Three approaches to glossing and their effects on vocabulary learning

Abstract Glossing facilitates the creation of correct form-meaning connections, but does not encourage inferring or word meaning retrieving. This study investigates the effects of combining glossing with inferring or meaning retrieval on vocabulary learning. One hundred and eighteen university students read a text with target words occurring three times, either glossed or unglossed, under one of three conditions. In the inference-gloss-gloss condition, participants inferred the word meaning in the first word encounter and were provided with glosses for the subsequent two word encounters. In the gloss-retrieval-gloss condition, participants were provided with glosses for the first and last word encounters but had to retrieve the word meaning in the second word encounter. In the full glossing condition, participants were provided with glosses for all the word encounters. Immediately after the intervention, all participants completed a comprehension test and three vocabulary posttests. They completed delayed vocabulary posttests 2 weeks later. The main results showed that the gloss-retrieval-gloss condition was the most effective at improving vocabulary learning. The study concludes that gloss-retrieval-gloss is facilitative to learning new words from context.

[1]  Jan-Arjen Mondria.  THE EFFECTS OF INFERRING, VERIFYING, AND MEMORIZING ON THE RETENTION OF L2 WORD MEANINGS , 2003, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[2]  Jeffrey D. Karpicke,et al.  The Critical Importance of Retrieval for Learning , 2008, Science.

[3]  Yuichi Watanabe.  INPUT, INTAKE, AND RETENTION , 1997, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[4]  H. Pashler,et al.  The influence of retrieval on retention , 1992, Memory & cognition.

[5]  A. C. Butler,et al.  The critical role of retrieval practice in long-term retention , 2011, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[6]  Jessica Williams,et al.  The effect of multiple-choice L1 glosses and input-output cycles on lexical acquisition and retention , 2002 .

[7]  M. Ewers,et al.  Different rates of forgetting following study versus test trials , 2003, Memory.

[8]  B. Laufer.  Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition: The lexical plight in second language reading: Words you don't know, words you think you know, and words you can't guess , 1996 .

[9]  J. Hulstijn.  Retention of Inferred and Given Word Meanings: Experiments in Incidental Vocabulary Learning , 1992 .

[10]  Susanne Rott,et al.  The Effect of Frequency of Input‐Enhancements on Word Learning and Text Comprehension , 2007 .

[11]  J. Hulstijn,et al.  INCIDENTAL VOCABULARY ACQUISITION IN A SECOND LANGUAGE: THE CONSTRUCT OF TASK-INDUCED INVOLVEMENT , 2001 .

[12]  Joe Barcroft,et al.  Semantic and structural elaboration in L2 lexical acquisition , 2002 .

[13]  S. Krashen.  We Acquire Vocabulary and Spelling by Reading: Additional Evidence for the Input Hypothesis , 1989 .

[14]  Peter J. M. Groot,et al.  Computer Assisted Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition , 2000 .

[15]  Susanne Rott,et al.  Processing Glosses: A Qualitative Exploration of How Form-Meaning Connections Are Established and Strengthened. , 2005 .

[16]  J. Hulstijn.  Intentional and incidental second-language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity , 2001 .

[17]  J. Hulstijn,et al.  Incidental Vocabulary Learning by Advanced Foreign Language Students: The Influence of Marginal Glosses, Dictionary Use, and Reoccurrence of Unknown Words , 1996 .

[18]  I. S. P. Nation,et al.  Learning Vocabulary in Another Language: Frontmatter , 2001 .

[19]  K. Goodman.  Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game , 1967 .