Dictionaries vs concordancers

actual practice of the two different tools in EFL writing

Shu Li Lai, Hao-Jan Chen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A number of studies have suggested the possible benefits of using concordancers in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing. To date, however, there is still limited understanding of how EFL writers may make use of such tools along with dictionaries when engaging in a writing task. To better understand the question, this study investigated a class of non-English-major college students (N = 14) over a semester. Four online corpus tools, including monolingual and bilingual concordancers and collocation retrieval systems, were provided, along with two online dictionaries. After two tool-training sessions, students performed three timed-writing tasks online during three consecutive months and received individual stimulus recall interviews after each writing task. The recall interviews served as the main source of data; other data included the video clips of the writing process, student writing samples, and the researchers’ notes. The result showed that students used corpus tools and the bilingual dictionary for different purposes. They tended to use a bilingual dictionary when information on word form and word meaning was needed. When searching for information related to word usage, collocation information, and grammar patterns, they chose corpus tools more often than a bilingual dictionary. However, they also turned to corpus tools for meaning and form when the bilingual dictionary failed to provide clear word meanings, when they needed to search for word strings, and when they needed to just confirm an intuition regarding either word form or word meaning. This study provides empirical data that help to better understand how corpus tools contribute to EFL writing.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)341-363
Number of pages23
JournalComputer Assisted Language Learning
Volume28
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015 Jul 4

Fingerprint

Glossaries
dictionary
Students
student
video clip
interview
intuition
EFL Writing
Concordancer
Dictionary
foreign language
semester
grammar
stimulus
writer
Bilingual Dictionary
Word Meaning

Keywords

  • EFL writing
  • concordancers
  • corpus tools
  • stimulus recall interview

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Language and Linguistics
  • Linguistics and Language
  • Computer Science Applications

Cite this

Dictionaries vs concordancers : actual practice of the two different tools in EFL writing. / Lai, Shu Li; Chen, Hao-Jan.

In: Computer Assisted Language Learning, Vol. 28, No. 4, 04.07.2015, p. 341-363.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2f3929be23bf4ef49251fed4779a9059,
title = "Dictionaries vs concordancers: actual practice of the two different tools in EFL writing",
abstract = "A number of studies have suggested the possible benefits of using concordancers in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing. To date, however, there is still limited understanding of how EFL writers may make use of such tools along with dictionaries when engaging in a writing task. To better understand the question, this study investigated a class of non-English-major college students (N = 14) over a semester. Four online corpus tools, including monolingual and bilingual concordancers and collocation retrieval systems, were provided, along with two online dictionaries. After two tool-training sessions, students performed three timed-writing tasks online during three consecutive months and received individual stimulus recall interviews after each writing task. The recall interviews served as the main source of data; other data included the video clips of the writing process, student writing samples, and the researchers’ notes. The result showed that students used corpus tools and the bilingual dictionary for different purposes. They tended to use a bilingual dictionary when information on word form and word meaning was needed. When searching for information related to word usage, collocation information, and grammar patterns, they chose corpus tools more often than a bilingual dictionary. However, they also turned to corpus tools for meaning and form when the bilingual dictionary failed to provide clear word meanings, when they needed to search for word strings, and when they needed to just confirm an intuition regarding either word form or word meaning. This study provides empirical data that help to better understand how corpus tools contribute to EFL writing.",
keywords = "EFL writing, concordancers, corpus tools, stimulus recall interview",
author = "Lai, {Shu Li} and Hao-Jan Chen",
year = "2015",
month = "7",
day = "4",
doi = "10.1080/09588221.2013.839567",
language = "English",
volume = "28",
pages = "341--363",
journal = "Computer Assisted Language Learning",
issn = "0958-8221",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Dictionaries vs concordancers

T2 - actual practice of the two different tools in EFL writing

AU - Lai, Shu Li

AU - Chen, Hao-Jan

PY - 2015/7/4

Y1 - 2015/7/4

N2 - A number of studies have suggested the possible benefits of using concordancers in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing. To date, however, there is still limited understanding of how EFL writers may make use of such tools along with dictionaries when engaging in a writing task. To better understand the question, this study investigated a class of non-English-major college students (N = 14) over a semester. Four online corpus tools, including monolingual and bilingual concordancers and collocation retrieval systems, were provided, along with two online dictionaries. After two tool-training sessions, students performed three timed-writing tasks online during three consecutive months and received individual stimulus recall interviews after each writing task. The recall interviews served as the main source of data; other data included the video clips of the writing process, student writing samples, and the researchers’ notes. The result showed that students used corpus tools and the bilingual dictionary for different purposes. They tended to use a bilingual dictionary when information on word form and word meaning was needed. When searching for information related to word usage, collocation information, and grammar patterns, they chose corpus tools more often than a bilingual dictionary. However, they also turned to corpus tools for meaning and form when the bilingual dictionary failed to provide clear word meanings, when they needed to search for word strings, and when they needed to just confirm an intuition regarding either word form or word meaning. This study provides empirical data that help to better understand how corpus tools contribute to EFL writing.

AB - A number of studies have suggested the possible benefits of using concordancers in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing. To date, however, there is still limited understanding of how EFL writers may make use of such tools along with dictionaries when engaging in a writing task. To better understand the question, this study investigated a class of non-English-major college students (N = 14) over a semester. Four online corpus tools, including monolingual and bilingual concordancers and collocation retrieval systems, were provided, along with two online dictionaries. After two tool-training sessions, students performed three timed-writing tasks online during three consecutive months and received individual stimulus recall interviews after each writing task. The recall interviews served as the main source of data; other data included the video clips of the writing process, student writing samples, and the researchers’ notes. The result showed that students used corpus tools and the bilingual dictionary for different purposes. They tended to use a bilingual dictionary when information on word form and word meaning was needed. When searching for information related to word usage, collocation information, and grammar patterns, they chose corpus tools more often than a bilingual dictionary. However, they also turned to corpus tools for meaning and form when the bilingual dictionary failed to provide clear word meanings, when they needed to search for word strings, and when they needed to just confirm an intuition regarding either word form or word meaning. This study provides empirical data that help to better understand how corpus tools contribute to EFL writing.

KW - EFL writing

KW - concordancers

KW - corpus tools

KW - stimulus recall interview

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84930479512&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84930479512&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/09588221.2013.839567

DO - 10.1080/09588221.2013.839567

M3 - Article

VL - 28

SP - 341

EP - 363

JO - Computer Assisted Language Learning

JF - Computer Assisted Language Learning

SN - 0958-8221

IS - 4

ER -