Post on 26-Mar-2015
A Corpus-based Study of Connectors: Research from the CAS Learner Corpus of English Essays
Haiyang Ai, Gong PengGraduate 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
listing
enumerative e.g. for a star, finally
additiveequative e.g. in the same way, likewise
reinforcing e.g. moreover, further
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
contrastive
reformulatory e.g. more precisely, rather
replacive e.g. better, again
antithetic e.g. by contrast, instead
concessive e.g. in any case, however
transitionaldiscoursal e.g. by the way, incidentally
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 c
onnectors 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
46.7
99.5
0
2040
60
80
100120
140
CASCLEE BNC Sampler-Informative
ICLE-French
The Three Corpora
Per 1
0, 0
00 w
ords
Semantic distributionSemantic Distribution of Connectors in the Three Corpora
577.6
77.8116.7
84.4
18.2
322.8
11.6
110.1
44.74.7
53.675.0
8.1
192.8
25.062.7
116.1
28.4
196.5
137.2
12.5
264.7
14.2
225.9
0. 0
100. 0
200. 0
300. 0
400. 0
500. 0
600. 0
700. 0
listin
g
sum
mat
ive
appo
sitiona
l
resu
ltive
infe
rent
ial
cont
rast
ive
trans
ition
al
corrob
orat
ive
categories
per
10
0,
00
0 w
ord
s
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 (1
985) framework Methodology: contrastive interlanguage analysi
s 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 connect
ors, 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 !