Advertisement

Corpus-Based Studies of Learner Talk: Conclusion and Future Directions

  • Eric Friginal
  • Joseph J. Lee
  • Brittany Polat
  • Audrey Roberson
Chapter

Abstract

This book explored learner oral production in university-level ESL (and specifically, EAP) classrooms in the USA from a corpus-based approach, utilizing specialized corpora of learner talk. We described and interpreted the structure of learner (and teacher) spoken language in the classroom, language experience interviews, and peer response/feedback activities. Our discussions also focused on ideas related to corpus design and development, implications for SLA, semantic content analysis, and some methodological limitations of current research. A summary of our concluding remarks, suggestions for pedagogy and practice, and future research directions is presented below.

References

  1. Bamford, J. (2004). Gestural and symbolic uses of the deictic here in academic lectures. In K. Aijmer & A. Stenström (Eds.), Discourse patterns in spoken and written corpora (pp. 113–138). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Biber, D. (1993). Representativeness in corpus design. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 8(4), 243–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  4. Friginal, E. (2009). The language of outsourced call centers: A corpus-based study of cross-cultural interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Friginal, E., & Hardy, J. A. (2014). Corpus-based sociolinguistics: A guide for students. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Lee, J. J. (2016). “There’s intentionality behind it…”: A genre analysis of EAP classroom lessons. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 23, 99–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Min, H. T. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System, 33(2), 293–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Min, H. T. (2008). Reviewer stances and writer perceptions in EFL peer review training. English for Specific Purposes, 27(3), 285–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. O’Boyle, A. (2014). “You” and “I” in university seminars and spoken learner discourse. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 16, 40–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Sidnell, J., & Enfield, N. J. (2016). Deixis and the interactional foundations of reference. In Y. Huang (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of pragmatics (pp. 217–239). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Simpson-Vlach, R. (2013). Corpus analysis of spoken English for academic purposes. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 452–461). Malden: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
  12. Tagliamonte, S. A. (2006). Analysing sociolinguistic variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Weinberger, S. H. (2013). The speech accent archive. George Mason University. Retrieved from http://accent.gmu.edu

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eric Friginal
    • 1
  • Joseph J. Lee
    • 2
  • Brittany Polat
    • 3
  • Audrey Roberson
    • 4
  1. 1.Applied Linguistics and ESLGeorgia State UniversityAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.Ohio UniversityAthensUSA
  3. 3.Georgia State UniversityAtlantaUSA
  4. 4.Hobart and William Smith CollegesGenevaUSA

Personalised recommendations