A corpus-based analysis: The types of transition markers in the MA theses of native speakers of English and Turkish speakers of English

Year 2019, Volume: 15 Issue: 2, 496 - 507, 01.07.2019

Zehra Köroğlu

https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.586157

Abstract

Please fill up the following information accurately. (Please use Times New Roman, 12 pt.
A corpus-based analysis: The types of transition markers in the MA theses of native speakers of English and Turkish speakers of English
This study has been conducted to evaluate transition marker (TM) types in the MA theses written by the native speakers (NSs) of English and Turkish speakers (TSs) of English. The purpose is to compare the most salient transition types of the NSs and TSs randomly selected theses introduction, results and discussion, and conclusion sections in the field of ELT between 2010 and 2014. The Keyword in Concordance (KWIC) was used to analyze the data. TM types were analyzed in terms of percentages, frequencies per 1,000 words and they were interpreted by calculating the log-likelihood (LL) value if there was a significant difference in their usage. The results illustrated that the frequencies, and frequencies per 1,000 words of the most salient transition type usage in the sections were different.
Information about Author(s)*
Author 1
Author (Last name, First name)	Köroğlu,Zehra
Affiliated institution (University)	Çağ University
Country	Turkey
Email address	[e-mail]
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No) Write only one corresponding author.
Author 2
Author (Last name, First name)
Affiliated institution (University)
Country
Email address
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No)
Author 3
Author (Last name, First name)
Affiliated institution (University)
Country
Email address
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No)
Author 4
Author (Last name, First name)
Affiliated institution (University)
Country
Email address
Department & Rank
Corresponding author (Yes/No)

Keywords

Corpus

References

• Aidinlou, N. A., & Vafaee, A. (2012). The effect of textual and interpersonal metadiscourse markers on Iranian EFL high school learners’ reading comprehension. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 2(6), 6210-6214.
• Babbie, E. & Mouton, J. M. (2001). The practice of social research. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.
• Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Biber, D., & Reppen, R. (2002). What does frequency have to do with grammar teaching? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 199-208.
• Boulton, A. (2009). Testing the limits of data-driven learning: language proficiency and training. ReCALL, 21(1), 37–54.
• Burneikaitė, N. (2009). Metadiscoursal connectors in linguistics MA theses in English L1 & L2. KALBOTYRA, 61(3), 36-50.
• Buysse, L. (2011). The business of pragmatics. The case of discourse markers in the speech of students of business English and English linguistics. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 161, 10-30.
• Camiciottoli, B. C. (2003). Metadiscourse and ESP reading comprehension: An exploratory study. Reading in a Foreign Language, 15(1), 28-44.
• Celce-Murcia, M.,& Larsen-Freeman, D. (1983). The grammar book: An EFLIESL teacher’s course. New York: Newbury House.
• Charteris, B. J. (2004). Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. Hants: Palgrave-MacMillan.
• Cohen, R. (1984). A computational theory of the function of clue words in argument understanding. In Proceedings of the 10th international conference on computational linguistics (pp. 251–258).
• Cooper, P.,& Branthwaite, A. (1977). Qualitative Technology: New Perspectives on Measurement and Meaning through Qualitative Research. 20th Market Research Society Annual Conference, March, 79-92.
• Fraser, B. J. (1999). What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics, 31(7), 931-952.
• Friginal, E., & Hardy, J. A. (2014). Corpus-based sociolinguistics: A student guide. New York: Routledge.
• Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
• Hart, S. (1987). The use of the survey in industrial market research. Journal of Marketing Management, 3(1), 25-38.
• Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Hutchinson, B. (2005). Modelling the similarity of discourse connectives. Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci2005), July 21-23, Italy.
• Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Bodmin: MPG Books.
• Intarapraw, P., & Steffensen, M. S. (1995). The use of metadiscourse in good and poor ESL essays. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4(3), 253-272.
• Jaggi, S. (2003). Descriptive statistics and exploratory data analysis. Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute. Retrieved May 24, 2015, from http://iasri.res.in/ebook/EB_SMAR/ebook_pdf%20files/Manual%20II/1-DescriptiveStatistics.pdf
• Kehler, A. (2002). Coherence, reference, and the theory of grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
• Knott, A. (1996). A data-driven methodology for motivating a set of coherence relations. Doctoral dissertation, University of Edinburgh. Retrieved October 27, 2015 from http://www.era.lib.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/1842/583/3/1996-alik.pdf
• Liu, Y., Fang, A. C., & Wei, N. (2014). A Corpus-Based Quantitative Study of Nominalizations across Chinese and British Media English. 28th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation (PACLIC 28), 101–110.
• McEnery, T.,& Wilson, A. (2001). Corpus linguistics: An introduction. Edinburg: Edinburg University Press.
• Moser, M.,& Moore, J. (1995). Using discourse analysis and automatic text generation to study discourse cue usage. In Proceedings of the 1995 Spring Symposium on Empirical Methods in Discourse Interpretation and Generation(pp. 92–98).
• Rayson, P.,& Garside, R. (2000). Comparing corpora using frequency profiling. In proceedings of the workshop on Comparing Corpora, held in conjunction with the 38th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2000). 1-8 October 2000 (pp. 1-6), Hong Kong.
• Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Tognini-Bonelli, E. (2001). Corpus linguistics at work. Amster¬dam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.