Research articles
The use of synonymous adjectives by learners of Finnish as a second language
Applying the MuPDAR(F) approach
In this study, we apply Gries and Deshors’s (2014) and Deshors and Gries’s (2016) MuPDAR(F) approach to explore the use of synonymous adjectives
tärkeä (i.e. “important”) and keskeinen (i.e. “central”) in academic native and advanced
learner Finnish, linking the phenomenon with the general assumptions of usage-based cognitive linguistics. This method confidently
modelled the differences between using near-synonyms in native data and distinguished between native-like and non-native-like uses
in learner data. Crucially, it differentiated between the contexts in which one synonym was clearly favoured and those in which
either one was acceptable, in accordance with Gries and Deshors (2020). The results
suggest that Finnish learners fairly coherently follow the tendencies of native speakers, but several variables differentiate
their use of synonyms from the latter’s. We interpret the differences to reflect complexity- and prototypicality-related
phenomena. On the one hand, learners use more common options more often. On the other, non-nativelike adjectives are used only in
contexts that are structurally in the most prototypical and least complex form, suggesting that learners employ complexity-related
structural alternations – e.g., non-prototypical grammatical subjects or degree modifiers – after lexical alternations.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Background
- 2.1Learning synonymy in the crossroads of form, meaning and use
- 2.2Corpus-based work on near-synonyms
- 3.Dataset and methodology
- 3.1Corpus data: Native and non-native written academic Finnish
- 3.2Data extraction and annotation
- 3.3The MuPDAR(F) approach
- 4.Results
- 4.1Model 1: Random forests for NS Finnish data used to predict the near-synonymous adjectives in advanced NNS Finnish data
- 4.2Model 2: Random forest on F2 data used to predict F1-likeness in the L2 data
- 4.3Variables that distinguish between F1-like and non-F1-like uses
- 4.3.1Adjective choice
- 4.3.2Word order
- 4.3.3Type of grammatical subject
- 4.3.4Case marking
- 4.3.5The use of modifiers
- 5.Discussion and concluding remarks
- 5.1RQ1: Similarities and differences between NS and NNS in the use of tärkeä (“important”) and
keskeinen (“central”) in a predicative construction
- 5.2RQ2: Applicability of the MuPDAR(F) approach to studying the use of near-synonymous adjectives in academic NS and NNS
Finnish
- 5.3Future directions
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
References (57)
Arppe, A.
(
2002)
The
usage patterns and selectional preferences of synonyms in a morphologically rich
language. In
A. Morin &
P. Sébillot (Eds.),
JADT-2002:
6th International Conference on Textual Data Statistical Analysis, Vol.
1 (pp. 21–31). INRIA.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Arppe, A.
(
2008)
Univariate,
bivariate, and multivariate methods in corpus-based lexicography – A study of
synonymy (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Helsinki.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R.
(
1998)
Corpus
linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
CEFR
(
2018)
Common European framework of
reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Companion volume with new
descriptors. Council of Europe.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cruse, D. A.
(
1986)
Lexical
semantics. Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Danglli, L., & Abazaj, G.
(
2014)
Lexical
cohesion, word choice and synonymy in academic writing.
Mediterranean Journal of Social
Sciences,
5
(14), 628–632.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Divjak, D.
(
2010)
Structuring
the lexicon: A clustered model for near-synonymy. Mouton de Gruyter.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Divjak, D., & Gries, S. T.
(
2006)
Ways
of trying in Russian: clustering behavioral profiles.
Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic
Theory,
2
(1), 23–60.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Deshors, S. C., & Gries, S. T.
Deshors, S. C.
(
2016)
Multidimensional
perspectives on interlanguage: Exploring may and can across learner corpora. Presses universitaires de Louvain.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Deshors, S. C., & Gries, T. T.
Deshors, S. C., Götz, S., & Laporte, S.
Ellis, N. C.
(
2008)
Usage-based
and form-focused language acquisition: The associative learning of constructions, learned attention, and the limited L2
endstate. In
N. C. Ellis &
P. Robinson (Eds.),
Handbook
of cognitive linguistics and second language
acquisition (pp. 372–405). Routledge.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ellis, N. C., & Robinson, P.
(
2008)
An
introduction to cognitive linguistics, Second language acquisition, and language
instruction. In
N. C. Ellis &
P. Robinson (Eds.),
Handbook
of cognitive linguistics and second language
acquisition (pp. 1–24). Routledge.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ellis, N. C., & Larsen-Freeman, D.
(
2009)
Constructing
a second language: Analyses and computational simulations of the emergence of linguistic constructions from
usage.
Language
Learning,
59
(1), 90–125.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Firth, J. R.
(
1957)
A
synopsis of linguistic theory.
Studies in linguistic
analysis (pp. 1–32). Oxford Blackwell.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Granger, S.
(
2004)
Computer
learner corpus research: Current status and future
prospects. In
U. Connor &
T. Upton (Eds.),
Applied
corpus Linguistics: A multidimensional
perspective (pp. 123–145). Rodopi.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gries, S. T., & Adelman, A.
(
2014)
Subject
realization in Japanese conversation by native and non-native speakers: Exemplifying a new paradigm for learner corpus
research. In
T. Romero (Ed.),
Yearbook
of corpus linguistics and pragmatics 2014: New empirical and theoretical
paradigms (p. 35–54). Springer.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gries, S. T., & Deshors, S. C.
(
2014)
Using
regressions to explore deviation between corpus data and a standard/target: Two
suggestions.
Corpora,
9
(1), 109–136.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gries, S. T., & Deshors, S. C.
Gries, S. T., & Deshors, S. C.
(
2020)
There’s
more to alternations than the main diagonal of a 2×2 confusion matrix: Improvements of MuPDAR and other classificatory
alternation studies.
ICAME
Journal,
44
(1), 69–96.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gries, S. T., & Wulff, S.
Gries, S. T., & Wulff, S.
Hakulinen, A., Vilkuna, M., Korhonen, R., Koivisto, V., Heinonen, T. R., & Alho, I.
(
2004)
Iso
suomen kielioppi [Online version]. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura (Finnish Literature Society).
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hasselgren, A.
(
1994)
Lexical
teddy bears and advanced learners: A study into the ways Norwegian students cope with English
vocabulary.
International Journal of Applied
Linguistics,
4
(2), 237–260.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Huumo, T.
(
2007)
Kvantiteetti
ja aika II. Nominaalinen aspekti ja suomen predikatiivin
sijanvaihtelu.
Virittäjä,
111
(1), 3–23.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ivaska, I.
(
2014)
The
corpus of advanced learner Finnish (LAS2) – Database and toolkit to study academic learner
Finnish.
Apples: Journal of Applied Language
Studies,
8
(3), 21–38.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ivaska, I.
(
2015)
Edistyneen
oppijansuomen konstruktiopiirteitä korpusvetoisesti: avainrakenneanalyysi (
Annales
Universitatis Turkuensis C 409) (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). University of Turku.
Ivaska, I., & Bernardini, S.
(
2020)
Constrained
language use in Finnish: A corpus-driven approach.
Nordic Journal of
Linguistics,
43
(1), 33–57.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jantunen, J. H.
(
2001) “
Tärkeä
seikka” ja “keskeinen kysymys”: Mitä korpislingvistinen analyysi paljastaa
lähisynonyymeistä? Virittäjä,
2
1(2001), 170–192.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jantunen, J. H.
(
2004)
Synonymia
ja käännössuomi: Korpusnäkökulma samamerkityksisyyden kontekstuaalisuuteen ja käännöskielen leksikaalisiin
erityispiirteisiin (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). Faculty of Humanities, Savonlinna School of Translation Studies, University of Joensuu.
Jantunen, J. H.
(
2015)
Oppimiskontekstin
vaikutus oppijanpragmatiikkaan: astemääritteet leksikaalisina nallekarhuina.
Lähivertailuja.
Lähivõrdlusi,
25
1, 105–136.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jarvis, S.
(
2013)
Capturing
the diversity in lexical diversity.
Language
Learning,
63
(s1), 87–106.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kangasniemi, H.
(
1997)
Sana,
merkitys, maailma. Katsaus leksikaalisen semantiikan perusteisiin. Finn Lectura.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kielitoimiston
sanakirja
(
2020)
Kotimaisten kielten keskuksen verkkojulkaisuja
35. Kotimaisten kielten keskus.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kyle, K., & Eguchi, M.
(
2021)
Automatically
assessing lexical sophistication using word, bigram, and dependency
indices. In
S. Granger (Ed.),
Perspectives
on the L2 Phrasicon: The view from learner
corpora (pp. 126–151). Multilingual Matters.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Langacker, R. W.
(
1987)
Foundations
of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
LAS1
n.d.).
Akateemisen suomen
korpus. School of Languages and Translation Studies. University of Turku.
[URL]
LAS2
n.d.).
Edistyneiden suomenoppijoiden
korpus. School of Languages and Translation Studies. University of Turku (Language Bank of Finland).
[URL]
Lyons, J.
(
1968)
Introduction
to theoretical linguistics. Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martin, M.
(
1987)
Adjektiivipredikatiivin
sijasta.
Virittäjä,
91
(2), 274–278.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Partington, A.
(
1998)
Collocation
and synonymy. In
A. Partington (Ed.),
Patterns
and meanings: Using corpora for English language research and
teaching (pp. 29–47). John Benjamins.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
R Core Team
(
2018)
R: A language and
environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
[URL]
Ringbom, H.
(
1998)
Vocabulary
frequencies in advanced learner English: A cross-linguistic
approach. In
S. Granger (Ed.),
Learner
English on
computer (pp. 41–52). Longman.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ringbom, H.
(
2007)
Cross-linguistic
similarity in foreign language learning. Multilingual Matters.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rohdenburg, G.
(
1996)
Cognitive
complexity and increased grammatical explicitness in English.
Cognitive
Linguistics,
7
(2), 149–182.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sadeniemi, M.
(
1950)
Totaalisesta
ja partiaalisesta
predikatiivista.
Virittäjä,
54
1, 46–53.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Spoelman, M.
(
2013)
Prior
linguistic knowledge matters. The use of the partitive case in Finnish learner language (
Acta
Universitatis Ouluensis B, Humaniora 111) (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). University of Oulu.
Vanhatalo, U.
(
2003)
Kyselytestit
vs. korpuslingvistiikka lähisynonyymien semanttisten sisältöjen arvioinnissa – Mitä vielä keskeisestä ja
tärkeästä? Virittäjä,
107
(3), 351–369.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Vanhatalo, U.
(
2005)
Kyselytestit
synonymian selvittämisessä. Sanastotietoutta kielenpuhujilta sähköiseen
sanakirjaan (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Helsinki.
Wongkhan, P., & Thienthong, A.
(
2020)
EFL
Learners’ acquisition of academic collocation and synonymy: Does their academic experience
matter? RELC
Journal, 1–16.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wright, M. N., & Ziegler, A.
(
2017)
ranger:
A fast implementation of random forests for high dimensional data in C++ and R.
Journal of
Statistical
Software,
77
(1), 1–17.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wulff, S., Lester, N., & Martinez-Garcia, M. T.
(
2014)
That-variation
in German and Spanish L2 English.
Language and
Cognition,
6
(2), 271–299.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (2)
Cited by 2 other publications
Ivaska, Ilmari & Anne Tamm
Liu, Pengyuan, Jue Wen & Ning Cao
2022.
Exploring the Application of the Random Matrix Thinking Model in Teaching English Predicate Constructions.
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 2022
► pp. 1 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 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.