A Corpus-based Study of Connectors: Research from the CAS Learner Corpus of English Essays

Haiyang Ai, Gong Peng

Graduate University, Chinese Academy of Sciences

Outline of the talk

Introduction Previous Studies Methodology and Corpus Building

Results and Discussion

Conclusion and Pedagogical Implication

Definition of connectors

Connectors are devices used to state the

relationship between units of discourse

(Biber et al, 1999)

Including conjunctions, some adverbs (e.g. firstly, namely, alternatively), and some prepositional phrases (e.g. in brief, in fact,

of course)

Classification of connectors

Quirk et als (1985) framework A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language

Adding of corroborative category - (Granger & Tyson, 1996) - (Altenberg & Tapper, 1998)

Quirk et als (1985) framework

enumerative listing summative appositive resultive inferential additive e.g. for a star, finally equative reinforcing
e.g. in the same way, likewise e.g. moreover, further

e.g. in sum, altogether e.g. for example, namely e.g. as a result, consequently e.g. therefore, in that case, otherwise reformulatory e.g. more precisely, rather e.g. better, again replacive

contrastive

antithetic
concessive discoursal

e.g. by contrast, instead

e.g. in any case, however e.g. by the way, incidentally

transitional

temporal

e.g. in the meantime, meanwhile

Connectors investigated (68 items)

Listing: first, second, third, firstly, secondly, thirdly, finally, furthermore, in addition, moreover, lastly, last but not least, to begin with, for another, in the first place, in the second place, similarly, for one thing, for another

Summative: to sum up, to conclude, in summary, in short, in brief, in conclusion, overall, all in all, altogether Appositive: that is, that is to say, in other words, for instance, for example, namely, e.g.( eg), i.e.( ie)

Connectors investigated (68 items)

Resultive: consequently, hence, therefore, thus, as a result, as a consequence, in consequence, Inferential: otherwise, in that case Contrastive: however, although, (even) though, on the other hand, instead, after all, on the contrary, in contrast, besides, nevertheless, anyway, still, by contrast, nonetheless, alternatively Transitional: meanwhile, eventually, subsequently, originally Corroborative: actually, in fact, of course, indeed, apparently

Rationales to use corpus data

Corpus data are real and authentic => empirical study Combines intuitions of many, more objective (McEnergy & Wilson, 2001) Corpora are precious resources for testing out linguistic hypothesis (Meyer, 2002) Learner corpus serves as the meeting point of corpus linguistics and SLA (Granger 1998) => pioneer: Sylviane Granger, ICLE

Research questions

Whats the semantic distribution? Whats the top 10 most frequently used connectors? Which connectors are overused? Whats the differences and similarities compared with related studies, and why (universal features vs. transfer-related?)

Hypothesis

Hypothesis: PhD students at GUCAS would overuse connectors in their English writings Formulated based on Previous studies from HK and Taiwan (Crewe 1990, Field & Yip 1992, Milton & Tsang 1993, Bolton et al 2002, Chen 2006)

The authors own observation

Significance

Systematic and corpus-based connector studies on PhD students writing of in GUCAS => shed some light on the everlasting cohesion & coherence problems in ESL/EFL writing

Quantitative analysis can provide teachers (esp. at GUCAS) with a better idea on what needs to be done The construction of the CASCLEE computer learner corpus itself (Resources)

Outline again
Approaching Connectors Previous Studies Methodology and Corpus Building

Results and Discussion

Conclusion and Pedagogical Implication

Previous corpus-based studies

Milton & Tsang (1993)

high ratio of overuse of entire range of connectors (HKUST vs. Brown, LOB)

Granger & Tyson (1996)

108 connectors, CIA method

overuse <= L1 transfer

Altenberg & Tapper (1998)

timed + untimed essays underuse (resultive, contrastive) <= prefer less formal connectors

Previous corpus-based studies

Bolton et al (2002)

Overuse exists in both groups, ICE-HK vs. ICE-GB Raised 3 methodological issues

Chen (2006)

Latest, published on IJCL, Taiwanese EFL Learners Slightly overused connectors Increase learners register differences

Outline
Introduction Previous Studies Methodology and Corpus Building

Results and Discussion

Conclusion and Pedagogical Implication

Corpus building

Corpus name: CASCLEE - CAS Corpus of Learner English Essays Corpus Size: 494 essays, 120, 836 words, covering timed and untimed writings

Data analysis: WordSmith Tool 4.0 + Manual Extraction

Sampling & Representativeness

Learner Background & Register of text

Method: CIA

Contrastive interlanguage analysis (Granger 1996)

L2 vs. L1 L2 vs. L2

Reference corpora

Informative Writings of BNC Sampler Corpus (L1) The ICLE French Subcorpus (L2)

Outline
Introduction Previous Studies Methodology and Corpus Building

Results and Discussion

Conclusion and Pedagogical Implication

Overall frequencies (normalised)

Overall Connector Usage 140
Per 10, 000 words

131.9 99.5

120 100 80 60 40 20 0 CASCLEE BNC SamplerInformative The Three Corpora 46.7

ICLE-French

Semantic distribution
Semantic Distribution of Connectors in the Three Corpora 700.0 600.0 577.6

per 100, 000 words

500.0 400.0 322.8 300.0 200.0 116.1 100.0 0.0 44.7 77.8 28.4 4.7 116.7 53.6 196.5 137.2 84.4 75.0 18.2 12.5 8.1 25.0 11.6 14.2 264.7 192.8 225.9 110.1 62.7

ve

na l

na l

ia

ra st iv

tin

iv

re nt

lti

at

lis

tio

su

tio

su m

an si

si

re

fe

nt

po

in

co

ap

tr

categories CASCLEE NF BNC Sampler-Informative NF ICLE-French NF

co

rr

ob

or

at

iv

Top 10 most frequently used connectors

Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 CASCLEE first second however secondly for example although (even) though finally firstly of course BNC Sampler-info. however although thus (even) though therefore for example of course indeed instead in addition ICLE-French indeed however therefore of course moreover for example for instance in fact thus on the other hand

Quantitative difference: Overuse

Overused connectors

Group A (see Table 4) Group B (see Table 5)

Comparing with related studies

Altenberg & Tapper (1998) Overuse of furthermore, for instance, still, of course (CASCLEE also) Bolten et al (2002) overuse both exist in ICE-HK & ICE-GB Chen (2006) slightly overused

Major findings

PhD students overused a whole range of connectors (hypothesis supported) They significantly overused listing and summative connectors Overuse of connectors exist both in CASCLEE and ICLE French subcorpus

Outline
Introduction Previous Studies Methodology and Corpus Building

Results and Discussion

Conclusion and Pedagogical Implication

Conclusion

Objectives and contributions

Build the CASCLEE learner corpus

Analyzing connectors based on Quirk et al (1985) framework

Methodology: contrastive interlanguage analysis

L1 vs. L2 (CASCLE vs. BNC Sampler-info) L2 vs. L2 (CASCLEE vs. ICLE-French)

Pedagogical Implication

Pedagogical implication

Focus on contrastive, resultive and appositional connectors, over 70%

Listing connectors should be addressed Correct forms of connectors

Looking forward

More large-scale, corpus-based studies on EFL learners connector usage

Probe into the possible causes for certain connector usage patterns

The End !