Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:58:09.101Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Discovering formulaic language through data-driven learning: Student attitudes and efficacy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 February 2014

Joe Geluso  and
Atsumi Yamaguchi
Joe Geluso
Affiliation:
Iowa State University, USA (email: joe.geluso@gmail.com)
Atsumi Yamaguchi
Affiliation:
Kanda University of International Studies, Japan (email: yamaguchi-a@kanda.kuis.ac.jp)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Corpus linguistics has established that language is highly patterned. The use of patterned language has been linked to processing advantages with respect to listening and reading, which has implications for perceptions of fluency. The last twenty years has seen an increase in the integration of corpus-based language learning, or data-driven learning (DDL), as a supporting feature in teaching English as a foreign / second language (EFL/ESL). Most research has investigated student attitudes towards DDL as a tool to facilitate writing. Other studies, though notably fewer, have taken a quantitative perspective of the efficacy of DDL as a tool to facilitate the inductive learning of grammar rules. The purpose of this study is three-fold: (1) to present an EFL curriculum designed around DDL with the aim of improving spoken fluency; (2) to gauge how effective students were in employing newly discovered phrases in an appropriate manner; and (3) to investigate student attitudes toward such an approach to language learning. Student attitudes were investigated via a questionnaire and then triangulated through interviews and student logs. The findings indicate that students believe DDL to be a useful and effective tool in the classroom. However, students do note some difficulties related to DDL, such as encountering unfamiliar vocabulary and cut-off concordance lines. Finally, questions are raised as to the students’ ability to embed learned phrases in a pragmatically appropriate way.

Keywords

corpusdata-driven learningformulaic languagelanguage learning.
Type
Research Article
Information
ReCALL , Volume 26 , Issue 2: Researching uses of corpora for language teaching and learning , May 2014 , pp. 225 - 242
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

Aguado-Jiménez, P., Pérez-Paredes, P. and Sánchez, P. (2012) Exploring the use of multidimensional analysis of learner language to promote register awareness. System, 40(1): 90–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernardini, S. (2004) Corpora in the classroom: An overview and some reflections on future developments. In: Sinclair, J. (ed.), How to use corpora in language teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 15–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Conrad, S. and Cortes, V. (2004) ‘If you look at…’: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25(3): 371–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boulton, A. (2009) Testing the limits of data-driven learning: Language proficiency and training. ReCALL, 21(1): 37–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boulton, A. (2010a) Data-driven learning: Taking the computer out of the equation. Language Learning, 60(3): 534–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boulton, A. (2010b) Learning outcomes from corpus consultation. In: Moreno Jaén, M., Serrano Valverde, F. and Calzada Pérez, M. (eds.), Exploring new paths in language pedagogy: Lexis and corpus-based language teaching. London: Equinox, 129–144.Google Scholar
Chambers, A. (2005) Integrating corpus consultation in language studies. Language Learning & Technology, 9(2): 111–125.Google Scholar
Chambers, A. (2007) Integrating corpora in language learning and teaching. ReCALL, 19(3): 249–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, A. and O’Sullivan, Í. (2004) Corpus consultation and advanced learners’ writing skills in French. ReCALL, 16(1): 158–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Y. H. and Baker, P. (2010) Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning & Technology, 14(2): 30–49.Google Scholar
Cobb, T. and Boulton, A.(Forthcoming) Classroom applications of corpus analysis. In: Biber, D. and Reppen, R. (eds.), Cambridge handbook of corpus linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Conklin, K. and Schmitt, N. (2008) Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics, 29(1): 72–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Council of Europe. (2001) Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Strasbourg: Language Policy Unit. http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/source/framework_en.pdfGoogle Scholar
Davies, M. (2008) The Corpus of Contemporary American English: 450 million words, 1990-present. http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. and Taguchi, T. (2010) Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Educational Testing Service. (2013) Sukoa no meyasu [Score descriptors]. http://www.toeic.or.jp/toeic/about/result.htmlGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2002) Frequency effects in language processing: A review with implications for theories of implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(2): 143–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2012) Formulaic language and second language acquisition: Zipf and the phrasal teddy bear. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32(1): 17–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erman, B. and Warren, B. (2000) The idiom principle and the open choice principle. Text, 20: 29–62.Google Scholar
Frankenberg-Garcia, A. (2012) Learners’ use of corpus examples. International Journal of Lexicography, 25(3): 273–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gries, S. T. (2008) Corpus-based methods in analyses of second language acquisition data. In: Ellis, N. C. and Robinson, P. (eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition. New York/London: Routledge, 406–431.Google Scholar
Gries, S. T. (2010) Behavioral profiles: A fine-grained analysis and quantitative approach in corpus-based lexical semantics. The Mental Lexicon, 5(3): 323–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoey, M. (2009) Corpus driven approaches to grammar: The search for common ground. In: Römer, U. and Schulze, R. (eds.), Exploring the lexis-grammar interface. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 33–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunston, S. (2002) Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irujo, S. (1986) A piece of cake: Learning and teaching idioms. ELT Journal, 40(3): 236–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, N. and Nekrsova, T. M. (2007) The processing of formulaic sequences by seond language speakers. The Modern Language Journal, 91(3): 433–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johns, T. (1986) Micro-concord: A language learner’s research tool. System, 14(2): 151–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johns, T. (1991) From printout to handout: Grammar and vocabulary teaching in the context of data-driven learning. In: Johns, T. and King, P. (eds.), Classroom concordancing. English Language Research Journal, 4: 27–45.Google Scholar
Kennedy, G. (2008) Phraseology and language pedagogy: Semantic preference associated with English verbs in the British National Corpus. In: Meunier, F. and Granger, S. (eds.), Phraseology in foreign language learning and teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, C. and Miceli, T. (2010) Corpus-assisted creative writing: Introducing intermediate Italian learners to a corpus as a reference resource. Language Learning & Technology, 14(1): 28–44.Google Scholar
Liu, D. and Jiang, N. (2009) Using a corpus-based lexicogrammatical approach to grammar instruction in EFL and ESL contexts. The Modern Language Journal, 93(1): 61–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., Abbhul, R. and Gass, S. (2012) Interactionist approach. In: Gass, S. and Mackey, A. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition. New York: Routledge, 7–23.Google Scholar
Pérez-Paredes, P. and Cantos Gómez, P. (2004) Some lessons students learn: Self-discovery and corpora. In: Aston, G., Bernardini, S. and Stewart, D. (eds.), Corpora and language learners. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 247–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Römer, U. (2009) The inseparability of lexis and grammar. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7: 141–163.Google Scholar
Römer, U. (2011) Corpus research applications in second language teaching. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31: 205–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, J. (1991) Corpus, concordance, and collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. (2004) Trust the text: Language, corpus, and discourse. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swain, M. (1995) Three functions of output in second language learning. In: Cook, G. and Seidlhofer, B. (eds.), Principles and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 125–144.Google Scholar
Tremblay, A., Derwing, B., Libben, G. and Westbury, C. (2011) Processing advantages of lexical bundles: Evidence from self-paced reading and sentence recall tasks. Language Learning, 61(2): 569–613.Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2002) Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wray, A. and Fitzpatrick, T. (2010) Pushing learners to the extreme: The artificial use of prefabricated material in conversation. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 4(1): 37–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoon, H. (2008) More than a linguistic reference: The influence of corpus technology on L2 academic writing. Language Learning & 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(4): 257–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar