Cover not available

Article published In: International Journal of Learner Corpus Research
Vol. 6:2 (2020) ► pp.163–192

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

A corpus-based analysis of differences in the use of very for adjective amplification among native speakers and learners of English

 | University of Queensland
Published online: 10 December 2020
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.20011.sch
Abstract
This paper analyzes the use of very as an adjective amplifier by native speakers and advanced learners of English with diverse language backgrounds based on the International Corpus of Learner English (ICLE) and the Louvain Corpus of Native English Essays (LOCNESS). The study applies Multifactorial Prediction and Deviation Analysis Using Regression/Random Forests (MuPDARF) to find differences between native speakers and advanced learners and evaluates which factors contribute to learners’ non-target-like use of very. The analysis finds language background and adjective-specific differences in the use of very between learners and native speakers. It shows that collocational preferences of specific adjective types are the most important factor, which is interpreted to show that differences between native speakers and learners are predominantly dependent upon the collocational profiles of individual adjective types. This finding supports approaches that focus on teaching collocations and contextualizing word use.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous research
  • 3.Data and methodology
    • 3.1Data sources and processing
    • 3.2Statistical methods
  • 4.Results
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
References (57)
References
Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing inguistic Ddata. A ractical Iintroduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323–370. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (2007). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. (1972). Degree words. The Hague: Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boucher, J., & Osgood, C. E. (1969). The Pollyanna Hypothesis. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, 81, 1–8. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
The British National Corpus, version 3 (BNC XML Edition). (2007). Distributed by Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford, on behalf of the BNC Consortium. Retrieved from [URL] (accessed May 2020).
Bybee, J. (2003). Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. (1977). Where have all the adjectives gone? Studies in Language, 11, 19–80. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004). Adjective classes in typological perspective. In R. M. W. Dixon & A. Y. Aikhenvald (Eds.), Adjective classes. A cross-linguistic typology (pp. 1–49). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Edmonds, A., & Gudmestad, A. (2014). Your participation Is greatly/highly appreciated: Amplifier collocations in L2 English. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 70(1), 76–102. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(2), 143–188. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fallas Escobar, C., & Chaves Fernández, L. (2017). EFL learners’ development of voice in academic writing: Lexical bundles, boosters/hedges and stance-taking strategies. Education and Learning Research Journal, 151, 96–124.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Field, A., Miles, J., & Field, Z. (2012). Discovering statistics using R. London: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Forsberg, F. (2010). Using conventional sequences in L2 French. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 48(1), 25–51. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2002). Frequency effects and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(2), 249–260. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Granger, S. (1993). The International Corpus of Learner English. In J. Aarts, P. de Haan, & N. Oostdijk (Eds.), English language corpora: Design, analysis and exploitation (pp. 57–69). Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1998a). Prefabricated patterns in advanced EFL writing: Collocations and formulae. In A. P. Cowie (Ed.), Phraseology: Theory, analysis, and applications (pp. 145–160). Oxford, UK: Clarendon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1998b). The computer learner corpus: A versatile new source of data for SLA research. In S. Granger, (Ed.), Learner English on computer (pp. 3–18). London: Addison Wesley LongmanGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Granger, S., Dagneaux, E., & Meunier, F. (2002). The International Corpus of Learner English [Handbook + CD]. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. Th., & Adelman, A. S. (2014). Subject realization in Japanese conversation by native and non-native speakers: exemplifying a new paradigm for learner corpus research. In J. Romero-Trillo (Ed.), Yearbook of corpus linguistics and pragmatics 2014: New empirical and theoretical paradigms (pp. 35–54). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. Th., & Deshors, S. C. (2014). Using regressions to explore deviations between corpus data and a standard/target: two suggestions. Corpora, 9(1), 109–136. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heller, B., Bernaisch, T., & Gries, S. Th. (2017). Empirical perspectives on two potential epicenters: The genitive alternation in Asian Englishes. ICAME Journal, 411, 111–144. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hendrikx, I., Van Goethem, K., & Wulff, S. (2019). Intensifying constructions in French speaking L2 learners of English and Dutch. Cross-linguistic influence and exposure effects. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 5(1), 63–103. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hinkel, E. (2003). Adverbial markers and tone in L1 and L2 students’ writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(7), 1049–1068. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hornik, K. (2016). openNLP: Apache OpenNLP Tools Interface (Version 0.2-6). Retrieved from [URL] (accessed January 2020).
Hyland, K. (2005). Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(2), 173–192. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ito, R., & Tagliamonte, S. (2003). Well weird, right dodgy, very strange, really cool: Layering and recycling in English intensifiers. Language in Society, 321, 257–279. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jockers, M. (2017). syuzhet: Extracts Sentiment and Sentiment-Derived Plot Arcs from Text. (Version 1.0.1). Retrieved from [URL] (accessed January 2020).
Kennedy, G. (2003). Amplifier collocations in the British National Corpus: Implications for English language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 37(3), 467–487. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1985). Intensity. In D. Schiffrin (Ed.), Meaning, form and use in context: Linguistic applications (pp. 43–70). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lorenz, G. R. (1998). Overstatement in advanced learners’ writing: Stylistic aspects of adjective intensification. In S. Granger (Ed.), Learner English on computer (pp. 53–66). London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1999). Adjective intensification – Learners versus native speakers: A corpus study of argumentative writing. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2002). Really worthwhile or not really significant: A corpus-based approach to the delexicalisation and grammaticalisation of dverbial intensifiers in Modern English. In I. Wischer & G. Diewald (Eds.), New reflections on grammaticalization (pp. 143–161). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mohammad, S. M., & Turney, P. D. (2013). Crowd sourcing a word-emotion association lexicon. Computational Intelligence, 29(3), 436–465. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nesselhauf, N. (2003). The use of collocations by advanced learners of English and some implications for teaching. Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 223–242. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paradis, C. (1997). Degree modifiers of adjectives in spoken British English. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). Adjectives and boundedness. Cognitive Linguistics, 12(1), 47–65. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Partington, A. (1993). Corpus evidence of language change: The case of intensifiers. In M. Baker, G. Francis, & E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair (pp. 177–192). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pérez-Paredes, P., & Díez-Bedmar, M. B. (2012). The use of intensifying adverbs in learner writing. In Y. Tono, Y. Kawaguchi, & M. Minegishi (Eds.), Developmental and crossslinguistic erspectives in learner corpus research (pp. 105–124). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peters, H. (1992). English boosters: Some synchronic and diachronic aspects. In G. Kellermann & M. D. Morrissey (Eds.), Diachrony within synchrony: Language history and cognition (pp. 529–545). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Philip, G. (2008). Adverb use in EFL student writing: From learner dictionary to text production. In E. Bernal & J. DeCesaris (Eds.), Proceedings of the XIII EURALEX International Congress (Barcelona, 15–19 July 2008) (pp. 1301–1310). Barcelona: Institut Universitari de Lingüística aplicada Universitat Pompeu Fabra.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from [URL] (accessed January 2019).
Saffran, J. R. (2003). Statistical language learning: mechanisms and constraints. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(4), 110–114. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saffran, J. R., Newport, E. L., Aslin, R. N., Tunick, R. A., & Barrueco, S. (1997). Incidental language learning: Listening (and learning) out of the corner of your ear. Psychological Science, 8(2), 101–105. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, B. (2005). Language users as creatures of habit: A corpus-based analysis of persistence in spoken English. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 1(1), 113–150. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Morphosyntactic persistence in spoken English: A corpus study at the intersection of variationist sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, and discourse analysis. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, S. (2008). So different and pretty cool! Recycling intensifiers in Toronto, Canada. English Language and Linguistics, 12(2), 361–394. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, S., & Roberts, C. (2005). So weird; so cool; so innovative: The use of intensifiers in the television series Friends. American Speech, 80(3), 280–300. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2009). The usage-based theory of language acquisition. In E. L. Bavin (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Child Language (pp. 69–87). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tulving, E., & Schacter, D. L. (1990). Priming and human memory systems. Science 247(4940), 301–306. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wagner, S. (2017). Totally new and pretty awesome: Amplifier-adjective bigrams in GloWbE. Lingua, 2001, 63–83. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wulff, S., & Gries, S. Th. (2019a). Exploring individual variation in learner corpus research: Some methodological suggestions. In B. S. W. LeBruyn & M. Paquot (Eds.), Learner corpus research and second language acquisition (pp. 191–213). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019b). Particle placement in learner language. Language Learning, 69(4), 873–910. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zuur, A. F., Ieno, E. N., & Elphick, C. S. (2010). A protocol for data exploration to avoid common statistical problems. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 1(1), 3–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Schweinberger, Martin
2025. A corpus‐based analysis of adjective amplification in Hong Kong, Indian and Philippine English. World Englishes 44:3 ► pp. 456 ff. DOI logo
Spina, Stefania & Aivars Glaznieks
2025. Morphological and syntactic adjective intensification in L2 Italian and German in a multilingual context. Folia Linguistica DOI logo
Spina, Stefania, Aivars Glaznieks & Andrea Abel
2025. Intensification in written L2 Italian. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 11:2 ► pp. 276 ff. DOI logo
Lívio, Camila & Chad Howe
2024. Text Mining Approaches to Language Use in Social Media: The Case of Portuguese Bué. Languages 9:3 ► pp. 82 ff. DOI logo
Jadoulle, Pauline
2023. L1 novice writing as a missing piece in the Learner Corpus Research puzzle. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 9:2 ► pp. 180 ff. DOI logo
Gries, Stefan Th.
2022. MuPDAR for corpus-based learner and variety studies. In Broadening the Spectrum of Corpus Linguistics [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 105], ► pp. 257 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue