Transcript Connector usage in advanced Lithuanian learners’ English

Connector usage in advanced
Lithuanian learners’ English
writing
Lina Bikelienė
Vilnius University
3 September, 2010
Introduction
Foreign-soundingness (Granger, 1999:192)
Controversial findings:
–No overall connector overuse in IL
(Granger and Tyson 1996,
Altenberg and Tapper 1998)
–Overuse in IL
(Tankó 2004)
Aim
• Quantitative analysis of the use of adverbial
connectors by Lithuanian learners
• Comparison with native speakers’ usage
• Brief comparison with non-native speakers’
usage
Material
• LICLE – 154,992 words
• LOCNESS:

LOCNESS-BR – 95,695 words
Material 2
• Learners
with
background :
other
mother-tongue
Swedish - Altenberg and Tapper (1998)
French - Granger and Tyson (1996)
Hungarian - Tankó (2004)
Chinese - Ai and Peng (2006)
Polish - Leńko-Szymańska (2007)
Taiwanese - Chen (2006)
Japanese - Narita et al (2004)
Methodology
CIA
(Contrastive
Interlanguage
Analysis) – ‘establishes comparisons
<...> between native and learner
varieties of one and the same language’
(Granger, 1996: 43)
• Connectors extracted using TextSTAT-2 and
AntConc3.2.1w
• Grouped into the categories distinguished
by Quirk et al (1991: 634-636)
• Log-likelihood
calculator
(http://ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/llwizard.html)
p<0.01, critical value 6.63
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
LISTING
(i) enumerative
(ii) additive:
SUMMATIVE
APPOSITIONAL
RESULTIVE
INFERENTIAL
CONTRASTIVE
(i) reformulatory
(ii) replacive
(iii) antithetic
(iv) concessive
TRANSITIONAL
(i) discoursal
(ii) temporal
equative
reinforcing
(first of all, finally)
(in the same way)
(moreover)
(in conclusion, altogether)
(namely, for example)
(consequently, so)
(otherwise, in that case)
(more precisely, rather)
(again, alternatively)
(instead, on the contrary)
(however, nevertheless)
(by the way, incidentally)
(meanwhile,in the meantime)
Quirk et al (1991:634-636)
Overall figures
LICLE
2710
LOCNESS-BR
1381
174.85
144.31
Number of connectors
per essay
10.11
15.34
Essay length (in
words)
578
1063
Total number of
connectors
Number of connectors
(10 000 words)
Ratio of connector usage
LICLE : LOCNESS-BR
1.22 : 1
FRENCH NNS : NS
0.92 : 1
SWICLE : LOCNESS
0.74 : 1
HUNGARIAN CORPUS : LOCNESS
2.13 : 1
• ...the learners use most frequently those
connectors which add to, exemplify, or
emphasize a point, rather than those which
change the direction of the argument or
take the argument logically forward.
Granger and Tyson (1996: 20)
Category
LICLE
LOCNESS-BR
LL
1.
Listing
63.7
43.50
+44.71
2.
Summative
10.32
0.63
+113.80
3.
Appositive
17.68
10.76
+19.72
4.
Resultive
37.49
38.87
-0.30
5.
Inferential
1.87
1.67
+0.13
6.
Contrastive
43.03
45.77
-1,00
7.
Transitional
1.23
3.13
-19,07
174.85
144.31
+34.36
Total
Top four semantic categories
LICLE
LOCNESS-BR
SWICLE
Hungarian
Corpus
1
Listing
Contrastive
Contrastive
Listing
2
Contrastive
Listing
Resultive
Resultive
3
Resultive
Resultive
Appositive
Contrastive
4
Appositive
Appositive
Listing
Summative
Commonly overused connectors
Category
Swedish learners
French learners
Lithuanian
learners
O Listing
moreover
moreover
moreover
V Appositive
for instance
for instance
for instance
E
namely
namely
namely
R Contrastive
on the contrary
on the contrary
on the contrary
U
still
S
E
STILL
(UNDERUSE)
Commonly underused connectors
U Resultive
hence
hence
hence
N
therefore
therefore
therefore
D
thus
thus
THUS
(OVERUSE)
E
R Contrastive
however
however
(OVERUSE)
U
S
E
HOWEVER
yet
yet
yet
instead
instead
LICLE
LOCNESS-BR
SWICLE
PICLE
Hungarian
Chinese Corpus
Corpus
Taiwanese
Corpus
1.
however
however
for example
also
however
first
however
2.
also
also
however
however
also
second
therefore
3.
for example
therefore
of course
therefore
therefore
however
for instance/ for
example
4.
thus
so
so
for example
thus
secondly
thus
5.
so
thus
therefore
so
furthermore
for example
moreover
6.
therefore
for example
thus
thus
moreover
although
besides
7.
moreover
yet
for instance
moreover
secondly
though
also
8.
first of all
again
that is
on
finally
first
the
other though
hand
9.
of course
on
the
other still
consequently
in addition
firstly
then
nevertheless
first of all
of course
in addition
hand
10. on
hand
the
other too
furthermore
LICLE
LOCNESS-BR
SWICLE
PICLE
Hungarian
Chinese Corpus
Corpus
Taiwanese
Corpus
1.
however
however
for example
also
however
first
however
2.
also
also
however
however
also
second
therefore
3.
for example
therefore
of course
therefore
therefore
however
for instance/ for
example ???
4.
thus
so
so
for example
thus
secondly
thus
5.
so
thus
therefore
so
furthermore
for example
moreover
6.
therefore
for example
thus
thus
moreover
although
besides
7.
moreover
yet
for instance
moreover
secondly
though
also
8.
first of all
again
that is
on
finally
first
the
other though
hand
9.
of course
on
the
other still
consequently
in addition
firstly
then
nevertheless
first of all
of course
in addition
hand
10. on
hand
the
other too
furthermore
LICLE
LOCNESS-BR
SWICLE
PICLE
Hungarian
Chinese Corpus
Corpus
Taiwanese
Corpus
1.
however
however
for example
also
however
first
however
2.
also
also
however
however
also
second
therefore
3.
for example
therefore
of course
therefore
therefore
however
for instance/ for
example ???
4.
thus
so
so
for example
thus
secondly
thus
5.
so
thus
therefore
so
furthermore
for example
moreover
6.
therefore
for example
thus
thus
moreover
although
besides
7.
moreover
yet
for instance
moreover
secondly
though
also
8.
first of all
again
that is
on
finally
first
the
other though
hand
9.
of course
on
the
other still
consequently
in addition
firstly
then
nevertheless
first of all
of course
in addition
hand
10. on
hand
the
other too
furthermore
Top ten
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
67
73
68
66
PICLE
HUNGARIAN
CORPUS
60
LICLE
LOCNESS-BR
SWICLE
Types of connectors
Category
LICLE
LOCNESS-BR
1.
Listing
26
25
2.
Summative
6
4
3.
Apppositive
5
6
4.
Resultive
8
8
5.
Inferential
3
2
6.
Contrastive
16
18
7.
Transitional
5
4
69
67
Total
Sentence position
100
percentage
80
60
LICLE
40
LOCNESS-BR
20
0
SI
SM
SF
LICLE
61
37
2
LOCNESS-BR
26
71
3
itiv
e
tin
g
m
e
Re
su
lt i
e
ve
Co
nt
ra
st
iv
on
al
at
iv
Tr
an
sit
i
Su
m
In
fe
re
nt
ia
l
Ap
po
s
Li
s
Position in LICLE
(semantic categories)
600
500
400
SI
300
SM
200
SF
100
0
Possible explanation
• Features of interlanguage
• SI position
• Developmental errors
• Register confusion <...> seems to be as much part of the process of acquiring a
foreign language as it is art of the process of becoming an expert writer.
(Guilquin and Paquot, 2007:7)
e.g. Number of listing connectors in LICLE and LOCNESS-A-level
• L2 instruction
• Non-native teachers’ discourse
• L1 transfer
• Inadequate material
• Lack of clear information in dictionaries and grammars
– lists of connectors in textbooks
Conclusions
• The Lithuanian learners overuse connectors.
• The Lithuanian learners tend to rely on the most
frequent connectors.
• The Lithuanian learners share a set of under- and
overused connectors with the learners from
different mother-tongue backgrounds.
• Sentence distribution of connectors in LICLE is
similar to distribution in other NNS corpora.