Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) Vol.4, No.6, 2013 42 Lexical Richness, a reliable measure of Intermediate L2 Learners’ current status of acquisition of English language 1. Sayed Kazim Shah Department of English Linguistics, Government College University, Faisalabad, Pakistan E-mail: kazimkazmi@gmail.com 2. Ayesha Asghar Gill M.phil Scholar, Department of English Linguistics, Government College University, Faisalabad, Pakistan 3. Dr. Rashid Mahmood Department of English Linguistics, Government College University, Faisalabad, Pakistan E-mail: ch.raashidmahmood@gmail.com 4. Muhammad Bilal Department of English Linguistics, Government College University, Faisalabad, Pakistan Abstract This article aims to explore the utility of the relationship between lexical richness and size as an indicator of acquisition status of English language of L2 learners of intermediate level, having rural background on the basis of their self -written output. 126 students’ essays were used to measure the lexical richness (126 students of Sem- I and 63 students of Sem-II) Lexical Frequency Profile was used to sort it out. Its values discriminated students of different proficiency level and displayed L2 Learners vocabulary size in use. LFP result’s consistency and legitimacy was obtained by comparing its result with an independent and separate measure of vocabulary size, VLT. The result showed that lexical richness has a direct link with vocabulary size (receptive vocabulary) of L2 learners. It discusses the utility of the inference based on the lexical richness of L2’s written text for monitoring purpose of language acquisition process of L2 learners and to determine appropriate strategies for the desired growth of vocabulary size. 1.1 Introduction Vocabulary size is an important factor for, mastering L2 language (Schmitt, 2008). It is essential for meaningful communication and effective reading comprehension (McCarthy, 1990). In Pakistan, most of the educational material, taught and used, basically is written by and for the natives. It is creating a hindrance to grasp the conceptual knowledge of English language for L2 Learners, especially less proficient ones .In order to increase their comprehension and productivity, in both spoken and written language skills, we need to know the present status of L2 learners as a reference point (Nation, 2001). In this regard, the measure of lexical richness of L2 learners facilitates to quantify the desired level of vocabulary level at any threshold of education. It will define the requirement of vocabulary level to perform different tasks of academic education. Such statistical information determines the quality of factors that affect the quality of language learning process and on the other hand it gives clear cut relationship between vocabulary knowledge and use on the basis of written text. 1.2 Literature History Vocabulary learning is a focal point of second language acquisition (Gao, 2003). It means that vocabulary gives a clue about the different areas of language based on different aspects of vocabulary such as size, depth, receptive and productive level on one hand, the way vocabulary is taught and influencing factor such as educational background and the environment of learning on the other hand. This study focuses to sort out a reference point with the help of lexical richness that can be served as measuring unit for the induction of students in a particular level for the positive development of vocabulary growth. One of the general issues that emerge in relation to vocabulary is the distinction between productive and receptive vocabulary. This study assumes the R/P bipolar rather than binary distinction between these two aspects of vocabulary (Melka, 1997). The distance between these two points is thought as the increased familiarity of a word on a continuum. That shows a gradual movement along with the continuum with the increase of familiarity with word from recognition form, towards recognition meaning, recall form and recall meaning (Laufer & Goldstein. 2004). Similarly, there is always a problem while measuring productive vocabulary accurately of the respondent as compared to recessive vocabulary. The basic reason is that, productive vocabulary is always subjected to context. It calls accuracy of the measurement of productive vocabulary in question (Meara &Fitzpatrick, 2000) because such association gives inconsistent results. Many past researches have reported a gap between receptive and productive vocabulary. Receptive vocabulary level is greater than productive vocabulary knowledge. This disparity is resolved by following the Reads