A Study of Vocabulary Teaching

Shoko TANAKA

lntroduction

Language is not simply patterns of noise． N o matter how system‑
atic noise is， it cannot be language until it has been given a meaning ； andit derives this meaning largely from its use in real‑life situations．

Languqge does not exist in a vacuum：it has no independent existenceapart from its users and the uses to which we put it． We

read' meanings

into words and sentences by seeing how they are used． A sequence ofsounds remains nonsense until we see how people are using it in relation
to some aspect of our experience，

writes Crystal．i） Language， then， is asymbolic system of communication．
Linguistic analysis of a language begins with the identification of thesounds of speech， shows how these sounds are combined into meaningful
elements and examines the structure of words and their relationships inlarger structures． Rivers and Temperley classify linguistic meaning into

three levels； lexical meaning， structural or grammatical meaning andsocial‑cultural meaning一

Lexical meaning' means the semantic impli‑

cations of the words and expressions，

sttuctural or grammatical mean‑

ing' is expressed at times by semantically empty function words， but also

by interrelationships among words， andsocial‑cultural meaning' is theevaluative dimension which English‑speaking people give to words
because of their common experiences with language in their culture．2）

1） Crystali D．， Vl（hat is Linguistics ．P， London：Edward Arnold， 1974， p． 50．
2 ） Rivers， W． M． and Temperley， M． S．， A Practical guide to the teaching of English
as a second or foreign language， N ew Y ork ： O， U． P．， 1978， p． 202．

181

第24号

徳山大学論・叢Now that meaning is the most difficult aspect of language to treat in

an objective way， linguists， who characteristically view language as astructured system， devote themselves mostly to the study of phonology
and grammar． Wilkins writes，

Reflecting the linguist's concern withgrammar and the related view that mastery of a foreign language depends

upon complete control of its grammatical rules， we find the meth‑odologist's emphasis on the subordination of vocabulary teaching togrammar teaching．

3） Linguistic studies of vocabulary and semantics（the study of language concerned with meanings）， therefore， have been
little investigated in the last fifty years． However， the obvious fact isthat to communicate at all seriously and adequately through language， weneed a good command of vocabulary as well as grammar， and also aproper understanding of semantics．
In this paper 1 would like to study of the system of meanings，

examine what the problems of learning vocabulary， and attempt todiscover any implications for language teaching．

1 ． lndividual words and their meanings

When we use language， we express our ideas about the world aroundus；we talk about things we see happening， with reference to the objectsof the physical world and to their qualities； we report activities andmanner in which we do a thing ； we express the way in which events are
related in time to'

盾獅?another． Since events occur in connection withspace and time， we need tQ be able to describe locations， directions andmovements． At the same time， as Wilkins says，） we need to express ourattitudes about the truth and reliability of the report we are making，
whether it is certain or uncertain． desired or doubted．
'

The popular view of words is that they serve as

names' orlabels' forthings． lt is clear that there is a relationship between linguistic elements，

3） Wilkins， D． A．， Lingudstics in language teaching， London ： Edward Arnold， 1972，
p． 109．

4 ） Ditto， Second‑ltzng'uage learning and teaching， London ： Edward Arnold， 1974， p． 5．

182

1985年12月 田中晶子二AStudy of Vocabulary Teachingwords， sentences， etc．， and the non‑linguistic world of experience， and thisrelationship is commonly described asdenotative' orreferential' mean‑

ing． Furthermore， it is certainly true that the child learns many of his

words by a process of naming or labeling things．
There are， however， many difficulties with this view ： lt is not at allplausible for most adjectives to be regarded asnames' ； in other words，

most adjectives cannot be used as a label to identify something that they
denote' orverb；

refer to'． lt is impossible to identify what iseven in so far as we can distinguishsomeone' andnamed' by awhat he isdoing'， it is far more difficult to identify precisely what are the essential

characteristics of what is denoted by the verb than what is denoted by thenoun．

5） There are some nouns that， while not referring to imaginary

items， do not refer to physical objects at all；love'，

hate'，

belief'， forinstance， relate to an idea or general notion， but they have nothing to dowith physical entities at all． Even if we restrict our attention to words
that are connected with visible objects in the world， they often seem torefer to a whole set of rather differeht object ；chairs' for instance， comein all shapes and sizes， but what is it that makes each one a chair rather

than a sofa or a stool ？ The dividing line between the items referred toby one word and those referred to by another is often vague and there
may be overlap．
Although the citation from different languages of quite different
words referring to the same thing or having the same meaning （e．g． tree
in English， arbre in French， lei in J apanese）， as Lyons points out，

tends toencourage the view that the vocabulary of any given language is essen‑tially a list of names associated by convention with independently existing

things or meanings， yet one soon comes to realize， in learning a new

language， that there are distinctions of meaning made in one languagethat are not made in another．

6） For example'：5） Palme'r， F． R．， Semantics， Cambridge：C． U． P．， 1976， p． 20．

6）Lyons， J．，加吻伽。'ガ。η'o Theoretical五inguistics， Cambridge：C． U． P．，1968， P．55．

183

第24号

徳山大．学論叢lEnglishJapanese

bloom
blossomhana（?lower in general）

flowersheep

ramhitsuji（＝sheep in general）

ewe
lamb

kyodai（＝brothers）

brotherani（＝elder brother）

ototo（＝younger．brother）

So there is no word which is equivalent toblossom' in Japanese， just as

there is no word which is equivalent toelder brother' in English． To

take another example；the English verb

wear' or 〈put on' can be trans‑

lated into Japanese as

hayasu'，meaning ofkiru'，

kaburu'，haku'，

hameru'，kakeru'，shimeru'，

ukaberu' and so on． lt happens that Japanese distinguishes thewear a jacket' fromwear glasses'，

wear a hat'，wear shoes'，wear a ring'，．

wear a tie' and so on， and uses different verbs for each ；whereas English covers a wide semantic area with one verb． These
examples mentioned above， although they are not sufficient enough to beconclusive， imply that the words of a language often reflect not so muchthe reality of the world， but the interests of the people who speak it．

Since our classification of the physical and abstract world is itself

determined by the lexical structure of the language we speak7）， 一weshould keep in mind， in learning a foreign language， ． that learning the

vocabulary is not simply a matter of acquiring a fresh set of labels to

attach to familiar meanings， but a matter of learning a new way ofclassifying things．

7） Wilkins， D． A．， op． cit．， 1974， pp． 19‑20．

184

1985年12月 田中晶子：AStudy of Vocabulary Teaching
II． Lexical structure

The study of the vocabulary of a language will lead us to realize that

there are many aspects of meaning associated with words； that is，through the study of the meaning of words， we can find out not only theirrelations with the physical world but also their relations with one another．

The term

sense' is used， to contrast withreference'， to distinguishbetween two very different， though related， aspects of meaning． The
words

bull' and

cow'， for instance， refer to particular kinds of animals

and derive their meaning in a certain way， but at the same time they
belong to a pattern in English that includes

boar／sow'，ram／ewe'，dog／

bitch'， etc． There are many other kinds of relations between words suchasfather／son'，male／female'，buy／sell' and so on． Since there arecomplex and varied types of relations that exist between words， it is not

too much to say that Words are not comprehensible solely in terms ofreference'． Lyons writes，

Whether the two elements have reference ornot， we can ask whether they have the same meaning or not in thecontext， or contexts， in which they both occur． Since sameness of
meaning， synonymy， is a relation which holds between two （or more）
vocabulary‑items， it is a matter of sense， not reference．
to as the sense of a lexical item is the whole set of8） What we refersense‑relations' whichit contracts with other items in the vocabulary． There are many othersense‑relations besides synonymy， and now 1 want to consider these
relations in detail．

1． Synonymy
Two， or more， forms may be associated with the same meaning（e．g． hide／conceal， big／large） ； in which case the words in ques‑tion are synonyms．

，（Lyons， 1968）

8） Lyons， J．， op． cit．， 1968， p．・427．

185

第24号

徳山大学論叢It 'seems to me， however， that no two words have exactly the same

meaning， or at least it seems unlikely that two words with exactly thesame meaning exist within a language ； in other words，

synonyms' can beseen to differ in some ways： First， some sets of synonyms belong todifferent dialects of the language； in Britain， people commonly use
autumn' instead of

fall'，' just as the case withthe railroad' instead ofrailway' in the United States． Secondly，

gentleman／man／fellow／chap／

guy' differ one．another in degree of formality ； it is possible thatcan be substituted forthea chap'a man' without changing the overall meaning of theutterance， but it may achieve different effects in the style． Thirdly，some words may be said to differ only in their emotive or evaluative
meanings ； there is the emotive difference between

man' Chide' andor disapproval．

conCeal'，liberty' andpolitician' andstates‑freedom'， each implying approval9） Fourthly， some synonyms are collocationally orcontextually restricted ；rancid' is used for bacon or butter， andaddled'is used for egg or ・brains．

2． Homonymy
Two， or more， meanings may associated with the same form
（e．g． bank ： （1）of a river'， （2）for the deposit of money'） in

which case the words are homonyms．

Palmer， however， points out， '（Lyons， 1968）

We cannot clearly distinguish whether

two meanings are the same or different and， therefore， determine exactly
how many meanings a word has．

iO） To． consider the verb

eat'，． for

instance； we eat different types of food in different ways， and themeaning ofeat' overlaps that ofdrink'． But there is no clear criterionof either difference or sameness． Palmer also says，There is the prob‑

lem that if one form has several meanings， it is not always clear whether
we shall say that this is an example of the word with several meanings or9） Palmer， F． R．， op． cit．， 1976， p． 61．
10） lbid．， p． 65．

186

1985年12月 田中晶子 AStudy of Vocabulary TeachingOfhomonymy'．

ii）

3． Hyponymy

By

hyponymy' is meant a relationship of inclusion（Wilkins，

1972）；that is， it is ．the term fQr the words which refer to the classitself‑ttulip'，rose'，

daffodil' are included intable' includes

carrot'，onion'，

flower'， and Cvege‑

lettuce' and so on．

Inclusion is thus a matter of class membership． The same term，
however， may appear in several places；
dog'， anddog' is also a hyponym ofbitch' andpuppy' are included in

dog' as distinct frombitch'．

4． lncompatibility

The relation ofincompatibility' is in a sense the reverse ofhyponymy， in that it is one of'??モ撃浮唐奄盾氏D（Wilkins， 1972）

Simple difference of meaning is not an object of concern， but
ing' and．

afternoon／evening／night／，

day'；some colour terms （e．g．

incompatible， just as

blue' andmorning' andMonday' andred'， ormorn‑

Sunday／Tuesday／Fri‑

black' andyellow'） arenight' are incompatible．

5． Antonymy
The termantonymy' is used for

relations like that between

oppositeness of meaning'， foryoung' andold'， orwide' andnarrow'．

，Some antonyms， however， can be ．seen in terms of degrees of the quality
involved： To say

not wide' is not necessarily to say

there is a gradation fromkind ofwide' tonarrow'， so thatnarrow'． There is a quite different

opposite'， which exist between pairs like11） lbid．， p． 67．

一 187

buy／sell'，lend／borrow'，徳山大学論叢
or第24号

垂≠窒?獅煤^child'．

So far， I have dealt with meaning in terms of the sense‑relations．

The meaning of words， however， is determined not only by the sense
relationships but also by the relationships that a linguistic element haswith other elements in particular sentences． ln other words， a vocabu‑
lary item derives its meaning in two ways ； first by means of the way inwhich it contrast with other items in a language （paradigmatic relations）

and second by the way how it relates to other items in a particularsentence （syntagmatic relations）．
If we discuss

relation between

The book is on the table'， we can talk of a syntagmatic

book' andtable'， whereas if we compare this with

The

notebook is on the table'， then we can talk of a paradigmatic relation
betweenbook' andnotebook'． Context， therefore， can be viewed as away of providing the meaning of a word （in a syntagmatic approach）， andas a way of restricting the meaning to a small number of all the senses
that might have been available for the word （in a paradigmatic approach）．
Although the word is not confined to a particular area by the reference toother words in the lexicon， the syntagmatic relations to other items in atext somehow effect a sort of narrowing down． For example， within therange of meaning that

driVe' has by virtue of the relation to other itemsin the lexicon， there is a further narrowing down indrink' and in

She drove him to

She drove the car to the station'． Syntagmatic relations

betWeen lexical items， however， often make a language difficult to learn
by presenting many kinds of co‑occurrence to the learner， and consequent‑ly the complex interrelationship in context often causes non‑native

speakers to make errors． The development of the paradigmatic
approach to vocabulary instruction， therefore， might be regarded as aprerequisite to the syntagmatic approach．
III． lmplications for the teaching of vocabulary

Since words do not exist in isolation， and their meanings are defined

through their relationship with other words， it is clear that knowledge‑of188

1985年12月 田中晶子：AStudy of Vocabulary Teaching

the network of associations between words in a language will help thelearner understand a new way of classifying things， when he learns aforeign language ：Knowing of a 'Word means knowing the semantic value of a word
（e．g．

boy' contains 十male， 一adult， 十human ；table' contains 十inani‑mate， 十nonhuman）． Knowledge of such features will help the learnermake use of different combination of words and some restrictions in theword usage：

e．g． female panda pregnant woman＊ female ram ＊ pregnant mana）

Knowing a word means knowing many of the different meanings
associated with the word． Consequently whether the learner understands'
the word or not can be measured in word association tests like ：e．g． hand wrist dial face （＝watch）
theatre sister bed ward （＝一 ．一 ．．．一．）

nursery lift slope snow （＝a（source from Heaton， 1975）

Close Study of the syntactic and semantic relationships among words
will make the context easy to understand for the learner； in multiple‑
choice test， for instance， the learner may

easily choose a word for thecontext br find the right word for the context， jf he knows the relations

between words．
e．g．

The word astronauts' is used in the passage to refer totravellers in
A． an ocean liner B． a space‑ship

C． asubmarine D． a balloon
e．g．

was Robert late last week ？
Three times．

A． How much B． How many
C． How often D． How long（source from Heaton， 1975）

a ） Conventionally， an aSterisk before an item signifies that it is unacceptable．

189徳山大学論叢第24号

Knowing a word means knowing the syntactic behaviour associatedwith the word ； in other words， knowledge of a word may lead the learnerto specifY the structural and grammatical behaviour of words in thecontext'
De．g． The verbb）give' commonly occurs in the frame S P （O'） Od （A）

1 gave him the money．

SP Ot od

1 gave the money to him．

SP Od AHe gave 50 pence．

SP Od＊ He gave them．

Sp oi（source from Young， 1977）

While being aware of these things mentioned above， then， how can weapply them to our teaching？ H ow could the teacher of English as aforeign language use his study of vocabulary in his teaching．
Since it is impossible for us to teach the whole of a language we areforced to select the part of it we wish to teach． The vocabulary selec‑tion， by which we intend to provide the learners with an indispensable
minimum vocabulary and to let the learners avoid wasting their time on
unnecessary items outside the minimum， ．should be made in order to meetthe needs．of various goals and conditions ： ln speaking and writing， one'can chooSe one's words， but in listening or reading， one cannot， so that aminimum vocabulary for listening and reading will be larger than one forspeaking and writing． The criteria used in making the deliberate choiceof a particular set of words arechability' andfrequency'，classroorh need'．

range'，

Frequency'，

criteria which help to determine theavailability'，

range' andtea‑

availability' areusefulness' of the item once thelearner has learnt it‑usefulness outside the classroom， as the terms arecommonly used．
We should， however， take into account non‑linguistic factors such aslearners' ages， different levels， and different national environments， asb） Here， the letters S， P， O
predicator'，，． Od and A stand for the elements of structureindirect object'，direct object' and190

adjunct' respectively．

subject'，

1985年12月 田中晶子：A Study of Vocabulary Teachingwell as linguistic factors． ln Japan， as far as teaching Engli＄h as a foreign

language is concerned， very limited vocabulary is used in the junior highschools， where pupils are taught using a book based on syntactic princi‑
ples， and this consists mainly of classroom words ； whereas in the seniorhigh schools， a much wider vocabulary is'used， but there is very little

repetition of the word． We should， therefore， keep in mind， in making
vocabulary selection， such questions as： ls the course for adults， forchildren， or for learners of all ages？ How long is the course supposed to

take？ How long is each lesson？ What teaching methods are to be
used？ and so on．

Some words， especially content words from the immediate environ‑ment， will be preferred and found useful at the early stage， for not only

the reason that they may be of great use to the beginner， but also thereason that we can refer to the physical entities or concepts by them． A

certain number of structural words （or functional words）， which arecapable of putting the rest of the words to work， will be selected without

question in any course， as it is impossible'to speak or write English
without them ； the selection here depends neither on physical environment
nor on the age of the learner．
Since it is impossible for us to teach all of what we have selected atonce， we are forced to put these teaching items into the most appropriate

order for practical teaching purposes． Lado says，Once the vocabulary

has been selected， it needs to be graded as to difficulty on the basis ofsimilarity to and difference from the first language． Words which aresimilar in form and meaning can be used freely with little effort given to

their presentation or learning． Words that differ in form or meaning，
however， have to be taught more formally．

i2） In fact， the process ofgrading teaching materials is regarded very important in foreign lan‑
guage teaching． The criteria for the grading vocabulary are the same as
for the selection；

frequency'，

range'，

availability'，

teachability' andclassroom need'．

12） Lado， R．， Language Teaching， New York ： McGraw‑Hill， 1964， p． 120．

191

徳山大学論叢第24号

From the point of lexical grading， the large number of content words

may be divided into
verbs

concrete nouns， abstract nouns， quality word， andi3）， and then may be arranged in sequence to make the patterns inconnection with the grammatical patterns． Structural words will also be
put in order in connection with the grammatical patterns with which they
are associated．

From the point of semantic grading， the vocabulary of a language
may be put in order along with its lexical meaning （paradigmatic rela‑tions between words out of context） and structural meaning （syntagmatic
relations between Words in context）． For example ：ora beautiful flower' may come beforethe'the mouth of a man'@mouth of river' or

beautifulpeople'；that is， some sets of synonym， hyponym or antonym such as
flower／blossom'，

flower／tulip／rose'，animal／dog／sheep'，

big／small' canbe introduced at the same time even in a beginners' course， but some setsof synonym， homonym， hyponym or antonym such as ihide／conceal'，（metal）／（dog's） lead'，cattle／cow'，

lead

hot／warm／cool／cold' are best

introduced later． ldiomatic collocations will be introduced for theadvanced students， and technical and scientific vocabulary will be definedfor particular purposes and so on．

Conclusion
Language is a system whi'ch relates sounds with meanings． AskCrystal writes，Semantics studies the meaning dr meanings of linguistic

forms firstly by showing how these forms relate to each other （forexample， one way of defining a word likegood' is to tell someone what

its opposite is， another way is to give various equivalents‑synonyms‑and so on） ； and secondly， by looking at the relationship which exists

between these forms and the phenomena the forms refer to in theWorld'，i） so Wilkins writes，

13） Mackey， W． F．，

outside

To describe the meaning of words it is

The Meaning of Method' in Lee， W． R． （ed．）， E L． T． Selection 2，

London：O． U． P．， 1967， p． 25．．
14） Ctystal， D．， op． cit．， 1974， p． 50．

192

1985年12月 田中晶子 AStudy of Vocabulary Teachingnecessary to look at them in two respects‑in terms of their relations withthe physical world， and in terms of their relations with one artother．

'5）

Learning the vocabulary of another language， then， is not simply a matterof acquiring a fresh set of labels to attach to familiar meanings．
However，in the past， vocabulary Was taught mostly by translation ：either a list of words with their translation at the beginning of the lessonor the translation of the material containing new words or glossaries atthe end． The error in this was to confuse tran＄lation with language use，

and to assume that putting across the meaning was the whole of teaching
vocabularY．

i6）

Actually， to give a translation equivalent of an unfamiliar word is not

to teach its meaning， and besides， the lack of equivalence between thelexical items of different languages causes many problems of learning
vocabulary． Wilkins points out，Vocabulary learning is learning todiscriminate progressively the meanings of words in the target language
from the meanings of their nearest

equivalents' in the mother‑tongue． lt

is also learning to make the most appropriate lexical choices for particu‑

1ar linguistic and situational contexts． The contribution that our under‑

standing of vocabulary acquisition makes to teaching is largely that it
enables us to define the necessary conditions for learning． The evalua‑tion of vocabulary teaching is then a qu'estion of whether or not it meetsthese conditions．

i7）

In order to establish what principles should be followed in the teach‑ing of foreign languages， therefore， we must look at the nature of lan‑
guage itself， to say nothing of the nature of language learning． lf theteacher， considering the role of vocabulary teaching， could give proper
aspects of vocabulary to his students， there will be many students who
extend not only their vocabulary knowledge but also their language skills．

15） Wilkins， D． A．， op． cit．， 1972， p． 119．
16） Lado， R．， op． cit．， 1964， p． 120．

17） Wilkins， D． A．， op． cit．， 1972， p． 130．

193

徳山大学論叢

第24号

References
Crystal， D．， Linguistics， H armondsworth ： PengUin， 1971．
Fromkin， V． and Rodman， R．， A n．In troduction to Language， N ew York ：Holt， Rinehart and Winston， 1974．

Gann6n， P． and Czerniewska， P．， Using Lingudstics， London： Edward
Arnold， 1980．

Heaton， J． B．， Writing Engldsh Language Tests， London ： Longman， 1975．
Leech， G．， Semantics， H armondsworth ： Penguin， 1974．

Rivers， W． M．， Teaching'F碗忽η．加㎎微即翫げ1な， Chicago：The Univer‑sity of Chicago Press， 1968．

Stork， F． C． and Widdowson， J．． D． A．， Lear痂g About LingudStics，
London ： Hutchinson Educational． 1974．
'

Young， D． J．， The Structure of English Clazdses， London ： H utchinson， 1980．

194