1887
Volume 24, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1384-6655
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9811
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The present study compared 4-word lexical bundles found in a general engineering corpus (2,030,000 words) with those found in a corpus of texts collected from a Pathway engineering course for ESL (English as a Second Language) students (356,000 words) and a corpus of pedagogical materials used to teach advanced ESL students at an intensive English program (440,000 words). The results indicated that the structural and functional characteristics of the lexical bundles in the Pathway engineering materials were representative of the discourse features found in the general engineering corpus. This finding provides additional evidence of the overall appropriateness of the pedagogical materials selected for the Pathway course. Furthermore, the two engineering corpora also included a substantial number of bundles that were unique to the specific course materials, and, therefore, can potentially be targeted during language instruction.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.17075.nek
2019-08-05
2019-10-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. 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.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Alquraishi, M. A.
    (2014) Lexical Bundles in an Advanced INTO CSU Writing Class and Engineering Texts: A Functional Analysis (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Anderson, N.
    (2015) Academic reading expectations and challenges. InN. Evans, N. Anderson & W. Eggington (Eds.), ESL Readers and Writers in Higher Education: Understanding Challenges, Providing Support (pp.95–109). New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Biber, D.
    (2009) A corpus-driven approach to formulaic language in English: Multi-word patterns in speech and writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 14(3), 275–311. 10.1075/ijcl.14.3.08bib
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.14.3.08bib [Google Scholar]
  5. Biber, D., & Barbieri, F.
    (2007) Lexical bundles in university spoken and written registers. English for Specific Purposes, 26(3), 263–286. 10.1016/j.esp.2006.08.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2006.08.003 [Google Scholar]
  6. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E.
    (1999) Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V.
    (2004) If you look at …: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25(3), 371–405. 10.1093/applin/25.3.371
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.3.371 [Google Scholar]
  8. (2003) Lexical bundles in speech and writing: An initial taxonomy. InA. Wilson, P. Rayson & T. McEnery (Eds.), Corpus Linguistics by the Lune: A Festschrift for Geoffrey Leech. Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Biber, D., & Gray, B.
    (2013) Nominalizing the verb phrase in academic science writing. InB. Aarts, J. Close, G. Leech & S. Wallis (Eds.), The Verb Phrase in English: Investigating Recent Language Change with Corpora (pp.99–132). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139060998.006
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139060998.006 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bybee, J.
    (2010) Language, Usage, and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511750526
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750526 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chen, L.
    (2010) An investigation of lexical bundles in ESP textbooks and electrical engineering introductory textbooks. InD. Wood (Ed.), Perspectives on Formulaic Language: Acquisition and Communication (pp.107–125). New York, NY: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Chen, Y.-H., & Baker, P.
    (2010) Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning & Technology, 14(2), 30–49.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Cortes, V.
    (2002) Lexical Bundles in Published and Student Academic Writing in History and Biology (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. (2004) Lexical bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: Examples from history and biology. English for Specific Purposes, 23(4), 397–423. 10.1016/j.esp.2003.12.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2003.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  15. (2008) A comparative analysis of lexical bundles in academic history writing in English and Spanish. Corpora, 3(1), 43–58. 10.3366/E1749503208000063
    https://doi.org/10.3366/E1749503208000063 [Google Scholar]
  16. Dym, C. L., & Little, P.
    (2009) Engineering Design: A Project-based Introduction (3rd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Evans, N., Anderson, N., & Eggington, W.
    (2015) ESL Readers and Writers in Higher Education: Understanding Challenges, Providing Support. New York, NY: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315762654
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315762654 [Google Scholar]
  18. Grabe, W.
    (2009) Reading in a Second Language: Moving from Theory to Practice. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hartshorn, J., Evans, N., Egbert, J., & Johnson, A.
    (2017) Discipline-specific reading expectation and challenges for ESL learners in US universities. Reading in a Foreign Language, 29(1), 33–60.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Hsu, W.
    (2014) The most frequent opaque formulaic sequences in English-medium college textbooks. System, 47, 146–161. 10.1016/j.system.2014.10.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.10.001 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hyland, K.
    (2008) As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes, 27(1), 4–21. 10.1016/j.esp.2007.06.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2007.06.001 [Google Scholar]
  22. (2012) Bundles in academic discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 150–169. 10.1017/S0267190512000037
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190512000037 [Google Scholar]
  23. Hyland, K., & Milton, J.
    (1997) Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 students’ writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6(2), 183–205. 10.1016/S1060‑3743(97)90033‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(97)90033-3 [Google Scholar]
  24. Lammi, M.
    (2013) Engineering design thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 24(2), 55–77.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Leech, G.
    (2000) Grammars of spoken English: New outcomes of corpus-oriented research. Language Learning, 50(4), 675–724. 10.1111/0023‑8333.00143
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00143 [Google Scholar]
  26. Leńko-Szymańska, A.
    (2014) The acquisition of formulaic language by EFL learners: A cross-sectional and cross-linguistic perspective. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 19(2), 225–251. 10.1075/ijcl.19.2.04len
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.19.2.04len [Google Scholar]
  27. Mudraya, O.
    (2006) Engineering English: A lexical frequency instructional model. Journal of English for Specific Purposes, 25(2), 235–256. 10.1016/j.esp.2005.05.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.05.002 [Google Scholar]
  28. Nekrasova-Beker, T., & Becker, A.
    (2017) Integrating project-based learning into English for specific-purposes classrooms: A case study of Engineering. InM. Long (Ed.), Language for Specific Purposes: Trends in Curriculum Development (pp.101–125). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Rayson, P.
    (2009) Wmatrix: A web-based corpus processing environment [Computer Software]. Lancaster: Lancaster University. Available fromucrel.lancs.ac.uk/wmatrix/ (last accessedJune 2019).
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Scott, M., & Tribble, C.
    (2006) Textual Patterns. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.22
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.22 [Google Scholar]
  31. Schmitt, N., Grandage, S., & Adolphs, S.
    (2004) Are corpus-derived recurrent clusters psycholinguistically valid?InN. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic Sequences: Acquisition, Processing, and Use (pp.127–151). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.9.08sch
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.9.08sch [Google Scholar]
  32. Todd, R. W.
    (2017) An opaque engineering word list: Which words should a teacher focus on?English for Specific Purposes, 45, 31–39. 10.1016/j.esp.2016.08.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.08.003 [Google Scholar]
  33. Ward, J.
    (2007) Collocation and technicality in EAP engineering. Journal of English for Specific Purposes, 6(1), 18–35. 10.1016/j.jeap.2006.10.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2006.10.001 [Google Scholar]
  34. Wood, D., & Appel, R.
    (2014) Multiword constructions in first year business and engineering university textbooks and EAP textbooks. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 15, 1–13. 10.1016/j.jeap.2014.03.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2014.03.002 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.17075.nek
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.17075.nek
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): discipline-specific language , engineering corpus , ESL and lexical bundles
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