Cover not available
Article published In:
Pedagogical Linguistics
Vol. 3:2 (2022) ► pp.193–200

Reflections on applied cognitive corpus linguistics

ORCID logo | Université catholique de Louvain

This article is a response to the commentaries written in reaction to my target article “Cognitive corpus linguistics and pedagogy: From rationale to applications”. It focuses on some issues raised by several commentators: the complexity of applying cognitive corpus linguistics in the language classroom; the question of authenticity in pedagogy; the link between input, intake and output; the place of the teacher and the researcher in applied cognitive corpus linguistics; and possible expansions of the paradigm. It concludes by underlining the importance of exchanges such as those found in this target issue.

Keywords: applied cognitive corpus linguistics, authenticity, input-intake-output, teacher-researcher, theoretical paradigms
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The complexity of applying cognitive corpus linguistics
  • 3.Authenticity in pedagogy
  • 4.From input to intake to output
  • 5.The place of the teacher and the researcher
  • 6.Expanding the paradigm
  • 7.Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 13 July 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pl.22006.gil
References
Gilquin, G., Bestgen, Y., & Granger, S.
(2022) Assessing EFL speech: A teacher-focused perspective. Journal of Second Language Teaching and Research, 9 1.Google Scholar
Gilquin, G., & Granger, S.
(2015) Learner language. In D. Biber, & R. Reppen (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of English corpus linguistics (pp. 418–435). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2022) Using data-driven learning in language teaching. In A. O’Keeffe, & M. McCarthy (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics. Second edition (pp. 430–442). London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kotze, H.
(2022) Translation as constrained communication: Principles, concepts and methods. In S. Granger, & M.-A. Lefer (Eds.), Extending the scope of corpus-based translation studies (pp. 67–97). London: Bloomsbury. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Le Foll, E.
Forthcoming). “I’m putting some salt in my sandwich.”: The use of the progressive in EFL textbook conversation. In S. Flach, & M. Hilpert Eds. Broadening the spectrum of corpus linguistics: New approaches to variability and change Amsterdam John Benjamins
Leech, G.
(2011) Frequency, corpora and language learning. In F. Meunier, S. De Cock, G. Gilquin, & M. Paquot (Eds.), A taste for corpora. In honour of Sylviane Granger (pp. 7–31). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lo, M. L., & Marton, F.
(2012) Towards a science of the art of teaching: Using variation theory as a guiding principle of pedagogical design. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 1 (1), 7–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Madlener, K.
(2015) Frequency effects in instructed second language acquisition. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B.
(1993) Grammar teaching for the acquisition-rich classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 26 (4), 435–450. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Widdowson, H. G.
(2000) On the limitations of linguistics applied. Applied Linguistics, 21 (1), 3–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003) Defining issues in English language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Willis, J.
(1998) Concordances in the classroom without a computer: Assembling and exploiting concordances of common words. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Materials development in language teaching (pp. 44–66). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar