• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

site logo
The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language
search
  • Home
  • About TESL-EJ
  • Vols. 1-15 (1994-2012)
    • Volume 1
      • Volume 1, Number 1
      • Volume 1, Number 2
      • Volume 1, Number 3
      • Volume 1, Number 4
    • Volume 2
      • Volume 2, Number 1 — March 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 2 — September 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 3 — January 1997
      • Volume 2, Number 4 — June 1997
    • Volume 3
      • Volume 3, Number 1 — November 1997
      • Volume 3, Number 2 — March 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 3 — September 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 4 — January 1999
    • Volume 4
      • Volume 4, Number 1 — July 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 2 — November 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 3 — May 2000
      • Volume 4, Number 4 — December 2000
    • Volume 5
      • Volume 5, Number 1 — April 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 2 — September 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 3 — December 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 4 — March 2002
    • Volume 6
      • Volume 6, Number 1 — June 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 2 — September 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 3 — December 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 4 — March 2003
    • Volume 7
      • Volume 7, Number 1 — June 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 2 — September 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 3 — December 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 4 — March 2004
    • Volume 8
      • Volume 8, Number 1 — June 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 2 — September 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 3 — December 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 4 — March 2005
    • Volume 9
      • Volume 9, Number 1 — June 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 2 — September 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 3 — December 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 4 — March 2006
    • Volume 10
      • Volume 10, Number 1 — June 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 2 — September 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 3 — December 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 4 — March 2007
    • Volume 11
      • Volume 11, Number 1 — June 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 2 — September 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 3 — December 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 4 — March 2008
    • Volume 12
      • Volume 12, Number 1 — June 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 2 — September 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 3 — December 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 4 — March 2009
    • Volume 13
      • Volume 13, Number 1 — June 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 2 — September 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 3 — December 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 4 — March 2010
    • Volume 14
      • Volume 14, Number 1 — June 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 2 – September 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 3 – December 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 4 – March 2011
    • Volume 15
      • Volume 15, Number 1 — June 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 2 — September 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 3 — December 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 4 — March 2012
  • Vols. 16-Current
    • Volume 16
      • Volume 16, Number 1 — June 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 2 — September 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 3 — December 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 4 – March 2013
    • Volume 17
      • Volume 17, Number 1 – May 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 2 – August 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 3 – November 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 4 – February 2014
    • Volume 18
      • Volume 18, Number 1 – May 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 2 – August 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 3 – November 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 4 – February 2015
    • Volume 19
      • Volume 19, Number 1 – May 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 2 – August 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 3 – November 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 4 – February 2016
    • Volume 20
      • Volume 20, Number 1 – May 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 2 – August 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 3 – November 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 4 – February 2017
    • Volume 21
      • Volume 21, Number 1 – May 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 2 – August 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 3 – November 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 4 – February 2018
    • Volume 22
      • Volume 22, Number 1 – May 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 2 – August 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 3 – November 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 4 – February 2019
    • Volume 23
      • Volume 23, Number 1 – May 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 2 – August 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 3 – November 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 4 – February 2020
    • Volume 24
      • Volume 24, Number 1 – May 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 2 – August 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 3 – November 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 4 – February 2021
    • Volume 25
      • Volume 25, Number 1 – May 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 2 – August 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 3 – November 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 4 – February 2022
    • Volume 26
      • Volume 26, Number 1 – May 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 2 – August 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 3 – November 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 4 – February 2023
    • Volume 27
      • Volume 27, Number 1 – May 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 2 – August 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 3 – November 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 4 – February 2024
    • Volume 28
      • Volume 28, Number 1 – May 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 2 – August 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 3 – November 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 4 – February 2025
    • Volume 29
      • Volume 29, Number 1 – May 2025
      • Volume 29, Number 2 – August 2025
      • Volume 29, Number 3 – November 2025
  • Books
  • How to Submit
    • Submission Info
    • Ethical Standards for Authors and Reviewers
    • TESL-EJ Style Sheet for Authors
    • TESL-EJ Tips for Authors
    • Book Review Policy
    • Media Review Policy
    • TESL-EJ Special issues
    • APA Style Guide
  • Editorial Board
  • Support

The Lexical Approach

August 1994 — Volume 1, Number 2

The Lexical Approach

Michael Lewis (1993)
Hove, England: Language Teaching Publications
Pp. ix + 200. ISBN 0-906717-0-99-X

Michael Lewis makes a strong and convincing case in this book for the primacy of meaning in language teaching. This approach should and will be welcomed by many teachers who emphasize lexico-semantic knowledge in their teaching and whose goal is successful communication over grammatical drilling and the ambiguous notion of correctness. These and other teachers and scholars will find in this book a lot of knowledge and common sense on language learning and the way language works, with carefully drawn distinctions, clear terminology, and valuable theoretical and practical ideas all towards building a tight argument for a switch from the present-practice-produce paradigm to an observe-hypothesize-experiment paradigm, with the lexicon and the generative power of words at its core.

The approach itself is formulated in the space of thirteen chapters. The first five cover a detailed account of basic terminology and dichotomies and continua (or spectra, as Lewis calls them) used in discourse about language and language learning; a larger context of philosophical and psychological problems in language teaching; and some relevant issues about the nature of meaning and vocabulary. These five introductory chapters will offer most readers a wealth of knowledge about language learning and teaching, will make them understand the approach put forth by the author, and will probably challenge them to study more of the theoretical underpinnings of particular teaching methods used in the classroom.

The remaining eight chapters develop the new approach, which concludes with nine methodological principles and ten methodological implications. The approach Lewis is urging teachers to use (actually, an approach within the communicative approach) is not simply one that encourages students to develop their vocabularies and teachers to spend more time on vocabulary build-up; nor is it one that involves lists of words with or without contextual support. When Lewis talks about lexis, he refers to units larger than the single word, such as polywords (e.g., by the way, catch up with, etc.), fixed and free collocations (the fixed ones similar to the polywords, while the free ones are words that are most likely to co-occur in infinitely creative ways), institutionalized expressions (i.e., whole utterances whose pragmatic import depends entirely on the features of the speech event in which they occur) in short, both creatively associated lexical items and formulaic, or frozen, unanalyzable chunks. The idea of a continuum of idiomaticity is introduced in this connection, from the opaque kick the bucket to the more literally transparent and pragmatically complex funny you should say that, with collocations or [-1-] co-occurring language, playing a particularly important part in language teaching.

The books emphasis on the teaching of collocating words, on the linguistic rather than the situational environment, with the dictionary as a learning (rather than just a reference) resource, and the identification of lexical chunks as a basic classroom activity, is novel and deserves our entire attention. It is in keeping with research on first and second language learning by children, which points to the use of whole unanalyzed (and sometimes unanalyzable) chunks of language in appropriate contexts before the emergence of a grammatical system. It also reflects native speakers reliance on many thousands of ready-made chunks of language, in addition to discrete vocabulary items. Finally, and most compellingly, it is a way of handling the huge task a second language learner is faced with: that of learning close to 40,000 words and an almost equal number of prefabricated chunks of varying lengths. Such a life-long task can hardly be accomplished in a haphazard way, by incidental learning of vocabulary, although that will obviously happen too along the way. What Michael Lewis proposes is that vocabulary be exploited and recorded in principled ways (p. 118). To that end, he provides types of activities that have the lexis in focus: exercises that identify collocations in specific texts, ways of recording lexical information (e.g., in collocation boxes or pattern displays), cloze procedures, even lexical phrase drills, and more lexical exercises (some requiring advanced comprehension of instructions). For those who consider that grammar is not paid sufficient attention, Lewis provides a chapter outlining the role of grammar in the new approach. Succinctly stated, there is a continuum between words and grammar, with the former determining the latter and not the other way around. Grammar rules in the classroom should be, as they are in modern linguistics, partial, provisional, personal (p. 150), and the teachers attitude should be more accepting of error.

Some readers may find the five introductory chapters too long an introduction into the matter at hand. Other shortcomings that this reviewer found were the authors explicit dislike for what he calls the cumulative bibliography, leading him to cite very little from current literature; the lack of North American references in what he does cite; and the misspelling of Dell Hymes name.

On the copyright page of this book we are told that the author is co-founder of Language Teaching Publications, and that the book is part of a teacher training seriesthere can be no doubt then that the intended audience of The Lexical Approach is foreign language teachers in general and more specifically, given the examples throughout the book, ESL and EFL teachers and trainees. In this context, the reviewer found rather disconcerting what sounds like signs of distrust, and sometimes even disregard, for language teachers attitudes, knowledge, and classroom practices. While [-2-] theoretical overstatements are often understandable as part of the strategy for selling an argument, a more considerate view of the intended audience would have gone a long way. Many more language teachers and students than Michael Lewis realizes already know that the key to successful oral or written communication (i.e., comprehensible to the audience and satisfying to the producer) is, indeed, a large repertoire of words and lexical formulas used appropriately in appropriate contexts.

As one who has used a lexical approach almost obsessively for many years, with many of the exercises suggested by Michael Lewis, but also with an equally obsessive emphasis on reading, the reviewer (and she is by no means alone) embraces wholeheartedly the tightly formulated and appealing argument for the primacy of meaning in language learning. The practical side of the book, however, is less convincing. It is true that having a theoretical foundation for what one is doing in the classroom is important, but it is at least equally important to transform that knowledge into activities that are simple, appealing to the students, and successful, and that the short-term vocabulary gains become solid acquisition. Some types of vocabulary exercises may be enjoyed by some students, but many are not. More importantly, the task seems to many simply unmanageable, for the road from the first encounter with a word or chunk through passive knowledge to active use is long. The learning of vocabulary is slow and incremental. The time spent in the classroom is by no means enough for accomplishing the lexical task. Most of the time teachers do not get to see spectacular results in a few months. One only hopes that students who have been exposed to the lexical approach will leave the language training program with a whole range of techniques for learning and organizing vocabulary, and that the larger the lexical repertoire, the easier it will be to increase it even further outside the formal instructional setting. In that sense Michael Lewis book is a way forward for English language teaching.

Anca M. Nemoianu
The Catholic University of America
<nemoianu@cua.edu>


[-3-]

© Copyright rests with authors. Please cite TESL-EJ appropriately.

Editor’s Note: Dashed numbers in square brackets indicate the end of each page in the paginated ASCII version of this article, which is the definitive edition. Please use these page numbers when citing this work.

© 1994–2026 TESL-EJ, ISSN 1072-4303
Copyright of articles rests with the authors.