Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T22:46:37.256Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of paper-based DDL on the acquisition of lexico-grammatical patterns in L2 writing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2014

Zeping Huang
Zeping Huang*
Affiliation:
Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong (email: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper examines whether and to what extent data-driven learning (DDL) activities can improve the lexico-grammatical use of abstract nouns in L2 writing. A topic-based corpus was compiled to develop concordance learning activities, and 40 Chinese students majoring in English were randomly assigned to a control group or an experimental group. At the prewriting stage, both groups were given a list of five abstract nouns: the experimental group was provided with paper-based concordance lines to study the collocations of the words, while the control group was allowed to consult dictionaries for the usage of the words. The written texts of the pre-test, immediate post-test, and delayed post-test were analysed and compared between and within groups. The results showed that the written output by the experimental group, as compared with the control group, contained a higher variety of collocational and colligational patterns and had fewer linguistic errors in using the target abstract nouns. The post-experiment learning journals and questionnaires administered to the experimental group further confirmed that concordance activities encouraged usage-based learning, helped students notice the lexical collocations and prepositional colligations of the target words, and thus improved accuracy and complexity in their productive language. Despite these positive findings, potential problems of using concordance activities for independent learning were also reflected in the students’ written output and reported in the learning journals.

Keywords

paper-based DDLconcordancelexico-grammatical patternsL2 writing
Type
Research Article
Information
ReCALL , Volume 26 , Issue 2: Researching uses of corpora for language teaching and learning , May 2014 , pp. 163 - 183
Copyright
Copyright © European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning 2014 

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.)

References

Bernardini, S. (2002) Exploring new directions for discovery learning. In Kettemann, B. and Marko, G. (eds.), Teaching and learning by doing corpus analysis. New York: Edwin Mellen Press, 165–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloch, J. (2009) The design of an online concordancing program for teaching about reporting verbs. Language Learning & Technology, 13(1): 59–78.Google Scholar
Boulton, A. (2008) DDL: Reaching the parts other teaching can’t reach? In Frankenberg-Garcia, A. (ed.), Proceedings of the 8 thTeaching and Language Corpora Conference. Lisbon: Associação de Estudos e de Investigação Cientifíca do ISLA-Lisboa, 38–44.Google Scholar
Boulton, A. (2009) Testing the limits of data-driven learning: Language proficiency and training. ReCALL, 21(1): 37–54.Google Scholar
Boulton, A. (2010) Data-driven learning: Taking the computer out of the equation. Language Learning, 60(3): 534–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, S. (2007) Designing and exploiting small multimedia corpora for autonomous learning and teaching. In Hidalgo, E., Quereda, L. and Santana, J. (eds.), Corpora in the foreign language classroom. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 31–46.Google Scholar
Chambers, A. and O’Sullivan, Í. (2004) Corpus consultation and advanced learners’ writing skills in French. ReCALL, 16(1): 158–172.Google Scholar
Cobb, T. (1997) Is there any measurable learning from hands on concordancing? System, 25(3): 301–315.Google Scholar
Coxhead, A. (2000) A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34: 213–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coxhead, A. and Byrd, P. (2007) Preparing writing teachers to teach the vocabulary and grammar of academic prose. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16: 129–147.Google Scholar
Cresswell, A. (2007) Getting to ‘know’ connectors? Evaluating data-driven learning in a writing skills course. In Hidalgo, E., Quereda, L. and Santana, J. (eds.), Corpora in the foreign language classroom. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 267–287.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (1993) The structural syllabus and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 27: 91–113.Google Scholar
Flowerdew, L. (2009) Applying corpus linguistics to pedagogy: A critical evaluation. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 14(3): 393–417.Google Scholar
Flowerdew, L. (2010) Using corpora for writing instruction. In McCarthy, M. and O’Keeffe, A. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics. London: Routledge, 444–457.Google Scholar
Gaskell, D. and Cobb, T. (2004) Can learners use concordance feedback for writing errors? System, 32(3): 301–319.Google Scholar
Hyland, K. (2003) Second language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Johns, T. (1991) Should you be persuaded: Two samples of data-driven learning materials. English Language Research Journal, 4: 1–16.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. (2000) A dynamic usage-based model. In Barlow, M. and Kemmer, S. (eds.), Usage-based models of language. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, 1–63.Google Scholar
Lee, D. and Swales, J. (2006) A corpus-based EAP course for NNS doctoral students: Moving from available specialized corpora to self compiled corpora. English for Specific Purposes, 25(1): 56–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leki, I. and Carson, J. (1994) Students’ perceptions of EAP writing instruction and writing needs across the disciplines. TESOL Quarterly, 28: 81–101.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. (2009) Comparing Englishes: ICE and ICELite. Proceedings of the 6 thNational Natural Language Processing Research symposium. Manila: De La Salle University, 12–17.Google Scholar
O’Sullivan, Í. and Chambers, A. (2006) Learners’ writing skills in French: Corpus consultation and learner evaluation. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(1): 49–68.Google Scholar
Pérez-Paredes, P. (2010) Appropriation and integration issues in corpus methods and mainstream language education. In Harris, T. and Moreno Jaén, M. (eds.), Corpus linguistics in language teaching. Bern: Peter Lang, 53–73.Google Scholar
Pérez-Paredes, P., Sánchez-Tornel, M. and Alcaraz Calero, J. M. (2012) Learners’ search patterns during corpus-based focus-on-form activities. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 17(4): 483–516.Google Scholar
Pérez-Paredes, P., Sánchez-Tornel, M., Alcaraz Calero, J. M. and Aguado Jiménez, P. (2011) Tracking learners’ actual uses of corpora: Guided vs non-guided corpus consultation. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(3): 233–253.Google Scholar
Rayson, P. (2002) Matrix: A statistical method and software tool for linguistic analysis through corpus comparison. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Lancaster University.Google Scholar
Read, J. (2004) Research in teaching vocabulary. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24: 146–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Römer, U. (2008) Corpora and language teaching. In Lüdeling, A. and Kyto, M. (eds.), Corpus linguistics: An international handbook (Vol. 1), Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 112–130.Google Scholar
Stevens, V. (1991) Concordance-based vocabulary exercises: A viable alternative to gap-fillers. In Johns, T. and King, P. (eds.), Classroom concordancing. English Language Research Journal, 4: 47–63.Google Scholar
Thurstun, J. and Candlin, C. (1997) Exploring academic English: A workbook for student essay writing. Sydney: NCELTR.Google Scholar
Thurstun, J. and Candlin, C. (1998) Concordancing and the teaching of the vocabulary of academic English. English for Specific Purposes, 17(3): 267–280.Google Scholar
Tribble, C. (1997) Improvising corpora for ELT: Quick-and-dirty ways of developing corpora for language teaching. In Melia, J. and Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B. (eds.), PALC ’97 proceedings. Lodz: Lodz University Press, 106–117.Google Scholar
Tribble, C. (2001) Small corpora and teaching writing: Towards a corpus-informed pedagogy of writing. In Ghadessy, M., Henry, A. and Roseberry, R. (eds.), Small corpus studies and ELT: Theory and practice. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 381–408.Google Scholar
Tribble, C. (2002) Corpora and corpus analysis: New windows on academic writing. In Flowerdew, J. (ed.), Academic discourse. Harlow: Longman, 131–149.Google Scholar
Tribble, C. (2009) Writing academic English: A survey review of current published resources. ELT Journal, 63(4): 400–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tribble, C. and Jones, G. (1997) Concordances in the classroom: A resource guide for teachers. Houston, TX: Athelstan.Google Scholar
Tseng, Y. and Liou, H. (2006) The effects of online conjunction materials on college EFL students’ writing. System, 34: 270–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, J. (2001) A concordance-and genre-informed approach to ESP essay writing. ELT Journal, 55(1): 14–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoon, C. (2011) Concordancing in L2 writing class: An overview of research and issues. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10: 130–139.Google Scholar
Yoon, H. (2008) More than a linguistic reference: The influence of corpus technology on L2 academic writing. Language Learning and Technology, 12(2): 31–48.Google Scholar
Yoon, H. and Hirvela, A. (2004) ESL student attitudes toward corpus use in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13: 257–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar