Formulaic sequences in spoken ENL, ESL and EFL

Götz, Sandra; Schilk, Marco

doi:10.1075/scl.44.05sch

Cited by 26 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…By contrast, phraseology seems to have attracted much less attention in contact linguistics (see Nesselhauf 2011: 159), especially when it comes to the study of word clusters. Three-word clusters are investigated in NEs by Götz and Schilk (2011), but this is within the context of a study that seeks to compare IndE with German learner English (see Section 2).…”

Section: Topic Of Investigationmentioning

confidence: 99%

At the interface of contact linguistics and second language acquisition research

Gilquin

2015

EWW

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the possible interface between contact linguistics and second language acquisition research by comparing the institutionalized second-language varieties of English known as “New Englishes” and the foreign varieties of English called “Learner Englishes”. On the basis of corpus data representing several populations of various origins, it investigates four linguistic phenomena, ranging from syntax (embedded inversion) to lexis (phrasal verbs withup), through phraseology (word clusters) and pragmatics (discourse markers), with a view to identifying similarities and differences between the two types of varieties at several levels of the language. The paper also explores avenues for going beyond a descriptive account towards a more explanatory one, in an attempt to build the foundations of a theoretical rapprochement between contact linguistics and second language acquisition research.

show abstract

Section: Topic Of Investigationmentioning

confidence: 99%

At the interface of contact linguistics and second language acquisition research

Gilquin

2015

EWW

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, some studies have compared native speakers to learners with the same L1 (Chen & Baker, 2010;Forsberg, 2010;Henderson & Barr, 2010), along with those conducted with learners of different native languages (Alejo- González, 2010;Cross & Papp, 2008;Waibel, 2008). Another difference is noted in the target of the analysis: some studies focused on spoken production (Crossley & Salsbury, 2011;Gotz & Schilk, 2011) and others on written production (Bestgen, 2017;Siyanova-Chanturia, 2015). Despite the diverse range of studies, these do not present a complete picture of L2 learners' lexical competence.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association of lexical and collocation knowledge: A comparative analysis of native speakers and nonnative learners of English

Kim,

Shin,

Kim

2024

VIAL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To provide a comprehensive estimate of Korean college students’ lexical competence, this study compared L2 learners’ (EFL) use of single words and collocations with that of native speakers (NSs). The study compiled two text corpora, one from an existing native corpus and the other with texts from Korean EFL learners at three proficiency levels. There were significant differences between the two corpora in lexical diversity, although the difference between advanced EFL learners and NSs was non-significant, indicating that advanced learners were on par with NSs in terms of using a diverse range of words. In a comparison of lexical distribution of single words, however, these advanced learners were found to use words between the 1K and 4K level, whereas NSs used words beyond this level. This suggests the need to cover a wider range of words in classroom teaching and assessment. Regarding collocational knowledge, the difference between the NSs and EFL group was apparent and statistically significant, regardless of learners’ proficiency levels. Namely, EFL learners used far fewer collocations in a smaller range than their counterparts. The learners’ limited collocational competence indicates that collocations should be considered an integral component of the curriculum, instruction, and assessment.

show abstract

“…Beyond mode, another potential problematic issue involves the lack of comparability between corpora at an even finer level of resolution, that is at the level of register. Götz & Schilk (2011) illustrate this issue clearly as they compare learner spoken data from the Louvain International Database of Spoken English Interlanguage (LINDSEI) with broadcast discussions, interviews and unscripted speeches from the Indian subsection of ICE. While data sparsity issues may explain this decision, it still casts some doubt on the authors' results given the potential lack of comparability across the two corpora.…”

Section: Existing Attempts To Bridge the Paradigm Gapmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is an important point because at a theoretical level, combining EFL and ESL is not necessarily straightforward: The two varieties are distinct types of non-native English, and while ESL varieties are essentially institutionalized varieties (i.e., they have an extended range of uses in the sociolinguistic context of a nation, an extended register/style range, they exhibit traces of the process of nativization they are undergoing, …), EFL varieties are primarily performance Englishes (i.e., they have no social status and they are used as a foreign language) (Kachru 1982). While studies such as Götz & Schilk (2011) have found this distinction between EFL and ESL to be linguistically reflected in corpus data, the corpus methodologies employed in such studies often exhibit limitations that prevent their authors from drawing theoretical conclusions on the (different) linguistic statuses of EFL and ESL. The relevant literature indicates that this type of issue is not unusual.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

EFL and/vs. ESL?

Gries

Deshors

2015

IJLCR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study of learner language and that of indigenized varieties are growing areas of English-language corpus-linguistic research, which are shaped by two current trends: First, the recognition that more rigorous methodological approaches are urgently needed (with few exceptions, existing work is based on over-/under-use frequency counts that fail to unveil complex non-native linguistic patterns); second, the collective effort to bridge an existing "paradigm gap" (Sridhar & Sridhar 1986) between EFL and ESL research.This paper contributes to these developments by offering a multifactorial analysis of seventeen lexical verbs in the dative alternation in speech and writing of German/French learners and Hong Kong/India/Singapore English speakers. We exemplify the advantages of hierarchical mixed-effects modeling, which allows us to control for speaker and verb-specific effects, but also for the hierarchical structure of the corpus data. Second, we address the theoretical question of whether EFL and ESL represent discrete English varieties or a continuum.

show abstract

Formulaic sequences in spoken ENL, ESL and EFL

Cited by 26 publications

References 0 publications

At the interface of contact linguistics and second language acquisition research

At the interface of contact linguistics and second language acquisition research

Association of lexical and collocation knowledge: A comparative analysis of native speakers and nonnative learners of English

EFL and/vs. ESL?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About