A COMPARISON OF COMMUNICATION VERBS USED BY TURKISH EFL LEARNERS AND ENGLISH NATIVE SPEAKERS: A CORPUS BASED STUDY
Öz
This
study investigates a certain set of semantically categorized verbs, namely
Communication Verbs (CV) (Biber, 2006) in learner language. Communication verbs
are “a special subcategory of activity verbs that involve communication
activities” (2006, p.247) and they are relatively common both in written and
spoken discourse. Two corpora, LOCNESS and TICLE, were analysed to reveal
frequencies of these verbs in both corpora and the findings showed that though
priming of most frequent verbs in each corpus are identical, Turkish EFL
learners significantly underused such verbs in their argumentative essays. In
depth analysis additionally signified distinctive grammatical patterns as well
as various semantic frames of nouns collocated with verbs selected in TICLE.
Finally, based on the findings, usage based differences were examined and the
reasons why learners might have used particular patterns in comparison to the
ones used by NSs, were suggested by making references to Hunston and Francis’s
Pattern Grammar (2000).
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynakça
- Babanoğlu, M. P. (2012). A corpus-based study on Turkish EFL learners' written English: The Use of Adverbial Connectors by Turkish Learners. (Doctoral Dıssertatıon). Çukurova universitesi, Adana. Biber, D. (2006). University language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written registers (Vol. 23). John Benjamins Publishing. Boas, H. C. (2010). The syntaxlexicon continuum in Construction Grammar: A case study of English communication verbs. Belgian journal of linguistics, 24(1), 54-82. Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. University of Chicago Press. Halliday, M. A. (1994). Functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold. Hearst, M. A. (1992, August). Automatic acquisition of hyponyms from large text corpora. In Proceedings of the 14th conference on Computational linguistics-Volume 2 (pp. 539-545). Association for Computational Linguistics. Hoey, M. (2005). Lexical priming. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Holtz, M. (2011). Lexico-grammatical properties of abstracts and research articles. A corpus-based study of scientific discourse from multiple disciplines (Doctoral dissertation, Technische Universität Darmstadt). Hornby, A.S. 1954. A Guide to Patterns and Usage in English. London: OUP. Housen, A. (2002). A corpus-based study of the L2-acquisition of the English verb system. Computer learner corpora, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching, 6, 2002-77. Hunston, S. & G. Francis. (2000). Pattern Grammar - A Corpus-driven Approach to the Lexical Grammar of English. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Kilgarriff, A., Rychly, P., Smrz, P., & Tugwell, D. (2004). ITRI-04-08 The Sketch Engine. Information Technology, 105, 116. Louw, B. (1993). Irony in the text or insincerity in the writer? The diagnostic potential of semantic prosodies. In M. Baker, G. Francis, & E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair (pp. 157-176). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Luna, r n (2010). Interlanguage in undergraduates' academic english: preliminary results from written script analysis. Online submission, encuentro v19 p60-73 Meunier, F. (2002). The pedagogical value of native and learner corpora in EFL grammar teaching. Computer learner corpora, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching, 119-142. Paquot, M. (2010). Academic vocabulary in learner writing: from extraction to analysis. Continuum International Publishing Group. Partridge, M. (2011). A comparison of lexical specificity in the communication verbs of L1 English and TE student writing 1. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 29(2), 135-147. Rayson, P. (2008). Wmatrix: a web-based corpus processing environment. Ringbom, H. (1998). High-frequency verbs in the ICLE corpus. LANGUAGE AND COMPUTERS, 23, 191-200. Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10(1-4), 209-232. Sinclair, J. (1996). The search for units of meaning. Textus, 9(1), 75-106. Sinclair, J. (2000). Lexical grammar. Naujoji Metodologija, 24, 191-203. Tirumalesh, K. V. (1999). Grammar and Communication: Essays on the Form and Function (Vol. 6). Allied Publishers. Tono, Y. (2003). Corpus wo Eigo Kyoiku ni Ikasu [What corpora can do for language teaching]. English Corpus Studies, 10, 249-264. Willis, D. (2003). Rules, patterns and words: Grammar and lexis in English language teaching. Ernst Klett Sprachen. http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english-cobuild-learners http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/
Yabanci Dil Olarak İngilizce Öğrenen Türk Öğrenciler ve Anadil Olarak İngilizce Konuşanlar Tarafından Kullanılan İletişim Eylemlerinin Bir Karşılaştırması: Derlem Tabanlı Bir Çalışma
Öz
Bu çalışma, anlamsal olarak
sınıflandırılmış eylemleri, özellikle İletişim Eylemlerini (Communication
Verbs) (Biber, 2006) öğrenci dilinde incelemektedir. İletişim eylemleri,
"iletişim etkinliklerini içeren etkinlik eylemlerininözel bir alt
sınıfıdır" (2006, s.247) ve hem yazılı hem de sözlü söylemde nispeten
yaygındır. İki derlem, LOCNESS ve TICLE, bu eylemlerin iki derlemdeki
sıklıklarını ortaya koymak için incelendi ve bulgular her bir derlemdeki en
sık eylemlerin öne çıkartılma durumları benzer olmasına rağmen, yabancı dil
olarak İngilizce öğrenen Türk öğrencilerin, bu eylemleri kompozisyonlarında
önemli ölçüde daha az kullandığını gösterdi. Derinlemesine incelemesonuçları ek
olarak, TICLE'da seçilen eylemlerin ad eşdizimliliklerinin , çeşitli anlamsal
çerçevelerin yanı sıra, ayırt edici dilbilgisel örüntüleri belirtilmiştir. Son
olarak, elde edilen bulgulara dayanarak, kullanıma dayalı farklılıklar
incelendi ve öğrencilerin anadil olarak İngilizce konuşan kişilere kıyasla,
belirli örüntüleri neden kullanmış olabileceklerine dair nedenler Hunston ve Francis'in
Örüntü Dil Bilgisi yaklaşımına (2000) göndermeler yaparak önerildi.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynakça
- Babanoğlu, M. P. (2012). A corpus-based study on Turkish EFL learners' written English: The Use of Adverbial Connectors by Turkish Learners. (Doctoral Dıssertatıon). Çukurova universitesi, Adana. Biber, D. (2006). University language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written registers (Vol. 23). John Benjamins Publishing. Boas, H. C. (2010). The syntaxlexicon continuum in Construction Grammar: A case study of English communication verbs. Belgian journal of linguistics, 24(1), 54-82. Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. University of Chicago Press. Halliday, M. A. (1994). Functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold. Hearst, M. A. (1992, August). Automatic acquisition of hyponyms from large text corpora. In Proceedings of the 14th conference on Computational linguistics-Volume 2 (pp. 539-545). Association for Computational Linguistics. Hoey, M. (2005). Lexical priming. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Holtz, M. (2011). Lexico-grammatical properties of abstracts and research articles. A corpus-based study of scientific discourse from multiple disciplines (Doctoral dissertation, Technische Universität Darmstadt). Hornby, A.S. 1954. A Guide to Patterns and Usage in English. London: OUP. Housen, A. (2002). A corpus-based study of the L2-acquisition of the English verb system. Computer learner corpora, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching, 6, 2002-77. Hunston, S. & G. Francis. (2000). Pattern Grammar - A Corpus-driven Approach to the Lexical Grammar of English. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Kilgarriff, A., Rychly, P., Smrz, P., & Tugwell, D. (2004). ITRI-04-08 The Sketch Engine. Information Technology, 105, 116. Louw, B. (1993). Irony in the text or insincerity in the writer? The diagnostic potential of semantic prosodies. In M. Baker, G. Francis, & E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair (pp. 157-176). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Luna, r n (2010). Interlanguage in undergraduates' academic english: preliminary results from written script analysis. Online submission, encuentro v19 p60-73 Meunier, F. (2002). The pedagogical value of native and learner corpora in EFL grammar teaching. Computer learner corpora, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching, 119-142. Paquot, M. (2010). Academic vocabulary in learner writing: from extraction to analysis. Continuum International Publishing Group. Partridge, M. (2011). A comparison of lexical specificity in the communication verbs of L1 English and TE student writing 1. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 29(2), 135-147. Rayson, P. (2008). Wmatrix: a web-based corpus processing environment. Ringbom, H. (1998). High-frequency verbs in the ICLE corpus. LANGUAGE AND COMPUTERS, 23, 191-200. Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10(1-4), 209-232. Sinclair, J. (1996). The search for units of meaning. Textus, 9(1), 75-106. Sinclair, J. (2000). Lexical grammar. Naujoji Metodologija, 24, 191-203. Tirumalesh, K. V. (1999). Grammar and Communication: Essays on the Form and Function (Vol. 6). Allied Publishers. Tono, Y. (2003). Corpus wo Eigo Kyoiku ni Ikasu [What corpora can do for language teaching]. English Corpus Studies, 10, 249-264. Willis, D. (2003). Rules, patterns and words: Grammar and lexis in English language teaching. Ernst Klett Sprachen. http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english-cobuild-learners http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/
Ayrıntılar
| Bölüm | Dilbilim |
|---|---|
| Yazarlar | |
| Yayımlanma Tarihi | 31 Temmuz 2017 |
| Gönderilme Tarihi | 19 Mayıs 2017 |
| Kabul Tarihi | 25 Temmuz 2017 |
| Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2017 Cilt: 16 Sayı: 3 |
