32.2721, Diss: Text/Corpus Linguistics: Mohsen Shirazizadeh: ''Academic collocates: Identification, Variation and pedagogical Value''

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-32-2721. Fri Aug 20 2021. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 32.2721, Diss:  Text/Corpus Linguistics: Mohsen Shirazizadeh: ''Academic collocates: Identification, Variation and pedagogical Value''

Moderator: Malgorzata E. Cavar (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Student Moderator: Jeremy Coburn, Lauren Perkins
Managing Editor: Becca Morris
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Everett Green, Sarah Robinson, Nils Hjortnaes, Joshua Sims, Billy Dickson
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Sarah Robinson <srobinson at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 21:50:38
From: Mohsen Shirazizadeh [mohsenshirazizadeh at gmail.com]
Subject: Academic collocates: Identification, Variation and pedagogical Value

 
Institution: Tarbiat Modares University 
Program: PhD 
Dissertation Status: Completed 
Degree Date: 2014 

Author: Mohsen Shirazizadeh

Dissertation Title: Academic collocates: Identification, Variation and
pedagogical Value 

Linguistic Field(s): Text/Corpus Linguistics


Dissertation Director(s):
Reza Ghafar Samar
Ramin Akbari

Dissertation Abstract:

Successful completion of any linguistic task requires sensitivity to the
context in which the task is being performed since any context calls for a
particular way of employing language. Such context-based linguistic variation
occurs at different linguistic levels and in various types of language use.
Although academic writing is different from other types of writing in terms of
its various linguistic features, it could not be perceived as a unified whole.
Different disciplines within academia employ language differently as they have
to conform to the linguistic conventions of different discourse communities.
Such variation within academic language might be found at various linguistic
levels (e.g. lexis, grammar, discourse). In view of this fact, one of the aims
of the present study was to investigate the effect of different disciplinary
contexts on the use and variation of the collocates of certain academic words.
In so doing, we selected, based on some criteria, a number of the words from
the Academic Vocabulary List (Gardner & Davies, 2013) and compared their
collocates across the texts of four university disciplines, namely humanities,
medicine, (basic) sciences and engineering. Our findings indicated that the
collocates of our target academic words varied substantially across the texts
of different university discipline. As our second aim, we set out to also see
if native English speakers use the collocates of the academic words
differently from non-native writers. Hence, we compared the collocates of
academic words as used by native and non-native scholars. In a more focused
analysis, we also compared native writers with Iranian writers in this
respect. Our findings showed that although the L1 of academic writers
apparently affected the use of collocates, these differences were rooted, to a
large extent,  in the (con)textual requirements of the disciplines which had
appeared as L1-based differences due to textual and computational
probabilities and limitations. The final objective of our study was to examine
the possible effect of teaching academic words in combination with their
collocates on the academic writing performance of EFL learners. To this aim,
we compared the end-of-the-course academic writing performance of our target
experimental group with another group that had received instruction on
academic vocabulary alone (i.e. not with their collocates). The findings
showed that teaching academic vocabulary in combination with their collocates
had no significant effect on learners academic writing performance. An
important conclusion which could be drawn from this dissertation is that the
textual requirements of university disciplines affect even the collocates of
general academic words which are purported to be equally frequent and useful
across disciplines. It was also concluded that the influence of academic
writers’ L1 is possibly subdued by the generic and textual requirements of
academic writing. The findings are discussed in light of the previous
literature and logical deductions are made as to their implications for the
research and practice of English teaching in academia. Some recommendations
for further research are also made which are hoped to be taken up by future
researchers to fill the gaps in the research on different layers of linguistic
variation within academia.




------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***************************    LINGUIST List Support    ***************************
 The 2020 Fund Drive is under way! Please visit https://funddrive.linguistlist.org
  to find out how to donate and check how your university, country or discipline
     ranks in the fund drive challenges. Or go directly to the donation site:
                   https://crowdfunding.iu.edu/the-linguist-list

                        Let's make this a short fund drive!
                Please feel free to share the link to our campaign:
                    https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-32-2721	
----------------------------------------------------------