International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences

2016, Vol. 6, No. 11

ISSN: 2222-6990

Receptive Vocabulary Knowledge or Productive

Vocabulary Knowledge in Writing Skill, Which One
Important?
Zunita Mohamad Maskor1
National University of Malaysia, Malaysia

Harun Baharudin2
National University of Malaysia, Malaysia

DOI: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v6-i11/2395 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v6-i11/2395

ABSTRACT

This paper discusses the role of vocabulary knowledge on the writing performance of the Arabic
language which known as a foreign language in the Malaysian education system. It also
discussed the role of each part of vocabulary knowledge which namely receptive vocabulary
knowledge and productive vocabulary knowledge. This paper reviews scholars’ views regarding
the relationship of both receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge in producing written
text. It also highlights the comparison between Arabic vocabulary knowledge and English due to
enhance learners’ writing skill. Conclusion and recommendations such as integrating receptive
and productive instructional styles were made in order to increase learners' interest towards
writing in Arabic.

Keyword: Vocabulary knowledge, Receptive vocabulary knowledge, Productive vocabulary

knowledge, Writing skill

INTRODUCTION
Vocabulary knowledge is known as the knowledge of the word (Nation, 1990, 2001; Laufer et
al., 2004; Milton 2009). In the research on vocabulary, vocabulary knowledge is also known as
the depth of vocabulary that brings up to the extent to which the word is understood by
speakers. Vocabulary knowledge also means students learn the words with deep meaning,
including pronunciation, meaning, spelling, frequency, sound structure, syntax and collocation
according to context (Qian, 2002). While Haastrup and Henriksen (2000) define the vocabulary
knowledge is knowledge of words from the perspective of meaning, knowledge, and
collocation.

Nation (1990) stipulates that vocabulary knowledge is knowledge of words in speech and
writing that includes syntax, collocation, frequency of use, compatibility, meaning, concept and
261
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 11
ISSN: 2222-6990

relationship with other word vocabulary knowledge totalling nine at all. More simply, Schmitt
(2014) concluded that vocabulary knowledge is knowledge of the components of vocabulary,
lexical organisation, receptive and productive mastery and fluency. Therefore the process is
more than just knowing the word, but also understand the various aspects of the process and
vocabulary constructs.

Pullido & Hambrick (2008) found that knowledge of vocabulary to be an indicator of the quality
of a person's vocabulary. Vocabulary knowledge is a benchmark of proficiency in writing,
reading, listening and speaking. In fact, knowledge of vocabulary dominated a student
influences the quality of their writing (Engber, 1995; Milton, 2013; Park, 2012; Stæhr, 2008) and
shows that students need to master the meaning of the word and its use in the context of
writing skills (Chen et al. 2015). It is agreed by Leki & Carson (1994) that the lack of vocabulary
will affect the quality of writing as compared to other factors such as attitude, motivation, and
preparation for the exam. Therefore, for students who learn a second language, and a foreign
language they should dominate the vocabulary of quantity and quality with the goal of
understanding and expressing meaning in writing (Milton, 2013).

RECEPTIVE VOCABULARY KNOWLEDGE VS PRODUCTIVE VOCABULARY KNOWLEDGE

Most prominent researchers in this field agreed to divide, renowned vocabulary knowledge
within the scope of its use in either the skills of writing, reading, listening and speaking. Thus,
they divide vocabulary knowledge into productive and receptive vocabulary (Laufer, 1998;
Laufer & Paribakht, 1998; Henriksen, 1999; Nation, 2001; Read, 2000; Schmitt, 2014). However,
Harmer (2001) has identified knowledge of vocabulary to the active vocabulary which students
can use and call it orally. While a passive vocabulary of words known by learners through
recognition, but they cannot call and produced through writing.

Distribution of this definition seems to limit the knowledge of vocabulary receptive and
productive just to function, meaning and word structure. Nevertheless, it should be
investigated to what extent both parties have a relationship or not in learning a second
language and foreign language. Henriksen (1999) divided the knowledge of vocabulary into
three dimensions, (a) a partial trend towards the right dimensions that reflect the level of
meaning and understanding; (b) the depth dimension, such as the construction of the system
showing the relationship between words; and (c) receptive-productive dimension that shows
the learner control and access to knowledge about the word. These dimensions may bring light
to guide researchers in determining aspects of vocabulary to stress in their study.

Instead, Nation (2001) has determined the construction of vocabulary knowledge in a broader
perspective by combining form (pronunciation, spelling and the words), meaning (structure or
meaning of words, ideas and preferences, a combination of words) and use (syntax, collocation,
constraints in use). Nation also viewed in detail all aspects of vocabulary knowledge which can
serve as guidelines in the construction of measurement instruments and define vocabulary

262
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 11
ISSN: 2222-6990

teaching strategies. Every single aspect of this perspective can also be seen in the form of
receptive and productive as shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1 What is involved in knowing a word

Form Spoken R What does the word sound like?
P How is the word pronounced?
Written R What does the word look like?
P How is the word written and spelled?
Word parts R What parts are recognisable in this word?
P What words parts are needed to express meaning?
Meaning Form and meaning R What meaning does this word form signal?
What word form can be used to express this
P meaning?
Concepts and
referents R What is included in the concept?
P What items can the concept refer to?
Associations R What others words does this word make us think of?
P What other words could we use instead of this one?
Use Grammatical functions R In what patterns does the word occur?
P In what patterns must we use this word?
Collocations R What words or types of word occur with this one?
What words or types of words must we use with this
P one?
Where, when and how often would we meet this
Constraints on use R word?
P Where, when and how often can we use this word?

Source: Nation (2001: 27)

Note : R receptive, P productive

However, vocabulary knowledge model highlighted by Nation’s (2001) categorized by some

scholars as complex and detailed (Webb, 2013) and complicate the construction of an
instrument for measuring vocabulary knowledge (Milton, 2009). In this case, Nation’s ideas has
enabled researchers to evaluate and select the language aspects that is truly in keeping with
the constructs that form the focus of the study. For example, one aspect which is selected as
the productive aspects of meaning can be guided in creating suitable learning strategies and
methods of teaching vocabulary in the classroom.

What Is Receptive Vocabulary Knowledge?

Receptive vocabulary knowledge is known and understood its meaning by learners when
reading text or listening to the text. Learners know and recognize the meaning of words that
263
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 11
ISSN: 2222-6990

caused them to understand the text they have read but not used to speak and write. Learning
the receptive vocabulary usually in the form in which the teacher will usually give the meaning
of the word, using the word in a sentence, but just ask the learners to spell and pronounce only
(Nagy, Anderson & Herman, 1987; Webb, 2005).

What Is Productive Vocabulary Knowledge?

Productive vocabulary knowledge assumed as the words that are understood and can be
pronounced by the learners. In fact, learners can use these words in speech and writing well.
Thus, productive vocabulary can be regarded as a process of active word because learners can
generate words to express their thoughts and feelings which understood by others (Webb,
2005). Productive vocabulary knowledge is deemed as the ability to recover the structure and
meaning (Laufer et al, 2004; Webb, 2008), or to pass on the word as in the original learners’
language (Webb, 2009). Laufer (1998) divides knowledge into productive vocabulary into
controlled and free vocabulary. Controlled productive vocabulary knowledge indicates the
capacity to construct words when the cue is given while, free productive vocabulary knowledge
is the ability to use words spontaneously and without specific encouragement to produce
certain words, such as writing independently.

Relations Between Receptive Vocabulary Knowledge and Vocabulary Knowledge Productive

Various assumptions about the nature of receptive vocabulary knowledge and productive
vocabulary knowledge which previously existed between them. Although there are various
responses the researchers gave, this could only be true if we look over at the each aspect of
vocabulary knowledge in broader perspective. For example, the ability to identify spelling in
written form will precede the ability to spell correctly, or the ability to identify and recognize
the written form may precede the ability to convey meaning and use it in the right words.

On the other hand, is also likely to spell the word correctly (productive vocabulary knowledge in
written aspect) or using the right words with grammar (productive vocabulary knowledge in
grammatical function) before the meaning of the word is understood (receptive vocabulary
knowledge in form and meaning). Therefore, to study and understand the productive
vocabulary knowledge, it is necessary to distinguish between receptive and productive
knowledge in every aspect of vocabulary knowledge. It should be noted also the main goal is to
bring learning vocabulary, in the form of communicative either orally or written.

According to Webb (2013) study of the word receptively only gives impact at the meaning in
receptive. While learning vocabulary in productive way, the results accounted for receptive and
productive knowledge. Both turned out to have a strong relationship and mutual in the
development of the vocabulary, especially in improving the learners’ language efficiency.
Consequently, teaching and learning vocabulary may optimize and benefit both parties
(teachers and learners) when the aspect of vocabulary knowledge and its process being
understood.

264
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 11
ISSN: 2222-6990

VOCABULARY KNOWLEDGE IN WRITING SKILL

Writing is a process to convey the meaning which is complicated and requires coordination of
various metacognitive skills. To produce a narrative writing, a writer must be able to organize
and generate ideas, develop plans for ideas, review and revise what you have written and
monitor performance in writing (Olinghouse & Leaird, 2009). Writing is also a behaviour which
serves to recall an event in a form that is understandable using letters and words. Through
writing, learners' thinking can be highlighted through their preparation, consolidation and
development of ideas and seeks a relationship that can help learners understand their thinking
organizations (Marohaini, 1999).

While Rosni (2009) states writing skills is an expression that describes the learners' ability in
language use. In order to master writing skills, listening skills must be mastered in advance to
get the language. Next, learners should have the reading skills to recognize the letters and
writings. After mastering these skills the learners considered can write well. This coincided with
Nation (2001) that stated writing skills are not skills acquired naturally, but involves
coordination of other senses to stimulate metacognitive. Therefore, to master the writing skills,
vocabulary selection is one of an important skill. Olinghouse & Leaird (2009) & Flower et al.
(1981) also defines that vocabulary in writing symbolizes the maturity and authenticity of words
selection for the learners which is stated as one of the writing theories in second or foreign
language.

In relation with the theoretical ideas, vocabulary knowledge is the key factor to ensure that
written production is understandable and meaningful. If there is no appropriate vocabulary,
writing results will not be understood. Rosni (2009) urged on the acquisition of words via a
process of recognizing letters and words followed by the ability to read the words which known
as a learning process for receptive vocabulary knowledge. Efforts to produce an understandable
sentences using words that can be read and known by the learners is the development of
vocabulary knowledge productively. This clearly shows that the development of the receptive
vocabulary and productive vocabulary is a complex process in language acquisition.

The study by linguistic researchers suggest reading the text containing the target words can
encourage students to write well (Chen & Hirsh, 2012; Webb, 2009). Even the vocabulary
acquired through direct teaching can improve the knowledge of the words, increase words
memory and ability to use the words, especially in writing (Chen & Hirsh, 2012; Lee, 2003;
Zimmerman, 1997). These findings confirmed the opinion that the acquisition of receptive
words affects words acquisition productively. This case turned out to be that learning process
for receptive vocabulary related to productive vocabulary.

Coxhead (2007) also saw a continuation of receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge
model featured by Nation (2001) and used it as a guide to build the constructs in writing skills
model. He adapted the aspects of language which assumed suitable and that should be
emphasized in writing skills, as described in Table 2.

265
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 11
ISSN: 2222-6990

Table 2 Knowledge required for production word in writing (Coxhead, 2007)

Form How is the word written and spell?

What word form can be used to express this
Meaning Form and meaning meaning?
Concepts and referents What items can the concept refer to?
Associations What other words could we use instead of this one?
Use Grammatical functions In what patterns must we use this word?
What words or types of words must we use with this
Collocations one?
Constraints on use Where, when and how often can we use this word?

Therefore, in the transferring process from receptive to productive knowledge known as a final
stage in vocabulary learning. Learners’ ability in writing new words that they learnt can also
stimulate their confidence in conveying meaningful written text. These conditions showed the
success of vocabulary knowledge acquisition in second or foreign languages.

VOCABULARY KNOWLEDGE IN ARABIC WRITING

In learning Arabic, mastery of word meanings in depth will help learners link the word with
another word in addition to using it in the context of the proper grammar. This is in line with
the concept of productive vocabulary knowledge in English language studies. However, factors
such as the context, culture, social environment and purpose should be taken into account to
ensure that the meaning can be interpreted by the other parties whom hear and read it
accurately (Che Radiah & Norhayuza, 2013).

Division of aspects of vocabulary knowledge as has been debated by Henriksen (1999) and
Nation (2001) in accordance with aspects of vocabulary knowledge of Arabic language debated
by Al-Shuwairekh. Al-Shuwairekh (2001) was classified the vocabulary knowledge in Arabic into
four elements namely; 1) know the words and patterns of words, 2) learn how to apply their
morphology in words to form a pattern of different words, 3) distinguish the word speech with
the written words and 4) learn how to conclude a short pronunciation of context. Harun (2014)
also divides Arabic vocabulary knowledge into five aspects, namely as; 1) singular, 2) clause, 3)
synonym, 4) translation and 5) words usage in sentences.

While Al-Naqah (1985) categorize writing skills into four phases; 1) write Arabic letters, 2) write
Arabic words with correct spelling and can be read, 3) sentence structure understood by Arabic
readers and 4) using structures in Arabic verse paragraphs explaining the clarity of ideas. Al-
Naqah’s view this explaination as the development of writing skills through a combination of
knowing about the Arabic letters which known as harf hijaiyyah until finally forming a
combination of vocabulary knowledge aspects that will be able to form a complete sentence
that can be understood in oral or written interaction. When a word cannot be understood,

266
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 11
ISSN: 2222-6990

indirectly its not using accurate words according to contextual. For example, in shown in Table
3 below.

Table 3 Sample of sentences

Correct use of vocabulary knowledge ‫ذهب زيد اىل املدرسة على قدميه‬

Incorrect use of vocabulary knowledge ‫ذهب زيد اىل املدرسة على الرجل‬

Mistakes are often done on learners of Arabic, especially at primary and secondary school
levels. This is because they understand and know the meaning of the words, but could not
discern the meaning by grammatical function, combination of words, collocations and proper
use.

Highlighting the concept of Arabic productive vocabulary knowledge in writing, to note the
aspect of form it is emphasized at single word. While in the aspect of meaning one must know
the translation and the word that is synonymous with the word target. In terms of use, students
need to know how the word can be developed into a complete sentences. Obviously here,
vocabulary knowledge in Arabic language writing skills concluded as productive, whereas in
common with the ideas brought by Coxhead (2007) as shown in Table 2 above.

Therefore, in Arabic productive vocabulary knowledge not only concern from the number of
words which are mastered, but also its use as a significant impact on producing words of one's
writing skills. Rosni (2009) before it, confirmed that gaining the word receptively is the initial
phase before the learner will be able to produce words in written text. Chen & Hirsh (2012);
Webb (2013) also stated that productive vocabulary knowledge acquired through receptive and
productive. Practically, the learners' ability to generate new words in writing is productive
despite the acquisition of a word occurs in both ways.

THE IMPORTANCE OF VOCABULARY KNOWLEDGE IN TEACHING AND LEARNING

In the context of learning Arabic as a foreign language, learners are less likely to use the
language learned in communication outside the classroom. While in the classroom, learning the
vocabulary is taught implicitly with other skills. Al-Juhany (1990), Al-Shuwairekh (2001) and Al-
Batal (2006) have stressed the importance of mastering the vocabulary of Arabic from its form,
the word and usage Therefore, more attention should be paid to the development of
productive vocabulary knowledge since it was a benchmark of language proficiency especially in
writing and speaking skill.

Thus Arabic teachers should pay attention to the level of vocabulary knowledge which was
occupied by learners in order to adapt the teaching strategies to the level of learners’ ability.
Indirectly, when teachers have identified the level of vocabulary knowledge of learners,

267
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 11
ISSN: 2222-6990

teaching writing strategies can be designed efficiently. Teachers also need to be creative in
delivering instruction to suit the level of learners’ knowledge. Teachers can manipulate reading
skills, to improve learners’ new word acquisition (Hulstijn, 2001; Webb, 2008) and utilize
various vocabulary learning approach, especially involving learners participation actively (Laufer
& Hulstijn, 2001). Teachers also need to design a variety of activities to meet the needs and
level of learners’ language proficiency which varied from each other.

Teachers also can integrate the teaching of vocabulary and reading practice in the context of
writing. Since the writing process can provide a space for learners to think about the words that
correspond to convey their ideas. This is in contrast to the speech that requires immediate
reaction to convey ideas. Thus, teachers can combine exercise in a receptive and productive to
improve the mastery of words that have been taught in their writings.

Learning vocabulary directly by setting the number of target words to be learned can be an
advantage and increase learners focus on learning a foreign language. So, in learning Arabic
language at secondary level teachers should pay attention around 3,000 words which often
repeated in the written text and speech. Teaching and learning that focused on the target
words will be able to improve learners' mastery of vocabulary effectively.

Teachers support also serve as a catalyst to encourage learners to use new words in their
writing without fear or shame. Factors such as motivation, desire and environmental support
should also be given attention to ensure successful use of productive vocabulary knowledge. In
addition, knowledge in productive vocabulary knowledge aspects also provides information and
guidelines for teachers in developing appropriate instruments to measure the level of
knowledge of students about words, its form and use.

Acknowledgement
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Harun Baharudin of National University of
Malaysia, Bangi, Malaysia for his guidance and support in the writing of this manuscript. I would
also like to thank the Ministry of Education for the financial assistance.

REFERENCES
Al-Batal, M. (2006). Playing with words: Teaching vocabulary in the Arabic curriculum.
Handbook for arabic language teaching professionals in the 21st century, New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Al-Juhany, A. (1990). Mushkilat ta’alim allughah al-`arabiyyah lighairi annatiqin biha wa wasail
`ilajiha. Arab Saudi

Al-Naqah, M. K. (1985). Ta`alim al Lughah al`Arabiyyah Linnatiqina Biha. Saudi Arabia:

Universiti Ummul Qura.

268
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 11
ISSN: 2222-6990

Al-Shuwairekh, S. (2001). Vocabulary learning strategies used by AFL ( Arabic as a foreign

language ) learners in Saudi Arabia, PhD Thesis, University of Leeds.

Che Radiah Mezah & Norhayuza Mohammad, (2013). Kosa kata Arab : Teori dan aplikasi,
Serdang: Penerbit Universiti Putra Malaysia.

Chen, Chun Lin & Hirsh, David. (2012). Manipulating instructional method: The effect on
productive vocabulary use, In David Hirsh (Ed), Current Perspectives in Second Language
Vocabulary Research, Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang, 117-142.

Coxhead, A. (2007). Factors and aspects of knowledge affecting L2 word use in writing. In P.
Davidson, C. Coombe, D. Lloyd & D. Palfreyman (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary in
another language (pp. 331-342). Dubai: TESOL Arabia.

Engber, C. A. (1995). The relationship of lexical proficiency to the quality of ESL compositions.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 4, 139-155.
Flower, L., Hayes, J. R., Flower, L. & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing.
College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387.

Haastrup, K., & Henriksen, B. (2000). Vocabulary acquisition: Acquiring depth of knowledge
through network building. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10, pp. 221–240.

Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching, 3rd Edition. London: Pearson
Education.

Harun Baharudin. (2014). Strategi pembelajaran kosa kata, PhD Thesis, Faculty of Education,
Universiti of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur.
Hatch, E. & Brown, C. (1995). Vocabulary, semantics, and language education, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Henriksen, B. (1999). Three dimensions of vocabulary development. Studies in Second Language

Acquisition, 21(2), pp. 303–317.

Hulstijn, Jan. (2001). Intentional and incidential second-language vocabulary learning: A

reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automacity. In Robinson, Peter (ed.), Cognition
and Second Language Instruction, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 258 - 286

Hulstijn, Jan. & Laufer, Batia. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the involvement load
hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition, Language Learning 51 (3), 539-558.

Laufer, B. 1998. The Development of Passive and Active Vocabulary in a Second Language :
Same or Different ? Applied Linguistics, 19(2), 255–271. doi:10.1093/applin/19.2.255

269
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 11
ISSN: 2222-6990

Laufer, B., & Paribakht, T. (1998). The relationship between passive and active vocabularies:
effects of language learning context. Language Learning 48, 365-391

Laufer, B., Elder, C., Hill, K., & Congdon, P. (2004). Size and strength: do we need both to
measure vocabulary knowledge? Language Testing, 21, pp. 202–226.
doi:10.1191/0265532204lt277oa.

Lee, Siok H. (2003). ESL learners’ vocabulary use in writing and the effect of explicit vocabulary
instruction. System 31, 537-561.

Leki, I., & Carson, J. G. (1994). Students’ perceptions of EAP writing instruction and writing
needs across the disciplines. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 81-101.

Marohaini Yusoff. (1999). Pengajaran kemahiran menulis karangan di sekolah : Isu dan cabaran.
Persidangan Bengkel Pedagogi Bahasa Melayu, hlm.1–28. Kuala Lumpur: Universiti
Malaya.

Milton, J. (2009). Measuring second language vocabulary acquisition, Vol. 54, Bristol:
Multilingual Matters.

Milton, J. (2013). Measuring the contribution of vocabulary knowledge to proficiency in the four
skills. In C. Bardel, C. Lindqvist, & B, Laufer, eds. L2 Vocabulary acquisition, knowledge and
use : New perspectives on assesment and corpus analysis, European Second Language
Association, pp. 57–78.

Nagy, W. E., Anderson, R. C. & Herman, P. A. (1987). Learning word meanings from context
during normal reading. American Educational Research Journal, 24, pp. 237–270.

Nation, P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Nation, P. & Waring, R. (1997). Vocabulary size, texts coverage and word lists. In N. Schmitt &
M. McCarthy, eds. Vocabulary : Description , acquisition and pedagogy, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, pp. 6–19.

Nation, P. (2001). Learning Vocabulary In Another Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Nation, P. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian
Modern Language Review, 63(1), pp. 59–82.

Olinghouse, N. G. & Leaird, J. T. 2009. The relationship between measures of vocabulary and
narrative writing quality in second- and fourth-grade students. Reading and Writing, 22(5),
545–565. doi:10.1007/s11145-008-9124-z
270
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2016, Vol. 6, No. 11
ISSN: 2222-6990

Park, B. (2012). Does the PVLT Provide an accurate measure of productive vocabulary
knowledge ? English Teaching, 67(2), 159–183.

Pulido, D. & Hambrick, D.Z. (2008). The virtuous circle: Modeling individual differences in L2
reading and vocabulary development. Reading in a Foreign Language, 20(2), pp.164-190.

Qian, D. D. (2002). Investigating the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and academic
reading performance: An assessment persepective. Language Learning, 52(3), pp. 513–
536. doi:10.1111/1467-9922.00193.

Rosni Samah. (2009). Isu Pembelajaran Bahasa Arab di Malaysia. Nilai: Penerbit USIM.
Schmitt, N. (2014). Size and depth of vocabulary knowledge : What the research shows.
Language Learning, 64:4(December), pp. 913–951.
Stæhr, L. S. (2008). Vocabulary size and the skills of listening, reading and writing. Language
Learning Journal, 36(2), 139–152. doi:10.1080/09571730802389975

Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning : The effects of reading and
writing on word knowledge. SSLA, 27, pp. 33–52.

Webb, S. (2008). Receptive and productive vocabulary sizes of L2 learners. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition 30, no. 1: 79–95.

Webb, S. (2009). The effects of receptive and productive learning of word pairs on vocabulary
knowledge. RELC Journal, 40(3), 360–376.

Webb, S. (2013). Depth of vocabulary knowledge. The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics.

doi:10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal1325
Zimmerman, Cheryl B. (1997). Do reading and interactive vocabulary instruction make a
difference? An empirical study. TESOL Quarterly 31/1, 121-140.

1Corresponding author: Zunita Mohamad Maskor

E-mail: [email protected]

271
www.hrmars.com