1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics
  4. Volume 22, Issue 4
  5. Article
Volume 22, Issue 4
  • ISSN 1384-6655
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9811
PDF

Abstract

(EP) is an ongoing empirical exploration of learner English initiated by Cambridge University Press and Cambridge English, among others. EP aims to create a set of empirically-based descriptions of language competencies for English. ‘Reference Level Descriptors’ already exist as part of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) but are intuitively derived and not designed for one specific language. The (EGP, www.englishprofile.org/english-grammar-profile) is a sub-project of EP which aims to profile learner competence in grammar. This paper details the rationale for the study and the methodology that was developed to investigate the Cambridge Learner Corpus to arrive at over 1,200 grammatical competence statements. Key findings which link to existing corpus-based second language acquisition work are also presented.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.14086.oke
2017-12-01
2023-06-07

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.14086.oke
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ijcl.14086.oke.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.14086.oke&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Ädel, A.
    (2015) Variability in learner corpora. In Granger, S. , Gilquin, G. , & Meunier, F. (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Learner Corpus Research (pp.401–421). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139649414.018
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139649414.018 [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson, C.
    (2007) The CEFR and the need for more research. Modern Language Journal, 91(4), 659–663. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2007.00627_4.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00627_4.x [Google Scholar]
  3. Bardovi-Harlig, K.
    (2013) Developing L2 pragmatics. Language Learning, 63(s1), 68–86. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2012.00738.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00738.x [Google Scholar]
  4. 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. doi: 10.1515/iprg.2011.017
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2011.017 [Google Scholar]
  5. Brown, R.
    (1973) A First Language: The Early Stages. London: George Allen & Unwin. doi: 10.4159/harvard.9780674732469
     https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674732469 [Google Scholar]
  6. Burnard, L.
    (1995) Users’ Reference Guide to British National Corpus. Oxford: Oxford University Computing Services.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Burton, G.
    (2012) Corpora and coursebooks: Destined to be strangers forever?Corpora, 7(1), 91–108. doi: 10.3366/cor.2012.0019
     https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2012.0019 [Google Scholar]
  8. Buttery, P. , & Caines, A.
    (2012) Normalising frequency counts to account for ‘opportunity of use’ in learner corpora. In Y. Tono , Y. Kawaguchi & M. Minegishi (Eds.), Developmental and Crosslinguistic Perspectives in Learner Corpus Research (pp.187–204). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tufs.4.16but
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tufs.4.16but [Google Scholar]
  9. Callies, M.
    (2015) Learner corpus methodology. In Granger, S. , Gilquin, G. , & Meunier, F. (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Learner Corpus Research (pp.35–55). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139649414.003
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139649414.003 [Google Scholar]
  10. Callies, M. , & Zaytseva, E.
    (2013) The Corpus of Academic Learner English (CALE): A new resource for the study and assessment of advanced language proficiency. In S. Granger , G. Gilquin & F. Meunier (Eds.), Twenty Years of Learner Corpus Research: Looking back, Moving ahead. Corpora and Language in Use – Proceedings 1 (pp.49–59). Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de Louvain.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Cambridge University Press
    Cambridge University Press (2015) English Grammar Profile. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved fromwww.englishprofile.org/english-grammar-profile/egp-online (last accessedMarch 2016).
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Capel, A.
    (2010) A1 – B2 Vocabulary: Insights and issues arising from the English Profile Wordlists project. English Grammar Profile Journal, 1(1), 1–11. Retrieved fromjournals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=%2F1715_9743C07C92A1D32D9C5923E4578849FE_journals__EPJ_EPJ1_01_S2041536210000048a.pdf&cover=Y&code=b5d9787bd17ae6a4a22b52fd9ff5084a (last accessedNovember 2014).
     [Google Scholar]
  13. (2015) The English Vocabulary Profile. In J. Harrison & F. Barker (Eds.), English Profile in Practice, English Profile Studies, Vol.5 (pp.9–27). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Carlsen, C.
    (2012) Proficiency level: A fuzzy variable in computer learner corpora. Applied Linguistics, 3(2), 161–183. doi: 10.1093/applin/amr047
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amr047 [Google Scholar]
  15. Carter, R. , McCarthy, M. , Mark, G. , & O’Keeffe, A.
    (2011) English Grammar Today. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Council of Europe
    Council of Europe (2001a) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Council of Europe
    Council of Europe (2001b) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment Structured Overview of all CEFR Scales. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Retrieved fromwww.coe.int/t/dg4/education/elp/elp-reg/Source/Key_reference/Overview_CEFRscales_EN.pdf (last accessedNovember 2014).
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Díez-Bedmar, M. B.
    (2012) The use of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages to evaluate compositions in the English exam section of the University admission examination. Revista de Educación, 357, 55–79.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Ellis, N. C. , & Ferreira-Junior, F. (2009) Constructions and their acquisition: Islands and the distinctiveness of their occupancy. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7(1), 188–221. doi: 10.1075/arcl.7.08ell
     https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.7.08ell [Google Scholar]
  20. Ellis, N. C. , O’Donnell, M. , & Römer, U.
    (2015) Usage-based language learning. In B. MacWhinney & W. O’Grady (Eds.), The Handbook of Language Emergence (pp.163–180). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Figueras, N. , North, B. , Takala, S. , Verhelst, N. , & Van Avermaet, P.
    (2005) Relating examinations to the Common European Framework: A manual. Language Testing, 22(3), 262–279. doi: 10.1191/0265532205lt308oa
     https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532205lt308oa [Google Scholar]
  22. Fulcher, G.
    (2004) Deluded by artifices? The Common European Framework and harmonization. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1(4), 253–266. doi: 10.1207/s15434311laq0104_4
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15434311laq0104_4 [Google Scholar]
  23. Gablasova, D. , Brezina, V. , McEnery, T. , & Boyd, E.
    (2015) Epistemic stance in spoken L2 English: The effect of task and speaker style. Applied Linguistics, Advance online publication. doi: 10.1093/applin/amv055
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv055 [Google Scholar]
  24. Gablasova, D. , Brezina, V. , & McEnery, T.
    (2017) Exploring learner language through corpora: Comparing and interpreting corpus frequency information. Language Learning, 67(s1), 130–154. doi: 10.1111/lang.12226
     https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12226 [Google Scholar]
  25. Granger, S.
    (1994) The learner corpus: A revolution in applied linguistics. English Today, 10(3), 25–33. doi: 10.1017/S0266078400007665
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078400007665 [Google Scholar]
  26. (2012) How to use foreign and second language learner corpora. In A. Mackey & S. Gass (Eds.), Research Methods in Second Language Acquisition: A Practical Guide (pp.7–29). Malden: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781444347340.ch2
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444347340.ch2 [Google Scholar]
  27. Granger, S. , Gilquin, G. , & Meunier, F.
    (Eds.) (2015) The Cambridge Handbook of Learner Corpus Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139649414
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139649414 [Google Scholar]
  28. Green, A.
    (2012) English Profile Studies. Language Functions Revisited: Theoretical and Empirical Bases for Language Construct Definition across the Ability Range. Cambridge: UCLES/Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Halliday, M. A. K.
    (1985) Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Handford, M.
    (2010) The Language of Business Meetings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139525329
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139525329 [Google Scholar]
  31. Harrison, J. , & Barker, F.
    (Eds.) (2015) English Profile in Practice. English Profile Studies, Vol.5. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Hawkins, J. A. , & Buttery, P.
    (2009) Using learner language from corpora to profile levels of proficiency: Insights from the English Profile Programme. In L. Taylor & C. J. Weir (Eds.), Language Testing Matters: Investigating the Wider Social and Educational Impact of Assessment (pp.158–175). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. (2010) Criterial features in learner corpora: Theory and illustrations. English Profile Journal, 1(1). doi: 10.1017/S2041536210000103
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S2041536210000103 [Google Scholar]
  34. Hawkins, J. , & Filipović, L.
    (2012) Criterial Features in L2 English: Specifying the Reference Levels of the Common European Framework. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Hoey, M.
    (2005) Lexical Priming: A New Theory of Words and Language. London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203327630
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203327630 [Google Scholar]
  36. Jones, N. , & Saville, N.
    (2009) European language policy: Assessment, learning, and the CEFR. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 29, 51–63. doi: 10.1017/S0267190509090059
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190509090059 [Google Scholar]
  37. Kilgarriff, A. , Baisa, V. , Bušta, J. , Jakubíček, M. , Kovář, V. , Michelfeit, J. Rychlý, P. , & Suchomel, V.
    (2014) The Sketch Engine: Ten years on. Lexicography, 1(1), 7–36. doi: 10.1007/s40607‑014‑0009‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s40607-014-0009-9 [Google Scholar]
  38. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006) The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 590–619. doi: 10.1093/applin/aml029
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml029 [Google Scholar]
  39. (2014) Another step to be taken: Rethinking the end point of the interlanguage continuum. In Z. -H. Han & E. Tarone (Eds.), Interlanguage: Forty Years Later (pp.203–220). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.39.11ch9
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.39.11ch9 [Google Scholar]
  40. (2015) Saying what we mean: Making a case for ‘language acquisition’ to become ‘language development’. Language Teaching, 48(4), 491–505. doi: 10.1017/S0261444814000019
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444814000019 [Google Scholar]
  41. Lave, J. , & Wenger, E.
    (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511815355
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355 [Google Scholar]
  42. Littlejohn, A.
    (1992) Why are ELT coursebooks the way they are? (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. McCarthy, M. J.
    (1998) Spoken Language and Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. (2013) Corpora and the advanced level: Problems and prospects. English Australia Journal, 29(1), 39–49.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. McEnery, T. , Xiao, R. , & Tono, Y.
    (2006) Corpus-Based Language Studies: An Advanced Resource Book. London: Routledge
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Meunier, F.
    (2015) Developmental patterns in learner corpora. In Granger, S. , Gilquin, G. , & Meunier, F. (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Learner Corpus Research (pp.379–400). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139649414.017
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139649414.017 [Google Scholar]
  47. Milanovic, M.
    (2009) Cambridge ESOL and the CEFR. University of Cambridge ESOL Examinations Research Notes, 37, 2–5. Retrieved fromwww.cambridgeenglish.org/images/23156-research-notes-37.pdf (last accessedNovember 2014).
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Milton, J. , & Meara, P.
    (1995) How periods abroad affect vocabulary growth in a foreign language. ITL Review of Applied Linguistics, (107–08), 17–34. doi: 10.1075/itl.107‑108.02mil
     https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.107-108.02mil [Google Scholar]
  49. Murakami, A.
    (2013) Cross-linguistic influence on the accuracy order of L2 English grammatical morphemes. In S. Granger , S. Gaëtanelle & F. Meunier (Eds.), Twenty Years of Learner Corpus Research. Looking back, Moving ahead: Proceedings of the First Learner Corpus Research Conference (LCR 2011) (Vol.1) (pp.325–334). Louvain: Presses universitaires de Louvain.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Myles, F.
    (2004) From data to theory: The over‐representation of linguistic knowledge in SLA. Transactions of the Philological Society, 102(2), 139–168 doi: 10.1111/j.0079‑1636.2004.00133.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0079-1636.2004.00133.x [Google Scholar]
  51. (2015) Second language acquisition theory and learner corpus research. In S. Granger , G. Gilquin & F. Meunier (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Learner Corpus Research (pp.309–331). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139649414.014
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139649414.014 [Google Scholar]
  52. Negishi, M. , Tono, Y. , & Fujita, Y.
    (2013) A validation study of the CEFR levels of phrasal verbs in the English Vocabulary Profile. English Profile Journal, 3, 1–16. Retrieved fromjournals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=8663926 (last accessedNovember 2014).
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Osbourne, J.
    (2014) Multiple assessments of oral proficiency: Evidence from a collaborative platform. In P. Leclercq , A. Edmonds & H. Hilton (Eds.), Measuring L2 Proficiency: Perspectives from SLA (pp.54–70). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. O’Sullivan, B.
    (2011) Language testing. In J. Simpson (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Applied Linguistics (pp.259–273). London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Pienemann, M.
    (1998) Developmental dynamics in L1 and L2 acquisition: Processability Theory and generative entrenchment. Bilingualism, 1(1), 1–20. doi: 10.1017/S1366728998000017
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728998000017 [Google Scholar]
  56. Simpson, R. C. , Briggs, S. L. , Ovens, J. , & Swales, J. M. (2002) The Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English. Ann Arbor, MI: The Regents of the University of Michigan.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Swan, M.
    (2005) Practical English Usage (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Tavakoli, P.
    (2009) Assessing L2 task performance: Understanding effects of task design. System, 37(3), 482–495. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2009.02.013
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.02.013 [Google Scholar]
  59. Thewissen, J.
    (2013) Capturing L2 accuracy developmental patterns: Insights from an error tagged learner corpus. The Modern Language Journal, 97(S1), 77–101. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2012.01422.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01422.x [Google Scholar]
  60. Tono, Y. , & Díez-Bedmar, M. B.
    (2014) Focus on learner writing at the beginning and intermediate stages: The ICCI corpus. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 19(2), 163–177. doi: 10.1075/ijcl.19.2.01ton
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.19.2.01ton [Google Scholar]
  61. Tracy-Ventura, N. , & Myles, F.
    (2015) The importance of task variability in the design of learner corpora for SLA research. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 1(1), 58–95.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Van Ek, J. A. , & Trim, J. L. M.
    (1991a) Waystage 1990. Cambridge: Council of Europe/Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. (1991b) Threshold 1990. Cambridge: Council of Europe/Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. (2001) Vantage. Cambridge: Council of Europe/Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Wang, X.
    (2013) Grammatical Development of Chinese among Non-native Speakers: From a Processability Account. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars. Retrieved fromwww.cambridgescholars.com/download/sample/58986 (last accessedApril 2015).
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Weir, C. J.
    (2005) Language Testing and Validation: An Evidence-Based Approach. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. doi: 10.1057/9780230514577
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230514577 [Google Scholar]
  67. Beaumont, D.
    (1989) The Heinemann English Grammar. Oxford: Heinemann Educational.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. (1993) The Heinemann Elementary English Grammar (2nd ed.). Oxford: Heinemann Educational.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Biber, D. , Conrad, S. , & Leech, G.
    (2002) Longman Student Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson Education.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Carter, R. A. , & McCarthy, M. J.
    (2006) The Cambridge Grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Carter, R. A. , McCarthy, M. J. , Mark, G. , & O’Keeffe, A.
    (2011) English Grammar Today. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Conrad, S. , Biber, D. , & Leech, G.
    (2002) Longman Student Grammar of Spoken and Written English Workbook. Harlow: Pearson Education.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Dean, M.
    (1993) English Grammar Lessons: Upper-Intermediate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Eastwood, J.
    (2005) Oxford Learner Grammar: Grammar Finder. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Hewings, M.
    (2013) Advanced English Grammar in Use (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Murphy, R.
    (2012) English Grammar in Use (4th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  77. (2007) Essential Grammar in Use (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Parrott, M.
    (2010) Grammar for English Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Swan, M.
    (2005) Practical English Usage (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  80. Thomson, A. J.
    (1980) A Practical English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.14086.oke
Loading
The English Grammar Profile of learner competence
International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 22, 457 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.14086.oke
/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.14086.oke
/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.14086.oke
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): CEFR; English Grammar Profile; learner competence; learner corpus; learner grammar

Most Cited

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