Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T08:39:06.429Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Measuring knowledge of multiple word meanings in children with English as a first and an additional language and the relationship to reading comprehension

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 March 2021

Sophie A BOOTON Open the ORCID record for Sophie A BOOTON [Opens in a new window] ,
Alex HODGKISS ,
Sandra MATHERS Open the ORCID record for Sandra MATHERS [Opens in a new window]  and
Victoria A MURPHY
Sophie A BOOTON*
Affiliation:
Department of Education, University of Oxford, UK
Alex HODGKISS
Affiliation:
Department of Education, University of Oxford, UK
Sandra MATHERS
Affiliation:
Department of Education, University of Oxford, UK
Victoria A MURPHY
Affiliation:
Department of Education, University of Oxford, UK
*
Corresponding author: Department of Education, University of Oxford, 15 Norham Gardens, Oxford, OX2 6PY, UK. E-mail: sophie.booton@education.ox.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Polysemy, or the property of words having multiple meanings, is a prevalent feature of vocabulary. In this study we validated a new measure of polysemy knowledge for children with English as an additional language (EAL) and a first language (EL1) and examined the relationship between polysemy knowledge and age, language status, and reading comprehension. Participants were 112 British children aged 5 to 6 (n = 61) or 8 to 9 years (n = 51), 37% of whom had EAL (n = 41). Participants completed the new measure of knowledge of polysemes, along with other measures of language, literacy and cognitive ability. The new measure was reliable and valid with EAL and EL1 children. Age and language status predicted children's polyseme knowledge. Polyseme knowledge uniquely contributed to reading comprehension after controlling for age, language status, non-verbal intelligence, time reading in English, and breadth of vocabulary. This research underscores the importance of polysemy for children's linguistic development.

Keywords

polysemysecond languagevocabulary
Type
Article
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 49 , Issue 1 , January 2022 , pp. 164 - 196
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arndt, H. L., & Woore, R. (2018). Vocabulary learning from watching YouTube videos and reading blog posts. Language Learning and Technology, 22(3), 124–142. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10125/44660Google Scholar
Babayiǧit, S., & Stainthorp, R. (2014). Correlates of early reading comprehension skills: A componential analysis. Educational Psychology, 34(2), 185–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.785045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E., Luk, G., Peets, K. F., & Yang, S. (2010). Receptive vocabulary differences in monolingual and bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13(4), 525–531. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909990423CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bleses, D., Makransky, G., Dale, P. S., Højen, A., & Ari, B. A. (2016). Early productive vocabulary predicts academic achievement 10 years later. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37(6), 1461–1476. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716416000060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brysbaert, M., & Biemiller, A. (2017). Test-based age-of-acquisition norms for 44 thousand English word meanings. Behavior Research Methods, 49(4), 1520–1523. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0811-4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cain, K., Lemmon, K., & Oakhill, J. (2004). Individual differences in the inference of word meanings from context: The influence of reading comprehension, vocabulary knowledge, and memory capacity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(4), 671–681. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.4.671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Elbro, C. (2003). The ability to learn new word meanings from context by school-age children with and without language comprehension difficulties. Journal of Child Language, 30(3), 681–694. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305000903005713CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cameron, L., & Besser, S. (2004). Writing in English as an additional language at Key Stage 2. Retrieved from https://www.naldic.org.uk/Resources/NALDIC/Research and Information/Documents/RR586.pdfGoogle Scholar
Carlo, M. S., August, D., Mclaughlin, B., Snow, C. E., Dressler, C., Lippman, D. N., … White, C. E. (2004). Closing the gap: Addressing the vocabulary needs of English-language learners in bilingual and mainstream classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(2), 188–215. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.39.2.3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catts, H. W., Adlof, S. M., & Weismer, S. E. (2006). Language deficits in poor comprehenders: A case for the simple view of reading. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49(2), 278–293. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2006/023)CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clemmons, K. (2008). The problem of polysemy in the first thousand words of the general service list: A corpus study of secondary chemistry texts. Retrieved from http://login.proxy.library.vanderbilt.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/621754893?accountid=14816%5Cnhttp://sfx.library.vanderbilt.edu/vu?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&genre=dissertations+%26+theses&sid=PGoogle Scholar
Costa, A. (2020). The Bilingual Brain: And What It Tells Us about the Science of Language. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Dale, E., & O'Rourke, J. (1981). The living word vocabulary: A national vocabulary inventory. Chicago: World Book.Google Scholar
Dautriche, I. (2015). Weaving an ambiguous lexicon (Université Paris Descartes). https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.06.003Google Scholar
Degani, T., & Tokowicz, N. (2010). Ambiguous words are harder to learn. Bilingualism, 13(3), 299–314. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909990411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department For Communities and Local Government. (2019). English indices of deprivation. Retrieved from http://imd-by-postcode.opendatacommunities.org/imd/2019Google Scholar
Department for Education. (2012). EAL pupils by school. Retrieved from https://www.naldic.org.uk/research-and-information/eal-statistics/eal-pupils/Google Scholar
Department for Education. (2020). Schools, pupils and their characteristics. Retrieved from https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/school-pupils-and-their-characteristicsGoogle Scholar
Doherty, M. J. (2004). Childrens difficulty in learning homonyms. Journal of Child Language, 31(1), 203–214. https://doi.org/10.1017/S030500090300583XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duff, F. J., Reen, G., Plunkett, K., & Nation, K. (2015). Do infant vocabulary skills predict school-age language and literacy outcomes? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 56(8), 848–856. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12378CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunn, D. M., & Dunn, L. M. (2009). BPVS III. In British Picture Vocabulary Scales (Third Edit). London: GL Assessment.Google Scholar
Elston-Gúttler, K. E., & Friederici, A. D. (2005). Native and L2 processing of homonyms in sentential context. Journal of Memory and Language, 52(2), 256–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2004.11.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elston-Gúttler, K. E., & Williams, J. N. (2008). First language polysemy affects second language meaning interpretation : evidence for activation of first language concepts during second language reading. Second Language Research, 24(2), 167–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Commission. (2012). Special Eurobarometer 386: Europeans and their languages. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/archives/ebs/ebs_386_en.pdfGoogle Scholar
Farnia, F., & Geva, E. (2011). Cognitive correlates of vocabulary growth in English language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32(4), 711–738. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716411000038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gathercole, V. C. M., & Moawad, R. A. (2010). Semantic interaction in early and late bilinguals: All words are not created equally. Bilingualism, 13(4), 385–408. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909990460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geva, E., & Farnia, F. (2012). Developmental changes in the nature of language proficiency and reading fluency paint a more complex view of reading comprehension in ELL and EL1. Reading and Writing, 25(8), 1819–1845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-011-9333-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geva, E., & Massey-Garrison, A. (2013). A Comparison of the Language Skills of ELLs and Monolinguals Who Are Poor Decoders, Poor Comprehenders, or Normal Readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46(5), 387–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412466651CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hessel, A. K., & Murphy, V. A. (2019). Understanding how time flies and what it means to be on cloud nine: English as an Additional Language (EAL) learners’ metaphor comprehension. Journal of Child Language, 46(2), 265–291. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000918000399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lepola, J., Lynch, J., Laakkonen, E., Silvén, M., & Niemi, P. (2012). The role of inference making and other language skills in the development of narrative listening comprehension in 4-6-year-old children. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(3), 259–282. https://doi.org/10.1002/RRQ.020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lervåg, A., & Aukrust, V. G. (2010). Vocabulary knowledge is a critical determinant of the difference in reading comprehension growth between first and second language learners. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 51(5), 612–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2009.02185.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lesaux, N. K., Crosson, A. C., Kieffer, M. J., & Pierce, M. (2010). Uneven profiles: Language minority learners’ word reading, vocabulary, and reading comprehension skills. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 31(6), 475–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2010.09.004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lippeveld, M., & Oshima-Takane, Y. (2015). The Effect of Input on Children's Cross-Categorical Use of Polysemous Noun-Verb Pairs. Language Acquisition, 22(3), 209–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2014.943902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Logan, K. J., & Kieffer, M. J. (2017). Evaluating the role of polysemous word knowledge in reading comprehension among bilingual adolescents. Reading and Writing, 30(8), 1687–1704. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-017-9745-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marulis, L. M., & Neuman, S. B. (2010). The Effects of Vocabulary Intervention on Young Children's Word Learning: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 300–335. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310377087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, V. A. (2014). Bilingual development in young children. In Second Language Learning in the Early School Years: Trends and Contexts-Oxford Applied Linguistics (pp. 37–81). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nakamoto, J., Lindsey, K. A., & Manis, F. R. (2007). A longitudinal analysis of English language learners’ word decoding and reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 20(7), 691–719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-006-9045-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00014-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nation, K., & Snowling, M. J. (2004). Beyond phonological skills: Broader language skills contribute to the development of reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 27(4), 342–356. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2004.00238.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osborne, J. W. (2010). Improving your data transformations : Applying the Box-Cox transformation. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 15(12), 1–9.Google Scholar
Ouellette, G. P. (2006). What's meaning got to do with it: The role of vocabulary in word reading and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(3), 554–566. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.3.554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J. (2011). Individual differences in child English second language acquisition. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1(3), 213–237. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.1.3.01parCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J., Tulpar, Y., & Arppe, A. (2016). Chinese L1 children's English L2 verb morphology over time: Individual variation in long-term outcomes. Journal of Child Language, 43(3), 553–580. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000915000562CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paradis, J., & Jia, R. (2017). Bilingual children's long-term outcomes in English as a second language: language environment factors shape individual differences in catching up with monolinguals. Developmental Science, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12433CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pearson, B. Z., Fernández, S. C., & Oller, D. K. (1993). Lexical Development in Bilingual Infants and Toddlers: Comparison to Monolingual Norms. Language Learning. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1993.tb00174.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Proctor, C. P., August, D., Carlo, M., & Snow, C. (2005). Native spanish-speaking children reading in english: Toward a model of comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 246–256. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rabagliati, H., Pylkkänen, L., & Marcus, G. F. (2013). Top-down influence in young children's linguistic ambiguity resolution. Developmental Psychology, 49(6), 1076–1089. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026918CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richard, G. J., & Hanner, M. A. (2005). Language processing test 3 Elementary. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed Inc.Google Scholar
Rodd, J. M., Gaskell, G., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (2002). Making sense of semantic ambiguity: Semantic competition in lexical access. Journal of Memory and Language, 46(2), 245–266. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2001.2810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, C. (2013). American Community Survey Reports: Language Use in the United States. Retrieved from https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2013/acs/acs-22/acs-22.pdfGoogle Scholar
Schuth, E., Köhne, J., & Weinert, S. (2017). The influence of academic vocabulary knowledge on school performance. Learning and Instruction, 49, 157–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.01.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, S. A., & Murphy, V. A. (2015). Measuring productive elements of multi-word phrase vocabulary knowledge among children with English as an additional or only language. Reading and Writing, 28(3), 347–369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-014-9527-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snowling, M. J., Stothard, S. E., Clarke, P., Bowyer-Crane, C., Harrington, A., Truelove, E., … Hulme, C. (2009). YARC York Assessment of Reading for Comprehension Passage Reading. (Second Edi). London: GL Assessment.Google Scholar
Srinivasan, M., & Snedeker, J. (2011). Judging a book by its cover and its contents: The representation of polysemous and homophonous meanings in four-year-old children. Cognitive Psychology, 62(4), 245–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2011.03.002CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sundqvist, P. (2019). Commercial-of-the-shelf games in the digital wild and L2 learner vocabulary. Language Learning & Technology, 23(1), 87–113. https://doi.org/10125/44674Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (2016). Wechsler intelligence scale for children–Fifth UK Edition. London: Harcourt Assessment.Google Scholar
Wiig, E. H., & Secord, W. (1991). Test of word knowledge. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Zipke, M. (2011). First graders receive instruction in homonym detection and meaning articulation: The effect of explicit metalinguistic awareness practice on beginning readers. Reading Psychology, 32(4), 349–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2010.495312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zipke, M., Ehri, L. C., & Cairns, H. S. (2009). Using Semantic Ambiguity Instruction to Improve Third Graders’ Metalinguistic Awareness and Reading Comprehension: An Experimental Study. Reading Research Quarterly, 44(3), 300–321. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.44.3.4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Booton et al. supplementary material

Booton et al. supplementary material

Download Booton et al. supplementary material(File)
File 15.2 KB