Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-f46jp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T22:57:42.171Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Corpus-based approaches to language description for specialized academic writing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2014

John Flowerdew
John Flowerdew*
Affiliation:
English Department, City University of Hong Kong, Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Language description is a fundamental requirement for second language (L2) syllabus design. The greatest advances in language description in recent decades have been done with the help of electronic corpora. Such language description is the theme of this article. The article first introduces some basic concepts and principles in corpus research. It then reviews some recent corpus studies of relevance to the teaching of English for specific purposes (ESP) writing. The speech focuses on four different types of corpora: expert professional corpora, expert student corpora, L2 learner corpora, and lingua franca corpora. It also discusses application of the corpus approach, including indirect applications and direct applications. In a final section, it presents some caveats of the corpus approach for future language teaching research.

Type
Plenary Speech
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , January 2017 , pp. 90 - 106
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 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

Biber, D. (2006). University language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written registers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Biber, D. & Conrad, S. (2009). Real grammar: A corpus-based approach to English. Harlow: Pearson/Longman.Google Scholar
Biber, D., Conrad, S. & Leech, G. N. (2011). Longman student grammar of spoken and written English. [1]. Harlow, Essex: Longman.Google Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., Finegan, E. & Quirk, R. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bloch, J. (2008). Technology in the L2 composition classroom. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly 34.2, 213–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flowerdew, J. (2009). Corpora in language teaching. In Long, M. H. & Doughty, C. J. (eds.), The handbook of language teaching. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 327–335.Google Scholar
Flowerdew, J. & Forest, R. (2009). Schematic structure and lexico-grammatical realization in corpus-based genre analysis: the case of Research in the Ph.D. literature review. In Charles, M., Pecorari, D. & Hunston, S. (eds.), Academic writing: At the interface of corpus and discourse. London: Equinox, 15–36.Google Scholar
Flowerdew, J. & Forest, R. (2015). Signalling nouns in English: A corpus-based discourse approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Flowerdew, J. & Li, Y. (2007). Language re-use among Chinese apprentice scientists writing for publication. Applied Linguistics 28.3, 440–465.Google Scholar
Friginal, E. (2013). Developing research report writing skills using corpora. English for Specific Purposes 32, 208–220.Google Scholar
Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Hyland, K. (2012a). Bundles in academic discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 32, 150–169.Google Scholar
Hyland, K. (2012b). Disciplinary identities: Individuality and community in academic discourse. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Johns, T. (1997). Contexts: the background, development and trialling of a concordance-based CALL program. In Wichmann, A., Fligelstone, S., McEnery, T. & Knowles, G. (eds.), Teaching and language corpora. London: Longman,100–115.Google Scholar
Kachru, B. (1992). The other tongue: English across cultures. University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Kwan, B. (2006). The schematic structure of literature reviews in doctoral theses of applied linguistics. English for Specific Purposes 25.1, 30–55.Google Scholar
Leech, G. (2011). Frequency, corpora and language learning. In G., G. & Meunier, F., De Cock, S., Gilquin, G. & Paquot, M.. (eds.), A taste for corpora. In honour of Sylviane Granger. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins, 7–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nesi, H. & Gardner, S. (2012). Genres across the disciplines: Student writing in higher education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Paquot, M. (2010). Academic vocabulary in learner writing. London and New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Rozycki, W. & Johnson, N. H. (2013). Non-canonical grammar in Best Paper award winners in engineering. English for Specific Purposes 32.3, 157–169.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. M. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Swales, J. M. (2002). Integrated and fragmented worlds: EAP materials and corpus linguistics. In Flowerdew, J. (ed.), Academic discourse. London: Longman, 150–164.Google Scholar
Swales, J. M. (2011). A critical view on the use of corpora. In Viana, V., Zyngier, S. & Barnbrook, G. (eds.), Perspectives on corpus linguistics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 221–227.Google Scholar
Wood, A. (2001). International scientific English. In Flowerdew, J. & Peacock, M. (eds.), Research perspectives on English for academic purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 71–83.Google Scholar