subject: The Large Differences between Reaching 95% and 98% Coverage for the Movie Corpus [print this page] In answer to the first research question, a vocabulary of the most frequent 3,000 word families plus proper nouns and marginal words would provide 95% coverage, and a vocabulary of the most frequent 6,000 word families plus proper nouns and marginal words would provide 98% coverage of movies.
This suggests that if 95% coverage is sufficient for comprehension then movies may be an appropriate source of L2 input for many language learners. Learning the most frequent 3,000 word families should be an attainable goal in both the EFL and ESL learning context.
However, if 98% coverage is necessary for comprehension then understanding movies may prove to be too difficult for many learners and an appropriate source of L2 input only for more advanced learners unless additional support is given.
It is important to note the large differences between reaching 95% and 98% coverage for the movie corpus as well as within Chanel Jewelry the genres. For all of the movies in the study, the difference between reaching 95% and 98% coverage were 3,000 word families.
Thus, to move from 95% coverage, at which point viewers need to know the most frequent 3,000 word families, to 98% coverage, viewers will need twice the vocabulary size. When individual genres were examined, the difference between reaching 95% and 98% coverage was as large as 6,000 word families.
Overall the results indicate that if 95% coverage is sufficient for comprehension and incidental learning, the 3,000 word families necessary may be an attainable target vocabulary size for most learners and movies could become a valuable learning resource.
However, if 98% coverage is necessary, reaching the target vocabulary size may be too difficult a task for many learners and movies should probably not be used without providing some learning support.
We suggest that teachers and learners target receptive knowledge of the most frequent 3,000 word families as the minimum vocabulary size necessary to watch movies for language learning.
There are several reasons for this. First, research indicates that combined visual and aural input can be at least as effective as learning vocabulary solely through written input.
Second, research indicates that the combination of visual and aural input may make comprehension of movies easier than listening comprehension (Mueller 1980; Hanley et al. 1995), and the amount of visual input which is presented in movies is likely to facilitate comprehension.
Third, while 98% coverage or higher may be ideal, it is likely that coverage lower than 95% may also provide adequate comprehension and facilitate incidental vocabulary learning on occasion. However, comprehension and incidental learning will likely improve with higher coverage.
In fact, higher coverage should always be the aim particularly when learners are watching their first L2 movies. Coverage below 95% may often lead to poor comprehension and may discourage learners.
Thus we believe that knowledge of the most frequent 3,000 word families should be the prerequisite vocabulary size for L2 Jewelry On Sale learning with movies. Fourth, movies may provide a large amount of L2 aural input in a form which learners are motivated to use.
In an EFL context, where there is likely to be a great amount of learning from written text, movies could be used to both improve listening skills, learn vocabulary, and focus on specific language points. Together, movies and books may provide both written and aural input which should lead to greater vocabulary knowledge than through written input alone.
The Large Differences between Reaching 95% and 98% Coverage for the Movie Corpus
By: endeavor
welcome to Insurances.net (https://www.insurances.net)
