{"title":"Lexical bundles from one century to the next","authors":"Rachel Allan","doi":"10.1075/JHP.00017.ALL","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This corpus study compares lexical bundles found in the language input of a selection of historical and current\n English language teaching materials to see what insights they can give into changes in spoken language use. English teaching texts\n published between 1905 and 1917 were used to construct a historical corpus, and a collection of English language self-study texts\n published between 2004 and 2014 were used for comparison. Both groups of texts focused on spoken language. The most frequent\n three-word lexical bundles extracted from each corpus varied considerably. The contemporary texts showed both a greater use of\n formulaic language and more syntactic complexity within it, while the historical texts relied on simpler structures. An\n exploratory analysis of the lexical bundles in the historical texts suggests, however, that viewed in conjunction with other\n historical sources, they can assist in building a picture of spoken language use of the period.","PeriodicalId":54081,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Historical Pragmatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1075/JHP.00017.ALL","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Historical Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/JHP.00017.ALL","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
This corpus study compares lexical bundles found in the language input of a selection of historical and current
English language teaching materials to see what insights they can give into changes in spoken language use. English teaching texts
published between 1905 and 1917 were used to construct a historical corpus, and a collection of English language self-study texts
published between 2004 and 2014 were used for comparison. Both groups of texts focused on spoken language. The most frequent
three-word lexical bundles extracted from each corpus varied considerably. The contemporary texts showed both a greater use of
formulaic language and more syntactic complexity within it, while the historical texts relied on simpler structures. An
exploratory analysis of the lexical bundles in the historical texts suggests, however, that viewed in conjunction with other
historical sources, they can assist in building a picture of spoken language use of the period.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Historical Pragmatics provides an interdisciplinary forum for theoretical, empirical and methodological work at the intersection of pragmatics and historical linguistics. The editorial focus is on socio-historical and pragmatic aspects of historical texts in their sociocultural context of communication (e.g. conversational principles, politeness strategies, or speech acts) and on diachronic pragmatics as seen in linguistic processes such as grammaticalization or discoursization. Contributions draw on data from literary or non-literary sources and from any language. In addition to contributions with a strictly pragmatic or discourse analytical perspective, it also includes contributions with a more sociolinguistic or semantic approach.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
