1 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Introduction
This chapter presents the background of the conducted research, the purpose of the research, the scope of the problem that would be discussed in the
research, the benefits that may be obtained from the research and the definition of
terms related to the study.
A. Background
Vocabulary learning is central to language acquisition, whether the language is first, second or foreign Decarrico, 2001: 285. In the past years, the
area of vocabulary learning and teaching was often neglected, because it was thought that vocabulary could be left behind and the students could learn it by
themselves. Indeed, there was a period when too much vocabulary learning was regarded as positively dangerous thing Seal, 1991: 296. Although vocabulary
has not always been recognized as priority in language teaching, interest in its role in second language teaching has grown rapidly in recent years. It is evidenced by
the booming of experimental studies and pedagogical materials that most of which are aimed to address the issues in second language vocabulary learning and
teaching. Most research on L2 acquisition to date, however, has focused on estimates of vocabulary size or breadth measures rather than on the depth of
vocabulary knowledge of specific words or the degree of such knowledge, on the growth of L2 lexicons and on the number of words gained or forgotten over time
2
Wesche Paribakht, 1996: 13; Schmitt, 1998: 282. One obvious limitation of test measuring the vocabulary size is that they do not measure how well given
words are known Read, 1998 quoted in Wesche and Paribakht 1996: 13. Schmitt 1998: 281 says that vocabulary research that is focused on the size of lexicons
and the number of words learned through various activities has generated little understanding on how individual words are acquired.
Studies on the students’ vocabulary knowledge have been conducted inside the Sanata Dharma English Education Study Program. Two of them were
conducted by Susilo 2001 and Saputro 2005. Susilo 2001 in his study measured the controlled active vocabulary of the students. He found that there
were significant differences of students’ vocabulary size in every semester. He concluded that there were gradual improvements of students’ vocabulary sizes
along with their length of study. Another study was conducted by Saputro 2005. He investigated the lexical richness in the written work of Indonesian students
learning English as foreign language. He found that there were significant differences of lexical density indices of written work between second semester
and fourth semester but the others are static. The study also showed that the higher the students’ proficiency level, the students produced more word types and
used word types that are less frequent. Boogards 2000: 494, quoting Wesche and Paribakht 1996: 424, says
that the other types of test on vocabulary knowledge are also necessary because advanced learners need depth and speed of access as well as range in their
vocabulary knowledge, for ease and precision of comprehension as well as for effective composition and oral expression. Although breadth of knowledge is
3
essential dimension, it does not mean that the other dimension i.e. depth of knowledge is not important. For advanced learners it is important that they
acquire more senses of polysemous word and learn more about possible collocates, special uses, and so on Boogards, 2000: 495.
The present study is conducted with the aim to study the depth of vocabulary knowledge of the third semester students of English Education Study
Program of Sanata Dharma University. The study is focused on the third semester students who are considered as the sophomore students. From the study, an
assumption of depth of vocabulary knowledge of EFL learners in the initial level could be gained, so that further research aiming to observe the development of
vocabulary knowledge could use the results or finding of this study as one of the
related references.
B. Problem Identification
