Cover not available

Article published In: Register Studies
Vol. 3:1 (2021) ► pp.88–114

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

The influence of the benchmark corpus on keyword analysis

ORCiD logo with link | King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi
ORCiD logo with link | King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi
Published online: 3 June 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/rs.19017.poj
Abstract
The growing popularity of keyword analysis as an applied linguistics methodology has not been matched by an increase in the rigour with which the method is applied. While several studies have investigated the impact of choices made at certain stages of the keyword analysis process, the impact of the choice of benchmark corpus has largely been overlooked. In this paper, we compare a target corpus with several benchmark corpora and show that the keywords generated are different. We also show that certain characteristics of the keyword list and of the keywords themselves vary in relatively predictable ways depending on the benchmark corpus. These variations have implications for the choice of benchmark corpus and how the results of a keyword analysis should be interpreted. Analyzing the keywords from a comparison with a large general corpus or the keyword lists from multiple comparisons may be most appropriate for register studies.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Uses of keyword analysis
    • 1.2Conducting a keyword analysis
    • 1.3Research into the effects of different benchmark corpora
  • 2.Methodology
    • 2.1The target corpus
    • 2.2The benchmark corpora
    • 2.3Generating the keyword lists
    • 2.4Analysing the keyword lists and the keywords
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Does the benchmark corpus influence the keywords?
    • 3.2How does the benchmark corpus influence the keyword lists as a whole?
    • 3.3How does the benchmark corpus influence the keywords?
  • 4.Discussion
  • References
References (36)
References
Archer, D., Wilson, A., & Rayson, P. (2002). Introduction to the USAS category system. Retrieved from [URL].
Baker, P. (2009). The question is, how cruel is it? Keywords, fox hunting and the house of commons. In D. Archer (Ed.), What’s in a word-List?: Investigating word frequency and key word extraction (pp. 125–136). Aldershot: Ashgate. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bigi, B., Brun, A., Haton, J. P., Smaïli, K., & Zitouni, I. (2001). A comparative study of topic identification on newspaper and e-mail. Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on String Processing and Information Retrieval (pp. 238–241). Retrieved from [URL].
Blaxter, T. T. (2014). Applying keyword analysis to gendered language in the Íslendingasögur. Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 37(2), 169–198. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Camiciottoli, B. C. (2016). “All those Elvis-meets-golf-player looks”: A corpus-assisted analysis of creative compounds in fashion blogging. Discourse, Context & Media, 121, 77–86. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd Ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cselle, G., Albrecht, K., & Wattenhofer, R. (2007). Buzztrack: Topic detection and tracking in email. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (pp. 190–197). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ferret, O., & Grau, B. (2000). A topic segmentation of texts based on semantic domains. Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 426–430). IOS Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gabrielatos, C., & Marchi, A. (2012). Keyness: appropriate metrics and practical issues. Critical Approaches to Discourse Studies. Bologna. Retrieved from [URL].
Gardner, D. (2007). Validating the construct of word in applied corpus-based vocabulary research: A critical survey. Applied Linguistics, 28(2), 241–265. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gerbig, A. (2010). Key words and key phrases in a corpus of travel writing. In M. Bondi & M. Scott (Eds.), Keyness in texts (pp. 147–168). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gilmore, A., & Millar, N. (2018). The language of civil engineering research articles: A corpus-based approach. English for Specific Purposes, 511, 1–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goh, G. Y. (2011). Choosing a reference corpus for keyword calculation. Linguistic Research, 28(1), 239–256. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harvey, K., Churchill, D., Crawford, P., Brown, B., Mullany, L., Macfarlane, A., & McPherson, A. (2008). Health communication and adolescents: What do their emails tell us?. Family Practice, 25(4), 304–311. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jones, C., Byrne, S., & Halenko, N. (2018). Successful spoken English: Findings from learner corpora. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, A., & Berber Sardinha, T. (2000). Proceedings of the Workshop on Comparing Corpora. Hong Kong. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kotzé, E. F. (2010). Author identification from opposing perspectives in forensic linguistics. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 28(2), 185–197. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Loudermilk, B. C. (2007). Occluded academic genres: An analysis of the MBA thought essay. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(3), 190–205. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meier, H. E., Rose, A., & Hölzen, M. (2017). Spirals of signification? A corpus linguistic analysis of the German doping discourse. Communication & Sport, 5(3), 352–373. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meltzer, E. O., Wallace, D., Dykewicz, M., & Shneyer, L. (2016). Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in allergic rhinitis: Agency for healthcare research and quality or anchor-based thresholds?. The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice, 4(4), 682–688. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nkechinyere, E. M., Andrew, I., & Idochi, O. (2015). Comparison of different methods of outlier detection in univariate time series data. International Journal for Research in Mathematics and Statistics, 1(1), 55–83. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paquot, M., & Bestgen, Y. (2009). Distinctive words in academic writing: A comparison of three statistical tests for keyword extraction. Papers from the 29th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 29) (pp. 247–269). Retrieved from [URL].
Pojanapunya, P. (2017). A theory of keywords. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from [URL].
Pojanapunya, P., & Watson Todd, R. (2018). Log-likelihood and odds ratio: Keyness statistics for different purposes of keyword analysis. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 14(1), 133–167. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scharl, A., & Weichselbraun, A. (2008). An automated approach to investigating the online media coverage of US presidential elections. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 5(1), 121–132. 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
(2006). In search of a bad reference corpus. Paper presented at Word Frequency and Keyword Extraction: AHRC ICT Methods Network Expert Seminar on Linguistics., Lancaster University, UK. Retrieved from [URL].
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Willis, R. (2017). Taming the climate? Corpus analysis of politicians’ speech on climate change. Environmental Politics, 26(2), 212–231. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xiao, Z., & McEnery, A. (2005). Two approaches to genre analysis: Three genres in modern American English. Journal of English Linguistics, 33(1), 62–82. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (9)

Cited by nine other publications

Cvrček, Václav & Martina Berrocal
2025. Sibling-texts keyword analysis: exploring topic and register keywords. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 40:3 ► pp. 762 ff. DOI logo
Palayon, Raymund & Irish Mae Dalona
2025. The Language of Praise and Worship: A Corpus Analysis of Register Variation in Christian Songs. Southeastern Philippines Journal of Research and Development 30:2 ► pp. 119 ff. DOI logo
Elsoufy, Ayman Mohamed
2024. Media bias through collocations: a corpus-based study of Egyptian and Ethiopian news coverage of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 11:1 DOI logo
Nickels, Lindsay C, Trisha L Marshall, Ezra Edgerton, Patrick W Brady, Philip A Hagedorn & James J Lee
2024. Defining diagnostic uncertainty as a discourse type: A transdisciplinary approach to analysing clinical narratives of Electronic Health Records. Applied Linguistics 45:1 ► pp. 134 ff. DOI logo
Bozward, David, Matthew Rogers-Draycott, Kelly Smith, Mokuba Mave, Vic Curtis, Chinthaka Aluthgama-Baduge, Rob Moon & Nigel Adams
2023. Exploring the outcomes of enterprise and entrepreneurship education in UK HEIs: An Excellence Framework perspective. Industry and Higher Education 37:3 ► pp. 345 ff. DOI logo
Kyröläinen, Aki-Juhani & Veronika Laippala
2023. Predictive keywords: Using machine learning to explain document characteristics. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence 5 DOI logo
Palayon, Raymund & David Perrodin
2023. "I am Christ": Keyness Analyses of Christ Claimants' Sermons. Southeastern Philippines Journal of Research and Development 28:1 ► pp. 69 ff. DOI logo
Palayon, Raymund T., Richard Watson Todd & Sompatu Vungthong
2022. From the temple of life to the temple of death: keyness analyses of the transitions of a cult. Corpora 17:3 ► pp. 331 ff. DOI logo
T. Palayon, Raymund, Richard Watson Todd & Sompatu Vungthong
2022. Distinguishing the Language of Destructive Cults from the Language of Mainstream Religion: Corpus Analyses of Sermons. rEFLections 29:1 ► pp. 20 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