1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Register Studies
  4. Volume 6, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 6, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2542-9477
  • E-ISSN: 2542-9485
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

A register, defined as a text variety with specific situational characteristics and a communicative purpose (Biber & Conrad 2019), is also recognized as a cultural construct (Biber & Egbert 2023). Registers merit thorough investigation due to their pivotal role in reflecting linguistic and cultural landscapes. However, existing studies predominantly focus on Indo-European languages. This study investigates Turkish web registers through the introduction of the Turkish Corpus of Online Registers (TurCORE). Comprising 2,780 web texts, TurCORE was manually annotated using a register taxonomy targeting the entire unrestricted web and identifying 24 web register categories. By employing Text Dispersion Keyword Analysis (Egbert & Biber 2019), the research examines the register characteristics with a specific focus on news reports, interactive discussions, and recipes, drawing comparisons with their English equivalents. Results reveal parallels between Turkish and English news reports while Turkish interactive discussions and recipes exhibit distinctive language- and culture specific features.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/rs.24002.ert
2024-12-17
2026-03-05

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/rs.24002.ert
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Akbas, E.
    (2014) Are they discussing in the same way? Interactional metadiscourse in Turkish writers’ texts. InA. Łyda & K. Warchał (Eds.), Occupying niches: Interculturality, cross-culturality and aculturality in academic research (pp.119–133). Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑02526‑1_8
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02526-1_8 [Google Scholar]
  2. Alazzawie, A.
    (2022) The linguistic and situational features of WhatsApp messages among high school and university Canadian students. SAGE Open, 12(1). 10.1177/21582440221082124
     https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221082124 [Google Scholar]
  3. Arpaci, I., & Baloğlu, M.
    (2016) The impact of cultural collectivism on knowledge sharing among information technology majoring undergraduates. Computers in Human Behaviour, 561, 65–71. 10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.031
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.031 [Google Scholar]
  4. Asheghi, N., Sharoff, S., & Markert, K.
    (2016) Crowdsourcing for web genre annotation. Language Resources and Evaluation, 50(3), 603–641. 10.1007/s10579‑015‑9331‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-015-9331-6 [Google Scholar]
  5. Ayçiçegi-Dinn, A., & Caldwell-Harris, C.
    (2011) Individualism–collectivism among Americans, Turks and Turkish immigrants to the U.S. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 351, 9–16. 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2010.11.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2010.11.006 [Google Scholar]
  6. Baker, P.
    (2004) Querying keywords: Questions in difference, frequency, and sense in keyword analysis. Journal of English Linguistics, 32(4), 346–359. 10.1177/0075424204269894
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424204269894 [Google Scholar]
  7. Barbaresi, A.
    (2021) Trafilatura: A web scraping library and command-line tool for text discovery and extraction. InProceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations (pp.122–131). 10.18653/v1/2021.acl‑demo.15
     https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.acl-demo.15 [Google Scholar]
  8. Berber-Sardinha, T.
    (2018) Dimensions of variation across Internet registers. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 23(2), 125–157. 10.1075/ijcl.15026.ber
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.15026.ber [Google Scholar]
  9. Biber, D.
    (1988) Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511621024
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621024 [Google Scholar]
  10. (1995) Dimensions of register variation: A cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511519871
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519871 [Google Scholar]
  11. (2012) Register as a predictor of linguistic variation. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 8(1), 9–37. 10.1515/cllt‑2012‑0002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2012-0002 [Google Scholar]
  12. Biber, D., & Egbert, J.
    (2016) Register variation on the searchable web: A multi-dimensional analysis. Journal of English Linguistics, 44(2), 95–137. 10.1177/0075424216628955
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424216628955 [Google Scholar]
  13. (2018) Register variation online. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316388228
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316388228 [Google Scholar]
  14. Biber, D., & Conrad, S.
    (2019) Register, genre, and style (2nd ed). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108686136
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108686136 [Google Scholar]
  15. Biber, D., & Egbert, J.
    (2023) What is a register? Accounting for linguistic and situational variation within — and outside of — textual varieties. Register Studies, 5(1), 1–22. 10.1075/rs.00004.bib
     https://doi.org/10.1075/rs.00004.bib [Google Scholar]
  16. Comrie, B.
    (1997) Turkic languages and linguistic typology. Turkic Languages, 11, 14–24.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Can, T., & Cangir, H.
    (2019) A corpus-assisted comparative analysis of self-mention markers in doctoral dissertations of literary studies written in Turkey and the UK. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 421, 1–14. 10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100796
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100796 [Google Scholar]
  18. Can, H., & Hatipoğlu, Ç.
    (2023) Cultural conceptualization of congratulatory happy events in British English and Turkish: A cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 23(3), 289–309. 10.1163/15685373‑12340164
     https://doi.org/10.1163/15685373-12340164 [Google Scholar]
  19. Candarli, D.
    (2022) Linguistic characteristics of online academic forum posts across subregisters, L1 backgrounds, and grades. Lingua, 2671, 103190. 10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103190
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103190 [Google Scholar]
  20. Egbert, J., Biber, D., & Davies, M.
    (2015) Developing a bottom-up, user-based method of web register classification. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(9), 1817–1831. 10.1002/asi.23308
     https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23308 [Google Scholar]
  21. Egbert, J., & Biber, D.
    (2019) Incorporating text dispersion into keyword analyses. Corpora, 14(1), 77–104. 10.3366/cor.2019.0162
     https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2019.0162 [Google Scholar]
  22. Erten, S.
    (2019) Corpus profiles of Turkish mental verbs with reference to Pattern Grammar and Corpus-Assisted Discourse Studies (Master thesis). Retrieved fromhttps://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Göksel, A., & Kerslake, C.
    (2005) Turkish: A comprehensive grammar. London, New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Gries, S.
    (2021) A new approach to (key) keyword analysis: Using frequency, and now also dispersion. Research in Corpus Linguistics, 9(2), 1–33. 10.32714/ricl.09.02.02
     https://doi.org/10.32714/ricl.09.02.02 [Google Scholar]
  25. Kaya, E. K., & Yağlı, E.
    (2023) Recontextualization of the arguments of ‘innocence’ by a football club on Turkish newsprint media. Text & Talk. 10.1515/text‑2022‑0048
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2022-0048 [Google Scholar]
  26. Koçak, A.
    (2013) A comparative register analysis of the language of cooking used in Turkish recipes (Master thesis). Retrieved fromhttps://acikbilim.yok.gov.tr/handle/20.500.12812/465043
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Laippala, V., Kyllönen, R., Egbert, J., Biber, D., & Pyysalo, S.
    (2019) Toward multilingual identification of online registers. InProceedings of the 22nd Nordic Conference on Computational Linguistics (pp.292–297). https://aclanthology.org/W19-6130
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Lewis, G.
    (2000) Turkish grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198700364.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198700364.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  29. Li, L., Li, A., Song, X., Li, X., Huang, K., & Ye, E. M.
    (2023) Characterizing response quantity on academic social Q&A sites: A multidiscipline comparison of linguistic characteristics of questions. Library Hi Tech, 41(3), 921–938. 10.1108/LHT‑05‑2021‑0161
     https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-05-2021-0161 [Google Scholar]
  30. Liimatta, A.
    (2019) Exploring register variation on Reddit. A multi-dimensional study of language use on social media website. Register Studies, 1(2), 269–295. 10.1075/rs.18005.lii
     https://doi.org/10.1075/rs.18005.lii [Google Scholar]
  31. (2022) Do registers have different functions for text length? A case study of Reddit. Register Studies, 4(2), 263–287. 10.1075/rs.22007.lii
     https://doi.org/10.1075/rs.22007.lii [Google Scholar]
  32. Olfert, H.
    (2023) The concept of register in heritage language retention. Register Studies, 5(1), 52–81. 10.1075/rs.20017.olf
     https://doi.org/10.1075/rs.20017.olf [Google Scholar]
  33. Özyıldırım, I.
    (2011) A comparative register perspective on Turkish legislative language. InT. Salmi-Tolonen, I. Tukiainen, R. Foley (Eds.), Law and language in partnership and conflict. (pp.79–94). Turku, Finland: Lapland Law Review.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Pomikalek, J.
    (2011) Removing boilerplate and duplicate content from web corpora (Doctoral dissertation), Masaryk University, Faculty of Informatics, Czech Republic.
  35. Repo, L., Skantsi, V., Rönnqvist, S., Hellström, S., Oinonen, M., Salmela, A., Biber, D., Egbert, J., Pyysalo, S., & Laippala, V.
    (2021) Beyond the English web: Zero-shot cross-lingual and lightweight monolingual classification of registers. Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Student Research Workshop, 183–191. 10.18653/v1/2021.eacl‑srw.24
     https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.eacl-srw.24 [Google Scholar]
  36. Scott, M.
    (1997) PC analysis of key words — and key words. System, 25(2), 233–245. 10.1016/S0346‑251X(97)00011‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(97)00011-0 [Google Scholar]
  37. Scott, M., & Tribble, C.
    (2006) Textual patterns: Keywords and corpus analysis in language education. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.22
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.22 [Google Scholar]
  38. Sharoff, S.
    (2021) Genre annotation for the Web: Text-external and text-internal perspectives. Register Studies, 3(1), 1–32. 10.1075/rs.19015.sha
     https://doi.org/10.1075/rs.19015.sha [Google Scholar]
  39. Skantsi, V., & Laippala, V.
    (2023) Analyzing the unrestricted Web: The Finnish corpus of online registers. Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 1(1), 1–31. 10.1017/S0332586523000021
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0332586523000021 [Google Scholar]
  40. Staples, S., Egbert, J., Biber, D., & Conrad, S.
    (2015) Register variation: A corpus approach. InD. Tannen, H. E. Hamilton & D. Schiffrin (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (2nd ed) (pp.505–525). Wiley Blackwell. 10.1002/9781118584194.ch24
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118584194.ch24 [Google Scholar]
  41. Taavitsainen, I.
    (2001) Middle English recipes: Genre characteristics, text type features and underlying traditions of writing. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 2(1), 85–113. 10.1075/jhp.2.1.05taa
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.2.1.05taa [Google Scholar]
  42. Tanova, C., & Nadiri, H.
    (2010) The role of cultural context in direct communication. Baltic Journal of Management, 5(2), 185–196. 10.1108/17465261011045115
     https://doi.org/10.1108/17465261011045115 [Google Scholar]
  43. Zhang, G., Jo, C., & Jhang, S.
    (2022) Keyword analysis of maritime legal text: Text-dispersion approach. Corpus Linguistics Research, 7(2), 21–41. 10.18659/CLR.2022.7.2.02
     https://doi.org/10.18659/CLR.2022.7.2.02 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/rs.24002.ert
Loading
Linguistic variation beyond the Indo-European web
Register Studies 6, 60 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1075/rs.24002.ert
/content/journals/10.1075/rs.24002.ert
/content/journals/10.1075/rs.24002.ert
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): linguistic analysis of web registers; manual register annotation; Text Dispersion Keyword Analysis; Turkish; web registers

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