981. 10.1016/j.system.2013.08.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  17. Dang, T. N. Y.
    (2018a) 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]
  18. (2018b) The nature of vocabulary in academic speech of hard and soft-sciences. English for Specific Purposes, 511, 69–83. 10.1016/j.esp.2018.03.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2018.03.004 [Google Scholar]
  19. Dang, T. N. Y., Coxhead, A., & Webb, S.
    (2017) The academic spoken word list. Language Learning, 67(4), 959–997. 10.1111/lang.12253
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12253 [Google Scholar]
  20. Dang, T. N. Y., & Webb, S.
    (2014) The lexical profile of academic spoken English. English for Specific Purposes, 331, 66–76. 10.1016/j.esp.2013.08.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2013.08.001 [Google Scholar]
  21. Douglas, S. R.
    (2015) The relationship between lexical frequency profiling measures and rater judgements of spoken and written general English language proficiency on the CELPIP-General test. TESL Canada Journal, 32(9), 43–64. 10.18806/tesl.v32i0.1217
    https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v32i0.1217 [Google Scholar]
  22. Eldor, T.
    (2018, January27) Data reveals: What makes a TED talk popular?Towards Data Science. https://towardsdatascience.com/data-reveals-what-makes-a-ted-talk-popular-6bc15540b995?gi=c86077fa9e7f
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Fraser, S.
    (2007) Providing ESP learners with the vocabulary they need: Corpora and the creation of specialized word lists. Hiroshima Studies in Language and Language Education, 101, 127–143.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Gardener, D., & Davies, M.
    (2014) A new academic vocabulary list. Applied linguistics, 35(3), 305–327. 10.1093/applin/amt015
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt015 [Google Scholar]
  25. Green, T. M.
    (2015) The Greek & Latin roots of English (5th ed.). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Jin, N. Y., Ling, L. Y., Tong, C. S., Sahiddan, N., Philip, A., Azmi, N. H. N., & Tarmizi, M. A.
    (2013) Development of the engineering technology word list for vocational schools in Malaysia. International Education Research, 1(1), 43–49. 10.12735/ier.v1i1p43
    https://doi.org/10.12735/ier.v1i1p43 [Google Scholar]
  27. Khani, R., & Tazik, K.
    (2013) Towards the development of an academic word list for applied linguistics research articles. RELC journal, 44(2), 209–232. 10.1177/0033688213488432
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688213488432 [Google Scholar]
  28. Kwary, D. A., & Artha, A. F.
    (2017) The academic article word list for social sciences. MEXTESOL, 41(4), 1–11.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Laufer, B.
    (1989) What percentage of text lexis is essential for comprehension?InC. Laurén & M. Nordman (Eds.), Special language: From humans thinking to thinking machines (pp.316–323). Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Laufer, B., & Nation, P.
    (1995) Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied linguistics, 16(3), 307–322. 10.1093/applin/16.3.307
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/16.3.307 [Google Scholar]
  31. Laufer, B., & Ravenhorst-Kalovski, 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]
  32. Lei, L., & Liu, D.
    (2016) A new medical academic word list: A corpus-based study with enhanced methodology. English for Academic Purposes, 22(1), 42–53. 10.1016/j.jeap.2016.01.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.01.008 [Google Scholar]
  33. Li, X., & Li, L.
    (2015) Characteristics of English for science and technology. InX. Du, C. Huang & Y. Zhong (Eds.) Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Humanities and Social Science Research (pp.161–165). Atlantis-Press. 10.2991/ichssr‑15.2015.31
    https://doi.org/10.2991/ichssr-15.2015.31 [Google Scholar]
  34. Lindqvist, C., Gudmundson, A., & Bardel, C.
    (2013) A new approach to measuring lexical sophistication in L2 oral production. InC. Bardel, C. Lindqvist & B. Laufer (Eds.), L2 vocabulary acquisition, knowledge and use: New perspectives on assessment and corpus analysis (pp.109–126). EuroSLA.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Liu, C. Y., & Chen, H. H. J.
    (2019) Academic spoken vocabulary in TED talks: Implications for academic listening. English Teaching & Learning, 43(4), 353–368. 10.1007/s42321‑019‑00033‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s42321-019-00033-2 [Google Scholar]
  36. Liu, J. Y., & Han, L.
    (2015) A corpus-based environmental academic word list building and its validity test. English for Specific Purposes, 391, 1–11. 10.1016/j.esp.2015.03.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2015.03.001 [Google Scholar]
  37. Miller, L.
    (2014) English for science and technology. InV. Bhatia & S. Bremner (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language and professional communication (pp.332–468). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Milton, J.
    (2010) The development of vocabulary breadth across the CEFR levels. InI. Bartning, M. Maisa & I. Vedder (Eds.), Communicative proficiency and linguistic development: Intersections between SLA and language testing research (pp.211–232). EuroSLA.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Minshall, D. E.
    (2013) A computer science word list [MA thesis, Swansea University]. Swansea University. Available at DE Minshall. https://www.baleap.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Daniel-Minshall.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Moini, R., & Islamizadeh, Z.
    (2016) Do we need discipline-specific academic word lists? Linguistics Academic Word List (LAWL). Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 35(3), 65–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Morris, L., & Cobb, T.
    (2004) Vocabulary profiles as predictors of the academic performance of teaching English as a second language trainees. System, 32(1), 75–87. 10.1016/j.system.2003.05.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2003.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  42. Nation, P.
    (1983) Testing and teaching vocabulary. Guidelines, 51, 12–25.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. (2006) How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening?Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(1), 59–82. 10.3138/cmlr.63.1.59
    https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.63.1.59 [Google Scholar]
  44. (2012) The BNC/COCA word family lists. www.victoria.ac.nz/lals/about/staff/paul-nation [Accessed1 April 2018].
    [Google Scholar]
  45. (2013) Learning vocabulary in another language (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139858656
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139858656 [Google Scholar]
  46. Nation, P., & Waring, R.
    (1997) Vocabulary size, text coverage and word lists. Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy, 141, 6–19.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Nurmukhamedov, U.
    (2017) Lexical coverage of TED Talks: Implications for vocabulary instruction. TESOL Journal, 8(4), 768–790. 10.1002/tesj.323
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.323 [Google Scholar]
  48. Parkinson, J.
    (2013) English for science and technology. InB. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes (pp.155–173). Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Read, J., & Nation, P.
    (2006) An investigation of the lexical dimension of the IELTS speaking test. IELTS research reports, 61: 207–231.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Schmitt, N., Xiangying, J., & Grabe, W.
    (2011) The percentage of words known in a text and reading comprehension. The Modern Language Journal, 95(1), 26–43. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2011.01146.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01146.x [Google Scholar]
  51. Takaesu, A.
    (2013) TED Talks as an extensive listening resource for EAP students. Asian-Focused ELT research and practice: Voices from the far edge, 41, 150–162.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Valipouri, L., & Nassaji, H.
    (2013) A corpus-based study of academic vocabulary in chemistry research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(4), 248–263. 10.1016/j.jeap.2013.07.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2013.07.001 [Google Scholar]
  53. van Zeeland, H., & Schmitt, N.
    (2012) Lexical coverage in L1 and L2 listening comprehension: The same or different from reading comprehension?Applied Linguistics, 34(4), 457–479. 10.1093/applin/ams074
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams074 [Google Scholar]
  54. Vuković-Stamatović, M.
    (2020) Vocabulary complexity and reading and listening comprehension of various physics genres. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 16(3), 487–514. 10.1515/cllt‑2019‑0022
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2019-0022 [Google Scholar]
  55. Wang, J., Liang, S., & Guang-chun, G.
    (2008) Establishment of a medical word list. English for Specific Purposes, 271, 442–458. 10.1016/j.esp.2008.05.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2008.05.003 [Google Scholar]
  56. Wang, Y.
    (2012) An exploration of vocabulary knowledge in English short talks: A corpus driven approach. International Journal of English Linguistics, 21, 33–43. 10.5539/ijel.v2n4p33
    https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v2n4p33 [Google Scholar]
  57. Webb, S. A., & Chang, A. C. S.
    (2012) Second language vocabulary growth. RELC Journal, 43(1), 113–126. 10.1177/0033688212439367
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688212439367 [Google Scholar]
  58. West, M.
    (1953) A general service list of English words. Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Wingrove, P.
    (2017) How suitable are TED Talks for academic listening?Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 301, 79–95. 10.1016/j.jeap.2017.10.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.10.010 [Google Scholar]
  60. Wolfe, J. D.
    (2015) The TED word list: An analysis of TED Talks to benefit ESL teachers and learners. Royal Roads University (Canada).
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/resla.20062.vuk
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/resla.20062.vuk
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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