Cover not available
Part of
Lexical Priming: Applications and advances
Edited by Michael Pace-Sigge and Katie J. Patterson
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 79] 2017
► pp. 273–296

Concordancing lexical primings

The rationale and design of a user-friendly corpus tool for English language teaching and self-tutoring based on the Lexical Priming theory of language

| Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, China
Lexical Priming (Hoey 2005) brings together a range of linguistic patterns that should be an important focus of language learning and teaching. But it also adds an additional load to learners and teachers, demanding attention to different primings of words and nested combinations of words. With many tendencies difficult to observe in dictionary entries or other concordancing software, learners and teachers will face difficulties finding and presenting information about these primings. This chapter introduces the design of a concordancer (The Prime Machine), created for a doctoral degree project and developed to be firmly based on the theory of Lexical Priming. It introduces the pedagogical rationale for the development of some key features, including the search screen interface and the display of concordance lines.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Developing learner-friendly design criteria for The Prime Machine
    • 2.1Claim 1: The design should help language learners explore differences between words and phrases
    • 2.2Claim 2: The design of the display for concordance lines should help language learners notice textual colligation, co-text and contexts
    • 2.3Claim 3: The design should help language learners notice features in the patterning of words and phrases
  • 3.Further work and concluding comments
  • Notes
  • List of Corpora
  • References
Published online: 14 August 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.79.11jea
References (55)
List of Corpora
BNC. 2007. The British National Corpus, Version 3 BNC XML ed. Oxford University Computing Services on behalf of the BNC Consortium.
Hindawi. 2013. Hindawi's open access full-text corpus for text mining research. (6 November 2013).
References
Anthony, L. 2004. AntConc: A learner and classroom friendly, multi-platform corpus analysis toolkit. Paper presented at the Interactive Workshop on Language e-Learning, Waseda University, Tokyo.
Barlow, M. 2016. WordSkew. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 21(1): 105–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bernardini, S. 2004. Corpora in the classroom: An overview and some reflections on future developments. In How to Use Corpora in Language Teaching [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 12], J.M. Sinclair (ed.), 15–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D. & Conrad, S.M. 2009. Register, Genre, and Style. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolitho, R., Carter, R., Hughes, R., Ivanič, R., Masuhara, H. & Tomlinson, B. 2003. Ten questions about Language Awareness. ELT Journal 57(3): 251–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cobb, T. 1999. Giving learners something to do with concordance output. Paper presented at the ITMELT '99 Conference, Hong Kong.
Coniam, D. 1997. A practical introduction to corpora in a teacher training language awareness programme. Language Awareness 6(4): 199–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N.C., O'Donnell, M.B. & Römer, U. 2013. Usage-based language: Investigating the latent structures that underpin acquisition. Language Learning 63(Suppl 1): 25–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Firth, J.R. 1957. Linguistic analysis as a study of meaning. In Selected Papers of J.R. Firth 1952–59, F.R. Palmer (ed.), 12–26. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Gabel, S. 2001. Over-indulgence and under-representation in interlanguage: Reflections on the utilization of concordancers in self-directed foreign language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning 14(3–4): 269–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garretson, G. 2007. What your words know: The theory of lexical priming. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 12(3): 445–452. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Corpus-derived Profiles: A Framework for Studying Word Meaning in Text. PhD dissertation, Boston University.
Gaskell, D. & Cobb, T. 2004. Can learners use concordance feedback for writing errors? System 32(3): 301–319. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoey, M. 2005. Lexical Priming: A New Theory of Words and Language. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoey, M. & O'Donnell, M.B. 2008. Lexicography, grammar, and textual position. International Journal of Lexicography 21(3): 293–293. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horst, M., Cobb, T. & Nicolae, I. 2005. Expanding academic vocabulary with an interactive on-line database. Language Learning & Technology 9(2): 90–110.Google Scholar
Hunston, S. 2002. Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jeaco, S. 2015. The Prime Machine: A User-friendly Corpus Tool for English Language Teaching and Self-tutoring Based on the Lexical Priming Theory of Language. PhD dissertation, University of Liverpool. 〈[URL]〉
Johns, T. 1991. Should you be persuaded: Two samples of data-driven learning materials. In Classroom Concordancing, Vol. 4, T. Johns & P. King (eds), 1–13. Birmingham: Centre for English Language Studies, University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
. 2002. Data-driven learning: The perpetual change. In Teaching and Learning by Doing Corpus Analysis, B. Kettemann, G. Marko,T. McEnery & (eds), 107–117. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaltenböck, G. & Mehlmauer-Larcher, B. 2005. Computer corpora and the language classroom: On the potential and limitations of computer corpora in language teaching. ReCALL 17(01): 65–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaszubski, P. 2007. Michael Hoey. Lexical priming: A new theory of words and language. Functions of Language 14(2): 283–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, G.D. 1998. An Introduction to Corpus Linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Kenning, M.-M. 2000. Concordancing and comprehension: preliminary observations on using concordance output to predict pitfalls. ReCALL 12(2): 157–169. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kettemann, B. 1995. On the use of concordancing in ELT. TELL&CALL 4: 4–15.Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, A., Rychly, P., Smrz, P. & Tugwell, D. 2004. The Sketch Engine. Paper presented at the 2003 International Conference on Natural Language Processing and Knowledge Engineering, Beijing.
Krashen, S. 1989. We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: additional evidence for the Input Hypothesis. The Modern Language Journal 73(iv): 440–464. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krishnamurthy, R. & Kosem, I. 2007. Issues in creating a corpus for EAP pedagogy and research. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 6(4): 356–373. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, D.Y.W. 2001. Genres, registers, text types, domains, and styles: Clarifying the concepts and navigating a path through the BNC jungle. Language Learning and Technology 5(3): 37–72.Google Scholar
Lewis, M. 2000. Language in the lexical approach. In Teaching Collocation: Further Developments in the Lexical Approach, M. Lewis (ed.), 126–154. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.Google Scholar
Lieven, E., Behrens, H., Speares, J. & Tomasello, M. 2003. Early syntactic creativity: A usage-based approach. Journal of Child Language 30(2): 333–370. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B. 2014. Childes Project. Tools for Analyzing Talk, Vol. I: Transcription Format and Programs, 3rd edn. London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
Mair, C. 2002. Empowering non-native speakers: The hidden surplus value of corpora in continental English departments. In Teaching and Learning by Doing Corpus Analysis, B. Kettemann, G. Marko, & T. McEnery (eds), 119–130. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MDBG. 2013. CC-CEDICT Download page. 〈[URL]〉
Meyer, C.F. 2002. English Corpus Linguistics: An Introduction. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, G.A. 1995. Word Net: A lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM 38(11): 39–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mills, J. 1994. Learner autonomy through the use of a concordancer. Paper presented at the Meeting of EUROCALL, Karlsruhe, Germany.
O'Donnell, M.B., Scott, M., Mahlberg, M. & Hoey, M. 2012. Exploring text-initial words, clusters and concgrams in a newspaper corpus. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 8(1): 73–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rayson, P. 2008. From key words to key semantic domains. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 13(4): 519–549. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R.W. 1990. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11(2): 129–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scott, M. 2010. WordSmith Tools, Version 5.0. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Scott, M. & Tribble, C. 2006. Textual Patterns: Key Words and Corpus Analysis in Language Education [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 6]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, J.M. 1991. Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Siyanova, A. & Schmitt, N. 2008. L2 learner production and processing of collocation: A multi-study perspective. Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne des Langues Vivantes 64(3): 429–458. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sun, Y.-C. 2003. Learning process, strategies and web-based concordancers: A case study. British Journal of Educational Technology 34: 601–613. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomas, J. 2015. Discovering English with Sketch Engine. Brno: Versatile.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. 2003. Constructing a Language: A Usage-based Theory of Language Acquisition. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tomlinson, B. 1994. Pragmatic awareness activities. Language Awareness 3(3–4): 119–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. Language acquisition and language learning materials. In English Language Learning Materials: A Critical Review, B. Tomlinson (ed.), 3–13. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Tsui, A.B.M. 2004. What teachers have always wanted to know – and how corpora can help. In How to Use Corpora in Language Teaching [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 12], J.M. Sinclair (ed.), 39–61. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Varley, S. 2009. I'll just look that up in the concordancer: Integrating corpus consultation into the language learning environment. Computer Assisted Language Learning 22(2): 133–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, A. 2013. Embracing Bayes Factors for key item analysis in corpus linguistics. In New Approaches to the Study of Linguistic Variability, M. Bieswanger & A. Koll-Stobbe (eds), 3–12. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Yeh, Y., Liou, H.-C. & Li, Y.-H. 2007. Online synonym materials and concordancing for EFL college writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning 20(2): 131–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (9)

Cited by nine other publications

Malyuga, Elena N.
2023. A corpus-based approach to corporate communication research. Russian Journal of Linguistics 27:1 ► pp. 152 ff. DOI logo
Scott, Penelope
2023. Conceptualizing health. International Journal of Language and Culture 10:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Hoey, Michael & Katie Patterson
2021. Lexical Priming. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Jeaco, Stephen
2019. Exploring Collocations with The Prime Machine. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching 9:3 ► pp. 29 ff. DOI logo
Jeaco, Stephen
2020. Key words when text forms the unit of study. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 25:2 ► pp. 125 ff. DOI logo
Jeaco, Stephen
2020. Calculating and displaying key labels: the texts, sections, authors and neighbourhoods where words and collocations are likely to be prominent. Corpora 15:2 ► pp. 169 ff. DOI logo
Jeaco, Stephen
2021. Exploring register withThe Prime Machine. Register Studies 3:2 ► pp. 279 ff. DOI logo
Jeaco, Stephen
2021. Concordance line sorting in The Prime Machine . International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 26:2 ► pp. 284 ff. DOI logo
Jeaco, Stephen
2023. How can we communicate (visually) what we (usually) mean by collocation and keyness?. Journal of Second Language Studies 6:1 ► pp. 29 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 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.