学术讲座中的词汇复杂性:EMI 和非 EMI 环境及影响因素的比较分析

Chen Chen , Philip Durrant
{"title":"学术讲座中的词汇复杂性:EMI 和非 EMI 环境及影响因素的比较分析","authors":"Chen Chen ,&nbsp;Philip Durrant","doi":"10.1016/j.acorp.2024.100115","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Despite the substantial body of research on vocabulary in English Medium Instruction (EMI), there is a noticeable dearth of corpus-based studies examining lexical complexity of EMI lectures, particularly in specific disciplines. To fill this gap, this study developed an EMI spoken academic corpus in Business (EMIB) with 120 lectures collected from 54 lecturers with nine different first languages (L1), reaching 1.12 million tokens. The study compared the lexical complexity of EMI Business lectures in China with academic lectures in Anglophone and non-Anglophone settings, represented by teachers’ speech in the British Academic Spoken English Corpus (BASE) and the Corpus of English as a Lingua Franca in Academic Settings (ELFA), respectively. Lexical complexity was conceptualised by lexical sophistication (operationalised by lexical frequency profile and mean frequency band score) and lexical diversity (operationalised by the VOCD-D). Results show that ELFA has significantly higher lexical sophistication than BASE, and significantly lower lexical diversity than BASE and EMIB. This study further explored whether speaker L1, speaker gender, and discipline contributed to the lexical complexity of lectures using multiple linear regression with interaction terms. Results show that speaker L1 and discipline significantly impacted the lexical complexity of lectures. Pedagogical implications are discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":72254,"journal":{"name":"Applied Corpus Linguistics","volume":"4 3","pages":"Article 100115"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lexical complexity in academic lectures: Comparative analysis of EMI and Non-EMI settings and influential factors\",\"authors\":\"Chen Chen ,&nbsp;Philip Durrant\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.acorp.2024.100115\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Despite the substantial body of research on vocabulary in English Medium Instruction (EMI), there is a noticeable dearth of corpus-based studies examining lexical complexity of EMI lectures, particularly in specific disciplines. To fill this gap, this study developed an EMI spoken academic corpus in Business (EMIB) with 120 lectures collected from 54 lecturers with nine different first languages (L1), reaching 1.12 million tokens. The study compared the lexical complexity of EMI Business lectures in China with academic lectures in Anglophone and non-Anglophone settings, represented by teachers’ speech in the British Academic Spoken English Corpus (BASE) and the Corpus of English as a Lingua Franca in Academic Settings (ELFA), respectively. Lexical complexity was conceptualised by lexical sophistication (operationalised by lexical frequency profile and mean frequency band score) and lexical diversity (operationalised by the VOCD-D). Results show that ELFA has significantly higher lexical sophistication than BASE, and significantly lower lexical diversity than BASE and EMIB. This study further explored whether speaker L1, speaker gender, and discipline contributed to the lexical complexity of lectures using multiple linear regression with interaction terms. Results show that speaker L1 and discipline significantly impacted the lexical complexity of lectures. Pedagogical implications are discussed.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72254,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Corpus Linguistics\",\"volume\":\"4 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 100115\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Corpus Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666799124000327\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Corpus Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666799124000327","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管有关英语教学(EMI)词汇的研究数量庞大,但基于语料库的研究却明显不足,尤其是对特定学科的EMI讲座词汇复杂性的研究。为填补这一空白,本研究开发了一个以英语为教学语言的商业学术口语语料库(EMIB),该语料库包含从 54 位讲师那里收集的 120 篇讲座,涉及 9 种不同的第一语言(L1),共计 112 万个词块。该研究比较了中国 EMI 商务讲座与英语和非英语环境中学术讲座的词汇复杂性,后者分别以英国学术英语口语语料库(BASE)和学术环境中英语作为母语的语料库(ELFA)中的教师演讲为代表。词法复杂性的概念是词法复杂性(通过词频分布图和平均频带得分来操作)和词法多样性(通过 VOCD-D 来操作)。结果显示,ELFA 的词汇复杂度明显高于 BASE,词汇多样性则明显低于 BASE 和 EMIB。本研究使用多元线性回归和交互项进一步探讨了说话者的 L1、说话者的性别和学科是否会影响讲座的词汇复杂性。结果表明,说话者的 L1 和学科对讲座的词汇复杂性有显著影响。本文对其教学意义进行了讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Lexical complexity in academic lectures: Comparative analysis of EMI and Non-EMI settings and influential factors
Despite the substantial body of research on vocabulary in English Medium Instruction (EMI), there is a noticeable dearth of corpus-based studies examining lexical complexity of EMI lectures, particularly in specific disciplines. To fill this gap, this study developed an EMI spoken academic corpus in Business (EMIB) with 120 lectures collected from 54 lecturers with nine different first languages (L1), reaching 1.12 million tokens. The study compared the lexical complexity of EMI Business lectures in China with academic lectures in Anglophone and non-Anglophone settings, represented by teachers’ speech in the British Academic Spoken English Corpus (BASE) and the Corpus of English as a Lingua Franca in Academic Settings (ELFA), respectively. Lexical complexity was conceptualised by lexical sophistication (operationalised by lexical frequency profile and mean frequency band score) and lexical diversity (operationalised by the VOCD-D). Results show that ELFA has significantly higher lexical sophistication than BASE, and significantly lower lexical diversity than BASE and EMIB. This study further explored whether speaker L1, speaker gender, and discipline contributed to the lexical complexity of lectures using multiple linear regression with interaction terms. Results show that speaker L1 and discipline significantly impacted the lexical complexity of lectures. Pedagogical implications are discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Corpus Linguistics
Applied Corpus Linguistics Linguistics and Language
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
70 days
期刊最新文献
‘I am still unsure…’ – Spontaneous expressions of vaccine indecision on Mumsnet How humans and machines identify discourse topics: A methodological triangulation Anywhere but here: Discourses and representations surrounding same-sex marriage in Japanese newspapers Is LIWC reliable, efficient, and effective for the analysis of large online datasets in forensic and security contexts? The personal_relationship frame in love fraud
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1