Lexical bundles are frequently recurring word sequences (e.g. as can be seen) that function as
building blocks of discourse. This corpus-based study examined the use of four-word lexical bundles in business emails written by
three groups of writers: intermediate business English learners, advanced business English learners, and working professionals.
The prominent structural and functional characteristics of lexical bundles expressed in business emails were identified and
compared across the three groups. The results showed that lexical bundles were related to the extent to which formality and
politeness were expressed in written business communications. The advanced business English learners and working professionals
used more structural and functional characteristics of lexical bundles that are characteristic of written conventions than did
intermediate business English learners. Both intermediate and advanced learner groups used functionally different lexical bundles
from those produced by the working professionals.
Aimoldina, A., Zharkynbekova, S., & Akynova, D. (2016). Investigating
pragmatic failures in business letters of Kazakhstani professionals. Procedia Economics and
Finance,
39
1, 65–70.
Anthony, L. (2020). AntConc (Version
3.5.9) [Computer software]. Waseda University.
Baron, N. S. (2002). Who
sets e-mail style? Prescriptivism, coping strategies, and democratizing communication
access. Information
Society,
18
(5), 403–413.
Bestgen, Y. (2013). Inadequacy
of the chi-squared test to examine vocabulary differences between corpora. Literary and
Linguistic
Computing,
29
(2), 164–170.
Bestgen, Y. (2020). Comparing
lexical bundles across corpora of different sizes: The Zipfian problem. Journal of Quantitative
Linguistics,
27
(3), 272–290.
Biber, D., & Barbieri, F. (2007). Lexical
bundles in university spoken and written registers. English for Specific
Purposes,
26
(3), 263–286.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V. (2004). If
you look at …: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied
Linguistics,
25
(3), 371–405.
Biber, D., Stig, J., Geoffrey, L., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman
grammar of spoken and written English. Pearson Education.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness:
Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.
Bybee, J. L., & Beckner, C. (2015). Usage-based
theory. In B. Heine & H. Narrog (Eds.), The
Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis. Oxford University Press.
Bychkovska, T., & Lee, J. J. (2017). At
the same time: Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 university student argumentative writing. Journal
of English for Academic
Purposes,
30
1, 38–52.
Chan, C. S. C. (2019). Long-term
workplace communication needs of business professionals: Stories from Hong Kong senior executives and their implications for
ESP and higher education. English for Specific
Purposes,
56
1, 68–83.
Chen, Y. H. (2009). Investigating
lexical bundles across learner writing development (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). Lancaster University.
Chen, Y. H., & Baker, P. (2010). Lexical
bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning &
Technology,
14
(2), 30–49.
Chen, Y. H., & Baker, P. (2016). Investigating
criterial discourse features across second language development: Lexical bundles in rated learner essays, CEFR B1, B2 and
C1. Applied
Linguistics,
37
(6), 849–880.
Conrad, S. M., & Biber, D. (2005). The
frequency and use of lexical bundles in conversation and academic
prose. Lexicographica,
20
1, 56–71.
Cortes, V. (2004). Lexical
bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: Examples from history and
biology. English for Specific
Purposes,
23
(4), 397–423.
Evans, S. (2014). Teaching
business correspondence: Lessons from the globalised workplace. The Asian Journal of Applied
Linguistics,
1
(2), 102–120.
Flowerdew, L. (2012). Exploiting
a corpus of business letters from a phraseological, functional
perspective. ReCALL,
24
(2), 152–168.
Forsberg, F., & Bartning, I. (2010). Can
linguistic features discriminate between the communicative CEFR-levels? : A pilot study of written L2
French. In I. Bartning, M. Martin, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Communicative
proficiency and linguistic development: Intersections between SLA and language testing
research (pp. 133–157). John Benjamins.
Freytag, V. (2019). Exploring
politeness in business emails. Multilingual Matters.
Geertzen, J., Alexopoulou, T., & Korhonen, A. (2013). Automatic
linguistic annotation of large scale L2 databases: The EF-Cambridge Open Language Database
(EFCamDat). In R. T. Miller, K. I. Martin, C. M. Eddington, A. Henery, N. Marcos Miguel, A. M. Tseng, A. Tuninetti, & D. Walter (Eds.), Selected
proceeding of the 2012 Second Language Research Forum: Building bridges between
disciplines (pp. 240–254). Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Gimenez, J. C. (2006). Embedded
business emails: Meeting new demands in international business communication. English for
Specific
Purposes,
25
(2), 154–172.
Grabowski, Ł. (2015). Phrase
frames in English pharmaceutical discourse: a corpus-driven study of intra-disciplinary register
variation. Research in
Language,
13
(3), 266–291.
Granger, S. (2018). Formulaic
sequences in learner corpora: Collocations and lexical
bundles. In A. Siyanova-Chanturia, & A. Pellicer-Sánchez (Eds.), Understanding
formulaic language: A second language acquisition
perspective (pp. 228–247). Routledge.
Handford, M. (2010). The
language of business meetings. Cambridge University Press.
Huang, Y., Murakami, A., Alexopoulou, T., & Korhonen, A. (2018). Dependency
parsing of learner English. International Journal of Corpus
Linguistics,
23
(1), 28–54.
Hyland, K. (2008). As
can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific
Purposes,
27
(1), 4–21.
Hyland, K. (2018). The
essential Hyland: Studies in applied
linguistics. Bloomsbury.
Incelli, E. (2013). Managing
discourse in intercultural business email interactions: A case study of a British and Italian business
transaction. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural
Development,
34
(6), 515–532.
Kankaanranta, A., Karhunen, P., & Louhiala-Salminen, L. (2018). “English
As Corporate Language” in the multilingual reality of multinational
companies. Multilingua,
37
(4), 331–351.
Kankaanranta, A., & Louhiala-Salminen, L. (2013). “What
language does global business speak?” – The concept and development of
BELF. Ibérica,
26
(1), 17–34.
Kankaanranta, A., & Planken, B. (2010). BELF
competence as business knowledge of internationally operating business professionals. Journal
of Business
Communication,
47
(4), 380–407.
Li, Z., & Volkov, A. (2017). “To
whom it may concern”: A study on the use of lexical bundles in email writing tasks in an English proficiency
test. TESL Canada
Journal,
34
(3), 54–75.
Millot, P. (2017). Inclusivity
and exclusivity in English as a business lingua franca: The expression of a professional voice in email
communication. English for Specific
Purposes,
46
1, 59–71.
Pan, F., Reppen, R., & Biber, D. (2016). Comparing
patterns of L1 versus L2 English academic professionals: Lexical bundles in telecommunications research
journals. Journal of English for Academic
Purposes,
21
1, 60–71.
Qian, D. D., & Pan, M. (2019). Politeness
in business communication: Investigating English modal sequences in Chinese learners’ letter
writing. RELC
Journal,
50
(1), 20–36.
R Core Team. (2020). R: A language
and environment for statistical computing (Version 3.6.3) [Computer
software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Ren, C., & Lu, X. (2021). A
multi-dimensional analysis of the Management’s Discussion and Analysis narratives in Chinese and American corporate annual
reports. English for Specific
Purposes,
62
1, 84–99.
Römer, U. (2009). English
in academia: Does nativeness matter?Anglistik: International Journal of English
Studies,
20
(2), 89–100.
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,
12
(3), 214–225.
Taylor, S. (2005). Communication
for business: A practical approach (4th ed.). Pearson Education.
Vergaro, C. (2004). Discourse
strategies of Italian and English sales promotion letters. English for Specific
Purposes,
23
(2), 181–207.
Warren, M. (2016). Signalling
intertextuality in business emails. English for Specific
Purposes,
42
1, 26–37.
Yates, J. A., & Orlikowski, W. (2002). Genre
systems: Structuring interaction through communicative norms. Journal of Business
Communication,
39
(1), 13–35.
Zhu, W. (2012). Polite
requestive strategies in emails: An investigation of pragmatic competence of Chinese EFL
learners. RELC
Journal,
43
(2), 217–238.
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
Wang, Nan & Zhou Tang
2024. Multi Source Collection Method of Service QoS Data for Intelligent Business English Teaching System. In e-Learning, e-Education, and Online Training [Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, 545], ► pp. 445 ff.
Warren, Martin
2023. Researcher commentary on Warren (2013): The prevalence and forms of intertextuality. English for Specific Purposes 71 ► pp. 100 ff.
Xia, Detong, Yudi Chen & Hye K. Pae
2023. Lexical and grammatical collocations in beginning and intermediate L2 argumentative essays: a bigram study. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 61:4 ► pp. 1421 ff.
Xia, Detong, Mark A. Sulzer & Hye K. Pae
2023. Phrase-frames in business emails: a contrast between learners of business English and working professionals. Text & Talk 0:0
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 august 2024. 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.