AKADEMİK DİSİPLİNE GÖRE KATEGORİZE EDİLMİŞ DOKTORA TEZLERİNDEKİ SÖZ ÖBEKLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI

Year 2023, Volume: 13 Issue: 2, 936 - 953, 30.06.2023

Mustafa Yıldız

https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.1245616

Abstract

The present study sets out to compare PhD dissertations, written by Turkish postgraduate students learning English as a foreign language, both by the field of science and by the majors of authors in terms of the use of 4-word lexical bundles. To retrieve recurrent lexical bundles and to make their structural and functional analysis, various disciplines are grouped under two separate groups based on the scientific fields such as hard and social sciences. Also, English-major and non-English-major disciplines are compared to each other to see the variation in use of lexical bundles across disciplines. The findings reveal that ELT dissertations, representative of English-major disciplines, have three and four times as many lexical bundles as the dissertations written in the scientific fields of soft and hard sciences, respectively. However, the scientific fields contain almost the same amount of normalized frequency of lexical bundles, suggesting that soft and hard sciences do not show variation in use of 4-word lexical bundles. With regard to the structural analysis of lexical bundles, it is found that lexical bundles most frequently appear in the syntactic categories of noun phrases and prepositional phrases. As for the functional distribution of lexical bundles, the findings indicate that the vast number of lexical bundles in each group function to be referential expressions.

Keywords

Lexical bundles, multi-word expressions, formulaic expressions, corpus linguistics

COMPARISON OF LEXICAL BUNDLES IN DISSERTATIONS CATEGORIZED BASED ON ACADEMIC DISCIPLINES

Abstract

The present study aims to compare PhD dissertations, written by Turkish postgraduate students learning English as a foreign language, categorized based on the academic disciplines, in terms of the use of 4-word lexical bundles. To retrieve recurrent lexical bundles and to make their structural and functional analysis, various disciplines are grouped under two separate groups based on the academic fields such as hard and soft sciences. Also, English-major and non-English-major disciplines are compared to each other to see the variation in use of lexical bundles across disciplines. The findings reveal that ELT dissertations, representative of English-major disciplines, have three and four times as many lexical bundles as the dissertations written in the academic fields of soft and hard sciences, respectively. However, the academic fields produce almost the same number of lexical bundle types, suggesting that soft and hard sciences do not show variation in use of 4-word lexical bundles. With regard to the structural analysis of lexical bundles, it is found that lexical bundles most frequently appear in the syntactic categories of noun phrases and prepositional phrases. As for the functional distribution of lexical bundles, the findings indicate that the vast number of lexical bundles in each group function to be referential expressions

Keywords

Lexical bundles, multi-word expressions, formulaic expressions, corpus linguistics

References

• Allen, D. (2010) Lexical bundles in learner writing: An analysis of formulaic language in the ALESS learner corpus. Komaba Journal of English Education, 1, 105-127.
• Altenberg, B. (1998). On the phraseology of spoken English: the evidence of recurrent word combinations. In A. P. Cowie (Ed.), Phraseology: theory, analysis and applications (pp. 101–122). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Anthony, L. (2022). AntConc (Version 4.2.0) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Available from https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software
• Bal-Gezegin, B. (2019). Lexical bundles in published research articles: A corpus-based study. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 15(2), 520-534.
• Bao, K., & Liu, M. (2022). A corpus study of lexical bundles used differently in dissertations abstracts produced by Chinese and American PhD students of Linguistics. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.893773
• Biber, D., & Barbieri, F. (2007). Lexical bundles in university spoken and written registers. English for Specific Purposes, 26(3), 263–286.
• Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson.
• Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V. (2004). If you look at . . .: Lexical Bundles in University Teaching and Textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25(3), 371-405.
• Byrd, P. & Coxhead, A. (2010). On the other hand: Lexical bundles in academic writing and in the teaching of EAP. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL, 5, 31-64.
• Chen, Y., & Baker, P. (2010). Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning & Technology, 14(2), 30–49.
• Cortes, V. (2004). Lexical bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: Examples from history and biology. English for Specific Purposes, 23(4), 397-423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2003.12.001
• Cortes, V. (2008). A comparative analysis of lexical bundles in academic history writing in English and Spanish. Corpora, 3(1), 43-57. https://doi.org/10.3366/E1749503208000063
• Dahunsi, T. N., & Ewata, T. O. (2022). An exploration of the structural and colligational characteristics of lexical bundles in L1–L2 corpora for English language teaching. Language Teaching Research, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211066572 (Epub ahead of print)
• Erman, B., & Warren, B. (2000). The idiom principle and the open-choice principle. Text, 20, 29-62. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.2000.20.1.29
• Granger, S. (1998). Prefabricated patterns in advanced EFL writing. Collocations and formulae. In A. P. Cowie (Ed.), Phraseology. Theory analysis and applications (pp. 145–160). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Güngör, F., & Uysal, H. H. (2016). A comparative analysis of lexical bundles used by native and non-native scholars. English Language Teaching, 9(6), 176-188.
• Hsu, W. (2014). The most frequent opaque formulaic sequences in English-medium college textbooks. System, 47, 146-161. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.10.001
• Hyland, K. (2008). As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes, 27, 4-21.
• Hyland, K. (2008b). Academic clusters: Text patterning in published and postgraduate writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18(1), 41-62.
• Hyland, K. (2012). Bundles in academic discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 150-169.
• Kecskes, I. (2007). Formulaic language in English lingua franca. In I. Kecskes, & L. Horn (Eds.), Exploration in pragmatics: Linguistic, cognitive and intercultural aspects (pp.191-218). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110198843
• Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. NewYork: Newbury House.
• Ortaçtepe, D. (2013). Formulaic language and conceptual socialization: The Route to becoming nativelike in L2. System, 14, 852-865. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.08.006
• Öztürk, Y., & Köse, G. D. (2016). Turkish and native english academic writers’ use of lexical bundles. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 12(1), 149-165.
• Pérez-Llantada, C. (2014). Formulaic language in L1 and L2 expert academic writing: Convergent and divergent usage. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 14, 84-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2014.01.002
• Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Schmitt, N., & Carter, R. (2004). Formulaic sequences in action. In N. Schmitt (Ed.) Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp. 1–22). Amsterdam:Benjamins.
• Rayson, P., Berridge, D., & Francis, B. (2004). Extending the Cochran rule for the comparison of word frequencies between corpora. In G. Purnelle, C. Fairon and A. Dister (Eds.). Le Poids des Mots. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Statistical Analysis of Textual Data (JADT 2004) (pp. 926-936). Louvain: Presses Universitaires de Louvain.
• Shin, D., & Nation, P. (2007). Beyond single words: the most frequent collocations in spoken English. ELT Journal, 62(4), 339–348. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccm091
• Thornbury, S. (2002). How to teach vocabulary. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
• Üstünbaş, Ü. & Ortaçtepe, D. (2016). EFL learners’ use of formulaic language in oral assessments: A study on fluency and proficiency. Hacettepe University Journal of Education. 31(3), 578-592.
• Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519772