The Relationship Between Background Knowledge And Incidental Vocabulary Learning Of Chinese College Students

Researchers and practitioners in the field of language acquisition and teaching are engaged in the studies of vocabulary learning. Vocabulary learning is usually divided into two categories:intentional vocabulary learning and incidental vocabulary learning (IVL)(Laufer,2001). The latter is widely accepted as an important part of vocabulary learning. Thus, researches about IVL are meaningful to theories and practices. Many experimental studies have investigated the effects of factors on IVL, such as text types, tasks, input enhancements, learner strategies, etc, on IVL. However, there remains a lack of studies on the role of learners’ background knowledge (scenario familiarity) on IVL during narrative reading. Therefore, by controlling other variables to a scientific extent, based on the design of Pulido (2004) with necessary modifications and improvements, the present study examined the influence of background knowledge on IVL in terms of short-term and long-term word-form recognition, receptive semantic knowledge and productive semantic knowledge performances. Based on theories related, such as the Basic Assumptions of Attention, Levels of Processing, Chunking, this study is intended to answer two research questions(1) During narrative text reading, does background knowledge play a robust role in IVL in aspects of short-term and long-term form-recognition, receptive semantic knowledge and productive semantic knowledge?(2) Does background knowledge’s contribution to the three aspects of IVL significantly increase along with the increase of background knowledge in short-term and long-term performances?A pilot experiment with51participants was done to ensure the validity and feasibility of the experimental design. A month later,94sophomore non-English majors from Lanzhou University of Finance and Economics were invited as participants of formal experiment based on results of a pretest. Four narrative passages (two with more familiar scenarios; two with less familiar scenarios) were given to the participants to read with no tasks, but only with one requirement as trying the best to comprehend them. After having proved an extremely consistency between the reading comprehension level and the background knowledge, the present study adopted the score of the recall test as the quantitative index for background knowledge. Then, word-form learning, receptive semantic knowledge, and productive semantic knowledge were tested in both a posttest and a delayed test with a two-week interval. All the statistics were analyzed with SPSS11.5for differences and correlations. Conclusions for question1and2were made based on the statistical results:(1) Under a condition of a one-time encounter during reading narrative texts, in terms of short-term learning effect, background knowledge did not play any significant role in word-form learning, but did play a robust role in new words’ receptive and productive semantic knowledge learning.(2) Under a condition of a one-time encounter during reading narrative texts, in terms of long-term learning effect, the mechanism of background knowledge’s role in IVL followed the same pattern as that in the short-term result, but with the significant degree decreased slightly from it.(3) In the short term, the contribution of background knowledge to incidental form learning was rather weak and insignificant, and it did not give any sign of falling or increasing along with the increase of background knowledge. Its contribution to incidental receptive semantic knowledge learning was significant, and it increased when background knowledge increased. Its contribution to incidental productive knowledge learning was significant, and increased when background knowledge increased.(4) In the long term, the contribution of background knowledge to incidental form learning followed the same pattern with that in the short-term test. However, its contribution to incidental receptive semantic knowledge learning followed a completely reversed pattern, which decreased when background knowledge increased in the long-term test. Its contribution to incidental productive knowledge learning was rather weak and insignificant, though it still showed a pattern of increasing when background knowledge increased.Experimental and pedagogical implications are presented as follows:(1) The Basic Assumptions of Attention might only be suitable for explaining the role of background knowledge in short-term IVL in self-governed reading;(2) It might be being processed with deep consciousness that makes the vocabulary knowledge stored in long-term memory to constitute a real learning;(3) The results show that learners started from processing the semantic knowledge then to the form in IVL occasion. In addition, it suggested that the performance in the posttest could hardly be used to predict the incidental learning of a new word. The IVL in reading should be treated as a holistic and dynamic process in experiments;(4) Pedagogically, moderately adding background introduction might help significantly in IVL during narrative readings with less familiar scenarios. Limitations existed in the present study due to the restricted experimental condition. Future studies about IVL in reading could be conducted with the assistance of online techniques, as well as more elaborate statistical methods, such as Structural Equation Model.