Dinámica del aprendizaje incidental de léxico en lengua extranjera

  1. Maria Del Pilar Agustin Llach 1
  1. 1 Universidad de La Rioja
    info

    Universidad de La Rioja

    Logroño, España

    ROR https://ror.org/0553yr311

Journal:
Revista Nebrija de Lingüística aplicada a la enseñanza de Lenguas

ISSN: 1699-6569

Year of publication: 2013

Issue: 14

Type: Article

beta Ver similares en nube de resultados
DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Revista Nebrija de Lingüística aplicada a la enseñanza de Lenguas

Abstract

Este artículo presenta una breve revisión de tres teorías que tratan de dar cuenta del aprendizaje incidental de vocabulario y estudiar su efectividad. Encontrar el enfoque más efectivo para el aprendizaje y enseñanza del vocabulario en lengua extranjera (LE) ha sido una tarea que ha ocupado a los investigadores de manera intensa a lo largo de las últimas décadas. Tres hipótesis principales han intentado explicar el fenómeno del aprendizaje incidental de vocabulario y dar con las actividades más efectivas, que maximicen el esfuerzo de los aprendices en el proceso de adquisición del léxico. Así, la hipótesis del input defiende que la exposición a input comprensible es suficiente para aprender nuevas palabras, mientas que la hipótesis del output estima que los aprendices deben producir en LE para poder retener los nuevos elementos léxicos; y finalmente la hipótesis de la carga de implicación afirma que independientemente del tipo de tarea, el aprendiz tiene que implicarse en la actividad y cuantas mayores demandas cognitivas y de motivación exija dicha actividad, mejores resultados se observarán a nivel de aprendizaje léxico

Bibliographic References

  • Agustin Llach, M.P. (en evaluación). "Maximising incidental vocabulary acquisition in Spanish as a Foreign Language" Foreign Language Annals
  • Atkinson, R.C. (1975). Mnemotechnics in second-language learning. American Psychologist 30(8): 821-828.
  • Browne, C. (2003). Vocabulary acquisition through reading, writing and tasks: A comparison. Tesis doctoral, Temple University. Disponible en: http://www.wordengine.jp/research/pdf/Vocabulary_acquisition.pdf
  • De Groot, P. (2000). "Computer Assisted Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition" Language Learning and Technology 4 (1): 60-81. http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num1/groot/default.html
  • Ellis, N. C. (1997). Vocabulary acquisition: Word structure, collocation, word-class, and meaning. En: N. Schmitt y M. McCarthy. (eds.) Vocabulary: Description Acquisition and Pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 122 139.
  • Feng, J. y Huang. J. (2004). The Effect of Output Tasks on Acquisition of Linguistic Forms. Modern Foreign Languages 2: 195-200.
  • Gass, S., Mackey, A., Alvarez-Torres, M.J. y Fernández-García, M. (1999). "The Effects of Task Repetition on Linguistic Output" Language Learning 49 (4): 549-581.
  • Gardner, D. (2004). "Vocabulary Input through Extensive Reading: A Comparison of Words Found in Children's Narrative and Expository Reading Materials" Applied Linguistics 25 (1): 1-37. Gu, P.Y. (2003). "Fine Brush and Freehand: The Vocabulary-Learning Art of Two Successful Chinese EFL Learners" TESOL Quarterly 37 (1): 73-104.
  • Horst, M., Cobb, T. y Meara, P. (1998). "Beyond a Clockwork Orange: Acquiring Second Language Vocabulary Through Reading" Reading in a Foreign Language 11 (2): 207- 223.
  • Hulstijn, J. y Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the Involvement Load Hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51 (3), 539-558.
  • Izumi, S., Bigelow, M., Fujiwara, M., y Fearnow, S. (1999). Testing the Output Hypothesis. Effects of Output on Noticing and Second Language Acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 21 (3): 421-452.
  • Keating, G. (2008). Task effectiveness and word learning in a second language: the involvement load hypothesis on trial. Language Teaching Research, 12 (3), 365-386.
  • Kim, Y. (2008). The role of task-induced involvement and learner proficiency in L2 vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 58 (2), 285-325.
  • Krashen, S. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications, New York: Longman.
  • Krashen, S. (1989). "We Acquire Vocabulary and Spelling by Reading: Additional Evidence for the Input Hypothesis" The Modern Language Journal 73 (4): 440-464.
  • Laufer, B. (2004). "Focus on Form in Second Language Vocabulary Learning" Conferencia plenaria en el 14 Congreso Internacional EUROSLA, San Sebastián, 8-11 Septiembre, 2004.
  • Laufer, B. y Hulsijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics 22 (1): 1-26.
  • Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach: The state of ELT and the way forward. Hove, England: Language Teaching Publications.
  • Maftoon, P. y Haratmeh, M.S. (2012). Effects of Input and Output-oriented Tasks with Different Involve­ment Loads on the Receptive Vocabulary Knowledge of Iranian EFL Learners. Iranian Journal of Research in English Language Teaching 1 (1): 65-87.
  • McKeown, M., y Curtis, M. (1987). (eds.). The nature of vocabulary acquisition.Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Meara, P. (1997). "Towards a new approach to modelling vocabulary acquisition". En: Schmitt, N. y McCarthy, M. (eds.). Vocabulary. Description, Acquisition and Pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 109-121.
  • Nagy, W. (1997). "On the role of context in first- and second-language vocabularylearning". En: Schmitt, N. y McCarthy, M. (eds.). Vocabulary. Description, Acquisition and Pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 64-83.
  • Nation, I.S.P. 2001. Learning Vocabulary in another Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Nobuyoshi, J. y Ellis, R. (1993). Focused communication tasks and second language acquisition. ELT Journal 47: 203-210.
  • Pressley, M., Levin, J. y McDaniel, M. (1987). "Remembering versus Inferring What a Word Means: Mnemonic and Contextual Approaches". En: McKeown, M. yCurtis, M (eds.). The nature of vocabulary acquisition. Hillsdale, N.J.: LawrenceErlbaum, pp. 107-127.
  • Rieder, A. (2000). Implicit and explicit learning in incidental vocabulary acquisition. VIEWS 12 (2): 24-39.
  • Rodríguez, M. y Sadoski, M. (2000). "Effects of Rote, Context, Keyword, and Context/Keyword Methods on Retention of Vocabulary in EFL Classrooms" Language Learning 50 (2): 385-412.
  • Rott, S. (2004). "A Comparison of Output Interventions and Un-enhanced Reading Conditions on Vocabulary Acquisition and Text Comprehension" The Canadian Modern Language Review / La revue canadienne des langues vivantes 61 (2): 169-202.
  • Singleton, D. (1999). Exploring the Second Language Mental Lexicon. Cambridge:CUP.
  • Song, Z. (2010) "An Empirical Study of the Role of Output in Promoting the Acquisition of Linguistic Forms" English Language Teaching 3 (4): 109-114.
  • Sökmen, A. (1997). "Current trends in teaching second language vocabulary". En: Schmitt, N. y McCarthy, M. (eds.). Vocabulary. Description, Acquisition and Pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 237- 257.
  • Swain, M. (1985)."Communicative competence:some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development". En: Gass, S. y Madden, C. (eds.) Input in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
  • Swain, M. y Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied linguistics 16: 371-391.
  • Wang, C., Niu, R. y Zheng, X. (2000). Improving English through Writing. Foreign Language Teaching and Research 3: 207-212.
  • Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing of word knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 33-52.
  • Yaqubi , B. y Rayati R.A. (2010). The Involvement Load Hypothesis and Vocabulary Learning: The Effect of Task Types and Involvement Index on L2 Vocabulary Acquisition. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills (JTLS) 2 (1), Ser. 59/4: 145-163.
Data source: Dialnet