Cover not available

Article published In: Journal of Second Language Studies
Vol. 7:1 (2024) ► pp.75–98

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

Using lexical bundles to teach prepositions to Korean EFL students

Corpus-based instructed SLA

 | Georgia State University, United States
 | Hallym University, Korea
 | Sogang University, Korea
Published online: 18 January 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.00022.kan
Abstract
Integrating corpus-based analyses with instructed SLA, this study explores how lexical bundles can be used to teach prepositions to EFL learners. It first identifies lexical bundles occurring most frequently with preposition errors in a learner corpus of L1-Korean high school student writing. It then uses the 10 identified bundles to compare three different types of instructional treatment: one hundred L1-Korean high school EFL students received either implicit instruction (teaching each bundle as a unit with no emphasis on embedded prepositions) or one of two types of explicit instruction (focusing on embedded prepositions with or without input enhancement). The explicit-instruction-with-input-enhancement group showed the greatest improvement, followed closely by the implicit-instruction group; the other explicit group showed the least improvement. These results suggest that textual enhancement can facilitate L2 preposition acquisition and that recurrent sequences such as lexical bundles can serve as a useful pedagogical means to teach linguistic forms.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
    • 2.1English prepositions in LBs
    • 2.2Visual input enhancement and LB-based instruction
  • 3.Research questions
  • 4.Methodology
    • 4.1Stage 1: Corpus analysis
    • 4.2Stage 2: Preposition instruction
      • 4.2.1Participants and instructional conditions
      • 4.2.2Teaching materials
      • 4.2.3Pretest and posttests
  • 5.Results and discussion
    • 5.1Stage 1: Corpus-based analysis
    • 5.2Stage 2: Preposition instruction
  • 6.Conclusion
  • References
References (52)
References
Alasmary, A. (2019). Academic lexical bundles in graduate-level math texts: A corpus-based expert-approved list. Language Teaching Research, 26(1), 99–123. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anthony, L. (2022). AntConc (Version 4.2.0) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Available from [URL]
Arnon, I., & Snider, N. (2010). More than words: Frequency effects for multi-word phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 62(1), 67–82. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Back, J. (2011). Preposition errors in writing and speaking by Korean EFL learners: A corpus-based approach. Studies in British and American Language and Literature, 991, 227–247.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V. (2004). If you look at…: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbook. Applied Linguistics, 25(3), 371–405. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 141, 191–205. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bychkovska, T., & Lee, J. (2017). At the same time: Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 university student argumentative writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 301, 38–52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Y., & Baker, P. (2010). Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning and Technology, 14(2), 30–49.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). Investigating critical 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
Dahunsi, T., & Ewata, T. (2022). An exploration of the structural and colligational characteristics of lexical bundles in L1-L2 corpora for English language teaching. Language Teaching Research. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duan, S., & Shi, Z. (2021). A longitudinal study of formulaic sequence use in second language writing: Complex dynamic systems perspective. Language Teaching Research. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gholami, L. (2021). Oral corrective feedback and learner uptake in L2 classrooms: Non-formulaic vs. formulaic errors. Language Teaching Research. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gholami, L., & Gholami, J. (2018). Uptake in incidental focus-on-form episodes concerning formulaic language in advanced adult EFL classes. Language Teaching Research, 24(2), 189–219. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Han, Z., Park, E. S., & Combs, C. (2008). Textual enhancement of input: Issues and possibilities. Applied Linguistics, 29(4), 597–618. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, K. (2012). Bundles in Academic Discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 321, 150–169. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jourdenais, R., Ota, M., Stauffer, S., Boyson, B., & Doughty, C. (1995). Does textual enhancement promote noticing? A think-aloud protocol analysis. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 183–216). Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kinne, S. (2017). Weight as a determinant of syntactic variation in English L1 and L2 academic writing. A corpus study of weight effects in verb-particle/prepositional phrase combinations. In P. de Haan, R. de Vries, & S. van Vuuren (Eds.), Language, Learners and Levels: Progression and Variation. Presses Universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Izumi, S. (2002). Output, input enhancement, and the noticing hypothesis: An experimental study on ESL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 241, 541–577. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lah, J., & Yoo, I. (2015). A corpus analysis of the preposition of a in Korean college matriculants’ writing. English Teaching, 70(3), 99–115. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, M., & Révész, A. (2018). Promoting grammatical development through textually enhanced captions: An eye-tracking study. The modern language journal, 102(3), 557–577. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, S. (2007). Effects of textual enhancement and topic familiarity on Korean EFL students’ reading comprehension and learning of passive voice. Language Learning, 571, 87–118. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, Y., Yoo, I., & Shin, Y. (2020). The use of English prepositions in lexical bundles in essays written by Korean university students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 451, 100848. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leow, R. (1997). The effects of input enhancement and text length on adult L2 reader’s comprehension and intake in second language acquisition. Applied Language Learning, 81, 151–182.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). Do learners notice enhanced forms while interacting with the L2? An online and offline study of the role of written input enhancement in L2 reading. Hispania, 841, 496–509. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leow, R., Egi, T., Nuevo, A., & Tsai, Y. (2003). The roles of textual enhancement and type of linguistic item in adult L2 learners’ comprehension and intake. Applied Language Learning, 131, 1–16.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Loewen, S., & Inceoglu, S. (2016). The effectiveness of visual input enhancement on the noticing and L2 development of the Spanish past tense. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 89–110. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mueller, C. (2011). English learners’ knowledge of prepositions: Collocational knowledge or knowledge based on meaning? System, 391, 480–490. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nekrasova, T. (2009). English L1 and L2 speakers’ knowledge of lexical bundles. Language Learning, 59(3), 647–686. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Keeffe, A. (2021). Data-driven learning – a call for a broader research gaze. Language Teaching, 541, 259–272. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Overstreet, M. (1998). Text enhancement and content familiarity: The focus of learner attention. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 21, 229–258.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 641, 878–912. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Puimège, E., Montero Perez, M., & Peters, E. (2021). Promoting L2 acquisition of multiword units through textually enhanced audiovisual input: An eye-tracking study. Second Language Research, 02676583211049741.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rankin, T., & Schiftner, B. (2011). Marginal prepositions in learner English: Applying local corpus data. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 16(3), 412–434. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmitt, N., Grandage, S., & Adolphs, S. (2004). Are corpus-derived recurrent clusters psychologically valid? In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp. 127–152). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shin, Y. (2019). Do native writers always have a head start over nonnative writers? The use of lexical bundles in college students’ essays. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 401, 1–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shin, Y., Cortes, V., & Yoo, I. (2018). Using lexical bundles as a tool to analyze definite article use in L2 academic writing: An exploratory study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 391, 29–41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shin, Y., & Kim, Y. (2017). Using lexical bundles to teach articles to L2 English learners of different proficiencies. System, 691, 79–91. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shook, D. (1994). FL/L2 reading, grammatical information, and the input-to-intake phenomenon. Applied Language Learning, 51, 57–93.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Song, J., & Sardegna, V. (2014). EFL learners’ incidental acquisition of English prepositions through enhanced extensive reading instruction. RELC Journal, 45(1), 67–84. 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, 121, 214–225. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tyler, A., & Evans, V. (2003). The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial sciences, embodied meaning, and cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
White, J. (1998). Getting the learners’ attention: A typographical input enhancement study. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus-on-form in second language classroom acquisition (pp. 91–128). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Winke, P. (2013). The effects of input enhancement on grammar learning and comprehension: A modified replication of Lee (2007) with eye-movement data. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(2), 323–352. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wood, D. (2015). Fundamentals of formulaic language: An introduction. New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wong, W. (2000). The effects of textual enhancement and simplified input on L2 comprehension and acquisition of non-meaningful grammatical form (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA.
(2003). Textual enhancement and simplified input: Effects on L2 comprehension and acquisition of non-meaningful grammatical form. Applied Language Learning, 131, 17–45.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2004)). ‘Here’s one I prepared earlier’: Formulaic language learning on television. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp. 249–268). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wu, S., Liu, D., & Li, Z. (2023). Testing the Bottleneck Hypothesis: Chinese EFL learners’ knowledge of morphology and syntax across proficiency levels. Second Language Research, 39(4), 1191–1217. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yeldham, M. (2018). Does the presence of formulaic language help or hinder second language listeners’ lower-level processing? Language Teaching Research, 24(3), 338–363. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yoo, I., & Shin, Y. (2020). Determiner use in English quantificational expressions: A corpus-based study. TESOL Quarterly, 54(1), 90–117. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Alasmary, Abdullah
2025. Lexical bundles in psychology lectures and textbooks: a contrastive corpus-based study with implications for academic writing. Frontiers in Psychology 16 DOI logo
Math, Mahantesh M., R. Sridhar, A. Bharatish, Radha Halagani, S. G. Divya Sharma, J. Reddy Naik, Mohammed Najeeb & Shrishail B. Sollapur
2025. Mechanical Characteristics of SLA Printed Parts Using Photopolymer Resin. Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India): Series D DOI logo
Xia, Detong & Hye K. Pae
2025. Understanding “the” in L2 writing: Article use in formulaic sequences among beginning and intermediate Chinese learners of English. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 75 ► pp. 101512 ff. DOI logo
Kim, Hyung-Sun & Baegseung Kim
2024. Understanding L2 Learners’ Use of English Prepositions Through the Perspective of Markedness. Modern English Education 25:0 ► pp. 430 ff. DOI logo
Shin, Yu Kyoung & Dong-Ok Won
2024. To what extent do L2 learners produce genre-appropriate language? A comparative analysis of lexical bundles in argumentative essays and speeches. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 69 ► pp. 101389 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 november 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