1. Haiyang Ai, Gong Peng Graduate University, Chinese Academy of Sciences
A Corpus-based Study of Connectors: Research from the CAS Learner Corpus of English Essays
Haiyang Ai, Gong Peng
Graduate University, Chinese Academy of Sciences

2. Outline of the talk Introduction Previous Studies
Methodology and Corpus Building
Results and Discussion
Conclusion and Pedagogical Implication

3. Definition of connectors
Connectors are devices used to state the relationship between units of discourse (Biber et al, 1999)
Including conjunctions, some adverbs (e.g. firstly, namely, alternatively), and some prepositional phrases (e.g. in brief, in fact, of course)

4. Classification of connectors
Quirk et al’s (1985) framework
A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language
Adding of corroborative category - (Granger & Tyson, 1996) - (Altenberg & Tapper, 1998)

5. Quirk et al’s (1985) framework
listing
enumerative
e.g. for a star, finally
additive
equative
e.g. in the same way, likewise
reinforcing
e.g. moreover, further
summative
e.g. in sum, altogether
appositive
e.g. for example, namely
resultive
e.g. as a result, consequently
inferential
e.g. therefore, in that case, otherwise
contrastive
reformulatory
e.g. more precisely, rather
replacive
e.g. better, again
antithetic
e.g. by contrast, instead
concessive
e.g. in any case, however
transitional
discoursal
e.g. by the way, incidentally
temporal
e.g. in the meantime, meanwhile

6. Connectors investigated (68 items)
Listing: first, second, third, firstly, secondly, thirdly, finally, furthermore, in addition, moreover, lastly, last but not least, to begin with, for another, in the first place, in the second place, similarly, for one thing, for another
Summative: to sum up, to conclude, in summary, in short, in brief, in conclusion, overall, all in all, altogether
Appositive: that is, that is to say, in other words, for instance, for example, namely, e.g.( eg), i.e.( ie)

7. Connectors investigated (68 items)
Resultive: consequently, hence, therefore, thus, as a result, as a consequence, in consequence,
Inferential: otherwise, in that case
Contrastive: however, although, (even) though, on the other hand, instead, after all, on the contrary, in contrast, besides, nevertheless, anyway, still, by contrast, nonetheless, alternatively
Transitional: meanwhile, eventually, subsequently, originally
Corroborative: actually, in fact, of course, indeed, apparently

8. Rationales to use corpus data
Corpus data are real and authentic => empirical study
Combines intuitions of many, more objective (McEnergy & Wilson, 2001)
Corpora are precious resources for testing out linguistic hypothesis (Meyer, 2002)
Learner corpus serves as the meeting point of corpus linguistics and SLA (Granger 1998) => pioneer: Sylviane Granger, ICLE

9. Research questions What’s the semantic distribution?
What’s the top 10 most frequently used connectors?
Which connectors are overused?
What’s the differences and similarities compared with related studies, and why (universal features vs. transfer-related?)

10. Hypothesis
Hypothesis: PhD students at GUCAS would overuse connectors in their English writings
Formulated based on
Previous studies from HK and Taiwan (Crewe 1990, Field & Yip 1992, Milton & Tsang 1993, Bolton et al 2002, Chen 2006)
The author’s own observation

11. Significance
Systematic and corpus-based connector studies on PhD students writing of in GUCAS => shed some light on the everlasting cohesion & coherence problems in ESL/EFL writing
Quantitative analysis can provide teachers (esp. at GUCAS) with a better idea on what needs to be done
The construction of the CASCLEE computer learner corpus itself (Resources)

12. Outline again Approaching Connectors Previous Studies
Methodology and Corpus Building
Results and Discussion
Conclusion and Pedagogical Implication

13. Previous corpus-based studies
Milton & Tsang (1993)
high ratio of overuse of entire range of connectors (HKUST vs. Brown, LOB)
Granger & Tyson (1996)
108 connectors, CIA method
overuse <= L1 transfer
Altenberg & Tapper (1998)
timed + untimed essays
underuse (resultive, contrastive) <= prefer less formal connectors

14. Previous corpus-based studies
Bolton et al (2002)
Overuse exists in both groups, ICE-HK vs. ICE-GB
Raised 3 methodological issues
Chen (2006)
Latest, published on IJCL, Taiwanese EFL Learners
Slightly overused connectors
Increase learner’s register differences

15. Outline Introduction Previous Studies Methodology and Corpus Building
Results and Discussion
Conclusion and Pedagogical Implication

16. Corpus building
Corpus name: CASCLEE - CAS Corpus of Learner English Essays
Corpus Size: 494 essays, 120, 836 words, covering timed and untimed writings
Data analysis: WordSmith Tool Manual Extraction
Sampling & Representativeness
Learner Background & Register of text

17. Method: CIA Contrastive interlanguage analysis (Granger 1996)
L2 vs. L1
L2 vs. L2
Reference corpora
Informative Writings of BNC Sampler Corpus (L1)
The ICLE French Subcorpus (L2)

18. Outline Introduction Previous Studies Methodology and Corpus Building
Results and Discussion
Conclusion and Pedagogical Implication

19. Overall frequencies (normalised)

20. Semantic distribution

21. Top 10 most frequently used connectors
Rank
CASCLEE
BNC Sampler-info.
ICLE-French 1
first
however
indeed 2
second
although 3
thus
therefore 4
secondly
(even) though
of course 5
for example
moreover 6 7
for instance 8
finally
in fact 9
firstly
instead 10
in addition
on the other hand

22. Quantitative difference: Overuse
Overused connectors
Group A (see Table 4)
Group B (see Table 5)

23. Comparing with related studies
Altenberg & Tapper (1998) Overuse of furthermore, for instance, still, of course (CASCLEE also)
Bolten et al (2002) overuse both exist in ICE-HK & ICE-GB
Chen (2006) slightly overused

24. Major findings
PhD students overused a whole range of connectors (hypothesis supported)
They significantly overused listing and summative connectors
Overuse of connectors exist both in CASCLEE and ICLE French subcorpus

25. Outline Introduction Previous Studies Methodology and Corpus Building
Results and Discussion
Conclusion and Pedagogical Implication

26. Conclusion Objectives and contributions
Build the CASCLEE learner corpus
Analyzing connectors based on Quirk et al (1985) framework
Methodology: contrastive interlanguage analysis
L1 vs. L2 (CASCLE vs. BNC Sampler-info)
L2 vs. L2 (CASCLEE vs. ICLE-French)

27. Pedagogical Implication
Focus on contrastive, resultive and appositional connectors, over 70%
Listing connectors should be addressed
Correct forms of connectors
Looking forward…
More large-scale, corpus-based studies on EFL learners’ connector usage
Probe into the possible causes for certain connector usage patterns

28. The End !