Kobe University Repository : Kernel

タイトルTit le

Uncovering Collocat ion Errors by Using Automat ic Collocat ionExtract ion and Comparison

著者Author(s) Chen, Hao-jan

掲載誌・巻号・ページCitat ion Learner Corpus Studies in Asia and the World,2:137-147

刊行日Issue date 2014

資源タイプResource Type Departmental Bullet in Paper / 紀要論文

版区分Resource Version publisher

権利Rights

DOI

JaLCDOI 10.24546/81006696

URL http://www.lib.kobe-u.ac.jp/handle_kernel/81006696

PDF issue: 2020-03-11

137

Uncovering Collocation Errors by Using Automatic

Collocation Extraction and Comparison

Hao-jan CHEN

National fiiwsn Normal UDiversity

Abstract

Collocations have been widely recognized as an essential component of the lexical

competence. Many studies, however, have consistently revealed that 1.2 learners had

insufficient collocational knowledge. Given its importance and learning difficulty, many

researchers are interested in gaining more thorough information about collocation errors.

Most previous stud:i.e.s, however, are based on manual analysis on small learner corpora.

For researchers who work on a larger learner corpus, the manual analysis method. would

be impractical.

To overcome the aforementioned limitations, an innovative extraction method is

proposed. This automatic retrieval approach is achieved through the use of The Sketch

EDgiDe, a corpus system developed by Adam Kilgarriff and his associates. In this study,

a l.B-miliion-word Taiwanese learner English corpus was :first uploaded onto

the SKEfor automated comparison with a 90-million-word native English corpus (The

written corpus of BNe). Based on this machine-aided collocation comparison method,

many types of high-frequency V-N collocation errors were identified. The Sketch

Engine tools were found to be very robust in uncovering various miscollocations in a

learner corpus.

Keywords

Learner corpora, Taiwanese ESL Leamer, Miscol1ocation, Sketch engine

I Introduction

Collocations have been recognized as an influential factor ofvocabulary competence in

the field of Second Language Acquisition (Biber et aI, 1999; Nattinger & DeCarrioo, 1992;

Schmitt, 2010; Sinclair, 1991; Wray, 2OOS), There have been ample studies showing the

significance of collocation in developing learners' mental lexicon and suggesting

collocation's strong influence on learners' success of language acquisition (Ellis, 1996;

Lewis, 2000; Lien, 2003), As indicated in the studies of Granger (199S), Lewis (2000),

138

and Martinex & Schmitt (2012), collocations not only facilitate linguistic production but

also enhance overall comprehension. The more diverse collocations a leaner knows, the

more skillfully the learner could achieve fluency in the target language (Aitchison, 1987;

Pawley & Syder, 1983; Wray, 2002).

Many studies, however, have consistently revealed that L2learners had insufficient

collocational knowledge. Given its importance and learning difficulty, many researchers

are interested in gaining more thorough information about collocation errors. Most

previous studies, however, are based on manual analysis on small learner corpora.

Some major studies are reviewed in the following section. For researchers who work on

a larger learner corpus, the manual analysis method would be impractical. To overcome

the aforementioned limitations, an innovative extraction method is proposed in this

paper. This new method will be presented in the research design section.

II Literature Review

2.1 EFL Learners' Difficulties in Learning Collocations

Although the importance of collocation in developing second/foreign language learners'

lexical proficiency has been proposed by many researchers, it is also widely

acknowledged that, for many secondlforeign language learners, collocations are difficult

to acquire and master. Many studies have consistently revealed that EFL learners had

insufficient knowledge of English collocations (Bahns & Eldaw, 1993; Channel, 1981;

Chen, 2008; Gitsaki., 1999; Liu, 1999). Some researchers also discovered that lexical

miscollocations were the most common errors made by EFL learners (Babns & Eldaw,

1993; Newman, 1988). Among the various types of collocations, verb-noun (V-N)

collocations are recognized as the most significant combinations in a language because

they ''form the communicative core of utterances where the most important information

is placed" (Altenberg, 1993). VoN collocations are also found to be particularly difficult

for second/foreign language learners to acquire and frequently misused by learners (Li,

2005; Liu, 2002; Wang, 2001; Wu, 1996).

In addition to intermediate level learners, Nesselhauf (2003, 2005) reported on an

exploratory study that analyzed the use of verb-noun collocations by advanced German­

speaking learners of English in free written production. Based on a medium-sized leaner

corpus, she was able to identify many collocation errors produced by these advanced level

learners. Moreover, she also found that learners' Ll turned out to have a strong influence

on these miscollocations.

Laufer & Waldman (2011) also investigated the use of English verb-noun collocations

in the writing of native speakers of Hebrew at three proficiency levels. They compiled a

learner corpus that consisted of about 300,000 words of argumentative and descriptive

essays. For comparison purposes, they also selected WCNES8, a corpus of young adult

native speakers of English. Various verb-noun collocations were extracted from the

139

LOCNESS corpus and the learner corpus. Subsequently, they performed two types of

comparisons: not only were the learners compared with native speakers on the frequency

of collocation use, but they also were compared with other learners of different

proficiencies on the frequency and correctness of collocations. The data revealed that

learners at all three proficiency levels produced far fewer collocations than native

speakers. Collocational errors, particularly int.erlingual ones, continued to persist even

at advanced levels of proficiency. It seems clear that collocations remain a difficult area

for many advanced ESUEFL learners.

Durrant and Schmitt (2009) compared the collocations (e.g. noun-noun and adjective­

noun) in written English by native speakers and non-native speakers. The non-native

essays were written by postgraduate students in an EAP class in a UK university and

first year undergraduate students in an EAP class at an English medium university in

Turkey. The comparable native essays were taken from British undergraduates. Each

assay/article was further classified as long-text or short-text to make the study more

meaningful. Several findings emerged from this study. First, the native writers used

more low-frequency combinations than non-natives. This trend appeared to be fairly

consistent across texts. Second, non-natives also tended to repeat certain favored

collocations; they showed a significant overuse of these strong collocations (those with

high-frequency) in comparison to native norms. Thirdly, non-native writers significantly

underused collocations with high mutual information scores Oess frequent but have very

strong associations) in comparison with native norms. These findings thus account for

the impression that non-native writing lacks idiomatic phraseology

Li and Schmitt (2009) reported on a longitudinal case study which followed a Chinese

MA student over the course of an academic year. All of her written assignments (8 essays

and a dissertation) were analyzed for lexical phrase use, and she was interviewed after

each assignment was submitted. It was found that she learned 166 new lexical phrases

during her studies, and that she improved in her degree of appropriate usage. She also

gained some confidence in using the phrases. She successfully utilized both explicit and

implicit sources for this improvement, particularly benefiting from her academic reading.

However, she also tended to rely too heavily on a limited range of phrases.

Li and Schmitt (2010) conducted a multiple case study to track ESL learner's

development of collocation knowledge (adj+nounl. The four participants were female

Chinese postgraduates, on a one-year MA programme in English Language Teaching

(here after ELT) in the School of Education at the University of Nottingham. All of them

were English majors from China, with ages ranging from 26 to 29. Their writing samples

were collected and analyzed. After careful analysis on their collocation use, the results

indicated that the group of four Chinese postgraduates as a whole demonstrated a

tendency to use a somewhat smaller group of collocations more repetitively by the end of

the MA program. In terms of how 'native-like' the collocations were, the group produced

a modest increase in t-score (frequency-based) over the year, while the MI scores

140

(association strengths-based) remained relatively static. In summary, the statistical

approach used in this study was able to show relatively little substantial change in the

production of adjective-noun collocations over the course of an academic year. However,

the authors also noted that there were some individual variations among the four

learners.

Based on the findings of these studies, it is clear that ESUEFL learners often

encounter various difficulties in learning English collocations. They were found to

misuse some collocates, overused a limited. number of collocates, and underused many

collocates widely used by native speakers. Given its importance and difficulty for

secondlforeign language learners to master, collocations have aroused many researchers'

interest in investigating learners' use of these collocations and finding out possible

solutions to facilitate their learning. According to Woodlard (2000) and Lewis (2000),

helping students observe and notice their own problems would enhance students'

awareness of acceptable collocations. Therefore, investigating learners' misused,

overused and underused patterns can help teachers and learners better understand

learners' difficulties and needs for learning collocation. The findings should also shed

lights on what collocations to teach and how to draw language learners' attention to

special difficulties.

2.2 Common Methods for Analyzing Collocational Patterns

Although many studies have tried to uncover the miscollocation patterns in learner

corpora, most past research on learners' miscollocations was mainly based on analyzing

data extracted by two methods, namely, elicitation (e.g., questionnaire and translation

tasks) and corpus-generated data.

2.2.1 Studies on Learners' V-N Miscollocations through Elicitation

Many studies have been carried out through various techniques of elicitation, such as

translation, cloze, fill-in, multiple-choice tests, or questionnaires. For example, Biskup

(1990) adopted a translation test to investigate Polish ESL leaners' collocation

knowledge, and he observed that, while these leaners could correctly translate L2

collocations to their Ll, they often failed to translate their Ll collocations to the L2.

Wang (2001), through using a 50-item fill-in test for her subjects, uncovered that learners

had great difficulty in mastering English collocations that were more idiomatic, had no

similar Chinese counterparts, or contained more interchangeable synonyms. Combining

translation tasks with fill-in questions, Bahns and Eldaw (1993) discovered that the verb

collocates were usually the most problematic component for leaners to master. Gitsaki.

(1999) proceeded further by combining essay writing, translation tasks, and fill-in

questions to examine ESL learners' collocational knowledge. Her research results

indicated several opposing factors that hindered ESL leaners' mastery of English

collocations, namely, the discrepancy between Ll and. L2, the intrinsic complicatedness

141

of collocations, and the insufficient amount of received L2 input. In addition to the

aforementioned task types, Chen (2008) designed a 50-item multiple-choice test to

measure college ESL leaners' knowledge of V-N collocations. The results of his study

suggested that negative L1 transfer, overgeneralization, and confusion of synonyms were

the main causes of leaners' deficiency of English collocations.

The aforementioned elicitation studies provided some evidence for ESL learners'

collocational errors and suggested some possible causes of these miscollocations, yet the

miscollocations found were fairly restricted due to the limited data. It is questionable if

the results of these studies can be generalized to most of the ESL leaners. In addition,

frequently misused misco1locations cannot be identified through the use of elicitation

such as multiple-choice tests, translation tasks, etc., for the items are pre-determined by

the researchers and thus cannot truthfully reflect ESL learners' collocational knowledge.

'lb solve this problem, it is necessary to analyze data generated from more naturally

produced learner output.

2.2.2 Corpus-based Studies on Learners'V-N Miscolloca.tions

With the advance of technology and the wider availability of learner corpora, several

investigations into learners' miscollocations through learner corpora have emerged

(Zhang & Yang, 2009; Lin, 2010; Liu, 2002; Nesselhauf, 2005; Shih, 2000). One of the

most comprehensive studies is the one carried out by Nesselhauf (2005). She investigated

the use of verb-noun collocations produced by advanced German learners of English

based on ICLE. NesseIhauf manually extracted and analyzed the verb-noun

combinations in the 318 essays selected from the 150-thousand-word. sub-corpus

(GeCLEE) of ICLE, in which 507 V-N miscollocations were identified.

While NesseIhauf's study targeted at European ESL leaners, there are also some

corpus-based studies specifically on investigating Chinese ESIJEFL learners'

miscoIlocations. For example, Shih (2000) manually inspected the most frequently-used

verbs by ESL students in the :Thiwan Learner Corpus of EnghBh (~, a 415,700-word.

corpus, and discovered some key verb collocates (e.g., achieve, understand, disturb, ask,

and avoicIJ that leaners tended to misuse. She further proposed the idea that high

frequency verbs were more likely to be miscollocated with other nouns. Liu (2002)

conducted a study on Taiwanese learners'V-N .miscollocations by analyzing data in the

English Taiwan Leaner Corpus (ETLO. She utilized data in the error-tagged corpus and

retrieved 233 V-N miscollocations made by the leaners. Among these miscollocations, she

found that most of the errors were resulted from the misuse of verb collocates and that

many of these verb-based errors stemmed from leaners' confusion of semantically related

verbs (e.g., run versus move) and direct translation from their Ll.

2.3 Limitations of Traditional Corpus-based Studies

Since these corpus-based studies resolved the limitation of elicitation studies with a

142

great amount of data naturally produced by ESIJEFL leaners, the study results might

be more representative. There are, however, some existing limitations of these corpus­

based studies.

The first concern is the data extraction procedures. Most past research required

intensive labor to extract the data, which might be less practical for other researchers to

replicate if they aim. to extract potential miscollocations from larger corpora. In addition,

miscollocations in previous studies were manually double-checked with resources such

as 'J1J.e BBI Dictionary at EDglish Word Combination, Ozford COllocatiOllS Dictionary,

and Ozford AdVlUlceti Leamer's Dictionary, whereas few of the studies made use of data

extracted from native corpora (e.g., BNQ for further consultation. Facing these

challenging tasks of data analysis, researchers around the world might need. a more

robust corpus research tool to uncover miscollocations more efficiently. In addition to

misco1locations, researchers also desperately need a better to tool to uncover the

underuse and overuse problems

III Research Design and Results

3.1 Semi-automatic Extraction with Sketch Engine

To overcome the aforementioned limitations, an innovative semi -automatic data

extraction method is proposed in the current study. This semi-automatic retrieval

approach is achieved through the use of 'J1J.e Sketch Engine

(http://www.sketchengine.co.uk).aninnovated corpus query system developed by Adam

Kilgarriff and his associates which can demonstrate word sketches, grammatical

relations and a distributional thesaurus. A screenshot of SKEis shown below in Figure

1. 'J1J.e Sketch Engine (SJ{:& also allows users to build their own corpus by uploading

data onto the system and to research their data online. In addition, SKE also provides

the Sketch-DiLffunction, a unique function that is often utilized to compare a keyword's

collocates of different parts of speech in two different corpora, e.g., two general corpora

or one general corpus with another learner corpus.

143

anal ys 1 S /_"1 arttl.~ ~'Ion.ol CorpIO' 1!\!I'I' ill.!.l (ll'-Spo< millIOn)

$" l,..,...j"'~ '1.01>1.1 f01l<b f b ,~- " ... "' , ,- --....,. .~, ... ",,_..r.., lnl ••• ~'""-" Hll " -. 2126 L. -,~ '" 9./6 v,n",,,.

" 9.)) ,",- "

, .. pr'lmane " , ..

"ltl.tbl '" 9.11 <II'um '" 1.6' ~" n I." -- n •• ' ....... ion ill 8.11 -~- • •• 100",",,' II 1.16 """p ..... 'ion n 6."1

~-n .. tIv. n , .. < .... ri."". II •• <end"", II 6.11 'Y"u...;, II ' .11

11",1 ll. 1.91 do' ...... n.", " 6.1) ~. " ... <_"'1 • 6.1<

<omporlt;"" n as ~. II •• comp/",.", • ••• If""'",""""" " 6.13

d;«O\Ir"OO • ••• .. II ' ,11 -- I ••• """"p';",, " 6.01 ... • U . m. • .n ~- • 6,ll .... "",;u,,...., II I."'

v.n.Io!o " 1.61 ,to,;,,;., " Ul

_. " •.. -... • U!

""""van.'. • , .. '«' " HI _.""' .. , ••• • •• 1 .. ,- " ,.' • )"IttK.1C • 1.19 '-Imp/' " , .. ~ II ••• PlycOoiOlY • 1.1'

<,"", ,,,,,,1\, II U I - • BI .""oIif)' , •• ......... ' ion , 1.'1

",,'" • 1.11 w._ .... • ' .ll .. • •• .... ;1" II '-61

Fig. 1. The Wont.Sltec1I of'ltMfy8I.J'.

3.2 Data ExlrBction 1hf"DU!tl Skelch-Oilf

In this Btudy, the SKE engine tool was fOWld to be very robust in UllCOVe:ring

milIcollocationa in a very large Chinese learner cmp11lI. In thilIlltudy, a 1.3-million-word

Chinese learner corpus was uploaded onto the SKEfor eemi.-automated extraction and

comparison. To extract potential miscollocatione from the learner carpus, the written

IIIICtion of BNG WJUI adopted. lUI the refenmca corpu8 for comparieon. A li!Jt of the most

frequently used nouns from the learner corpus was first generated online by the SKE.

The reason Cor compiling a frequent IIOUIlliat, WI pojnted out by !.iu (2002), is that nouns

tend to be the mam. crucial. indicaton Cor lsarnen' EngJi.llb v-N miacollocation.l. Asimilar

idee is also proposed by Manning and Sehlitze (1999) with the term "fooal word"

indicating the crucial. featuze of nouns :in VoN oo11ocations. Hence, inspecting the verb

collocates of a noun ill more efficisnt to capture the V-N mi8Ilse than loo1ring into the

noun oollocatel! of a verb.

The higb-frequenq nouns, with their COJJlJ!WD. verb colloeates :in the Iearner corpUi

and the BNe, were individually examined with the Sbtcb-Ditf'functimJ... A detailed

illustration of employing 8ketch-Ditf' Cor detecting potential VoN miscollocations ill

described below.

For example, the noun lmow-ledge was targeted Cor the comparison between the BNe

and the learner 00lJIlU. '1'hrough the use of Slcetcb-DifF, a 1IWIlms.ry chart DIlIllleming the

correspond:ing collocates of }mow-ledge :in distind pal'tl of speech positions could be

obta:ined, as alwwn in Figure 2. Since the focus oCthe study is OIl VoN miBcolI.ocations,

the left column with the heading object-ufO-e., lmo",Jedp used. as Objects) would be

ezomjnoo Verbs in the gray area of the first column (e.g., 'eruicJi, 'maatm; 'leard,

'ezJiRrgfJ, 'studY, 'gruP. and'remfw) were the 0D.e8 that the EFL leamen tended to

colloeate with lmowJedga, though these verba were rarelylnewr applied by native

speakers. These words in thi8 area were not necessarily incorrect, but they were not

144

found or ranly Ullild in thII nati,", BNC 00IpU" Given thIIt BNChu IIZOUlld 90 million

words, there miPt be aooeptable Ulage not oovered by BNC cxapu8. With tbi8 , keteb,

the relearehen could then euily identify pOllible V' N nn.oollooa:tiolll of. howJed&t! for

further analyaia.

The gray area in the 8eOOnd column IignifieI the verb ooI1ooate. that nati,", .~

commonly uae with .bowl" The collocatel in tbi8 area mi.cht help to provide

information about undezuaed. item .. The white area often . howa the collocate. frequently

\lied by both nati,", and lIarner writers.

knowledge 11""''''/

.II;!I!: .. BNCTXT Imergedtwcn~ee , .. • ·z.o ~. ... I!- ai!!! .. ,..... .. ~" 33104 ••• ••• Van:o.m lt 11. 1 5.' 3. ' -._. -i! -;; d_ .. lop " 11 5. ' 3.' -~, • te s t .. • 5.' 3.5 .ern , ;W l .' U ....... • .. , .. Ia<k .. • ~ l l.' .~. • ., , .. share '" • ~. 3 .' .- • '"

., pou e u '" • ~. '.l ,- • ;u> ••• r . qulre ill .ll! u 3.' ... - 1 .. ,., , .. u ... ~. .. ... ... • •• 'i : t ee"h 1 » , .. ••• - .... "'oMl .. " • .. ••• M .. , ... I • ... o btain .1lI "

.., ••• II .. ....... I • ... .~" . ... d , II ... 5.' ........ I • ... ....-Id.n • " ••• ••• d ...... lZ • ... -• • In 1> ill , .. ••• l",t.> .CI¥"a '" .. 5.' 5.' "- :lI • ... : Umlt li 2.Il ... .. , - • ... u"d ate 11 '" ••• ••• - II • ... -h.,, ~ .... "

,. ••• 5.' - 21 • ... eUeln , • 5.' ... - !I • ... -. ,,<, ., IH ul . . .. ... II .., • •• ~ ... "" '" 5.' ' .' 11 • ...

eCQui , . ill '" .., , .. 11 • ...

I"'PM' li • S." ••• - 10 • ... -.""Iy "" l.l 5.' ••• .... :: • ... ~ .. mb.n e -'" , ••• ... • 70 • >.t.nd .tl 11 •. , •••

Fic. 2. Skelck-Dijf of '.bwwledge' bctwcc:D 1hc BNe md 1hc 1camc:z: corpIII.

3.3 Common Types of VoN Mlscoliocatlon In Chlnale EFL LlilIiIrner WrIIIng

Filtend throurh the aforenumtianed. procI!!lIe. , 67 type. (951 token8) pf VoN

miIoollooation. were identitied through the UIIO of. Sketcb-DUf, and theIe 67 tYJl'» could

be categorized into 6 upecta olmimae, .. preaented in Table 1. It i . clear that Chine. e

ESL learner. produced. rna.ny Ll trllIlllfer. Thill findinpwertl v.ry llimilar to prnious

atudie~ . ueh u N-nwur (2003, 20(5). l..eIrmn tend to rqlly (m their LI knowled&e .... hen

145

producing collocations. It would be more effective for language teachers to target on these Ll-bascd

eIIOIS.

Table 1. The Classification ofV-N Collocation Errors

AIpects of MIsuse Typ .. TokoD.

N % N %

Verb-bued Error

Erroueous Verb Cboice c.g. *cherish electricjty 40 59.7 389 40.9

Erroueous Preposition after Verb e.g. *prepare exam 10 14.9 261 27.4

MIsuse of Delu:Ical Verb e.g. *take a mistake 6 9.0 121 12.7

Noun-based Error

ErroDeouS Noun Choice e.g. *take a travel 8 11.9 154 16.2

IDcomplete Noun Phrase e.g. *ask taxi 2 3.0 8 0.8

Other

RedUDdnt RepetitioD e.g. *call phone 1.5 18 1.9

1"cJt.1 67 100 951 100

IV Conclusion

It is clear that the semi-automatic way of identifying learners' collocation errors is far

more efficient than the traditional manual analysis. With the right tool such as Sketch

Engine, many high-frequency collocation errors can be quickly identified by researchers.

AB learner corpora size continues to grow quickly, it seems important to look for various

ways of computer-assisted error analysis. If more robust corpus analysis tools can be

developed, it would be easier for L2 researchers to uncover various hidden patterns in

learners'interlanguage.

References

Altenberg, B. (1993). Recurrent verb-complement constructions in the London-Lund

Corpus. In J. Aarts, P. de Haan, & N. Oostdijk OldsJ, English /l1l1IfUsge corpora:

IJesig1J, analysis and ezp/oitation (pp. 227·246). Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Altenberg, B. (1998). On the phraseology of spoken English. In A P. Cowie (Ed.),

Pbrs.seoJogy: Theory. 8..Dalysia, IHld applications (pp. 101-122). Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Bahns, J., & Eldaw, M. (1993). Should we teach EFL students collocations? System, 21(1),

101-114.

Bonsoo, M., Bensoo, E., & Ilsoo, R. (1986). Lericographical description of English.

146

Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Biskup, D. (1992) L1 influence on learners' rendering of English collocations: A Polish!

German empirical study. In P. J. L. Arnaud & H. Bejoint (Eds.), Vocabulary and

applied linguistics (pp. 85-93). London: Macmillan.

Chen, M. H. (2008). A study of English collocation competence of college students in

'Jaiwan. Unpublished master's thesis. National University of Taiwan, Taiwan.

Durrant, P., & Schmitt, N. (2009). To what extent do native and non-native writers

make use of collocations? International Review of Applied Linguistics in

Language Thaching, 47(2), 157-177.

Flowerdew, J., & Peacock, M. (2001). Issues in EAP: A preliminary perspective. In J.

Flowerdew & M. Peacock (Eds.), Research. perspectives on English for academic

purposes (pp. 8-24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Flowerdew, L. (2001). The exploitation of small learner corpora in EAP materials design.

In J. Sinclair (Ed.), Small corpus studiss and ELT(pp. 363'379). Amsterdam: John

Benjamins.

Flowerdew, L. (2002). Corpus-based analysis in EAP. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic

discourse (pp. 95-114). Lmdon: Pearson Education Limited..

Gitsaki, C. (1999). Second lllllgUBge lezical acquisition: A study of the development of

collocationallmowledge. San Francisco: Intemational Scholars Publications.

Granger, S. (1998). Prefabricated patterns in advanced EFL writing: Collocations and

lexical phrases. In A. Cowie (Ed,), Phraseology: theory; analysis and applicatiODB

(Pp.145·160). Orlord:Orlord University Pres,.

Granger, S. (2008). Learner corpora. InA Ladeling & M. Kytii (Eda.), Carpus Linguistics:

AD IntemationaJ Handbook (vol. 1, pp. 259-275). Berlin & New York: Walter de

Gruyter.

Granger, S. & Paquot, M. 2013. "'Language for specific purposes learner corpora". In C.

A. Chapelle (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Apph'ed Linguistics. New York: Blackwell,

3142-,3146.

Jarvis, S. (2000). Methodological rigor in the study of transfer: Identifying L1 influence

in them interlanguage lexicon. LanguagelearniDg, 5fX2.), 245-309.

Laufer, B., & Waldman, T. (2011). Verb - Noun Collocations in Second Language

Writing: A Corpus Analysis of Learners' English. Language Learning, 61(2), 647·

672.

Lewis, M. (2000). 'JeachiDg collocation: Further development in lexical approach.

London: Language Thaching Publications.

Li, C.C. (2005). A study of co1locstionsJ error types in ESliEFL college lelH7J.ers'writing:

Unpublished master's thesis, Ming Chuan University, Taiwan.

Li, J., & Schmitt, N. (2009). The acquisition of lexical phrases in academic writing: A

longitudinal case study. Journal of 8ecoDd Language Writing, lli..2), 85-102.

Li, J., & Schmitt, N. (2010). The development of collocation use in academic texts by

147

advanced L2 learners: A multiple case study approach. In D. Wood (Ed.),

Perspectives on Formulaic Language: Acquisition and Communication (chap. 2,

pp.23-46). London: Continuum.

Lien, H. Y. (2003). The e1f'ects of collocation instruction on the reading comprehension of

'laiwanese college students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University

of Pennsylvania.

Lin, M. J. (2010). A study ofverb-DouD miscollocations based on Thiwanese and Chinese

learners' English corpora. Unpublished master's thesis, National Taiwan Normal

University, Taiwan.

Liu, C. P. (1999). An analysis of collocational errors in EFL writings. In The proceedings

althe Eighth Intern.tiona! Symposium on EDglieb 7escbiDgl.,p. 483'494). Taipei:

Crane.

Liu, D. (2011). The most frequently used English phrasal verbs in American and British

English: A multicorpus examination. TESOL Quarterly, 49...4),661-688.

Liu, Y. C. (2012). A Semi-automated Corpus-based method of Comparing Verb-Noun

Collocations between Native and Non-Native English Speakers. Unpublished

Master's Thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan.

Nesselhauf, N. (2003). The use of collocations by advanced learners of English and some

implications for teaching. Applied linguistics, 242,), 223-242.

Nesselhauf, N. (2005). Collocations in a Learner COlpus. Amsterdam.: John Benjamins.

Paquot, M. (2007). EAPvrx:abularyin EFLlearner writ:ing:from extraction toanaJysis:

A phrB.BeOlogy-oriented approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Universite

cathoIique de Louvain, Belgian.

Wang, C. J. (2001). A study of the English collocational competence of English majors in

1Biwan. Unpublished master's thesis, Fu Jen Catholic University, Taiwan.

Wang, Y., & Shaw, P. (2008). Transfer and universality: Collocation use in advanced

Chinese and Swedish learner English. ICAME Journal, 32, 201-228.

Woolard, G. (2000). Collocation'enoouragmg learner mdependenoe.ln M. Lewis (Ed),

Teaching collocation: Further developments in the leIica1 approach (Pp.28-46).

Germany: Klett.

Wu, W. S. (1996). Lexical collocations: One way to make passive vocabulary active.

In Paper from the eleventh conference on English Teaching and learning in the

RepublicalChiD. (pp. 461'480). Taipei: Crane.

Zhang, W. -Z., & Yang, S. (2009). An analysis ofV-N collocation errors in CLEL. Journal

al PLA UDiversity al Foreign LaDguI1lJe8, 32(2), 2009. [Text in Chineeel.