Article published in:
International Journal of Corpus Linguistics
Vol. 24:2 (2019) ► pp. 143–168

Lexical bundles in university course materials

From academic English to pathway to mainstream engineering

| Colorado State University
| Colorado State University
The present study compared 4-word lexical bundles found in a general engineering corpus (2,030,000 words) with those found in a corpus of texts collected from a Pathway engineering course for ESL (English as a Second Language) students (356,000 words) and a corpus of pedagogical materials used to teach advanced ESL students at an intensive English program (440,000 words). The results indicated that the structural and functional characteristics of the lexical bundles in the Pathway engineering materials were representative of the discourse features found in the general engineering corpus. This finding provides additional evidence of the overall appropriateness of the pedagogical materials selected for the Pathway course. Furthermore, the two engineering corpora also included a substantial number of bundles that were unique to the specific course materials, and, therefore, can potentially be targeted during language instruction.
Keywords: engineering corpus, ESL, lexical bundles, discipline-specific language
Published online: 05 August 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.17075.nek
References

[ p. 166 ]References

Allen, D.
(2010) Lexical bundles in learner writing: An analysis of formulaic language in the ALESS learner corpus. Komaba Journal of English Education, 1 , 105–127.Google Scholar
Alquraishi, M. A.
(2014) Lexical Bundles in an Advanced INTO CSU Writing Class and Engineering Texts: A Functional Analysis (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.Google Scholar
Anderson, N.
(2015) Academic reading expectations and challenges. In N. Evans, N. Anderson & W. Eggington (Eds.), ESL Readers and Writers in Higher Education: Understanding Challenges, Providing Support (pp. 95–109). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Biber, D.
(2009) A corpus-driven approach to formulaic language in English: Multi-word patterns in speech and writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 14 (3), 275–311. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., & Barbieri, F.
(2007) Lexical bundles in university spoken and written registers. English for Specific Purposes, 26 (3), 263–286. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E.
(1999) Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson.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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2003) Lexical bundles in speech and writing: An initial taxonomy. In A. Wilson, P. Rayson & T. McEnery (Eds.), Corpus Linguistics by the Lune: A Festschrift for Geoffrey Leech. Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Biber, D., & Gray, B.
(2013) Nominalizing the verb phrase in academic science writing. In B. Aarts, J. Close, G. Leech & S. Wallis (Eds.), The Verb Phrase in English: Investigating Recent Language Change with Corpora (pp. 99–132). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J.
(2010) Language, Usage, and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chen, L.
(2010) An investigation of lexical bundles in ESP textbooks and electrical engineering introductory textbooks. In D. Wood (Ed.), Perspectives on Formulaic Language: Acquisition and Communication (pp. 107–125). New York, NY: Continuum.Google Scholar
Chen, Y.-H., & Baker, P.
(2010) Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning & Technology, 14 (2), 30–49.Google Scholar
Cortes, V.
(2002) Lexical Bundles in Published and Student Academic Writing in History and Biology (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ.Google Scholar
(2004) Lexical bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: Examples from history and biology. English for Specific Purposes, 23 (4), 397–423. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008) A comparative analysis of lexical bundles in academic history writing in English and Spanish. Corpora, 3 (1), 43–58. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dym, C. L., & Little, P.
(2009) Engineering Design: A Project-based Introduction (3rd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Evans, N., Anderson, N., & Eggington, W.
(2015) ESL Readers and Writers in Higher Education: Understanding Challenges, Providing Support. New York, NY: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 167 ]
Grabe, W.
(2009) Reading in a Second Language: Moving from Theory to Practice. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hartshorn, J., Evans, N., Egbert, J., & Johnson, A.
(2017) Discipline-specific reading expectation and challenges for ESL learners in US universities. Reading in a Foreign Language, 29 (1), 33–60.Google Scholar
Hsu, W.
(2014) The most frequent opaque formulaic sequences in English-medium college textbooks. System, 47 , 146–161. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K.
(2008) As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes, 27 (1), 4–21. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) Bundles in academic discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32 , 150–169. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K., & Milton, J.
(1997) Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 students’ writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6 (2), 183–205. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lammi, M.
(2013) Engineering design thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 24 (2), 55–77.Google Scholar
Leech, G.
(2000) Grammars of spoken English: New outcomes of corpus-oriented research. Language Learning, 50 (4), 675–724. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leńko-Szymańska, A.
(2014) The acquisition of formulaic language by EFL learners: A cross-sectional and cross-linguistic perspective. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 19 (2), 225–251. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mudraya, O.
(2006) Engineering English: A lexical frequency instructional model. Journal of English for Specific Purposes, 25 (2), 235–256. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nekrasova-Beker, T., & Becker, A.
(2017) Integrating project-based learning into English for specific-purposes classrooms: A case study of Engineering. In M. Long (Ed.), Language for Specific Purposes: Trends in Curriculum Development (pp. 101–125). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Rayson, P.
(2009) Wmatrix: A web-based corpus processing environment [Computer Software]. Lancaster: Lancaster University. Available from http://​ucrel​.lancs​.ac​.uk​/wmatrix/ (last accessed June 2019).
Scott, M., & Tribble, C.
(2006) Textual Patterns. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, N., Grandage, S., & Adolphs, S.
(2004) Are corpus-derived recurrent clusters psycholinguistically valid? In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic Sequences: Acquisition, Processing, and Use (pp. 127–151). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Todd, R. W.
(2017) An opaque engineering word list: Which words should a teacher focus on? English for Specific Purposes, 45 , 31–39. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ward, J.
(2007) Collocation and technicality in EAP engineering. Journal of English for Specific Purposes, 6 (1), 18–35. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wood, D., & Appel, R.
(2014) Multiword constructions in first year business and engineering university textbooks and EAP textbooks. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 15 , 1–13. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 168 ]