Cover not available

Article published In: International Journal of Learner Corpus Research
Vol. 9:2 (2023) ► pp.215–247

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

Exploring patterns of lexical variation in the use of epistemic stance markers in written L2 English across task types and levels of proficiency

A corpus-based study

 | University of Turku
Published online: 8 February 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.00034.pyy
Abstract
The present study examines the lexical patterning of altogether 4,022 instances of epistemic stance markers (EDs) across four levels of L2 proficiency (B1–C2) and three types of writing tasks (‘opinion’, ‘complaint’, and ‘letter’) by using the exploratory technique of Multiple Correspondence Analysis. The data stem from a Finnish learner English corpus, comprising of 1,773 texts. The results of the study showed that while the lexical patterns of EDs in the data seemed to be mostly related to task type, some proficiency-related patterns of ED use were observed across all tasks. In some cases, proficiency-related patterns could also only be observed in some of the tasks, suggesting task type and proficiency are, to some extent, interrelated when examining the use of EDs. The results thus suggest that both task- and proficiency-related constraints of EDs should be considered in both foreign language teaching and assessment.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical background
    • 2.1Epistemic stance
    • 2.2Lexical variation of epistemic stance in learner writing
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Data
    • 3.2Procedure
    • 3.3Multiple correspondence analysis
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1An overview of the MCA results
    • 4.2Lexical patterns related to both task type and proficiency level (Dimensions 1 & 2)
      • 4.2.1Dimension 1
      • 4.2.2Dimension 2
    • 4.3Lexical patterns related to task (Dimension 3)
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
References (47)
References
Aijmer, K. (2011). Well I’m not sure I think… The use of well by non-native speakers. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 16(2), 231–254. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anthony, L. (2020). Antconc (3.5.9) [Computer software]. [URL]
Aull, L., & Lancaster, Z. (2014). Linguistic markers of stance in early and advanced academic writing: A corpus-based comparison. Written Communication, 31(2), 151–183. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bartley, L., & Hidalgo-Tenorio, E. (2016). “Well, I think that my argument is…,” or modality in a learner corpus of English. Revista Espanola de Linguistica Aplicada, 29(1), 1–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D. (2006). Stance in spoken and written university registers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(2), 97–116. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G. N., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (2021). Grammar of Spoken and Written English. John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Y. H., & Baker, P. (2016). Investigating criterial discourse features across second language development: Lexical bundles in rated learner essays, CEFR B1, B2 and C1. Applied Linguistics, 37(6), 849–880.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment – Companion Volume. Council of Europe Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crosthwaite, P., & Jiang, K. (2017). Does EAP affect written L2 academic stance? A longitudinal learner corpus study. System, 691, 92–107. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Desagulier, G. (2020). Multivariate exploratory approaches. In M. Paquot & S. Th. Gries (Eds.), A Practical Handbook of Corpus Linguistics (pp. 435–469). Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fordyce, K. (2014). The differential effects of explicit and implicit instruction on EFL learners’ use of epistemic stance. Applied Linguistics, 35(1), 6–28. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gablasova, D., Brezina, V., McEnery, T., & Boyd, E. (2017). Epistemic Stance in Spoken L2 English: The Effect of Task and Speaker Style. Applied Linguistics, 38(5), 613–637. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glynn, D. (2014). Correspondence analysis: Exploring data and identifying patterns. In D. Glynn, J. A. Robinson, & T. Colleman (Eds.), Corpus methods for semantics: Quantitative studies in polysemy and synonymy (pp. 443–485). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gray, B., & Biber, D. (2014). Stance markers. In K. Aijmer & C. Rühlemann (Eds.), Corpus Pragmatics: A Handbook (pp. 219–248). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hasselgård, H. (2015). Lexicogrammatical features of adverbs in advanced learner English. ITL – International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 166(1), 163–189. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hasselgren, A. (1994). Lexical Teddy Bears and advanced learners: A study into to the ways Norwegian students cope with English vocabulary. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 237–260. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hinkel, E. (2009). The effects of essay topics on modal verb uses in L1 and L2 academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(4), 667–683. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hunston, S. (2007). Using a corpus to investigate stance quantitatively and qualitatively. In R. Englebretson (Ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction (pp. 27–48). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse. Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, K., & Milton, J. (1997). Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 students’ writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6(2), 183–205. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kärkkäinen, E. (1992). Modality as a strategy in interaction: Epistemic modality in the language of native and non-native speakers of English. Pragmatics and Language Learning, 31, 197–216.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Stance taking in conversation: From subjectivity to intersubjectivity. Text and Talk, 26(6), 699–731. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Larsson, T. (2017a). A functional classification of the introductory it pattern: Investigating academic writing by non-native-speaker and native-speaker students. English for Specific Purposes, 481, 57–70. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017b). The importance of, it is important that or importantly?. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 22(1), 57–84. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019). Grammatical stance marking across registers. Register Studies, 1(2), 243–268.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Larsson, T., Egbert, J., & Biber, D. (2022). On the status of statistical reporting versus linguistic description in corpus linguistics: A ten-year perspective. Corpora, 17(1), 137–157. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Larsson, T., & Kaatari, H. (2019). Extraposition in learner and expert writing: Exploring (in)formality and the impact of register. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 5(1), 33–62.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Larsson, T., Paquot, M., & Biber, D. (2021). On the importance of register in learner writing: A multi-dimensional approach. In E. Seoane & D. Biber (Eds.), Corpus-based approaches to register variation (pp. 235–258). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Finnish National Agency for Education. (2023). National Certificates for Language Proficiency (YKI). Oph.fi. [URL]
Nenadić, O., & Greenacre, M. (2007). Correspondence analysis in R, with two- and three-dimensional graphics: The ca package. Journal of Statistical Software, 20(3), 1–13.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pérez-Paredes, P., & Bueno-Alastuey, M. C. (2019). A corpus-driven analysis of certainty stance adverbs: Obviously, really and actually in spoken native and learner English. Journal of Pragmatics, 1401, 22–32. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pérez-Paredes, P., & Díez-Bedmar, M. B. (2019). Certainty adverbs in spoken learner language: The role of tasks and proficiency. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 5(2), 257–279. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pyykönen, M. (2023). Epistemic stance in written L2 English: The role of task type, L2 proficiency, and authorial style. Applied Corpus Linguistics, 3(1), 100040. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL]
Rizomilioti, V. (2006). Exploring epistemic modality in academic discourse using corpora. In E. A. Macià, A. S. Cervera, & C. R. Rueda (Eds.), Information technology in Languages for Specific Purposes. Issues and prospects (pp. 53–71). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Salsbury, T., & Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2000). Oppositional talk and the acquisition of modality in L2 English. In B. Swierzbin, F. Morris, M. E. Anderson, C. Klee, & E. Tarone (Eds.), Social and Cognitive Factors in Second Language Acquisition: Selected Proceedings of the 1999 Second Language Research Forum (pp. 57–76). Cascadilla.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Samuda, V., & Bygate, M. (2008). Tasks in Second Language Learning. Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Staples, S., Egbert, J., Biber, D., & McClair, A. (2013). Formulaic sequences and EAP writing development: Lexical bundles in the TOEFL iBT writing section. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(3), 214–225. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thompson, G., & Hunston, S. (2001). Evaluation: An introduction. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse (pp. 1–27). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wisniewski, K. (2017). Empirical learner language and the levels of the Common European Framework of Reference. Language Learning, 67(S1), 232–253. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yoon, H.-J. (2017). Textual voice elements and voice strength in EFL argumentative writing. Assessing Writing, 321, 72–84. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2020). Interactions in EFL argumentative writing: Effects of topic, L1 background, and L2 proficiency on interactional metadiscourse. Reading and Writing, 341, 705–725. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhang, G. Q., & Sabet, P. G. P. (2016). Elastic “I think”: Stretching over L1 and L2. Applied Linguistics, 37(3), 334–353. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue