Feature Article

Comparing Initial L2 Vocabulary
Size Differences with Deliberate
Vocabulary Learning Strategies

Yuka Yamamoto
Rikkyo University
The aim of this case study is to investigate the deliberate vocabulary learning strategies
Japanese university learners use at different levels of their vocabulary size. A semi-structured
interview with six female university students was conducted on low-intermediate,intermediate, and high-intermediate learners in this study. Analyses of the data suggest thatlearners’ initial vocabulary levels affected the choice of strategies and learning processes
used. Even though low-intermediate and intermediate learners employed the same strategies
and learning processes, high-intermediate learners employed them differently. While
memorization was popular among all the levels, high-intermediate learners memorized
them productively through oral and written repetition. They also employed more varieties ofcognitively demanding strategies, and their vocabulary learning process was more structured
than other learners.
本事例研究では、日本人大学生を対象に、語彙レベル別に意図的語彙学習におけるストラテジーの違いについて調査した。低中級、中級、中上級レベルの６名の女子大学生を対象に半構造的インタビューを実施した。分析の結果、初期の語彙レベルの違いは、ストラテジーの選択や使用する学習プロセスに影響を与えることが判明した。低中級、中級レベルの学習者と同様のストラテジーや学習プロセスを用いていたが、中上級レベルにおいては用いる方法に違いが見られた。全てのレベルにおいて、暗記は人気が高かったが、中上級レベルの学習においては、繰り返し口に出したり、書いたりして産出的に暗記をする傾向が見られた。また、他のレベルの学習者と比べより多くの認知的に高度なストラテジーを用い、語彙学習プロ
セスはより構造的なものを構築していることが明らかとなった。

21

Yamamoto

There is no universal, one-size-fits-all strategy that will result in acquiring
vocabulary for all learners with different levels. Even though there are individual
variations, by examining the tendencies of different level groups of language
learners, we can better understand how learners are able to learn vocabulary more
effectively and efficiently. With strategy training, students can choose and selectthose which work best for them. Rubin (1987) stated that “making learning
decisions conscious can lead both poorer and better learners to improve theobtaining, storing, retrieving and using of information, that is, can lead them tolearn better” (p. 16).
In the earlier studies, the focus was on the relationship between vocabulary
learning strategies and lexical growth (Horst, Cobb, & Meara, 1998; Nation,
2001; Saragi, Nation, & Meister, 1978; Waring & Takaki, 2003) and the effect ofvarious factors such as motivation, age, gender, learning environments and cultureon the choice of vocabulary learning strategies (Kojic-Sabo & Lightbown, 1999;
Mizumoto, 2010; Nakamura, 2002; Nyikos & Fan, 2007).
Studies showed that students who use different vocabulary learning strategies
and who practice repeatedly would outperform the students who used limited
strategies and spent less time on practicing (e.g., Horst, Cobb, & Meara, 1998;
Nation, 2001; Saragi, Nation, & Meister, 1978; Waring & Takaki, 2003).
Researchers have also found that previous learning experience and culture havea strong impact on strategy choice and use. For instance, Stoffer (1995) foundthat the more the learner’s first language is lexically different from their second
language, the greater the tendency of more frequent use of vocabulary strategies.
Other studies focused on certain groups of nationalities. For instance, JapaneseEnglish as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners often use mechanical rote learningand avoid using a cognitively demanding strategy such as creating mental images(Nakamura, 2002), whereas Chinese learners show a negative view on rotememorization except for oral repetition (Gu & Johnson, 1996).
However, not much research has been done to find out how L2 vocabularylevel influences vocabulary learning strategies in deliberate vocabulary learning
situations. Deliberate vocabulary learning refers to the learning of target words
in an intentional learning condition (Hulstijn, 2003) that is completely out
22Comparing Initial L2 Vocabulary Size Differences, OnCUE Journal, 9(1), pages 21-38

of context such as by using word cards or word lists. It is especially useful forindependent learning in a condition where students are in class for a limited
amount of time, such as in EFL countries like Japan.
The main purpose of this study is to clarify whether there are any differencesof vocabulary learning strategies among low-intermediate, intermediate, andhigh-intermediate learners while they are engaged in vocabulary list learning.

Methods
Participants
Six students at a private women’s university volunteered for the study. They werefirst-year students majoring in Social Sciences. Since they had specific reasons tostudy the vocabulary list such as for studying abroad and improving their English
skills, they were highly motivated, intermediate EFL learners in Japan.
In order to diagnose the vocabulary level of the individual students, theVocabulary Levels Test (VLT; Schmitt, 2000; Schmitt, Schmitt, & Clapham,2001) was used. The test is constructed so that the results show the learners’
vocabulary size based on the General Service List (GSL; West, 1953). It is
divided into five levels: (a) the 2,000-word level (high-frequency words), (b)the 3,000-word level (low-frequency words), (c) the academic vocabulary level(high frequency for academic studies), (d) the 5,000-word level (low-frequency
words), and (e) the 10,000-word level (low-frequency words). All the sections
except for the academic vocabulary level and 10,000-word level were used in thepresent study. The test took about 10 minutes for each level.
Their total mean scores were converted to estimated word families1 as definedby Nation (2001). Students were then classified into three levels (Table 1): lowintermediate (scores less than 3,000), intermediate (scores of 3,000-3,900), andhigh-intermediate (scores higher than 3,900). All participants’ names used in thisstudy are pseudonyms.
Lesson Procedure
Data collection took place during a one-year 90-minute weekly writing course,which focused on the development of general writing ability. The course was23

Yamamoto
Table 1
Receptive and Productive Vocabulary Size and Level of the Participant
Vocabulary Levels Test
2,000

3,000

5,000

WF

Level

Hina

(S1)

23

17

11

2,933

Low-intermediate

Azusa

(S2)

24

13

14

2,950

Low-intermediate

Yuko

(S3)

24

19

19

3,500

Intermediate

Eri

(S4)

23

17

19

3,333

Intermediate

Yuri

(S5)

29

24

19

4,083

High-intermediate

Kaori

(S6)

24

25

22

3,950

High-intermediate

Note. WF = Estimated Word Families

mandatory for first-year students. The Academic Word List (Coxhead, 2000)
was used in the study since the majority of students were planning to apply to ashort-term study abroad program mostly in English-speaking countries during
the second semester of their second year. Thus, academic words were consideredessential for these students.
The list was compiled from a corpus of 3.5 million words from 28 different
types of academic texts including Arts, Commerce, Law and the Sciences. Of
those words, the most frequent 570 word families were chosen. On the first dayof class, students were given the list divided up into 10 sublists; the students were
to complete tables as homework in which they wrote the Japanese translation andexample sentences for words on the lists.
Sublists 1 to 9 contained 60 words each, and Sublist 10 had 30 words,
matching the total of the 570 words on the AWL. However, they were given theoption to use the columns, change the headings, or simply leave the column blank.
The purpose of the study was to check their natural vocabulary learning habits
so neither vocabulary strategy training nor dictionary training was given before
and during the class hours. They were simply asked to learn unknown vocabulary
items from each AWL sublist from 1 to 10 to prepare for in-class quizzes. In eachquiz, learners were asked to produce the target items within a given context in theform of crossword puzzles or to find the word in word searches. Table 2 shows24Comparing Initial L2 Vocabulary Size Differences, OnCUE Journal, 9(1), pages 21-38
Table 2
Class Schedule
In-class activities
Vocabulary quiz
(20 min)

Outside of class activities

Writing(70 min)

Vocabulary(1 sublist/week)

Writing(varies)the class schedule for each round of word lists. For each sublist, students had two
weeks to prepare for the in-class vocabulary quizzes.
Interviews
The interviews took place individually during the interviewee’s free time between
May and June during the spring semester. Each interview averaged 40 minutesin length, and all the interviews were recorded on an IC recorder. The responses
were translated by the author, and the English translations were checked by anative English speaking university teacher.
In order to encourage diverse answers, relatively open questions were used
(Appendix). Warm-up questions were asked at the start of each interview tomake sure that interviewees felt comfortable and willing to share their views andexperiences. The interview consisted of three main parts. First, students wereencouraged to talk about independent learning strategies for studying the list.
Second, participants answered questions concerning their dictionary use. Lastly,
they demonstrated the processes of vocabulary learning in front of the author
when they encountered unknown words.

Results
Data Analysis
The interview responses were transcribed manually, and then using a qualitative
analysis software package (ATLAS.ti, Version 6) each interview was coded andanalyzed. Using the transcripts, words and phrases that appeared several times
were coded to visualize the relations between them.
Codes refer to quotations that are important or interesting segments taken out
from the primary data. If the words or phrases are repeated in the text, the audiocoding feature automatically assigns a code to them. Codes serve as a means of25

Yamamotocapturing the meaning in the data. They also create sets of units to compare theconcepts. Codes are clustered by forming families known as code families (CF)and then conceptualized by structuring sets of similar elements by linking codes
in a visual diagram (Figures 1, 2) to show relationships between codes.
In the diagram, codes are followed by two numbers. The first number shows
how often a code appeared across documents, and the second number shows theamount of relations that exist between the code and other codes.
Interview Results
For all three vocabulary levels, all the learners used memorization (Figure 1,{7-4}) while they were studying the vocabulary list. This was also confirmed byprevious studies (e.g., Nakamura, 2002). Jiang and Smith (2009) found thatlearners’ strategies were influenced by teachers’ method of instruction which isreflection of national language educational policy. In fact, several students talked
about their high school and cram school teachers. One student described herhigh school experience in the following way:
I focused on words that I couldn’t say the Japanese translation for within 3
seconds. While I was studying for the university entrance exam, my cram school
teacher told me that if I cannot say the Japanese translation within 3 seconds,
that means I don’t know the word. (Hina, S1)
In the case of the interviewee’s individual vocabulary learning processes while
they were studying the vocabulary list, students had their own systematic wayof vocabulary learning regardless of their initial vocabulary levels. The learners
mainly followed the pattern of 1) checking the dictionary, 2) memorizing and 3)
rehearsing. One student reported:
First, I wrote the Japanese translations, example sentences, parts of speech on
the list and reviewed them several times. Then, I tested myself using the list by
writing the vocabulary words by looking at the Japanese translation. (Yuko, S3)
Regardless of their vocabulary levels, they all consulted the dictionary toreconfirm the correct use of all the target items (‘look up the dictionary’, {170}). Similar to previous findings (e.g., Cohen & Dörnyei, 2002; Kojic-Sabo &Lightbown, 1999; Mizumoto, 2010; Nakamura, 2002; Nyikos & Fan, 2007),
26

Comparing Initial L2 Vocabulary Size Differences, OnCUE Journal, 9(1), pages 21-38

Figure 1. Display showing the strategies used for vocabulary list learning.
Note. {X-Y} = X refers to the frequency of the code words; Y refers to the amount of relations
that exist between the code word and other objects.

female interviewees tend to avoid taking risks. Some of the key words depicted in
Figure 2 were ‘no confidence’ {1-0}, ‘to confirm’ {6-0}, and ‘worries’ {3-0}.
Checking the meanings of all the target words in the dictionary could havebeen also driven by extrinsic reason of getting good grades in class since they were
expecting to have quizzes in class. For instance, one student reported:
I checked all the words in the dictionary. Even if I thought that I knew them,since they would be on the test, I didn’t want to remember the wrong meanings
and I wasn’t totally confident whether I knew them in the first place so I looked
them up in the dictionary to confirm their meanings. (Yuko, S3)
Low-Intermediate and Intermediate Level Learners
Even though memorization was used for all the levels, the way of memorization
varied depending on students’ vocabulary level. For low-intermediate and27

YamamotoFigure 2. Display of dictionary use for studying the vocabulary list.
Note. {X-Y} = X refers to the frequency of the code words; Y refers to the amount of relations
that exist between the code word and other objects.

intermediate learners, their productive use of memorization which involves
speaking and writing (e.g., reading the target words out loud or spelling out thewords) was rather limited compared with their receptive use which involves
listening and reading (e.g., checking the pronunciation of electronic dictionary).
For instance, Azusa (S2) explained:
First, I checked the Japanese translations in the dictionary and wrote them downon the vocabulary list. Then I covered the words and tested myself. I remembered
the ones that I made mistakes on, so when I made the same mistake for the second
time, I put a check mark next to the word. For spelling mistakes, I circled thewords. For example, the spelling for ‘correspond’ was not ‘l’, but ‘r’.
Furthermore, low-intermediate learners tended to use limited strategies
in general. For instance, when Hina (S1) consulted a dictionary like otherinterviewees, she mainly checked the Japanese translation and example sentences
to see how they were used in context. She also checked the pronunciation using
the audio function on her electronic dictionary, but only when she didn’t feel28Comparing Initial L2 Vocabulary Size Differences, OnCUE Journal, 9(1), pages 21-38

confident. When she encountered a long word, she checked the origin of theword. She went over the list only one or two days before the test and studied
intensively for 2.5 hours. She did not practice them productively using oral andwritten repetition. During self-tests, she simply put a check mark next to theword for the ones she got wrong.
Another important thing to note was their dictionary use. The learners viewed
all the target items as equally important and had trouble identifying and selecting
the appropriate definition for the target academic words in the dictionary. For
instance, Hina (S1) reported, “Since there are many entries, I am not sure which
ones I should remember”. Having difficulties selecting the appropriate meaning
in the dictionary was also found among intermediate learners. Eri (S4) explained:
Finding the academic meaning of words was hard. Because there are different
meanings for each word, I was a little worried if the definition that I had chosen
would be the same as the definition given on the quiz. However, if the teacher
simply gave me the vocabulary list with the definitions, I think I would havejust looked at the list, and by not looking up the words myself in the dictionary, I
probably would have easily forgotten them.
Yet, to my surprise, both learners preferred not to have a list with definitions.
By not giving the definitions, I believed it would encourage the learners to think
more deeply about a word’s meaning because they would have to check eachword in the dictionary and also search other sources of information. However, by
not being given enough instructions on how to select the appropriate meaning,
students simply chose the “easiest” definition from the dictionary. Eri (S4) further
explained:
If there was a meaning that I knew, I chose it. If I couldn’t find any that I knew,
I would choose the easiest one to understand. For example, when I looked up theword “identify”, I found many Japanese translations that were long and difficult
to understand. So, I chose the simplest translation which was “douitsushi”(identification).

29

YamamotoIntermediate and High-Intermediate Level Learners
Intermediate learners showed both the low-intermediate and high-intermediate
learners’ characteristics. As shown in Figure 1, during the process of vocabularyacquisition, a lot of time was spent on memorizing through visual (‘look at thelist’, {1-1}), written (‘write repeatedly’, {12-1}), and oral repetitions (‘pronounce
repeatedly’, {8-1}). In contrast to low and low-intermediate learners, theproductive use of memorization was seen especially clearly among intermediateand high-intermediate learners. Eri (S4) said:
On weekdays, I checked the vocabulary when I was on the bus and on theweekends, I wrote them down repeatedly while saying them out loud.
While memorization was the most frequent strategy used among alllevels, there were several strategies that were unique among high-intermediatelevel learners. One was memorizing the root and associating them with theword (Figure 1, ‘origin of words’, {5-2}). Kaori (S6) used imagery as one of thelearning strategies to memorize words. She explained, “I read all the example
sentences and tried to picture the meaning of the words from them”. Other thanmemorizations, high-intermediate learners tended to learn them in context suchas by reading all the example sentences in the dictionary (Yuri, S5; Kaori, S6),
whereas low-intermediate learners simply checked the meaning and even if there
were several example sentences, they read only the example sentence on top. The
list may have served as an impetus to review the words as well as deepen their
vocabulary knowledge.
Similar to previous findings (e.g., Mizumoto, 2010; Nyikos & Fan, 2007),
instead of using specific limited strategies, the students used a variety of strategies(Table 3). Kaori (S6) employed a variety of vocabulary learning strategies such as
consulting a dictionary, memorizing strategies through visual, written, and oral
repetition, and rehearsing. Her dictionary use was extensive in that she checked
the L1 translation, example sentences, pronunciation, collocation, and parts ofspeech and when she encountered polysemous words with different meanings,
she read all the example sentences and pictured the word’s meanings. Comparedwith other interviewees who made only simple bilingual lists with translations,she provided each word’s collocation and example sentences.
30

Comparing Initial L2 Vocabulary Size Differences, OnCUE Journal, 9(1), pages 21-38
Table 3
Summary of Interview (Vocabulary Learning Strategies)
Memorize
Check
Dictionary

VisualRepetition Repetition(Written)(Oral)

Rehearsal

Hina

(S1)

✔

✔

Azusa

(S2)

✔

✔

✔

✔

Yuko

(S3)

✔

✔

✔

✔

Eri

(S4)

✔

✔

✔

✔

Yuri

(S5)

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

Kaori

(S6)

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

Others✔

✔

For their vocabulary learning processes, high-intermediate level learners also
had a strict way of organizing their own learning. They developed their own wayof monitoring and reviewing the target words. Yuri (S5) recalled:
I studied it for 30 minutes every day. I looked up the meanings that I didn’t
remember in the dictionary. The day before the quiz, I studied the vocabulary list
for two hours. For example, I tested myself on the Japanese translations and thecorrect spelling of all the words. I wrote down the words repeatedly while saying
the words out loud.
Kaori (S6) also had a systematic way of vocabulary learning. She checked themeanings in the dictionary, wrote the Japanese translation, example sentence,collocations, pronunciation and parts of speech, listened to the pronunciationfrom the electronic dictionary, memorized the spellings, and reviewed and tested
the meaning.
When consulting a dictionary, high-intermediate learners were more sensitive
to the way a word could be used compared to other learners. Kaori (S6) checked
the related information of a word, including its syntactic and semantic aspects.
For example, she stated:
When I looked up a word in a dictionary, I checked the Japanese translations,example sentences, collocations, pronunciation and parts of speech. I checked theexample sentence so that I would be able to use the words in practice.
Another interesting thing to note is that intermediate and high-intermediate31

Yamamotolearners had a tendency to focus on target words that they were especiallystruggling with. This was usually related to spelling difficulty while they werepracticing for the quizzes. Whereas both intermediate learners (Yuko, S3; Eri,
S4) focused on learning the target words that they didn’t know the Japanesemeaning of, high-intermediate learners focused on words that presented spellingand pronunciation difficulties. Kaori (S6) mentioned, I focused on words that had
similar spellings and/or pronunciation such as ‘regulate’ and ‘relevant’. And words
that have a different spelling, such as ‘resource’. Yuri (S5) also focused on words she
had difficulty spelling. She stated, There were a lot of words starting with ‘C’ and‘P’ so I focused on them, especially words that looked similar like as ‘previous’ and‘primary’. In fact, as Milton (2009) stated:
A foreign language word is thought likely to be easier to learn if: it is like its
first language translation; it is relatively short; it is concrete and imaginable; itis different in sound and appearance from the other new words. (p. 37)

Conclusions and Future Directions

In support of other studies (e.g., Gass & Mackey, 1999; Klapper, 2008; Saito,2008) students’ perceptions of the importance of memorization revealed thatthey regarded repetition as an essential component for vocabulary learning
regardless of their levels. The use of memory strategies was seen to be affectedby factors of cultural differences and past language learning experience. For
instance, students’ heavy reliance on memorization may have been due to thestrong influence of vocabulary learning strategies taught in high school or cramschool while studying for university entrance exams. Also, as studies have shownthat certain vocabulary learning strategies can be transferred from other subject
areas (Porte, 1988), it could be assumed that the Japanese learners’ habit ofrepetitively writing out the target words could have been transferred from thestudy of learning Japanese kanji characters.
However, the use of strategy was not always culturally conditioned. Even
though previous studies showed that Japanese learners tend to avoid using a
cognitively demanding strategy such as imagery (e.g., Nakamura, 2002), higher
level learners tend to actively use mental images as one of the strategies for learning
32

Comparing Initial L2 Vocabulary Size Differences, OnCUE Journal, 9(1), pages 21-38

the target words. This suggests that while cognitively less demanding strategies
may be more appropriate for beginner levels, cognitively more challenging
strategies could be suitable for intermediate and/or advanced learners.
At all levels, the vocabulary learning process followed a certain pattern of 1)
checking the dictionary, 2)memorizing and 3)rehearsing. However, there was atendency for higher level learners to develop their own way of vocabulary learning
by following an even more structured approach. They were also more sensitive tothe way they used the dictionary compared with other learners. Nation (2008)
reported the importance of encountering words repeatedly to “strengthen andenrich the previous learning” (p. 113). However, instead of simply repeating thewords many times without having a break, the timing for repetition also needs
to be taken into account (Mukoyama, 2004). Repetition needs to be spaced
systematically and this may also largely contribute to better retention.
There is no intention to imply that the results of the six participants could
be generalized to other learners. Yet, the results can be used to shed light on therelationship between deliberate vocabulary learning strategies and initial L2
vocabulary size.

Acknowledgments

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all the participants in this study for
their cooperation. I would like to especially thank Prof. Yoshinori Watanabe andProf. Masamichi Mochizuki for their insightful comments and advice regarding
the original version of this paper.

Notes
1

“A word family consists of a headword, its inflected forms, and its closely related
derived forms” (Nation, 2001, p. 8). For example, “accept”, “acceptability”,“unacceptable”, “accepted”, accepting”, “accepts”, and “acceptance” are allcounted as one word family.

33

Yamamoto

References

Cohen, A. D., & Dörnyei, Z. (2002). Focus on the language learner:
Motivation, styles, and strategies. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), An introduction toapplied linguistics (pp. 170-190). London, England: Arnold.
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213238.
Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (1999). The effects of task repetition on linguistic
output. Language Learning, 49(4), 549-581.
Gu, Y., & Johnson, R. K. (1996). Vocabulary learning strategies and language
learning outcomes. Language Learning, 46(4), 643–679.
Horst, M., Cobb, T., & Meara, P. (1998). Beyond A Clockwork Orange:
Acquiring second language vocabulary through reading. Reading in a
Foreign Language, 11(2), 207-223.
Hulstijn, J. H. (2003). Incidental and intentional learning. In C. J. Doughty &M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 349381). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Jiang, X., & Smith, R. (2009). Chinese learners’ strategy use in historicalperspective: A cross-generational interview-based study. System, 37(2), 286299.
Klapper, J. (2008). Deliberate and incidental: Vocabulary learning strategies
in independent second language learning. In S. Hurd & T. Lewis (Eds.),
Language learning strategies in independent settings (pp. 159-178). Bristol,England: Multilingual Matters.
Kojic-Sabo, I., & Lightbown, P. M. (1999). Students’ approaches to vocabulary
learning and their relationship to success. Modern Language Journal, 83(2),176-192.
Milton, J. (2009). Measuring second language vocabulary acquisition. Bristol,England: Multilingual Matters.
Mizumoto, A. (2010). Exploring the art of vocabulary learning strategies: A closer
look at Japanese EFL university students. Tokyo, Japan: Kinseido.
Mukoyama, M. (2004). Efficiently memorizing words in foreign language
acquisition. (Master’s thesis, Notre Dame Seishin University). Retrieved
34

Comparing Initial L2 Vocabulary Size Differences, OnCUE Journal, 9(1), pages 21-38

from http://www.robwaring.org/classes/thesis/2004/Mami_Wordcard_learning.pdf
Nakamura, T. (2002). Vocabulary learning strategies: The case of Japanese learnersof English. Kyoto, Japan: Koyo Shobo.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press.
Nation, I. S. P. (2008). Teaching vocabulary: Strategies and techniques. Boston,
MA: Heinle, Cengage Learning.
Nyikos, M., & Fan, M. (2007). A review of vocabulary learning strategies:
Focus on language proficiency and learner voice. In A. Cohen & E. Macaro(Eds.), Language learner strategies: 30 years of research and practice (pp. 251273). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Porte, G. (1988). Poor language learners and their strategies for dealing withnew vocabulary. ELT Journal, 42(3), 167-172.
Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies: Theoretical assumptions, researchhistory and typology. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies
in language learning (pp. 15-29). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
International Ltd.
Saito, H. (2008). A framework for goal-driven pair drills. ELT Journal, 62(1),56-65.
Saragi, T., Nation, I. S. P., & Meister, A. (1978). Vocabulary learning andreading. System, 6(2), 72-78.
Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press.
Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D., & Clapham, C. (2001). Developing and exploring
the behaviour of two new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test. Language
Testing, 18(1), 55-88.
Stoffer, I. (1995). University foreign language students’ choice of vocabulary
learning strategies as related to individual difference variables. (Unpublisheddoctoral dissertation). University of Alabama.
Waring, R., & Takaki, M. (2003). At what rate do learners learn and retain new
vocabulary from reading a graded reader? Reading in a Foreign Language,
35

Yamamoto15(2), 130-163.
West, M. (1953). A general service list of English words. London, England:
Longman.

Author Bio

Yuka Yamamoto, Ph. D., Applied Linguistics, is an associate professor at Rikkyo
University, College of Intercultural Communication. Her research interests are
in second language vocabulary acquisition, EAP curriculum development, andextensive reading. yukayamamoto@rikkyo.ac.jp
Received: October 21, 2014
Accepted: November 29, 201536

Comparing Initial L2 Vocabulary Size Differences, OnCUE Journal, 9(1), pages 21-38

Appendix
Interview Guide
1. What was your incentive to study the vocabulary list?
語彙リストを勉強しようと思った動機はなんですか。

2. How long did you study the vocabulary list every day?
毎日どれくらいの時間勉強しましたか。

3. Which vocabulary words did you focus studying?
どの単語に焦点を当て、勉強しましたか。

4. How did you study the vocabulary list?
どのように語彙リストを勉強しましたか。

5. Which strategies have you used?
どのストラテジーを使用しましたか。（複数回答可）
 英英辞典で調べる		 英和辞典で調べる		 知り合いに日本語訳を尋ねる
 単語カードを作る		 日本語訳を書く		
 発音記号・カタカナを書く
 例文を書く		

Look up in the English-English dictionary
Look up in the English-Japanese dictionary
Ask others
Make a vocabulary card
Write the meaning in Japanese
Write the pronunciation (in katakana)Write an example sentence 名詞、動詞、形容詞などの区別を書く Write the parts of speech

Write a synonym その他			Others
6. How did you review the list? (When? Where? How? How frequent? How
long? )
 同じ意味の英単語を書く		

どのように復習しましたか。
（いつ、どこで、どのように、どれくらいの頻度で、どれくらいの長さ）

7. Did you actually try to use them in practice? If yes, when and how?
実際に習った単語を使用しようと試みましたか。
「はい」の場合、いつどのようにして使用しましたか。

8. How many words on the list did you look up in the dictionary? (Total 60
words) どれくらいの数の語彙を辞書で引きましたか。（合計60語）
9. When you used the dictionary to check the unknown words, what kind(s) ofdictionaries did you use?
37

Yamamoto
分からない語彙があった際、どのような辞書を使用しましたか。（複数回答可）

electronic dictionary		
電子辞書
English-English dictionary
英英辞典Bilingual dictionary		
英和辞典
Others				その他
10. When you looked up a word in the dictionary, what did you look for? Why?


辞書を引いたとき、辞書のどのセクションを見ましたか。（複数回答可）どうしてですか？

Translation		
日本語訳
English synonym
英語で同じ意味の単語

Example sentence
例文
Collocation		
コロケーション

Frequency		
頻度Pronunciation		
発音記号Others			その他
11. There are a number of different meanings for each word in the dictionary.
How did you select the most appropriate meaning? 一つの単語につき、いくつか違う意味がある単語があります。どのようにして最も適切な意味を見つけましたか。

12. Imagine that you encountered an unknown word on the list. Pleasedemonstrate what you would do. 単語リストにわからない単語があったと想定し、実際にどうするか口に出して、実践して見せて下さい。

38