Examining the Effect of Semantic Relatedness on the Acquisition of English Collocations
This study examines whether semantic relatedness facilitates or impedes the acquisition of English collocations by conducting two experiments respectively on Chinese undergraduates. Each experiment was composed of a reading session, a productive test, and a receptive test. Experiment 1 began with th...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of psycholinguistic research 2020-04, Vol.49 (2), p.199-222 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 222 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 199 |
| container_title | Journal of psycholinguistic research |
| container_volume | 49 |
| creator | Jiang, Michael Yi-chao Jong, Morris Siu-yung Tse, Chi-shing Chai, Ching-sing |
| description | This study examines whether semantic relatedness facilitates or impedes the acquisition of English collocations by conducting two experiments respectively on Chinese undergraduates. Each experiment was composed of a reading session, a productive test, and a receptive test. Experiment 1 began with the reading session of 28 paired-up words and their collocations (in sentence context). Those words were counterbalanced between two randomly selected groups by cross-matching on semantic relatedness. Results of the productive test revealed that the participants scored significantly higher on test items that were semantically related than the randomly cross-paired counterparts. However, for the receptive test, the participants performed significantly better on semantically unrelated items. Experiment 2 was similar to Experiment 1 except that the word pairs selected were only semantically related and did not have any shared morphemes. Experiment 2 also revealed consistent results. The results of the two experiments consistently illustrate that semantic relatedness may exert a facilitatory effect on language output but an inhibitory effect on the process of language input. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10936-019-09680-9 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2318744579</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1251381</ericid><sourcerecordid>2318744579</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c348t-55bc9e0b884f8478b35eb65b332eda273c70a33a91a08ddaeb5bbafabb220a473</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1L5TAUhoOMjFdn_oDgUHDjps5J0zTJUi6dDxEEZ4ZZhiQ9vUbaVJsWnH9v7q2j4MJVOHmfvDk8hBxTOKcA4mukoFiVA1U5qEpCrvbIinLB8opz_oGsABTklQJ-QA5jvIM0S0k_kgNGRSUl8BX5Wz-a3gcfNtl0i1ndtuimbGizX9ibMHmX3WBnJmwCxpgNYUdduIfZRz_5NCe0DpvOx9tsPXTd4Mz2On4i-63pIn5-Po_In2_17_WP_Or6-8_1xVXuWCmnnHPrFIKVsmxlKaRlHG3FLWMFNqYQzAkwjBlFDcimMWi5taY11hYFmFKwI3K29N6Pw8OMcdK9jw67zgQc5qgLRqUoSy5UQk_foHfDPIa0XaJUWUpVCZaoYqHcOMQ4YqvvR9-b8Z-moLfa9aJdJ-16p11vq788V8-2x-blyX_PCThZABy9e4nrS1pwyiRNOVvymLKwwfF1t3e-fQJiUpbx</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2394489673</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Examining the Effect of Semantic Relatedness on the Acquisition of English Collocations</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Jiang, Michael Yi-chao ; Jong, Morris Siu-yung ; Tse, Chi-shing ; Chai, Ching-sing</creator><creatorcontrib>Jiang, Michael Yi-chao ; Jong, Morris Siu-yung ; Tse, Chi-shing ; Chai, Ching-sing</creatorcontrib><description>This study examines whether semantic relatedness facilitates or impedes the acquisition of English collocations by conducting two experiments respectively on Chinese undergraduates. Each experiment was composed of a reading session, a productive test, and a receptive test. Experiment 1 began with the reading session of 28 paired-up words and their collocations (in sentence context). Those words were counterbalanced between two randomly selected groups by cross-matching on semantic relatedness. Results of the productive test revealed that the participants scored significantly higher on test items that were semantically related than the randomly cross-paired counterparts. However, for the receptive test, the participants performed significantly better on semantically unrelated items. Experiment 2 was similar to Experiment 1 except that the word pairs selected were only semantically related and did not have any shared morphemes. Experiment 2 also revealed consistent results. The results of the two experiments consistently illustrate that semantic relatedness may exert a facilitatory effect on language output but an inhibitory effect on the process of language input.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0090-6905</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-6555</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10936-019-09680-9</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31768805</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Adult ; Behavioral Science and Psychology ; China ; Chinese languages ; Cognitive Psychology ; Collocations ; English (Second Language) ; English as a second language learning ; Experiments ; Foreign Countries ; Humans ; Item Analysis ; Language Tests ; Language Tests - statistics & numerical data ; Linguistic Input ; Morphemes ; Multilingualism ; Phrase Structure ; Psycholinguistics ; Psychology ; Reading ; Reading Tests ; Receptive Language ; Second Language Instruction ; Second Language Learning ; Semantics ; Semiotics ; Test Items ; Undergraduate Students ; Vocabulary ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2020-04, Vol.49 (2), p.199-222</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c348t-55bc9e0b884f8478b35eb65b332eda273c70a33a91a08ddaeb5bbafabb220a473</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6807-4039</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10936-019-09680-9$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10936-019-09680-9$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1251381$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31768805$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jiang, Michael Yi-chao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jong, Morris Siu-yung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tse, Chi-shing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chai, Ching-sing</creatorcontrib><title>Examining the Effect of Semantic Relatedness on the Acquisition of English Collocations</title><title>Journal of psycholinguistic research</title><addtitle>J Psycholinguist Res</addtitle><addtitle>J Psycholinguist Res</addtitle><description>This study examines whether semantic relatedness facilitates or impedes the acquisition of English collocations by conducting two experiments respectively on Chinese undergraduates. Each experiment was composed of a reading session, a productive test, and a receptive test. Experiment 1 began with the reading session of 28 paired-up words and their collocations (in sentence context). Those words were counterbalanced between two randomly selected groups by cross-matching on semantic relatedness. Results of the productive test revealed that the participants scored significantly higher on test items that were semantically related than the randomly cross-paired counterparts. However, for the receptive test, the participants performed significantly better on semantically unrelated items. Experiment 2 was similar to Experiment 1 except that the word pairs selected were only semantically related and did not have any shared morphemes. Experiment 2 also revealed consistent results. The results of the two experiments consistently illustrate that semantic relatedness may exert a facilitatory effect on language output but an inhibitory effect on the process of language input.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Behavioral Science and Psychology</subject><subject>China</subject><subject>Chinese languages</subject><subject>Cognitive Psychology</subject><subject>Collocations</subject><subject>English (Second Language)</subject><subject>English as a second language learning</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>Foreign Countries</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Item Analysis</subject><subject>Language Tests</subject><subject>Language Tests - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Linguistic Input</subject><subject>Morphemes</subject><subject>Multilingualism</subject><subject>Phrase Structure</subject><subject>Psycholinguistics</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Reading</subject><subject>Reading Tests</subject><subject>Receptive Language</subject><subject>Second Language Instruction</subject><subject>Second Language Learning</subject><subject>Semantics</subject><subject>Semiotics</subject><subject>Test Items</subject><subject>Undergraduate Students</subject><subject>Vocabulary</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0090-6905</issn><issn>1573-6555</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1L5TAUhoOMjFdn_oDgUHDjps5J0zTJUi6dDxEEZ4ZZhiQ9vUbaVJsWnH9v7q2j4MJVOHmfvDk8hBxTOKcA4mukoFiVA1U5qEpCrvbIinLB8opz_oGsABTklQJ-QA5jvIM0S0k_kgNGRSUl8BX5Wz-a3gcfNtl0i1ndtuimbGizX9ibMHmX3WBnJmwCxpgNYUdduIfZRz_5NCe0DpvOx9tsPXTd4Mz2On4i-63pIn5-Po_In2_17_WP_Or6-8_1xVXuWCmnnHPrFIKVsmxlKaRlHG3FLWMFNqYQzAkwjBlFDcimMWi5taY11hYFmFKwI3K29N6Pw8OMcdK9jw67zgQc5qgLRqUoSy5UQk_foHfDPIa0XaJUWUpVCZaoYqHcOMQ4YqvvR9-b8Z-moLfa9aJdJ-16p11vq788V8-2x-blyX_PCThZABy9e4nrS1pwyiRNOVvymLKwwfF1t3e-fQJiUpbx</recordid><startdate>20200401</startdate><enddate>20200401</enddate><creator>Jiang, Michael Yi-chao</creator><creator>Jong, Morris Siu-yung</creator><creator>Tse, Chi-shing</creator><creator>Chai, Ching-sing</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7T9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8BM</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>CPGLG</scope><scope>CRLPW</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6807-4039</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200401</creationdate><title>Examining the Effect of Semantic Relatedness on the Acquisition of English Collocations</title><author>Jiang, Michael Yi-chao ; Jong, Morris Siu-yung ; Tse, Chi-shing ; Chai, Ching-sing</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c348t-55bc9e0b884f8478b35eb65b332eda273c70a33a91a08ddaeb5bbafabb220a473</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Behavioral Science and Psychology</topic><topic>China</topic><topic>Chinese languages</topic><topic>Cognitive Psychology</topic><topic>Collocations</topic><topic>English (Second Language)</topic><topic>English as a second language learning</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>Foreign Countries</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Item Analysis</topic><topic>Language Tests</topic><topic>Language Tests - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Linguistic Input</topic><topic>Morphemes</topic><topic>Multilingualism</topic><topic>Phrase Structure</topic><topic>Psycholinguistics</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Reading</topic><topic>Reading Tests</topic><topic>Receptive Language</topic><topic>Second Language Instruction</topic><topic>Second Language Learning</topic><topic>Semantics</topic><topic>Semiotics</topic><topic>Test Items</topic><topic>Undergraduate Students</topic><topic>Vocabulary</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jiang, Michael Yi-chao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jong, Morris Siu-yung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tse, Chi-shing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chai, Ching-sing</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ComDisDome</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Education Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Psychology</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of psycholinguistic research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jiang, Michael Yi-chao</au><au>Jong, Morris Siu-yung</au><au>Tse, Chi-shing</au><au>Chai, Ching-sing</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1251381</ericid><atitle>Examining the Effect of Semantic Relatedness on the Acquisition of English Collocations</atitle><jtitle>Journal of psycholinguistic research</jtitle><stitle>J Psycholinguist Res</stitle><addtitle>J Psycholinguist Res</addtitle><date>2020-04-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>49</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>199</spage><epage>222</epage><pages>199-222</pages><issn>0090-6905</issn><eissn>1573-6555</eissn><abstract>This study examines whether semantic relatedness facilitates or impedes the acquisition of English collocations by conducting two experiments respectively on Chinese undergraduates. Each experiment was composed of a reading session, a productive test, and a receptive test. Experiment 1 began with the reading session of 28 paired-up words and their collocations (in sentence context). Those words were counterbalanced between two randomly selected groups by cross-matching on semantic relatedness. Results of the productive test revealed that the participants scored significantly higher on test items that were semantically related than the randomly cross-paired counterparts. However, for the receptive test, the participants performed significantly better on semantically unrelated items. Experiment 2 was similar to Experiment 1 except that the word pairs selected were only semantically related and did not have any shared morphemes. Experiment 2 also revealed consistent results. The results of the two experiments consistently illustrate that semantic relatedness may exert a facilitatory effect on language output but an inhibitory effect on the process of language input.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>31768805</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10936-019-09680-9</doi><tpages>24</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6807-4039</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0090-6905 |
| ispartof | Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2020-04, Vol.49 (2), p.199-222 |
| issn | 0090-6905 1573-6555 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2318744579 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals |
| subjects | Adult Behavioral Science and Psychology China Chinese languages Cognitive Psychology Collocations English (Second Language) English as a second language learning Experiments Foreign Countries Humans Item Analysis Language Tests Language Tests - statistics & numerical data Linguistic Input Morphemes Multilingualism Phrase Structure Psycholinguistics Psychology Reading Reading Tests Receptive Language Second Language Instruction Second Language Learning Semantics Semiotics Test Items Undergraduate Students Vocabulary Young Adult |
| title | Examining the Effect of Semantic Relatedness on the Acquisition of English Collocations |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-30T09%3A39%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Examining%20the%20Effect%20of%20Semantic%20Relatedness%20on%20the%20Acquisition%20of%20English%20Collocations&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20psycholinguistic%20research&rft.au=Jiang,%20Michael%20Yi-chao&rft.date=2020-04-01&rft.volume=49&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=199&rft.epage=222&rft.pages=199-222&rft.issn=0090-6905&rft.eissn=1573-6555&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10936-019-09680-9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2318744579%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2394489673&rft_id=info:pmid/31768805&rft_ericid=EJ1251381&rfr_iscdi=true |