355

Yoshiko Okuyama

CALL Vocabulary Learning in Japanese:

Does Romaji Help Beginners
Learn More Words?
YOSHIKO OKUYAMA

University of Hawaii at Hilo

ABSTRACT
This study investigated the effects of using Romanized spellings on beginnerlevel Japanese vocabulary learning. Sixty-one rst-semester students at two universities in Arizona were both taught and tested on 40 Japanese content words in
a computer-assisted language learning (CALL) program. The primary goal of the
study was to examine whether the use of RomajiRoman alphabetic spellings
of Japanesefacilitates Japanese beginners learning of the L2 vocabulary. The
study also investigated whether certain CALL strategies positively correlate with
a greater gain in L2 vocabulary. Vocabulary items were presented to students in
both experimental and control groups. The items included Hiragana spellings,
colored illustrations for meaning, and audio recordings for pronunciation. Only
the experimental group was given the extra assistance of Romaji. The scores
of the vocabulary pretests and posttests, the types of online learning strategies
and questionnaire responses were collected for statistical analyses. The results
of the project indicated that the use of Romaji did not facilitate the beginners
L2 vocabulary intake. However, the more intensive use of audio recordings was
found to be strongly related to a higher number of words recalled, regardless of
the presence or absence of Romaji.

KEYWORDS
CALL, Vocabulary Learning, Japanese as a Foreign Language (JFL), Romaji Script, CALL
Strategies

INTRODUCTION
Learning a second language (L2) requires the acquisition of its lexicon. How do
American college students learn basic L2 vocabulary in a CALL program? If the
vocabulary is written in a nonalphabetic L2 script, such as Japanese, is it more
efcient to learn the words with the assistance of more familiar Roman-alphabetic
symbols? This experimental study explored these questions in the context of Japanese CALL vocabulary learning.
CALICO Journal, 24 (2), p-p 355-379.

2007 CALICO Journal

356

CALICO Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2

Teachers of less commonly taught languages (LCTLs) are faced with a variety
of issues that include lack of pedagogically sound resources and instructional materials (Johnston & Janus, 2003). Although categorically an LCTL, Japanese is in
fact the most commonly taught Asian language in the United States. A great challenge awaits learners of this nonalphabetic language, however, because Japanese
is ranked as category 4 language (highest) by the US Federal standards in terms
of its difculty for American students to acquire. While more college-level course
books are being published and software programs being created, many aspects of
teaching and learning Japanese still remain to be empirically investigated. One of
these underresearched aspects is the effect of nonalphabetic script on word learning.
Japanese Orthography

Japanese consists of three types of script: Hiragana, Katakana, and Kanji. The rst
two are called syllabaries because each symbol is a syllabic unit, while Kanji
characters are ideographic symbols. Japanese children have to memorize the two
syllabaries, with each set made of the basic 46 syllabic units and 61 extensions,
before mastering over 2,000 Kanji characters in order to master all three sets
of Japanese script. This is no easy task for learners since the difculty with the
syllabaries only worsens when learners come to understand that not all symbols
clearly map onto the sound units of the Japanese language (e.g., the same sound
e in oneesan big sister and eego English happens to be transcribed with different hiragana symbols).
Yet, the perceived difculty in learning Kana might be relative. According to
the orthographic depth hypothesis (Katz & Frost, 1992), it is easier to learn to read
words written in a transparent script than an opaque script. Kana syllabaries are
considered a transparent script, a type of orthography in which phoneme-grapheme mappings are highly consistent, and these symbols are processed differently
than Kanji characters by native speakers of Japanese (Ellis et al., 2004; Kawakami, Hatta, & Kogure, 2001; Sumiyoshi et al., 2004). English, on the other hand, is
called an opaque script, a type of orthography that lacks systematic sound-symbol
correspondence. In English, many alphabetic letters are associated with several
different sounds (particularly in the case of its ve vowels), making the mapping
of the letters to the sounds less predictable. Thus, unlike the English alphabet or
Kanji characters, the regularity of the symbol-sound mappings makes hiragana
an exceptionally transparent orthography (Ellis et al., 2004, p. 443).
Romaji versus Japanese Script

According to the Standards for Japanese Language Learning (National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project, 1999), there is an orthographic barrier between English and Japanese: In order to be able to read Japanese materials
written for adult native speakers, students must learn two different syllabic writing
systems and approximately 2,000 Chinese characters (kanji), most of which have
multiple meanings and readings (p. 332). The complexity of the Japanese writing

Yoshiko Okuyama

357

system poses a great challenge to learners of Japanese as a foreign language (JFL)

especially at the beginning level. In the US, Romaji (i.e., Romanized spellings of
Japanese text) is commonly used as a starter for JFL beginners.
Romaji is not entirely foreign to native speakers of Japanese. The script is used
on limited occasions by Japanese native speakers, such as writing their name on
a passport or indicating the name of a train station to foreign visitors. However,
it is not an integral part of the native orthography and is not mixed with the other
scripts within the same text. Romaji does not always transcribe the spoken language in a perfect grapheme-phoneme match. Moreover, both the Hepburn system (a style of Romanization invented by a missionary in 1867) and Kunrei-shiki
(a Romanization system adopted by the Japanese government in 1937) have been
used in Japan (Hannas, 1997). Two varying ways to transcribe some sounds (e.g.,
/fu/ vs. /hu/, /zi/ vs. /ji/) cause confusion on the part of readers and writers. Contrary to Romaji, grapheme-to-phoneme correspondences are entirely regular in
Hanyu Pinyin (meaning assembling sound), a phonetic alphabet set of 26 Roman letters in 13 letter groups used in addition to the traditional character system
in China (Chen, Fu, Iversen, Smith, & Matthews, 2002, pp.1089-1091). Pinyin is
taught to school age children in China as a phonetic assistance in learning a set of
about 6,000 meaning-based characters. Like Romaji, however, Pinyin is not used
as an independent written script nor mixed with the Chinese characters. Thus, it is
much easier for (adult) native speakers of Japanese and Chinese to process texts
entirely in the traditional orthography rather than in Romaji or Pinyin.
Many textbooks for JFL learners published in the US seem to encourage the use
of Romaji as an effective pedagogical aid. Books designed for self-study, such as
Japanese in 10 Minutes a Day (Kershul, 1992) and Master the Basics: Japanese
(Akiyama & Akiyama, 1995), are also written entirely in Romaji. An audiotapebased program, Just Listen n Learn Japanese (Katao & Takada, 1994), is accompanied with a transcription of the recordings written only in Romaji. By contrast,
college-level textbooks for JFL beginners, such as Yookoso (Tohsaku, 1994) and
Nakama (Makino, Y. Hatasa, & K. Hatasa, 1998), are mainly written in authentic
Japanese orthography.
When it comes to CALL software, existing programs lack consistency in spelling Japanese materials. CALL tutorials and commercially available language software vary in the degree of their use of Romaji as opposed to authentic Japanese
orthography. For example, NihongoWare 1 presents vocabulary and conversational materials exclusively in Romaji, while TriplePlay Plus! Japanese has these
items only in Japanese script. Yet, some programs, such as Robo-Sensei (Nagata,
2004), come in two versionsRomaji only and Japanese script onlyfor the user
to choose from.
In the North American context, Romaji is assumed to be an effective learning
aid particularly during the initial period of JFL learning. However, when to switch
to the authentic script has been controversial among JFL practitioners (Dewey,
2004; Hatasa, 2002). Those who advocate the early introduction of kana and kanji
have pedagogical philosophies quite different from those of the proponents of
delayed introduction. Divided views on the use of Romaji also exist among JFL

358

CALICO Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2

learners. Even if the kana syllabaries are taught in the early stages of instruction,
as in most JFL classes, many students are likely to use Romaji as a quick and easy
note-taking device throughout the rst year. These students claim that the use of
Romaji reduces their language-related anxiety and helps them overcome the challenge of learning Japanese especially when their L1 is English, a Roman alphabetic language. They may adamantly defend their Romaji transcription as a way
to absorb a large amount of new words efciently for quizzes and exams. Others
may simply consider this assistive device as a crutch, inhibiting themselves from
developing strong reading and writing skills in Japanese. Moreover, JFL learners
views on Romaji may also be inuenced by their teachers attitudes toward the
script (Dewey, 2004).
The question is: does the use of Romaji really facilitate JFL beginners language learning? Little research has been done to test whether substituting Japanese
orthography for Romaji in introductory textbooks or CALL programs is indeed
an effective pedagogical tool. In the absence of empirical evidence for the value
of Romaji, teachers are left to select courseware or textbooks for beginning-level
students based on their experience as an L2 learner or their own instincts. The
primary goal of this study is, therefore, to nd empirical evidence to address the
question of the pedagogical value of Romaji in CALL for JFL beginners.
L2 Vocabulary Learning across Different Nonalphabetic Orthographies

The main issue of second language acquisition discussed in this study is collegelevel students L2 word learning in a nonalphabetic language. L2 vocabulary gain
plays a crucial role especially in beginning SLA (Ellis, 1995). Although the topic
of vocabulary is no longer undervalued in SLA research due to a rapid increase
in L2 vocabulary research, little is available regarding how L2 learners process,
store, and retrieve words written in nonalphabetic script. Because research on L2
word recognition skills tends to be conducted on the learners of alphabetic languages, some issues specic to the lexical acquisition of nonalphabetic languages
are yet to be investigated.
As mentioned above, a major challenge to the beginners in Japanese is to learn
new vocabulary in the orthographically different script. In fact, for L2 learners of
any nonalphabetic language, the orthographic form is one key element affecting
lexical learning: The form of items is more likely to inuence difculty than
meaning, because there is much more shared knowledge of meaning between two
distinct languages than there is shared form (Nation, 2001, p. 29). Learning new
words by itself is a complex process and requires learners to access the semantic representation of the new word while simultaneously making sound-spelling
correspondence. Naturally, the process becomes even more demanding if the L2
script is completely different from that of L1. For learners whose rst language
is not related to the second language, the learning burden will be heavy (Nation,
2001, p. 24) because the learning burden of the written form of words will be
strongly affected by rst and second language parallels (p. 45). L2 orthography
also plays a signicant role even beyond word recognition. L2 learners acquisi-

Yoshiko Okuyama

359

tion of reading skills is dependent upon their ability to identify the printed (i.e.,
orthographic) form of a word or lexical item in order to activate the words meaning, structural/syntactic information, and other pragmatic or world knowledge associations (Fender, 2003, p. 291).
The orthographic distance between L1 and L2 creates a cognitive overload in
deciphering L2 lexical items or processing L2 reading materials (Akamatsu, 1999;
Fender, 2003; Laufer, 1997; Koda, 1997, Tan et al., 2003), whereas the similarity in L1 and L2 spelling patterns facilitates word recognition (Muljani, Koda, &
Moates, 1998). The orthographic mismatch may make L2 word learning challenging for beginners but not impossible. For example, Wong, Perfetti, and Liu (2003)
found that native speakers of English were able to develop sensitivity toward
structural complexity and compositional relationship of Chinese radicals at the
early stage of L2 learning. According to their lexical processing model of Chinese
characters, understanding Chinese characters involves three interlinked constituents: orthographic, phonological, and semantic. Since one-to-one grapheme-phoneme mappings are unavailable in the logographic script of Chinese, L2 learners
visual-orthographic processing turned out to be the most critical element. In this
model, learners of Chinese must rst work on stroke analysis, seeking information in the orthographic unit of the character, and then access the phonological
unit of the character as well as its semantic unit. Yet, rst-year learners of Chinese
have not made a strong connection between the orthographical and phonological
units. Chung (2002, 2003) also looked at alphabetic learners of Chinese, shedding
light on how to reduce cognitive overload derived from L1-L2 script discrepancy.
When it comes to alphabetic learners of Japanese, research has been done primarily on American students processing of Kanji characters (e.g., Matsunaga, 1995,
2001) rather than Kana.
As mentioned before, Japanese syllabaries and kanji characters require different types of processing. Therefore, drawing directly on the ndings of research
in logographic script does not sufce in understanding how L2 learners process
and store words written in syllabic script. The current study lls a critical need by
investigating whether Romaji, a phonetic assistance consisting of visually familiar Roman alphabet letters, helps JFL beginners overcome the burden of learning
words in Hiragana, a nonalphabetic orthography.
CALL Strategies

This study also investigated what strategies students were likely to use when
learning L2 words in multimedia software. Gathering useful information on learners strategies has always been a challenge to researchers. Survey studies on vocabulary learning strategies (e.g., Kudo, 1999) provide an insightful account on
learners self-reported strategy use, but there is often a discrepancy between what
strategies L2 learners report having used and what they actually used in languagelearning problem solving. To obtain a holistic view of L2 learner behaviors, we
need to incorporate a method of recording the students actual strategy use.
Here, CALL research technologies come in handy: the computer can be pro-

360

CALICO Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2

grammed to compile inventories of behavioral patterns followed by users of language software. The use of hypermedia presents intensive interaction between
user and computer and executes a variety of tasks, allowing for a rich recording
of online learning strategies in an unobtrusive way. Recently, there has been a
surge of interest in CALL strategies and CALL user tracking technologies (AlSeghayer, 2001; Ashworth, 1996; Collentine, 2000; Hwu, 2003; Hegelheimer &
Tower, 2004; Laufer & Hill, 2000; Liou, 2000; Vincent & Hah, 1996).
For example, Ashworths (1996) CALL program, The Observer, was designed
to store L2 learners keyboard activities (e.g., mouse-clicks and cursor movements) in computer les. He suggested the possibility of observing other online
actions, such as transcriptions of user input in computer-mediated conversational
exchanges or frequency counts of accessing online dictionaries and thesauruses
in a reading comprehension task. Liou (2000) also emphasized the advantage
of using computers recording abilities to collect learner data. Hwu (2003) used
WebCTs student-tracking system to collect learner data during CALL activities.
Other SLA studies have also incorporated user behavior tracking technologies as
a data collection methodology or have documented strategies employed by CALL
users for L2 word learning (Collentine, 2000; Laufer & Hill, 2000; Al-Seghayer,
2001), showing great promise for conducting L2 vocabulary research in this electronic medium.
CALL is thought to have great potential in increasing the amount of L2 input
and improving the relatively low L2 achievement by learners of Asian languages
(McMeniman, 1997). Although Chinese, Japanese, Hebrew and other nonalphabetic LCTLs have traditionally suffered from a shortage of orthographically well
designed CALL programs due to problems in displaying ideographs or rightto-left writing (Ariew, 1991, p. 34), the development of Unicode has improved
CALL programs capability of handling foreign fonts (Corda & Van Der Stel,
2004). However, it is still unknown how efciently CALL can assist learners of
non-Western, nonalphabetic languages. For instance, what sort of CALL strategies do JFL students use in a self-paced computer environment? What CALL
strategies facilitate the learning of this orthographically complex difcult language, especially with respect to trying to absorb as many new words as possible?
The current study attempts to demonstrate the feasibility of applying computer
technology to document CALL strategies employed in learning nonalphabetic
vocabulary materials. The ndings from the study will also add insight on the
relationship between L2 script and vocabulary learning in a CALL environment,
providing useful implications to JFL teachers as well as software developers.
METHODOLOGY
The main purpose of the study was to investigate the effects of using Romaji on
English-speaking college students learning of beginning-level Japanese words.
The research question was whether or not the availability of Romaji signicantly
facilitated learners short-term learning of such words when using a CALL program.

Yoshiko Okuyama

361

The primary independent variable of the study was the type of orthography used
to present the Japanese vocabulary items (i.e., Japanese vocabulary instruction in
Hiragana only or together with Romaji). The dependent variable was L2 learners
immediate vocabulary increase in Japanese, measured by both kana and sound
recognition tests in the same CALL environment. Because the research purported
to test the impact of the independent variable (i.e., script type) on the dependent
variable (i.e., L2 vocabulary learning), an experimental design was selected. The
students in the control group learned new words in a Hiragana-only version of
the CALL program, while the students in the experimental group learned the same
words in a Romaji-plus version of the program. It was hypothesized that the use
of Romaji would result in better attainment of the newly learned nonalphabetic
(Japanese) words by English-speaking students.
Subjects

The target population for this experiment was dened as English-speaking learners of entry level Japanese who were enrolled in American universities. A sample
of students from rst-semester Japanese courses was thought to be representative
of the identied population.
Sixty-one students of rst-semester Japanese in two research universities were
randomly assigned to either the experimental or control group. The control group
(n = 31) was made of 18 students from Arizona State University (ASU) and 13
students from Northern Arizona University (NAU), while the experimental group
(n = 30) consisted of 17 students from ASU and 13 students from NAU. The average age of the students was 21.7 years. Although there was a gap in the mean ages
of the students at the two universities (M = 20.8 for ASU; M = 23.0 for NAU),
an unpaired t test showed that the discrepancy in age distribution was not statistically signicant when the alpha level was set at .01: t (59) = -2.101, p = .0399.
A frequency distribution of each of the other demographic characteristics was
also made between the groups by university. There were more male students (23
in ASU, 16 in NAU) than female students (12 in ASU, 10 in NAU). More than
half of each group (n = 20 for both groups) had no experience with the Japanese
language prior to the semester. Sixteen ASU students identied themselves as
uent in a language other than English, while only 6 NAU students identied
themselves as uent in another language. However, Each group had the same
number (n = 5) of international students (i.e., nonnative speakers of English). The
demographic comparisons of the two school groups indicated that, whereas NAU
students were relatively older, ASU students had slightly more linguistically enriched backgrounds. Despite these few differences, the overall background characteristics of ASU and NAU students were similar. Thus, it was appropriate to
treat the two school groups as one and to draw conclusions about the population.
The students at both institutions used the same textbook, Yookoso! in their
classes.1 Having little or no previous knowledge of Japanese, the students at both
ASU and NAU were introduced to the hiragana and katakana syllabaries in class
within the rst few weeks of the semester. They were instructed to use the vo-

362

CALICO Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2

cabulary CALL program to learn new Japanese words (i.e., words other than those
presented in the textbook) as a supplemental learning task.
Pilot Phase of the Project

Early prototypes of the CALL program were piloted for feasibility and effectiveness in a series of sessions with 20 volunteer subjects. Feedback from the volunteer subjects enabled the researcher to address problematic areas and strengthen
the programs design and functionality, including the use of English translations
to reinforce learners accurate interpretation of visual and audio input and the addition of situational contexts (e.g., dialogues) to enrich the vocabulary learning.
Hardware and Software

The instructional materials used in the vocabulary CALL program were an adaptation of a commercially available CD-ROM software program, Learn to Speak
Japanese (1994), a self-paced language program for beginning-level learners of
Japanese. Four of 20 lessons in Learn to Speak Japanese, four lessons were selected and adapted for this study.2 The existing words of the four lessons and their
accompanying illustrations and audio recordings were entirely replaced with new
words and color drawings as well as new recordings by two different Japanese
speakers (a male and a female). The modied lesson materials contained a total
of 40 words that were not included in the rst-semester Japanese class (for more
information, see the Tasks section below).
The CALL program, designed for Macintosh,3 consisted of three modules: (a) a
preview module on how to use the CALL program, (b) a lesson module containing the exercises, and (c) a testing module to administer tests on vocabulary recall.
It is important to emphasize that the lesson module was designed not only to
provide L2 vocabulary lessons to the students, but also to gather learner data on
each student (i.e., data on online learning behaviors such as how long the student
spent on each lesson). Similarly, the testing module was programmed to execute
the test batteries and then to record an individual students test scores and other
information (e.g., reaction time to test items).
The method of computer-mediated data collection was chosen because of its
ability to discretely and objectively capture language-learning data and languagetesting data and to reduce internal threats to validity such as teacher experience
during the learning session (Chapelle and Jamieson, 1991). Specically, in this
study, the program randomized the test items in the testing module. Students were
tested on the same words but in different orders, thereby greatly reducing subject sensitivity toward individual items that could have developed in the lesson
module. This method also randomly distributed words of varying difculty (e.g.,
word length ranging from two-syllable to ve-syllable words) throughout the test.
Thus, computer technology helped not only to control the effect of extraneous
variables but also to secure accuracy and consistency in measurement. The study
was able to pool a large amount of data without data collection errors.

363

Yoshiko Okuyama
Tasks

The aim of instruction in this experiment was to expose the students to 40 Japanese lexical items in two versions of a CALL program (with Romaji and without
Romaji) in order to test which version can teach L2 vocabulary lessons more
effectively. All the words were concrete nouns in Japanese and were of appropriate length and complexity for the students prociency level. Words containing
consonant-glide combinations (i.e., hiragana syllables such as kya, hyi, ryo) and
geminates (i.e., double consonants as in sakka) were avoided except for one item
(sentakki refrigerator). The selected words were relatively high frequency words,
and the range of the number of syllables varied from two to ve. All words were
hiragana type words that t each lessons vocabulary theme and which had clear
English equivalents. Because the students lived in Arizona, familiar creatures of
desert life (e.g., scorpion and hummingbird) were also included. The Japanese
instructors at each school were also consulted on the nal corpus of vocabulary
items in order to eliminate any words of potential familiarity to the students. For
preliminary vocabulary assessment, 10 words were drawn randomly from the 40
for each of two pretests. All 40 words used in the lessons and the tests are listed
in Table 1.
Table 1
List of Japanese Vocabulary Items

Lesson 1 Structural Emphasis: Likes and dislikes

( )
1. shika deer

Vocabulary theme:
Desert animals

2. hebi snake

3. tokage lizard
4. uzura quail

5. sasori scorpion

6. yamaneko wildcat
7. koomori bat

8. fukuroo owl

9. hachidori hummingbird
10. araiguma raccoon

Lesson 2 Structural emphasis: Describing things

(... // )
1. shima island

2. taki waterfall
3. umi sea

4. mori forest

5. kazan volcano

Average word length:

3.4 syllables

Vocabulary theme:
The physical world/the cosmos

364

CALICO Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2

6. kasee Mars

7. dosee Saturn
8. taiyoo Sun

9. sekidoo equator

10. nagareboshi shooting

star

Lesson 3 Structural emphasis: This and that

(// )
1. masu trout

Average word length:

3.0 syllables
Vocabulary theme:
Ocean life

2. kani crab

3. kai seashell
4. same shark

5. kame turtle

6. hitode starsh
7. kujira whale
8. unagi eel

9. kamome seagull

10. tobiuo ying sh

Lesson 4 Structural emphasis: Where is it?
( )
1. hasami scissors

Average word length:

2.6 syllables
Vocabulary theme:
Household items

2. kabin vase

3. kagami mirror
4. denchi battery

5. soojiki vacuum cleaner

6. dentaku calculator

7. gomibako trash can

8. fuutoo envelope

9. reezooko refrigerator
10. sentakuki washing
machine

Average word length:

3.8 syllables

Each word was presented with a color drawing and an English translation. The
use of the English gloss was necessary to ensure the clarity of meaning of the L2
word, which may not always be immediately evident in a drawing alone. There
were also buttons for the pronunciation of a single word and for a conversation
containing the relevant vocabulary item. The audio recordings of single-word
pronunciations as well as dialogues were made in a male voice for some and in

365

Yoshiko Okuyama

a female voice for others. Both speakers were native speakers of standard Tokyo Japanese. Each dialogue was a dyadic conversation scripted to present the
keyword in a sentence structure familiar to the rst-semester Japanese learners.
For example, in lessons 1 and 2, Speaker A asked a yes/no question (e.g., X wa
suki desuka? Do you like X? or X wa tooi desuka? Is X far away?), to which
Speaker B responded positively or negatively. In lessons 3 and 4, Speaker A asked
an interrogative question (e.g., Sore wa nan desuka? What is that? or X wa doko
desuka? Where is X?) to which Speaker B supplied pertinent answers. These
sentence structures were also in accordance with the grammar instruction that
both the ASU and NAU students had already been provided in their regular classroom lessons. The spellings of the vocabulary and dialogues were presented in
Hiragana because of the students prociency level. The Romaji spellings of the
40 words (not the dialogues) were included in the version of the CALL program
used by the students in the experimental group. Figure 1 shows the structure of the
vocabulary displays in the lesson module.
Figure 1
Vocabulary Display in the Lesson Module

Button
to hear dialogue
and see its
written script

Button
to review
hiragana
syllabary

Button
for grammar
explanation

Drawing with
button for
single-word
pronunciation

Navigation buttons

In the lesson module, the following types of information were collected: (a) total learning time (i.e., the time the subject spent per lesson and on all the lessons),
(b) audio access (i.e., the number of clicks made on the drawing to hear the Japanese pronunciation of the word), (c) kana access (i.e., the number of clicks made
on Kana to review the syllabary of the 46 basic hiragana symbols and to learn
some tips on how to read sets of symbols as words), (d) grammar access (i.e., the
number of clicks made on grammar button to access grammatical explanation),
and (e) dialogue access (i.e., the number of clicks made on dialogue button to hear
the dialogue and have it displayed in Japanese text).

366

CALICO Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2

The testing module was made up of two posttests. The purpose of the posttests
was to measure students short-term vocabulary learning. The immediate recall
of the instructed L2 vocabulary was evaluated in terms of L2 sound recognition
and of L2 script recognition. The rst posttest, Sound Games, consisted of four
pages of sound recognitions on all the 40 words and measured students ability to
identify the illustration (for meaning) that corresponded to an L2 sound cue. The
second posttest, Kana Games, presented four pages of kana script recognition
test on the same 40 words and assessed students ability to select the correct illustration based on the hiragana spelling shown in the upper left-hand corner of
the display (see Figure 2). All the test directions were written in English.
Figure 2
Sample Kana Game

In the testing module, the program collected learner information (e.g., subjects
name, response items, and score of each vocabulary test automatically calculated
by the computer) and stored the data in the individual subject le.
Procedures

The students were rst given two pen-and-paper pretests, each of which contained
10 Japanese words. The rst pretest was a sound recognition test, and the second
pretest was a written hiragana recognition test. The pretests were administered to
ensure that there was no signicant difference in Japanese vocabulary knowledge
between the experimental and control groups as well as between the two university groups. After a brief orientation session in which the features of the program
were presented and explained, the students started the vocabulary lessons at their
own computer stations. They were told that the main instructional objective was
to learn new Japanese words using the multimedia software. They were allowed
to navigate from one lesson to another at their own pace. After completing all
of the lesson modules, the students took the posttest in the testing module. The

367

Yoshiko Okuyama

students completed both the lessons and tests in one sitting at the laboratory. After
exiting the program, the students were asked to ll out a short questionnaire as the
last procedure. The main purpose of the exit questionnaire was to collect various
information on the learners. The rst portion of the questionnaire was designed
to obtain subject characteristics (e.g., gender, age, major, native language, prior
exposure to Japanese and length of experience in learning Japanese, and prior
foreign language learning experience). Questions related to the students demographic background were adapted from Graces (1995) CALL experimental study
on L2 learners of French. Other parts were drawn from a study of JFL learners by
Okamura (1995) for comparative purposes.
RESULTS

Group Differences

The results of the analysis of the subject characteristics from the questionnaire
showed that both gender and age were evenly distributed between the groups and
the universities. The only substantial difference was the amount of previous Japanese exposure. In the control group (n = 31), 25 students had had some experience
learning Japanese (e.g., as a language course requirement in high school) prior to
taking the rst-semester Japanese course in college. In the experimental group (n
= 30), only half of the students had had some prior exposure to the language.
However, in spite of the discrepancy in their previous Japanese experience, the
groups did not differ in their knowledge of the Japanese vocabulary items. The results from a t test conrmed that the group-based difference in pretest scores was
not statistically signicant at the .01 level. Table 2 shows the means and standard
deviations of the pretest scores by group and pretest type.
Table 2
Means and Standard Deviations of Pretest Scores by Pretest Type and by Group
Pretest

Prestest 1
Pretest 2

Group

SD

Cont (n = 31)

1.000

1.033

Cont (n = 31)

1.613

1.407

Exp (n = 30)
Exp (n = 30)

1.233
1.067

1.223
1.015

The very low scores in both pretests indicate that the students knowledge of
Japanese words was minimal prior to the CALL instruction and was evenly spread
across the groups.
Overall L2 CAL-based Vocabulary Learning

Table 3 presents a summary of the pretest-posttest results for both groups combined.

368

CALICO Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2

Table 3
Means and Standard Deviations of Pretest and Posttest Scores for Combined
Groups by Test Type
Test

Prestest 1
Pretest 2

Posttest 1
Posttest 2

SD

1.115

1.127

21.262

9.588

1.344

18.738

1.250
11.275

While the mean scores of the pretests were very low, those of the posttests
indicate a sizable increase in the students vocabulary knowledge after the CALL
instruction: students correctly identied approximately half of the 40 items on
each posttest (21.3 [53%] in posttest 1 and 18.7 [47%] in posttest 2). This general
outcome provides evidence that students learned an appreciable amount of vocabulary as the result of using the CALL program.
Research Questions and Hypotheses

The main research question in this study was whether or not Romaji facilitated
Japanese beginners short-term learning of hiragana words in CALL. The primary
research hypothesis was
There is a systematic relationship between the presence or absence of Romaji
assistance and students gain in knowledge of Japanese vocabulary.
Romaji and Japanese Vocabulary Learning

To investigate the effect of Romaji, two-tailed independent t tests were performed

between the control and experimental groups on the two posttests. Generally
speaking, a one-tailed t test is more powerful. However, the two-tailed procedure
was used because both the possible positive and negative effects of Romaji on
vocabulary learning had to be considered. The results of the t tests did not show a
signicant difference in either posttest 1 or posttest 2 (t = .262, df = 59, p = .794
and t = .364, df = 59, p = .717, respectively).
Another variable measured was reaction time (RT) to the vocabulary items in
the posttest, here measured in computer ticks (60 ticks = 1 sec). The experimental groups mean RT was slightly lower than that of the control group, 183 ticks
versus 230 ticks, for posttest 1 and virtually the same for posttest 2. Independent
t tests did not show a signicant difference for either posttest.
CALL Strategies and Japanese Vocabulary Learning

As mentioned earlier, this study also examined the students use of several learning strategies. These strategies were labeled as CALL strategies because they
inform us of how students approached the L2 learning tasks in a CALL environ-

369

Yoshiko Okuyama

ment. The program recorded the students use of the CALL strategies in individual computer les. The following acronyms are used in reporting the analyses
of the use of these strategies:
1. TL = total learning time spent on the CALL program,
2. AA (Audio Access) = clicking the audio recording button for each new L2
word,
3. KA (Kana Access) = clicking the kana tutor button to review the hiragana
syllabary,
4. GA (Grammar Access) = clicking the Grammar Help button to learn about
the sentence structures used in the program, and
5. DA (Dialogue Access) = clicking the dialogue button to listen to a dyadic
conversation containing the target word.
Students use of each strategy (other than TL) was measured by the number of
clicks made on the relevant button. Table 4 presents descriptive statistics of students use of all CALL strategies.
Table 4
Means and Standard Deviations of Use of CALL Strategies
Strategy

SD

TL

1339.508

631.627

KA

1.918

4.961

AA
GA
DA

188.410
2.721

71.311

182.836
2.788

37.649

The unit of measure for TL was 1 sec; the average TL (1,340 in the table) is equal
to approximately 22 minutes. The standard deviation is very large (631.627), indicating a wide disparity in the length of time individual students spent in the
program. Among the other strategies, the mean score of AA was found to be the
highest (M = 188.410 clicks). The second most frequently used strategy was DA
(M = 71.311 clicks). The least used functions were KA (M = 1.918 clicks) and GA
(M = 2.721 clicks).
To examine whether the students in the experimental group studied the CALL
vocabulary differently than those in the control group, t tests were performed on
the use of the strategies. Table 5 displays the results of the t tests. There were no
signicant differences between the groups in the use of any of the strategies.

370

CALICO Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2

Table 5
Between-group Comparisons of the Use of CALL Strategies
Strategy
TL

Mean diff.

AA
KA
GA
DA

df

34.452

59

1.347

59

72.629
-0.680
-9.226

0.211

.833

1.062

.293

59

1.570

59

-0.951

59

-0.956

.122
.345
.343

To determine whether students use of CALL strategies were related to their

vocabulary learning, the control and experimental groups were combined and correlations between their use of strategies and posttest scores were computed (see
Table 6).
Table 6
Correlation Coefcients of Use of CALL Strategies and Posttest Scores
Posttest 1
Posttest 2

TL

.309
.285

AA

.499
.513

KA

-.079
-.143

GA

-.078
-.133

DA

.056

-.048

The gures in Table 6 show that using AA (sound) was highly correlated with
both posttests: .499 for Posttest 1 and .513 for Posttest 2. A stepwise regression
analysis conrmed that the frequent use of audio access was indeed a strong predictor of vocabulary learning.
To further investigate the extent to which this strategy alone contributed to vocabulary learning, a linear regression was run on AA and the two posttests. In
this analysis, AA was used as the predictor variable and the posttest scores as the
criterion variable. For posttest 1 (sound recognition), the coefcient of determination (r2) was .249, meaning that approximately 25% of the variance in posttest 1
was explained by the variance in AA (Audio Access). For posttest 2 (kana recognition), the coefcient of determination was .264, meaning that about 26% of the
variance in posttest 2 was explained by the variance in AA. Based on the results
this analysis, AA is a clearly important predictor of vocabulary learning.
To summarize this section, the results of statistical analyses in this study did
not provide empirical support for the benecial role of Romaji in learning new
hiragana words within a short instructional period. Instead, the results showed a
systematic relationship between the use of L2 audio and L2 vocabulary learning.
DISCUSSION

Effects of Romaji

It was hypothesized in this project that the use of Romaji would help Englishspeaking learners acquire Japanese vocabulary because of the similarity of the

Yoshiko Okuyama

371

symbols used in Romaji and the Roman alphabet. However, it was found that the
experimental group who learned the Japanese content words with Romaji in the
CALL program did not score higher in the posttests than the control group who
learned the same vocabulary without Romaji assistance. This nding was consistent with the results from both the sound and script posttests. The opportunity to
view Japanese vocabulary in Romaji had no effect on the number of words correctly identied by the students in the rst-semester Japanese classes.
JFL learners attitudes toward Romaji has been raised as a signicant variable in a survey study (Dewey, 2004). Is it possible that the results in the current
study were inuenced by the subject groups preference for Japanese script? In
the exit questionnaires, the students were asked whether the presence or absence
of Romaji would have helped them remember more Japanese words in the CALL
program. The responses from students in both groups were almost evenly divided:
25 students favored the Romaji assistance in the CALL program and 23 students
preferred the Japanese script only in the program. (The rest of the students were
undecided on the issue.) Of greater importance, these orthographic preferences
were evenly distributed between the control and experimental groups. Thus, the
beginning-level Japanese learners personal beliefs about Romaji were unlikely to
have affected the overall L2 vocabulary outcome.
Is it possible that the students in the experimental group did not pay attention
to Romaji because of their solid familiarity with the hiragana syllabary? As many
JFL practitioners can attest, it is highly unlikely that students in rst-semester
Japanese can fully master the Hiragana syllabary within the rst few weeks of
instruction. Their knowledge of the syllabary tends to be shaky until the end of
the semester. The reaction time data of the study showed that those who viewed
the vocabulary items with Romaji during the CALL lessons were slightly faster in
matching L2 audio cues with correct meanings. This nding may suggest that the
students in the experimental group made use of Romaji to some extent. The difference in reaction time between the two groups may imply that Romaji assisted the
experimental group in speeding up the activation of lexical memory, but it should
be remembered that the difference was not statistically signicant.
Contrary to the pedagogical assumptions supporting the use of Romaji, such
orthographic assistance did not have an impact on beginning-level CALL-based
vocabulary learning in Japanese. Hatasas (2002) study on the classroom use of
Romaji provided evidence that conrms this nding. Students who were taught
with the prolonged use of Romaji in class did not perform signicantly better
on their midterm and nal exams than those who had an early introduction of
authentic Japanese orthography. No effects of the use of Romaji were found either on their short-term or long-term development of Japanese prociency at the
introductory level in Hatasas study. Therefore, once Hiragana script has been
introduced, JFL beginners are ready to handle the learning burden of L2 written
forms (Nation, 2001) in acquiring basic Japanese words.
What are possible explanations for the lack of effects of Romaji assistance,
then? One explanation may come from the orthographic depth hypothesis (Katz
& Frost, 1992) and the correlation between orthographic transparency and the

372

CALICO Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2

ease in developing L1 word recognition skills (Ehri, 1999; Ellis & Hooper, 2001;
Fender, 2003; Seymour, Aro, & Erskine, 2003; Ellis et al., 2004; Kim, Davis,
Burnham, & Luksaneeyanawin, 2004). For example, in an experimental study
(Ellis et al., 2004), Japanese elementary school children rarely made errors in
reading the target words in the transparent script of Hiragana but were not so
successful with the opaque script of Kanji. Similarly, Greek children were more
successful at reading the words due to the transparent script of Greek with highly
regular grapheme-to-phoneme mappings than English-speaking children in the
same grades whose orthography is far less transparent than the Greek writing
system. Ellis et al. concluded that it is much harder to learn to read aloud in
orthographically opaque scripts (p.455) and that self-teaching might be more
difcult in orthographically opaque scripts than in transparent ones (p.456).
Kim et al. (2004) examined the visual sensitivity of Thai readers and Korean
Hangul readers. Thai is written in 72 alphabetic symbols of some visual complexity (e.g., many similar looking symbols), yet has high regularity between symbol
and sound. Hangul, on the other hand, is a script of 24 alphabetic symbols that
has a clear one-to-one match with Korean phonology and presents phonologically
similar phonemes, such as /n/, /d/, and /t/, with visually similar graphemes. They
found that the nature of Thai orthography demands higher visual sensitivity in
processing words and that the lack of such sensitivity negatively affects readers of
Thai, but not Hangul readers. In a similar study, Kim and Davis (2004) also found
that visual processing problems did not result in poor reading in Hangul because
the Korean orthography is visually transparent. Drawing from these ndings, one
can speculate that L2 vocabulary is more easily learned in a transparent script
(e.g., Japanese Hiragana and Korean Hangul) than in an opaque script (e.g., Japanese Kanji and the English alphabet) and that it is more likely for L2 learners to
become self-sufcient in decoding new words in transparent orthographies early
in the learning process. Once Hiragana is introduced to JFL learners, reverting to
the Roman alphabet does not appear to bring pedagogical merit to their beginning-level vocabulary learning.
CALL Strategies

In the second set of analyses, the frequency of using the sound button to access
audio recordings was strongly correlated with higher scores in both the sound and
script recognition posttests. Hegelheimer and Tower (2004) also found a close
relationship between achievement and repetitive use of L2 audio. On the other
hand, the strategy of spending more time in the CALL program was found to
only marginally inuence L2 vocabulary retention. In other words, time on task
had little impact on the number of words recalled. This was also similar to what
Hegelheimer and Tower (2004) discovered. The students who frequently used the
dialogue recordings stayed in the program for a longer period of time mainly because the auditory presentation of each dialogue took longer than that of a single
word. Thus, although those who listened to the dialogues took longer to complete
the CALL lessons, the length of CALL learning time per se was not a strong

Yoshiko Okuyama

373

predictor of vocabulary learning. The other tools available in the CALL software,
such as the kana tutor and grammar review, were rarely utilized by the students
(the mean number of mouse clicks on the kana button was 1.9 and on the grammar
button 2.7) and had no impact on their vocabulary learning.
Why is accessing L2 sound so important in retaining newly learned words in
short-term memory? Baddeley (2000) distinguished between two domains of
working memory: verbal and visual-spatial. It has been widely accepted that word
recognition is primarily a phonological process in Hiragana, Hangul, or Pinyin
(Simpson & Kang, 1994; Kawakami et al., 2001; Kim & Davis, 2002; Chen et al.,
2002; Ellis et al., 2004) but more of a visual-spatial process in Chinese (Tavassoli, 1999; Sugishita & Omura, 2001; Ho, Chan, Tsang, & Lee, 2002; Chen et al.,
2002; Flaherty, 2003). For example, a neurolinguistic study (Chen et al., 2002)
provided fMRI images of different brain activities involved in native speakers
processing Chinese characters and its phonetic counterpart, Pinyin.
If Hiragana also requires a high degree of phonological processing in reading
words, English-speaking JFL beginners need not struggle as much due to their
prior experience with another phonological script, the English alphabet. Furthermore, the symbol-sound mapping of the Hiragana syllabary is much more consistent than that of English orthography. Thus, adding another phonetic script of high
regularity, Romaji, to the CALL program was probably redundant and did not
enable the students to store any more words than their short-term memory could
hold. From a pedagogical point of view, it might be more benecial for JFL beginners to develop the solid knowledge of all the Hiragana symbols and adequate
word recognition skills based on that knowledge. If Hiragana itself was a sufcient device for the students to learn new words on their own in this brief CALL
instruction, then mastering the syllabary within the rst year of Japanese learning
should be of high priority. If the use of a phonetic notation device enhances the
learning of Kanji (a logograph that demands more visual-spatial processing), then
having Hiragana might be sine qua non for learning more L2 words via Kanji
characters in the following years.
The current study demonstrated the important role of L2 sound in CALL vocabulary learning. The intensive use of audio recordings was linked to better lexical learning not only in the recognition of L2 sound form (Posttest 1) but also in
the recognition of L2 orthographic form (Posttest 2). If the use of audio recordings
has a substantial impact on L2 vocabulary retention, focus on L2 phonological
form needs to be recognized as an important CALL learning strategy. CALL users
should be encouraged to access the softwares audio input frequently if the goal
of an L2 task is to learn new words. Whether students prefer Romaji assistance
or not, as long as they utilize L2 audio intensively, they are likely to learn new
vocabulary more effectively in CALL-based materials.
Limitations of the Study

The implications of this study should be viewed in the light of some limitations.
First, the implication that introductory-level students benet not from reading in

374

CALICO Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2

Romaji but from listening to L2 sound applies only to the short-term learning of
L2 vocabulary. Second, the study focused on students receptive knowledge of L2
vocabulary acquired in a CALL environment and did not address how students
could develop productive knowledge of L2 vocabulary. Third, the main purpose
of this study was to examine the effects of Romaji assistance for JFL beginners
in CALL. The students represented in the study were rst-semester Japanese students who had become acquainted with the hiragana syllabary within the rst few
weeks of instruction. Thus, the ndings should not be interpreted as pedagogical
implications for those who have no familiarity with Japanese orthography. Last
of all, because of the correlational nature of much of the analysis in the study, the
results of the study do not offer evidence in support of a cause-effect relationship
between any variables.
Suggestions for Future Studies

Milton and Meara (1995) estimated that advanced learners of English as a Second
Language (ESL) possibly acquire about 2,500 words per year. If this estimate is
valid for any foreign language, successful vocabulary learning represents a very
important pedagogical agenda. We need to continue our investigation on how L2
words are learned through different tasks, at different levels, as well as for different effects (e.g., short-term vs. long-term retention). If L2 word recognition
is critical in developing L2 reading ability at later stages, research on Japanese
word recognition will help provide insight for L2 reading experts. Furthermore,
because the distance between L1 and L2 orthographic forms can burden L2 vocabulary learning, more studies need to be conducted on lexical acquisition in a
nonalphabetic language.
Although the results of this study did not show a measurable outcome for the
use of Romaji, one can investigate long-term effects of using Romaji by conducting subsequent experiments and following the same students over a semester or a
year. The long-term effects of Romaji need to be investigated because many JFL
textbooks and CALL materials still use Romaji, and many JFL students continue
to use it as a quick and easy note-taking device even after their learning materials
have completely shifted to the authentic orthography. Individual differences in
English speakers predisposition for Hiragana symbol learning (e.g., visual memory capacity) also need to be examined in a CALL environment.
Due to the rapid growth of distance learning courses in American higher education, more and more language courses are offered online. However, the display of
non-English fonts continues to pose challenges to course designers/instructors as
well as students. For instance, WebCT, one of the most popularly adopted instructional delivery systems in the US, cannot be easily applied to develop a Japanese
language course (e.g., the Java-supported chat of WebCT 4.1 does not allow users
to type in Japanese, resulting in some confusion and typos derived from Romaji
input). Continuing research on the interaction between learner outcomes and L2
script use will help bring about a better understanding of how students can effectively use CALL instructional materials in Asian languages.

Yoshiko Okuyama

375

CONCLUSION
The primary goal of this study was to explore the role of L2 orthography in computer-assisted Japanese vocabulary learning. What this study revealed was strong
evidence for the advantage of using, not Romaji assistance, but rather L2 audio recordings. The insights from the study are perhaps most applicable to future
development of CALL software or for CALL vocabulary research. Nowadays,
there are many commercially available CALL programs for JFL learners either
to supplement their classroom learning or to learn the language on their own.
With clear guidelines for language software use, teachers and students of foreign
languages are better able to make pedagogically wise decisions. For the adequate
incorporation of CALL materials into a classroom curriculum, SLA researchers
need to explore empirically what works best in virtual learning environments.

NOTES
The Yookoso! textbook is designed to cover all the four language skills: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Although the book presented all the regular chapters primarily
in Japanese orthography, the preliminary chapter is written all in Romaji as a transitional
phase.
1

The Learning Company kindly provided a sample copy of the original Learn to Speak
Japanese software and granted permission for its adaptation and use in this study.
2

3
The HyperCard program was used to program all the three modules. Each module was
created as a stack of cards, and the three stacks were linked in sequence for easy navigation.

REFERENCES
Akamatsu, N. (1999). The effects of rst language orthographic features on word recognition processing in English as a second language. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 11 (3), 381-403.
Akiyama, N., & Akiyama, C. (1995). Master the basics: Japanese. Hauppauge, NY: Barrons Educational Series.

Al-Seghayer, K. (2001). The effect of multimedia annotation modes on L2 vocabulary

acquisition: A comparative study. Language Learning & Technology, 5 (1), 202232. Retrieved October 30, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol5num1/AlSeghayer/
default.html
Ashworth, D. (1996). Hypermedia and CALL. In M. Pennington (Ed.), The power of CALL
(pp. 79-94). Houston, TX: Athelstan.

Ariew, R. (1991). Effective strategies for implementing language training technologies.

Applied Language Learning, 2 (2), 31-44.
Baddeley, A. D. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory?
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4 (4), 417-423.

376

CALICO Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2

Chapelle, C., & Jamieson, J. (1991). Internal and external validity issues in research on
CALL effectiveness. In P. Dunkel (Ed.), Computer-assisted language learning
and testing: Research issues and practice. (pp. 38-59). New York: Newbury
House.

Chen, Y., Fu, S., Iversen, S. D., Smith, S. M., & Matthews, P. M. (2002). Testing for dual
brain processing routes in reading: A direct contrast of Chinese characters and
Pinyin reading using fMRI. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14 (7), 10881098.

Chung, K. K. H. (2002). Effective use of Hanyu Pinyin and English translations as extra
stimulus prompts on learning of Chinese characters. Educational Psychology, 22
(2), 149-164.
Chung, K. K. H. (2003). Effects of Pinyin and rst language words in learning of Chinese
characters as a second language. Journal of Behavioral Education, 12 (3), 207223.

Collentine, J. (2000). Insights into the construction of grammatical knowledge provided

by user-behavior tracking technologies. Language Learning & Technology, 3
(2), 44-57. Retrieved October 30, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol3num2/col
lentine/index.html
Corda, A., & Van Der Stel, M. (2004). Web-based CALL for Arabic: Constraints and challenges. CALICO Journal, 21 (3), 485-495.

Dewey, D. P. (2004). Connections between teacher and student attitudes regarding script
choice in rst-year Japanese language classrooms. Foreign Language Annals,
37 (4), 567-579.

Ehri, L. C. (1999). Phrases of development in learning to read words. In J. Oakhill & R.

Beard (Eds.), Reading development and teaching of reading: A psychological
perspective (pp.79-108). Oxford: Blackwell.
Ellis, R. (1995). Modied oral input and the acquisition of word. Applied Linguistics, 16
(4), 409-41.

Ellis, N. C., & Hooper, A. M. (2001). It is easier to learn to read in Welsh than in English:
Effects of orthographic transparency demonstrated using frequency-matched
cross-linguistic reading tests. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22 (4), 571-599.
Ellis, N. C., Natsume, M., Stavropoulou, K., Hoxhallari, L., Van Daal, V. H. P., Polyzoe,
N., Tsipa, M., & Petalas, M. (2004). The effect of orthographic depth on learning
to read alphabetic, syllabic, and logographic scripts. Reading Research Quarterly, 39 (4), 438-468.

Fender, M. (2003). English word recognition and word integration skills of native Arabic- and Japanese-speaking learners of English as a second language. Applied
Psycholinguistics, 24 (2), 289-315.

Flaherty, M. (2003). Sign language and Chinese characters on visual-spatial memory: A

literature review. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 97 (4), 797-802.

Grace, A. C. (1995). Beginning CALL vocabulary learning: Translation in context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.

Hannas, W. C. (1997). Asias orthographic dilemma. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii

Press.

Yoshiko Okuyama

377

Hatasa, Y. A. (2002). The effects of differential timing in the introduction of Japanese syllabaries on early second language development in Japanese. The Modern Language Journal, 86 (3), 349-367.

Hegelheimer, V., & Tower, D. (2004). Using CALL in the classroom: Analyzing student
interactions in an authentic classroom. System, 32 (2), 185-205.

Ho, C. S.-H., Chan, D. W.-O., Tsang, S.-M., & Lee, S.-H. (2002). The cognitive prole and
multiple-decit hypothesis in Chinese developmental dyslexia. Developmental
Psychology, 38 (4), 543-553.

Hwu, F. (2003). Learners behaviors in computer-based input activities elicited through

tracking technologies. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16 (1), 5-29.

Johnston, B., & Janus, L. (2003). Teacher professional development for the less commonly
taught languages. Minnesota University, Minneapolis. Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED479299)

Kato, H., & Takada, N. (1994). Just listen n learn Japanese: Beginning through intermediate. New York: McGraw-Hill/Contemporary Books.
Katz, L., & Frost., R. (1992). Reading in different orthographies: The orthographic depth
hypothesis. In R. Frost & L. Katz (Eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology,
and meaning (pp. 67-84). Amsterdam: New Holland.

Kawakami, A., Hatta, T., & Kogure, T. (2001). Differential cognitive processing of Kanji
and Kana words: Do orthographic and semantic codes function in parallel in
word matching tasks? Perceptual and Motor Skills, 93 (4), 719-726.
Kershul, K. (1992). Japanese in 10 minutes a day. Seattle, WA: Bilingual Books Inc.

Kim, J., Davis, C., Burnham, D., & Luksaneeyanawin, S. (2004). The effect of script on
poor readers sensitivity to dynamic visual stimuli. Brain and Language, 91 (1),
326-335.

Kim, J., & Davis, C. (2002). Using Korean to investigate phonological priming effects
without the inuence of orthography. Language & Cognitive Processes, 17 (6),
569-592.
Koda, K. (1997). Orthographic knowledge in L2 lexical processing: A cross-linguistic perspective. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 35-52). New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Kudo, Y. (1999). L2 Vocabulary Learning Strategies. NFLRC NetWork #14, 1-46.

Learn to speak Japanese [Computer software]. (1994). Knoxville, TN: HyperGlot Software Company.

Laufer, B. (1997). Whats in a word that makes it hard or easy: some intralexical factors
that affect the learning of words. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp.140-155). New York: Cambridge
University Press.

Laufer, B. & Hill, M. (2000). What lexical information do L2 learners select in a CALL
dictionary and how does it affect word retention? Language Learning & Technology, 3 (2), 58-76. Retrieved October 30, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol3num2/
laufer-hill/index.html

378

CALICO Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2

Liou, H. (2000). Assessing learner strategies using computers: New insights and limitations. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13 (1), 65-78.
Matsunaga, S. (1995). The role of phonological coding in reading kanji: A research report
and some pedagogical implications (Technical Report #6). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.

Matsunaga, S. (2001). Subvocalization in reading kanji: Can Japanese texts be comprehended without it? In H. Nara (Ed.), Advances in Japanese language pedagogy
(pp. 30-46). Columbus, OH: The National East Asian Languages Resource Center.
Makino, S., Hatasa, Y. A., Hatasa, K. (1998). Nakama 1: Japanese communication, culture,
context. New York: Houghton Mifin Company.

McMeniman., M. (1997). Introduction. Setting the Australian context: The teaching and
learning of languages and technology. In M. McMeniman & N. Viviano (Eds.),
The role of technology in the learning of Asian languages: A report on the Grifth
University National Priority Reserve Fund Project (pp. 5-10). Melbourne, Australia: Language Australia.
Milton, J., & Meara, P. M. (1995). How periods abroad affect vocabulary growth in a foreign language. Issues in Teaching Languages, 107-108, 17-34.
Muljani, D., Koda, K., & Moates, D. (1998). The development of word recognition in a
second language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19 (1), 99-113.

Nagata, N. (2004). Robo-Sensei: Personal Japanese tutor [Computer software]. Boston:

Cheng & Tsui Company.
National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project (1999). Standards for foreign
language learning in the 21st century (2nd ed.). Lawrence, KS: Allen Press.

Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. New York: Cambridge

University Press.

NihongoWare 1: An interactive approach to learning Business Japanese [computer software]. (1992). Webster, NY: Ariadne Language Link Co.
Okamura, Y. (1995). Students and nonteachers perception of elementary learners spoken
Japanese. The Modern Language Journal, 79 (1), 29-40.

Seymour, P. H. K., Aro, M., & Erskine, J. M., (2003). Foundation literacy acquisition in
European orthographies. British Journal of Psychology, 94 (2), 143-174.

Simpson, G. B., & Kang, H. (1994). The exible use of phonological information in word
recognition in Korean. Journal of Memory and Language, 33 (3), 319-331.

Singleton, D. (1999). Exploring the second language mental lexicon. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sugishita, M., & Omura, K. (2001). Learning Chinese characters may improve visual recall. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 93 (3), 579-594.

Sumiyoshi, C., Sumiyoshi, T., Matsui, M., Nohara, S., Yamashita, I., Kurachi, M., & Niwa,
S. (2004). Effect of orthography on the verbal uency performance in schizophrenia: Examination using Japanese patients. Schizophrenia Research, 69 (1),
15-22.

Yoshiko Okuyama

379

Tan, L. H., Spinks, J. A., Feng, C., Siok, W. T., Perfetti, C. A., Xiong, J., Fox, P. T., & Gao,
J. (2003). Neural systems of second language reading are shaped by native language. Human Brain Mapping, 18 (1), 158-166.

Tavassoli, N. T. (1999). Temporal and associative memory in Chinese and English. Journal
of Consumer Research, 26 (2), 170-187.

Tohsaku, Y. (1994). Yookoso!: An invitation to Japanese. New York: McGraw-Hill.

TriplePlay Plus! Japanese [computer software]. (1994-1997). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse

Language Systems.

Vincent, E., & Hah, M. (1996). Strategies employed by users of a Japanese computer assisted language learning (CALL) program. Australian Journal of Educational
Technology, 12 (10), 25-34.
Wong, M., Perfetti, C. A., & Liu, Y. (2003). Alphabetic readers quickly acquire orthographic structure in learning to read Chinese. Scientic Studies of Reading, 7
(2), 183-208.

AUTHORS BIODATA
Yoshiko Okuyama is Assistant Professor in the Department of Languages at the
University of Hawaii at Hilo (UHH). While working at UHH, she completed her
dissertation and earned her Ph.D. from the University of Arizona in 2000. She
currently teaches courses in Japanese, introductory linguistics, psycholinguistics,
and second language acquisition theory and has served as UHH Language Lab
Coordinator.
AUTHORS ADDRESS
Yoshiko Okuyama, Ph.D.
Department of Languages
The University of Hawaii at Hilo
PO Box 6917
Hilo, HI 96720
Phone: 808 982 9871
Fax:
808 974 7736 (Attn: Yoshiko Okuyama)
E-mail: yokuyama@hawaii.edu

380

CALICO Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2