CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW
The chapter is composed of four main sections. Section 2.1 reviews previous
studies of the effect on dictionary consultation on reading comprehension. Section
2.2 reviews related studies focusing on incidental vocabulary learning while reading.
Section 2.3 presents the research questions of this study.
2.1 Effects of Dictionary Consultation on Reading Comprehension
Dictionary consultation while reading aroused controversial debates in foreign
language reading research. The effectiveness of the dictionary use on reading
comprehension or on vocabulary retention has been a main concern of numerous
studies. In addition, over a few decades, computers have become widespread and
indispensable and the use of computers has been expanded so dramatically that
language teachers start to consider the implications of computers for language
learning and teaching. A large number of investigations were conducted with a view
to comparing the learning outcomes gained from paper-printed dictionary use and
electronic dictionary or online dictionary use.
2.1.1 Dictionary Consultation While Reading
Whether dictionary consultation while reading helps text comprehension has
yet reached an agreement among the educators. The results of these related studies
varied from one another. The findings of some research which aimed to find out the
relation between dictionary use and reading comprehension came to an astonishing
conclusion that dictionary consultation had little to do with the performance in
reading comprehension (e.g., Davis and Lyman-Hager, 1997; Block, 1992). On the
other hand, numerous research (e.g., Al-Seghayer, 2001; Groot, 2000; Hulstijn, 2000;
Hulstijn, Hollander & Greidanaus, 1996; Knight, 1994; Lomicka, 1998; Luppesku &
Day, 1993) focusing on the effectiveness of dictionary consultation while reading
presented the supporting evidence that the dictionary offered a useful tool for readers
to enhance the text comprehension.
2.1.1.1 Enhancing Text Comprehension
Since the unknown words are generally regarded as obstacles to comprehending
a given text, how to get rid of them has become the main concern of most L2 learners.
According to the findings of these studies, a number of researchers regarded
dictionary consultation while reading as a great help in the comprehension of the
given text. According to Coady (1993), good L1 readers have the ability to
recognize words automatically. However, EFL learners generally fail to do that, so
they have to learn to take advantage of contextual redundancy and clues to
comprehend the text. Coady concluded that “poor readers typically don’t have
enough vocabulary knowledge to have the attention necessary for taking advantage of
the context” (p.8). Therefore, the use of dictionary while reading is encouraged.
English learner’s dictionaries as well as bilingual dictionaries. By consulting the
dictionary, the language learners will acquire and employ more vocabulary items not
only to meet their communicative needs but also to enhance the language proficiency.
In the common notion of vocabulary, poor vocabulary is equivalent to low language
proficiency. Stroller and Grabe (1993) suggested that dictionary consultation is a
useful strategy for dealing with unfamiliar vocabulary items (p.32). Therefore, EFL
learners should be equipped with the ability to use the dictionary efficiently under
appropriate guidance.
A few studies were conducted with a view to proving its merits (e.g., Aust et
al., 1993; Chun & Plass,1996; Grace, 2000; Hulstijn, 2000; Knight, 1994; Krashen,
1989; Laufer & Hill, 2000; Luppesku & Day, 1993; Mondria & Wit-de Boer, 1991;
Stewart & Cross, 1991). Stewart and Cross (1991) concluded that marginal glosses
enabled the readers to take an active stance in their reading, which in turn promoted
comprehension monitoring, a meta-cognitive behavior. In other words, marginal
glosses or definitions or translations in the dictionary help readers monitor the
construction of meaning and promote the greater elaboration of the text. Moreover,
marginal glosses and definitions in the dictionary will help create deeper, longer
lasting memory in language learners. Therefore, in the study conducted by Stewart
and Cross (1991), students having access to marginal glosses retained more
information from the text for longer periods than those who read without the glosses
offered.
The study conducted by Knight (1994) supported the use of dictionary while
reading. In the study, there were significant differences between dictionary access
and no dictionary access conditions on the scores of reading comprehension.
According to Knight, “L2 learners will learn more new word meanings if they could
see the words in the contexts and also have access to a dictionary (p.286).” In other
words, besides using contextual cues to guess the meaning of an unknown word, L2
learners need to adopt another strategy while reading, that is, consulting the dictionary
when necessary.
Orsini (1999) conducted a study in which selected intermediate EFL college
students were required to read three self-selected newspaper articles from the New
York Times at home and were asked to look up words in the dictionary, write down
their definitions and write a summary of the article. The result of the study
demonstrated that 79% of the word entities in the dictionary provided acceptable
definition matching with the text representation. Orsini concluded that language
learners “had the lexical, linguistic sophistication to use the dictionary and select an
appropriate definition.” and that “dictionary consultation is necessary and meaningful,
for readers can focus their attention on their vocabulary needs and their perceived
reading comprehension”. The more adept a dictionary user becomes, the quicker he or
she can scan for the entry and find out the closest definition.
The similar findings obtained from the other studies conducted by Tono (1989),
Hulstijn (1993), Hulstijn, Hollander & Greidanus (1996), and Lomicka (1998) tended
to support the use of dictionaries or glossing in L2 reading. In the study conducted
by Lomicka (1998), 12 subjects were divided into three groups to read an excerpt
from a French poem under one of the following conditions: full glossing, limited
glossing and no glossing. The subjects were also asked to think aloud while reading
the text. The analysis of think-aloud data implied that “the major obstacle for L2
readers may have been vocabulary”(p.49). The findings of the research indicated that
reading with the assistance of dictionaries or glosses facilitated the comprehension of
the text and promoted text comprehension. In Tono’s study (1989), the
relationship between dictionary reference skills and reading comprehension was
investigated. 32 subjects were asked to read two different passages, one with
dictionaries and the other without. The results of the study confirmed the idea that
there is a significant difference in performances between reading comprehension with
dictionary and that without dictionary.
Hulstijn (1993) conducted a research investigating the reading behavior of EFL
learners and the possibility of using computers as an aid to the reading process of EFL
learners. The 82 subjects from Dutch high school in the experiment had to perform
three tasks: a reading comprehension test, an inferring ability test and a vocabulary
test. The 82 subjects were separated into a summary Group (OD)nd question
group. The former had to write a short summary of the reading text; the latter had to
answer 12 comprehension questions. The subjects in the summary group were
predicted to skim the entire text to write a summary. However, they consulted as
many words as those in the question group. By observing the look-up behavior of
the learners when encountering unfamiliar words, Hulstijn found that EFL readers
“are more likely to look up the meaning of the words which they find relevant to the
comprehension than the words they find irrelevant” (p.141).
While readers can guess or infer the meaning of the unknown word from the
context, as the opponents of dictionary use suggested, Hulstijn(1993) concluded that
they still needed to “conduct the final step in the inferring procedures, namely, to
check the correctness of their inference, in case of doubt, by consulting
dictionary”(p.142). After all, not all words can be guessed or inferred from the text.
Cook (2000) also mentioned that despite being a much-used strategy in L2 reading,
guessing from the context may “go wrong and come to the wrong conclusion” and
that “much language is unpredictable from the situation” (p.66).
The conclusion of the above mentioned studies reached a similar conclusion
that L2 readers who were able to consult dictionaries and glosses during reading
process could understand the text more than those who did not have access to
dictionaries or glossing aids.
2.1.1.2 Interrupting Comprehension Process
On the other hand, the opponents (e.g., Davis & Lyman-Hager,1997;
Block,1992; Bensoussan et al,1984) of the dictionary use suggested that L2 learners
should learn how to infer and guess the meaning of the unknown words from the
context instead of looking up the unknown word in the dictionary. They argued that
looking up unknown words in the dictionary would distract the reader’s attention from
the present study and interrupt the process of comprehension.
In Davis and Lyman-Hager’s research (1997), there was a contrast between “the
overwhelming positive feeling toward the computerized gloss and the lack of any
clear evidence that the program had enhanced comprehension “(p.68). According to
Davis et al., although the subjects may have thought that they understood the passage
because they could have access to definitional information, many of the subjects
seemed to have been “false comprehenders.” In other words, L2 readers may
misunderstand the passage even with the aid of the dictionary. The researchers
concluded that computerized glosses are not necessarily beneficial to reading
comprehension.
In Block’s research (1992), through the data collected from the think-aloud
protocols of 25 college freshmen and from the comprehension monitoring process
used by L1 and L2 readers of English, it was indicated that dictionary consultation
while reading would not benefit readers. The investigation result of monitoring the
reading process indicated that “the reading process is not supposed to be a smooth one
in which difficult words, structures and concepts were pre-taught” while the common
belief is that comprehension depends on the understanding of all the language features.
Block suggested that the language learners should be offered the chance to “chew up
the text” by themselves and to “identify and solve their own reading problems”(p.338).
He added that instead of focusing on developing vocabulary, teachers should put
emphasis on “building cognitive and meta-cognitive resources”, which may reinforce
students’ word-oriented processing style.
Bensoussan et al. (1984) conducted a study exploring the effect of dictionary
consultation on text comprehension and also concluded that the use of bilingual
dictionaries while reading had no significant effect on scores on a comprehension test.
Chang (2002) concluded from her study that neither marginal glosses nor pocket
electronic dictionaries exhibit facilitating effects on the subjects’ reading
comprehension.
In conclusion, the opponents of dictionary use don’t think that dictionary access
while reading will enhance the text comprehension and are even worried about the
possibility that sometimes the word definition in the dictionary may not match with
the context, and the readers are not able to choose the suitable definition from the
entity of the polysemous word. Such being the case, dictionary information or
definition may result in the distortion of the context.
2.1.2 Electronic Dictionary or Paper-printed Dictionary
When using the conventional paper-printed dictionary, language learners had to
turn over pages after pages to look up the words they did not know. It was a great
pity that the inconvenience and labor deterred many of the language learners from
making good use of the information the dictionary had. With the development of
technology, electronic pocket dictionaries and the online dictionary came into being.
Language learners do not have to look through pages to find definitions or translations
of unfamiliar words. Instead, all they have to do is key in the word they want to look
up or just move the cursor to the position of the unknown word on the computer
screen. In a second or two, information the word will be displayed on the screen.
It is more convenient, more labor-saving and less time-consuming than the
conventional paper-printed dictionary, and as a result, now language learners are more
willing to consult the dictionary when encountering unfamiliar words in language
learning.
The great easy accessibility of the electronic dictionary and the online
dictionary allows language learners to find out the definition or translation of the
unknown word they encounter while reading. However, whether this quick access to
the definition or translation of the unknown word can enhance reading comprehension
becomes the main concern of research. The easy accessibility indeed motivates
language learners to look up unfamiliar words they encounter while reading. The
effect of the high frequency of look-up behavior on vocabulary acquisition and on
reading comprehension has been the great interest to some educators and researchers.
Research was conducted to investigate how this type of dictionary could be efficiently
used and how their handiness and convenience as a helping tool in language learning
could contribute to incidental vocabulary learning and better reading comprehension.
Leffa (1992) conducted a research which aimed to make a comparison of the
efficiency of using an electronic dictionary and convention paper dictionary. The
subjects were asked to take a translation task and from the results of the study, it was
evident that the electronic dictionary could enhance the subjects’ comprehension of
the passage by 38% and reduce reading time by 50%. In Knight’s study (1994), the
comparison of the effect of CALL dictionary lookup and guessing words from the
context became the main focus again. The finding was that the subjects had access
to dictionary use learned more words and attained higher reading comprehension
scores.
In 1993 Aust conducted a study to compare hyper-reference and conventional
paper dictionary use on the measures of consultation frequency, study time, efficiency,
and comprehension. The findings showed that hyper-reference users consulted over
twice as many word definitions as conventional dictionary users, and the former spent
much less time finishing reading the passage than did the latter. In the study, the
researchers also investigated the bilingual and monolingual dictionary use and
concluded that bilingual dictionary users consulted 25% more definition and spent
20% less time than monolingual dictionary users. As for the comprehension, no
significant difference was found.
Lin (2002) explored the effect of the “click-on” and “key-in” CALL
dictionaries on vocabulary acquisition, reading comprehension and look-up behavior.
The results showed that the “click-on” group looked up words significantly more
frequently than the “key-in” Group (OD)nd the former read faster than the latter.
As for the reading comprehension and vocabulary acquisition, there was no
significant difference.
From the outcomes of the previous studies, it seemed that electronic or online
dictionary access while reading would greatly reduce the read time and would trigger
higher frequency of lookup behavior compared with the conventional paper-printed
dictionary access. However, as far as the reading comprehension was concerned,
most of the studies found no significant difference between the two types of
dictionary use.
2.2 Vocabulary Acquisition
Foreign language vocabulary is viewed as a determining factor in successful
communication and to a great extent in high level reading ability and comprehension
(Nikolova, 2002). On the other hand, reading is referred to as the most important
vocabulary building activity not only for the first language but also for the second
language. Therefore, the fact that reading ability is closely related to vocabulary has
been widely accepted. The relation between vocabulary knowledge and reading
comprehension has been explored and investigated.
Krashen (1989) mentioned that a large vocabulary is “essential for mastery of
a language”. Coady (1993) also mentioned good readers had the ability to recognize
much vocabulary automatically and effortlessly, and this ability increased “the
cognitive processing resources they have available for dealing with unknown
words”(p.18). As Davis commented, “subjects felt the key factor in understanding
the passage was accessing word meanings in their language” and “information such as
grammatical explanation… was perceived as less crucial comprehension” (p.62).
Haynes and Baker (1993) conducted a study to explore the reasons why college
students in Taiwan were less successful than their American counterparts in learning
new word meanings from reading an English text. They concluded that “most
significant handicap for these L2 readers is not inflexible reading strategies but
insufficient vocabulary knowledge in English” (p.130). American students’ prior
vocabulary knowledge contributed mainly to the comprehension of the new concepts
in the given context, whereas the Chinese students’ deficient amount of vocabulary
severely restricted their comprehension although they read closely “with considerable
strategic flexibility”. It is clearly indicated that a large number of unknown words in
the given text indeed hinder the process of L2 learners’ comprehending the context.
For L2 learners, a large amount of vocabulary apparently facilitates reading
comprehension.
Stroller and Grabe (1993) commented, “without a commitment to vocabulary
instruction, our ESL students will find themselves at a loss for words, unable to
function adequately in L2 contexts” (p.39). Therefore, vocabulary acquisition of the
language learners in the EFL classroom in Taiwan is viewed as the first priority. Not
only the EFL teachers but the students also emphasize vocabulary. Though
vocabulary teaching has been playing a vital part in the English instruction of high
school in Taiwan, how many words the teacher has taught and how much the high
school students can acquire from the process seem difficult to strike a balance. As
far as English instruction in Taiwan is concerned, direct instruction of vocabulary in
the classroom accounts for a large amount of vocabulary learning. However, Jenkins
et al. (1984) stated,
Direct teaching of vocabulary is not a prominent classroom activity and incidental learning from reading seems to require a sizable number of word repetitions, even when the surrounding contexts are highly informative. We don’t mean to minimize the role of oral language experiences in learning word meaning; … learning word meanings from context would have to assign a prominent role to reading in accounting for vocabulary growth. (p.784)
Hulstijn, Hollander and Greidanus (1996) commented that a large percentage of
words must have been picked up by language learners during listening or reading
activities in which the learners’ main focus is to comprehend the meaning of a
sentence heard or read instead of trying to learn or to memorize new words. This
“picking up” is usually referred to as incidental learning. Therefore, extensive L2
reading has been thought a universal principle for enhancing vocabulary acquisition in
EFL classrooms. Taking reading tasks has a positive effect on vocabulary learning.
2.2.1 Incidental Vocabulary Learning While Reading
A few studies in second language acquisition (Coady, 1993; Day, Omura &
Hiramatsu, 1991; Knight, 1994; Krashen, 1989; Leung, 2002; Pitts, White & Krashen,
1989) examined the role of context in vocabulary acquisition which took place
through reading or reading associated tasks. Reading materials can serve as a
significant role in vocabulary acquisition by providing necessary input. According
to Input Hypothesis proposed by Krashen, language acquisition should be attained by
environmental ingredient, which is thought of as a specified internal language
acquisition device making a significant contribution to language acquisition. Input
Hypothesis holds that when language acquisition device is triggered, language is
acquired subconsciously. In other words, a language learner does not have the
slightest idea that he/she is acquiring something when he/she is acquiring. The
acquisition process is identical to what has been termed “incidental learning”
(Krashen, 1989). Krashen (1989) remarked that competence in spelling and
vocabulary is most efficiently attained by comprehensible input in the form of reading
(p. 440).
Joe (1994) conducted a study investigating the effect of reading and retell
techniques on vocabulary learning. In the study, the adult learners were divided into
3 groups. Two of the groups had to take the pre-test and post test, and to read and
retell a story. The other group completed only the pre-test and the post test on the
words. The finding of the research indicated that subjects performing the reading
and retelling task could recognize and define more accurately and fully the meaning
of the words from the story.
Similar conclusion was also obtained from the study investigating the
hypothesis that new vocabulary knowledge could be acquired through incidental
learning of word meaning from context (Jenkins, Stein & Wysocki, 1984). Jenkins
et al. (1984) stated that “more frequent presentation in context increased learning and
better skilled readers profited more from context than did less skilled readers”. A
dictionary can offer valuable resources for language learners. McKeown (1993)
commented that interaction with a definition can be regarded as an initiating event in
learning a word. “Initiating event” means that a definition is unlikely to allow a
complete understanding of the word. A thorough understanding of a word must
come through repeated exposures to information rich contexts (McKeown, 1993,
p.17).
Indeed, vocabulary acquisition while reading usually occurs in an incidental
process and has much to do with the learners’ guessing from the context. However,
not every guessing will lead to the correct meaning of the word. A plausible support
of the guessing can be obtained through dictionary consultation. By associating
guessing from the context with the use of the dictionary or glosses, the learners truly
can pay sufficient attention to the link between the form and the meaning, and
consequently acquire the word successfully. Checking a guessed meaning from a
dictionary brings positive reinforcement and also allows for a longer manipulation of
the form and the correct meaning of the word (Nikolova, 2002).
2.2.2 The Effect of Dictionary Use on Vocabulary Acquisition
In the study conducted by Luppescu and Day (1993), the role the dictionary
They tried to investigate the relationship between the use of dictionary and vocabulary
learning while reading in a foreign language. In the study, one group was allowed to
use a dictionary when reading a short story and the other group was not. After
finishing the reading task, the 293 Japanese college students had to take a vocabulary
test without being informed in advance. The result of the vocabulary test showed
that the dictionary group performed much better than the other group, about 50%
higher. The findings of the study proved that using a dictionary while reading
apparently had a significant effect on language learners’ performance on the
vocabulary test. It also gave strong support to the claim that the dictionary use while
reading can improve incidental vocabulary learning.
The results of the study conducted by Watanabe (1997) indicated that both
single and multiple-choice marginal glosses had a positive effect on the subjects’
vocabulary retention test. (The single-gloss version provides a single translation for
each target vocabulary item. The multiple-choice version provides two or more
possible translations in a multiple-choice format, followed by immediate feedback in
response to learners’ selections.) After reading a given text, the subjects in the above
two conditions performed significantly better on the unexpected vocabulary retention
test than those either in the no-cue condition or in the appositive condition in which
restatements of difficult words were inserted immediately after each word as
appositive. Again, this study demonstrated that incidental vocabulary learning
through context did occur.
The study conducted by Grace (2000) investigated the effect of L1 translations
on the subjects’ vocabulary test performance. Analyses of the findings indicated that
access to L1 translations indeed affected learners’ performance on vocabulary tests.
Learners in the translation group who had access to L1 outperformed those in
no-translation group. Grace concluded that L1 translations of unknown words did
have a great help not only to short term but also long term vocabulary retention tests.
Several other studies (e.g., Chang, 2002; Chun & Plass, 1996; Davis & Lyman-Hager,
1997; Hulstijn et al. 1996; Knight, 1994; Luppesku & Day, 1993; Nagata, 1999;
Watanabe, 1997) also supported that marginal glosses were more effective than no
gloss in learning second language vocabulary. These similar studies reached the
same conclusion that second language learners who had access to glosses or the use of
dictionary outperformed those without on the vocabulary retention or translation task
administrated immediately after reading the text. One of the assumptions made by
Laufer and Hulstijn (2001) about determining factors in vocabulary retention is as
follows: “retention of words, when processed incidentally, is conditional upon the
following factors in a task: need, search and evaluation” (p.14). Take a reading task
for example. When a language learner is reading a text and an unknown word is
necessary to comprehend, thus he/she is sure to experience the need to understand it.
Then he/she has to find out the meaning of the unknown word by consulting the
dictionary or asking the teacher. Search is the attempt to find the definition or
translation of the unknown word. If the word looked up is a homonym, a language
learner has to decide the meaning of the unknown word by comparing all the
meanings against the specific context. Then he/she chooses the best one fitting the
given context, which is the process of evaluation.
Hulstijn (1993), Knight (1994), Chun and Plass (1996) and Grace (2000)
concluded that L2 learners, if offered access to L1 translations while learning L2,
would make use of them to some degree and benefited from them. Some studies (e.g.
Davis & Lyman-Hager, 1997; Luppescu & Day, 1993; Laufer & Hill 2000) have
examined the impact of look-up behavior by offering glossing or on-line dictionary on
the vocabulary retention performance.
In the research conducted by Hulstijn et al. (1996), they found the evidence
that “when L2 readers did use the dictionary, the incidental vocabulary learning
will be as good as or even better than when they were provided with marginal glosses
(p.336).” In the same study, they also found that when L2 readers were given the
meanings of unfamiliar words through marginal glosses or when they looked up these
words in the dictionary, they would have a much better performance on the
vocabulary learning test than when they had no access to any external information
about the meaning of the unknown words. Support was found for the hypothesis that
look-up behavior would foster vocabulary learning while the goal is reading.
2.3 Research Questions
Based on the previous related studies, the present study is to explore whether
dictionary consultation while reading will enhance the language learners’ text
comprehension. Also, the subjects’ learning outcomes gained from two different
types of dictionary consultation, the online dictionary and conventional paper-printed
dictionary will be compared. Furthermore, the present study intends to investigate
whether the incidental vocabulary learning will occur while learners are taking a
reading task, as the previous related studies concluded, and how lookup behavior
affects the learners’ vocabulary acquisition and text comprehension. Finally, in the
study, the texts of different levels of difficulty are employed because the researcher
wants to know whether the learning outcomes of reading comprehension and of
vocabulary retention will also be influenced by the article’s difficulty level.
The research questions of the present study are proposed as follows:
1. Will the online dictionary check enhance the subjects’ text comprehension better
than the no dictionary access? Will the conventional paper dictionary enhance
text comprehension better than no dictionary access? Will the online dictionary,
with a handy and efficient consultation system, benefit the subjects more in text
comprehension than the conventional paper-printed dictionary? Finally, will the
texts of different levels of difficulty affect the subjects’ performance on text
comprehension?
2. Will the online dictionary check have a significantly enhancing effect on
vocabulary learning? Will there be a great word loss between the unexpected
immediate and unexpected delayed vocabulary retention tests? Finally, will the
texts of different levels of difficulty affect the subjects’ performance on
vocabulary learning?
3. Will the subjects in the online dictionary group look up more unknown words than
did those in the conventional paper dictionary group? Will the subjects look
up more unknown words when reading the difficult text than when reading the
easy one?
4. Does more lookup behavior contribute to text comprehension? Does the high
frequency of lookup behavior contribute to better vocabulary retention? Finally,
will better vocabulary retention performances lead to better text comprehension?
5. After using the online dictionary consultation system, will the subjects in the
online group benefit from the handiness and efficiency of reading on the
computer screen? Will reading and consultation on the computer screen
enhance the subjects’ interest in learning and learning outcomes?
