Cover not available

Article published In: Australian Review of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 44:1 (2021) ► pp.82–108

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Repetitive bundles in Malaysian learner writing

ORCiD logo with link | Universiti Teknologi MARA
Published online: 6 August 2020
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.19028.joh
Abstract
One way to investigate learner writing is by analyzing the most frequently recurring sequences of words, that is, lexical bundles. This paper presents results for lexical bundles analyses of a Malaysian corpus (MCSAW) against its reference language variety, LOCNESS (Louvain Corpus of Native English Essays). Key 4-word lexical bundles are firstly investigated in terms of their frequencies as well as distribution in both corpora. Following this, key lexical bundles are further categorized and analyzed according to their functions, including qualitative analysis of the most recurrent bundles by examination of concordance lines. Results show that learners use simple types of lexical bundles repeatedly compared to their native speaker counterparts. Evidence of tautology can also be found in learner writing. The findings highlight that using lexical bundles appropriately is important to achieve native-like fluency, while the absence of more varied lexical bundles in learners’ discourse may result in unidiomatic-sounding writing style.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Corpus linguistics and second language research
    • 2.1Corpus linguistic research on learner language: A focus in Malaysia
    • 2.2Functional categorization of lexical bundles
  • 3.Methods
    • 3.1Corpora as data
    • 3.2Procedures
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Key bundles and their functions
    • 4.2Key bundle in context: Viewing concordances for qualitative reasoning
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
References (43)
References
Ädel, A., & Erman, B. (2012). Recurrent word combinations in academic writing by native and non-native speakers of English: A lexical bundles approach. English for Specific Purposes, 31(2), 81–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beng, C. O. S., & Keong, Y. C. (2015). Functional types of lexical bundles in reading texts of Malaysian University English Test: A corpus study. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 15(1), 77–90. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bestgen, Y., & Granger, S. (2014). Quantifying the development of phraseological competence in L2 English writing: An automated approach. Journal of Second Language Writing, 261, 28–41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., & Barbieri, F. (2007). Lexical bundles in university spoken and written registers. English for Specific Purposes, 26(3), 263–286. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V. (2003). Lexial bundles in speech and writing: An initial taxonomy. In A. Wilson, P. Rayson & T. McEnery (Eds.), Corpus linguistics by the lune (pp. 71–93). Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004). If you look at ...: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25(3), 371–405. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Botley, S. P. (2010, December). A corpus-based comparison of idiom use by Malaysian, British and American students. Paper presented at the International Conference on Science and Social Research (CSSR 2010).
Brookes, G., & Harvey, K. (2016). Examining the discourse of mental illness in a corpus of online advice-seeking messages. In L. Pickering, E. Friginal & S. Staples (Eds.), Talking at work: Corpus-based explorations of workplace discourse (pp. 209–234). London: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Y.-H., & Baker, P. (2010). Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning & Technology, 14(2), 30–49.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). Investigating criterial discourse features across second language development: Lexical bundles in rated learner essays, CEFR B1, B2 and C1. Applied Linguistics, 37(6), 1–33.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ebeling, S. O. (2011). Recurrent word-combinations in English student essays. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 10(1), 49–76. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ebeling, S. O., & Hasselgård, H. (2015). Learners’ and native speakers’ use of recurrent word combinations across disciplines. Bergen Language and Linguistics Studies (BeLLS), 61, 87–106.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, R., & Barkhuizen, G. P. (2005). Analysing learner language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ferris, D. R. (1994). Rhetorical strategies in student persuasive writing: Differences between native and non-native English speakers. Research in the Teaching of English, 28(1), 45–65.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gablasova, D., Brezina, V., & McEnery, T. (2017). Exploring learner language through corpora: Comparing and interpreting corpus frequency information. Language Learning, 67(S1), 130–154. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gilquin, G., & Granger, S. (2015). Learner language. In D. Biber & R. Reppen (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of English corpus linguistics (pp. 418–435). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Götz, S., & Schilk, M. (2011). Formulaic sequences in spoken ENL, ESL and EFL: Focus on British English, Indian English and learner English of advanced German learners. In J. Mukherjee & M. Hundt (Eds.), Exploring second-language varieties of English and learner Englishes: Bridging a paradigm gap (pp. 79–100). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hajar, A. R. (2014). Corpora in language research in Malaysia. Kajian Malaysia, 321, 1–16.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London/New York: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes, 271, 4–21. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Imm, T. S. (2009). Lexical borrowing from Chinese languages in Malaysian English. World Englishes, 28(4), 451–484. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ishikawa, S. (2014). Design of the ICNALE-spoken: A new database for multi-modal interlanguage analysis. In S. Ishikawa (Ed.), Learner corpus studies in Asia and the world (Vol. 21, pp. 63–76). Kobe, Japan: Kobe University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaworska, S. (2017). Corpora and corpus linguistic approaches to studying business language. In G. Mautner & F. Rainer (Eds.), Handbook of business communication: Linguistic approaches (pp. 583–606). Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kamariah, Y., & Su’ad, A. (2011). Collocational competence among Malaysian undergraduate law students. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 7(1), 151–202.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kashiha, H., & Heng, C. S. (2014). Discourse functions of formulaic sequences in academic speech across two disciplines. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 12(2), 15–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, D. Y. W., & Chen, S. X. (2009). Making a bigger deal of the smaller words: Function words and other key items in research writing by Chinese learners. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(3), 149–165. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McEnery, T., & Hardie, A. (2012). Corpus linguistics: Method, theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miller, R. T., Mitchell, T. D., & Pessoa, S. (2016). Impact of source texts and prompts on students’ genre uptake. Journal of Second Language Writing, 311, 11–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mohamed Ismail, A. K., Begi, N., & Vaseghi, R. (2013). A corpus-based study of Malaysian ESL learners’ use of modals in argumentative compositions. English Language Teaching, 6(9), 146–157.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mukundan, J., & Kalajahi, S. A. R. (2013). Malaysian corpus of students’ argumentative writing (MCSAW). Victoria, Australia: Lulu Press Inc.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mukundan, J., Khairil Anuar, S., Razalina, I., & Nur Hairunnisa, J. Z. (2013). Malaysian ESL students’ syntactic accuracy in the usage of English modal verbs in argumentative writing. English Language Teaching, 6(12), 98–105. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peromingo, J. R. (2012). Corpus analysis and phraseology: Transfer of multi-word units. Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 6(1–3), 321–343.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sardinha, T. B., & Pinto, M. V. (2017). American television and off-screen registers: A corpus-based comparison. Corpora, 12(1), 85–114. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scott, M. (2012). WordSmith Tools. (Version 6.0). [Computer Software]. Stroud: Lexical Analysis Software. Retrieved from [URL]
(2015). WordSmith Tools help. Stroud: Lexical Analysis Software.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scott, M., & Tribble, C. (2006). Textual patterns: Key words and corpus analysis in language education. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Simpson, R. (2004). Stylistic features of academic speech: The role of formulaic expressions. In T. Upton & U. Connor (Eds.), Discourse in the professions: Perspectives from corpus linguistics (pp. 37–64). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Staples, S., & Fernández, J. (2019). Corpus linguistics approaches to L2 pragmatics research. In N. Taguchi (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and pragmatics (pp. 241–254). Abingdon/New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Staples, S., Egber, J., Biber, D., & McClair, A. (2013). Formulaic sequences and EAP development: Lexical bundles in the TOEFL iBT writing section. English for Specific Purposes, 121, 214–225. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thewissen, J. (2013). Capturing L2 accuracy developmental patterns: Insights from an error tagged EFL learner corpus. Modern Language Journal, 97(S1), 77–101. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wray, A. (1999). Formulaic language in learners and native speakers. Language Teaching, 321, 213–231. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue