Is there a relationship between language aptitude and vocabulary size?

Graduation Thesis

Presented to

the Faculty of the Department of

English Language and Literature

Notre Dame Seishin University

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirement for the Degree

Bachelor of Arts

by

Misaki Watanabe

2015

i

Contents

Abstract

Chapter 1: Aptitude and English ability

1.1 Inroduction 2

1.2 What is L2 learning? 3

1.3 Aptitude 3

1.3.1 What is aptitude 3

1.3.2 Number Learning 5

1.3.3 Phonetic Script 5

1.3.4 Spelling Clues 5

1.3.5 Words in Sentences 6

1.3.6 Paired Associates 6

1.3.7 The comparison of two aptitude 6

1.3.8 LLAMA test 8

1.4 The importance of vocabulary 9

1.5 Ways to assess a learner’s language ability 11

1.5.1 Formal tests 11

1.5.2 Informal tests 12

1.5.3 Advantages of formal tests 12

1.5.4 Problems with assessing students with formal tests 13

1.6 What do we know about the relationship between aptitude and language ability? 13

1.7 Research questions 14

1.8 Chapter Summary 15

ii

Chapter 2: Experiment

2.1 Introduction 16

2.2 The Experiment 17

2.2.1 Introduction to the experiment 17

2.2.2 Method 17

a) Subject 17

b) The experiments 17

c) Procedure 19

2.3 Results 19

2.3.1 Subjects’ aptitude 20

2.3.2 Subjects’ English level 20

2.3.3 The relationship between subjects’ aptitude and vocabulary size 21

2.4 Summary 22

Chapter 3: Discussion

3.1 Introduction 23

3.2 Summary of the results from the experiments 23

3.3 Discussion of the results 24

3.3.1 Analysis of the relationship between aptitude and English ability 24

3.3.2 Analysis of variation between the subjects for aptitude for L2 26

3.4 Implications 27

3.5 Limitations of the Experiments 27

3.6 Further research 28

iii

3.7 Conclusion 29

Reference 30

iv

Abstract

Today, it is not uncommon for people to speak English. English is called “International

Language”. A lot of Japanese can go abroad for travel or on business easily, so they have to

master English and use it with foreign people. However, there are people who are good at

learning English and are poor at doing it. There also is a big gap difference of English ability

between students even they start learning English from the same time and with the same teacher.

The experts say these three factors cause the gap; the teachers, the textbook and the learners. The

most important factor is the learners, and they cannot change their aptitude even though they can

change their motivation or learning style. What is aptitude? Is there a relationship between the

learner’s aptitude and English learning?

In Chapter One, we looked at LLAMA test and the vocabulary size test. LLAMA test can

measure the subjects’ aptitude for learning English, and the vocabulary size test can measure

their knowledge of word familiesy. We decided to focus on vocabulary learning because it is the

most important to when mastering English. Then, in Chapter Two, we looked at the results of

two experiments. The 24 subjects took two tests and we found they had higher scores on both of

tests from their scores than the average.

In Chapter Three, we compared the two results in detail and discussed about the

relationship between aptitude and English ability. We expected the higher score they had on the

LLAMA test, the higher score they could take on the vocabulary size test, however, the results

from two experiments showed us that there is no relationship between aptitude and English

vocabulary knowledge.ability

.

Chapter 1: Aptitude and English ability

1.1 Introduction

Today, the world is becoming more globalized. Most people think we must learn English

and it is natural to use English even if our language is not English, because English is the

“International Language”. Also Japanese can easily go overseas for studying or traveling, and

watch foreign dramas or movies. For that, Japanese have become more interested in learning

English to communicate with foreign people. Now, students can learn English at school, and

many adults go to English conversation school for their business or overseas travel. Many

parents make their children study English before their children enter junior high school. We have

to understand English and use it from now on in Japan, too.

There are each thoughtmany different ideas about for learning English. Some people like

learning English. The others dislike learning English. Some people are good at learning English.

The Oothers are poor at learning English even though many people have actually studied English

since they were elementary school students. ThenSo, why do people have the different feelings

for English? Recently, 4th grade university students are searching for their jobs from next spring

and they have to take aptitude tests for many times. People have their own aptitude for each job

and employers emphasize the result of the tests. Therefore, aptitude must relate to learning

English, too. So, we will research aptitude and English ability in this thesis. One important

question is whether there is a relationship between language aptitude and English ability?

Moreover, is there a personal gap of each aptitude for L2? In this chapter, we will look at general

ideas of aptitude.

1

1.2 What is L2 learning?

Second Language Acquisition is the scientific study what kind ofof the mechanisms

which helps language learning. In this case, Second Language contains “foreign language” we

learn English or Chinese in Japan, and “second language” people whose language is not English

learn English in America. SLA is studied in both of the environments.

Some students succeed in learning L2. The others do not do. When the students who take

get a bad score on English tests are asked the reasons why they do not succeed in learning

English, they answer “I do not like English.”, “I could not keep up with the classes.”, “I am

dull.”,,” “I am good at math and science.”, “I do not like the teacher who teach me English at

first.”. All students start learning English at the same time, but there are big gaps of each

students’ English ability. People think there are three reasons for this. One is the gap of teachers

– character, ability, sex, age and the quantity of experience. The second is textbooks – items to

learn and skill. The third is learners’ individual gap – age, character, learning aptitude,

motivation and sex. EThe experts think the most important reason for the success for learning

English is the reason for learners. Learners cannot change their teachers and textbook when they

learn English, but they can change themselves. In this thesis, we will focus on aptitude above all

things, because we have it from our birth and we cannot change it though we can change

motivation for learning English. Now, we will look at aptitude.

2

1.3 Aptitude

1.3.1 What is aptitude

Aptitude means one’s natural ability or talent. It is in contrast to achievement which

represents knowledge or ability that is gained. Language aptitude directly means talent or ability

for second language learning. Carroll (1973) said the universal personal equation of aptitude

existed because there was the personal gap even though the learners’ mother tongue was

different. He also said the aptitude was not sensitive about education or training.

There are some reasons which are based on personal equation when we learn a foreign

language well except age. The experts especially think the aptitude for learning it is the most

important. The aptitude is comparatively stable, and they is scarcely thought to change during

their life. People say “he or she has a remarkable aptitude for languages.”, however, this

“languages” is ability in learning languages, and this is the very aptitude for learning languages.

Thus, there are people who are cut out for learning language and people who are not cut out for

that. Actually, the experts recognize that Learning Disabilities in America, and there are

students who can learn other subjects but cannot do foreign language.

Now, how do people investigate more scientific aptitude? At first, Carroll & Sapon

(1959) began to sort people who are cut out for learning language and then, they examined the

interrelation between aptitude and learning results. This is called Modern Language Aptitude

Test (MLAT). There are some tests which can examine the language aptitude, but MLAT is the

3

most popular because MLAT makes a point of materialistic ability than theoretical construction

to sort people who are cut out for learning them. MLAT is constituted of the five subtests –

Number Learning, Phonetic Script, Spelling Clues, Words in Sentences and Paired Associates.

We will look at these five subtests with each exercise.

1.3.2 Number Learning

At first, we can listen to strange language numbers for English number and learn the

correspondence. We can only listen to the strange language numbers and we have to write

English number for them.

e.g.) “ba” is “one” “baba” is “two” “dee” is “three” “tu” is “twenty” “ti” is “thirty”

1. ti-ba 2. ti-dee 3. baba 4. tu-dee

1.3.3 Phonetic Script

We listen to the pronunciation, looking at spelling of four words. We can only listen to

one word of four words and choose the correct answer.

e.g.) 1. bot but bok buk 2. bok buk bov bof 3. geet gut beet but

1. “buk” 2. “bok” 3. “gut”

1.3.4 Spelling Clues

We recognize the disguised English words spelled approximately as it is pronounced. We

can choose one of the five words beneath it that corresponds most closely in meaning to the

disguised words.

4

e.g.1) kloz A. attire B. nearby C. stick D. giant E. relatives

e.g. 2) restrunt A. food B. self-control C. sleep D. space explorer E. drug

1.3.5 Words in Sentences

We choose the word which has the same function as first sentence from second sentence.

e.g.) MARY is happy.

From the look A on your face B, I C can tell that you must D have had a bad day.

1.3.6 Paired Associates

We have to memorize the list of the 24 corresponds strange language and English words

in two minutes.

e.g.) si?…wood k?ab…hand kab…juice bat…ax

1. bat A. animal B. stick C. corn D. ax E. stone

2. kab A.juice B. cart C. corn D. tool E. run

1.3.7 The comparison of two aptitude

MLAT is composed by these five subtests. However, Carroll (1962) showed the theory of

language aptitude which composed four elements – Phonemic coding ability, Associative

memory, Grammatical sensitivity and Inductive language learning ability.

5

1. Phonemic coding ability: the ability which recognizes strange phonetic material and

keeps into long-term memory

2. Associative memory: the ability which connects mother tongue words and goal

language ones and memorizes

3. Grammatical sensitivity: the ability which recognizes grammatical function in

sentences

4. Inductive language learning ability: the ability which generalizes the rules from

language materials

Figure 1: Details of MLAT

The subtests Constitutional elements which Carroll thought

The capable ability

1. Number Learning Associative memory (Inductive language learning ability)

2. Phonetic Script Phonemic coding ability Remembrance

3. Spelling Clues Phonemic coding ability Vocabulary

4. Words in Sentences Grammatical sensitivity Grammar

5. Paired Associates Associative memory

However, there are two problems; one is whether the five subtests can determine all of

four aptitude elements, and the second is whether each subtest becomes the pure measure of the

four elements. At first, a lot of experts have pointed the subtest which measures Inductive

language learning ability is not composed. Winke (2005) said Number learning of MLAT

measured it, but we cannot say each subtest determines it sufficiently. Skehan (1998) thought

6

each subtest was not the pure measure of the four elements on second problem; for example,

Phonetic Script of MLAT determines both of Phonetic coding ability and memory. Then, we

will look at the chart about the relationship between subtests of MLAT and aptitude elements.

According to this chart, there are a few tests which measure Phonemic coding ability and

Associative memory, but there are no elements which do Inductive language learning ability.

MLAT has some problems like that, but people use these subtests. Some experts say

MLAT is the most influential aptitude test though it has been more than forty years since MLAT

was published.

1.3.8 LLAMA test

LLAMA test is the one of MLATs and we will use LLAMA test to examine the subjects’

aptitude for learning English. It has grown out of a series of projects carried out by students of

English Language and Linguistics at University of Wales Swansea. The materials are a set of

exploratory tests designed to assess aptitude for learning foreign languages. The tests are loosely

based on pioneering work by John Carroll, but over many years people have been running these

projects, and the design of the tests has significantly diverged from the originals which they were

based. Their first attempt at works appeared as Meara, Milton and Lorenzo-Dus (2002). That

publication included a set of five tests, unimaginatively named Lat_A, Lat_B, Lat_C, Lat_D and

Lat_E. The most successful tests were Lat_B which was a test of vocabulary learning, Lat_C

which was a test of grammatical inference, and Lat_E, which was a test of the sound-symbol

associations. Lat_A which was a self-test of phonetic memory and Lat_D which was a test of

memory for unusual sound sequences, were less satisfactory.

7

Since the publication of MM&L-D in 2002, people have been surprised by how much

interest these tests generated in the research community. A number of colleagues asked people

whose first language was not English if it would be possible to adapt the tests for them, and this

resulted in Swedish, Hungarian and French versions of the tests. However, they subsequently got

requests from Japan, Greece, Russia and Georgia to produce versions of the test in languages

which the Roman alphabet are not used. Their attempts to rework the program code to cope with

these problems which were not entirely successful. An additional problem that developed as part

of the original tests expanded was that some of the materials developed as part of the 2002 tests

contained materials loosely based on Polish, and on Turkish. These languages are not recognized

widely in the UK, but of course, they are more familiar to test-takers whose L1 is Hungarian or

Azeri. These problems prompted them to develop a version of the tests which was a large extent

independent of the L1 of the test-takers. LLAMA tests are the result of this work.

1.4 The importance of vocabulary

We used LLAMA test to examine subjects’ aptitude for learning English. Above all, we

used Llama_B which is a test of vocabulary learning because we focus on vocabulary learning. It

is very important to learn a lot of vocabulary when we study L2 because we cannot use English

well if we do not know words. Even if we do not know grammar of L2, we can speak L2 with

vocabulary. Ono (1994) showed vocabulary ability proved L2 ability and we could measure our

language ability from vocabulary in search about bilingual. Language learning ability which is

needed to help progress in English learning and thought, is the language ability corresponded to

our age. However, in Japan it is not clear that how to learn vocabulary of L2 and the difficulty of

learning L2 for learners. Recently experts study about vocabulary learning, but Nagatomo (1999) 8

insisted the study of Japanese vocabulary learning was uncultivated. On the other hand, since the

feature article about vocabulary learning was composed (Studies in Second Language acquisition

1987), L2 learning became notable in foreign country. (Wesche & Paribakht 1999) As a result,

these four points are studied deeply.

1. the systematic vocabulary learning using keyword and the word list with translation

2. the incidental vocabulary learning which the learners acquire new words through reading and

listening

3. when the learners acquire new words, how do they use the clue from the contexts and guess

the meaning?

4. the learner’s communicative strategy which the learners use when they meet the strange words

during their communications

Many vocabulary tests have been invented, and the tests are divided into two groups; the

size which we measure how many words we master, and the depth which we measure how

detailed we understand one word. Above all things, they are divided into Receptive Vocabulary

and Productive Vocabulary, and the test which can measure each ability have been made. It is

ideal to measure learner’s ability exactly with some vocabulary tests for measuring complex

vocabulary knowledge, however, this is not realistic because time when we learn English is

limited. Then, which is more important to master English, the size or the depth? Meara (1996)

and Read (2000) thought it was more important for learners to measure their vocabulary size.

Therefore, we will use the vocabulary size test to measure the subjects’ English ability.

9

For measure subjects’ English ability, we use the vocabulary size test. The test was

designed to estimate the size of their current vocabulary knowledge, not their knowledge of

individual words. The test has 140 questions which match English words and Japanese

translations, so we can measure our vocabulary size purely.

1.5 Ways to assess a learner’s language ability

1.5.1 Formal tests

There are some formal tests which can measure our language ability. The one of them is

Test for English for International Communication which is called TOEIC. It is common all over

the world and can measure our communications skill in English by listening and reading widely.

There are three kinds of tests; TOEIC bridge test, TOEIC test and TOEIC SW test. TOEIC has

three features; the standard for constant evaluation, the global standard and the general

evaluation of communication skill in English. First, TOEIC is evaluated by from 10 to 990 score

not by passing or failing. The score is done statistical transaction to keep the standard for

evaluation constantly, so the score is kept constantly unless our ability changes. Secondly, people

in about 150 countries take TOEIC test. The questions which ask the original cultural

backgrounds or expressions are excluded, so the score in TOEIC is the world common standard.

Finally, TOEIC can measure ability for communicate in English from close contents to business,

not one for translate Japanese into English and vice versa.

In December 1979, TOEIC proceeded in Japan, however, the people who took the test

were only 3000 peoples. Then, the number of people who take it increase every year, the people

10

were over 1,000,000 because the globalization of business were increasing rapidly by the

progress of it. TOEIC which was contrived in Japan has become the global standard.

1.5.2 Informal tests

TOEIC can measure our language ability for listening and reading. Then, are there tests

which can measure language ability for speaking? In 2002, the speaking test proceeded by ALT

(Assistant Language Teacher) at schools in Chuo-Ku, Tokyo. The aims of the speaking test are

to challenge the ability for speaking and the interest in communications and to give chances to

speak English with other people actively. The students interviewed with ALTs and introduced

themselves one-to-one in English. The top marks on the speaking test were 13 points and the

ALTs gave some comments to the students; for example, the accuracy of their pronunciations

and English sentences, the amounts of their information, and so on. There were preparatory

periods for one week, so almost of students easily took top marks as teachers have expected.

When we focus on the scores, the speaking test had no meaning as a test, however, it gave

absolute evaluations to the students by comments from ALTs. Therefore, the comments became

the students’ own learning data. They said “I enjoyed speaking with ALT and could have

confidence to speak English.” and” I was glad to convey my words to ALT and wanted to learn

English harder.” after the speaking test. The test could tell them the importance and the pleasure

for learning English.

1.5.3 Advantages of formal tests

We discussed about the formal tests and the informal tests. The formal tests have scores

for each person, so we can measure their language ability with the figures. On the other hand, the

informal tests have scores, too, however, we cannot measure actual language ability because the

11

students have preparatory periods before the test. Therefore, the formal test is better than the

informal test in that we measure actual language ability. The formal test has constant score, so

we can rank students easily. The scores are absolute evaluation, so the gap of their ability is

visible. The formal test also can measure language ability more quickly because each question

has only one answer and marking the answer is easier than the informal test. Because of these

advantages, the formal test is superior to the informal test. Next, we will discuss about problems

with assessing student with formal test.

1.5.4 Problems with assessing students with formal tests

The formal test has some advantages; it is easier and more quickly to rank the students,

however, there are some problems with assessing the students, too. First, the test do not tell us

about their natural ability for learning languages. They can take good scores if they learn

languages harder, so the scores do not depend on their natural ability. If their learning styles and

the amounts of learning languages are different, of course, the scores must be far different.

Secondly, the scores can change due to their conditions. If they are fine, they can take better

score, however, if they are bad, they must take worse score. Their health, motivations and worry

may cause waves of their score on the test. Therefore, we can rank the students by their scores,

but the rank is not always correct actually. There are some problem with the formal tests, so they

treat them carefully.

1.6 What do we know about the relationship between aptitude and　language

ability?

12

People say “he or she has a remarkable aptitude for languages.”,,” but this presumes that

there is proper aptitude for learning languages. On the other hand, they say “he or she can speak

fluent English” and “he or she is clever.” These thoughts comprehend general intelligence and

aptitude for learning English are the same things, so the thought conflicts with the one which

there is a proper aptitude for learning English. We discussed about the importance of aptitude

and language ability. ThenSo, is there a relationship between aptitude and English ability

actually?

There are huge studies of the relationship between aptitude and language ability. Shirai

(2008) used the score in MLAT scores for aptitude and the one inan IQ test for intelligence, and

as a results, he and found out the two abilities had the pretty same partcorrelated. However, they

just are not the same and there is an independent aptitude which is proper for learning languages.

Gardner (1980) showed the interrelation between the score of Modern Language Aptitude Test

for learners who spoke English at Canadian school and the grade of French was r=0.41. From the

results, he said that there was a close relationship between aptitude and language ability. ThenSo

from now, we will measure the subjects’ aptitude and language ability actually, and discuss

about them.

1.7 Research questions

In section 1.6 we looked at the relationship between aptitude and language ability.

Language aptitude has a proper position to learn languages. However, we do not know much

about the actual relationship between aptitude and language ability. So in Chapter Two we will

research about the relationship between aptitude and English ability in some experiments.

13

The research questions are:

1. Is there a relationship between aptitude and English ability?

2. Is there variation between the subjects for aptitude for L2?

1.8 Chapter Summary

In this chapter, we looked at the aptitude test. MLAT is the most popular aptitude test,

and we will use the one of aptitude tests; LLAMA test. We also examine their English ability of

vocabulary learning because vocabulary size is the most important for learning English, and we

will compare it with the result of aptitude test. In Chapter Two, we will look at the results of

experiments about this, and in Chapter Three, we will discuss about there is any relationship

between aptitude and English ability.

14

Chapter 2: Experiment

2.1 Introduction

In Chapter One, we looked at aptitude and the importance of vocabulary size. We have

natural aptitude from our birth and it iseveryone is different each other. There is a proper

aptitude for learning languages, and it is very important for us to study them. Many aptitude

tests which can measure our aptitude exist, but MLAT is the most popular all overin the the

world but it is hard to source. Therefore, wWe will use the LLAMA test to examine our aptitude

in this thesis. AlsoMoreover, when we learn languages we need larger vocabulary size because

they can use the foreign languages easily if they know many words. ThenSo, we wonder can

assess if aptitude and language ability have any connection. In this chapter, we will see if there is

relationship between the subjects’ aptitude and language ability by looking at the results from

some experiments.

2.2 The Experiment

2.2.1 Introduction to the experiment

The main aim of these experiments is to find if there is a relationship between subjects’

aptitude and English ability. We used two experiments from the Internet; LLAMA test and

vocabulary size test. The LLAMA test can examine the subjects’ aptitude for learning languages.

They have to remember 20 characters’ names in an imaginary language with its picture. Then,

they match the names and pictures, depending on their memory. The test can especially measure

their aptitude for learning vocabulary. The vocabulary test has 140 word quiz and the subjects

15

need to choose correct Japanese translation of English words. At first, we will look at the results

of each experiments. Then, we will compare with their results to find out any relationship

between aptitude and English ability.

2.2.2 Method

a) Subject

24 subjects answered these experiments. They were third and fourth year students of

Notre Dame Seishin University, Department of English language and Literature. All of them

were female. Their mother tongue is Japanese and second language is English.

b) The experiments

The subjects took two experiments; one is the aptitude test called LLAMA test

(Lognostics.co.uk, 2008) and the second is the vocabulary size test.

LLAMA test

LLAMA test has 20 characters and the subjects have to remember the character’s

pictures and their names in an artificial strange language in two minutes. The subjects’ task is to

memorize as many names of the twenty objects as they can in time. During two minutes, they

can click the objects as many as they like to memorize the names, but they should not take notes.

When their time is up, they can start the test to match the names and pictures which they

memorized. When they do it, the program will display the name of an object in its central panel,

and wait for you to identify the correct object by clicking it. Finally, the screen display their

score (%) as they work through the test.

16

LLAMA test is a simple vocabulary task, which measures your ability to learn relatively

large amount of vocabulary in a relatively space of time. The program is based on the original

vocabulary learning subtask of Carroll & Sapon (1959), but uses a completely new interface.

This version no longer requires any L1 input, so the test is suitable for using with the subjects of

any L1. The strange words of the characters’ names are real words which are taken from a

Central American language, and they are arbitrarily assigned to the target images.

Vocabulary size test

17

The vocabulary size test (my.vocabularysize.com) has a 140 word quiz. The subjects

should match English words and translations in Japanese. The vocabulary size test can measure

the subjects’ knowledge of the most basic form of a word and assume that they can recognize the

other forms; for example, nation, a noun, can also forms which can be an adjective, or an adverb.

There are also forms which can be made with an affix such as de- or -ing which also modify the

way that the word is used or adds to the basic meanings. For a test of receptive vocabulary

knowledge such as this one, word families are considered to be the most accurate way of

counting words.

c) Procedure

We used two tests; LLAMA test and the vocabulary size test. Each test can examine the

subjects’ ability. First, the LLAMA test can measure their aptitude score as a percentage (%).

The larger scores they get, the easier they can learn English. Secondly, the vocabulary size test

can measure their knowledge of word familiesy. The larger scores they get, the more words

which are needed when they use English they master. The data of the 24 subjects’ test scores

were made into graphs which showed a relationship between aptitude and English ability. We

will discuss about the relationship between of them from the results of two experiments.

2.3 Results

In this section, we will look at the results of the experiments. First, we will see the

subjects’ aptitude for learning English from the results of LLAMA test. Secondly, we would like

to look at the vocabulary size test to understand their English level.

18

2.3.1 Subjects’ aptitude

Table 1 shows the scores of LLAMA test.

Table 1: Data for the scores of LLAMA test

Score 0-20 25-45 50-70 75-100

The number 0 6 13 5

According to Table 1, 6 subjects got 25-45 (an average score), 13 subjects got 50-70 (a

good score) and 5 subjects got 75-100 (an outstandingly good score). Only one subject got full

score. She answered all questions without hesitation. The average score is 25-45, but more than

half subjects got 50-70. Therefore, the subjects have higher aptitude for learning English.

2.3.2 Subjects’ English level

Table 2 shows the scores of the vocabulary size test.

Table 2: Data for the scores of the vocabulary size test

Score 4000～ 5000～ 6000～ 7000～ 8000～ 9000～ 10000～

The number 2 5 3 8 3 2 1

We had the subjects take the vocabulary size test on the Internet, and these results were

shown in Ttable 2. According to this table, 2 subjects got 4000-4999, 5 subjects got 5000-5999, 3

subjects got 6000-6999, 8 subjects got 7000-7999, 3 subjects got 8000-8999, 1 subject got 9000-

9999 and 2 subjects got more than 10000 score.

19

According to Nation (2006), we should have 8000-9000 word families for reading, and

6000-7000 word families for listening if we wish to read native texts comfortably. In addition,

the native speakers have more than 20,000 word families. In this test, the average score of the

subjects wasis 7,317, so they had enough word families which were necessary for listening.

2.3.3 The relationship between subjects’ aptitude and vocabulary size

Table 3 shows the relationship between subjects’ aptitude and vocabulary size.

Table 3: The data for the relationship between subjects’ aptitude and vocabulary size

The Pearson Product Correlation score for these data was r= -0.086 which shows there

was no correlation between aptitude and vocabulary size.

20

Table 3 shows the relationship between subjects’ aptitude and vocabulary size. If there is

a relationship between them, the dots were like a line which was slantingly from the down of left

to the top of right. The higher aptitude they had, the more words they learn. However, according

to the graph, the dots dispersed. Therefore, there was no relationship between aptitude and

vocabulary size, contrary to our expectation.

2.4 Summary

We have looked at the results from two experiments; LLAMA test and the vocabulary

size test. We could learn the subjects have higher ability for aptitude and vocabulary size through

two experiments. They are students who major in English, so their study time for English may

longer than ones who major in other subjects. Therefore, the results of the thesis must be for the

students who have higher ability. In Chapter Two, we found there is no relationship between

aptitude and English ability. In Chapter Three, we will discuss about what these results’ mean.

21

Chapter 3: Discussion

3.1 Introduction

In Chapter One, we looked at aptitude and the importance of vocabulary for learning

English. Aptitude is natural ability not knowledge, understanding, learnt or acquired abilities or

attitude. There is proper aptitude for learning English and we can measure the ability with

LLAMA test. When we learn English deeply, it is most important to increase vocabulary size

because we can use English easily if we know many words. Some experts said the same things,

so we decided to measure the subjects’ vocabulary with the vocabulary size test on the Internet.

In Chapter Two, we looked at the results from two experiments. We found the subjects have high

scores on LLAMA test and the vocabulary size test, however, there is no relationship between

their aptitude and English ability. Now, we will discuss the results from experiments more

detailed and find answers of each search question.

3.2 Summary of the results from the experiments

The vocabulary size test has a 140 word quiz, and the subjects have to match English

words and translation in Japanese. We can measure their word family knowledge by the test.

LLAMA test has 20 pictures which have each name in strange an artificial language, and the

subjects should remember the character’s pictures and their name in two minutes. The subjects’

task is to learn as many names of the twenty characters as they can in the time available. We can

measure their aptitude for learning vocabulary in English through the test. By comparing each

experiment’s data, we can find the answers of the two research questions. Research Question 1

was “Is there a relationship between aptitude and English ability?” The result showed that there

22

were few relationships between aptitude and English ability. Next, Research Question 2 was “Is

there variation between the subjects for aptitude for L2?” The result showed we could find the

variation of each subject’s aptitude. We will look at the particular results for two Research

Questions with charts.

3.3 Discussion of the results

3.3.1 Analysis of the relationship between aptitude and English ability

Research Question 1 was Is there a relationship between aptitude and English ability?

In Chapter Two we looked at the results of LLAMA test and the vocabulary size test

which the subjects took on the Internet, and we would like to look at the distribution of aptitude

and English ability.

According to Table 4, no one had 0-20 (poor score) on the LLAMA test. 33.4% of the

subjects took 25-45 (an average score) had 7000-7999, 33.4% had 8000-8999, 16.7% had 5000-

5999, and 16.7% had 6000-6999. 38.5% of the subjects took 50-70 (a good score) had 7000-

7999, 23.1% had 5000-5999, 15.4% had more than 10000, 7.7% had 4000-4999, 7.7% had 6000-

6999, and 7.7% had 8000-8999. 20.0% of the subjects got 75-100 (an outstandingly good score)

had 4000-4999, 20.0% had 5000-5999, 20.0% had 6000-6999, 20.0% had 7000-7999, and 20.0%

had 9000-9999.

23

Table 4: The data for distribution of aptitude and English ability

LLAMA test

Vocabulary

size test0-20 25-45 50-70 75-100

4000～ 0

(0.0%)

0

(0.0%)

1

(7.7%)

1

(20.0%)

5000～ 0

(0.0%)

1

(16.7%)

3

(23.1%)

1

(20.0%)

6000～ 0

(0.0%)

1

(16.7%)

1

(7.7%)

1

(20.0%)

7000～ 0

(0.0%)

2

(33.4%)

5

(38.5%)

1

(20.0%)

8000～ 0

(0.0%)

2

(33.4%)

1

(7.7%)

0

(0.0%)

9000～ 0

(0.0%)

0

(0.0%)

0

(0.0%)

1

(20.0%)

10000～ 0

(0.0%)

0

(0.0%)

2

(15.4%)

0

(0.0%)

Total 0

(0.0%)

6

(100.0%)

13

(100.0%)

5

(100.0%)

According to Table 4, all of the 24 subjects do not have poor scores. They are third and

fourth year students of Notre Dame Seishin University, Department of English language, so they

may like learning English and be better at English than the students who major in other subjects.

Typically, the higher score the subjects took on LLAMA test, the higher score they took on the

vocabulary size test, too. However, Table 4 showed unexpected results. 7.7% of the subjects who

took 50-70 and 20.0% of those who got a 75-100 score had 4000- 4999 on the vocabulary size

test. People who took more than 50 on LLAMA test must be good learners for English 24

vocabulary, however, they just could had score 4000-4999 on the vocabulary size test. On the

other hand, 15.4% of the subjects who took got 50-70 had more than 10000. People who did not

take an outstandingly good score on LLAMA test could higher score on the vocabulary size test.

We found that the score on LLAMA test did not relate to the one on the vocabulary size test.

From the results, it appears there is no relationship between aptitude and English level.

3.3.2 Analysis of variation between the subjects for aptitude for L2

Research question 2 was Is there variation between the subjects for aptitude for L2?

In Chapter Two we looked at each subject’ score on LLAMA test. Aptitude is natural

ability, so it may have personal equation, so we would like to look at the distribution of aptitude

scores on the test.

Table 5: The data for distribution of LLAMA test score

Score 0-20 25-45 50-70 75-100

The number 0(0%)

6(25.0%)

13(54.2%)

5(20.8%)

According to Table 5, no one had a 0-20 score on the LLAMA test. 25.0% of the subjects

took 25-45 (an average score), 54.2% of them took 50-70 (a good score), and 20.8% of them

took 75-100 (an outstandingly good score). 25-45 score is called an average score, but more than

half of subjects took 50-70 score; a good score. Thus, the subjects must have high English

ability. Also, not everyone does not havehas the same ability. The subject who had highest score

of all took got 100; a full score, and the one who had lowest score of all took got 35. When they

took the test some advanced the test smoothly, others did not do well on it. We found there was

25

an independent aptitude score for each person’s aptitude. From the results, there is variation

between the subjects for aptitude for L2.

3.4 Implications

We have looked at the results of the experiments in Chapter Two and discussed about

them in this chapter. It could be expected that people who had higher score on LLAMA test

could take get a higher score on the vocabulary size test, too. However, the subjects who took got

lower scores on LLAMA test could take get higher scores on the vocabulary size test, and vice

versa. Therefore, we found out there was not so much of a relation between aptitude and English

ability through the experiments. If aptitude for learning English does is not related to English

ability, there may be other important elements for learning English. We will consider whether

there are limitations of the experiments and discuss about improvement in examining the

relationship between aptitude and English ability deeply.

3.5 Limitations of the Experiments

We could see some good results to understand a relationship between aptitude and

English ability, however, there are some limitations with the experiments. Firstly, the number of

subjects was not enough to get the clear differences to see the relationship between them. If more

appropriate number of subjects had took the experiments, we could have got better data. That

was not the adequate number to get more reliable data for checking the differences between

aptitude and English ability. Also all of the subjects were the females who major in English at

Notre Dame Seishin University. They must have stronger motivation for learning English and

spend much time studying it, so they can take better score on the vocabulary size test than the

26

students who do not major in English. If the subjects were from various majors, we could get

more average results of people who learn English as L2.

Secondly, we have to consider each subjects’ learning circumstances. There were some

returnee students or people who had stayed in a foreign country for a long time of the subjects.

They have learned English with people whose mother tongue was English, so they may have

higher English skill. If the circumstances they learned English were different, their scores on the

vocabulary size test were different, too.

Finally, there were many English words which the students did not learn at school; for

example, reptile, cranny, jug, lectern, and so on. Some subjects could answer the meaning, but

others could not do because they learned the word in each place and from each teacher. If we

used TOEIC test which could measure English ability from close scenes to business ones, we

could find out their actual English ability.

3.6 Further research

There are some ideas which we can examine a relationship between aptitude and English

ability more. First, we measured the subjects’ language aptitude with LLAMA test and English

ability with the vocabulary size test in this thesis. However, we should have asked them about

their backgrounds of learning English more carefully because their studying was different from

each other. If their backgrounds are different, there are likely to be big differences of in their

English ability. We also should have focus on the styles of learning English. Some like learning

it by themselves, and others like learning it with teachers or classmates. The differences of

learning style must relate to the ones of their English ability. Therefore, we have to ask them 27

about their learning styles, the length of studying English, motivation for learning it, and so on.

Secondly, when we measured the subjects’ English ability, we focused on their

vocabulary size in this thesis. If we focused on reading, listening, or writing ability, the results

may be different. We have to measure their ability from some aspects to examine their actual

English ability. Therefore, we should measure various English ability and compare them with

their aptitude for learning English.

3.7 Conclusion

This research showed us what is language aptitude and their English ability does not

depend on their natural aptitude for learning English. In these experiments, we could not find a

strong relationship between aptitude and English ability, however, we could see some significant

results about them. If we examine the relationship between them carefully noting the limitations

again, we will find out new discovery about them.

As we saw in this thesis, there is no relationship between language aptitude and English

ability. Each person has each aptitude for learning English and their aptitude does not depend on

their English ability.

28

References

Carrol, J. B. (1973). Implication of aptitude test research and psycholinguistic theory for foreign

language teaching. International Journal of Psycholinguistics.

Carroll, J. B. & Sapon, S. (1959). Modern language aptitude test: From A. NY: Psychological

Corporation.

Carroll, J. B. (1962). The prediction of success in intensive foreign language training. In R.

Graser (Ed.), Training, research and education. NY: Wiley.

Gardner, R. (1980). On the validity of affective variables in second language acquisition: conceptual, contextual and statistical considerations. Language Learning. Volume 30 ,   Issue 2 ,   pages 255–270, December 1980

Meara, P. (1996). “The Dimensions of Lexical Competence,” In Brown, G., Malmkjaer, K. &

Williams, J. (Eds.), Performance and competence in second language acquisition, Cambridge,

UK: Cambridge University Press.

Meara PM, JL Milton and N Lorenzo-Dus. (2002). Language Aptitude Tests. Newbury: Express.

Read, J. (2000). “Assessing Vocabulary in Another Language,” Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

29

Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wesche, M. & Paribakht, T. S. (1999). Introduction, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

Winke, P. M. (2005). Individual differences in adult Chinese second language acquisition:

The relationships among aptitude, memory and strategies for learning. Unpublished Ph. D.

thesis, Georgetown University.

Meara, P. (1996). “The Dimensions of Lexical Competence,” In Brown, G., Malmkjaer, K. &

Williams, J. (Eds.), Performance and competence in second language acquisition, Cambridge,

UK: Cambridge University Press.

Read, J. (2000). “Assessing Vocabulary in Another Language,” Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Gardner, R. (1980). On the validity of affective variables in second language acquisition:

conceptual, contextual and statistical considerations. Language Learning.

向山陽子（2013）『第二言語習得における言語適性の役割』ココ出版

小野博（1994）『バイリンガルの科学』講談社

LLAMA Language Aptitude Tests The Manual　Paul Meara　2014.05

30

<http://www.lognostics.co.uk/tools/llama/llama_manual.pdf>

学習者論　学習者の個人差と第２言語学習.　山崎朝子

<http://www.yc.tcu.ac.jp/~kiyou/no6/1-10.pdf>

第二言語としての語彙習得研究の概観：学習形態　方略の観点から（第２章　語彙の習得）

<http://hdl.handle.net/10083/48949>

「第二言語としての日本語の習得研究－概観、展望、本科研研究の位置づけ－」『第 2

言語としての日本語の習得に関する総合研究』平成 8 年度～平成 10 年度科学研究費補

助金研究成果報告書研究 代表者カッケンブッシュ・寛子 1999

TOEIC　2014. 11.13

<http://www.toeic.or.jp/>

語彙サイズテストは何を測っているのか？－語彙サイズテストの開発における問題－

水本篤　2014.11.17

<http://www.mizumot.com/files/VocSizeMeasure.pdf>

白井恭弘（2008）『外国語学習の科学 ――第二言語習得論とは何か』岩波新書

31