Category: corpus linguistics

Where´ is home? EU citizens as migrants.

Approaches to migration, language and identity 2020 AMLI Conference (www)

University of Sussex, Wednesday 9 – Friday 11 June 2021

Book of abstracts.


Pascual Pérez-Paredes & Elena Remigi
Universidad de Murcia / The In Limbo Project

When?

Thursday June 10, Panel A: Foregrounding migrant perspectives 11:25 UK time


Abstract

Since January 2021, UK and EU citizens can no longer exercise freedom of movement between the two areas. EU, EEA or Swiss citizens living in the UK before 31 December 2020 have been forced to apply to the EU Settlement Scheme to continue living in the UK. In practical terms, EU citizens have become a new migrant community. The 2016 Brexit referendum started a period of uncertainty,
agony and frustration for both EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens in the EU that ended with the trade deal that the EU and the UK made public on 24 December 2020. The anger, the sense of betrayal (Bueltmann, 2020) and various mental health issues (Reimer, 2018; Bueltmann, 2020), however, linger on. This study uses a corpus of 200 testimonies from EU citizens in the UK to explore their feelings and reactions to Brexit and the hostile environment (Leudar et al., 2008) that emerged soon after the referendum. The In Limbo corpus of testimonies contains personal accounts by EU citizens living in Britain from 2017 until 2020. It has 81,000 tokens and 7,600 types. The collection of the data was organised by volunteers on a not-for-profit basis. The testimonies in Remigi, E., Martin, V., & Sykes
(2020) were chosen as the basis of our corpus.


We used keyword (Baker, 2006; Baker et al., 2008) and collocation (Baker, 2006; Pérez-Paredes, Aguado & Sánchez, 2017; Pérez-Paredes, 2020) analyses to explore the self-representation of EU citizens across four emerging areas of interest: family life, loss of identity, feeling unwelcome and representations of post-Brexit Britain, including discourses about settled status and Britishness. In
order to moderate the impact of Brexit-as-a-topic in the analysis of the narratives, we used two reference corpora in our study: the Brexit corpus and the enTenTen 2015, both provided through Sketch Engine. We used Wodak’s (2001) framework of analysis of representation strategies to pin down our discussion of the discourses emerging in the testimonies. Two strategies appear to be relevant in the context of our data: predication and perspectivation. The former is used mainly when expressing feelings about the UK while the latter are crucial to deliver the narratives
discursively. While our research confirms some of the conclusions in the survey conducted by Bueltmann (2020), the combination of corpus-based CDA methods and the rich data provided through these narratives open up further understanding of the discursive strategies used by EU citizens when resisting the anti-EU environment that was unleashed in the wake of Brexit. Our analysis provides an alternative representation of the consequences and impact of Brexit on EU migrants that is in contrast with the recent triumphalist discourse of the Tory government that misrepresents EU citizens as happily embracing the settled status scheme.

Keywords: Brexit, EU citizens, migrants, keyword analysis, representation strategies

Download the top 100 multiword key terms from the In Limbo corpus.

How learners are using corpora in EMI contexts

This talk was part of Cambridge University Press ELS Insights on Demand.

You can download my presentation slides here.

Here´s a list of the references I used in this presentation:

Biber, D. (2019). Text-linguistic approaches to register variation. Register Studies, 1(1), 42-75.

Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2009). Register, genre, and style. Cambridge University Press.

Brian, A. (2020). A case study of corpus-informed ESP language learning materials for EMI psychology students at the University of Padova.

Curry, N. & Pérez-Paredes, P. (2021). Understanding Lecturers’ Practices and Processes: A Qualitative Investigation of English-Medium Education in a Spanish Multilingual University, published in Teaching Language and Content in Multicultural and Multilingual Classrooms, editedby Carrió-Pastor, M.L., & Bellés Fortuño, B. Palgrave MacMillan.

Dafouz, E., & Smit, U. (2016). Towards a dynamic conceptual framework for English-mediumeducation in multilingual university settings. Applied Linguistics, 37(3), 397-415.

Dafouz, E., & Smit, U. (2020). ROAD-MAPPING English medium education in the internationaliseduniversity. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Dushku, S. & Thompson, P. (2020). CAMPUS TALK. Edinburgh University Press.

Jablonkai, R. R. (2019). Corpus linguistic methods in EMI research: A missed opportunity?In Research methods in EMI. Routledge.

Kırkgöz, Y., & Dikilitaş, K. (2018). Recent developments in ESP/EAP/EMI contexts. In Key issues in English for specific purposes in higher education (pp. 1-10). Springer, Cham.

Kunioshi, N., Noguchi, J., Tojo, K., & Hayashi, H. (2016). Supporting English-medium pedagogythrough an online corpus of science and engineering lectures. European Journal of EngineeringEducation, 41(3), 293-303.

O’keeffe, A., McCarthy, M., & Carter, R. (2007). From corpus to classroom: Language use and language teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Street, B. (2004). Academic literacies and the’new orders’: implications for research and practice in student writing in higher education. Learning & Teaching in the Social Sciences, 1(1).

Timmis, I. (2015). Corpus linguistics for ELT: Research and practice. Routledge.

Extending corpus linguistics methods to education research

University of Exeter

Language & Education Network Research Seminar, 22 February 2021.

Abstract

Corpora have been widely used in applied linguistics research and, to a lesser extent, in other fields such as political science or sociology. However, corpus research methods are rarely taught in education faculties. I will discuss different approaches to using CL methods in education research and examine the underlying assumptions that may justify distinguishing between corpus linguistics (CL) as a methodology and as a set of methods. This talk seeks to contribute to the advancement of the debate about how CL can position itself within the wide spectrum of current educational research methods.

References

Bednarek, M., Pinto, M. V., & Werner, V. (2021). Corpus approaches to telecinematic language. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 26(1), 1-9.


Cameron, D. & Panović, I. (2014). Corpus-based discourse analysis. In Working with written discourse (pp. 81-96). Sage.


Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2018) Research methods in education. Routledge.


Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.

Durrant, P., Brenchley, M., & McCallum, L. (2021). Understanding development and proficiency in writing: quantitative corpus linguistic approaches. Cambridge University Press.


Fest, J. (2015). Corpora in the Social Sciences-How corpus-based appraches can support qualitative interview analyses. LFE. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 21,2, 48-69.


Gianfreda, S. (2019). Using a mixed-method approach to examine party positioning on immigration and the european union in parliamentary proceedings.In SAGE Research Methods Cases.


Leech, G. (2000). Grammars of spoken English: New outcomes of corpus‐oriented research. Language learning, 50(4), 675-724.


Leavy, P. (2017). Research design: Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, arts-based, and community-based participatory research approaches. The Guildford Press.

Pérez-Paredes, P. (2020). Corpus Linguistics for Education: A Guide for Research. Routledge.


Seale, C. & Charteris-Black, J. (2010). Keyword analysis: a new tool for qualitative research. In The SAGE handbook of qualitative methods in health research (pp. 536-556). Sage.


Sealey, A., & Thompson, P. (2004). ‘What do you call the dull words?’Primary school children using corpus-based approaches to learn about language. English in Education, 38(1), 80-91.


Wright, D. (2017). Using word n-grams to identify authors and idiolects: A corpus approach to a forensic linguistic problem. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 22(2), 212-241.


Vessey, R. (2013). Challenges in cross-linguistic corpus-assisted discourse studies. Corpora, 8(1), 1-26.


Vessey, R. (2017). Representations of language education in Canadian newspapers. Canadian Modern Language Review, 73(2), 158-182.

Aprendizaje de lenguas mediante dispositivos móviles: alcance, praxis y teoría

Conferencia plenaria, 25 de noviembre 2020,; XXI Congreso SEDLL Multimodalidad y nuevos entornos de aprendizaje en la enseñanza de las lenguas y las literaturas.

3 case studies

Pérez-Paredes, P., Ordoñana Guillamón, C., Van de Vyver, J., Meurice, A., Aguado Jiménez, P., Conole, G., & Sánchez Hernández, P. (2019). Mobile data-driven language learning: Affordances and learners’ perception. System, 84, 145–159.

Zhang, D., & Pérez-Paredes, P. (2019). Chinese postgraduate EFL learners’ self-directed use of mobile English learning resources. Computer Assisted Language Learning.  

Zhang, D. & Pérez-Paredes, P. (2020). Exploring Chinese EFL teachers’ perceptions of Augmented Reality (AR) in English language learning. In Miller, L. & Wu, G. (eds) Language Learning with Technology: theories, principles and practices. Springer.

Keynote abstract

Mobile assisted language learning (MALL) has become one the most popular keywords in computer assisted language learning (CALL) research over the last twenty years. While MALL enthusiasts have glossed its many affordances, the use of MALL in instructed classroom settings presents challenges of their own (Kukulska-Hulme & Shield, 2008; Conole & Pérez-Paredes, 2017; Pérez-Paredes, Ordoñana Guillamón, & Aguado Jiménez, 2018) that, I argue, have not been successfully defined in CALL research and classroom settings.

Traxler (2009) has noted that mobile learning is uniquely placed to support learning that is personalized, authentic, and situated. However, some relevant studies have thrown cold water on these expectations (Golonka, E. et al., 2014; Grgurović, Chapelle & Shelley, 2013). In this plenary, I will discuss different conceptualizations of MALL that emphasize areas of language learning that are anchored on different theories of language learning. I will use three case studies that have used different research methodologies, namely survey and mixed methods, across different contexts, countries and types of learning. I will discuss the self-directed uses of MALL (Zhang  & Pérez-Paredes, 2019), the design and use of apps to promote the acquisition of frequency-related declarative knowledge (Pérez-Paredes et al., 2019)  and the impact of new technologies such as Augmented Reality (AR) on language classrooms  (Zhang  & Pérez-Paredes, 2020). Ultimately, I will discuss a conceptual framework that situates MALL more critically in the context of existing and future practices of instructed (Foster, 2019; Kaminski, 2019) and self-directed (Trinder, 2017) language learning. Keywords: MALL, language learning, self-directed language learning, second language learning theory

References

Conole, G. & Pérez-Paredes, P. (2017). Adult language learning in informal settings and the role of mobile learning. Mobile and ubiquitous learning. An international handbook. New York: Springer, pp.45-58.

Foster, I. (2019) The future of language learning. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 32,3, 261-269,

Golonka, E. et al. (2014). Technologies for foreign language learning: a review of technology types and their effectiveness”. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27.1, 70-105.

Grgurović, M. Chapelle, C.  & Shelley, M.  (2013). A meta-analysis of effectiveness studies on computer technology-supported language learning. ReCALL, 25, pp 165-198.

Kaminski, A. (2019). Young learners’ engagement with multimodal texts. ELT Journal, 73(2), 175–185.

Kukulska-Hulme, A. & Shield, L. (2008). An overview of mobile assisted language learning: From content delivery to supported collaboration and interaction. ReCALL, 20, pp 271-289.

Pérez-Paredes, P., Ordoñana Guillamón, C., & Aguado Jiménez, P. (2018). Language teachers’ perceptions on the use of OER language processing technologies in MALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(5-6), 522-545.

Pérez-Paredes, P., Ordoñana Guillamón, C., Van de Vyver, J., Meurice, A., Aguado Jiménez, P., Conole, G., & Sánchez Hernández, P. (2019). Mobile data-driven language learning: Affordances and learners’ perception. System, 84, 145–159.

Zhang, D., & Pérez-Paredes, P. (2019). Chinese postgraduate EFL learners’ self-directed use of mobile English learning resources. Computer Assisted Language Learning.  

Zhang, D. & Pérez-Paredes, P. (2020). Exploring Chinese EFL teachers’ perceptions of Augmented Reality (AR) in English language learning. In Miller, L. & Wu, G. (eds) Language Learning with Technology: theories, principles and practices. Springer.

TELL-OP products and reports available here.

Traxler, J. (2009). Current state of mobile learning. In Ally, M. (ed.) Mobile learning: Transforming the delivery of education and training. Athabasca University Press, 9-24.

Traxler, J. (2018). Learning with Mobiles in the Digital Age. Pedagogika, Special Monothematic Issue: Education Futures for the Digital Age: Theory and Practice

Traxler, J.; Timothy, R.; Kukulska-Hulme, A. & Barcena, E. (2019). Paradoxical paradigm proposals – Learning languages in mobile societies. Argentinian Journal of Applied Linguistics (AJAL), 7(2) pp. 89–109.

Trinder, R. (2017). Informal and deliberate learning with new technologies. ELT Journal, 71(4), 401–412.

Wegerif, R. (2007). Dialogic education and technology: Expanding the space of learning (Vol. 7). Springer Science & Business Media.