scholarly journals Formulaic sequences in native and non-native argumentative writing in German

2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 500-525 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvia Jaworska ◽  
Cedric Krummes ◽  
Astrid Ensslin
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
Argumentative Writing ◽  
Formulaic Language ◽  
Formulaic Sequences ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
Learner Corpus ◽  
Argumentative Essays

The aim of this paper is to contribute to learner corpus research into formulaic language in native and non-native German. To this effect, a corpus of argumentative essays written by advanced British students of German (WHiG) was compared with a corpus of argumentative essays written by German native speakers (Falko-L1). A corpus-driven analysis reveals a larger number of 3-grams in WHiG than in Falko-L1, which suggests that British advanced learners of German are more likely to use formulaic language in argumentative writing than their native-speaker counterparts. Secondly, by classifying the formulaic sequences according to their functions, this study finds that native speakers of German prefer discourse-structuring devices to stance expressions, whilst British advanced learners display the opposite preferences. Thirdly, the results show that learners of German make greater use of macro-discourse-structuring devices and cautious language, whereas native speakers favour micro-discourse structuring devices and tend to use more direct language.

Resources and obstacles in very advanced L2 French

2009 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 185-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inge Bartning ◽  
Fanny Forsberg Lundell ◽  
Victorine Hancock
Keyword(s):  
Information Structure ◽  
Developmental Stages ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
Transitional Stage ◽  
Formulaic Language ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
Very High

This study builds on the proposition that there are six developmental stages for spoken L2 French, based on morpho-syntactic criteria (Bartning and Schlyter 2004). In order to investigate developmental stages ‘beyond stage 6’, oral productions of several groups of advanced learners/users and native speakers are analyzed in terms of resources and obstacles. Among the resources, we investigate expected late features such as formulaic language and elaboration of information structure (Forsberg 2008; Hancock 2007). Morpho-syntactic deviances (MSDs), i.e. obstacles are also investigated. MSDs are expected to be almost absent beyond stage 6 (von Stutterheim 2003). Surprisingly, they continue to be present even at these very high levels. The results also show that formulaic language and information structure are promising measures of high levels, although the latter did not yield significant differences compared to lower stages. The study concludes by the proposal of a transitional stage with L2 users called functional bilinguals, which would constitute a stage between the advanced learner and the near-native speaker.

Becoming a proficient academic writer: shifting lexical preferences in the use of the progressive

Corpora ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefanie Wulff ◽  
Ute Römer
Keyword(s):  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
Text Type ◽  
Learner Corpus ◽  
Verb Aspect ◽  
Academic Writer ◽  
Upper Level ◽  
The One

Recent corpus studies have shown that learners of English are aware of systematic associations between verbs and their preferred argument structures to an extent that is similar to that of a native speaker of English (e.g., Gries and Wulff, 2005 ). Given evidence for similarly systematic associations in native speaker data at the lexis–morphology interface (e.g., Römer, 2005a ), the question arises whether, and to what extent, learners of English are also sensitive to lexical dependencies at the level of morphology, and how their verb-aspect associations compare with those of native speakers. In order to address this question, this study focusses on the potential associations between verbs and progressive aspect in German learners' academic writing. On the basis of the German component of the International Corpus of Learner English and the Cologne–Hanover Advanced Learner Corpus, learners' significantly preferred verb-aspect pairs are identified using an adaptation of collostructional analysis ( Stefanowitsch and Gries, 2003 ). The results are complemented with corresponding analyses of a subset of the Michigan Corpus of Upper-level Student Papers on the one hand and published research articles from the Hyland Corpus on the other hand. The findings indicate that upper-intermediate and advanced German learners of English exhibit clear lexical preferences in the use of progressives. Furthermore, comparative analyses suggest that verb-aspect preferences shift as a function of writers' mastery of text type-specific conventions rather than language proficiency at large.

Lexical and discourse factors in the second language acquisition of Spanish word order

2003 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 273-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tammy Jandrey Hertel
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Order Effects ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
Spanish Word ◽  
Native Speakers Of English ◽  
Beginning Learners

This study investigates the acquisition of Spanish word order by native speakers of English. Specifically, it considers the development of sensitivity to the distinct interpretations of subject-verb (SV) vs. verb-subject (VS) order, as determined by lexical verb class (unaccusative and unergative verbs) and discourse structure.Participants included a native speaker control group and learners at four proficiency levels. Results from a contextualized production task indicate that beginning learners transferred the SV order of English for all structures. Intermediate learners showed a gradual increase in the production of lexically and discourse-determined inversion, although their data was also characterized by indeterminacy and variability. The advanced learners demonstrated a sensitivity to the word order effects of unaccusativity and discourse factors, but also tended to overgeneralize inversion to unergative verbs in a neutral discourse context.

scholarly journals An Examination of Relative Clauses in Argumentative Essays Written by EFL Learners

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 87-97
Author(s):  
Hesamoddin Shahriari ◽  
Farzaneh Shadloo ◽  
Ahmad Ansarifar
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Second Language Writing ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
Nonnative Speakers ◽  
Writing Classroom ◽  
Grammatical Structure ◽  
Language Writing ◽  
Nonnative Speakers Of English ◽  
Argumentative Essays

Syntactic complexity has received a great deal of attention in the literature on second language writing. Relative clauses, which function as a kind of noun phrase post-modifier, are among those structures that are believed to increase the complexity of academic prose. This grammatical structure can pose difficulties for EFL writers even at higher levels of proficiency, and it is therefore important to determine the frequency and accuracy with which relative clauses are used by L2 learners; understanding learners’ strengths and weaknesses in using these structures can inform the process of their instruction in the writing classroom. This paper reports on a corpus-based comparison of relative clauses in a number of argumentative essays written by native and nonnative speakers of English. To this end, 30 argumentative essays were randomly selected from the Persian sub-corpus of the ICLE and the essays were analyzed with respect to the relative clauses found in them. The results were then compared to a comparable corpus of essays by native speakers. Different dimensions regarding the structure of relative clauses were investigated. The type of relative clause (restrictive/non-restrictive), the relativizer (adverbial/pronoun), the gap (subject/non-subject), and head nouns (both animate and non-animate) in our two sets of data were manually identified and coded. The Findings revealed that Iranian EFL writers tend to use a greater number of relative clauses compared to their native-speaker counterparts.

Universals and transfer in the acquisition of the progressive aspect: Evidence from L1 Chinese, German, and Spanish learners’ use of the progressive -ing in spoken English

2019 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyan Zeng ◽  
Yasuhiro Shirai ◽  
Xiaoxiang Chen
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
First Language ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
Progressive Aspect ◽  
Aspect Hypothesis ◽  
Proficiency Levels ◽  
Spoken English ◽  
Lexical Aspect ◽  
Learner Corpus

Abstract This study investigated the effects of learners’ first language (L1), lexical aspect of verbs, and proficiency levels on their use of the English progressive aspect. It analyzed spoken data from learners of three different L1s (Chinese, German, and Spanish) in an international learner corpus (LINSEI), in comparison with native speech in a comparable native speaker corpus (LOCNEC). The analysis reveals that regardless of learners’ L1 and proficiency levels, their use of progressive markings is predominantly associated with activity verbs (prototypes), supporting the association prediction of the Aspect Hypothesis (Andersen, Roger W. & Yasuhiro Shirai. 1994. Discourse motivations for some cognitive acquisition principles. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16(2). 133–156). Contrary to the fourth prediction of the Aspect Hypothesis, both intermediate and advanced learners use stative progressives, and especially intermediate L1 Spanish learners overuse stative progressives, indicating a complex interaction between L1 and proficiency on non-prototypical form-meaning associations. The results suggest that L1 effect, lexical aspect of verbs, and proficiency levels jointly drive tense-aspect acquisition.

scholarly journals A Comparative Analysis of Lexical Bundles Used by Native and Non-native Scholars

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatih Gungor ◽  
Hacer Hande Uysal
Keyword(s):  
Language Learners ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Lexical Knowledge ◽  
Formulaic Sequences ◽  
Lexical Bundles ◽  
Native Speakers Of English ◽  
Lexical Bundle ◽  
L1 And L2

<p>In the recent years, globalization prepared a ground for English to be the lingua franca of the academia. Thus, most highly prestigious international journals have defined their medium of publications as English. However, even advanced language learners have difficulties in writing their research articles due to the lack of appropriate lexical knowledge and discourse conventions of academia. Considering the fact that the underuse, overuse and misuse of formulaic sequences or lexical bundles are often characterized with non-native writers of English, lexical bundle studies have recently been on the top of the agenda of corpus studies. Although the related literature has represented specific genres or disciplines, no study has scrutinized lexical bundles in the research articles that are written in the educational sciences. Therefore, the current study compared the structural and functional characteristics of the lexical-bundle use in L1 and L2 research articles in English. The results revealed the deviation of the usages of lexical bundles by the non-native speakers of English from the native speaker norms. Furthermore, the results indicated the overuse of clausal or verb-phrase based lexical bundles in the research articles of Turkish scholars while their native counterparts used noun and prepositional phrase-based lexical bundles more than clausal bundles.</p>

The Treatment of Foreground-Background Information in the On-Line Descriptive Discourse of Second Language Learners

1984 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell S. Tomlin
Keyword(s):  
Language Learners ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
Communication Strategy ◽  
Background Information ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
Discourse Production ◽  
On Line ◽  
Native Speakers Of English

This paper compares the foregrounding strategies of native speakers of English and advanced learners of ESL. Fifteen native speakers and thirty-five advanced learners produced on-line (play-by-play) descriptions of the unfolding action in an animated videotape. A methodology for the quantitative analysis of discourse production is described which permits the explicit identification of foreground-background information and its interaction with both native speaker and interlanguage syntaxes. Results show that: (1) Native speakers and learners exhibit one universal discourse strategy in retreating to a more pragmatic mode of communication under the severe communicative stress of on-line description, as revealed through the systematic loss of the coding relations ordinarily holding between foreground-background information and clause independence/tense-aspect; (2) Learners also exhibit a learner-specific general communication strategy in which significant events are described but nonsignificant events avoided.

Formulaic Language in Learner Corpora

2012 ◽  
Vol 32 ◽  
pp. 130-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Magali Paquot ◽  
Sylviane Granger
Keyword(s):  
First Language ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Formulaic Language ◽  
Formulaic Sequences ◽  
Learner Corpus ◽  
Corpus Linguistic ◽  
Learner Corpora ◽  
Linguistic Research ◽  
Multiword Units ◽  
The Relationship

Formulaic language is at the heart of corpus linguistic research, and learner corpus research (LCR) is no exception. As multiword units of all kinds (e.g., collocations, phrasal verbs, speech formulae) are notoriously difficult for learners, and corpus linguistic techniques are an extremely powerful way of exploring them, they were an obvious area for investigation by researchers from the very early days of LCR. In the first part of this article, the focus is on the types of learner corpus data investigated and the most popular method used to analyze them. The second section describes the types of word sequences analyzed in learner corpora and the methodologies used to extract them. In the rest of the article, we summarize some of the main findings of LCR studies of the learner phrasicon, distinguishing between co-occurrence and recurrence. Particular emphasis is also placed on the relationship between learners’ use of formulaic sequences and transfer from the learner's first language. The article concludes with some proposals for future research in the field.

scholarly journals The Processing of Formulaic Language

2012 ◽  
Vol 32 ◽  
pp. 45-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathy Conklin ◽  
Norbert Schmitt
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
Nonnative Speakers ◽  
Long Term Memory ◽  
Formulaic Language ◽  
Formulaic Sequences ◽  
Lexical Bundles ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Word Selection ◽  
The Brain

It is generally accepted that we store representations of individual words in our mental lexicon. There is growing agreement that the lexicon also contains formulaic language (How are you? kick the bucket). In fact, there are compelling reasons to think that the brain represents formulaic sequences in long-term memory, bypassing the need to compose them online through word selection and grammatical sequencing in capacity-limited working memory. The research surveyed in this chapter strongly supports the position that there is an advantage in the way that native speakers process formulaic language compared to nonformulaic language. This advantage extends to the access and use of different types of formulaic language, including idioms, binomials, collocations, and lexical bundles. However, the evidence is mixed for nonnative speakers. While very proficient nonnatives sometimes exhibit processing advantages similar to natives, less proficient learners often have been shown to process formulaic language in a word-by-word manner similar to nonformulaic language. Furthermore, if the formulaic language is idiomatic (where the meaning cannot be understood from the component words), the figurative meanings can be much more difficult to process for nonnatives than nonidiomatic, nonformulaic language.

Creating a grammar checker for CALL by constraint relaxation: a feasibility study

ReCALL ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 110-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANNE VANDEVENTER
Keyword(s):  
Natural Language Processing ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
Viable Option ◽  
Major Drawback ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
Learner Corpus ◽  
Constraint Relaxation

Intelligent feedback on learners’ full written sentence productions requires the use of Natural Language Processing (NLP) tools and, in particular, of a diagnosis system. Most syntactic parsers, on which grammar checkers are based, are designed to parse grammatical sentences and/or native speaker productions. They are therefore not necessarily suitable for language learners. In this paper, we concentrate on the transformation of a French syntactic parser into a grammar checker geared towards intermediate to advanced learners of French. Several techniques are envisaged to allow the parser to handle ill-formed input, including constraint relaxation. By the very nature of this technique, parsers can generate complete analyses for ungrammatical sentences. Proper labelling of where the analysis has been able to proceed thanks to a specific constraint relaxation forms the basis of the error diagnosis. Parsers with relaxed constraints tend to produce more complete, although incorrect, analyses for grammatical sentences, and several complete analyses for ungrammatical sentences. This increased number of analyses per sentence has one major drawback: it slows down the system and requires more memory. An experiment was conducted to observe the behaviour of our parser in the context of constraint relaxation. Three specific constraints, agreement in number, gender, and person, were selected and relaxed in different combinations. A learner corpus was parsed with each combination. The evolution of the number of correct diagnoses and of parsing speed, among other factors, were monitored. We then evaluated, by comparing the results, whether large scale constraint relaxation is a viable option to transform our syntactic parser into an efficient grammar checker for CALL.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document