Get documents about "A Corpus-based Study of Connectors Research from the CA
Document Sample
A Corpus-based Study of Connectors: Research
from the CAS Learner Corpus of English Essays
Haiyang Ai, Gong Peng
Graduate University, Chinese Academy of Sciences
Outline of the talk
Introduction
Previous Studies
Methodology and Corpus Building
Results and Discussion
Conclusion and Pedagogical Implication
Definition of connectors
Connectors are devices used to state the
relationship between units of discourse
(Biber et al, 1999)
Including conjunctions, some adverbs (e.g.
firstly, namely, alternatively), and some
prepositional phrases (e.g. in brief, in fact,
of course)
Classification of connectors
Quirk et al’s (1985) framework
A Comprehensive Grammar of the
English Language
Adding of corroborative category
- (Granger & Tyson, 1996)
- (Altenberg & Tapper, 1998)
Quirk et al’s (1985) framework
enumerative e.g. for a star, finally
listing equative e.g. in the same way, likewise
additive e.g. moreover, further
reinforcing
summative e.g. in sum, altogether
appositive e.g. for example, namely
resultive e.g. as a result, consequently
inferential e.g. therefore, in that case, otherwise
reformulatory e.g. more precisely, rather
replacive e.g. better, again
contrastive
antithetic e.g. by contrast, instead
concessive e.g. in any case, however
discoursal e.g. by the way, incidentally
transitional
temporal e.g. in the meantime, meanwhile
Connectors investigated (68 items)
Listing:
first, second, third, firstly, secondly, thirdly,
finally, furthermore, in addition, moreover,
lastly, last but not least, to begin with, for
another, in the first place, in the second place,
similarly, for one thing, for another
Summative:
to sum up, to conclude, in summary, in short,
in brief, in conclusion, overall, all in all,
altogether
Appositive:
that is, that is to say, in other words, for
instance, for example, namely, e.g.( eg),
i.e.( ie)
Connectors investigated (68 items)
Resultive:
consequently, hence, therefore, thus, as a
result, as a consequence, in consequence,
Inferential: otherwise, in that case
Contrastive:
however, although, (even) though, on the other
hand, instead, after all, on the contrary, in
contrast, besides, nevertheless, anyway, still,
by contrast, nonetheless, alternatively
Transitional:
meanwhile, eventually, subsequently, originally
Corroborative:
actually, in fact, of course, indeed, apparently
Rationales to use corpus data
Corpus data are real and authentic =>
empirical study
Combines intuitions of many, more
objective (McEnergy & Wilson, 2001)
Corpora are precious resources for testing
out linguistic hypothesis (Meyer, 2002)
Learner corpus serves as the meeting
point of corpus linguistics and SLA
(Granger 1998)
=> pioneer: Sylviane Granger, ICLE
Research questions
What’s the semantic distribution?
What’s the top 10 most frequently used
connectors?
Which connectors are overused?
What’s the differences and similarities
compared with related studies, and why
(universal features vs. transfer-related?)
Hypothesis
Hypothesis:
PhD students at GUCAS would overuse
connectors in their English writings
Formulated based on
Previous studies from HK and Taiwan
(Crewe 1990, Field & Yip 1992, Milton &
Tsang 1993, Bolton et al 2002, Chen
2006)
The author’s own observation
Significance
Systematic and corpus-based connector
studies on PhD students writing of in
GUCAS => shed some light on the
everlasting cohesion & coherence
problems in ESL/EFL writing
Quantitative analysis can provide teachers
(esp. at GUCAS) with a better idea on
what needs to be done
The construction of the CASCLEE
computer learner corpus itself (Resources)
Outline again
Approaching Connectors
Previous Studies
Methodology and Corpus Building
Results and Discussion
Conclusion and Pedagogical Implication
Previous corpus-based studies
Milton & Tsang (1993)
high ratio of overuse of entire range of
connectors (HKUST vs. Brown, LOB)
Granger & Tyson (1996)
108 connectors, CIA method
overuse <= L1 transfer
Altenberg & Tapper (1998)
timed + untimed essays
underuse (resultive, contrastive) <=
prefer less formal connectors
Previous corpus-based studies
Bolton et al (2002)
Overuse exists in both groups, ICE-HK vs.
ICE-GB
Raised 3 methodological issues
Chen (2006)
Latest, published on IJCL, Taiwanese EFL
Learners
Slightly overused connectors
Increase learner’s register differences
Outline
Introduction
Previous Studies
Methodology and Corpus Building
Results and Discussion
Conclusion and Pedagogical Implication
Corpus building
Corpus name: CASCLEE - CAS Corpus of
Learner English Essays
Corpus Size: 494 essays, 120, 836 words,
covering timed and untimed writings
Data analysis:
WordSmith Tool 4.0 + Manual Extraction
Sampling & Representativeness
Learner Background & Register of text
Method: CIA
Contrastive interlanguage analysis
(Granger 1996)
L2 vs. L1
L2 vs. L2
Reference corpora
Informative Writings of BNC Sampler
Corpus (L1)
The ICLE French Subcorpus (L2)
Outline
Introduction
Previous Studies
Methodology and Corpus Building
Results and Discussion
Conclusion and Pedagogical Implication
Overall frequencies (normalised)
Overall Connector Usage
131.9
140
120
Per 10, 000 words
99.5
100
80
60 46.7
40
20
0
CASCLEE BNC Sampler- ICLE-French
Informative
The Three Corpora
Semantic distribution
Semantic Distribution of Connectors in the Three Corpora
700.0
600.0 577.6
per 100, 000 words
500.0
400.0
322.8
300.0 264.7
225.9
196.5 192.8
200.0
137.2
116.1 116.7 110.1
77.8 84.4
75.0
100.0 53.6 62.7
44.7 28.4 18.2 12.5 25.0
11.6 14.2
4.7 8.1
0.0
e
ve
e
l
l
g
e
l
ia
na
na
iv
iv
iv
tin
nt
lti
at
st
at
tio
tio
lis
su
re
ra
or
m
si
si
fe
re
nt
m
ob
an
po
in
su
co
rr
ap
tr
co
categories
CASCLEE NF BNC Sampler-Informative NF ICLE-French NF
Top 10 most frequently used connectors
Rank CASCLEE BNC Sampler-info. ICLE-French
1 first however indeed
2 second although however
3 however thus therefore
4 secondly (even) though of course
5 for example therefore moreover
6 although for example for example
7 (even) though of course for instance
8 finally indeed in fact
9 firstly instead thus
10 of course in addition on the other hand
Quantitative difference: Overuse
Overused connectors
Group A (see Table 4)
Group B (see Table 5)
Comparing with related studies
Altenberg & Tapper (1998)
Overuse of furthermore, for instance, still,
of course (CASCLEE also)
Bolten et al (2002)
overuse both exist in ICE-HK & ICE-GB
Chen (2006)
slightly overused
Major findings
PhD students overused a whole
range of connectors (hypothesis
supported)
They significantly overused listing
and summative connectors
Overuse of connectors exist both in
CASCLEE and ICLE French subcorpus
Outline
Introduction
Previous Studies
Methodology and Corpus Building
Results and Discussion
Conclusion and Pedagogical
Implication
Conclusion
Objectives and contributions
Build the CASCLEE learner corpus
Analyzing connectors based on Quirk et
al (1985) framework
Methodology: contrastive interlanguage
analysis
L1 vs. L2 (CASCLE vs. BNC Sampler-info)
L2 vs. L2 (CASCLEE vs. ICLE-French)
Pedagogical Implication
Pedagogical implication
Focus on contrastive, resultive and appositional
connectors, over 70%
Listing connectors should be addressed
Correct forms of connectors
Looking forward…
More large-scale, corpus-based studies on EFL
learners’ connector usage
Probe into the possible causes for certain connector
usage patterns
The End !
