본 논문의 목적은 한국인 대학생을 대상으로 하여, 중국어의 수용적 어휘량과 생 산적 어휘량의 차이, 수용적 어휘와 생산적 어휘의 난이도 차이를 분석하는 데 있다. 분석 결과 생산적 어휘 정답률 27.66%이고 생산적 어휘량은 691.5개로 분석되었다. 수용적 어휘 정답률은 74.57%이고 어휘량은 1864개였다. 수용적 어휘량과 생산적 어 휘량은 거의 세 배 차이가 났다. 같은 어휘여도 생산적 어휘 지식이 더 어렵다는 것 을 알 수 있었다. 다음은 문항반응이론에 입각한 난이도 분석 결과다. 첫째, 수용적 어휘와 생산적 어휘는 HSK 급수가 높아질수록 난이도가 높아졌다. 둘째, 수용적 어휘에 비해 생산적 어휘의 난이도는 상당히 높았다. 셋째, 수용적 어휘와 생산적 어휘 목록이 비대칭을 보였다. 예를 들어 HSK 2급 어휘 ‘雪, 教室, 左边’은 수용적 지식 난이도 목록에서는 ‘매우 쉽다’, ‘쉽다’에 속했지만 생산적 어휘 목록에서는 ‘어렵다’에 속했다.

The present study aims to investigate the direct and indirect contributions of Korean EFL college students’ L2 receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge to their L2 writing performances by using a structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis with a goal to explore the pathways of vocabulary knowledge to writing. Data from 178 students were collected through tests of receptive and productive vocabulary breadth and depth, a writing test and a reading test. In testing a hypothesized model on the roles of receptive and productive vocabulary in writing, the results of the SEM analysis reveal the direct role of productive vocabulary in writing. The indirect role of receptive vocabulary on writing was observed through the mediating role of productive vocabulary or reading ability due to the direct contribution of receptive vocabulary to both productive vocabulary and reading and that of productive vocabulary and reading to writing. Findings from the study shed light on the relations of L2 receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge with L2 writing abilities, suggesting potential benefits of both receptive and productive vocabulary learning for L2 writing.

This article reports on a study that compared EFL freshman university students’receptive and productive recall vocabulary knowledge and their ability to use that knowledge, as it remains unclear in the literature to what extent knowledge of vocabulary, especially productive knowledge, is indicative of learners’ ability to use vocabulary to communicate. The study first measured the vocabulary size of 169students from 24 majors. Next, deeper meaning word knowledge and vocabulary userelated knowledge were assessed by administering depth tests to 51 of the students who completed the size tests. The study found that the participants were able to use only 60.3% of the words that were known receptively and productively on the size tests, and that receptive deeper meaning vocabulary knowledge was 43.0% greater than productive knowledge. Finally, the study results support the concept of a vocabulary knowledge continuum, but highlight the importance of including both receptive and productive knowledge, as they were found to develop in a dissimilar manner.

The realization that there is a mismatch between the vocabulary level presented in the Korean National Curriculum, and the required vocabulary size for EFL (English as a Foreign Language) high school learners to take the high-stakes Korean College Scholastic Ability Test stimulated the researchers of the present study to administer an assessment of Korean high school learners’ vocabulary sizes. Measurement of vocabulary knowledge was conducted with the adaptation of Nation’s bilingual vocabulary size test, receptive and productive, by improving construct validity of the items. Learners were tested for the 1st ~ 10th 1,000 word bands to ascertain learners’ vocabulary size at each level. The assessment of vocabulary size demonstrated receptive vocabulary knowledge to be as large as 6,000 words. However, unforeseen rises in the EFL learners’ vocabulary sizes at some word bands were observed, which seem to have emerged from the educational milieu and the predominant focus on receptive lexical knowledge and the testing of them. Suggestions are proposed for the revision of word list of the National Curriculum, which would become the blueprint for controlling vocabulary level in the development of national textbooks of English.