1887
image of Corpus linguistics in L2 pragmatics research
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

In second language acquisition, corpus linguistics (CL) enjoys prominence as a methodology valuable for its descriptive power in the textual analysis of patterns. Within second language (L2) pragmatics, CL has been increasingly influential in shaping our understanding of learners’ pragmatic capacities and articulating new insights and possibilities. In this narrative review, I take a broad view of corpora in L2 pragmatics research with a focus on automatization, size, representativeness, temporal design, and annotation. This is followed by a review of representative research highlighting language proficiency, prosodic pragmatics, pragmatic particles and oral fluency, and pragmatics pedagogy. I conclude with future directions where the discussion centers on bringing CL and other methodologies together for pragmatic analysis and extending the use of these methodologies to more L2 pragmatic learning contexts.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ap.00008.fer
2022-04-13
2022-05-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adolphs, S.
    (2008) Corpus and context: Investigating pragmatic functions in spoken discourse. John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.30
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.30 [Google Scholar]
  2. Aijmer, K.
    (1996) Conversational routines in English: Convention and creativity. Studies in language and linguistics. Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. (2002) Modality in advanced Swedish learners’ written interlanguage. InS. Granger, J. Hung, & S. Petch-Tyson (Eds.), Computer learner corpora, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching (pp.55–76). John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.6.07aij
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.6.07aij [Google Scholar]
  4. (2011) Well I’m not sure I think… The use of well by non-native speakers. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 16(2), 231–254. 10.1075/ijcl.16.2.04aij
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.16.2.04aij [Google Scholar]
  5. (2015) General extenders in learner language. InN. Groom, M. Charles, & S. John (Eds.), Corpora, grammar and discourse. In honour of Susan Hunston (pp.211–233). John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.73.10aij
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.73.10aij [Google Scholar]
  6. Andersen, G.
    (2018) Corpus construction. InA. H. Jucker, K. P. Schneider, & W. Bublitz (Eds.), Methods in pragmatics (pp.467–494). De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110424928‑019
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110424928-019 [Google Scholar]
  7. Anthony, L., & Baker, P.
    (2015) ProtAnt: A tool for analyzing the prototypicality of texts. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 20(3), 273–293. 10.1075/ijcl.20.3.01ant
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.20.3.01ant [Google Scholar]
  8. Archer, D., & Culpeper, J.
    (2018) Pragmatic annotation. InA. H. Jucker, K. P. Schneider & W. Bublitz (Eds.), Methods in Pragmatics (pp.493–525). De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bardovi-Harlig, K.
    (2019) Formulaic language in second language pragmatics research. InA. Siyanova-Chanturia & A. Pellicer-Sanchez (Eds.), Understanding formulaic language. A second language acquisition perspective (pp.97–114). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Bastos, M. T.
    (2011) Proficiency, length of stay, and intensity of interaction and the acquisition of conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics. Intercultural Pragmatics, 8(3), 347–384. 10.1515/iprg.2011.017
    https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2011.017 [Google Scholar]
  11. Bardovi-Harlig, K., Mossman, S., & Su, Y.
    (2017) The effect of corpus-based instruction on pragmatic routines. Language Learning & Technology, 21(3), 76–103. 10125/44622
    https://doi.org/10125/44622 [Google Scholar]
  12. Barron, A.
    (2019) Using corpus-linguistics methods to track longitudinal development: Routine apologies in the study abroad context. Journal of Pragmatics, 146, 87–105. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.08.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.08.015 [Google Scholar]
  13. Belz, J. A., & Vyatkina, N.
    (2005) Learner corpus analysis and the development of L2 pragmatic competence in networked intercultural language study: The case of German modal particles. Canadian Modern Language Review, 62(1), 17–48. 10.3138/cmlr.62.1.17
    https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.62.1.17 [Google Scholar]
  14. (2008) The pedagogical mediation of a developmental learner corpus for classroom-based language instruction. Language Learning and Technology, 12(3), 33–52. 10125/44154
    https://doi.org/10125/44154 [Google Scholar]
  15. Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R.
    (1998) Corpus Linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511804489
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804489 [Google Scholar]
  16. Buysse, L.
    (2014) ‘We went to the restroom or something’ General extenders and stuff in the speech of Dutch learners of English. InJ. Romero-Trillo (Ed.), The yearbook of corpus linguistics and pragmatics 2014: New empirical and theoretical paradigms (pp.213–237). Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑06007‑1_10
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06007-1_10 [Google Scholar]
  17. Chen, H.-I.
    (2010) Contrastive learner corpus analysis of epistemic modality and interlanguage pragmatic competence in L2 writing. Arizona Working Papers in Second Language Acquisition and Teaching, 17, 27–51.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Clancy, B., & O’Keeffe, A.
    (2015) Chapter 13. Pragmatics. InD. Biber, & R. Reppen (Eds.). The Cambridge handbook of English corpus linguistics (pp.235–251). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139764377.014
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139764377.014 [Google Scholar]
  19. Conrad, S.
    (2005) Corpus linguistics and L2 teaching. InE. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp.393–410). Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Culpeper, J., Mackey, A., & Taguchi, N.
    (2018) Second language pragmatics. From theory to research. Routledge. 10.4324/9781315692388
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315692388 [Google Scholar]
  21. Czerwionka, L., & Olson, D. J.
    (2020) Pragmatic development during study abroad. L2 intensifiers in spoken Spanish. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 6(2), 125–162. 10.1075/ijlcr.19006.cze
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.19006.cze [Google Scholar]
  22. De Cock, S.
    (2004) Preferred sequences of words in NS and NNS speech. Belgian Journal of English Language and Literatures(BELL) New Series 2, 225–246. hdl.handle.net/2078.1/75157
    [Google Scholar]
  23. De Felice, R., & Deane, P.
    (2012) Identifying speech acts in e-mails: Toward automated scoring of the TOEIC® E-Mail Task. ETS research report no. RR-12-16. Educational Testing Service. 10.1002/j.2333‑8504.2012.tb02298.x
    https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.2012.tb02298.x [Google Scholar]
  24. Du Bois, J. W., Chafe, W., Meyer, C., Thompson, S. A., Englebretson, R., & Martey, N.
    (2000–2005) Santa Barbara corpus of spoken American English (1–4). Linguistic Data Consortium.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Fernández, J.
    (2013) A corpus-based study of vague language use by learners of Spanish in a study abroad context. InC. Kinginger (Ed.), Social and cultural aspects of language learning in study abroad (pp.299–332). John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.37.12fer
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.37.12fer [Google Scholar]
  26. Fernández, J., & Davis, T.
    (2021) Overview of available learner corpora. InN. Tracy-Ventura & M. Paquot (Eds.), Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and corpora (pp.147–159). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Fernández, J., & Staples, S.
    (2021) Pragmatic approaches. InN. Tracy-Ventura & M. Paquot (Eds.), Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and corpora (pp.242–253). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Fernández, J., & Yuldashev, A.
    (2011) Variation in the use of general extenders and stuff in instant messaging interactions. Journal of Pragmatics, 23(10), 2610–2626. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.03.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.03.012 [Google Scholar]
  29. (2015) Using a corpus-informed pedagogical intervention to develop language awareness toward appropriate lexicogrammatical choices. L2 Journal, 7(4), 91–107. 10.5070/L27425197
    https://doi.org/10.5070/L27425197 [Google Scholar]
  30. Fernández, J., Gates Tapia, A., & Lu, X.
    (2014) Oral proficiency and pragmatic marker use in L2 spoken Spanish: The case of pues and bueno. Journal of Pragmatics, 74, 150–164. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.09.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.09.005 [Google Scholar]
  31. Fung, L., & Carter, R.
    (2007) Discourse markers and spoken English: Native and learner use in pedagogic settings. Applied Linguistics, 28(3), 410–439. 10.1093/applin/amm030
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm030 [Google Scholar]
  32. Gablasova, D. & Brezina, V.
    (2015) Does speaker role affect the choice of epistemic adverbials in L2 speech? Evidence from the Trinity Lancaster Corpus. InJ. Romero-Trillo (Ed.), Yearbook of corpus linguistics and pragmatics 2015 (pp.117–136). Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑17948‑3_6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17948-3_6 [Google Scholar]
  33. Gablasova, D., & Brezina, V.
    (2018) Disagreement in L2 spoken English: From learner corpus research to corpus-based teaching materials. InV. Brezina & L. Flowerdew (Eds.), Learner corpus research: New perspectives and applications (pp.69–89). Bloomsbury Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Gablasova, D., Brezina, V., Mcenery, T., Boyd, E.
    (2017) Epistemic stance in spoken L2 English: The effect of task and speaker style. Applied Linguistics, 38(5), 613–637. 10.1093/applin/amv055
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv055 [Google Scholar]
  35. Gilquin, G.
    (2008) Hesitation markers among EFL learners: Pragmatic deficiency or difference?InJ. Romero-Trillo (Ed.), Corpus and pragmatics. A Mutualistic entente (pp.119–149). De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. (2015) From design to collection of learner corpora. InS. Granger, G. Gilquin, & F. Meunier (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of learner corpus research (pp.9–34). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139649414.002
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139649414.002 [Google Scholar]
  37. Gilquin, G., & Gries, S. Th.
    (2009) Corpora and experimental methods: A state-of-the-art review. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 5(1), 1–26. 10.1515/CLLT.2009.001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/CLLT.2009.001 [Google Scholar]
  38. Gilquin, G., De Cock, S. & Granger, S.
    (2010) Louvain international database of spoken English interlanguage. Handbook and CD-ROM. Presses universitaires de Louvain.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Gilquin, G., Granger, S. & Paquot, M.
    (2007) Learner corpora: The missing link in EAP pedagogy. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(4), 319–35. 10.1016/j.jeap.2007.09.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2007.09.007 [Google Scholar]
  40. Götz, S.
    (2013) Fluency in native and nonnative English speech. Studies in corpus linguistics 53. John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.53
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.53 [Google Scholar]
  41. Götz, S., & Mukherjee, J.
    (2017) Investigating the effect of the study abroad variable on learner output: A pseudo-longitudinal study on spoken German learner English. InA. McEnery, D. Gablasova, V. Brezina, & L. Flowerdew (Eds.), Learner corpus research: New perspectives and applications (pp.47–65). Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Granger, S.
    (2008) Learner corpora. InA. Lüdeling & M. Kytö (Eds.), Corpus linguistics: An international handbook (pp.259–275). Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. (2017) Learner corpora in foreign language education. InS. Thorne, & S. May (Eds.), Language, education and technology. Encyclopedia of language and education (3rd ed., pp.427–440). Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑02237‑6_33
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02237-6_33 [Google Scholar]
  44. Grice, M., Baumann, S., & Benzmüller, R.
    (2005) German intonation in autosegmental-metrical phonology. InS.-A. Jun (Ed.), Prosodic typology. The phonology of intonation and phrasing (pp.55–83). Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199249633.003.0003
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199249633.003.0003 [Google Scholar]
  45. Gut, U.
    (2009) Non-native speech: A corpus-based analysis of phonological and phonetic properties of L2 English and German. Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑3‑653‑01155‑5
    https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-01155-5 [Google Scholar]
  46. Hasselgren, A.
    (1994) Lexical teddy bears and advanced learners: A study into the ways Norwegian students cope with English vocabulary. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 237–260. 10.1111/j.1473‑4192.1994.tb00065.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.1994.tb00065.x [Google Scholar]
  47. (2002) Learner corpora and language testing: Smallwords as markers of learner fluency. InS. Granger, J. Hung, & S. Petch-Tyson (Eds.), Computer learner corpora, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching (pp.143–173). John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.6.11has
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.6.11has [Google Scholar]
  48. Hellermann, J., & Vergun, A.
    (2007) Language which is not taught: The discourse marker use of beginning adult learners of English. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(1), 157–179. 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.04.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.04.008 [Google Scholar]
  49. Hyland, K. & Tse, P.
    (2005) Hooking the reader: A corpus study of evaluative that in abstracts. English for Specific Purposes, 24(2), 123–139. 10.1016/j.esp.2004.02.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2004.02.002 [Google Scholar]
  50. Hyland, K.
    (2005) Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(2), 173–192. 10.1177/1461445605050365
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365 [Google Scholar]
  51. Ishikawa, S.
    (2013) The ICNALE and sophisticated contrastive interlanguage analysis of Asian Learners of English. InS. Ishikawa (Ed.), Learner corpus studies in Asia and the world, 1 (pp.91–118). Kobe University.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Jucker, A. H., Schneider, G., Taavitsainen, I., & Breustedt, B.
    (2008) Fishing for compliments: Precision and recall in corpus linguistic compliment research. InA. H. Jucker & I. Taavitsainen (Eds.), Speech acts in the history of English (pp.273–294). John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.176.15juc
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.176.15juc [Google Scholar]
  53. Jucker, A. H., Schreier, D., & Hundt, M.
    (Eds.) (2009) Corpora: Pragmatics and discourse. Rodopi. 10.1163/9789042029101
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789042029101 [Google Scholar]
  54. Kang, O. & Kermad, A.
    (2019) Prosody in L2 pragmatics. InN. Taguchi (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and pragmatics (78–92). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R.
    (2002) Pragmatic development in a second language. Blackwell Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Lee, J. J., & Deakin, L.
    (2016) Interactions in L1 and L2 undergraduate student writing: Interactional metadiscourse in successful and less-successful argumentative essays. Journal of Second Language Writing, 33, 21–34. 10.1016/j.jslw.2016.06.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2016.06.004 [Google Scholar]
  57. Levon, E.
    (2016) Qualitative analysis of stance. InP. Baker, & J. Egbert (Eds.), Triangulating methodological approaches in corpus linguistics research (pp.152–166). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Lin, Y. L.
    (2017) Co-occurrence of speech and gestures: A multimodal corpus linguistic approach to intercultural interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 117, 155–167. 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.06.014
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.06.014 [Google Scholar]
  59. Maden-Weinberger, U.
    (2008) Modality as indicator of L2 proficiency? A corpus-based investigation into advanced German interlanguage. InM. Walter & P. Grommes (Eds.), Fortgeschrittene Lernervarietäten: Korpuslinguistik und Zweitspracherwerbsforschung (pp.141–64). Max Niemeyer Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Milà-Garcia, A.
    (2018) Pragmatic annotation for a multi-layered analysis of speech acts: A methodological proposal. Corpus Pragmatics, 2, 265–287. 10.1007/s41701‑018‑0037‑z
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-018-0037-z [Google Scholar]
  61. Müller, S.
    (2005) Discourse markers in native and non-native English discourse. John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.138
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.138 [Google Scholar]
  62. Paquot, M., & Plonsky, L.
    (2017) Quantitative research methods and study quality in learner corpus research. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 3(1), 61–94. 10.1075/ijlcr.3.1.03paq
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.3.1.03paq [Google Scholar]
  63. Pierrehumbert, J., & Hirschberg, J.
    (1990) The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. InP. R. Cohen, J. Morgan, & M. E. Pollack (Eds.), Intentions in communication (271–311). MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Polat, B.
    (2011) Investigating acquisition of discourse markers through a developmental learner corpus. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(15), 3745–3756. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.09.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.09.009 [Google Scholar]
  65. Ramírez-Verdugo, M. D.
    (2008) A cross-linguistic study on the pragmatics of intonation in directives. InJ. Romero-Trillo (Ed.), Pragmatics and corpus linguistics: A mutualistic entente (205–233). De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Reinhardt, J.
    (2010) Directives in office hour consultations: A corpus-informed investigation of learner and expert usage. English for Specific Purposes, 29(2), 94–107. 10.1016/j.esp.2009.09.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2009.09.003 [Google Scholar]
  67. Romero-Trillo, J.
    (2019) Prosodic pragmatics and feedback in intercultural communication. Journal of Pragmatics, 151, 91–102. 10.1016/j.pragma.2019.02.018
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.02.018 [Google Scholar]
  68. Rosen, A.
    (2019) The use of smallwords in the speech of German learners of English. A corpus-based study of the factors of instruction and natural exposure. InS. Götz, & J. Mukherjee (Eds), Learner corpora and language teaching (pp.219–241). John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.92.11ros
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.92.11ros [Google Scholar]
  69. Rühlemann, C.
    (2017) Integrating corpus-linguistic and conversation-analytic transcription in XML: The case of backchannels and overlap in storytelling interaction. Corpus Pragmatics, 1, 201–232. 10.1007/s41701‑017‑0018‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-017-0018-7 [Google Scholar]
  70. Rühlemann, C., & O’Donnell, M. B.
    (2012) Introducing a corpus of conversational stories. Construction and annotation of the Narrative Corpus. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistics Theory, 8(2), 313–350. 10.1515/cllt‑2012‑0015
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2012-0015 [Google Scholar]
  71. Sato, S.
    (2020) A corpus-based analysis of so in written discourse: A comparison between L1 English speakers and Japanese EFL learners. Applied Pragmatics, 1(1), 26–45. 10.1075/ap.00002.sat
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.00002.sat [Google Scholar]
  72. Shin, J.-Y., Velázquez, A. J., Swatek, A., Staples, S., & Partridge, R. S.
    (2018) Examining the effectiveness of corpus-informed instruction of reporting verbs in L2 first-year college writing. L2 Journal, 10(3), 31–46. 10.5070/L210337022
    https://doi.org/10.5070/L210337022 [Google Scholar]
  73. Staples, S.
    (2015) The discourse of nurse-patient interactions: Contrasting the communicative styles of U.S. and international nurses. John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.72
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.72 [Google Scholar]
  74. Staples, S., & Fernández, J.
    (2019) Corpus linguistics approaches to L2 pragmatics research. InN. Taguchi (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and pragmatics (pp.241–254). Routledge. 10.4324/9781351164085‑16
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351164085-16 [Google Scholar]
  75. Svartvik, J., & Quirk, R.
    (1980) A corpus of English conversation. Lund University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Taguchi, N.
    (2013) Production of routines in L2 English: Effect of proficiency and study abroad experience. System, 41(1), 109–121. 10.1016/j.system.2013.01.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.01.003 [Google Scholar]
  77. Taguchi, N., & Collentine, J.
    (2018) Language learning in a study-abroad context: Research agenda. Language Teaching, 51(4), 553–566. 10.1017/S0261444818000265
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444818000265 [Google Scholar]
  78. Taguchi, N., & Roever, C.
    (2017) Second language pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Tracy-Ventura, N., Mitchell, R., & McManus, K.
    (2016) The LANGSNAP longitudinal learner corpus. InM. Alonso-Ramos (Ed.), Spanish learner corpus research: Current trends and future perspectives (pp.117–142). John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.78.05tra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.78.05tra [Google Scholar]
  80. Tsuchiya, K.
    (2013) Listenership behaviors in intercultural encounters: A time aligned multimodal corpus analysis. John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.236
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.236 [Google Scholar]
  81. Vaughan, E., & Clancy, B.
    (2013) Small corpora and pragmatics. InJ. Romero-Trillo (Ed.), Yearbook of corpus linguistics and pragmatics 2013: New domains and methodologies (pp.53–73). Springer. 10.1007/978‑94‑007‑6250‑3_4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6250-3_4 [Google Scholar]
  82. Vyatkina, N., & Cunningham, D. J.
    (2015) Learner corpora and pragmatics. InS. Granger, G. Gilquin, & F. Meunier (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of learner corpus research (pp.281–304). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139649414.013
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139649414.013 [Google Scholar]
  83. Walsh, S.
    (2013) Classroom discourse and teacher development. Edinburgh University Press. 10.1515/9780748645190
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9780748645190 [Google Scholar]
  84. Weisser, M.
    (2014) Speech act annotation. InK. Aijmer & C. Rühlemann (Eds.), Corpus pragmatics: A handbook (pp.84–113). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  85. (2020) Speech acts in corpus pragmatics: Making the case for an extended taxonomy. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 25(4), 400–426. 10.1075/ijcl.19023.wei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.19023.wei [Google Scholar]
  86. Yuldashev, A., Fernández, J., & Thorne, S.
    (2013) Second language learners’ contiguous and discontiguous multi-word unit use over time. Modern Language Journal, 97(S1), 31–45. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2012.01420.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01420.x [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ap.00008.fer
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error