© University Publication Centre (UPENA), UiTM 2009

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,

copied, stored in any retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by
any means – electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise;
without prior permission in writing from the Director of University
Publication Centre (UPENA), Universiti Teknologi MARA, 40450 Shah
Alam, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia.
e-mail: upena@salam.uitm.edu.my
Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
International Conference ILLANNS (2nd : 2009 : Shah ALam)
Issues in language teaching and learning amongst non-native speakers :
language competence and performance : proceedings 2nd International
Conference Issues in Language Teaching and Learning Amongst Non-Native
Speakers (ILLANNS) 2009, Concorde Hotel, Shah Alam, Selangor, 2-3 December
2009.
ISBN 978-967-305-476-3 (V. I)
ISBN 978-967-305-481-7 (V. II)
1. English language--Study and teaching--Malaysia--Congresses. 2. Language
and languages--Study and teaching--Malaysia--Congresses. 3. Language and
education--Malaysia--Congresses. I. Title.
- 428.007109595
Vocabulary Learning Strategies of Students Learning Mandarin 181-190
as a Foreign Language
Tan Teow Ghee & Hoe Foo Terng

Vocabulary Learning Strategies of Students

Learning Mandarin as a Foreign Language
Tan Teow Ghee
Hoe Foo Terng
MARA University of Technology Malaysia
Abstract
This study investigated the vocabulary learning strategies employed by a group of Malay
diploma students learning Mandarin as a third language at a Malaysian public university.
These students are pursuing their study at the Faculty of Hotel Management and Tourism
where they study Mandarin to fulfill their academic requirement. The objectives of the
study are to examine the vocabulary learning strategies used among the students, and the
differences in strategies used by genders. Eighty six students voluntarily participated in
the study where by they were required to complete a questionnaire regarding vocabulary
learning strategies which was adapted from Oxford’s (1990) the Strategy Inventory for
Language Learning (SILL version 7). All completed questionnaires were used for data
analysis. The data was analyzed by means of frequency counts, average means and
standard deviation to compile demographics of the participants and to calculate the
vocabulary learning strategies used. Independent sample T-test was used to compare the
differences of vocabulary learning strategies used between genders. The results revealed
that overall vocabulary learning strategies was moderately used by the students. The
students mostly preferred cognitive strategies to learn vocabulary, followed by memory
strategies, and social strategies. Metacognitive strategies was the least preferred used
category. The study also found that there were no significant statistical differences
between the genders in the vocabulary learning strategies used.
1. INTRODUCTION
Vocabulary has been recognized as essential to language use. It is one of the basics of
communication and a necessary component in learners’ language development (David,
2008). Inadequate vocabulary knowledge could lead to learners’ difficulties such as lack
of meaningful communication. It is believed that a large amount of vocabulary can be
acquired with the help of vocabulary learning strategies (VLS) and that the strategies
proved useful for students of different language levels (Nation, 2001). As a result, VLS
has been an area of interest for psychologists, linguists, and language teachers for a long
time (Levenston, 1979).
A growing interest in VLS has been noticed in English as Second Language or Foreign
Language (ESL/EFL) researchers since the mid-1980s (Ming Wei, 2007) especially after
Meare (1980) described vocabulary acquisition research as a forgotten area of second and
foreign language acquisition research. However, VLS for foreign language has only been
investigated as a whole since mid 1990s starting with Stoffer (1995, cited in Kudo, 1999)
Proceedings ILANNS Issues in Language Teaching and Learning
182
and Schmidtt (1997). To date, compared to ESL/EFL studies in VLS, there is still a lack
of VLS research on acquisition of other languages as a foreign language.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
As mentioned earlier, VLS is a subcategory of language learning strategies, which is
defined by Oxford (1990, p.8) as “specific actions taken by the learner to make learning
easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self directed, more effective, and more transferable to
new situations.” VLS constitutes knowledge about what students do to find out the
meaning of new words, retain them in long-term memory, recall them when needed in
comprehension, and use them in language production (Catalan 2003).
Since 1990s, numerous studies have attempted to categorize VLS taxonomies (Gu &
Johnson, 1996; Kudo, 1999; Nation, 2001; Schmitt, 1997; Stoffer, 1995, cited in Kudo,
1999). Some were categorized based on the results obtained (e.g. Stoffer 1995; cited in
Kudo, 1999; Kudo, 1999), some were not (e.g. Schmidtt, 1997). However, most of these
attempts reflect more or less the same classifications of VLS without any drastic
differences.
The classification work started with Stoffer (1995, cited in Kudo, 1999) as the first
researcher who investigated VLS as a whole. She clustered VLS into nine categories:
• strategies involving authentic language use
• strategies used for self-motivation
• strategies used to organize words
• strategies used to create mental linkages
• memory strategies
• strategies involving creative activities
• strategies involving physical action
• strategies used to overcome anxiety
• auditory strategies
The classification work continued with Gu and Johnson (1996). They created a taxonomy
which identified six types of strategy:
• Guessing strategies
• Dictionary strategies
• Note-taking strategies
• Rehearsal strategies
• Encoding strategies
• Activation strategies
Next came Schmitt (1997). The taxonomy of Schmitt’s (1997) VLS was adapted from
Oxford’s (1990) language learning strategies. However, he excluded Oxford’s affective
and compensation strategies as categories and shifted some of the strategies to other
groups. In addition, Schmitt introduced another category, determination strategies, in
order to include cases where meanings of new words are recognized without assistance by
other people. Under Schmitt’s taxonomy, VLS is categorized into six main categories and
further grouped into discovery strategies and consolidation strategies. Discovery
strategies consist of strategies which learners use to discover denotation of new words
Vocabulary Learning Strategies of Students Learning Mandarin as a Foreign Language
183
when they first encounter them. It includes determination and social strategies. On the
other hand, consolidation strategies are strategies used for consolidating the new words. It
comprises social, memory, cognitive, and meta-cognitive strategies.
Although the most comprehensive effort has been that of Schmitt (1997), other
researchers after him still tried to categorize VLS. Kudo (1999) categorizes VLS into
four: memory, cognitive, social, and metacognitive strategies whereas, Nation (2001)
categorized VLS into three general classes:
• Planning : choosing what to focus on and when to focus on it.
• Sources : finding information about words.
• Processes : establishing knowledge
Very recently, Ming Wei (2007) classified VLS into eight groups: dictionary use,
rehearsal, management, sources, guessing, encoding, activation and vocabulary
perceptions.
Besides classification, the earlier VLS researches were interested to find out the
commonly used strategy by the learners. O’Malley et al. (1985) found that repetition was
the most commonly used strategy, and strategies much less frequently used were
strategies involving manipulation of information such as imagery, inferencing, and
Keyword Method. However, Chiang’s (2004) recent research work in Taiwan found that
the learners tended to use more dictionary strategies and contextual guessing strategies.
On the other hand, most of the researches also indicated that good learners used more
VLS than the poor learners (Ahmed, 1989; Fan, 2003; Kojic-Sabo & Lightbown, 1999;
Ming Wei, 2007). Besides, there were different preferences of VLS too. Ahmed’s (1989)
study involving Sudanese EFL learners found that good learners paid more attention to
collocation and spelling, and were more conscious of contextual learning. In contrast, the
poor learners not only refused to use the dictionary, they almost always ignored unknown
words. Weaker learners are also found to be relatively unable to transfer their knowledge
into SL/FL contexts (Prince, 1996).
Ming Wei’s (2007) study indicated that there was an average use of learning strategies
among the learners. In addition, contextualized activation and management strategies
were seldom used as compared to the dictionary use, rehearsal, sources, guessing,
encoding, and vocabulary perceptions. Kudo’s (1999) study showed that cognitive
strategies was the most frequently used, followed by memory strategies and metacognitive
strategies, whereas social strategies was the least frequently used.
Gender differences in VLS have also received some attention from the researchers. Many
studies corroborated finding that females were significantly more willing than males to try
out new vocabulary learning strategies (Gu, 2002; Oxford, Lavine, Hollaway, Felkins, &
Saleh, 1996; Young & Oxford, 1997). In addition, Catalan’s (2003) study on 581 Spanishspeaking
students learning Basque and English as SL/FL postulated that percentages of
female overall VLS usage are higher than those of the males. However, Ming Wei‘s
(2007) study showed contradicting result which indicated insignificant difference between
genders.
Proceedings ILANNS Issues in Language Teaching and Learning
184
3. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The present study intends to examine the VLS used by a group of Malay diploma students
learning Mandarin as a third language in a Malaysian public university. The objectives of
this study are:
1. To investigate the VLS used among Malay diploma programme students learning
Mandarin as a third language,
2. To examine the difference of gender preferences in VLS used among Malay diploma
programme students learning Mandarin as a third language.
4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Due to the importance of vocabulary learning in language and the lack of study conducted
on Malay students learning Mandarin as a third language, is study attempted to seek
answers to the following research questions:
1. What are the VLS commonly used by Malay diploma students learning Mandarin as a
third language?
2. Do the male and female Malay diploma students learning Mandarin as foreign
language prefer the same VLS in learning vocabulary?
5. METHODS
5.1 The Participants
The participants of the study were 86 university diploma students who were pursuing
their study in the Faculty of Hotel Management and Tourism at a branch campus of a
Malaysian public university which only caters for Bumiputera students. The students were
learning elementary Mandarin Level One, Two or Three during semester December
2008– April 2009. All these students are bilingual in Malay language and English. Those
who have background of Mandarin before they registered for the course were excluded
from the study.
Among the 86 participants, 16 of them were male (19%), and 70 were female (81%). Nine
of them aged between 17-18 (10.5%). 66 of them were in the age bracket of 19-20
(76.7%) and 11 of them 21-23 (13.7%). 22 (25.6 %) of them were learning elementary
Mandarin level one, 43 (50%) level two, and 21 (24.4 %) level three. The demographic
data of the participants is illustrated in Table 1.
Table 1: Demographic of participants
Gender Male: 16(19%) Female: 70 (81 %)
Age 17-18: 9 (10.5 %) 19-20: 66 (76.7 %) 21-23: 11 (13.7%)
Course level Level I: 22 (25.6 %) Level II: 43 (50 %) Level III: 21 (24.4 %)
5.2 Instrument
A set of questionnaire was used in the study as the instrument to gather information. This
set of questionnaire consists of two parts. The first part consists of questions about the
demographic data of the participant. The second part consists of VLS items. All the items
Vocabulary Learning Strategies of Students Learning Mandarin as a Foreign Language
185
were adapted from items regarding VLS of Oxford’s (1990) Strategy Inventory for
Language Learning (SILL version 7.0). The SILL has been employed as a key instrument
in numerous studies and has reported its Cronbach alpha reliability coefficients from .85
to .98 in those studies (Bremner, 1998; Oxford & Burry-Stock,1995, Park,1997; Wharton,
2000). This makes it a trusted measure for gauging students’ reported language learning
strategies. Furthermore, the Cronbach alpha reliability coefficients of this VLS
questionnaire is 0.90. This shows that the questionnaire not only meets the established
reliability criterion but also it has satisfactory high reliability too.
To avoid any ambiguity the students might face, the questionnaire is written in the
respondents’ mother language. This VLS questionnaire consists of a series of statements
to which participants are asked to respond on a five-point Likert scale range from 1 to 5.
A range of 3.5-5.0 on a SILL item is thought to reflect high use of that strategy, 2.5-3.4
medium use, and 1.0-2.4 low use (Oxford, 1990).
This VLS questionnaire consists of items from four VLS categories, that is, social
strategies, cognitive strategies, memory strategies and meta-cognitive strategies. Social
strategies are used to understand a word “by asking someone who knows it” (Schmitt,
1997, p.210); memory strategies are “approaches which relate new materials to existing
knowledge” (Schmitt, 1997, p. 205); cognitive strategies are featured as “manipulation or
transformation of the target language by the learner”(Oxford,1990, p. 43). Lastly, metacognitive
strategies are defined as “a conscious overview of the learning process and
making decisions about planning, monitoring or evaluating the best way of study”
(Schmitt, 1997, p. 205).
5.3 Data Analyses
The data collected was analysed using SPSS 16.0.
5.3.1 The VLS Preferred by the Students
As shown in Table 2, the overall VLS were medium frequently used (M= 3.37, SD=.52)
by the students. Among all VLS categories, cognitive strategies (M = 3.69, SD=.54) were
the most frequently used strategies, followed by memory strategies (M = 3.37, SD=.62)
and social strategies (M = 3.34, SD=.53). The least preferred categories was metacognitive
strategies (M = 3.08, SD=.70).
Table 2: The Average Means of VLS Used by the Participants (N = 86)
Cognitive Metacognitive Social Memory Overall
Mean 3.69 3.08 3.34 3.37 3.37
Std. Deviation .54 .70 .63 .62 .52
Minimum 2.25 1.25 2.00 1.70 2.18
Maximum 4.88 4.50 4.75 4.60 4.46
Rank 1 4 3 2
Proceedings ILANNS Issues in Language Teaching and Learning
186
From all the individual VLS included in the questionnaire, 15 strategies (53.6 %) were
reported to be high frequently used by the respondents (M= 3.50 – 4.26). 12 strategies
(42.8 %) were medium frequently used (M= 2.5 – 3.49) and only 1 strategy (3.6 %) was
least frequently used (M= 2.39). Table 3 shows the six most frequently used VLS
descriptions, and Table 4 showed the three least frequently used VLS.
Table 3: The Six Very High Frequently Used VLS
Item Descriptions Means
12 I write notes beside the new words. 4.26
8. I ask my teacher/ friend for the word I do not know. 4.25
30. I practise the sound of the new words. 4.22
7. I ask my teacher/ friend for the meaning of the words. 4.17
3. I use the word list in the text book to help me to use the new language. 4.12
14. I jot down the new words in a notebook. 4.08
Table 4: The Three Least Frequently Used Strategies
Item Descriptions means
5. I try to learn words not in the text book as many as I can. 2.80
10. I study and practice meaning in a group outside the class. 2.56
11 I quiz with my close friend outside the class. 2.39
5.3.2 The VLS Used between Genders
Table 5: The Average Means of VLS Used by the Female Participants (n = 70)
As shown in Table 5, the overall VLS were medium frequently used by the female
students (M= 3.39, SD=.54). Among all VLS categories, cognitive strategies (M = 3.72,
SD=.51) were the most frequently used strategies, followed by memory strategies (M =
3.40, SD=.63) and social strategies (M = 3.34, SD=.66). The least preferred categories
was metacognitive strategies (M = 3.10, SD=.71).
Table 6: The Average Means of VLS Used by the Male Participants (n= 16)
Cognitive Metacognitive Social Memory Overall
Mean 3.72 3.10 3.34 3.40 3.39
Std. Deviation .51 .71 .66 .63 .54
Minimum 2.50 1.25 2.00 1.70 2.18
Maximum 4.75 4.50 4.75 4.60 4.46
Rank 1 4 3 2
Cognitive Metacognitive Social Memory Overall
Mean 3.57 2.96 3.34 3.25 3.28
Std. Deviation .65 .68 .45 .57 .41
Minimum 2.25 2.00 2.25 1.90 2.41
Maximum 4.88 4.50 4.00 4.00 3.94
Rank 1 4 2 3
Vocabulary Learning Strategies of Students Learning Mandarin as a Foreign Language
187
The average means of all VLS categories for male students is illustrated on Table 6.
The overall VLS were also medium frequently used by the male students (M= 3.28,
SD=.41). Among all VLS categories, cognitive strategies (M = 3.57, SD=.65) were the
most frequently used strategies, followed by social strategies (M = 3.34, SD=.45) and
memory strategies (M = 3.25, SD=.57). The least preferred categories were metacognitive
strategies (M = 2.96, SD=.68).
5.3.3 The Comparison of VLS Used between Genders
The independent samples T-test was used to find out the differences of VLS used between
the genders. The result is shown in Table 7 - Cognitive strategies (t(84) =-.32, p=.40),
metacognitive strategies (t(84) =-.70, p=.48), social strategies (t(84) =-.02, p=.99),
memory strategies (t(84) =-.77, p=.40) and overall strategies (t(84) = -.75, p=.45). The p
values for all the comparison of VLS used are greater than .05. These indicate that there
are no significant differences between genders on the VLS used.
Table 7: The Comparison of VLS Used between the Genders (df=84)
Cognitive Metacognitive Social Memory Overall
Male 3.57 2.96 3.32 3.25 3.28
Female 3.72 3.10 3.34 3.40 3.39
t -.32 -.70 -.02 -.77 -.75
Sig.
(2-tailed) .40 .48 .99 .40 .45
6. DISCUSSION
6.1 Overall strategy use
The data shows that the average mean of overall VLS ranged from 2.18 to 4.46, with a
mean of 3.37 (SD = .52). This indicates an overall moderate VLS is used by the learners.
The result is consistent with Ming Wei’s (2007) study. There were six most frequently
used strategies, with a mean above 4. Among these six items, items 3, 12, 14 and 30 are
cognitive strategies; while items 7 and 8 are social strategies. On the other hand, among
the three least frequently used strategies, item 5 is a metacognitive strategy; while items
10 and 12 are social strategies. Only item 12 had a mean value below 2.5 (M =2.39). This
indicates that only one strategy was infrequently used by the learners. The findings also
revealed that the students preferred to use cognitive strategies most followed by memory
strategies. This is similar to a previous study done by Kudo (1999).
6.2 VLS Used by Genders
The results show the male and female students used almost the same VLS in learning
Mandarin. The only difference was the male preferred social strategies to memory
strategies as compared to the females. Besides, the means of male for all the VLS
categories were lesser than the female. In order to evaluate whether there were significant
differences in the VLS used between the male and female students, an independent Proceedings
ILANNS Issues in Language Teaching and Learning
188
samples T test was calculated to compare the means of these two groups. The test for all
the comparison results were not significant. In general, the differences of strategies in
vocabulary learning between the genders were not statistically significant.
7. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The results of the study indicate an overall moderate used of VLS by Malay students
learning Mandarin as a third language. This study also shows that the female are not
significantly more superior than male learners in the usage of VLS. The results are
consistent with the results of previous EFL studies.
However, the use of VLS is lesser compared to their counterpart in the previous EFL
studies. The quantity of VLS used among the students may be limited by the course
design itself. As the students learn Mandarin through situational dialogues, words are
primarily taught through decontextualized activities in the classes. As such, vocabulary
learning through context is restricted. In addition, the translation teaching method used
had helped the students to know the words without using VLS. Furthermore, the students
may not be interested to use outside classroom’s VLS to acquire additional vocabulary to
increase their vocabulary size as their main consent may be just to pass their examination.
As such, it is important for curriculum designers and teachers to find ways to encourage
students to use VLS more frequently to increase their vocabulary.
The students should be aware that without sufficient vocabulary knowledge,
communicative competence cannot be achieved. For this purpose, besides learning
through situational dialogues, the lesson should also emphasize on discourse. Textbooks
used should be revised in such a way that they address this important aspect of vocabulary
learning. As for the teachers, they should offering contextualized learning opportunities,
introduce and have learners practice using a variety of VLS, and showing students how to
learn words outside of their classes (Oxford and Scarcella, 1994). In this way, it will
encourage learner autonomy so that students will spontaneously learn vocabulary both
inside and outside the class for more productive outcomes.
This is an exploratory study with a small group of learners from one faculty and is
limited to one of the branch campuses. As such, the study cannot be generalize. It is
hoped that it will lead to more detailed investigations in this field in the future. It is
suggested that use a larger sample with more students from different faculties is used for
subsequent study in order to yield a more generalizable findings.
REFERENCES
Ahmed, M. O. (1989). Vocabulary learning strategies. In P. Meara (Ed.), Beyond words
(pp. 3-14). London: British Association for Applied Linguistics, in association with
Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research.
Bremner, S. (1999). Language learning strategies and language proficiency: Investigating
the relationship Hong Kong. Canadian Modern Language Review, 55, 490 -514.
Vocabulary Learning Strategies of Students Learning Mandarin as a Foreign Language
189
Catalán R.M.J. (2003). Sex differences in L2 vocabulary learning strategies,
International,Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13 (1), 54-77.
Chiang, H. (2004). The relationship between field sensitivity/field independence and the
use of vocabulary learning strategies of EFL university students in Taiwan(Doctoral
dissertation, Texas A&M University, 2004). Retrieved April 25, 2005, from
ProQuest database (AAT3143596).
David, A. (2008). Vocabulary breadth in French L2 learners. Language Learning, 36(2),
167-180.
Fan, M.Y. (2003). Frequency of use, perceived usefulness, and actual usefulness of
second language vocabulary strategies: A study of Hong Kong learners. Modern
Language Journal, 87(2), 222-241.
Gu, Y. (2002). Gender, academic major, and vocabulary learning strategies of Chinese
EFL learners. RELC Journal, 33(1), 35-54.
Gu, Y., & Johnson, R.K. (1996): Vocabulary learning strategies and language learning
outcomes. Language Learning, 46, 643-679.
Gu, Y. (2003). Vocabulary Learning in a Second Language: Person, Task, Context and
Strategies. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language(TESL-EJ). Sept,
2003,7(2) .Retrieved [09/03/2009] from http://tesl-ej.org/ej26/a4.html
Hulstijn, J.H. (1993). When do foreign-language readers look up the meaning of
unfamiliar words? The influence of tasks and learners variables. Modern Language
Journal, 77, 139-147.
Kojic-Sabo, I., & Lightbown, P. M. (1999). Students’ approaches to vocabulary learning
and their relationship to success. Modern Language Journal, 83(2), 176-192.
Kudo, Y.(1999). L2 vocabulary learning strategies (NFLRC NetWork #14) [HTML
document]. Honolulu: University of Hawai`i, Second Language Teaching &
Curriculum Center. Retrieved [19 June, 2009*] from the World Wide Web:
http://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/NetWorks/NW14/
Litwin, M. S. (1995). How to measure survey reliability and validity. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage
McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (1989). Research in education: A conceptual
introduction (2nd ed.). London: Scott, Foresman and Company
McCarthy, M. J. (1984). A new look at vocabulary in EFL. Applied Linguistics, 5, 12-22.
Meare_ P. M. (1980). Vocabulary acquisition: A neglected aspect of language learning.
Language teaching and Linguistices Abstracts, 13, 221-246.
Proceedings ILANNS Issues in Language Teaching and Learning
190
Ming Wei(2007) An Examination of Vocabulary Learning of College-level Learners of
English in China. AEFL2007,9(2).93-114.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press
O’Malley J. M, Chamot A. U., Stewner-Manzanares, G., Russo, R. P., & Kupper, L.
(1985). Learning strategies used by beginning and intermediate ESL students.
Language Learning, 35, 21-46
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know
Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Oxford, R. L., Lavine, R. Z., Hollaway, M. E., Felkins, G., & Saleh, A. (1996). Telling
their stories: Language learners use diaries and recollective studies. In R. L. Oxford
(Ed.), Language learning strategies around the world: Crosscultural perspectives
(pp. 19-34). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Oxford, R. L., & Burry-Stock, J. (1995). Assessing the use of language learning strategies
worldwide with the ESL/EFL version of the strategy inventory for language
learning (SILL). System, 23, 1–23
Oxford, R.L., & Scarcella, R.C. (1994). Second language vocabulary learning among
adults: State of the art in vocabulary instruction. System, 22(2), 231-243.
Park, G.P. (1997). Language learning strategies and English proficiency in Korean
University, Foreign Language Annals, 30, 211–221
Prince, P. (1996). Second language vocabulary learning: The role of context versus
translations as a function of proficiency. Modern Language Journal, 80(4), 478-
493.
Young, D. J., & Oxford, R. (1997). A gender-related analysis of strategies used to process
written input in the native language and a foreign language. Applied Language
Learning, 8(1), 43-73.
Schmitt, N. (1997) Vocabulary learning strategies. In Schmitt and M. McCarthy: (Eds.).
Vocabulary: Description Acquisition and Pedagogy. (pp. 199-227). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Wharton, G. (2000). Language learning strategy use of bilingual foreign language learners
in Singapore. Language Learning, 50, 203-243.