Cover not available
Article published In:
Graded Resources for Second and Foreign Language Learning
Edited by David Alfter and Thomas François
[ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics 175:1] 2024
► pp. 127–161

Swedish word family resource

Construction, applicability, strengths and first experiments

ORCID logo | University of Gothenburg
 | University of Gothenburg
 | University of Helsinki
The article introduces a novel lexical resource for Swedish based on word family principles. The development of the Swedish Word Family (SweWF) resource is set into the context of linguistic complexity in second language acquisition. The SweWF is particularly appropriate for that, given that it contains lexical items used in second language corpora, namely, in a corpus of coursebook texts, and in a corpus of learner essays. The main focus of the article is on the construction of the resource with its user interface and on its applicability for research, although it also opens vast possibilities for practical applications for language learning, testing and assessment. We demonstrate the value of the resource through several case studies.
Keywords: word family resources, linguistic complexity, graded lexical resources, Swedish as a second language, word formation morphology
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Related research
  • 3.Constructing the Swedish Word Family resource
    • 3.1Swedish morphology – a short introduction
    • 3.2Morphological complexity in a CAF context
    • 3.3CoDeRooMor resource
    • 3.4The Swedish Word Family user interface
    • 3.5Limitations and discussion
      • 1.Polysemy within word families
      • 2.Hierarchy within word families
      • 3.Replicability
      • 4.Manual versus automatic approaches to morphological analysis
  • 4.Hypotheses and case studies
    • 4.1Hypothesis 1: Distribution of singleton families over levels
    • 4.2Hypothesis 2: Morphological complexity within a family
    • 4.3Hypothesis 3: Extralinguistic insights through word families
  • 5.Conclusions and future work
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 26 February 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.22026.vol
References (73)
References
Allén, Sture, Berg, Sture, Järborg, Jerker, Löfström, Jonas, Ralph, Bo, Sjögreen, Christian. (1980). Nusvensk frekvensordbok baserad på tidningstext. Frequency Dictionary of Present-Day Swedish based on newspaper material. 41. Ordled Betydelser. Morphemes Meanings. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Anthony, Laurence. (2022). AntWordprofiler [computer software]. [URL]
Baroni, Marco, & Evert, Stefan. (2014). The zipfR package for lexical statistics: A tutorial introduction. [[URL]]
Bauer, Laurie, & Nation, Paul. (1993). Word families. International journal of Lexicography, 6 (4), 253–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald, Piepenbrock, Richard, & Gulikers, Leon. (1996). The CELEX lexical database (CD-rom).Google Scholar
Bolshakova, Elena, & Sapin, Alexander. (2020). An experimental study of neural morpheme segmentation models for Russian word forms. In CMCL (pp. 79–89).Google Scholar
Borin, Lars, Forsberg, Markus, & Roxendal, Johan. (2012). Korp – the corpus infrastructure of Språkbanken. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’12), pp. 474–478.Google Scholar
Bratlie, Siri Steffensen, Brinchmann, Ellen Irén, Melby-Lervåg, Monica, & Torkildsen, Janne von Koss. (2022). Morphology – A Gateway to Advanced Language: Meta-Analysis of Morphological Knowledge in Language Minority Children. Review of Educational Research, 92 (4), 614–650. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brezina, Vaclav, & Pallotti, Gabriele. (2019). Morphological complexity in written L2 texts. Second language research, 35 (1), 99–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Dale. (2018). Examining the word family through word lists. Vocabulary Learning and Instruction, 7 (1), 51–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Dale, Stoeckel, Tim, Mclean, Stuart, & Stewart, Jeff. (2022). The most appropriate lexical unit for L2 vocabulary research and pedagogy: A brief review of the evidence. Applied Linguistics, 43 (3), 596–602. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Capel, Annette. (2012). Completing the English vocabulary profile: C1 and C2 vocabulary. English Profile Journal 3 1, pp.1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cobb, Tom. (2021). Compleat Web VP v.2.5. [Computer programme]. [URL]
Cobb, Tom, & Laufer, Batia. (2021). The nuclear word family list: A list of the most frequent family members, including base and affixed words. Language Learning, 71 (3), 834–871. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coulange, Sylvain, Jouannaud, Marie-Pierre, Cervini, Cristiana, & Masperi, Monica. (2020). From placement to diagnostic testing: Improving feedback to learners and other stakeholders in SELF (Système d’Evaluation en Langues à visée Formative). Language Learning in Higher Education, 10 (1), 195–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Council of Europe [COE]. (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment: companion volume. Council of Europe Publishing.Google Scholar
Coxhead, Averil. (1998). An academic word list. Vol. 181. School of Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, Victoria University of Wellington.Google Scholar
De Clercq, Bastien, & Housen, Alex. (2019). The development of morphological complexity: A cross-linguistic study of L2 French and English. Second Language Research, 35 (1), 71–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de la Torre García, Nuria, Ainciburu, María Cecilia, & Buyse, Kris. (2021). Morphological complexity and rated writing proficiency: The case of verbal inflectional diversity in L2 Spanish. ITL-International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 172 (2), 290–318. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Creutz, Mathias & Lagus, Krista. (2007). Unsupervised models for morpheme segmentation and morphology learning. ACM Transactions on Speech and Language Processing (TSLP), 4(1):1–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, Ton, Martín, Fermín Moscoso del Prado, Schulpen, Béryl, Schreuder, Robert, & Baayen, R. Harald. (2005). A roommate in cream: Morphological family size effects on interlingual homograph recognition. Language and cognitive processes, 20 (1/2), 7–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dokulil, Miloš. (1962). Tvoření slov v češtině: Dokulil, M. Teorie odvozování slov. Nakl. Československé akademie věd.Google Scholar
Fellner, Hannes A., & Hill, Nathan. (2019). Word families, allofams, and the comparative method. Cahiers de linguistique Asie orientale, 48 (2), 91–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fliessbach, K., Weis, S., Klaver, P., Elger, C. E., & Weber, B. (2006). The effect of word concreteness on recognition memory. NeuroImage (Orlando, Fla.), 32 (3), 1413–1421. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forsberg, Fanny, & Bartning, Inge. (2010). Can linguistic features discriminate between the communicative CEFR-levels?: A pilot study of written L2 French. In Barthing, I., Martin, M. and Vedder, I. Communicative proficiency and linguistic development: Intersections between SLA and language testing research (2010): 81–99.Google Scholar
François, Thomas, Volodina, Elena, Pilán, Ildikó, & Tack, Anaïs. (2016). SVALex: a CEFR-graded lexical resource for Swedish foreign and second language learners. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’16), pp. 213–219.Google Scholar
Gaillat, Thomas, Knefati, Anas, & Lafontaine, Antoine. (2021). Towards a Data Analytics Pipeline for the Visualisation of Complexity Metrics in L2 writings. In 16th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications.Google Scholar
Gardner, Dee, & Davies, Mark. (2014). A new academic vocabulary list. Applied linguistics, 35 (3), 305–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. (2023). Defining the word. Word 69 (3):283–297. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heatley, A., Nation, Paul, & Coxhead, Averil. (2002). Range [Computer software]. [URL]
Hiebert, Elfrieda H., Goodwin, Amanda P., & Cervetti, Gina N. (2018). Core vocabulary: Its morphological content and presence in exemplar texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 53 (1), 29–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Housen, Alex, & Kuiken, Folkert. (2009). Complexity, accuracy and fluency in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30 (4), 461–473. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karlgren, Bernhard. (1933). Word families in Chinese. Stockholm.Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam, Charalabopoulou, Frieda, Gavrilidou, Maria, Johannessen, Janne Bondi, Khalil, Saussan, Johansson Kokkinakis, Sofie, Lew, Robert, Sharoff, Serge, Vadlapudi, Ravikiran, & Volodina, Elena. (2014). Corpus-based vocabulary lists for language learners for nine languages. Language resources and evaluation, 48 (1), 121–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kimppa, Lilli, Shtyrov, Yury, Hut, Suzanne C. A., Hedlund, Laura, Leminen, Miika, & Leminen, Alina. (2019). Acquisition of L2 morphology by adult language learners. Cortex, 116 1, 74–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krippendorff, Klaus. (2011). Computing Krippendorff’s alpha-reliability. Annenberg School for Communication Departmental Papers: Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Körtvélyessy, Lívia, Bagasheva, Alexandra, & Štekauer, Pavol (eds.). (2020). Derivational networks across languages. De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lango, Mateusz, Žabokrtský, Zdeněk, & Ševčíková, Magda. (2021). Semi-automatic construction of word-formation networks. Language Resources and Evaluation, 55 (1), 3–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laufer, Batia. (2021). LEMMAS, FLEMMAS, WORD FAMILIES, AND COMMON SENSE. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43 (5), 965–968. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laufer, Batia, & Nation, Paul. (1995). Vocabulary Size and Use: Lexical Richness in L2 Written Production, Applied Linguistics, 16 (3), 307–322. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laufer, Batia, Webb, Stuart, Kim, Su Kyung, & Yohanan, Beverley. (2021). How well do learners know derived words in a second language? The effect of proficiency, word frequency and type of affix. ITL-International Journal of Applied Linguistics 172:2, pp.229–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leminen, Alina, Smolka, Eva, Dunabeitia, Jon A., & Pliatsikas, Christos. (2019). Morphological processing in the brain: The good (inflection), the bad (derivation) and the ugly (compounding). Cortex, 116 1, 4–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leontjev, Dmitri, Huhta, Ari, & Tolvanen, Asko. (2022). L2 English Vocabulary breadth and knowledge of derivational morphology: One or two constructs? Language testing, 39 (1), 1–25.Google Scholar
Li, Juan, Hongquan Jiang, Aihua Shang, and Jingli Chen. (2021). Research on associative learning mechanisms of L2 learners based on complex network theory. Computer Assisted Language Learning 34, no. 5–6: 637–662. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindström Tiedemann, Therese. (2021). Official L2P morphology annotation guidelines. [URL]
Lindström Tiedemann, Therese, Alfter, David, Mohammed, Yousuf Ali, Piipponen, Daniela, Silén, Beatrice, Volodina, Elena. (in press). Multiword expressions in Swedish as a second language: taxonomy, annotation and initial results. In: Giouli, Voula & Mititelu, Verginica Barbu (eds.), Multiword expressions in language resources. Linguistic, Lexicographic and Computational Considerations. Berlin: Language Science Press.
Lindström Tiedemann, Therese, Alfter, David, & Volodina, Elena. (2022). CEFR-nivåer och svenska flerordsuttryck. In: S. Björklund, B. Haagensen, M. Nordman & A. Westerlund (eds.), Svenskan i Finland 19: Föredrag vid den nittonde sammankomsten för beskrivningen av svenskan i Finland, Vasa den 6–7 maj 2021. Vasa: Svensk-österbottniska samfundet, pp. 218–233.Google Scholar
Lüdeling, Anke, Hirschmann, Hagen, & Shadrova, Anna. (2017). Linguistic models, Acquisition Theories, and Learner Corpora: Morphological productivity in SLA research exemplified by complex verbs in German. Language learning, 67 (S1), 96–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michel, Marije. (2017). Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in L2 production. In The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition, pp. 50–68. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morin, Regina. (2006). Building depth of Spanish L2 vocabulary by building and using word families. Hispania 89:1: 170–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nation, Paul. (2012). The BNC/COCA word family lists. [URL]
. (2021). Thoughts on word families. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43 (5), 969–972. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nation, Paul, & Heatley, A. (1996). VocabProfile, Word and Range: Programs for Processing Text. LALS, Victoria University of Wellington.Google Scholar
Nikolaev, Alexandre, Ashaie, Sameer, Hallikainen, Merja, Hänninen, Tuomo, Higby, Eve, Hyun, JungMoon, Lehtonen, Minna, & Soininen, Hilkka. (2019). Effects of morphological family on word recognition in normal aging, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer’s disease. Cortex, 116 1, 91–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sasao, Yosuke, & Webb, Stuart. (2017). The word part levels test. Language Teaching Research, 21 ( 1 ), 12–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, Norbert, & Zimmerman, Cheryl Boyd. (2002). Derivative word forms: What do learners know?. TESOL quarterly, 36 (2), 145–171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smit, Peter, Virpioja, Sami, Grönroos, Stig-Arne & Kurimo, Mikko. (2014). Morfessor 2.0: Toolkit for statistical morphological segmentation. In The 14th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL) , Gothenburg, Sweden, April 26–30, 2014. Aalto University.
Šnajder, Jan. (2014). DerivBase.hr: A high-coverage derivational morphology resource for Croatian. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’14), pp. 3371–3377.Google Scholar
Snoder, Per, & Laufer, Batia. (2022). EFL Learners’ Receptive Knowledge of Derived Words: The Case of Swedish Adolescents. TESOL Quarterly. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sorokin, Alexey & Kravtsova, Anastasia. (2018). Deep convolutional networks for supervised morpheme segmentation of Russian language. In Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Natural Language, p. 3–10. Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stoeckel, Tim, Ishii, Tomoko, & Bennett, Phil. (2020). Is the lemma more appropriate than the flemma as a word counting unit? Applied Linguistics, 41 (4), 601–606. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svensk ordbok utgiven av Svenska akademien (2009). Stockholm: Norstedts.Google Scholar
Svensson, Anders. (2022). Tre av fyra nyord är substantiv. Språktidningen 21 Jan. 2022.Google Scholar
Talamo, Luigi, Celata, Chiara, & Bertinetto, Pier Marco. (2016). DerIvaTario: An annotated lexicon of Italian derivatives. Word Structure, 9 (1), 72–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Teleman, Ulf, Hellberg, Staffan, Andersson, Erik, & Christensen, Lisa. (1999). Svenska Akademiens Grammatik. Stockholm: Svenska Akademien & Norstedts ordbok.Google Scholar
Volodina, Elena, Mohammed, Yousuf Ali, & Lindström Tiedemann, Therese. (2021). CoDeRooMor: A new dataset for non-inflectional morphology studies of Swedish. In Proceedings of the 23rd Nordic Conference on Computational Linguistics (NoDaLiDa), pp. 178–189.Google Scholar
Volodina, Elena, Mohammad, Yousuf Ali & Tiedemann Lindström, Therese. (2022). Lyxig språklig födelsedagspresent from the Swedish Word Family. In Volodina, Dannélls, Berdicevskis, Forsberg and Virk (editors), Live and Learn – Festschrift in honor of Lars Borin, pages 153–160.Google Scholar
Volodina, Elena, Pilán, Ildikó, Enström, Ingegerd, Llozhi, Lorena, Lundkvist, Peter, Sundberg, Gunlög, & Sandell, Monica. (2016). SweLL on the rise: Swedish Learner Language corpus for European Reference Level studies. Proceedings of LREC 2016, Slovenia.Google Scholar
Volodina, Elena, Pilán, Ildikó, Rødven Eide, Stian, & Heidarsson, Hannes. (2014). You get what you annotate: a pedagogically annotated corpus of coursebooks for Swedish as a Second Language. Proceedings of the third workshop on NLP for computer-assisted language learning. NEALT Proceedings Series 22 / Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 107: 128–144.Google Scholar
Webb, Stuart. (2021). Word families and lemmas, not a real dilemma: Investigating lexical units. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43 (5), 973–984. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Žabokrtský, Zdeněk, Ševčíková, Magda, Straka, Milan, Vidra, Jonáš, & Limburská, Adéla. (2016). Merging data resources for inflectional and derivational morphology in Czech. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’16), pp. 1307–1314.Google Scholar
Zeller, Britta, Šnajder, Jan, & Padó, Sebastian. (2013). DErivBase: Inducing and evaluating a derivational morphology resource for German. In Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pp. 1201–1211.Google Scholar
Zhang, Dongbo, & Koda, Keiko. (2012). Contribution of morphological awareness and lexical inferencing ability to L2 vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension among advanced EFL learners: testing direct and indirect effects. Reading and writing 25 1, 1195–1216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar