Capturing technical terms in spoken CLIL
A holistic model for identifying subject-specific vocabulary
Content and language integrated learning (CLIL), an educational approach using a foreign language to teach
non-language subjects, has been consistently gaining in popularity. Despite an increasing research base suggesting its benefits
for general language proficiency, the contribution made to learning and using subject-specific target language elements is largely
under-researched. This paper addresses one aspect of this, i.e. students’ use of subject-specific vocabulary in CLIL classroom
communication. We propose a holistic model for identifying both single and multi-word lexical units specific to the school subject
in oral classroom data, integrating corpus-linguistic and qualitative data analysis. The method is trialled using a data set of 16
hours of secondary-school CLIL classroom data within the subject of European economics and politics in Year 12. Findings show that
a holistic definition of subject-specific vocabulary is vital, and that the model constitutes an adequate and flexible tool for
specifying CLIL terminology in oral classroom discourse.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.CLIL and subject-specific vocabulary
- 2.1The notion of subject-specific vocabulary
- 2.2Previous research on subject-specific vocabulary in CLIL
- 2.3Insights from related disciplines
- 3.A holistic 3-phase model for determining subject-specific vocabulary in oral CLIL-data
- 3.1Phase 1: Automatized quantitative analysis: Keyword & cluster analysis
- 3.2Phase 2: Qualitative selection through researchers (rating scale steps 1&2)
- 3.3Phase 3: Final selection involving experts (rating scale steps 3&4)
- 4.Trialling the 3-phase model
- 4.1Data set
- 4.2Conducting the SSV analysis
- 4.3SSV in the CLIL-data set
- 5.Strengths and limitations of the model
- 6.Conclusion
- Notes
-
References
References
Ahmad, K., Davies, A., Fulford, H., & Rogers, M.
Anthony, L.
(
2010)
AntConc. [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University.
Anthony, L.
(
2013)
AntWordProfiler. [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E.
(
1999)
Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Longman.
British National Corpus, version 3 (BNC XML Edition)
(
2007) Distributed by Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford, on behalf of the BNC Consortium. Retrieved from
[URL].
Browne, C., Culligan, B., & Phillips, J.
(
2013a)
The New Academic Word List. Retrieved from
[URL].
Browne, C., Culligan, B., & Phillips, J.
(
2013b)
The New General Service List. Retrieved from
[URL]
Chung, T. M., & Nation, P.
(
2003)
Technical vocabulary in specialized texts.
Reading in a Foreign Language,
15
(2), 103–116.
Chung, T. M., & Nation, P.
(
2004)
Identifying technical vocabulary.
System,
32
1, 251–263.
Council of Europe
(
2001)
Common European framework of reference for languages: learning, teaching, assessment (CEFR). Retrieved from
[URL].
Coxhead, A.
(
2000)
A new academic word list.
TESOL Quarterly,
34
1, 213–238.
Coxhead, A.
(
2013)
Vocabulary in ESP. In
B. Paltridge, &
S. Starfield (Eds.),
The handbook of English for specific purposes (pp. 115–132). Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D.
(
2010)
CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Csomay, E., & Petrović, M.
(
2012)
‘Yes, your Honor!’: A corpus-based study of technical vocabulary in discipline-related movies and TV shows.
System,
40
1, 305–315.
Dalton-Puffer, C.
(
2011)
Content-and-language integrated learning: From practice to principles? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,
31
1, 182–204.
Dalton-Puffer, C.
(
2013)
A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualising content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education.
European Journal of Applied Linguistics,
1
(2).
.
Dalton-Puffer, C., Nikula, T., & Smit, U.
Dalton-Puffer, C., Nikula, T., & Smit, U.
(
2010b)
Language use and language learning in CLIL: Current findings and contentious issues. In
C. Dalton-Puffer,
T. Nikula, &
U. Smit (Eds.),
Language Use and Language Learning in CLIL (pp. 279–291). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Davies, M.
(
2008)
The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): 520 million words, 1990–present. Retrieved from
[URL].
Drouin, P.
(
2010)
TermoStat. [Computer Software]. Montréal, Canada: Universitè de Montréal.
Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. J.
(
1998)
Developments in English for Specific Purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dunning, T.
(
1993)
Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence.
Computational Linguistics,
19
(1), 61–74.
Fernández Fontecha, A.
(
2014)
Receptive vocabulary knowledge and motivation in CLIL and EFL.
Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas [
Journal of Applied Linguistics and Languages],
9
1, 23–32.
Flowerdew, J.
(
2011)
ESP and corpus studies. In
D. Belcher,
A. M. Johns, &
B. Paltridge (Eds.),
New directions in English for Specific Purposes research (pp. 222–251). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Gablasova, D.
(
2014)
Learning and retaining specialized vocabulary from textbook reading: Comparison of learning outcomes through L1 and L2.
Modern Language Journal,
98
(4), 976–991.
Gardner, D.
(
2007)
Validating the construct of “word” in applied corpus-based vocabulary research: A critical survey.
Applied Linguistics,
28
(2), 241–265.
Gierlinger, E., & Wagner, T.
(
2016)
The more the merrier – Revisiting CLIL-based vocabulary growth in secondary education.
Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning,
9
(1), 37–63.
Ha, A. Y. L., & Hyland, K.
(
2017)
What is technicality? A technical analysis model for EAP vocabulary.
Journal of English for Academic Purposes,
28
1, 35–49.
Heatley, A., Nation, P., & Cohead, A.
(
2000)
RANGE. Wellington, New Zealand: Victoria University of Wellington.
Heras, A., & Lasagabaster, D.
(
2015)
The impact of CLIL on affective factors and vocabulary learning.
Language Teaching Research,
19
(1), 70–88.
Hüttner, J., & Smit, U.
(
2014)
CLIL (Content and language integrated learning): The bigger picture. A response to:
A. Bruton (2013)
CLIL: Some of the reasons why … and why not.
System,
41
1, 160–176.
Hüttner, J., & Smit, U.
(
2018)
Negotiating political positions: Subject-specific oral language use in CLIL classrooms.
International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,
21
(3), 287–302.
Hyland, K.
(
2008)
As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation.
English for Specific Purposes,
27
1, 4–21.
Jiménez Catalán, R. M., & Ruiz de Zarobe, Y.
(
2009)
The receptive vocabulary of EFL learners in two instructional contexts: CLIL vs. non-CLIL instruction. In
Y. Ruiz de Zarobe, &
R. M. Jiménez Catalán (Eds.),
Content and language integrated learning: Evidence from research in Europe (pp. 81–92). Bristol: Channel View Publications.
Kwary, D. A.
(
2011)
A hybrid method for determining technical vocabulary.
System,
39
1, 175–185.
Llinares, A.
(
2015)
Integration in CLIL: A proposal to inform research and successful pedagogy.
Language, Culture and Curriculum,
28
(1), 58–73.
Llinares, A., & Morton, T.
(
2010)
Historical explanations as situated practice in content and language integrated learning.
Classroom Discourse,
1
(1), 46–65.
Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R.
(
2012)
The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Llinares, A., & Whittaker, R.
(
2010)
Writing and speaking in the history class: A comparative analysis of CLIL and first language contexts. In
C. Dalton-Puffer,
T. Nikula, &
U. Smit (Eds.),
Language Use and Language Learning in CLIL (pp. 125–143). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Martinez, R., & Schmitt, N.
(
2012)
A phrasal expressions list.
Applied Linguistics,
33
(3), 299–320.
Martínez, I. A., Beck, S. C., & Panza, C. B.
(
2009)
Academic vocabulary in agriculture research articles: A corpus-based study.
English for Specific Purposes,
28
(3), 183–198.
Moghadam, N. Z., & Fatemipour, H.
(
2014)
The effect of CLIL on vocabulary development by Iranian secondary school EFL learners.
Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences,
98
1, 2004–2009.
Morton, T.
(
2015)
Vocabulary explanations in CLIL classrooms: A conversation analysis perspective.
Language Learning Journal,
43
(3), 256–270.
Nation, P.
(
2006)
How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review,
63
(1), 59–82.
Nation, P.
(
2008)
Teaching vocabulary: Strategies and techniques. Boston, MA: Heinle and Cengage.
Nation, P.
(
2013)
Learning vocabulary in another language (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nelson, M.
(
2000)
A corpus-based study of business English and business English teaching materials (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Manchester.
Nikula, T.
(
2012)
On the role of peer discussions in the learning of subject-specific language use in CLIL. In
E. A. Soler, &
M.-P. Safont-Jorda (Eds.),
Discourse and language learning across L2 instructional settings (pp. 133–153). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Nikula, T.
(
2015)
Hands-on tasks in CLIL science classrooms as sites for subject-specific language use and learning.
System,
54
1, 14–27.
Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer, C., & Llinares, A.
Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer, C., Llinares, A., & Lorenzo, F.
(
2016)
More than content and language: The complexity of integration in CLIL and multilingual education. In
T. Nikula,
E. Dafouz,
P. Moore, &
U. Smit (Eds.),
Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp. 1–28). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Ojeda Alba, J.
(
2009)
Themes and vocabulary in CLIL and non-CLIL Instruction. In
R. M. Jiménez Catalán &
Y. Ruiz de Zarobe (Eds.),
Content and language integrated learning : Evidence from research in Europe (pp. 95–116). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Olsson, E.
(
2015)
Progress in English academic vocabulary use in writing among CLIL and non-CLIL students in Sweden.
Moderna Språk [
Modern Language],
109
(2), 51–74.
Pérez-Vidal, C. & Roquet, H.
(
2015)
The linguistic impact of a CLIL science programme: An analysis measuring relative gains.
System,
54
1, 80–90.
Pinna, A.
(
2007)
Exploiting LSP corpora in the study of foreign languages. In
D. Gálová (Ed.),
Languages for specific purposes: Searching for common solutions (pp. 146–162). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
Preisfeld, A.
(
2016)
Die Bedeutung bilingualen Experimentalunterrichts in Biologie für die fachliche und sprachliche Kompetenz [The contribution of bilingual experiment-based instruction in biology to language and subject competence]. In
B. Dier,
A. Preisfeld, &
L. Schmelter (Eds.),
Bilingualen Unterricht weiterentwickeln und erforschen [
Enhancing and investigating bilingual instruction] (pp. 103–123). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Read, J.
(
2007)
Second language vocabulary assessment.
International Journal of English Studies,
7
1, 105–125.
Rizzo, C. R., & Pérez, M. J. M.
(
2015)
A key perspective on specialized lexis: Keywords in Telecommunication Engineering for CLIL.
Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences,
198
1, 386–396.
Sylvén, L. K., & Ohlander, S.
(
2014)
The CLISS Project: Receptive vocabulary in CLIL versus non-CLIL groups.
Moderna Språk [
Modern Language],
108
(2), 80–114.
Valpouri, L. & Nassaji, H.
(
2013)
A corpus-based study of academic vocabulary in chemistry.
Journal of English for Academic Purposes,
12
1, 248–263.
VOICE
(
2010)
Voice transcription conventions [2.1]. Retrieved from
[URL].
Wang, J., Liang, S., & Ge, G.
(
2008)
Establishment of a medical Academic Word List.
English for Specific Purposes,
27
1, 442–458.
West, M.
(
1953)
A General Service List of English words. London: Longman.
Woodward-Kron, R.
(
2008)
More than just jargon – the nature and role of specialist language in learning disciplinary knowledge.
Journal of English for Academic Purposes,
7
(4), 234–249.
Xanthou, M.
(
2011)
The impact of CLIL on L2 vocabulary development and content knowledge.
English Teaching,
10
(4), 116–126.
Cited by
Cited by 2 other publications
Hüttner, Julia
2020.
Functional Plurality of Language in Contextualised Discourse,
► pp. 63 ff.
Rieder-Bünemann, Angelika, Julia Hüttner & Ute Smit
2022.
‘Who would have thought that I’d ever know that!’: subject-specific vocabulary in CLIL student interactions.
International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 25:9
► pp. 3184 ff.
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.