{"title":"为学术目的评估多词单位词表","authors":"Thi My Hang Nguyen, Averil Coxhead","doi":"10.1075/itl.21041.ngu","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Word lists play a critical role in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) teaching and learning, and recent\n developments include lists of academic collocations (e.g., vast majority, ultimate goal). There is however still\n a gap in evaluating lists focusing on a similar group of lexis. This paper evaluates two lists of academic collocations by Ackermann and Chen (2013) and Lei and Liu\n (2018) using three different methods: applying an evaluation framework adapted from Nation (2016), comparing the lexical constituents, and analysing the lexical coverage. The evaluation results give\n implications for EAP teachers to select the list that best suits their needs. By modelling the practice of evaluating word lists,\n this study highlights the importance of this work and encourages similar attempts in wordlist development studies.","PeriodicalId":53175,"journal":{"name":"ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics (Belgium)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating multiword unit word lists for academic purposes\",\"authors\":\"Thi My Hang Nguyen, Averil Coxhead\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/itl.21041.ngu\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Word lists play a critical role in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) teaching and learning, and recent\\n developments include lists of academic collocations (e.g., vast majority, ultimate goal). There is however still\\n a gap in evaluating lists focusing on a similar group of lexis. This paper evaluates two lists of academic collocations by Ackermann and Chen (2013) and Lei and Liu\\n (2018) using three different methods: applying an evaluation framework adapted from Nation (2016), comparing the lexical constituents, and analysing the lexical coverage. The evaluation results give\\n implications for EAP teachers to select the list that best suits their needs. By modelling the practice of evaluating word lists,\\n this study highlights the importance of this work and encourages similar attempts in wordlist development studies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53175,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics (Belgium)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics (Belgium)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.21041.ngu\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics (Belgium)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.21041.ngu","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
单词表在学术英语(EAP)教学中起着至关重要的作用,最近的发展包括学术搭配列表(例如,vast majority, ultimate goal)。然而,在评估关注相似词汇组的列表方面仍然存在差距。本文对Ackermann and Chen(2013)和Lei and Liu(2018)的两份学术搭配清单进行了评估,采用了三种不同的方法:采用改编自Nation(2016)的评估框架,比较词汇成分,分析词汇覆盖范围。评估结果为EAP教师选择最适合自己需求的列表提供了启示。通过模拟评价词表的实践,本研究强调了这项工作的重要性,并鼓励在词表发展研究中进行类似的尝试。
Evaluating multiword unit word lists for academic purposes
Word lists play a critical role in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) teaching and learning, and recent
developments include lists of academic collocations (e.g., vast majority, ultimate goal). There is however still
a gap in evaluating lists focusing on a similar group of lexis. This paper evaluates two lists of academic collocations by Ackermann and Chen (2013) and Lei and Liu
(2018) using three different methods: applying an evaluation framework adapted from Nation (2016), comparing the lexical constituents, and analysing the lexical coverage. The evaluation results give
implications for EAP teachers to select the list that best suits their needs. By modelling the practice of evaluating word lists,
this study highlights the importance of this work and encourages similar attempts in wordlist development studies.