Formulaic Language in Learner Corpora

Paquot, Magali; Granger, Sylviane

doi:10.1017/s0267190512000098

Cited by 256 publications

(144 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

134

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, academic writing for non-native speakers (NNSs) is cognitively demanding, and students might not produce the target language in a native-like way. EFL students have problems with use of proper collocations, word choice and interference of their mother tongue (L1) (Bloch, 2009;Paquot & Granger, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Online Corpus Tools in Scholarly Writing: A Case of EFL Postgraduate Student

Kotamjani¹,

Razavi²,

Hussin³

2017

ELT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some studies have reported the positive outcome of using concordancers and dictionaries in (ESL) context. This study aims to examine how an EFL writer consulted with concordancers and dictionaries along with Google and Google Scholar when engaging in academic writing at university level. The researcher investigated a non-English-major postgraduate student corpus consultation over five months. The researcher provided a toolkit including corpus tools; concordancers, collocation dictionaries, thesaurus, Google, in combination with traditional reference resources such as monolingual and bilingual online dictionaries. The participant received a three-session training to consult with different resources while writing research paper. Real-time data, stimulated recall interview, participants' writing and query logs served as the main sources of data. Results showed that the participant was aware of the applicability of each corpus tool. He could successfully solve 604 linguistic problems, and promoted his linguistic awareness. It is implied that corpus tools have the potential to assist EFL writers in proofreading and editing the surface levels of their writing.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Online Corpus Tools in Scholarly Writing: A Case of EFL Postgraduate Student

Kotamjani¹,

Razavi²,

Hussin³

2017

ELT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thewissen (2008) argue that higher-level learners attempt a much wider range of lexical phrases which are not always error-free, and produce a large number of near-hits as compared to their lower intermediate counterparts. Paquot and Granger (2012) conclude that at an advanced level, learners take more risks, try out more complex lexical phrases and as a result, produce errors, but those are of a different, more 'advanced' nature than the basic errors typical of earlier stages.…”

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…We focus on three types of content word combinations that are some of the most frequent in learner writing and have previously been found challenging for language learners (Lorenz, 1999;Paquot and Granger, 2012): adjective-noun (AN), verbdirect object (VO) and subject-verb (SV). We (1) investigate how the use of the predicating words (adjectives and verbs) within these combinations develops over time, 1 and (2) look into how their selectional preference patterns change across levels of language proficiency.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Typically, researchers report negative effects of L1 transfer (Lorenz, 1999;Gilquin, 2007;Nesselhauf, 2005;Laufer and Waldman, 2011;Paquot and Granger, 2012), but some research also suggests that the learners whose L1 belongs to the same language family as English are more likely to make fewer mistakes than the learners from other L1 backgrounds (Waibel, 2008;Alejo Gonzalez, 2010;Gilquin and Granger, 2011). …”

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications

Tetreault

Burstein

Leacock³

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the first workshop in 1997, BEA has become the leading venue for sharing and publishing innovative work that uses NLP to develop educational applications. The consistent interest and growth of the workshop has clear ties to challenges in education. The research presented at the workshop highlights advances in the technology and the maturity of the field of NLP in education. The capabilities serve as a response to educational challenges and are poised to support the needs of a variety of stakeholders, including educators, learners, parents, and administrators.NLP capabilities now support an array of learning domains, including writing, speaking, reading, and mathematics. In the writing and speech domains, automated writing evaluation (AWE) and speech assessment applications, respectively, are commercially deployed in high-stakes assessment and instructional settings, including Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). We also see widelyused commercial applications for plagiarism detection and peer review and explosive growth of mobile applications for game-based applications for instruction and assessment. The current educational and assessment landscape continues to foster a strong interest and high demand that pushes the state of the art in AWE capabilities to expand the analysis of written responses to writing genres other than those traditionally found in standardized assessments, especially writing tasks requiring use of sources and argumentative discourse.Steady growth in the development of NLP-based applications for education has prompted an increased number of workshops that typically focus on a single subfield. In BEA, we make an effort to have papers from many subfields, for example, tools for automated scoring, automated test-item generation, curriculum development, evaluation of text, dialogue, evaluation of genres beyond essays, feedback studies, and grammatical error correction.This year we received a record 62 submissions, and accepted 9 papers as oral presentations and 25 as poster presentation and/or demos, for an overall acceptance rate of 55 percent. Each paper was reviewed by three members of the Program Committee who were believed to be most appropriate for each paper. We continue to have a very strong policy to deal with conflicts of interest. First, we made a concerted effort to not assign papers to reviewers to evaluate if the paper had an author from their institution. Second, with respect to the organizing committee, authors of papers for which there was a conflict of interest recused themselves from the discussions.While the field is growing, we do recognize that there is a core group of institutions and researchers who work in this area. With a higher acceptance rate, we were able to include papers from a wider variety of topics and institutions. The papers accepted were selected on the basis of several factors, including the relevance to a core educational problem space, the novelty of the approach or domain, and the strength of the research. The accepted papers were highly diverse -...

show abstract

“…Because most of the literature has focused on the construct of FS from a learner-external idiomaticity perspective (Paquot & Granger, 2012;Yorio, 1989), the identification criteria used are not concerned with the processing advantage of the sequences. Moreover, many researchers consider it impossible to investigate empirically psycholinguistic FSs, as there is no way to directly access the mental representations of learners in order to see what is stored holistically or not.…”

Section: Advanced Learnersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Formulaic Sequence(fs) Cannot Be an Umbrella Term in Sla

Myles

Cordier

2016

Stud Second Lang Acquis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term formulaic sequence (FS) is used with a multiplicity of meanings in the SLA literature, some overlapping but others not, and researchers are not always clear in defining precisely what they are investigating, or in limiting the implicational domain of their findings to the type of formulaicity they focus on. The first part of the article provides a conceptual framework focusing on the contrast between linguistic or learner-external definitions, that is, what is formulaic in the language the learner is exposed to, such as idiomatic expressions or collocations, and psycholinguistic or learner-internal definitions, that is, what is formulaic within an individual learner because it presents a processing advantage. The second part focuses on the methodological consequences of adopting a learner-internal approach to the investigation of FSs, and examines the challenges presented by the identification of psycholinguistic formulaicity in advanced L2 learners, proposing a tool kit based on a hierarchical identification method.

show abstract

Formulaic Language in Learner Corpora

Cited by 256 publications

References 60 publications

Online Corpus Tools in Scholarly Writing: A Case of EFL Postgraduate Student

Online Corpus Tools in Scholarly Writing: A Case of EFL Postgraduate Student

Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications

Formulaic Sequence(fs) Cannot Be an Umbrella Term in Sla

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About