Comparing Formulaic Sequences in English as a Lingua Franca and English as a Native Language in Academic Lectures

Document Type : research article

Authors

1 Department of linguistics and language teaching, Payame Noor University

2 Payame Noor University

Abstract

The high significance of Formulaic sequences (FSs) in each language has attracted the attention of scholars. This study aimed at comparing the use of FSs in English as a foreign language (EFL) and English as Native Language (ENL) lectures. Additionally, it attempted to discover the textual and structural functions of used FSs in two corpora of lectures. Finally, this study aimed at finding the position of FSs in sentences. To this end, two corpora, namely the transcribed corpus of spoken English of ELF and the Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English were selected to be studied. The present study selected 100,000 words from the two corpora, approximately 50,000 from each The study employed Antconc software in order to accomplish its goal. Then, 638 FSs were extracted from previous studies and examined one by one. They were analyzed from different perspectives according to the objectives of the study. The results indicated non-native speakers used FSs more than native ones. Moreover, the most used textual function was saptio-temporal one both by non-native and native speakers. The most used structure by both groups was prepositional phrase. Furthermore, both groups used FSs in initial position more than other positions. The present study has implications for students, teachers, and material developers.

Keywords

References

Altenberg, B., & Tapper, B. (1998). The use of adverbial connectors in advanced Swedish learners' written English. In S. Granger (Ed.), Learner English on computer (pp. 80-93). London: Longman.
Laurence, A. (2007). AntConc 3.2.1 program.
Appel, R., & Trofimovich, P. (2017). Transitional probability predicts native and non‐native use of formulaic sequences. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 27(1), 24-43.
Baker, W. (2011). Culture and identity through ELF in Asia: Fact of Fiction? In A. Cogo, A. Archibald, & J. Jenkins (Eds.), Latest trends in ELF research (pp. 35-52). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars.
Bestgen, Y. (2017). Beyond single-word measures: L2 writing assessment, lexical richness and formulaic competence. System, 69, 65-78.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., Finegan, E., & Hirst, G. (2002). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
Boers, F., & Lindstromberg, S. (2008). From empirical findings to pedagogical practice. In F. Boers & S. Lindstromberg (Eds.), Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology (pp. 375-393). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
Bolton, K., Nelson, G., & Hung, J. (2002). A corpus-based study of connectors in student
writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 7(2), 165-182.
Buerki, A. (2018). 1. Formulaic sequences: a drop in the ocean of constructions or something more significant? In Formulaicity and Creativity in Language and Literature. Taylor & Francis.
Chen, W. Y. C. (2006). The use of conjunctive adverbials in the academic papers of advanced
Taiwanese EFL learners. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 11(1), 113-130.
Chen, Y., & Baker, P. (2010). Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning & Technology, 14(2), 30-49.
Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than                 nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers?  Applied Linguistics, 29                    (1), 72–89.  https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm022
Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second-language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cortes, V. (2004). Lexical bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: examples
from history and biology. English for Specific Purposes, 23, 397-423.
Creswell, W. J. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. USA: Sage Publication.new
Ellis, N. C. (2008). Usage-based and form-focused SLA: The implicit and explicit learning of constructions. In A. Tyler, K. Yiyoung, & M. Takada (Eds.), Language in the context of use: Cognitive and discourse approaches to language (pp. 93-120). Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter.
Field, Y., & Yip, L. M. O. (1992). A comparison of internal conjunctive cohesion in the English essay writing of Cantonese speakers and native speakers of English. RELC Journal, 23(1), 15-28.
Ford, C. E. & Thompson, S. A. (1986). Conditionals in discourse: A text-based
study from English. In E. Traugott, C. Ferguson, J. S. Reilly, & A. ter Meulen (Eds.), Linking adverbials (pp. 353-372). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Granger, S., & Tyson, S. (1996). Connector usage in the English essay writing of native and
non-native EFL speakers of English. World Englishes, 15(1), 17-27.
Halliday, M. A. K. (2014). Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar. Oxen: Routledge.
Howarth, P. (1998). Phraseology and second language proficiency. Applied linguistics, 19(1), 24-44.
Hyland, K. (2008). Academic clusters: Text patterning in published and postgraduate writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18(1), 1-9.
Jalali, H. (2013). Lexical bundles in applied linguistics: Variations across postgraduate genres. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Translation Studies, 2(2), 1-29.
Jalilifar, A. (2008). Discourse markers in composition writings: The case of Iranian learners of English as a foreign language. English Language Teaching, 1, 114-122.
Jiang, N. A., & Nekrasova, T. M. (2007). The processing of formulaic sequences by second language speakers. The Modern Language Journal, 91(3), 433-445.
Kremmel, B., Brunfaut, T., & Alderson, J. C. (2017). Exploring the role of phraseological knowledge in foreign language reading. Applied Linguistics, 38(6), 848-870.
Lei, L. (2012). Linking adverbials in academic writing on applied linguistics by Chinese
doctoral students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(3), 267-275.
Le-Thi, D., Rodgers, M. P., & Pellicer-Sánchez, A. (2017). Teaching formulaic sequences in an English-language class: the effects of explicit instruction versus coursebook instruction. TESL Canada Journal, 34(3), 111-139.
McGuire, M., & Larson-Hall, J. (2017). Teaching formulaic sequences in the classroom: Effects on spoken fluency. TESL Canada Journal, 34(3), 1-25.
Milton, J., & Tsang, E. S. C. (1993). A corpus-based study of logical connectors in EFL students' writing: directions for future research. In R. Pemberton & E. S. C. Tsang (Eds.), Studies in lexis (pp. 215-246). Hong Kong: The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Language Centre.
Myles, F., & Cordier, C. (2017). Formulaic sequence (FS) cannot be an umbrella term in SLA: Focusing on psycholinguistic FSs and their identification. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39(1), 3-28.
Parvizi, N. (2011). Identification of discipline-specific lexical bundles in education. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Kashan, Kashan, Iran.
Rahimi, M. (2011). Discourse markers in argumentative and expository writing of Iranian EFL learners. World Journal of English Language, 1, 68-78.
Schmitt, N. (2004). Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Schmitt, N., Jiang, X., & Grabe, W. (2011). The percentage of words known in a text and reading comprehension. The Modern Language Journal, 95(1), 26-43.
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.
Talebinejad, M. R., & Namdar, A. (2011). Discourse markers in high school textbooks in Iran. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1, 1590-1602.
Valipoor, L. (2010). A corpus-based study of words and bundles in chemistry research
articles. Unpublished thesis. University of Kashan.
Wang, Y. (2017). Lexical bundles in spoken academic ELF: Genre and disciplinary variation. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 22(2). 187-211.
Wang, Y. (2018). As Hill seems to suggest: Variability in formulaic sequences with an interpersonal function in L1 novice and expert academic writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 33, 12-23.
Wood, D. (2006). Uses and functions of formulaic sequences in second language speech: An exploration of the foundations of fluency. Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(1), 13-33.
Wood, D. (2010). Formulaic language and second language speech fluency: Background, evidence and applications. London: Continuum.
Wray, A. (2008). Formulaic Language: Pushing the Boundaries. Oxford: OUP.
Wray, A. (2017). Formulaic sequences as a regulatory mechanism for cognitive perturbations during the achievement of social goals. Topics in cognitive science, 9(3), 569-587.
Zareva, A. (2011). And so that was it': linking adverbials in student academic presentations.
RELC Journal, 42(1), 5-15.
Zhang, Z. (2000). Cohesive features in the expository writing of undergraduates in two Chinese universities. RELC Journal, 31(1), 61-95.
Journal of Foreign Language Research
Volume 10, Issue 3
November 2020
Pages 558-573

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics