CHAPTER 1
Introduction
Vocabulary is a key part of any language-teaching program. Nation (2001)
proposed four general goals that are important in a language classroom. These learning
goals concern: Language, which includes vocabulary; Ideas, which covers content and
subject matter as well as cultural knowledge; Skills; and finally Text or discourse (Nation
2001, p.1). Moreover, in learning a language, specifically for vocabulary goals, there are
three aspects to be looked at: the number of words in the language, the number of words
known by the native speakers, and the number of words needed by a learner to use the
language productively. The number of words in English and number known by English
native speakers are not the interest of the current study, which instead focuses on the third
aspect: the words needed to use English productively, specifically for EFL learners in
Indonesia.
The research literature in vocabulary learning in a second language (L2) has
revealed the importance of knowing a sufficient number of words to be able to function
in the language (Duin and Graves, 1987; Walker, Greenwood, Hart and Carta, 1994;
Nation, 2001; Read, 2004; Tschirner, 2004; Zimmerman, 2005). The development of
adequate vocabulary size is vitally important, and researchers have examined the use of
learning strategies as one means to foster the development of L2 vocabulary knowledge.
Strategies that have been proposed to help develop vocabulary learning include Memory
Strategies (MEM), Social Strategies (SOC), Cognitive Strategies (COG), Metacognitive
Strategies (MET) and Determination Strategies (DET) (Schmitt, 1997). Morin, 2003;
2
Chang, Wagner, Muse, Chow, and Shu; 2005; and Schiff and Calif, 2007) have also
suggested that use of morphological cues for inferring meaning can help L2 learning.
Although only a handful of studies have examined the role of morphological
awareness in L2 vocabulary development, the findings suggest that various aspects of
morphological awareness may be particularly useful for vocabulary building.
Morphological awareness is defined as the "awareness of and access to the meaning and
structure of morphemes in relation to word" (Chang et al., 2005, p. 417). For example,
Wysocki and Jenkins (1987) found that students were able to learn new words by
generalizing from those sharing a root morpheme. Pica (1988, as cited in Morin, 2003)
also states the importance of the study of interlanguage morphology and the belief that
"morpheme analysis can provide important insights into the sequences, processes, and
input relevant to second language acquisition" (Morin, 2003, p. 107).
This paper builds on this body of research by examining the relationship between
the English vocabulary size of EFL senior high school students in Indonesia and their
morphological awareness. The study presented here attempts to evaluate and possibly
extend findings from previous studies to the context of EFL learners in Indonesia. The
obstacle that lack of vocabulary knowledge presents for Indonesian EFL learners has
been noted (Nur, 2004). An ultimate aim of the study is to assess the potential value of
incorporating instruction in morphological awareness as part of EFL vocabulary
instruction in Indonesian settings, similar to the one examined here. There are three
research questions to be tackled in the current study:
1. What is the vocabulary size of the Indonesian senior high school students in the
study, and does this differ by area of study, Social Science and Natural Science?
3
2. What level of English morphological awareness do these learners possess?
3. Can measures of morphological awareness be systematically related to the
measure of English vocabulary size?
Following the introduction, the review of previous studies in vocabulary learning
and morphological awareness are discussed in Chapter 2. At the end of the discussion,
the three research questions are presented. The methodology used in the study is
described in Chapter 3, and the report on the results obtained is presented in Chapter 4.
Those results then are analysed in Chapter 5 and compared to findings from previous
studies. Finally, in Chapter 6, a brief conclusion of the current study, the pedagogical
implication, limitations, and suggestions for the further study are provided.
4
CHAPTER 2
Literature Review
All languages have a vocabulary, a set of words that is the basis for making and
understanding sentences (Miller, 1991). Therefore, "without some knowledge of that
vocabulary, neither language production nor language comprehension would be possible"
(Anglin, 1993, p.2). Laufer and Nation (1999) stated that vocabulary provides the
enabling knowledge, which is required to be successful in other areas of language
proficiency. Thus, this chapter begins with a review of studies on the importance of
vocabulary learning, followed by a discussion on morphological awareness as a
vocabulary learning strategy and its two aspects, Morpheme Identification Awareness
and Structural Morphological Awareness. Finally, it presents the three research questions
examined in the present study.
2.1. Vocabulary Learning
There have been many studies about the significance of vocabulary in language
learning. For example, Walker, Greenwood, Hart and Carta (1994) stated that early
vocabulary knowledge has been shown to be a strong predictor of school progress in the
first language (L1). They found that vocabulary knowledge was particularly important in
reading achievement. In addition, Tschirner (2004) states that vocabulary size has been
identified as one of the most important indicators of L2 reading proficiency and of
academic language skills in general. He discusses the relationship between the extent of
participants’ L2 English vocabulary and other background information such as length of
time spent in English language-speaking countries, number of English books read per
5
year, learning strategies, etc. In other studies, the size of students’ vocabulary has also
been found to closely correlate with L2 writing ability (Laufer and Nation, 1995; Laufer,
1998; Beglar and Hunt, 1999; Zimmerman, 2005). Furthermore, Duin and Graves (1987)
found that if students are given a related set of words (through an intensive vocabulary
instruction as a prewriting technique) before they write an essay in which the words
might be used, the quality of their writing improves.
In another study, Read (2004) found that L2 learners are typically aware of the
extent to which limitations in their vocabulary knowledge hinder their ability to
communicate effectively in the target language. This is because lexical items carry the
basic information load of the meanings they wish to comprehend and express. In other
words, the learners realize that knowing more vocabulary will have a direct effect on
their ability to use and further develop the L2 they are learning. Thus, vocabulary can
lead the learners to be more confident in using the language.
Words are the primary carriers of meaning, and it is widely recognized that there
is a strong relationship between the individual’s vocabulary size and his/her general
language proficiency (Vermeer, 2001; Zimmerman, 2005). Methods for learning
vocabulary, then, are an important part of language learning.
There is variety of ways in which a child learns vocabulary in the L1. These
include:
1) Experiential learning (Armbruster, Lehr, and Osborn, 2001). The authors claim
that a child learns most vocabulary through reading or listening to words
being used in context. In other words, children are able to develop vocabulary
through their experiences with the words.
6
2) Memorizing (Levin, Levin, Glasman and Nordwall, 1992). These authors
believe that students learn new words by memorizing. If students are able to
connect words to a familiar image or visualization, they are more likely to be
able to remember, retrieve, and use the words in sentences.
3) Using words repeatedly, namely, the students are given practice (Long and
Rule, 2004). The learners are provided with worksheets to practice words that
have already been introduced.
Some of the viewpoints discussed above are also adopted for vocabulary learning in the
L2 teaching context. Additionally, Anglin (1993), referring to some previous studies,
proposed three approaches in the research literature to the development of vocabulary
knowledge:
1) Direct instruction of vocabulary in school (McKeown, Beck, Omalson, and
Perfetti, 1983)
2) Learning words and their meanings from context, especially during reading
activities (Miller, 1991; Nagy and Anderson, 1984). In addition, Zimmerman
(2005) emphasizes that the primary method for acquiring new vocabulary
(breadth) and deepen understanding for existing vocabulary (depth) is through
extensive reading. Furthermore, Krashen, (1985, 1989, as cited in Morin,
2003) believes that reading is the most efficient way to learn vocabulary
naturally.
3) Applying morphological knowledge to infer the meanings of words (Nagy and
Anderson, 1984; Wysocki and Jenkins, 1987).
7
The third approach is the focus of this thesis. In particular, it will consider the
individual learners’ application of morphological knowledge as a vocabulary learning
strategy. Learning strategies can play an important role in development because they
encourage the learner’s active involvement in the learning process. Vocabulary
instruction is most effective when students are positively and actively involved in their
learning and they are allowed to use their own strategies to learn the vocabulary (Long
and Rule, 2004). Therefore, investigating instructional approaches to the use of
morpheme or root word families in teaching vocabulary, Long and Rule (2004) found
that the learners could develop their vocabulary better when vocabulary was taught
through concrete representations (i.e. using pictures and real objects) and morphological
analyses rather than more traditional class instruction methods (e.g. simply writing words
down, students note taking, no morphological analysis).
The use of morphological knowledge as a potential strategy for vocabulary
learning was the focus of the following studies. Anglin (1993) found that the students
could analyze the morphological structure of complex words which they have not
actually learned before to figure out the meanings. Morin (2003) proposed the strategy of
using morphological knowledge to infer word meanings, and with it, the need to develop
morphological awareness in the L2. She characterizes morphological awareness as the
ability to reflect on and manipulate morphemes and word formation rules in a language
Morin (2003). Similarly, Chang et al. (2005) define morphological awareness as "the
awareness of and access to the meaning and structure of morphemes" (the smallest units
of meaning in a language) in relation to words. They quote Carlisle (1995, p. 194), who
defines morphological awareness as "children’s conscious awareness of the morphemic
8
structure of words and their ability to reflect on and manipulate that structure". The focus
is on children’s abilities to distinguish and manipulate morphemes at the word level, so
that children’s knowledge of both inflections and derivations in language are
simultaneously considered.
English morphology involves knowledge of both inflectional and derivational
processes, and each makes a distinctive contribution to language learning and use.
Fromkin, Blair and Collins (1999) define inflectional morphology as changes in the form
of a word according to its grammatical function, for example, talk becomes talked to
indicate activity in the past time. On the other hand, derivational morphology concerns
changes of a word to give additional meaning to the original word (e.g. sufficient
becomes insufficient) and may be in a different grammatical class from the underived
word as well (e.g. beauty, a noun, becomes beautiful, an adjective).
Knowledge of inflectional morphology plays a key role in grammatical accuracy,
while knowledge of derivational morphology plays a role in the development of
vocabulary knowledge. The role of learner knowledge of both inflectional and
derivational morphology in the development of L2 vocabulary is the focus of the present
study.
The study examines the relationship between morphological awareness and
vocabulary knowledge for the EFL Indonesian learners, with a focus on possible
implications this relationship might have for incorporating morphological awareness as a
part of vocabulary instruction in the L2 classroom. Morphological awareness will be
discussed in the next section.
9
2.2. Morphological Awareness as a Vocabulary Learning Strategy
As noted above, morphological awareness refers to the awareness of and access to
the meaning and structure of morphemes that are part of or related to the word. It
includes knowledge of derivational morphology such as prefixes (e.g., the un- in
undisciplined to indicate the antonym of the original, disciplined), suffixes (e.g., the -ion
in graduation changes the part of speech of the base word –graduate is a verb whereas
graduation is a noun), and compounding (e.g., cowboy to create new word combining the
two root morphemes: cow and boy). On the other hand, knowledge of inflectional
morphology focuses primarily on indicating grammatical changes in words (e.g., the s in
dogs to indicate the plural form of the base or the -ed in acted to refer to the action in the
past time).
Kuo and Anderson (2006) argue that morphological awareness in L1 English
becomes an increasingly important predictor of reading ability, as children grow older
because this awareness contributes to the decoding of morphologically complex words
and it is therefore assumed to contribute to the development of reading comprehension.
