A Study of Basic Vocabulary Selection for Treating First- and Second-Grade Elementary School Students With Language Disorders

Ⅰ. Introduction

A vocabulary is 'a set of words used within a certain range.' Currently, in Korean language education, the terms of fundamental vocabulary, basic vocabulary, and educational basic vocabulary differ slightly by researchers (Kim, 2003; Lee, 1998). However, vocabulary that is generally used in everyday life and used frequently, is called basic vocabulary. Since all the vocabulary in the Korean dictionary can not be used for language therapy or clinical practice, the vocabulary should be selected according to the purpose of use and used for instruction, education, and treatment. Therefore, it is required to construct the basic vocabulary list of language disorders of school age according to age, level and purpose of language use.

In particular, as children in school age continue to develop language in terms of syntax, semantics, and pragmatic approach, and their cognitive and learning needs are also increased, they are not significantly different from the previous period, but the expansion or difference in developmental speed is apparent. According to Owen (1999), as children of school age become first graders in elementary school, the development of vocabulary becomes remarkable under the influence of school education. For the first grade of elementary school, on average, the vocabulary of expression increases to 2,000 words, and the comprehension ability increases to 20,000~24,000 words, and they make and use complex sentences. A study was conducted to estimate the vocabulary of school-age children, and it was found that vocabulary increased significantly between grades 3 and 5 compared to grades 1 to 3 in elementary school (Owens, 1999).

School age is a time when vocabulary continues to grow, and understanding of the vocabulary also continues to grow. School-age children understand and use expressions such as antonyms, hyponyms, synonyms, metaphors, or analogy, which makes vocabulary more accurate and richer, and makes it easier to find words when needed (Chung & Shim, 2019; Paul & Courtenay, 2013; Yoon & Chung, 2019). In addition, the language of communication required in the school classroom is different from the pre-school age rules in terms of situations and communication, which causes a great change in the language of children.

According to a study that measured the overall vocabulary development ability of Korean school-age children, the number of vocabulary expressed and accepted continue to rise even after entering elementary school, peaking in the fourth grade. Children with language disorder in school age do not develop vocabulary at their age level properly during school age. Therefore, in the course of treatment or clinical guidance, it is regarded as a very important matter as to how to use and what vocabulary to mediate. In addition, the treatment room considers that improving the acquisition of the target vocabulary is important for language improvement and is actually investing a lot of time in treatment the vocabulary (Rivers, 1981).

In particular, the basic vocabulary according to the development of school age should be provided for language therapy for children with speech development disorders and for teaching vocabulary in school education for normal children. In elementary, middle and high school education, research on educational vocabulary according to the curriculum (Jo, 2003) was conducted. Recently, vocabulary research has been conducted in terms of language resources through the development of various software (Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, 2012; National Institute of Korean Language, 2005). Language resources are established not only in vocabulary but also in various linguistic aspects, but most of them are limited to the lower grades of elementary school or 1st grade. In addition, these previous studies mainly considered the aspect of vocabulary development, but basic vocabulary should consider frequency of use, part-of-speech, and category in everyday life (Chang et al., 2013). Vocabulary development in school age has a great influence on the development of other language components, but vocabulary research on the basic vocabulary of school age is very insufficient.

In addition, in the field of language rehabilitation, a list of essential vocabulary or various language treatment programs are being developed in complementary communication for children with severe disabilities, but the criteria for vocabulary selection are not clear (Kim et al., 2003; Lee et al., 2005; Park, 2013). Research is also being conducted on vocabulary of multicultural children of school age, vocabulary development (Jeong, 2016), vocabulary knowledge-based task (Ahn et al., 2018; Kim & Kwon, 2018; Oh & Kim, 2014), Academic Vocabulary instruction multicultural children (Kim, 2012). A standardized vocabulary list for the normal development process was created and used for the diagnosis and evaluation of as Receptive and Expressive Vocabulary Test (REVT, Kim et al., 2009) and Korean version-Boston Naming Test for Children (K-BNT-C, Kim & Na, 2007) of school-age children with language disorders. However, this is not a list of treatment or clinical basic vocabulary because it is for diagnostic evaluation, not the purpose of basic vocabulary selection.

Most studies on vocabulary treatment to date have focused on which vocabulary and how to treat (Kang & Jung, 2019; Kim & Yim, 2019; Park & Park, 2018; Park & Yim, 2019). However, when improving the vocabulary by teaching according to the level of vocabulary development is the final goal, deciding which vocabulary to teach should be given priority. The basic vocabulary selection for school-age children will be the basic data for treatment according to the level of target children. Therefore, this study aims to provide a basic vocabulary for effective vocabulary instruction in the treatment of children with language disorders in school age.

Ⅱ. Methods

1. Preliminary Research

1) Subject

The vocabulary selection method of this study was selected as an objective method and a subjective method using quantitative information. The primary basic vocabulary was selected as an eclectic method of comparing between vocabulary lists. This revised and supplemented the vocabulary selection method of Chang et al. (2013) study.

To select basic vocabulary for school-age children. Vocabulary used in the following language tests was collected and common vocabulary was selected. Language tests was selected as Language Scale for School-aged Children (LSSC, Lee et al., 2014), Korean Language-based Reading Assessment (KOLRA, Pae et al., 2015), Receptive & Expressive Vocabulary Test (REVT, Kim et al., 2009). These test tools were selected as standardized test tools commonly used in vocabulary evaluation of children with language disorder in school age. The test items of LSSC (Lee et al., 2014) were analyzed, and vocabularies of hyponyms, antonyms, and synonyms were extracted. The test items of KOLRA (Pae et al., 2015) were analyzed, and vocabularies of reading fluency, semantic words, and decoding phonological rules were extracted. The receptive vocabularies and expression vocabularies of the REVT (Kim et al., 2009) were extracted and analyzed. The vocabulary classifies the selected vocabulary based on these diagnostic tools and the vocabulary list.

In addition, the grade A vocabularies selected in the study of the Korean vocabulary results report (Jo, 2003) of study on the elementary school reading textbook vocabulary (Kim, 2004), which is a list of vocabulary created through extensive research, were compared. The list of vocabulary for learning was divided into A, B, C, D, and E grades according to the frequency and difficulty in Jo (2003) study 'Vocabulary Results Report for Korean Learning'. 617 vocabulary words from Kim (2004) study on elementary school textbook vocabulary were extracted and used.

2) Principles and standards of vocabulary selection

The principle of selecting basic vocabulary was based on the level of development and applied the principles of usefulness, efficiency, and step-by-step (Lee, 1996). The principle of usefulness is to select vocabulary that is used in real life by infants and toddlers. The principle of efficiency means selecting a vocabulary as a basic vocabulary that can achieve teaching-learning goals with minimal investment without wasting effort or time. The principle of step-by-step is to select by considering the step-by-step of vocabulary development.

Based on these principles, specific vocabulary selection criteria differ according to purpose and selection method. In this study the selection criteria were defined as follows (Lee, 1996): First, vocabulary with high importance, importance is intended to consider frequency and familiarity. second, vocabulary used effectively in everyday life, third, basic vocabulary used in school life, and fourth, vocabulary suitable for vocabulary development.

3) Reliability and validity

The basic vocabularies selected for the treatment of school-aged children with language disorders were entered into the Microsoft (MS) Excel program. In addition, to see the reliability of the recorded vocabulary, it was checked whether the researcher with a PhD. majored in language therapy, who has had over 10 years of experience in clinical practice for speech therapy analyzed the vocabulary list and input vocabulary correctly.

In addition, three expert advisers conducted to examine the validity of the vocabulary list. The expert advisors reviewed first, whether the vocabulary is suitable for children with school-age language disorders, second, whether vocabulary is presented correctly, and third, whether some vocabularies are excluded though they should be included.

4) Vocabulary analysis result

To find out the degree of vocabulary distribution, a method of counting the cumulative frequency of each individual vocabulary was applied. Even if the same vocabulary appears many times, it was counted as one vocabulary. The number of vocabulary of LSSC (Lee et al., 2014) was 148 in total. The number of vocabulary of the KOLRA (Pae et al., 2015) was 111 in total. The number of REVT (Kim et al., 2009) was 380 in total. In addition, 982 A-level vocabularies were selected in the study of the “Report of vocabulary for learning Korean languages (Jo, 2003).” 617 vocabulary words were also selected in the Study on elementary school reading textbook vocabulary (Kim, 2004).

Among the entire vocabulary of the study subjects, the vocabulary common to all study subjects was one. There were 18 vocabularies commonly found in 4 or more subjects, and 63 vocabularies commonly found in 3 or more subjects. In this study, a total of 524 vocabularies common to two or more subjects were selected.

The 524 selected vocabularies were checked by 3 expert advisers. Through this process, the vocabulary that is not suitable for the basic vocabulary for treatment of children with language disorders in school age is deleted and corrected, and the final selected vocabulary is 517. It was divided into parts of speech selected for preliminary research, and it is shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Distribution by part of speech in vocabulary

Ⅲ. Results

1. Basic Vocabulary by Importance

If the basic vocabulary is divided into grade A, B, and C according to importance, vocabularies with an average importance of 4.5 or higher were rated as grade A by speech therapists. Grade A vocabulary can be said to be a very important vocabulary when applying treatment to school-age children with speech disorders. Grade B is a vocabulary with a mean value of 4.0 or higher, and grade C is a vocabulary with a mean value of 3.0 or higher. Based on these criteria, grade A vocabularies are 451, grade B are 45, and grade C are 18 vocabularies.

The number of basic learning vocabularies for the treatment of speech disorders in the final school age was 514, which were selected by vocabularies with an average importance score of 3.0 or higher in response of speech therapists. The vocabulary whose importance was less than 3.0 in average was deleted from the 'Basic Vocabulary List for Treatment of School-Age Children with Language Disorders.' It was a total of 3 out of 514 selected in the preliminary study, representing 0.6% (Table 2).

Table 2.

Distribution of basic vocabulary words by importance

2. Basic Vocabulary by Parts of Speech

Table 3 shows the distribution of the basic vocabulary according to part-of-speech vocabulary list for treatment of school-aged children with speech disorders. A list of basic vocabulary classifications according to parts of speech for the treatment of school-aged children with speech disorders is presented in Appendix 1.

Table 3.

Distribution of basic vocabulary words by part of speech

When analyzing the vocabulary distribution, there were 256 nouns, 111 verbs, 60 adjectives, 43 adverbs, 12 determiner, 11 pronouns, 4 interjections, and 17 numerals out of a total of 514 basic vocabularies.

The proportion of basic vocabulary according to parts of speech was 49.8% for nouns, 21.6% for verbs, and 11.6% for adjectives. It was found that nouns, verbs, and adjectives occupy most of the basic vocabulary for school-age treatment.

3. Basic Vocabulary by Category

The basic vocabulary of school-aged children with speech disorders was classified according to categories that could be another criterion for treatment, and the distribution of the basic vocabulary according to the categories is shown in Table 4. A list of basic vocabulary classified by category for treatment of school-aged children with speech disorders is presented in Appendix 2.

Table 4.

Distribution of basic vocabulary words by category

A total of 514 basic vocabularies were classified according to 17 categories, including the category of others. In the vocabulary distribution, the category of action and state was generally high. The next is, in order, object, time, person, body, place, food, nature, food, nature, degree, clothing, location, learning, transportation, animal, conjunction, other. The percentage of basic vocabulary according to category was 20.8% for action, and 16.2% for other.

In the vocabularies by category, it can be seen that the vocabulary that can be experienced and easily experienced in the daily life of school-aged children is different from the basic vocabulary of adults and the basic vocabulary of pre-school age.

Ⅳ. Discussion

This study aims to provide a basic vocabulary for effective vocabulary instruction in the treatment of children with speech disorders in school age. For vocabulary selection, LSSC (Lee et al., 2014), KOLRA (Pae et al., 2015), REVT (Kim et al., 2009), Result report for Korean learning vocabulary (Jo, 2003) and Vocabulary study of elementary school reading textbook (Kim, 2004) were analyzed to confirm the validity through a speech therapist to construct a vocabulary list.

Summarizing the results of the study, the number of basic learning vocabulary words for the treatment of speech disorders in the final school age was 514, selected only from vocabularies with an average score of 3.0 or higher. In previous studies, the research was conducted using vocabulary related words (Kim, 2003; Kim, 2004; Kim, 2005; Jo, 2003). It is significant that in order to present the basic vocabulary list of children with speech disorders in the school age, children with speech disorders in the actual school age applied standardized content related to vocabulary development of children with speech disorders, including the words of vocabulary-related test. In addition, in the previous study, as 618 vocabulary lists were presented in Kim (2004) study and 982 in Jo (2003) study, and Kim (2003) suggested less than 2000, there were differences in the number of vocabulary required. It can be seen that this depends on the research purpose, research object, and research criteria. It shows that depending on the diversity and specificity of the vocabulary, it will not be possible to select all of them as basic vocabulary. This study is significant in that it is presented according to the importance of vocabulary treatment for speech disorders in school age. Based on this, it can be selected and used according to the purpose of treating speech disorders according to importance.

Second, when analyzing the vocabulary distribution selected as the basic vocabulary for speech disorders in school age, the proportion of nouns was 49.8%, the proportion of verbs was 21.6%, and the adjective was 11.6%. It was found that nouns, verbs, and adjectives occupy most of the basic vocabulary for school-age treatment. These results were the same as those in the previous study Chang et al. (2003), which had a large proportion in the order of noun adjectives. In particular, nouns are distributed in almost half of the vocabulary. Looking at a child's early acquisition vocabulary may be based on the hypothesis that a noun with a specific reference of a child is first developed (Nelson, 1973). Nouns have a lot of categories in the basic vocabulary list because they refer to concrete objects, they are easy to perceive, they have related and hierarchically organized semantic structures, and they are easily perceived and acquired cognitively. In addition to nouns, other parts of speech can also be seen as an important basic vocabulary for treating school-age children. Therefore, based on the basic vocabulary suggested by each part of speech in this study, it will be applied to the treatment of children with speech disorders in school-age and treatment in various contexts will lead to more effective vocabulary acquisition.

Lastly, as a result of analyzing the basic vocabulary for the treatment of children with speech disorders in school age according to the category, it could be classified into 17 categories. Looking at the vocabulary distribution, the areas of behavior and status were high. Then, the next categories were object, time, person, body, place, food, nature, degree, clothing, location, learning, transportation, animals, and conjunction, in order. The difference from the study of Chang et al. (2003) was found to be due to the differences in the age of the subjects, categories such as vocabulary related to learning and school were added in this study. The categories related to learning could be classified into basic vocabulary reflecting the daily life of school-aged children. The basic vocabulary is analyzed and presented according to categories to provide convenience in vocabulary treatment for school-age children. Categorization is the classification of various objects and phenomena according to the similarity of attributes in the acquisition of vocabulary (Kim, 2005), which is an important element in adapting to everyday life as a concept belonging to the concept of classification. Treatment guides can be provided based on the vocabulary list of children with speech disorders children in school age with these categorization attributes.

Based on the results of the study, this study suggested the basic vocabulary for the treatment of speech disorders in school age, but since it was based on limited research, subsequent studies related to it are required. In addition, although it was validated by 10 experts, it is considered that if the clinical opinions were collected more in the further researches, it will greatly contribute to vocabulary treatment of speech disorders in school age. This study is divided into A, B, and C according to the importance of vocabulary, but this is composed of the opinions of 10 speech therapists. However, the importance of vocabulary has limitations as a result of questionnaire surveys for adults regardless of actual frequency of use and appearance.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by research funds of Catholic University of Pusan (2019).

이 연구는 2019학년도 부산가톨릭대학교의 교내연구비 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임.

References

• Ahn, B. K., Bae, I. H., Park, H. J., & Kwon, S. B. (2018). The efficacy of augmented reality based speech language therapy program on verbal expression vocabulary improvement in children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Speech-Language & Hearing Disorders, 27(2), 111-124. [https://doi.org/10.15724/jslhd.2018.27.2.009]
• Chang, H. Y., Jeon, H. S., Shin, M. S., & Kim, H. J. (2013). A study on selection of basic vocabulary for infants and toddlers. Journal of Speech-Language & Hearing Disorders, 22(3), 167-189. [https://doi.org/10.15724/jslhd.2013.22.3.010]
• Chung, B. J., & Shim, S. E. (2019). The relation of morphological awareness, vocabulary, syntactic knowledge, reading and reading comprehension in 1st through 4th graders: Inflection and derivation. Journal of Speech-Language & Hearing Disorders, 28(3), 51-59. [https://doi.org/10.15724/jslhd.2019.28.3.051]
• Jeong, M. R. (2016). Vocabulary development in school-aged children from multicultural families. Journal of Special Education, 31(2), 53-62. [https://doi.org/10.31863/JSE.2016.02.31.2.53]
• Jo, N. H. (2003). Result report for Korean learning vocabulary. Seoul: National Institute of Korean Language.
• Kang, E. S., & Jung, K. H. (2019). Comprehension of polysemy in the 1st, 3rd and 5th grade elementary school children. Journal of Speech-Language & Hearing Disorders, 28(3), 31-40. [https://doi.org/10.15724/jslhd.2019.28.3.031]
• Kim, K. H. (2003). Vocabulary for Korean language education by grade. Seoul: Pijbook.
• Kim, H. H., & Na, D. R. (2007). Korean version Boston Naming Test for Children (K-BNT-C). Seoul: Hakjisa.
• Kim, H. J., & Kown, S. B. (2018). The effect of augmented reality-based language therapy program on the vocabulary strength improvement in children with language developmental delay. Journal of Speech-Language & Hearing Disorders, 27(3), 87-96.
• Kim, J. O. (2004). A study on vocabulary in reading texts of Korean language for elementary school children: Centered on the first grade (Master's thesis). Dong-A University, Pusan.
• Kim, J. S. (2005). The effect of superordinate categorization training on naming ability of Alzheimer's disease patients (Master's thesis). Daegu University, Gyungbuk.
• Kim, Y. H., & Yim, D. S. (2019). Vocabulary acquisition abilities by reading types of children with vocabulary delay and typically developing children during shared book-reading. Journal of Speech-Language & Hearing Disorders, 28(2), 57-65. [https://doi.org/10.15724/jslhd.2019.28.2.057]
• Kim, Y. T., Hong, K. H., Kim, K. H., Jang, H. S., & Lee, J. Y. (2009). Receptive & Expressive Vocabulary Test (REVT). Seoul: Seoul Community Rehabilitation Center.
• Kim, Y. T., Park, H. J., & Min, H. K. (2003). School-aged children and adults’s core vocabulary for the development of an augmentative and alternative communication tool. Korean Journal of Communication Disorders, 8(2), 93-110. uci:G704-000725.2003.8.2.010
• Kim, W. R. (2012). Academic vocabulary instruction for CLD children: Literature review. Journal of Speech-Language & Hearing Disorders, 21(3), 259-282. [https://doi.org/10.15724/jslhd.2012.21.3.016]
• Lee, Y. K., Heo, H. S., & Jang, S. M. (2014). Language Scale for School-aged Children (LSSC). Seoul: Hakjisa.
• Lee, Y. M., Kim Y. T., & Park, E. H. (2005). A preliminary study for the core and fringe AAC vocabulary used by elementary school students. Korean Journal of Communication Disorders, 10(1), 134-152. uci:G704-000725.2005.10.1.003
• Lee, Y. S. (1996). Study on the principles of selecting classroom vocabulary in Korean language classroom (Master's thesis). Seoul National University, Seoul.
• Lee, C. W. (1998). Basic study for development of Korean vocabulary teaching theory. Korean Language Education, 98, 75-103.
• Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. (2012). Integration of preschool's nuri curriculum. Seoul: Daehanetextbook.
• National Institute of Korean Language. (2005). 2005 year new word. Seoul: Author.
• Nelson, K. (1973). Structure and strategy in learning to talk. Monographs of the Society for Research in Children Development, 38, 149. [https://doi.org/10.2307/1165788]
• Oh, S. J., & Kim, Y. T. (2014). Multicultural school-aged childrens performance in vocabulary knowledge-based tasks and language processing tasks. Journal of Speech-Language & Hearing Disorders, 23(2), 55-88. [https://doi.org/10.15724/jslhd.2014.23.1.004]
• Owens, R. (1999). Language disorders: A functional approach to assessment and intervention (3rd ed.). Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon.
• Pae, S. Y., Kim, M. B., Yoon, H. J., & Jang, S. M. (2015). Korean Language-based Reading Assessment (KOLRA). Seoul: Hakjisa.
• Park, S. Y., & Yim, D. S. (2019). The effect of word exposure intensity during storybook reading on the vocabulary learning of children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech-Language & Hearing Disorders, 28(4), 123-136. [https://doi.org/10.15724/jslhd.2019.28.4.123]
• Park, S. H., & Park, M. A. (2018). The characteristics of figurative language in school-aged children. Journal of Speech-Language & Hearing Disorders, 27(3), 149-161.
• Park, Y. K. (2013). (The) Comparative study on vocabulary change included daily conversation of Korean young children in 1971 and 2012 (Master's thesis). Kosin University, Pusan.
• Paul, R., & Courtenay, F. N. (2013). Language disorders from infancy through adolescence (4th ed.). St. Louis: Mosbym.
• Rivers, W. M. (1981). Teaching foreign language skill (2nd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. [https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226518855.001.0001]
• Yoon, H. J., & Chung, B. J. (2019). Vocabulary, word reading, and reading comprehension of first through fourth graders in the education and welfare priority project schools. Journal of Speech-Language & Hearing Disorders, 28(2), 195-202. [https://doi.org/10.15724/jslhd.2019.28.2.195]

참 고 문 헌

• 강은선, 정경희 (2019). 초등학교 1,3,5학년 아동의 다의어 이해 특성. 언어치료연구, 28(3), 31-40.
• 국립국어연구원 (2005). 2005년 신어. 서울: 국립국어연구원.
• 김광해 (2003). 등급별 국어 교육용 어휘. 서울: 박이정.
• 김영태, 홍경훈, 김경희, 장혜성, 이주연 (2009). 수용ㆍ표현 어휘력 검사. 서울: 서울장애인종합복지관.
• 김영태, 박현주, 민홍기 (2003). 보완·대체의사소통도구 개발을 위한 학령기 아동 및 성인의 핵심어휘 조사. 언어청각장애연구, 8(2), 93-110.
• 김우리 (2012). 학령기 다문화 아동을 위한 학습어휘 교수에 대한 문헌고찰. 언어치료연구, 21(3), 259-282.
• 김윤희, 임동선 (2019). 함께 책 읽기 방식에 따른 어휘발달지연 아동과 일반아동의 어휘 학습능력 비교. 언어치료연구, 28(2), 57-65.
• 김저옥 (2004). 초등학교 읽기 교과서 어휘 연구: 1학년을 중심으로. 동아대학교 교육대학원 석사학위 논문.
• 김정숙 (2005). 상위 범주화 훈련이 알츠하이머형 치매 환자의 이름대기에 미치는 효과. 대구대학교 대학원 석사학위 논문.
• 김향희, 나덕렬 (2007). 아동용 한국판 보스톤 이름대기 검사. 서울: 학지사.
• 김혜진, 권순복 (2018). 증강현실 기반 언어치료 프로그램이 언어발달지체 아동의 어휘력 향상에 미치는 효과. 언어치료연구, 27(3), 87-96.
• 박선희, 박민아 (2018). 학령기 아동의 비유언어 이해 특성. 언어치료연구, 27(3), 149-161.
• 박수연, 임동선 (2019). 어휘 노출 강도에 따른 책읽기를 활용한 어휘 중재가 단순언어장애아동의 어휘 학습에 미치는 효과. 언어치료연구, 28(4), 123-136.
• 박영경 (2013). 1971년과 2012년 한국유아들이 일상회화 속에 담긴 어휘 비교 연구. 고신대학교 대학원 박사학위 논문.
• 배소영, 김미배, 윤효진, 장승민 (2015). 한국어 읽기 검사. 서울: 학지사.
• 안병강, 배인호, 박희준, 권순복 (2018). 증강현실기반 언어치료 프로그램이 지적장애아동의 동사 표현 어휘력 향상에 미치는 효과. 언어치료연구, 27(2), 111-124.
• 오소정, 김영태 (2014). 학령기 다문화가정 언어장애 아동의 어휘지식 및 구어처리 과제 수행 특성. 언어치료연구, 23(2), 55-88.
• 윤효진, 정부자 (2019). 교육복지우선지원학교 1-4학년 아동의 어휘, 단어읽기와 읽기이해 특성. 언어치료연구, 28(2), 195-202.
• 이윤경, 허현숙, 장승민 (2014). 학령기 아동 언어 검사. 서울: 학지사.
• 이영미, 김영태, 박은혜 (2005). 학령기 아동의 학교상황 어휘 연구: AAC 적용을 위한 기초연구. 언어청각장애연구, 10(1), 134-152.
• 이영숙 (1996). 국어과 지도 대상 어휘의 선정 원리에 관한 연구. 서울대학교 대학원 석사학위 논문.
• 이충우 (1998). 국어 어휘 교육론 개발을 위한 기초 연구. 국어교육, 98, 75-103.
• 장현진, 전희숙, 신명선, 김효정 (2013). 영유아의 기초 어휘 선정연구. 언어치료연구, 22(3), 167-189.
• 정미란 (2016). 학령기 다문화가정 아동의 어휘 발달. 특수교육논총, 31(2), 53-62.
• 정부자, 심승은 (2019). 초등 1~4학년 아동의 형태인식 유형에 따른 어휘, 구문 및 읽기 특성. 언어치료연구, 28(3), 51-59.
• 조남호 (2003) 한국어 학습용 어휘 선정결과보고서. 서울: 국립국어연구원.