Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T10:07:40.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Applied corpus linguistics for language acquisition, pedagogy, and beyond

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 December 2021

Ute Römer Open the ORCID record for Ute Römer [Opens in a new window]
Ute Römer*
Affiliation:
Georgia State University, Atlanta, USA
*
*Corresponding author: Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This plenary speech provides an overview of applications of corpus research in several core areas of applied linguistics, including second language acquisition and language assessment. It does this by showcasing a number of recent studies carried out by or with involvement of the author. These studies all focus on phraseological aspects of language and demonstrate the importance of studying its patterned nature. The studies also illustrate how corpora and corpus-analytic techniques can allow us as applied linguists to contribute to solving problems in other disciplines (such as legal scholarship or music theory) and hope to thereby encourage more interdisciplinary research collaborations between corpus linguists and scholars from other fields.

Type
Plenary Speech
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 55 , Issue 2 , April 2022 , pp. 233 - 244
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This paper is based on a plenary talk delivered by the author at the American Association for Applied Linguistics (AAAL) 2021 Virtual Conference on 21 March 2021.

References

Alderson, J. C., & Kremmel, B. (2013). Re-examining the content validation of a grammar test: The (im)possibility of distinguishing vocabulary and structural knowledge. Language Testing, 30(4), 535–556.10.1177/0265532213489568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexopoulou, T., Geertzen, J., Korhonen, A., & Meurers, D. (2015). Exploring big educational learner corpora for SLA research: Perspectives on relative clauses. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 1(1), 96–129.10.1075/ijlcr.1.1.04aleCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anthony, L. (2019). AntConc (Version 3.5.8) [Computer Software]. Waseda University. http://www.laurenceanthony.net/software.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. (2010). Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511750526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunningham, C. D., & Römer, U. (2021). Investigating the original public meaning of ‘misdemeanors’ in the impeachment clause. Paper presented at the 6th Law and corpus linguistics conference, 5 February 2021. Brigham Young University, Provo, UT.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2012). Formulaic language and second language acquisition: Zipf and the phrasal teddy bear. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 17–44.10.1017/S0267190512000025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Ferreira-Junior, F. (2009). Constructions and their acquisition: Islands and the distinctiveness of their occupancy. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7, 188–221. https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.7.08ellCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C., O'Donnell, M. B., & Römer, U. (2014). Second language processing of verb-argument constructions is sensitive to form, function, frequency, contingency, and prototypicality. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 4(4), 405–431. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.4.4.01ell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, W. H. (2007). KfNgram. USNA. Retrieved from http://www.kwicfinder.com/.Google Scholar
Gablasova, D., Brezina, V., & McEnery, T. (2019). The trinity Lancaster Corpus: Development, description and application. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 5(2), 126–158.10.1075/ijlcr.19001.gabCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geertzen, J., Alexopoulou, T., & Korhonen, A. (2013). Automatic linguistic annotation of large scale L2 databases: The EF-Cambridge Open Language Database (EFCAMDAT). Proceedings of the 31st second language research forum (SLRF). Carnegie Mellon University: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions. A construction grammar approach to argument structure. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hunston, S. E., & Francis, G. (1998). Verbs observed: A corpus-driven pedagogic grammar. Applied Linguistics, 19(1), 45–72.10.1093/applin/19.1.45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunston, S. E., & Francis, G. (2000). Pattern grammar. A corpus-driven approach to the lexical grammar of English. John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madlener, K. (2015). Frequency effects in instructed second language acquisition. De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110405538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mauranen, A. (2012). Exploring ELF. Academic English shaped by non-native speakers. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mukherjee, J. (2009). The lexicogrammar of present-day Indian English: Corpus-based perspectives on structural nativisation. In Römer, U. & Schulze, R. (Eds.), Exploring the Lexis-Grammar interface (pp. 117–135). John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.35.9mukCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norgaard, M., & Römer, U. (Forthcoming). Patterns in music: How linguistic corpus analysis tools can be used to illuminate central aspects of jazz improvisation. Jazz Education in Research and Practice.Google Scholar
Ren, H., Wood, M., Cunningham, C. D., Abbady, N., Römer, U., Kuhn, H., & Egbert, J. (2020). ‘Questions involving national peace and harmony’ or ‘injured plaintiff litigation’? The original meaning of ‘cases’ in Article III of the Constitution. Georgia State University Law Review, 36(5), 535–605.Google Scholar
Römer, U. (2008). Identification impossible? A corpus approach to realisations of evaluative meaning in academic writing. Functions of Language, 15(1), 115–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Römer, U. (2009). The inseparability of lexis and grammar: Corpus linguistic perspectives. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7, 140–162.10.1075/arcl.7.06romCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Römer, U. (2017). Language assessment and the inseparability of lexis and grammar: Focus on the construct of speaking. Language Testing, 34(4), 477–492.10.1177/0265532217711431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Römer, U. (2019). A corpus perspective on the development of verb constructions in second language learners. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 24(3), 268–290.10.1075/ijcl.00013.roeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Römer, U., & Banerjee, J. (2018). Validating the MET speaking test through phraseological analysis: A corpus approach to language assessment. CaMLA Working Papers.Google Scholar
Römer, U., & Garner, J. R. (2019). The development of verb constructions in spoken learner English: Tracing effects of usage and proficiency. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 5(2), 207–230.10.1075/ijlcr.17015.romCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Römer, U., Roberson, A., O'Donnell, M. B., & Ellis, N. C. (2014). Linking learner corpus and experimental data in studying second language learners’ knowledge of verb-argument constructions. ICAME Journal, 38, 59–79. https://doi.org/10.2478/icame-2014-0006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Römer, U., Skalicky, S., & Ellis, N. C. (2018). Verb-argument constructions in advanced L2 English learner production: Insights from corpora and verbal fluency tasks’. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. Advanced online access. https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2016-0055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Römer, U., & Yilmaz, S. (2019). Effects of L2 usage and L1 transfer on Turkish learners’ production of English verb-argument constructions. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16, 107–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruegg, R. (2015). An experiment in the ability of raters to evaluate lexis in writing. Language in Focus Journal, 1(1), 38–50.10.1515/lifijsal-2015-0003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruegg, R., Fritz, E., & Holland, J. (2011). Rater sensitivity to qualities of lexis in writing. TESOL Quarterly, 45(1), 63–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmid, H.-J. (2000). English abstract nouns as conceptual shells. From corpus to cognition. De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110808704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, J. McH. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. McH. (2004). Trust the text. Language, corpus and discourse. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, J. McH. (2008). The phrase, the whole phrase, and nothing but the phrase. In Granger, S. & Meunier, F. (Eds.), Phraseology. An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 407–410). John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stubbs, M. (2009). The search for units of meaning: Sinclair on empirical semantics. Applied Linguistics, 30(1), 115–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zipf, G. K. (1935). The psycho-biology of language. An introduction to dynamic philology. The MIT Press.Google Scholar