An exploration of presentation modality effects on derived word knowledge
Natalie Jo Nielsona & Valentina Taranb
aCommunication
bDepartment
Abstract
This study explores the effects of presentation modality, frequency,
and phonological transparency on fifth-graders’ vocabulary knowledge
of derived words. Children produced sentences to demonstrate
understanding of the meaning of derived words presented in either a
visual or verbal modality. Results indicated a main effect for
frequency, with children performing better on words with a high
frequency over those with a low frequency. Presentation modality and
phonological transparency did not affect vocabulary performance.
These results support prior research findings that frequency is an
important aspect of vocabulary learning.
Introduction
•Vocabulary knowledge contributes to reading comprehension and
academic achievement.
•Derived words are important for vocabulary development from 3rd to
5th grades.
•Vocabulary knowledge is multidimensional, incremental, interrelated,
and heterogeneous.
•Factors that may affect derived word knowledge include:
Sciences and Disorders, Oklahoma State University
of Speech-Language Pathology, University of Central Arkansas
Method
Results
Summary
Participants
•
•Children knew high frequency words better than low frequency
words.
36 Fifth Grade Students (13 male, 23 female)
Mean age = 11;1
Hearing and language were within typical limits
2 x 2 MANOVA
•
Independent variables:
• Frequency (high, low)
• Phonological Transparency (transparent, opaque)
•
Dependent variables:
• Sentence Score for Visual Presentation
• Sentence Score for Verbal Presentation
Stimuli
48 semantically transparent derived words
High and low frequency
Transparent and opaque
•The amount of exposure rather than type of exposure plays a bigger
role in children’s ability to learn and use vocabulary.
•Lexical frequency affects how well fifth grade children know derived
words.
•Auditory and visual modalities are both useful to children.
• Transparency
• How obvious the relationship is between the stem and a
derived form.
• Semantic Transparency
• The overlap in meaning of the stem and derived words.
• Transparent = happy-happiness
• Opaque = universe-university
• Phonological Transparency
• The overlap in sound of the stem and derived word.
• Phonological changes may occur in the vowel quality,
syllabification, stress, and/or consonant alterations at the
juncture between the stem and derived form.
• Transparent = excite-excitement
• Opaque = electric-electricity
• Phonologically transparent words are easier for children
to produce and spell than phonologically opaque words.
• Intelligible, complete sentences that included the derived word and
focused on meaning over form. were scored .
• Task: Can you use the word _____ in a sentence to show what it
means?
References
• Scoring: A 5-point scale was created to judge semantic content:
Table 2. Semantic Coding Scale for Sentence Use Question Code Description Examples of Responses 1 The meaning of the target You have to get resignation was definitely not known before you become by the speaker. president. 2 The meaning of the target The guy was so melodic that was probably not known by he cried. the speaker. 3 The meaning of the target She had great serenity. may or may not have been known by the speaker. 4 The meaning of the target The hurricane was very was probably known by the chaotic. speaker. 5 The meaning of the target The magician took his hat was definitely known by off and a bunny came out. the speaker. • The spelling of root words is often preserved in derived
words, even when the pronunciation of the root changes.
Procedure
•Does presentation modality, phonological transparency, and lexical
frequency have an effect on productive vocabulary knowledge for
derived words?
Discussion
Vocabulary Knowledge
Research Question
•Phonological transparency did not affect performance.
•Presentation modality does not have an effect on productive
vocabulary knowledge for derived words
Table 1. Examples of Derived Word Stimuli by Frequency and Phonological Transparency Phonological Transparency Frequency Transparent Opaque High
bright‐brightness magic‐magician
argue‐argument explode‐explosion Low punish‐punishable express‐expression rare‐rarity serene‐serenity • Frequency
• Frequent words are recognized and produced more easily
than infrequent words.
• Modality
• Vocabulary learning is incremental according to the type and
amount of exposure.
•Presentation modality did not affect vocabulary performance.
• Half of the stimuli words were presented aurally, half were
presented visually.
• Reliability
•Two independent coders scored all sentences.
•Where 1-point discrepancies were found, the average between the
two scores was used in the analysis.
•A consensus was reached for discrepancies greater than 2 points.
Figure 1. Sentence score for visually and verbally presented words
by frequency and phonological transparency.
•Main effect for Frequency was significant.
(Wilks Λ = .658; F (1,44) = 11.19; p < .001)
• Main effect for Transparency was not significant.
(Wilks Λ = .985; F (1,44) = .334; p = .72)
•Frequency x Transparency interaction was not significant.
(Wilks Λ = .928; F (1,44) = 1.67; p = .20)
Anglin, J. M (1993). Vocabulary development: A morphological analysis.
Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 58 (10), 1166.
Carlisle, J. F. (2000). Awareness of the structure and meaning of morphologically
complex words: Impact on reading. Reading and Writing: An
Interdisciplinary Journal, 12, 169-190.
Dell, G. S., & Reich, P. A. (1981). Stages in sentence production: An analysis of
speech error data. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20,
611-629.
Derwing, B. L. (1976). Morpheme recognition and the learning of rules for
derivational morphology. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 21(1), 38-66.
Derwing, B. L., & Baker, W. J. (1979). Recent research on the acquisition of English
morphology. In P. Fletcher & M. Garman (Eds.), Language acquisition:
Studies in first language development, 1st Ed. Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University Press.
Jarmulowicz, L. (2006). School-aged children’s phonological production of
derived English words. Journal of Speech-Language and Hearing
Research, 49, 294-308.
Jarmulowicz, L., & Taran, V. (in press). Exploration of lexical-semantic factors
affecting stress production in derived words. Language, Speech, and
Hearing Services in Schools.
Landauer, T. K., & Streeter, L. A (1973). Structural differences between common
and rare words: Failure of equivalence assumptions of word
recognition. Journal of Verbal earning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 119-131.
Nagy, W. E., & Anderson, R. C. (1984). How many words are there in printed
school English? Reading Research Quarterly, 3, 304-330.
Nagy, W. E., & Herman, P. A. (1987). Breadth and depth of vocabulary
knowledge: Implications for acquisition and instruction. In M. G.
McKeown & M. E. Curtis (Eds.), The nature of vocabulary acquisition
(pp. 19-36). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Nagy, W. E., & Scott, J. A., (2000). Vocabulary processes. In M. L. Kamil, P.
Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds), Handbook of reading research (Vol.
3, pp. 269-284). Mahway, NJ: Erlbaum.
For further information
Please contact [email protected]