Mohammad Al Towaim
MA Applied Linguistics
Corpora in Language Teaching and Language Description
Contents
Introduction
1
Section 1: The Main Contributions of Corpora to Pedagogical Description 2
of Language and Language Teaching
1.1 Contribution of corpora to pedagogical description:
2
1.1.1 Corpora in lexical studies:
3
1.1.2 Corpora and grammatical studies:
5
1.2 Contribution of corpora to language teaching:
6
1.2.1 Corpora and the contents of language teaching
7
1.2.2 Corpora and language teaching methodology
8
Section 2: Using Corpora in the Language Classroom
9
2.1 Data-Driven Learning (DDL)
9
2.2 Discovery Learning (DL):
10
Section 3: Some Limitations of Using Corpora:
11
Conclusion
13
References
14
Introduction
This essay will consider the position of Corpora in both language teaching and
language description. In section 1, I am going to focus on the main contributions
offered by corpora to a pedagogical description of language, especially to lexical and
grammar studies. In the same section, the positive effect of corpora will be
considered, regarding language teaching contents and methodology. After that,
section 2 will illustrate the applications of corpora in the language classrooms,
indicating some approaches. Then, the limitations of using corpora will be pointed
out. Finally, the conclusion will summarise the essay.
All of these features are focused on as an attempt to answer the following questions:

What have been the main contributions of Corpora to language teaching and
pedagogical description of language in recent years? Give appropriate
examples.

What are the limitations of Corpora as applied to language description and
language learning and teaching? How might one use their outputs in the
language classroom?
1
Section 1:
The Main Contributions of Corpora to a Pedagogical Description of
Language and Language Teaching
Most linguists and many language teachers, as Granger (1994) said, are interested in
corpora. Such a claim might be true, due to the importance of applications of corpora
in both linguistic descriptive and language teaching. In this section, I am going to
focus on the significant contributions offered by these applications, giving appropriate
examples.
1.1 Contribution of corpora to pedagogical description:
Kennedy (1998) says that the main reason for compiling corpus-based research is to
present a trustworthy description of the usage of language and how it is structured. So,
one could agree with Francis' definition of corpora, cited by Partington (1998:2) "A
collection of texts assumed to be representative of a given language, dialect or other
subset of a language, to be used for linguistic analysis". Moreover, the use of corpora
in applied linguistics, according to Biber, Conrad and Reppen (1994), has two main
advantages:
1. Rather than being based on intuition and perception, analyses depending on
corpora are made on the ground of naturally-occurring structures and patterns
of actual use.
2. In addition to quantitative analyses offered by using corpora, there are some
new areas, such as register variation, which allow the researcher to investigate
those areas. So, the discourse factors will govern the choice between structural
variants.
In the light of previous details, Partington (1998) indicates some of the main concepts
that corpora focus on regarding linguistic description and analysis:
i.
Lexis. The main sort of corpus-based
research into lexis, conducted using
corpora, investigates the frequency of words and word senses in different types of
text or language varieties and their collocational behavior, that is, their patterns of
combination with other word. .
2
ii.
Syntax. The patterns of combination of words in phrases, clauses or even
sentences, can be investigated using corpora. Such studies have shown how a
word, even each individual sense of word, appears in typical phraseologies.
iii.
Text. The description of linguistic phenomena at levels above that of the clause
has, in contrast, received relatively scant attention, largely because the nature of
the technology apparently facilities the study of discrete lexical items and
sequence rather than larger stretches of language.
iv.
Spoken language. Corpora of spoken language have been used to study, among
other things: pauses (Stenstrom 1990, cited in Partington, 1998), repetition and
other non-fluencies (Stenstrom & Svartvik 1993, cited in Partington, 1998),
hedging, back-channel responses and softeners (Altenberg 1990, cited in
Partington, 1998).
v.
Translation studies. A number of "equivalent corpora" (i.e. corpora in two or more
languages containing a similar text type) have been exploited to be used as
sources of linguistic, semantic or pragmatic information to aid the process of
translation. An example of this is the PIXI corpus (Gavioli & Mansfield (eds)
1990, cited in Partington, 1998), which consists of transcripts of interactions in
Italian and British bookshops.
vi.
Register studies. Corpora can be used for comparing, not whole languages, but
different varieties of the same language. The best-known work on comparing sublanguage is probably that carried out on register, by Biber and associates, (Biber
1988,1989; Biber, Conrad et al., 1994) who classify text types according to six
communicatively defined "dimensions", and by Nakamura (1993), who describes
methods of semi-automatically classifying texts according to type.
vii.
Lexicography. This is the area of corpus research which has had the greatest
impact on English language pedagogy. The sheer wealth of authentic examples
that corpora provide enables dictionary compilers to have a more accurate picture
of the usage, frequency and, as it were, social weight of word or word sense.
(Partington, 1998:2).
1.1.1 Corpora in Lexical Studies:
By using corpora, lexicographers can choose among millions of examples of a word
or phrase offered in few seconds. This means, according to McEnery and Wilson
(1996), that a dictionary can be produced much more quickly than before. In addition,
3
the definitions might be more complete and precise, due to a larger number of natural
samples examined. The relation between a node word and lexical set may, from a
traditional point of view, have been defined in isolated instances. It is clear that a
lexical relation which is not recorded systemically in either dictionaries or grammars
cannot be captured by current descriptive theory. Such definitions, as Partington
(1998) mentions, could be improved by means of corpora.
In addition, corpus-based lexicographic research indicates that there is a different
distribution between words and word senses among registers. So, our intuition about a
word, in fact, cannot reach the real patterns of use. Sinclair (1991, cited in Biber,
Conrad and Reppen, 1994) explains the previous point by an analysis of the word
back. Biber, Conrad and Reppen (1994), referring to Sinclair's claim and result, say
that most dictionaries consider the human body part as the core meaning of back. But
such meaning is rare, since the COBUILD corpus show that the dictionaries' sequence of
meaning is far from the actual use, which indicates that the most common meaning of
back is the adverbial sense meaning 'in, to, or toward the original starting point, place
or condition’.
One of the most frequent uses of corpora for lexical description is, as Kennedy (1998)
indicates, lexicography. Corpora can be a good associated in since it is used not only
to identify the set of different words in a language, but it might be applied to identify
the different uses of particular types and their relative frequencies.
Such benefits mentioned above might appear in many examples. One of them is cited
by McEnery and Wilson (1996). When Atkins and Levin (1995) focus on the verbs in
the semantic class of 'shake', they take the definitions of these verbs from three
dictionaries: the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, the Oxford Advanced
Learner's Dictionary and the Collins
COBUILD
Dictionary. In that paper, they show
how the dictionaries without considering Corpora had produced their information
wrongly. For instance, two verbs, quake and quiver, are considered as intransitive
verbs in both the Longman and
COBUILD
dictionaries. But such a claim is far from the
reality, since Atkins and Levin discovered these verbs in a corpus of 50,000,000
words and found that both quake and quiver can be transitive (foe examples, It quaked
her bowels; quivering her wings) as well as intransitive.
4
Another example is mentioned by Owen (1993). He considers the uses of take
described by the
COBUILD
Dictionary as: 'The most frequent use of take is in
expressions where it does not have a very distinct meaning of its own, but where most
of the meaning is in the noun that follows it (i.e. its direct object)'. This definition
could be true if it illustrated the cause of unacceptability of passive examples with
take. However, the matter is not satisfied in all delexicalization examples, due to the
fact that there are many delexicalized take structures in the passive. Owen (1993:176)
says in more detail:
“ …‘take’ is a verb which is used transitively in the great majority of
instances, but a very large number of the direct objects which occur after
it either cannot become the subject of the passive structure or can only do
so under conditions which are as yet unclear…. Facts like these were
known before the advent of computers, but lexicographic work using
concordances based on large quantity of data has undoubtedly brought
many more of them to light”'
1.1.2 Corpora and grammatical studies:
In addition to lexical studies, grammatical (or syntactic) researches are one of the
most common types of studies using corpora. Such usage might have obtained its
significance because, as Biber, Conrad and Reppen (1994) claim, most materials used
in the teaching of grammar have just been based on intuition rather than depending on
deep study. In addition, McEnery & Wilson (1996) point out some reasons to declare
the importance of using corpora in grammatical research:
i.
Corpora can represent the quantification of the grammar of all language variety.
ii.
Corpora's role, as empirical data, serves in the testing of the hypotheses resulting
from grammatical theory.
iii.
As mentioned in lexical studies, the grammatical studies using corpora can present
a real judgment of what usages are most typical and which variation occurs
within, or across, varieties.
iv.
The grammatical theory can dovetail with corpora. For example, Michael
Halliday's theory of systemic grammar is dependent on the notion of language as a
paradigmatic system: that is, as a set of selects for each example, from which a
5
speaker should choose one. So, he claims, since such choices are inherently
probabilistic, written English prefers which to that as a relativiser. When corpora
examines such a claim it would be declared that it is true, since which is 39 %
probable whereas that is 12 % probable.
In the light of such significance, Biber (2001) point out that there are a lot of
researches based on the corpora-based tools to discover English grammar and
discourse. For example, Fox and Thompson (1990, cited in Biber, 2001) have applied
corpora in their study of relative clauses. Another example is the research of the
discourse and function of modal verbs, which was investigated by Myhill (1995,
1997, cited in Biber, 2001).
.
1.2 Contribution of corpora to language teaching:
All descriptive findings above have many implications for language teaching. Such
information, as Kennedy (1998) points out, should influence many aspects of
language teaching:
i.
The selection of what to teach, the sequencing of pedagogy and the items which
are preferred to be taught, since the corpora is very useful for contents of
instruction.
ii.
The descriptive contributions offered by corpora are considered as a guide for
language teachers when they make sure about language and language use. A
teacher might be able, through corpora, to recognize the likelihood of occurrence
and frequency of use as a significant measure of usefulness.
iii.
Language teaching methodology, also, can be influenced by corpora studies. The
authentic analysed texts, which are available on a corpus database, play an
important role as a means for establish a suitable approach to make useful
techniques. Moreover, such procedures might encourage self-access and
individualized instruction.
Points 1 and 3 will be considered later.
In addition, corpora have a significant influence in the ESP field. For example,
Partington (1998) declares that a large number of language teachers and researchers
6
have established their own corpora to help them in specific aims. This kind of small
corpus has a positive impact on language teaching in a way which is more suitable
than a large corpus.
Partington cites Flowerdew's example (1993), which is a
collection adapted from Biology lecture texts, used to teach English for undergraduate
students attending classes in this particular area of science. The finding indicates the
fact that there is a huge gap between word and structure frequencies in both; this
small corpora and the large one, which is the ten-million word Birmingham COBUILD.
Apart from the English Language, corpora can play an important role regarding
teaching another languages. For instance, Welsh, which is a revival language, applies
corpora since corpus-based research offers a great deal of distribution in both general
and in special language. Ahmad and Davies (1997) indicate to some applied studies in
their article, pointing out in conclusion that such research can promote teaching and
learning Welsh, especially through the lexical resources which are based on authentic
texts.
1.2.1 Corpora and the contents of language teaching:
There is some evidence, according to Kennedy (1998), that the learners of language
seem to read rather than to say or write what they might want.
Furthermore,
Kennedy, citing George (1965), states that most first year English courses usually
produce some verb-forms, such as present progressive, which accounted for only 20%
of all verb-forms involved in his Hyderabad corpus. Moreover, there is a mismatch
between normal use of English and what the learners are exposed to in the text books
of learning English. Such a claim is made in research by Holmes (1988, cited in
Kennedy, 1998). That study is based on the comparison between a corpus analysis
and the linguistic devices taught in textbooks for expressing epistematic modality. It
is not just that the significant epistematic uses of modal verbs are absent: there is also
almost an absence of pedagogical focus on the use of lexical verbs. So, one could
argue, from such examples, that the corpora would have a positive impact when
applied to the contents of language teaching curriculum and materials:
" A major contribution of work in corpus linguistics to language teaching
is thus to provide quantitative evidence on the distribution of the
component parts of the language, as a yardstick against which to evaluate
7
subjective judgments about the goals and content of instruction. Kennedy
(1998:288)
1.2.2 Corpora and language teaching methodology:
Had a revival in the 1980's, some researchers such as Carter and McCarthy (1988,
cited in Kennedy, 1998), consider the nature of lexicon and its pedagogical
implications, and depending on such beliefs, the methodology of language teaching is
influenced, especially in the teaching sequence. For example, Sinclair and Renoir
(1988, cited in Kennedy, 1998), make an effort to declare that language learning
should follow the sequence which is based on corpora studies to ensure that students
obtain their language knowledge gradually. Kennedy (1998) also refers to another
effort made by Willis (1990) who considers some commercial applications, based on
the
COBUILD
project, to substantiate the role of lexis in syllabus design and language
teaching methodology.
8
Section 2:
Using Corpora in the Language Classroom
Aston (1995) points out that the findings of corpora studies might have applications in
the language classroom. Partington (1998:5) suggests two general approaches to
applied corpora in the classroom:
- Teachers can analyse the corpora themselves for material design; or;
- they can decide to introduce them into the classroom and train students in their
use.
In the first case, Partington cites from Barlow (1996:30) that:
"…teachers might use corpus-based investigation to (i) determine the
most frequent patterns in a particular domain; (ii) enrich their knowledge
of the language, perhaps in response to questions raised in the classroom;
(iii) provide "authentic data" examples; and (iv) general teaching
materials...”
In the second:
" … teachers may also wish to have their students explore corpora
materials; either in following a path of investigation determined by the
teacher (so that the student come to understand particular patterns of
usage such as ‘say’ versus ‘tell’ or the collocations of ‘bright’, or in
exploring an issue in a more open-ended way…”
2.1 Data-Driven Learning (DDL):
Johan (1991, cited in Bernadini 2004) suggests this approach to show the suitable uses
of corpora for language teachers and students, in which most work in this area,
according to Bernardini (2004), owes something to Johan. By applying DDL, or "the
learner as researcher" learning language moves from a deductive to an inductive
process. Such an approach, as Partington (1998) points out, could make the learners'
role more effective.
Furthermore, many researchers, according to Aston (1995),
declare that concordances allow for DDL 'data-driven learning', which can lead
9
students to deal, directly, with lexicogrammatical descriptions, in order to obtain
examples by themselves, instead of take them from textbooks or teachers.
2.2 Discovery Learning (DL):
Although the DDL has advantages, Bernardini (2004) considers the students as those
who have the same level of interests, competences and capacities. Therefore, she
suggests another approach, after examining it in the classrooms over many years.
This approach is "Discovery Learning", or "The learner as traveller". Whilst the
teacher in DDL has to be, as Partington (1998) cites Johan's term, "A director of
student-initiated research, the teacher in DL should stop pretending to be the source of
all knowledge, and students, on the other hand, should start to be active participants in
the classroom.” DL encourages students to follow their interests and focus on form as
well as meaning. It can serve not only learners, but also the teachers, especially if they
are non-native speakers of the language they teach, since the teacher seems to be a
learning expert rather than a language expert.
10
Section 3:
Some Limitations of Using Corpora:
Like all language teaching approaches, corpora, and its application, have some
limitations which many researchers consider, such as:
i.
One of the most extreme critics is Cook (1998) who criticizes the linguists
who "overreach themselves". In his short article, Cook points out many
limitations, and one of them is that:
a. "…Corpus statistics say nothing immeasurable, but crucial,
factors such as students' and teachers' attitudes and
expectations, the relationship between them, their own
wishes, or the diversity of traditions from which they
come…" Cook (1998:58)
ii.
On the other hand, the language studied by corpora is separated
from its context. As Partington (1998) says, we typically do not
know any thing about all the circumstances which are related to the
text.
iii.
Owen (1996: 221) points out that :
i. "… while teachers might believe that a better
prescription will follow from more reliable
description, in practice they would still have
to decide which of the two (or more)
descriptions they prefer."
iv.
Ferguson (2006:20) declares that: "corpora can present the danger of
facile over-generalization. We need to remember that a corpus …does
not represent the whole language…"
v.
The assumption that the language descriptions offered by corpora
necessarily entail a better basis for language teaching is criticized by
Widdowson (1991, cited in Aston, 1995), who points out that language
learning cannot be based on the database or the description of language,
11
and such analyses, apart from the facts they produce; do not themselves
have any guarantee of pedagogic relevance.
vi.
Regarding second language acquisition, Ferguson (2006:20) indicates
that:
" …corpora are based on native speakers speaking and
writing; so the effect is that the collocations, formulae and
patterns found are characteristic of native speakers usage and
not of second language users… the danger is that relying on
the description provided through these corpora may encourage
the imposition of native speaker norms that are, in fact,
inappropriate for second language users…"
12
Conclusion
Some aspects related to corpora have been considered, in terms of both language
description and language teaching. Alongside with the applications of corpora in the
classroom, the limitations of the usage of corpora have been indicated.
This topic is significant for me as a teacher of Arabic to foreign students, given the
lack of this kind of study in Arabic. Thus, the question arises of how such techniques
can be applied to Arabic. I hope to find some answers in future research.
13
References
Ahmad, K & Davies A (1997) 'The Role of Corpus in Studying and Promoting Welsh'. In
A. Wichmann, S. Fliegestone., T. McEnery & G. Knowles (eds.) Teaching and Language
Corpora. London: Addison Wesley Longman.
Aston, G (1995) 'Corpora in Language Pedagogy: Matching Theory and Practice'. In
Cook, G (ed.) Principle & Practice in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
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 Publishing.
Biber, D., Conrad, S. & Reppen R (1994) Corpus-Based Approaches and Issues in
Applied Linguistics. Applied Linguistics 15: 169-189.
Biber, D. (2001).'Using Corpus-based Methods to investigate Grammar and Use: Some
Case Studies on the Use of Verbs in English', in Simpson, R & Swales J (ed.) Corpus
Linguistics in North America. USA: The University of Michigan Press. p101.
Cook, G. (1998) 'The Uses of Reality: A Reply to Ronald Carter'. ELT Journal 52: 57-64
Ferguson, G. (2006) Handout: ‘Lecture on Corpora in Applied Linguistics. University
of Sheffield.
Granger, S (1994) The learner corpus: a revaluation in applied linguistics. English Today
39:25-29.
Kennedy, G (1998). An introduction to corpus linguistics. London: Addison Wesley
Longman
McEnery, T. & A. Wilson (1996) Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh. Edinburgh University
Press.
14
Owen, C (1993) Corpus-Based Grammar and the Heineken Effect: Lexico-grammatical
Description for Language Learners. Applied Linguistics 14: 167-187.
Owen, C (1996) Do Concordances Require to be Consulted? ELT Journal 50: 219-224
Partington, A. (1998) Patterns and meaning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
15