A Corpus Analysis of Would-Clauses without Adjacent If-Clauses

Abstract

This article reports the findings of a corpus analysis of a grammatical structure taught in intermediate‐ or advanced‐level ESL/EFL texts: clauses that contain the modal would to signify hypothetical and counterfactual meaning. Contrary to the way these structures are represented in ESL/EFL textbooks—as would‐clauses adjacent to conditional clauses with if—these corpus data indicate that would‐clauses in counterfactual/hypothetical environments occur more often quite distant from or entirely without any corresponding if‐clauses. Often the hypothetical and counterfactual conditions are present but are marked in ways other than by prototypical if‐clauses. The study categorizes the conditional and hypothetical uses of would‐clauses in spoken and written corpora, and it offers pedagogical suggestions based on the findings.

Investigating the Gap between L2 Grammar Textbooks and Authentic Speech: Corpus-Based Comparisons of Reported Speech

“…Several researchers have compared grammar descriptions that are presented in textbooks with real world language use (Al-Wossabi, 2014;Barbieri and Eckhardt, 2007;Biber and Reppen, 2002;Carter, 1998;Eckhardt, 2001;Frazier, 2003;Gilmore, 2004;Khojasteh &Shakrpour, 2014;Šegedin, 2008) and, all have noted that there is a large gap between the explanations and descriptions in textbooks and real world language use. They attribute this to several factors: 1) textbook material is not taken from empirical data about language use but rely on writer's intuition; 2) textbooks present grammatical constructions as equally generalizable and of equal communicative importance; 3) information concerning pragmatics, discourse context and register is ignored; 4) textbooks are based on written norms; 5) textbooks simplify the grammar for pedagogical purposes (Barbieri and Eckhardt, 2007;Biber and Reppen, 2002;Carter and McCarthy, 1995;Lawson, 2001).…”

“…There has been a lot of interest in Corpus Linguistics (CL) and its applications for second language acquisition (SLA) in recent years, and many studies have recommended using corpus-based findings to provide accurate content for prescriptive English grammar textbooks (Biber & Reppen, 2002;Conrad,1999;Carter & McCarthy, 1995;Frazier, 2003;Harwood, 2005;Kennedy, 2002;Lawson, 2001, Romer, 2010. Once thought of as only the domain of those interested in purely linguistic investigation, it is now seen as a useful tool for language teachers and SLA researchers for examining exactly how the language works in the real world.…”

Corpus Linguistics and English Language Teaching Materials: A Review of Recent Research

“…Many researchers have recommended the use of corpus-based findings to inform material writers as to L2 teaching materials (e.g. Biber & Reppen, 2002;Conrad, 1999;Carter & McCarthy, 1995;Frazier, 2003;Holmes, 1988;Harwood, 2005;Lawson, 2001, Romer, 2010, Kennedy, 2002. It is with the help of corpusbased studies that the "scope" of certain features can be investigated (Hulstijn, 1995), and according to Barbieri and Eckhardt (2007), "corpus-based analysis is an ideal tool to re-evaluate the order of presentation of linguistic features in textbooks and to make principled decisions about what to prioritize in textbook presentations".…”

The Effects of Foreign Accent on Perceptions of Nonstandard Grammar: A Pilot Study

“…Carter and McCarthy (), for example, note the frequency of ellipsis ([ I will ] see you next week ) and of left and right dislocation ( This one I haven't seen; He's a good guy, John is ) in spoken English. Scholars have called for greater attention to be paid to spoken grammar in English language teaching (Cullen & Kuo, ; Frazier, ; Jones & Waller, ), arguing that learners must be equipped with a full range of linguistic resources to communicate in a variety of situations (Carter & McCarthy, ; Mumford, ; Timmis, ). Cutting () has observed that vague language in spoken English, such as that kind of stuff , can serve as a marker of membership in a given speech community, and argues that this use can help learners show solidarity with first language (L1)–speaking peers.…”