This study uses the two largest available American English language corpora, Google Books and the Corpus of Historical American English (coha), to investigate relations between ecology and language. The paper introduces ecolinguistics as a promising theme for corpus research. While some previous ecolinguistic research has used corpus approaches, there is a case to be made for quantitative methods that draw on larger datasets. Building on other corpus studies that have made connections between language use and environmental change, this paper investigates whether linguistic references to other species have changed in the past two centuries and, if so, how. The methodology consists of two main parts: an examination of the frequency of common names of species followed by aspect-level sentiment analysis of concordance lines. Results point to both opportunities and challenges associated with applying corpus methods to ecolinguistc research.
{"title":"An historical analysis of species references in American English","authors":"C. Frayne","doi":"10.3366/cor.2019.0177","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2019.0177","url":null,"abstract":"This study uses the two largest available American English language corpora, Google Books and the Corpus of Historical American English (coha), to investigate relations between ecology and language. The paper introduces ecolinguistics as a promising theme for corpus research. While some previous ecolinguistic research has used corpus approaches, there is a case to be made for quantitative methods that draw on larger datasets. Building on other corpus studies that have made connections between language use and environmental change, this paper investigates whether linguistic references to other species have changed in the past two centuries and, if so, how. The methodology consists of two main parts: an examination of the frequency of common names of species followed by aspect-level sentiment analysis of concordance lines. Results point to both opportunities and challenges associated with applying corpus methods to ecolinguistc research.","PeriodicalId":44933,"journal":{"name":"Corpora","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45852631","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Review: Baker and Egbert (eds). 2016. Triangulating Methodological Approaches in Corpus Linguistic Research","authors":"Basim Alamri","doi":"10.3366/cor.2019.0180","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2019.0180","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44933,"journal":{"name":"Corpora","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47682759","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper attempts to shed some light on the importance of adjectives in the linguistic characterisation of tourism discourse in English in general and in adventure tourism in particular as well as to prove how significant the difference in usage is compared to the general language. It seeks to understand the role that adjectives play in this specific subdomain and to contribute to the linguistic characterisation of tourism discourse in this respect. It also aims to confirm or reject previous assumptions regarding the use, and frequency of use, of adjectives and adjectival patterns in this specialised domain and, in general, to promote the study of adjectivisation in domain-specific discourses. To do so, it proposes a corpus-based study that measures the keyness of adjectives in promotional texts of the adventure tourism domain in English by comparing their usage in the compiled corpus to the two most relevant reference corpora of English (coca and the bnc).
{"title":"Adjectives and their keyness: a corpus-based analysis of tourism discourse in English","authors":"Isabel Durán-Muñoz","doi":"10.3366/cor.2019.0178","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2019.0178","url":null,"abstract":"This paper attempts to shed some light on the importance of adjectives in the linguistic characterisation of tourism discourse in English in general and in adventure tourism in particular as well as to prove how significant the difference in usage is compared to the general language. It seeks to understand the role that adjectives play in this specific subdomain and to contribute to the linguistic characterisation of tourism discourse in this respect. It also aims to confirm or reject previous assumptions regarding the use, and frequency of use, of adjectives and adjectival patterns in this specialised domain and, in general, to promote the study of adjectivisation in domain-specific discourses. To do so, it proposes a corpus-based study that measures the keyness of adjectives in promotional texts of the adventure tourism domain in English by comparing their usage in the compiled corpus to the two most relevant reference corpora of English (coca and the bnc).","PeriodicalId":44933,"journal":{"name":"Corpora","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46387138","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
W. G. Reijnierse, C. Burgers, T. Krennmayr, Gerard J. Steen
There is renewed interest in the special role that metaphor can have in its communicative status as metaphor between language users. This paper investigates the occurrence of such deliberate metaphors in comparison with non-deliberate metaphors. To this end, a corpus of 24,762 metaphors was analysed for the presence of potentially deliberate (versus non-deliberate) metaphor use across registers and word classes. Results show that 4.36 percent of metaphors in the corpus are identified as potentially deliberate metaphors. News and fiction contain significantly more potentially deliberate metaphors, while academic texts and conversations exhibit significantly fewer potentially deliberate metaphors than expected. Moreover, nouns and adjectives are used relatively more frequently as potentially deliberate metaphors, while adverbs, verbs and prepositions are used relatively less frequently as potentially deliberate metaphors. These results can be explained by referring to the overall communicative properties of the registers concerned, as well as to the role of the different word classes in those registers.
{"title":"Metaphor in communication: the distribution of potentially deliberate metaphor across register and word class","authors":"W. G. Reijnierse, C. Burgers, T. Krennmayr, Gerard J. Steen","doi":"10.3366/COR.2019.0176","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/COR.2019.0176","url":null,"abstract":"There is renewed interest in the special role that metaphor can have in its communicative status as metaphor between language users. This paper investigates the occurrence of such deliberate metaphors in comparison with non-deliberate metaphors. To this end, a corpus of 24,762 metaphors was analysed for the presence of potentially deliberate (versus non-deliberate) metaphor use across registers and word classes. Results show that 4.36 percent of metaphors in the corpus are identified as potentially deliberate metaphors. News and fiction contain significantly more potentially deliberate metaphors, while academic texts and conversations exhibit significantly fewer potentially deliberate metaphors than expected. Moreover, nouns and adjectives are used relatively more frequently as potentially deliberate metaphors, while adverbs, verbs and prepositions are used relatively less frequently as potentially deliberate metaphors. These results can be explained by referring to the overall communicative properties of the registers concerned, as well as to the role of the different word classes in those registers.","PeriodicalId":44933,"journal":{"name":"Corpora","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48577716","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Brexit Blog Corpus (bbc) is a collection of texts extracted from political blogs, which, in a recent study, was annotated according to a cognitive–functional stance framework by two independent annotators (Annotator A and B) using semantic criteria ( Simaki et al., 2017 ). The goal was to label the stance or stances taken based on the overall meaning of a set of utterances. The annotators were not instructed to identify the lexical forms that were used to express the stances. In this study, we make use of those stance-labelled utterances as a springboard to approach stance-taking in text from the opposite point of view, namely from how stance is realised through language. Our aim is to provide a description of the specific lexical elements used to express six stance categories (i.e., contrariety, hypotheticality, necessity, prediction, source of knowledge and uncertainty). To this end, we followed a two-step experimental procedure. First, we performed a quantitative analysis of the stance-labelled utterances in order to identify the lexical realisations of each stance category. Second, we carried out a meta-annotation of the data. Annotator B was instructed to single out the actual lexical forms of the constructions that triggered his semantic stance category decisions. This meta-annotation procedure made it possible for us to sift out the most salient lexical realisations of the constructions of each of the six category types on the basis of the qualitative assessments made by Annotator B. We then compared the results of the quantitative and the qualitative approaches, and we present a list of shared stance expressions for each stance category type.
英国脱欧博客语料库(bbc)是从政治博客中提取的文本集合，在最近的一项研究中，两个独立的注释者(注释者a和B)使用语义标准根据认知功能立场框架对其进行了注释(Simaki et al.， 2017)。目标是根据一组话语的总体含义标记所采取的立场或立场。注释者没有被要求识别用来表达立场的词汇形式。在本研究中，我们利用这些带有立场标签的话语作为跳板，从相反的角度，即从立场如何通过语言实现的角度来探讨文本中的立场采取。我们的目的是提供一个具体的词汇元素的描述，用于表达六个立场类别(即，矛盾，假定性，必要性，预测，知识来源和不确定性)。为此，我们采用了两步实验程序。首先，我们对立场标记的话语进行了定量分析，以确定每个立场类别的词汇实现。其次，我们对数据进行了元注释。注释者B被指示挑出触发他的语义立场类别决定的结构的实际词汇形式。这种元注释程序使我们能够在注释者b所做的定性评估的基础上筛选出六种类别类型中每种类型结构的最显著的词汇实现。然后，我们比较了定量方法和定性方法的结果，并给出了每种立场类别类型的共享立场表达列表。
{"title":"A two-step procedure to identify lexical elements of stance constructions in discourse from political blogs","authors":"Vasiliki Simaki, C. Paradis, Kerren Andreas","doi":"10.3366/COR.2019.0179","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/COR.2019.0179","url":null,"abstract":"The Brexit Blog Corpus (bbc) is a collection of texts extracted from political blogs, which, in a recent study, was annotated according to a cognitive–functional stance framework by two independent annotators (Annotator A and B) using semantic criteria ( Simaki et al., 2017 ). The goal was to label the stance or stances taken based on the overall meaning of a set of utterances. The annotators were not instructed to identify the lexical forms that were used to express the stances. In this study, we make use of those stance-labelled utterances as a springboard to approach stance-taking in text from the opposite point of view, namely from how stance is realised through language. Our aim is to provide a description of the specific lexical elements used to express six stance categories (i.e., contrariety, hypotheticality, necessity, prediction, source of knowledge and uncertainty). To this end, we followed a two-step experimental procedure. First, we performed a quantitative analysis of the stance-labelled utterances in order to identify the lexical realisations of each stance category. Second, we carried out a meta-annotation of the data. Annotator B was instructed to single out the actual lexical forms of the constructions that triggered his semantic stance category decisions. This meta-annotation procedure made it possible for us to sift out the most salient lexical realisations of the constructions of each of the six category types on the basis of the qualitative assessments made by Annotator B. We then compared the results of the quantitative and the qualitative approaches, and we present a list of shared stance expressions for each stance category type.","PeriodicalId":44933,"journal":{"name":"Corpora","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3366/COR.2019.0179","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48276162","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Capitalisation is a salient orthographic feature, which plays an important role in linguistic processing during reading, and in writing assessment. Learners’ second language (L2) capitalisation skills are influenced by their native language (L1), but earlier studies of L1 influence did not focus on learners’ capitalisation, and examined primarily ‘narrow’ samples. This study examines capitalisation error patterns in a large-scale corpus of over 133,000 texts, composed by nearly 38,000 EFL learners, who represent seven different L1s and a wide range of English proficiency levels. The findings show that speakers of all L1s made a large number of capitalisation errors, in terms of errors per word and error proportion (out of all errors), especially at lower L2 proficiency levels. Under-capitalisation was more common than over-capitalisation, though this gap narrowed over time. Interestingly, L1s which share English's Latin script had higher error rates, suggesting that (assumed) perceived similarity between the L1 and the L2 increases interference, though this interference could not be explained only through direct negative transfer. There was also an interaction between L1 influence and L2 proficiency, so that differences between speakers of different L1s became smaller as their L2 proficiency improved.
{"title":"How native language and L2 proficiency affect EFL learners’ capitalisation abilities: a large-scale corpus study","authors":"Itamar Shatz","doi":"10.3366/COR.2019.0168","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/COR.2019.0168","url":null,"abstract":"Capitalisation is a salient orthographic feature, which plays an important role in linguistic processing during reading, and in writing assessment. Learners’ second language (L2) capitalisation skills are influenced by their native language (L1), but earlier studies of L1 influence did not focus on learners’ capitalisation, and examined primarily ‘narrow’ samples. This study examines capitalisation error patterns in a large-scale corpus of over 133,000 texts, composed by nearly 38,000 EFL learners, who represent seven different L1s and a wide range of English proficiency levels. The findings show that speakers of all L1s made a large number of capitalisation errors, in terms of errors per word and error proportion (out of all errors), especially at lower L2 proficiency levels. Under-capitalisation was more common than over-capitalisation, though this gap narrowed over time. Interestingly, L1s which share English's Latin script had higher error rates, suggesting that (assumed) perceived similarity between the L1 and the L2 increases interference, though this interference could not be explained only through direct negative transfer. There was also an interaction between L1 influence and L2 proficiency, so that differences between speakers of different L1s became smaller as their L2 proficiency improved.","PeriodicalId":44933,"journal":{"name":"Corpora","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41445254","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Carter's (2004) theory of creativity in everyday common talk is by far the most influential in the field. He hypothesises that linguistic creativity can be categorised into pattern-forming and pattern-reforming creativity. Television drama, despite its global popularity, receives little attention from the field of linguistics. This paper aims to explore the ‘common ground’ in television drama dialogue and linguistic creativity through deciphering how pattern-reforming creativity is realised through screenplay, telecinemato-graphy and acting as meaning-making strategies. Using dialogues from the TV medical dramedy House M.D., a corpus was created to facilitate the extraction of pattern-reforming creativity such as neologisms, portmanteaus and slang words. The extracted data was then analysed using a corpus linguistic approach to multimodal discourse analysis. The analysis reveals a strong association of pattern-reforming creativity production with actor's facial performance realised interpersonally by certain types of telecinematic resources, such as visual framing, camera angle, camera movement and proxemics. This research is a pioneering effort in linking up linguistic creativity with multimodality and is a positive driving force towards research in teledramatic discourse.
{"title":"Creativity and television drama: a corpus-based multimodal analysis of pattern-reforming creativity in House M.D.","authors":"Locky Law","doi":"10.3366/COR.2019.0167","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/COR.2019.0167","url":null,"abstract":"Carter's (2004) theory of creativity in everyday common talk is by far the most influential in the field. He hypothesises that linguistic creativity can be categorised into pattern-forming and pattern-reforming creativity. Television drama, despite its global popularity, receives little attention from the field of linguistics. This paper aims to explore the ‘common ground’ in television drama dialogue and linguistic creativity through deciphering how pattern-reforming creativity is realised through screenplay, telecinemato-graphy and acting as meaning-making strategies. Using dialogues from the TV medical dramedy House M.D., a corpus was created to facilitate the extraction of pattern-reforming creativity such as neologisms, portmanteaus and slang words. The extracted data was then analysed using a corpus linguistic approach to multimodal discourse analysis. The analysis reveals a strong association of pattern-reforming creativity production with actor's facial performance realised interpersonally by certain types of telecinematic resources, such as visual framing, camera angle, camera movement and proxemics. This research is a pioneering effort in linking up linguistic creativity with multimodality and is a positive driving force towards research in teledramatic discourse.","PeriodicalId":44933,"journal":{"name":"Corpora","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42288355","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Review: Desagulier. 2017. Corpus Linguistics and Statistics with R: Introduction to Quantitative Methods in Linguistics","authors":"G. Ranger","doi":"10.3366/COR.2019.0172","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/COR.2019.0172","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44933,"journal":{"name":"Corpora","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47889304","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：