1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of SEEFLEX
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This report presents the . In Germany, upper secondary school EFL exams feature recurring tasks targeting diverse text types. The was developed to investigate how students complete these tasks linguistically and whether they meet the curricular requirements. The corpus contains data from 575 transcribed authentic curriculum-based examinations (1,979 texts, ~625.000 words). The metadata include standardized receptive vocabulary assessments, a cognition scale, the participants’ reading habits, social background, and their language experience and proficiency. Extensive xml mark-up was added to investigate the influence of inter alia source material, structural text features, and selected language mistakes. An online repository provides full-text access as well as ample additional resources, including an interactive Shiny application to investigate register variation in the corpus.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ijlcr.24027.pau
2025-08-21
2026-03-10

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ijlcr.24027.pau
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alexopoulou, T., Michel, M., Murakami, A., & Meurers, D.
    (2017) Task Effects on Linguistic Complexity and Accuracy: A Large-Scale Learner Corpus Analysis Employing Natural Language Processing Techniques. Language Learning, (), –. 10.1111/lang.12232
     https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12232 [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson, J. A. E., Mak, L., Keyvani Chahi, A., & Bialystok, E.
    (2018) The language and social background questionnaire: Assessing degree of bilingualism in a diverse population. Behavior Research Methods, (), –. 10.3758/s13428‑017‑0867‑9
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0867-9 [Google Scholar]
  3. Biber, D.
    (1988) Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511621024
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621024 [Google Scholar]
  4. (1993) Representativeness in corpus design. Literary and Linguistic Computing, (), –. 10.1093/llc/8.4.243
     https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/8.4.243 [Google Scholar]
  5. Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E.
    (1982) The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, (), –. 10.1037/0022‑3514.42.1.116
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116 [Google Scholar]
  6. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Feng Kao, C.
    (1984) The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, (), –. 10.1207/s15327752jpa4803_13
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4803_13 [Google Scholar]
  7. Centre for English Corpus Linguistics
    Centre for English Corpus Linguistics (2024) Learner corpora around the world [Louvain-la-neuve: Université catholique de louvain.]. https://uclouvain.be/en/research-institutes/ilc/cecl/learner-corpora-around-the-world.html
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Chang, W., Cheng, J., Allaire, J. J., Sievert, C., Schloerke, B., Xie, Y., Allen, J., McPherson, J., Dipert, A., & Borges, B.
    (2025) Shiny: Web application framework for R (Version R package version 1.10.0.9000). https://CRAN.R-roject.org/package=shiny
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Council of Europe (Ed.)
    Council of Europe (Ed.) (2020) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment; companion volume. Council of Europe Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Coxhead, A.
    (2000) A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, (), –. 10.2307/3587951
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3587951 [Google Scholar]
  11. Daller, H., & Phelan, D.
    (2007) What is in a teacher’s mind? Teacher ratings of EFL essays and different aspects of lexical richness. InH. Daller, J. Milton, & J. Treffers-Daller (Eds.), Modelling and assessing vocabulary knowledge (pp.–). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511667268.016
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667268.016 [Google Scholar]
  12. Derewianka, B.
    (2012) Knowledge about language in the Australian curriculum: English. The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, (), –. 10.1007/BF03651879
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03651879 [Google Scholar]
  13. Derewianka, B., & Jones, P.
    (2016) Teaching language in context (Second edition). Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Dirdal, H., Johansen, S. H., & Durrant, P.
    (2024) Representativeness and metadata presentation in learner/child corpora: Lessons from the GiG and TRAWL corpora. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1016/j.rmal.2024.100145
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2024.100145 [Google Scholar]
  15. Ellis, N. C.
    (1997) Vocabulary acquisition: Word structure, collocation, word-class, and meaning. InM. McCarthy & N. Schmidt (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp.–). Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Ellis, R., & Barkhuizen, G.
    (2005) Analysing learner language. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Farmer, T. A., Fine, A. B., Misyak, J. B., & Christiansen, M. H.
    (2017) Reading span task performance, linguistic experience, and the processing of unexpected syntactic events. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, (), –. 10.1080/17470218.2015.1131310
     https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2015.1131310 [Google Scholar]
  18. Flowerdew, J., & Li, Y.
    (2007) Language re-use among Chinese apprentice scientists writing for publication. Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1093/applin/amm031
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm031 [Google Scholar]
  19. Garside, R.
    (1987) The CLAWS word-tagging system. InR. G. Garside, G. N. Leech, & G. Sampson (Eds.), The computational analysis of English: A corpus-based approach. Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Gilquin, G.
    (2015) From design to collection of learner corpora. InS. Granger, G. Gilquin, & F. Meunier (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of learner corpus research (pp.–). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139649414.002
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139649414.002 [Google Scholar]
  21. Glaznieks, A., Frey, J.-C., Stopfner, M., Zanasi, L., & Nicolas, L.
    (2022) Leonide: A longitudinal trilingual corpus of young learners of Italian, German and English. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, (), –. 10.1075/ijlcr.21004.gla
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.21004.gla [Google Scholar]
  22. Granger, S.
    (2008) Learner Corpora. InA. Lüdeling & M. Kytö (Eds.), Corpus linguistics: An international handbook (Vol., pp.–). Walter de Gruyter. 10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0669
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0669 [Google Scholar]
  23. (2009) The contribution of learner corpora to second language acquisition and foreign language teaching: A critical evaluation. InK. Aijmer (Ed.), Studies in corpus linguistics (Vol., pp.–). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/scl.33.04gra
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.33.04gra [Google Scholar]
  24. (2012) How to use foreign and second language learner corpora. InA. Mackey & S. M. Gass (Eds.), Research methods in second language acquisition (pp.–). Wiley. 10.1002/9781444347340.ch2
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444347340.ch2 [Google Scholar]
  25. Halliday, M. A. K.
    (1978) Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. E. Arnold.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R.
    (1989) Language, context and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.
    (2014) Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar (Fourth Edition). Routledge. 10.4324/9780203783771
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203783771 [Google Scholar]
  28. Halliday, M. A. K., McIntosh, A., & Strevens, P.
    (1964) The linguistic sciences and language teaching. Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Hardie, A.
    (2012) CQPweb — combining power, flexibility and usability in a corpus analysis tool. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, (), –. 10.1075/ijcl.17.3.04har
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.17.3.04har [Google Scholar]
  30. Kerz, E., Neumann, S., & Niemietz, P.
    (2022) Assessing linguistic complexity and register flexibility in advanced second language learners: Evidence from group- and individual-level analyses. Register Studies, (), –. 10.1075/rs.20014.ker
     https://doi.org/10.1075/rs.20014.ker [Google Scholar]
  31. KMK
    KMK (2012) Bildungsstandards für die fortgeführte Fremdsprache (englisch/französisch) für die allgemeine Hochschulreife (The Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs, Ed.). RetrievedDecember 17, 2024, fromhttps://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/veroeffentlichungen_beschluesse/2012/2012_10_18-Bildungsstandards-Fortgef-FS-Abi.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Krashen, S. D.
    (2003) Explorations in language acquisition and use: The Taipei lectures. Heinemann.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Kreyer, R.
    (2015) The Marburg Corpus of Intermediate Learner English (MILE). InM. Callies & S. Götz (Eds.), Studies in Corpus Linguistics, (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.70.01kre
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.70.01kre [Google Scholar]
  34. Kyle, K., Crossley, S., & Berger, C.
    (2018) The tool for the automatic analysis of lexical sophistication (TAALES): Version 2.0. Behavior Research Methods, (), –. 10.3758/s13428‑017‑0924‑4
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0924-4 [Google Scholar]
  35. Lemhöfer, K., & Broersma, M.
    (2012) Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid lexical test for advanced learners of English. Behavior Research Methods, (), –. 10.3758/s13428‑011‑0146‑0
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0146-0 [Google Scholar]
  36. Lu, X.
    (2011) A corpus-based evaluation of syntactic complexity measures as indices of college-level ESL writers’ language development. TESOL Quarterly, (), –. 10.5054/tq.2011.240859
     https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2011.240859 [Google Scholar]
  37. Lüdeling, A., & Hirschmann, H.
    (2015) Error annotation systems. InS. Granger, G. Gilquin, & F. Meunier (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of learner corpus research (pp.–). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139649414.007
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139649414.007 [Google Scholar]
  38. Marian, V., Blumenfeld, H. K., & Kaushanskaya, M.
    (2007) The language experience and proficiency questionnaire (LEAP-Q): Assessing language profiles in bilinguals and multilinguals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, (), –. 10.1044/1092‑4388(2007/067)
     https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2007/067) [Google Scholar]
  39. Martin, J. R.
    (1992) Genre and literacy — modeling context in educational linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, , –. 10.1017/S0267190500002440
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500002440 [Google Scholar]
  40. Martin, J. R., & Rose, D.
    (2008) Genre relations: Mapping culture. University of Toronto Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Meara, P.
    (1996) The dimensions of lexical competence. InG. Brown, K. Malmkjaer, & J. Williams (Eds.), Performance and competence in second language acquisition (pp.–). Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Melissourgou, M. N., & Frantzi, K. T.
    (2017) Genre identification based on SFL principles: The representation of text types and genres in English language teaching material. Corpus Pragmatics, , –. 10.1007/s41701‑017‑0013‑z
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-017-0013-z [Google Scholar]
  43. Milton, J.
    (2010) The development of vocabulary breadth across the CEFR levels. InI. Bartning, M. Martin, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Communicative proficiency and linguistic development. intersections between SLA and language testing research (pp.–). European Second Language Association.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. (2013) Measuring the contribution of vocabulary knowledge to proficiency in the four skills. InC. Bardel, C. Lindqvist, & B. Laufer (Eds.), L2 vocabulary acquisition, knowledge and use: New perspectives on assessment and corpus analysis. European Second Language Association. https://www.eurosla.org/monographs/EM02/TOC.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Milton, J., Wade, J., & Hopkins, N.
    (2010) Aural word recognition and oral competence in English as a foreign language. InR. Chacón-Beltrán, C. Abello-Contesse, & M. D. M. Torreblanca-López (Eds.), Insights into non-native vocabulary teaching and learning (pp.–). Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781847692900‑007
     https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847692900-007 [Google Scholar]
  46. Ministry of Education
    Ministry of Education (2014) Kernlehrplan für die Sekundarstufe II Gymnasium/Gesamtschule in Nordrhein-Westfalen. RetrievedDecember 17, 2024, fromhttps://www.schulentwicklung.nrw.de/lehrplaene/upload/klp_SII/e/KLP_GOSt_Englisch.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Ministry of Education
    Ministry of Education (2017) Operatorenübersicht für das Fach Englisch (Abitur ab 2017). RetrievedDecember 17, 2024, fromhttps://www.standardsicherung.schulministerium.nrw.de/cms/zentralabitur-wbk/faecher/getfile.php?file=3278
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Ministry of Education
    Ministry of Education (2023) Kernlehrplan für die Sekundarstufe II Gymnasium/Gesamtschule in Nordrhein-Westfalen. RetrievedDecember 17, 2024, fromhttps://www.schulentwicklung.nrw.de/lehrplaene/lehrplan/329/gost_klp_e_2023_06_07.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Ministry of Education
    Ministry of Education (2024) Klausuren in den modernen Fremdsprachen in der Qualifikationsphase der gymnasialen Oberstufe. RetrievedJanuary 23, 2025, fromhttps://www.standardsicherung.schulministerium.nrw.de/cms/zentralabitur-gost/faecher/getfile.php?file=5796
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Myles, F.
    (2021) Commentary: An SLA perspective on learner corpus research. InB. Le Bruyn & M. Paquot (Eds.), Learner corpus research meets second language acquisition (pp.–). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108674577.013
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108674577.013 [Google Scholar]
  51. Naismith, B., Han, N.-R., & Juffs, A.
    (2022) The university of Pittsburgh English language institute corpus (PELIC). International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, (), –. 10.1075/ijlcr.21002.nai
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.21002.nai [Google Scholar]
  52. Nation, I. S. P.
    (2001) Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524759
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524759 [Google Scholar]
  53. Neumann, S.
    (2014) Contrastive register variation: A quantitative approach to the comparison of English and German. Walter de Gruyter Mouton.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Neumann, S., & Evert, S.
    (2021) A register variation perspective on varieties of English. InE. Seoane & D. Biber (Eds.), Corpus-based approaches to register variation (pp.–). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/scl.103.06neu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.103.06neu [Google Scholar]
  55. Nunan, D.
    (2004) Task-based language teaching. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511667336
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667336 [Google Scholar]
  56. Paltridge, B.
    (1996) Genre, text type, and the language learning classroom. ELT Journal, (), –. 10.1093/elt/50.3.237
     https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/50.3.237 [Google Scholar]
  57. Paquot, M., König, A., Stemle, E. W., & Frey, J.-C.
    (2024) The core metadata schema for learner corpora (LC-meta): Collaborative efforts to advance data discoverability, metadata quality and study comparability in L2 research. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, (), –. 10.1075/ijlcr.24010.paq
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.24010.paq [Google Scholar]
  58. Pilegaard, M., & Frandsen, F.
    (1996) Text type. InJ. Verschueren, J.-O. Östman, J. Blommaert, & C. Bulcaen (Eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics (pp.–). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/hop.2.tex3
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hop.2.tex3 [Google Scholar]
  59. Puig-Mayenco, E., Chaouch-Orozco, A., Liu, H., & Martín-Villena, F.
    (2023) The LexTALE as a measure of L2 global proficiency: A cautionary tale based on a partial replication of Lemhöfer and Broersma (2012). Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, (), –. 10.1075/lab.22048.pui
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.22048.pui [Google Scholar]
  60. R Core Team
    R Core Team (2022) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Read, J.
    (2000) Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511732942
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511732942 [Google Scholar]
  62. Riemenschneider, A., Weiss, Z., Schröter, P., & Meurers, D.
    (2023) The interplay of task characteristics, linguistic complexity, and language proficiency in high-stakes English as a Foreign Language writing. TESOL Quarterly, (), — . 10.1002/tesq.3254
     https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3254 [Google Scholar]
  63. Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D., & Clapham, C.
    (2001) Developing and exploring the behaviour of two new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test. Language Testing, (), –. 10.1177/026553220101800103
     https://doi.org/10.1177/026553220101800103 [Google Scholar]
  64. Stæhr, L. S.
    (2008) Vocabulary size and the skills of listening, reading and writing. Language Learning Journal, (), –. 10.1080/09571730802389975
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09571730802389975 [Google Scholar]
  65. Stefanowitsch, A.
    (2020) Corpus linguistics: A guide to the methodology. Zenodo. 10.5281/ZENODO.3735822
     https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.3735822 [Google Scholar]
  66. Swales, J. M.
    (1990) Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. The TEI Consortium
    The TEI Consortium (2021) TEI p5: Guidelines for electronic text encoding and interchange (Version 4.3.0.). RetrievedJuly 2, 2024, fromhttps://tei-c.org/Vault/P5/4.3.0/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/Guidelines.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  68. van Rooy, B., & Schäfer, L.
    (2002) The effect of learner errors on POS tag errors during automatic POS tagging. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, (), –. 10.2989/16073610209486319
     https://doi.org/10.2989/16073610209486319 [Google Scholar]
  69. Webb, S., Sasao, Y., & Ballance, O.
    (2017) The updated vocabulary levels test: Developing and validating two new forms of the VLT. ITL — International Journal of Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1075/itl.168.1.02web
     https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.168.1.02web [Google Scholar]
  70. Wulff, S., & Gries, S. T.
    (2021) Exploring individual variation in learner corpus research: Methodological suggestions. InB. Le Bruyn & M. Paquot (Eds.), Learner corpus research meets second language acquisition (pp.–). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108674577.010
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108674577.010 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/ijlcr.24027.pau
Loading
SEEFLEX
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.24027.pau
/content/journals/10.1075/ijlcr.24027.pau
/content/journals/10.1075/ijlcr.24027.pau
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: xml mark-up ; learner corpora ; secondary school exams ; register ; curriculum-based writing ; text types

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