scholarly journals APPRAISAL resources in L1 and L2 argumentative essays: A contrastive learner corpus-informed study of evaluative stance

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suet Ling Lam ◽  
Peter Crosthwaite
Keyword(s):  
Learner Corpus ◽  
Argumentative Essays ◽  
L1 And L2

Use of signalling nouns in a learner corpus

2006 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 345-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Flowerdew
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Frequency Data ◽  
Abstract Noun ◽  
Learner Corpus ◽  
Cohesive Properties ◽  
Intuitive Idea ◽  
Argumentative Essays ◽  
The One ◽  
Error Types

Signalling nouns are nouns which have cohesive properties across and within clauses. A signalling noun is potentially any abstract noun the full meaning of which can only be made specific by reference to its context. Examples of nouns which can function as signalling nouns are attitude, assistance, difficulty, endurance, process, reason, result etc. Signalling nouns in discourse are closely associated with nominalisation and are problematic for learners. Based on a corpus of argumentative essays written by Cantonese L1 learners of English, this paper presents a taxonomy of error types and frequency data of the different error types in the use of signalling nouns. The paper then compares the average number of signalling nouns used per essay with grades awarded to the essays, on the one hand, and the numbers of signalling noun errors according to grades, on the other. In both cases there is a significant correlation. The findings confirm the intuitive idea that the use of signalling nouns adds to the overall coherence of a text.

How Learner Corpus Research can inform language learning and teaching

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 196-218
Author(s):  
Martin Schweinberger
Keyword(s):  
Language Learning ◽  
Language Teaching ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Learning And Teaching ◽  
Learner Corpus ◽  
Informal Conversation ◽  
L1 And L2

Abstract This study aims to exemplify how language teaching can benefit from learner corpus research (LCR). To this end, this study determines how L1 and L2 English speakers with diverse L1 backgrounds differ with respect to adjective amplification, based on the International Corpus of Learner English (ICLE) and the Louvain Corpus of Native English Essays (LOCNESS). The study confirms trends reported in previous research, in that L1 speakers amplify adjectives more frequently than L2 English speakers. In addition, the analysis shows that L1 and L2 English speakers differ substantially with respect to the collocational profiles of specific amplifier types and with respect to awareness of genre-specific constraints on amplifier use, and that even advanced L2 speakers tend to be unaware of stylistic constraints on adjective amplification because they model their academic output based on patterns generalized from informal conversation. These findings are useful for language teaching in that the data can be used to target L1-specific difficulties experienced by L2 English speakers.

scholarly journals The Reference to L1 and L2 in SFL: Proposals Based on the Aprescrilov Learner Corpus

2015 ◽  
Vol 173 ◽  
pp. 274-278
Author(s):  
Kris Buyse ◽  
Lydia Fernández Pereda ◽  
Katrien Verveckken
Keyword(s):  
Learner Corpus ◽  
L1 And L2

Discourse Features of Argumentative Essays Written by Chinese EFL Students

2008 ◽  
Vol 156 ◽  
pp. 179-200
Author(s):  
Ruiqin Miao ◽  
Xiuyun Lei
Keyword(s):  
Future Research ◽  
Written Discourse ◽  
Efl Students ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
Rhetorical Features ◽  
Argumentative Essays ◽  
Textual Organization ◽  
L1 And L2 Writing ◽  
L1 And L2

Studies on both second language discourse in general and Chinese EFL/ESL discourse in particular have reported mixed findings about the relationship between L1 and L2 writing. This study investigates the rhetorical features of argumentative essays written by Chinese college EFL students by analyzing paragraph and overall textual organization and development in 69 sample essays. The results show that the majority of the participants compose in a deductive pattern similar to what is typically employed by native English speaking writers. However, the way in which the Chinese EFL students develop their L2 written discourse lacks effectiveness and adequacy, in terms of the following features: the quality of the topic sentence (of paragraphs) and the introduction paragraph (of essays), the adequacy of supporting details, transitions between sentences and paragraphs, and the effectiveness of the ending (of essays). Furthermore, we explore the factors that may underlie the observed patterns. We conclude the paper by discussing the pedagogical implications of the findings and suggesting directions for future research.

Underuse of English verb–particle constructions in an L2 learner corpus: Focus on structural patterns and one-word preference

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min-Chang Sung
Keyword(s):  
Structural Type ◽  
Strong Preference ◽  
Structural Patterns ◽  
Learner Corpus ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Linguistic Analyses ◽  
Verb Particle Constructions ◽  
Argumentative Essays ◽  
English Verb ◽  
Quantitative Approaches

AbstractThis study analyzes English verb–particle constructions (VPC) in a learner and a native corpus of argumentative essays, focusing on two important factors: structural patterns of VPCs and preference for one-word verbs (e. g.,delayvs.put off). The results showed that while every structural type of VPC was significantly underused by L2 learners, greater underuse was observed with discontinuous transitive VPCs (e. g.,bring it back). In addition, the frequency of the most underused VPCs in the learner corpus was significantly lower than that of their one-word synonyms, indicating the learners’ strong preference for one-word verbs. Identifying these specific areas of difficulty when learning VPCs, the author explores how contrastive linguistic analyses and corpus-based quantitative approaches can collaboratively contribute to the investigation of complex interlanguage systems.

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.

scholarly journals Gender-preferential language use in L1 and L2 argumentative essays? Evidence against lists of ‘gendered’ language features

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 226-241
Author(s):  
Sulistya Ningrum ◽  
Peter Crosthwaite
Keyword(s):  
English Learners ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Female Students ◽  
Linguistic Features ◽  
Gendered Language ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
Gender Comparison ◽  
Argumentative Essays ◽  
L1 And L2 Writing ◽  
L1 And L2

This study identifies and compares the gender-preferential language features present in the argumentative writing of L1 Indonesian and Indonesian L2 English learners. The data is comprised of 80 English argumentative essays sampled from the International Corpus Network of Asian Learners of English (ICNALE, Ishikawa, 2011) and a comparative corpus of 80 L1 Indonesian argumentative essays collected online from Indonesian university students, both equally divided by gender. Comparison of the data was performed through quantitative analysis of three supposed ‘male-preferential’ features and seventeen ‘female-preferential’ features between the male- and female-produced corpora in L1 and L2 writing. This study investigated (1) the extent of variation in the use of ‘gendered language features’ between male and female-produced L1 and L2 texts; (2) whether the use of male/female ‘gendered-language features’ across male/female produced L1/L2 texts match their suggested gender preference, and (3) to what extent L1’s preference for ‘gender language features’ affects male and female learners’ use of such language in L2. The results suggest the majority of supposed gender-preferential features were not significantly different across male/female produced texts, indicating that argumentative essays may be gender-neutral to a certain extent. This study also revealed that L1 preference of gendered language forms does not determine their preferences in the L2. In conclusion, male and female students adopt similar linguistic features to express their arguments. We may claim that gender language forms are not fixed and absolute in academic discourse because instructive texts tend to have a set model to fulfil the pedagogical criteria.

scholarly journals The Use of Linking Adverbials in Malaysian Students’ Argumentative Essays

2020 ◽  
Vol 03 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ummul K. Ahmad ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Language Teachers ◽  
Learner Corpus ◽  
Southern States ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Small Set ◽  
Argumentative Essays ◽  
Writing Instructors ◽  
Esl Learners ◽  
Malaysian Students ◽  
Integrate Teaching

Many English as a Second Language (ESL) learners’ essays are deemed incoherent as they failed to signpost and facilitate readers’ understanding of their line of arguments—a task that can chiefly be accomplished through the use of appropriate and efficient use of linking devices. This study investigates the use of linking adverbials (LAs) as connective devices in argumentative essays written by pre-university students from Malaysian matriculation colleges. The learner corpus of this study comprises 95241 words from 209 argumentative essays written by students from three matriculation colleges in southern states of Malaysia. About 2465 occurrences of LAs were extracted and then coded according to Liu’s (2008) four-way categorization framework. Similar corpus of 110737 words was also extracted from BAWE corpus as reference. Malaysian learner writers overly relied on a small set of LAs and their essays largely offered one sided argumentation. Students tend to overuse ADDITIVE adverbials (e.g. furthermore) and SEQUENTIAL (e.g. next), mainly to enlist key points and rarely used the more semantically complex ADVERSATIVES (e.g. however). The corpus also revealed that certain LAs were used inappropriately. The findings offer insights for language teachers specifically writing instructors on helping students to prepare for more sophisticated writing tasks that require complex propositions and how to integrate teaching specific linguistics features such as Linking Adverbials.

scholarly journals A Corpus-based Study on the Use of Contractions by EFL Learners in Argumentative Essays

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 56
Author(s):  
M. Pınar Babanoğlu
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Significance ◽  
English For Academic Purposes ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Major Goal ◽  
Essay Writing ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Learner Corpus ◽  
Prose Style ◽  
Argumentative Essays ◽  
English Students

Contraction forms in English are mostly occur in speech and informal writing and they are generally avoided in formal writing types such as academic prose, business reports and journal articles, therefore, most teachers discourage their use in academic essays (Biber, Johansonn, Leech, Conrad and Finegan 1999). Contractions in English have two types; negative contractions (isn’t, haven’t, doesn’t) and verb contractions (I’m, they’ve, that’s). This corpus based study attempts to investigate contraction usage in learner and native English speaker essays. Major goal is to examine whether learners consider essay writing rules in respect of contractions which are accepted inappropriate for academic prose style. Five corpora, three learner and two native English, were utilized in order to analyze verb and not-contraction forms. Frequency calculations of contraction forms in each corpus compared via log-likelihood measurement for statistical significance.  Results revealed that learners use considerably more contraction forms, especially negative ones, than native English students in their argumentative essays.Keywords: English for Academic Purposes, learner corpus, contractions

scholarly journals The Trinity Lancaster Corpus

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 126-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dana Gablasova ◽  
Vaclav Brezina ◽  
Tony McEnery
Keyword(s):  
Language Learning ◽  
Critical Reflection ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Cultural Backgrounds ◽  
Learner Corpus ◽  
Corpus Construction ◽  
Learning Research ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
The Trinity ◽  
Different Levels

Abstract This paper introduces a new corpus resource for language learning research, the Trinity Lancaster Corpus (TLC), which contains 4.2 million words of interaction between L1 and L2 speakers of English. The corpus includes spoken production from over 2,000 L2 speakers from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds at different levels of proficiency engaged in two to four tasks. The paper provides a description of the TLC and places it in the context of current learner corpus development and research. The discussion of practical decisions taken in the construction of the TLC also enables a critical reflection on current methodological issues in corpus construction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document