Journal of English Language Teaching Volume 9 No.

1
Journal of English Language Teaching
ISSN 2302-3198
Published by English Language Teaching Study Program of
FBS Universitas Negeri Padang
available at http://ejournal.unp.ac.id/index.php/jelt

THE CORRELATION BETWEEN STUDENTS’ VOCABULARY

MASTERY AND SPEAKING ABILITY AT GRADE 8 OF JUNIOR
HIGH SCHOOL
Aulia Putri1 and Refnaldi2
English Department
Faculty of Languages and Arts
State University of Padang
email: aulia.aa2010@gmail.com

Abstract
This research aimed to find out the correlation between students’ vocabulary
mastery and speaking ability at grade 8 of SMP Negeri 26 Padang. This research
was quantitative research which used correlational technique design. The sample
of the research was 30 students of grade eight selected by clustering sampling.
The instruments used in the research were vocabulary test and speaking test.
Vocabulary test consisted of 50 questions of multiple choices, and speaking test in
the form of role play. The research data were in the form of interpretation of
students’ vocabulary and speaking test results, and their correlation. Based on data
analysis, it was found that students’ vocabulary mastery and speaking ability were
fair. They were proved by the mean score 65 for vocabulary mastery and 68 for
speaking ability. Moreover, there was strong correlation between students’
vocabulary mastery and speaking ability. It was shown by the rvalue = 0,703.

Key words: Vocabulary, Speaking, Role Play

A. INTRODUCTION
Speaking has a crucial role in the English instruction. Speaking as productive
skill produces language through sound which requires us to use vocal track and
brain. Moreover, the purpose of speaking is to communicate effectively. In many
contexts, people often judge person’ language competence from speaking rather
than any of the other language skills. This phenomenon happens because people
are aware that speaking has important role in many aspects of life. McDonough
(2013) stated that people want to speak something to achieve a particular goal.
This activity involves expressing ideas and opinion, expressing wish or desire to
do something, negotiating or solving problem, or establishing and maintaining the
relationship. Furthermore, speaking skill is found as the most enjoyable learned
skill for students. However, it also becomes the hardest one (Darancik, 2018).
However, there are many factors influencing students’ English-speaking
ability. According Adila & Refnaldi (2019) found that there were 6 kinds in
consonant sounds made by students’ speaking performance: alveolar, interdental,

1
English Language Education Program English Language and Literature Department of FBS
Universitas Negeri Padang graduated on March 2020
2
Lecturer of English Language and Literature Department of FBS Universitas Negeri Padang

© FBS Universitas Negeri Padang

 Vocabulary and Speaking – Aulia Putri and Refnaldi

alveo-palatal, labiodental, velar, and bilabial. Most pronunciation errors were in

alveolar and the lowest pronunciation errors was in velar. These errors were
generally influenced by their mother tongue, less using English in their daily life,
unchallenging lesson, being passive learners, and less confidence while
performing. Furthermore, Suryatiningsih (2015) and Sembiring and Ginting
(2016) stated that the other reason of problem in pronunciation is the unfamiliarity
words. Students mostly used familiar words or common words in speaking. When
they meet unfamiliar words, they also become unfamiliar to their pronunciation.
Besides, word becomes the key of the language to communicate. Vocabulary
mastery could be one of factors influencing students’ English speaking ability.
The students’ limited number of vocabularies may affect their speaking ability.
Students cannot build a sentence, they do not know an English word they are
going to say, they also do not know the function of a word. Thus, this problem
may cause the slow progress in speaking. They could not build sentences without
knowing the vocabulary to represent their mind, feeling and ideas.
There were several studies that conducted about vocabulary and speaking in
the past. Seffar (2015) and Khan (2018) analysed teacher and students’ perception
of the role of vocabulary and students’ speaking performance. Moreover, Fhonna
(2014), Yuwinda (2015) and Uzer (2017) have conducted the study to investigate
the correlation between vocabulary mastery and English-speaking ability for
senior high school students. Fhonna (2014) used two instruments to collect the
data: observing and test to measure students’ vocabulary mastery and speaking
skill. The vocabulary test consisted of translation words English to Indonesia and
Indonesia to English, matching items, and finding meaning from reading text.
Besides, for speaking test students were asked to speak monologue about their
experience or family for 3-4 minutes. Then, Yuwinda (2015) have conducted the
similar or MAN MODEL Palangkaraya. The researcher used vocabulary test and
speaking test. For speaking test students were asked to perform in the form of
monologue by choosing one focus they interested. Moreover, Uzer (2017) has
conducted the similar research for senior high school and used same tools: test.
However, the form of speaking tests is different with Fhonna’s and Yuwinda’s
research which used speech (monologue) to assess studeresearch fnts’ speaking
skill. Uzer (2017) used role play in theme of “Giving Compliment” as speaking
activities which was used to assess students speaking skill by following the terms
of its pronunciation, Grammar, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension.
Furthermore, Albar (2016) investigated the correlation between students’
vocabulary size, foreign language anxiety, and their speaking skill. He used
speaking test to collect the data in which students were asked to deliver a speech
about descriptive text by choosing one theme from describing your house,
describing your close friend, or describing the most beautiful place you have
visited.
From, the previous research, most researcher used monologue to assess
students’ speaking skill. However, the objective of teaching spoken language is
the development of the ability to interact successfully in that language, (Hughes,
2003). Afriani, Ratmanida, & Syafei (2017) also found that most frequently used
activity in English teaching speaking class was role play. This concept is in line

45
 JELT Vol 9 No. 1 March 2020

with Nunan (2003) who believe that people learn languages by interacting, then
learners should interact during lesson.
In order to add new research for analysing the correlation students’ vocabulary
mastery and speaking skill, the researcher used role play as interactive skill to
assess students’ speaking ability. This research will be conducted because of some
reasons. First, junior high school English Curriculum expects the students are able
to communicate effectively, however they face some problems in speaking. One
of the crucial problems is the lack of vocabulary. Second. There were few
researches which used role play as the activities to assess students’ speaking
ability.
Bas on the background above, the researcher was interested to analyse the
correlation between students’ vocabulary mastery and speaking ability of Grade 8
students of SMP Negeri 26 Padang
.
B. RESEARCH METHOD
This research was quantitative research which used the correlational technique
design. The purpose of a correlational study is to determine the correlation
between variable or use these correlation to make prediction (Gay, 2009:195). In
this research, the researcher found out the correlation of vocabulary as
independent variable through speaking skill as dependent variable.
The population of this research was the grade eight students of SMP Negeri 26
Padang with academic year 2019/2020. The total number of grade eight students
is 244 which is the combination of grade eight classes of grade eight of SMP
Negeri 26 Padang. The samples of this research were taken by using clustering
sampling. Clustering sampling means choosing an intact group of population
members as samples of the research with similar characteristics (Gay, 2009:1929).
The researcher chose randomly the group of population, then VIII-3 class was
selected as the sample of research. The total number of samples was 30 students.
The instruments used to collect data in this research were vocabulary test and
speaking test. In the vocabulary test, the students were given a vocabulary test
which consisted of 50 questions in form of multiple choices for 50 minutes. Then,
the students had speaking test in form of role play. After conducting the
vocabulary test and speaking test, the researcher gave a score on students’ answer
sheet for vocabulary test and speaking assessment for speaking test.
To analyze vocabulary test and speaking test, the researcher used the formula
below:

Table 1. The Classification of Students’ Achievement

Score Range Classifications Level
90 – 100 Excellent Outstanding
75 – 89 Good Above average
60 – 74 Fair Satisfactory
50 – 59 Less Below average

46
ISSN: 2302-3198
 Vocabulary and Speaking – Aulia Putri and Refnaldi

0 – 49 Poor Insufficient
(Arikunto,2009)

To find out the correlation between students’ vocabulary mastery and

speaking ability, the researcher used the formula of Perason Product Moment
Correlation (Chee, 2013).
Formula:

C. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

1. Research Finding
a) Students’ Vocabulary Mastery
Based on computation, the students’ vocabulary mastery in general was fair.
It was shown by the mean score 65. In the detail, the students were grouped into 4
categories.
Table 2. Students’ Ability in Vocabulary Mastery
Score Range Classification Level Number of Percentage
Students
90 – 100 Excellent Outstanding 0 0%
75 – 89 Good Above average 5 16,67%
60 – 74 Fair Satisfactory 17 56,67%
50 – 59 Less Below average 8 26,66%
0 – 49 Poor Insufficient 0 0%
From the table above, there was no student who had excellent category and
poor category in vocabulary mastery. Most students had fair category with
percentage 56,67%. From 30 students, 17 students had fair category; it meant
most students had satisfactory level. Besides, there were 16,67% students in
which 5 from 30 students had good category or above average level and 26, 66%
students in which 8 from 30 students had less category or below average level in
vocabulary mastery.

Table 3. The Percentage of the Scores Obtained from the Real Vocabulary
Test
Indicators Students’ Score Classification Level
Word Meaning 73% Fair Satisfactory
Synonym 71% Fair Satisfactory
Antonym 67% Fair Satisfactory
Complete Sentence 59% Less Below average
In this research students’ vocabulary mastery in word meaning, synonym and
antonym generally was fair. Based on the score range of classification of students
achievement by Arikunto (2009), score range 60 – 74 was classified into fair
classification and in satisfactory level. Thus, they were in fair classification.

47
 JELT Vol 9 No. 1 March 2020

Meanwhile, students’ vocabulary mastery in completing sentence was lee. It was

shown by its percentage (59%).

b) Students’ Speaking Ability

Based on computation, the students’ speaking ability in general was fair. It
was shown by the mean score 68. In the detail, the students were grouped into 4
categories.
Table 4. The Students’ Speaking Ability
Score Range Classification Level Number of Percentage
Students
90 – 100 Excellent Outstanding 0 0%
75 – 89 Good Above average 10 33,33%
60 – 74 Fair Satisfactory 15 50%
50 – 59 Less Below average 5 16, 67%
0 – 49 Poor Insufficient 0 0%
The result showed that there was no student who was in excellent category.
However, there were 33,33% students in good category, 50% students in fair
category, 16,67% students in less category and no students in poor category. Thus,
it showed that half students had good speaking ability.

Table 5. The Percentages of Students’ Score Based on Speaking

Indicators
Indicators Students’ Score Classification Level
Grammar 74% Fair Satisfactory
Vocabulary 73% Fair Satisfactory
Fluency 59% Less Below Average
Pronunciation 52% Less Below average
Interaction 83% Good Insufficient
Students’ speaking ability is assessed based on five indicators: grammar,
vocabulary, fluency, pronunciation, and interaction. Regarding the result of the
research, students’ speaking ability in grammar and vocabulary were fair. It was
shown by the percentage of them 74% and 73%. Moreover, the highest percentage
was obtained by the interaction (83%). Students’ speaking ability in interaction
was classified into good category. In the other hand, students’ speaking ability in
fluency and pronunciation were still less. They were proven by the percentages
score 59% and 52%.
c) Correlation Between Students’ Vocabulary Mastery and Speaking Skill
The research used Pearson Product Moment Correlation calculation with the
significant level of the refusal of null hypothesis α= 0.05. The writer calculated by
using manual calculation and also SPSS 26 Program to test the hypothesis using
Pearson Product Moment Correlation. The criteria of Ha was accepted when
tobseved > ttable, and Ho was rejected when tobserved < ttable.

48
ISSN: 2302-3198
 Vocabulary and Speaking – Aulia Putri and Refnaldi

Table 6. The Calculation of Pearson Product Moment Correlation Using

SPSS 26 Program.
Vocabulary Speaking
Vocabulary Pearson Correlation 1 .703**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 30 30
Speaking Pearson Correlation .703** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 30 30

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Based on the calculation by using SPSS 26 Program, it was found that rvalue =
0.703. It meant that Ha was accepted and Ho was rejected. It was found that the
result of rvalue = 0.703 was higher than rtable = 0,361 at df 28 with the significant
level of 5 The % and 0,462 at df 28 with the significant level of 1% as explained
in the table below:

Table 7. The Result of Pearson Product Moment Correlation Test Observed.

rtable
Variable Rvalue 5% 1% Df=n-2
X–Y 0.703 0,361 0,462 28
Then, the rvalue was consulted with the table of the interpretation coefficient
correlation as follows:

Table 8. The Interpretation of Coefficient Correlation r.

Interval Coefficient Level of Correlation
0,80 – 1, 000 Very strong
0,60 – 0,800 Strong
0,40 – 0,600 Moderate
0,20 – 0,400 Weak
0,00 – 0,200 Very weak (No correlation)
(Arikunto, 2014)
Therefore, coefficient correlation rvalue = 0.703 was categorized into strong
correlation. It meant that there was a significant positive correlation between
vocabulary mastery and speaking ability of grade 8 students at SMP Negeri 26
Padang.

2. Discussion
Based on the findings, the students’ vocabulary master of Grade 8 of SMP
Negeri 26 Padang was fair. It was shown by the mean score 65. Students’
vocabulary mastery was assessed by some aspects: word meaning, synonym,
antonym, and completing sentence. Word meaning was the highest indicator.

49
 JELT Vol 9 No. 1 March 2020

This is due to word meaning means the basic level to assess vocabulary
knowledge. In line with Thornburry (2002:130) the most basic level of
knowing a word involves knowing its form and its meaning. Gasparri, L and
Marconi, D (2019) also stated word meaning has played a somewhat marginal
role in early contemporary philosophy of language, which was primarily
concerned with the structural features of sentence meaning and showed less
interest in the nature of the word-level input to compositional processes.
However, the lowest indicator was completing sentence. It was in below
average level.
Relating to this study, Yuliastuti (2009) found that studnets’ vocabulary
mastery of second grade students at MTSN N Gemplak was fair with the ability
of word meaning (73.5%) and sentence construction (72.3%). Moreover, Aristi
(20017) found that the second year students of SMPN 12 Bintan got good level
with the average 83.16 in vocabulary mastery. Furthermore, Andriani &
Sriwahyuningsih (2019) found that students had good ability in mastering
vocabulary. Meanwhile, they had difficulties which were caused by grammar
and spelling such as in comparison degree and past tense, and other difficulties
are caused by meaning of word.
Beside students’ vocabulary mastery, the research also analyzed students’
speaking ability of SMP Negeri 26 Padang. From the finding, the students’
speaking ability was fair, it was shown by the mean score 68. Students’
speaking ability was assessed based on five indicators: grammar, Vocabulary,
fluency, pronunciation, and interaction. For grammar and vocabulary aspects,
students had fair categories; and interaction had good category. Meanwhile,
fluency and pronunciation had less category. This finding was similar with
Harahap (2015) which found that students’ speaking skill of SMP 8 Rambah
Hilir was fair. However, he assessed it based on pronunciation, intonation,
fluency, and content. Most students got the highest score in content. It meant
all students master the content which was tested. In the other hand, Khairani,
Rusdi, & Syafei (2017) assessed speaking ability based on grammatical
features and lexical features. They found that grammatical and lexical features
obtained fair and very good category. In grammatical features, students were
able to use the correct present perfect tense, modal auxiliary, and personal
pronouns. Then, in lexical features, students are able to use correct choice of
words, use discourse markers, and social formula in their speaking
appropriately. Moreover, Naskah, Refnaldi, & Syafei ( 2018) found that based
on grammar and knowledge of genre, students’ speaking ability of grade 10
Marketing 2 SMK Negeri 3 Padang was very good with mean score of
grammar 73,81 and knowledge of genre 69.27.
Furthermore, Kartika (2019) found overall students’ speaking ability of
grade eight students in one of Public Junior High School in academic year
2018/2019 was fair. Students’ speaking skill in grammar, vocabulary, and
comprehension were fair. Meanwhile, in fluency, they were poor.
After finding the students’ vocabulary mastery and speaking ability of
grade 8 of SMP Negeri 26 Padang, the researcher analyzed the correlation
between of them. Regarding to the computation of both their scores and

50
ISSN: 2302-3198
 Vocabulary and Speaking – Aulia Putri and Refnaldi

calculation of Pearson Product Moment Correlation, there was significant

correlation between vocabulary mastery and speaking ability of grade 8 of
SMP Negeri 26 Padang. The findings of the study indicated that alternative
hypothesis stating that there is a significant positive correlation between
vocabulary mastery and speaking ability of the grade 8 of SMP Negeri 26
Padang was accepted and the null hypothesis stating that there is no a
significant positive correlation between vocabulary mastery and speaking
ability of the grade 8 of SMP Negeri 26 Padang was rejected. It meant that the
students with large vocabulary performed comparably with the students with
much smaller vocabulary in speaking activities. The rvalue was 0.703 it was
interpreted as strong correlation, so there was a high positive correlation
between the students’ vocabulary mastery and speaking ability. On the other
hand, when the vocabulary increased, the speaking ability increased at the
same time.
These findings were suitable with Milton (2009) that the volume of
vocabulary a learner knows is driving the acquisition of other aspects of
language and overall proficiency; then a much closer association might be
expected. Learners with small or poorly developed vocabularies could not be as
proficient or as fluent in performing through the foreign language. It could be
assumed that the students’ vocabulary stock gave much contribution in their
acquisition of other aspects of learning the language skills. As the result of
calculating the scores of vocabulary and speaking test showed the mean
vocabulary scores was 65 and the mean of speaking scores was 68. Vocabulary
played an important role in improving the four skills in English especially for
communication purposes. The students with large vocabulary performed
comparably with the students with much smaller vocabulary in speaking
activities. In line with Seffar (2015) and Khan (2018) found that both teacher
and learners indicated vocabulary deficiency as the major factors in students’
inability to speak English.
Relating to this research, Aristi, N, et al (2017) found that there is a
positive correlation between vocabulary mastery and speaking ability in
describing people. It was shown by the rvalue was 0.68 with the mean score
83.16 in vocabulary and 73.56. Both vocabulary and speaking were in excellent
score and good score. Besides, Uzer (2017) found that there was
significant correlation between students’ vocabulary mastery and students’
English speaking ability. The result showed that the coefficient correlation of
them was 0.630, respectively with the significance level 5% was 0.320. It has
been analyzed by test of vocabulary mastery and English speaking ability test
in form of role play.

D. CONCLUSION
Based on the finding and discussion above, it could be concluded that the
students’ vocabulary mastery of grade 8 of SMP Negeri 26 Padang was
categorized as fair or in satisfied level with the mean score 65. Specifically, word
meaning obtained the highest score percentage as the indicator of vocabulary
mastery (73%). Moreover, based on the result of the test students’ speaking ability

51
 JELT Vol 9 No. 1 March 2020

was categorized as fair or in satisfied level with the mean score 68. Students had
sufficient vocabulary to speak. It was proved by the percentage of students’
vocabulary as indicator of speaking ability 72%. Therefore, regarding to the result
of students’ vocabulary and speaking tests, it was found that there was a
significant correlation in strong level between students’ vocabulary mastery and
speaking ability of SMP Negeri 26 Padang based on rvalue = 0.703 was higher
than rtable = 0.361 at df 28 with the significant level of 5% and 0.462 at df 28 with
the significant level of 1%. It mean that there was strong significant between
students’ vocabulary mastery and speaking ability.
Therefore, the researcher suggested to teachers to concern to the ability of
students to mastering vocabulary because it gives contribution to the ability of
students’ speaking. Moreover, teacher should develop and improve their teaching
learning strategies for delivering their material to make students more excited in
learning English, especially in speaking. Teacher also should use target language
in classroom activities and maintain to use media or other sources in teaching
learning process to increase students’ vocabulary.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adila, S., & Refnaldi, R. (2019). Pronunciation Errors Made By Senior High
School Students In Speaking Performance. Journal of English Language
Teaching, 8(3), 305-316.
Afriani, I., Ratmanida, R., & Syafei, A. F. R. (2017). An Analysis Of Fifth Grade
English Speaking Activities At Sd Kartika 1-10 And 1-11
Padang. Journal of English Language Teaching, 6(1), 32-40.
Albar, R. (2016). the relationship between students' vocabulary size, foreign
language anxiety and speaking ability (Master's thesis, Perpustakaan
Ilmu Tarbiyah dan Keguruan).Alqahtani, M. 2015. The Importance of
Vocabulary In Language Learning and How to Be Taught. Vol. III, No.
3.
Anova, C., Antoni, R., & Kasyulita, E. (2015). The Correlation Between
Students’vocabulary Mastery And Speaking Skill At Fifth Semester Of
English Study Program In Pasir Pengaraian University. Jurnal Ilmiah
Mahasiswa FKIP Prodi Bahasa Inggris, 1(1).
Arifin, W. 2017. Psychological Problems and Challenge In EFL Speaking
Classroom. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18326/rgt.v10i1.29-47
Arikunto & Suharsimi. 2009. Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.
Aristi, N., Prawati, A., & Maria, D. The Correlation Between the Vocabulary
Mastery and the Speaking Ability in Describing People by the Second
Year Students of SMPN 12 Bintan (Doctoral dissertation, Riau
University).Bailey, M. K. 2015. Practical English Language Teaching
Speaking. ISBN: 007-310310-1.
Brown, D. 2000. Principle of Language Learning. San Francisco: Pearson
Education.
Brown, D. 2001. Teaching by Principles. San Francisco: San Francisco State
University.

52
ISSN: 2302-3198
 Vocabulary and Speaking – Aulia Putri and Refnaldi

Brown, H Douglas .2004. Language Assessment Principles and Classroom

Practice. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
Burgess, S., & Head, K. (2005). How to teach for exams. Longman.
Chee, J. (2015). Pearson’s product moment correlation: sample analysis. Reseach
Gate (January), 1-15.
Darancik, Y. (2018). Students' Views on Language Skills in Foreign Language
Teaching. International Education Studies, 11(7), 166-178.
Faridl, A. M. (2015). the correlation between studentsvocabulary mastery and
their reading comprehension of narrative text at the third grade of smpn 1
tegineneng. the correlation between studentsvocabulary mastery and
their reading comprehension of narrrative text at the third year of smpn
1 tegineneng, 1-63.
Fhonna, R. 2014. The Correlation between Mastering Vocabulary and Speaking
Ability (Case Study at Sma 10 Fajar Harapan Banda Aceh).
Fitriani, D. A., & Apriliaswati, R. (2015). A Study on Student’s English Speaking
Problems in Speaking Performance. Jurnal Pendidikan dan
Pembelajaran Khatulistiwa, 4(9).
Gay, I. R. (2009). Educational Research: competencies for analysis and
implications Ninth Edition. New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Gower, R., D. Philips & S. Walters. (1995). Teaching Practice a Handbook for
Teachers in Training. London: Heinemann.
Hasan, H., & Subekti, N. B. (2017). The Correlation between Vocabulary Mastery
and Writing Skill of Secondary School Students. Journal of English
Language and Language Teaching (JELLT), 1(2), 55-60.
Hatch, E. and C. Brown. (2001). Vocabulary, Semantic and Language Education.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hernawati, M. (2015). Building Up The Studets’english Vocabulary Trough
Fanny Stories At Smp Negeri 2 Duampanua Kab. Pinrang. ETERNAL
(English, Teaching, Learning, and Research Journal), 1(2), 201-215.
Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for Language Teachers Second Edition. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 0-521-823250.
Kemendikbud. (2016). Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Dan Kebudayaan Republik
Indonesia Nomor 24 tentang Kompetensi Inti Dan Kompetensi Dasar
Pelajaran Pada Kurikulum 2013 Pada Pendidikan Dasar dan
Pendidikan Menengah. Jakarta: Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan
Khairani, U., Rusdi, R., & Syafei, A. F. R. (2017). An Analysis of Students’
Speaking Ability in Role Playing Dialogues of Guests Handlingat
Vocational High School. Journal of English Language Teaching, 6(1),
70-76.
Khan, R. M. I., Radzuan, N. R. M., Shahbaz, M., Ibrahim, A. H., & Mustafa, G.
(2018). The role of vocabulary knowledge in speaking development of
Saudi EFL learners. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Volume, 9.
Kurniati, A. n.d. A Study on the Speaking Ability of the Second Year Students of
SMK Telkom Pekanbaru.
Lessard, M. & Cluston. (2015. Teaching Vocabulary. Alexandria: TESOL
International Association. ISBN: 978-1931185974.

53
 JELT Vol 9 No. 1 March 2020

Luoma, S. (2004). Assessing Speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

ISBN: 978-0-521-80487-5.
McDonough, J. (2013). Materials and Methods in ELT: A Teacher’s Guide, Third
Edition. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Milton, J. (2009). Measuring Second Language Vocabulary Acqusition. Great
Britain: Short Run Press Ltd.
Naskah, T. P., Refnaldi, R., & Syafei, A. F. R. (2018). The Students' Speaking
Ability in Describing Products viewed from Grammar and Knowledge of
Genre at SMK N 3 Padang. Journal of English Language Teaching, 7(1),
86-92.
Nation, I. S. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Ernst Klett
Sprachen.
Nation, P. (1994). New Ways in Teaching Vocabulary. New Ways in TESOL
Series: Innovative Classroom Techniques. TESOL, 1600 Cameron Street,
Suite 300, Alexandria, VA 22314.Nisa, A. 2014. The Correlation
between Vocabulary Mastery and Reading Comprehension Skill of
Junior High School at 8th Grade.
http://onesearch.id/Record/IOS5571.1203
Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English Language Teaching, First Edition. New
York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN: 007-282062-4.
Nurani, D. (2013). The Correlation Between Vocabulary Mastery and Listening
Skill at The Fourth Semester Students in English Department of IAIN
Antasari Academic Year 2012/2013.https://idr.uin-antasari.ac.id/4079/
Rahayu, P. (2016). The Correlation between Students’ Vocabulary Mastery and
Their Reading Achievement at the Eighth Grade of SMPN 15 Cirebon
Academic Year 2015/2016.
Rahmati, U. (2018). The Correlation between Vocabulary Mastery and Students’
Writing Skill (A Study at English Department of UIN Ar-Raniry).
Rahmawati. (2010). The Use of English Children Songs as Media to Improve
Students’ English Vocabulary Power in Noun (A Classroom Action
Research with Tte Fifth Grade Students Of MI Miftahul Ulum Sekuro
Jepara in the Academic Year of 2010/2011).
Read, J. (2000). Assessing Vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ridwan, H. Sunarto. (2012) Pengantar Statistika untuk Penelitian: Pendidikan,
Sosial, Komunikasi, Ekonomi, dan Bisnis, Bandung: Alfabeta
Ridwan. (2009). Belajar Mudah Penelitian untuk Guru, Karyawan, dan Peneliti
Pemula. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Safida, Maya. (2014) The Correlation Between Vocabulary Mastery And
Listening Comprehension (A Correlational Study At Second Year
Students Of Mtsn Tungkop Aceh Besar. Banda Aceh : Universitas Syiah
Kuala.
Seffar, S. (2015). The Effect of Vocabulary Knowledge on EFL Oral Competence.
IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education (IOSR-JRME). e-
ISSN: 2320–7388,p-ISSN: 2320–737X Volume 5, Issue 6 Ver. I (Nov. -
Dec. 2015), PP 08-13 www.iosrjournals.org

54
ISSN: 2302-3198
 Vocabulary and Speaking – Aulia Putri and Refnaldi

Sembiring, N., & Ginting, F. Y. A. 2016. An Analysis of Pronunciation Errors

Made by the Fourt Semester Students of English Education Study
Program at UNIKA. Jurnal Seluruh Pendidikan FKIP-UHN. Vol 3, Edisi
1, Halaman 40-53.
Staehr, L.S. (2008). Vocabulary size and the skills of listening, reading and
writing. The Language Learning Journal. Vol, 36, 2008. Issue 2:
Vocabulary.
Staehr, L.S. (2009). Vocabulary Knowledge and Advanced Listening
Comprehension In English As A Foreign Language. The Language
Learning Journal Volume 31, Issue 4, pp. 577-607.
Sugiono (2013). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Suhendra, H. D. (2019). The Correlation between Vocabulary Mastery and
Reading Comprehension at Second Grade of Smp N 11 Bandar
Lampung.
Surya tiningsih, N. 2015. A Study on the Students’ Ability in Pronunciation
Dipthongs at STKIP PGRI Pasuruan. Jurnal Dimensi Pendidikan dan
pembelajaran, 3(2), 1-4.
Thornbury, S. (2002). How to Teach Vocab. Longman, Oxfordshire: Bluestone
Press.
Thornbury, S. (2005). How to teach speaking. Longman, Oxfordshire: Bluestone
Press. ISBN: 978-0582-42966-6.
Uzer, Y, V. (2017). The Correlation between Vocabulary Mastery and English
Speaking Ability of the Tenth Grade Students of Senior High School 12
Palembang. Jurnal Ilmiah Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris.Vol
8, No 2 (2017).
Werner, P.K. & Spaventa, L. (2007). Mosaic 1 Grammar. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Wilkins, D. A. (1974). Second language Learning and Teaching. ISBN: 0-7131-
5759-3.
Yuwinda. (2015). The Correlation between vocabulary Mastery and Speaking
Ability of the Eleventh Grade Students at MAN MODEL Palangkaraya.
Skripsi. State Islamic Institute Of Palangka Raya Faculty Of Teacher
Training And Education Language Education department Study Program
Of English Education.
Zaim. 2016. Evaluasi PEmbelajaran Bahasa Inggris. Jakarta: Kencana. ISBN:
978-602-422-094-5.

55