Cover not available

Article published In: Register Studies
Vol. 2:2 (2020) ► pp.176–208

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

Functional variation of lexical bundles in academic lectures and TED talks

 | National Taiwan Normal University
 | National Taiwan Normal University
Published online: 23 October 2020
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/rs.18003.liu
Abstract
This study explores the differences between academic lectures and TED talks by comparing their respective frequent four-word lexical bundles, and the discourse functions of those bundles in these two registers. The results indicate that academic lectures use more varied lexical bundles at a higher frequency than TED talks do. The functional distributions of the bundles further reveal that referential bundles are prevalent in both registers. However, TED speakers use more lexical bundles to organize their discourse and to guide the audience through their talks, while academic lecturers use more stance bundles to show their intentions and to inform the audience about upcoming events. The distinctive characteristics of academic lectures and TED talks are revealed via the divergent sets of lexical bundles in the two registers; the two registers are also shown to differ greatly in terms of the use of lexical bundles for different functions.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
    • 2.1Description and classification of lexical bundles
    • 2.2Lexical bundles in academic lectures
    • 2.3TED talks
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Corpora
    • 3.2Bundle extraction and analysis
  • 4.Results and discussion
    • 4.1Lexical bundles in academic lectures and TED talks
    • 4.2Functional distribution of lexical bundles
      • 4.2.1Stance expressions
      • 4.2.2Discourse organizers
      • 4.2.3Referential bundles
      • 4.2.4Special conversational functions
  • 5.Pedagogical implications
  • 6.Limitations and directions for future research
  • 7.Conclusion
  • References
References (60)
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
Altenberg, B. (1998). On the phraseology of spoken English: The evidence of recurrent word-combinations. In A. Cowie (Ed.), Phraseology: Theory, analysis and applications (pp. 101–122). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aston, G. (2015). Learning phraseology from speech corpora. In A. Leńko-Szymańska & A. Boulton (Eds.), Multiple affordances of language corpora for data-driven learning (pp. 65–84). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Banerjee, S., & Pedersen, T. (2003). The design, implementation, and use of the Ngram statistics package. In A. F. Gelbukh (Ed.), The Proceeding of the Fourth International Conference on Intelligent Text Processing and Computational Linguistics (pp. 370–381). Heidelberg: Springer Berlin. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D. (2010). What can a corpus tell us about registers and genres? In A. O’Keeffe & M. McCarthy (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics (pp.241–254). London and New York: Routledge. 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. (2009). Register, genre, and style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 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 textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25(3), 371–405. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., Finegan, E., & Quirk, R. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English (Vol. 21). London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Byrd, P., & Coxhead, A. (2010). On the other hand: Lexical bundles in academic writing and in the teaching of EAP. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL, 51, 31–64.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caliendo, G., & Compagnone, A. (2014). Expressing epistemic stance in university lectures and TED talks: a contrastive corpus-based analysis. Lingue e Linguaggi, 111, 105–122.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cettolo, M., Girardi, C., & Federico, M. (2012). Wit3: Web inventory of transcribed and translated talks. Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the European Association for Machine Translation (EAMT 2012) (pp. 261–268). Retrieved from [URL]
Chang, Y. J., & Huang, H. T. (2015). Exploring TED talks as a pedagogical resource for oral presentations: A corpus-based move analysis. English Teaching and Learning, 39(4), 29–62.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Y. -H., & Baker, P. (2010). Lexical bundles in L1 & L2 academic writing. Language Learning & Technology, 14(2), 30–49.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Conrad, S. (2015). Register variation. In D. Biber & R. Reppen (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of English corpus linguistics (pp. 309–329). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cortes, V. (2004). Lexical bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: Examples from history and biology. English for Specific Purposes, 23(4), 397–423. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). The purpose of this study is to: Connecting lexical bundles and moves in research article introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(1), 33–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cortes, V., & Csomay, E. (2007). Positioning lexical bundles in university classroom discourse. In M. C. Campoy & M. J. Luzon (Eds.), Spoken corpora in applied linguistics (pp. 57–76). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coxhead, A., & Walls, R. (2012). TED Talks, vocabulary, and listening for EAP. TESOLANZ Journal, 201, 55–67.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coxhead, A., Dang, T. N. Y., & Mukai, S. (2017). Single and multi-word unit vocabulary in university tutorials and laboratories: Evidence from corpora and textbooks. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 301, 66–78. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Csomay, E. (2013). Lexical bundles in discourse structure: A corpus-based study of classroom discourse. Applied Linguistics, 34(1), 369–388. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Csomay, E., & Cortes, V. (2010). Lexical bundle distribution in university classroom talk. In S. Gries, S. Wulff & M. Davies (Eds.), Corpus linguistics applications: Current studies, new directions (pp. 153–168). Amsterdam: Rodopi. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dang, T. N. Y. (2018a). A hard science spoken word list. ITL-International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 169(1), 44–71. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018b). The nature of vocabulary in academic speech of hard and soft-sciences. English for Specific Purposes, 511, 69–83. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dang, T. N. Y., & Webb, S. (2014). The lexical profile of academic spoken English. English for Specific Purposes, 331, 66–76. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dang, T. N. Y., Coxhead, A., & Webb, S. (2017). The academic spoken word list. Language Learning, 67(4), 959–997. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Chazal, E. (2014). Prepare English language students for academic listening. Retrieved from [URL]
Deroey, K. L. (2013). Marking importance in lectures: Interactive and textual orientation. Applied Linguistics, 36(1), 51–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Durrant, P. (2017). Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation in university students’ writing: Mapping the territories. Applied Linguistics, 38(2), 165–193. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flowerdew, J. (2003). Signalling nouns in discourse. English for Specific Purposes, 22(4), 329–346. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gardner, D., & Davies, M. (2014). A new academic vocabulary list. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 305–327. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gebbia, J. (2016), February). Joe Gebbia: How Airbnb designs for trust [Video file]. Retrieved from [URL]
Hyland, K. (2008a). Academic clusters: Text patterning in published and postgraduate writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18(1), 41–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008b). As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes, 27(1), 4–21. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Disciplinary identities: Individuality and community in academic discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kashiha, H., & Chan, S. H. (2014). Discourse functions of formulaic sequences in academic speech across two disciplines. GEMA: Online Journal of Language Studies, 14(2), 15–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meyer, P. (2011), July). Pamela Meyer: How to spot a liar [Video file]. Retrieved from [URL]
Nation, I. S. P. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(1), 59–82. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neely, E., & Cortes, V. (2009). A little bit about: Analyzing and teaching lexical bundles in academic lectures. Language Value, 1(1), 17–38.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nesi, H., & Basturkmen, H. (2006). Lexical bundles and discourse signaling in academic lectures. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 11(3), 283–304. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oliveros, J. C. (2015). Venny. An interactive tool for comparing lists with Venn’s diagrams (Version 2.1) [computer software]. Available from [URL]
Oakey, D. J. (2009). Fixed collocational patterns in isolexical and isotextual versions of a corpus. In P. Baker (Ed.), Approaches to Corpus Linguistics (pp. 142–160). London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Partington, A. (2014). The marking of importance in ‘Enlightentainment’ talks. In M. Gotti & D. S. Giannoni (Eds.), Corpus analysis for descriptive and pedagogical purposes (pp. 143–166). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Salazar, D. (2011). Lexical bundles in scientific English: A corpus-based study of native and non-native writing. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scott, M. (1997). PC analysis of key words – and key key words. System, 25(2), 233–245. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). WordSmith Tools (Version 7) [computer software]. Stroud: Lexical Analysis Software.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Simpson, R. (2004). Stylistic features of academic speech: The role of formulaic expressions. In U. Connor & T. A. Upton (Eds.), Discourse in the professions: Perspectives from corpus linguistics (pp. 37–64). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Simpson, R., & Mendis, D. (2003). A corpus-based study of idioms in academic speech. TESOL Quarterly, 37(3), 419–441. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Simpson, R., Briggs, S. L., Ovens, J., & Swales, J. M. (2002). The Michigan corpus of academic spoken English. Ann Arbor, Michigan: The Regents of the University of Michigan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Simpson-Vlach, R., & Ellis, N. C. (2010). An academic formulas list: New methods in phraseology research. Applied Linguistics, 31(4), 487–512. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ted.com. (2020a). TED | About | Conferences. Retrieved 1 April 2020, from [URL]
. (2020b). TED | About | Programs & Initiatives | TED Talks. Retrieved 1 April 2020, from [URL]
. (2020c). TED | About | Programs & Initiatives | TED.com. Retrieved 1 April 2020, from [URL]
Thompson, P. (2006). A corpus perspective on the lexis of lectures, with a focus on economics lectures. In K. Hyland & M. Bondi (Eds.), Academic discourse across disciplines (pp. 253–270). Frankfort: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thompson, P., & Nesi, H. (2001). Research in progress, The British Academic Spoken English (BASE) Corpus Project. Language Teaching Research, 5(3), 263–264.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wang, Y. (2017). Lexical bundles in spoken academic ELF. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 22(2), 187–211. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Watkins, J., & Wilkins, M. (2011). Using YouTube in the EFL classroom. Language Education in Asia, 2(1), 113–119. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Webb, S., & Rodgers, M. P. (2009). Vocabulary demands of television programs. Language Learning, 59(2), 335–366. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wingrove, P. (2017). How suitable are TED talks for academic listening? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 301, 79–95. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wood, D. C., & Appel, R. (2014). Multiword constructions in first year business and engineering university textbooks and EAP textbooks. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 151, 1–13. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Huang, Michelle Zeping, Mariah Chan & Jianwen Liu
2025. Stance and engagement in digital oratory. Journal of Second Language Studies DOI logo
Wang, Wei & Eniko Csomay
2024. Constructing proximity in popularization discourse: Evidence from lexical bundles in TED talks. English for Specific Purposes 73 ► pp. 95 ff. DOI logo
Liu, Chen-Yu
2023. Specialized vocabulary in TED talks and TED-Ed animations: Implications for learning English for science and technology. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 65 ► pp. 101293 ff. DOI logo
Liu, Chen-Yu
2025. Academic formulas in TED talks and TED-Ed animations: Insights for academic vocabulary learning. English for Specific Purposes 80 ► pp. 16 ff. DOI logo
Sun, Ya, Deyi Kong & Limei Zhai
2023. To Interact and to Narrate: A Categorical Multidimensional Analysis of Twitter Use by US Banks and Energy Corporations. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 66:2 ► pp. 117 ff. DOI logo
Liu, Chen-Yu & Hao-Jan Howard Chen
2022. A phraseological exploration of university lectures through phrase frames. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 58 ► pp. 101135 ff. DOI logo
Wingrove, Peter
2022. Academic lexical coverage in TED talks and academic lectures. English for Specific Purposes 65 ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 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