Redirecting to http://dergipark.org.tr/_fragment?_hash=2FWzZsceN6Z3hRXUImMZE1Y-w7d-Q4MLfNwejvv6duQ&_path=id%3D1083480%26_format%3Dhtml%26_locale%3Den%26_controller%3DApp%255CController%255CSite%255CArticleController%253A%253AesiArticleStats.
Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Collocational Links in the Multilingual Mind: Frequency Intuitions and Association Strength Measures

Year 2022, Volume: 33 Issue: 2, 191 - 219, 31.12.2022

Hakan Cangır , Cumhur Kuzu

https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.1083480

Abstract

Eşdizimli sözcükler günlük dilde çok sık kullanılır ve dili kullananlar bu sayede kulağa daha doğal gelen cümleler kurar. Bu sözcükler yabancı dil öğretimi derslerinde de genellikle öğretilir ve zihinsel işlemleme daha az olduğu için bu sözcük öbeklerini iyi kullanan öğrenciler dili daha akıcı bir şekilde kullanabilirler. Bu sözcük öbekleri farklı şekillerde tanımlanmaktadır, ancak mevcut çalışma sıklık odaklı tanımlamayı benimsemekte ve analizine derlembilim yöntemlerini ve anadil ve yabancı dil kullanıcısı tahminlerini dahil etmektedir. Eşdizimli sözcükler daha önce derlembilim ve ruhdilbilim yöntemleri harmanlanarak farklı açılardan incelenmiştir. Çıkış noktası eşdizimli sözcüklerde önceleme teorisi olan bu çalışma (a) derlem tabanlı eşdizimli sözcük sıklık profilleri ile D1 Türkçe-D2 İngilizce ve D3 İtalyanca kullananların sözcük sıklığı tahminleri arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemeyi, (b) diller arası benzerliğin sıklık ilişkileri arasındaki etkisini saptamayı, (c) İtalyancayı D1 olarak konuşan kişiler ile D3 olarak kullanan kişilerin eşdizimli sözcüklerin sıklık profillerine olan duyarlılığı arasında bir fark olup olmadığını sorgulamayı ve (d) eşdizimli sözcüklerin D3 olarak İtalyanca kullanan öğrencilerin zihin sözlüğündeki yerini ruhdilbilimsel açıdan açıklamayı hedeflemektedir. Bulgular, D2 İngilizce – D3 İtalyanca kullanan kişilerin sözcük sıklık tahminleri ile derlem sıklık profilleri (t-değeri) arasında belli bir oranda örtüşme olduğunu göstermektedir. Ayrıca, D3 İtalyanca kullanan kişiler ile anadil olarak İtalyanca kullanan kişilerin eşdizimli sözcük sıklığı tahminleri belli oranda benzeşmektedir. Araştırma sonuçları, kullanıcı temelli dil kullanımı ve sıklık tahminleri alanyazını ışığında tartışılmıştır.

Keywords

eşdizimli sözcükler önceleme sıklık çokdillilik

References

  • Aksan, Y., Aksan, M., Koltuksuz, A., Sezer, T., Mersinli, Ü., Demirhan, U., & Kurtoglu, Ö. (2012). Construction of the Turkish National Corpus (TNC). In N.Calzolari, K. Choukri, T. Declerck, M. U. Doğan, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, ... S.Piperidis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (pp. 3223–3226).European Language.
  • Bestgen, Y. (2017). Beyond single-word measures: L2 writing assessment, lexical richness and formulaic competence. System, 69, 65-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.08.004
  • Bod, R. (2006). Exemplar-based syntax: How to get productivity from exemplars. The Linguistic Review, 23, 291–320.
  • Brezina, V. (2018). Statistics in corpus linguistic: A practical guide. Cambridge University Press.
  • Bybee, J. (2010). Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750526
  • Cangır, H., Büyükkantarcıoğlu, S. N., & Durrant, P. (2017). Investigating collocational priming in Turkish. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 13(132), 465–486.
  • Cangır, H. (2021a). Objective and subjective collocational frequency Association strength measures and EFL teacher intuitions. Pedagogical Linguistics. 2(1), 64–91.
  • Cangır, H. (2021b). Lexical associations in the L1 Turkish mental lexicon: Can L1 lexical intuition and a representative corpus guide teaching of Turkish as a foreign language materials?. Journal of Linguistics, (37), 45-66. DOI: 10.26650/jol.2021.972166
  • Cangır, H., & Durrant, P. (2021c). Cross-linguistic collocational networks in the L1 Turkish–L2 English mental lexicon. Lingua, 258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103057
  • Chen, X., & Dong, Y. (2019). Evaluating objective and subjective frequency measures in L2 lexical processing. Lingua, 230, 102738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2019.10273884
  • Christiansen, M. H., & Chater, N. (2001). Connectionist psycholinguistics: Capturing the empirical data. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(2), 82–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01600-4
  • Durrant, P., & Schmitt, N. (2009). To what extent do native and non-native writers make use of collocations? IRAL, 47, 157–177. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2009.007
  • Durrant, P., & Doherty, A. (2010). Are high-frequency collocations psychologicallyreal? Investigating the thesis of collocational priming. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 6, 125–155. https://doi.org/10.1515/CLLT.2010.06
  • Ellis, N. C. (2001). Memory for language. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 33-68). Cambridge University Press.
  • Ellis, N. C. (2003). Constructions, Chunking, and Connectionism: The Emergence of Second Language Structure. In The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 63–103). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch4
  • Ellis, N. C. (2012). Formulaic language and second language acquisition: Zipf and the phrasal teddy bear. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32(2012), 17–44. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190512000025
  • Ellis, N. C., & Ogden, D. C. (2017). Thinking about multiword constructions: Usage-based approaches to acquisition and processing. Topics in Cognitive Science, 9(3), 604–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12256
  • Ellis, N. C. (2019). Usage-based theories of Construction Grammar: Triangulating Corpus Linguistics and Psycholinguistics. In Jesse Egbert & Paul Baker (Eds.), Using Corpus Methods to Triangulate Linguistic Analysis (pp. 239-267). Routledge
  • Fioravanti, I., Senaldi, M. S. G., Lenci, A., & Siyanova-Chanturia, A. (2021). Lexical fixedness and compositionality in L1 speakers’ and L2 learners’ intuitions about word combinations: Evidence from Italian. Second Language Research, 37(2), 291–322. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658320941560
  • Gablasova, D., Brezina, V., & McEnery, T. (2017). Exploring learner language through corpora: Comparing and interpreting corpus frequency information. Language Learning, 67(S1), 130–154. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12226
  • Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago University Press.
  • Gries, S., Th. (2013). 50-something years of work on collocations. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 18(1), 137–166. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.18.1.09gri
  • Hoey, M. (2005). Lexical priming: A new theory of words and language. Routledge.
  • Hoffmann, S., & Lehmann, H. M. (2000). Collocational Evidence from the British National Corpus. In J. M. Kirk (Ed.), Corpora Galore: Analyses and Techniques in Describing English. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
  • Jakubíček, M., Kilgarriff, A., Kovář, V., Rychlý, P., & Suchomel, V. (2013). The TenTen corpus family. In 7th International Corpus Linguistics Conference CL (pp. 125-127).
  • Jones, M., & Durrant, P. (2010). What can a corpus tell us about vocabulary teaching materials? In M.McCarthy and A.O’Keeffe (Eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics (pp. 387-400). Routledge.
  • Kyle, K., & Crossley, S. (2016). The relationship between lexical sophistication and independent and source-based writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 34, 12–24.
  • Lenci, A., Fioravanti, I., & Siyanova-Chanturia, A. (2021, August 15–20). Collocational priming: Are collocations psychologically real for L1 and L2 speakers of Italian? [Paper presentation]. American Association for Applied Linguistics.
  • Lewis, M. (1993). The Lexical Approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.
  • Lewis, M. (1997). "Implementing the lexical approach: Putting theory into practice." Hove, England: Language Teaching Publications.
  • Nesselhauf, N. (2003). The use of collocations by advanced learners of English and some implications for teaching. Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 223-242
  • Öksüz, D., Brezina, V., & Rebuschat, P. (2021). Collocational processing in L1 and L2: The effects of word frequency, collocational frequency, and association. Language Learning, 71(1), 55–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12427
  • Saito, K., & Liu, Y. (2022). Roles of collocation in L2 oral proficiency revisited: Different tasks, L1 vs. L2 raters, and cross-sectional vs. longitudinal analyses. Second Language Research, 38(3), 531–554. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658320988055
  • Schmitt, N. (2010). Researching vocabulary: A vocabulary research manual. New York: Palgrave Press. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230293977
  • Siyanova, A., & Schmitt, N. (2008). L2 learner production and processing of collocation: A multi-study perspective. Canadian Modern Language Review, 64, 429–458. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.64.3.429
  • Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Spina, S. (2015). Investigation of Native Speaker and Second Language Learner Intuition of Collocation Frequency. Language Learning, 65(3), 533–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12125
  • The British National Corpus, version 3 (BNC XML Edition). (2007). Distributed by Oxford University Computing Services on behalf of the BNC Consortium. URL: http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/
  • The jamovi project (2021). jamovi (Version 1.6) [Computer Software]. Retrieved from https://www.jamovi.org
  • Tiberii, P. (2018). Dizionario delle collocazioni. Le combinazioni delle parole in italiano. Bologna: Zanichelli editore.
  • Tomasello, M. (2006). Acquiring Linguistic Constructions. In D. Kuhn, R. S. Siegler, W. Damon, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Cognition, perception, and language (pp. 255–298). John Wiley & Sons Inc.
  • Wolter, B., & Gyllstad, H. (2011). Collocational links in the L2 mental lexicon and the influence of L1 intralexical knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 32(4), 430–449. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amr011
  • Wolter, B., & Gyllstad, H. (2013). Frequency of input and L2 collocational processing: A comparison of congruent and incongruent collocations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 451–482. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263113000107
  • Wolter, B., & Yamashita, J. (2015). Processing collocations in a second language. A case of first language activation? Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 1193–1221. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716414000113
  • Wolter, B., & Yamashita, J. (2018). Word frequency, collocational frequency, L1 congruency, and proficiency in L2 collocational processing: What accounts for L2 performance? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 395–416.

Collocational Links in the Multilingual Mind: Frequency Intuitions and Association Strength Measures

Year 2022, Volume: 33 Issue: 2, 191 - 219, 31.12.2022

Hakan Cangır , Cumhur Kuzu

https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.1083480

Abstract

Collocations are ubiquitous in everyday language, which help language users sound more natural and ease the processing burden during language production. They are also commonly taught in foreign language classrooms and those learners who can master these prevalent word combinations and chunks get to use the language more fluently as they enjoy a processing advantage. There are different approaches to the definition of these frequently co-occurring word combinations, but the current study embraces the frequentist approach which adopts a corpus linguistic technique and tries to combine corpus linguistics and user intuition data in its interpretations. Collocations have been extensively investigated from many different angles using both corpus linguistics and psycholinguistics techniques so far. Having its spark in the theory of collocational priming, the present study attempts to (a) investigate the relationship between corpus-driven association measures and the collocational frequency judgements of L1 Turkish-L2 English-L3 Italian users, (b) analyse the possible effect of congruence across the languages on the frequency relationship, (c) question if there is a difference between L1 Italian users’ and L3 Italian users’ sensitivity towards collocational strength based on their collocational frequency intuitions in Italian and (d) find humble evidence for the psycholinguistic reality of collocations in the L3 Italian mental lexicon, if any. The results indicate that language users’ frequency judgements in L2 English and L3 Italian correlate with an association measure (t-score) and the frequency of congruent items are judged more accurately. Additionally, L3 Italian users’ frequency intuitions overlap with native Italian users to a certain extent. The findings are discussed in the light of the earlier research on usage-based language use and frequency intuition.

Keywords

collocations priming frequency multilingual

References

  • Aksan, Y., Aksan, M., Koltuksuz, A., Sezer, T., Mersinli, Ü., Demirhan, U., & Kurtoglu, Ö. (2012). Construction of the Turkish National Corpus (TNC). In N.Calzolari, K. Choukri, T. Declerck, M. U. Doğan, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, ... S.Piperidis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (pp. 3223–3226).European Language.
  • Bestgen, Y. (2017). Beyond single-word measures: L2 writing assessment, lexical richness and formulaic competence. System, 69, 65-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.08.004
  • Bod, R. (2006). Exemplar-based syntax: How to get productivity from exemplars. The Linguistic Review, 23, 291–320.
  • Brezina, V. (2018). Statistics in corpus linguistic: A practical guide. Cambridge University Press.
  • Bybee, J. (2010). Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750526
  • Cangır, H., Büyükkantarcıoğlu, S. N., & Durrant, P. (2017). Investigating collocational priming in Turkish. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 13(132), 465–486.
  • Cangır, H. (2021a). Objective and subjective collocational frequency Association strength measures and EFL teacher intuitions. Pedagogical Linguistics. 2(1), 64–91.
  • Cangır, H. (2021b). Lexical associations in the L1 Turkish mental lexicon: Can L1 lexical intuition and a representative corpus guide teaching of Turkish as a foreign language materials?. Journal of Linguistics, (37), 45-66. DOI: 10.26650/jol.2021.972166
  • Cangır, H., & Durrant, P. (2021c). Cross-linguistic collocational networks in the L1 Turkish–L2 English mental lexicon. Lingua, 258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103057
  • Chen, X., & Dong, Y. (2019). Evaluating objective and subjective frequency measures in L2 lexical processing. Lingua, 230, 102738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2019.10273884
  • Christiansen, M. H., & Chater, N. (2001). Connectionist psycholinguistics: Capturing the empirical data. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(2), 82–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01600-4
  • Durrant, P., & Schmitt, N. (2009). To what extent do native and non-native writers make use of collocations? IRAL, 47, 157–177. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2009.007
  • Durrant, P., & Doherty, A. (2010). Are high-frequency collocations psychologicallyreal? Investigating the thesis of collocational priming. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 6, 125–155. https://doi.org/10.1515/CLLT.2010.06
  • Ellis, N. C. (2001). Memory for language. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 33-68). Cambridge University Press.
  • Ellis, N. C. (2003). Constructions, Chunking, and Connectionism: The Emergence of Second Language Structure. In The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 63–103). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch4
  • Ellis, N. C. (2012). Formulaic language and second language acquisition: Zipf and the phrasal teddy bear. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32(2012), 17–44. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190512000025
  • Ellis, N. C., & Ogden, D. C. (2017). Thinking about multiword constructions: Usage-based approaches to acquisition and processing. Topics in Cognitive Science, 9(3), 604–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12256
  • Ellis, N. C. (2019). Usage-based theories of Construction Grammar: Triangulating Corpus Linguistics and Psycholinguistics. In Jesse Egbert & Paul Baker (Eds.), Using Corpus Methods to Triangulate Linguistic Analysis (pp. 239-267). Routledge
  • Fioravanti, I., Senaldi, M. S. G., Lenci, A., & Siyanova-Chanturia, A. (2021). Lexical fixedness and compositionality in L1 speakers’ and L2 learners’ intuitions about word combinations: Evidence from Italian. Second Language Research, 37(2), 291–322. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658320941560
  • Gablasova, D., Brezina, V., & McEnery, T. (2017). Exploring learner language through corpora: Comparing and interpreting corpus frequency information. Language Learning, 67(S1), 130–154. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12226
  • Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago University Press.
  • Gries, S., Th. (2013). 50-something years of work on collocations. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 18(1), 137–166. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.18.1.09gri
  • Hoey, M. (2005). Lexical priming: A new theory of words and language. Routledge.
  • Hoffmann, S., & Lehmann, H. M. (2000). Collocational Evidence from the British National Corpus. In J. M. Kirk (Ed.), Corpora Galore: Analyses and Techniques in Describing English. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
  • Jakubíček, M., Kilgarriff, A., Kovář, V., Rychlý, P., & Suchomel, V. (2013). The TenTen corpus family. In 7th International Corpus Linguistics Conference CL (pp. 125-127).
  • Jones, M., & Durrant, P. (2010). What can a corpus tell us about vocabulary teaching materials? In M.McCarthy and A.O’Keeffe (Eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics (pp. 387-400). Routledge.
  • Kyle, K., & Crossley, S. (2016). The relationship between lexical sophistication and independent and source-based writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 34, 12–24.
  • Lenci, A., Fioravanti, I., & Siyanova-Chanturia, A. (2021, August 15–20). Collocational priming: Are collocations psychologically real for L1 and L2 speakers of Italian? [Paper presentation]. American Association for Applied Linguistics.
  • Lewis, M. (1993). The Lexical Approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.
  • Lewis, M. (1997). "Implementing the lexical approach: Putting theory into practice." Hove, England: Language Teaching Publications.
  • Nesselhauf, N. (2003). The use of collocations by advanced learners of English and some implications for teaching. Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 223-242
  • Öksüz, D., Brezina, V., & Rebuschat, P. (2021). Collocational processing in L1 and L2: The effects of word frequency, collocational frequency, and association. Language Learning, 71(1), 55–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12427
  • Saito, K., & Liu, Y. (2022). Roles of collocation in L2 oral proficiency revisited: Different tasks, L1 vs. L2 raters, and cross-sectional vs. longitudinal analyses. Second Language Research, 38(3), 531–554. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658320988055
  • Schmitt, N. (2010). Researching vocabulary: A vocabulary research manual. New York: Palgrave Press. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230293977
  • Siyanova, A., & Schmitt, N. (2008). L2 learner production and processing of collocation: A multi-study perspective. Canadian Modern Language Review, 64, 429–458. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.64.3.429
  • Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Spina, S. (2015). Investigation of Native Speaker and Second Language Learner Intuition of Collocation Frequency. Language Learning, 65(3), 533–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12125
  • The British National Corpus, version 3 (BNC XML Edition). (2007). Distributed by Oxford University Computing Services on behalf of the BNC Consortium. URL: http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/
  • The jamovi project (2021). jamovi (Version 1.6) [Computer Software]. Retrieved from https://www.jamovi.org
  • Tiberii, P. (2018). Dizionario delle collocazioni. Le combinazioni delle parole in italiano. Bologna: Zanichelli editore.
  • Tomasello, M. (2006). Acquiring Linguistic Constructions. In D. Kuhn, R. S. Siegler, W. Damon, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Cognition, perception, and language (pp. 255–298). John Wiley & Sons Inc.
  • Wolter, B., & Gyllstad, H. (2011). Collocational links in the L2 mental lexicon and the influence of L1 intralexical knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 32(4), 430–449. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amr011
  • Wolter, B., & Gyllstad, H. (2013). Frequency of input and L2 collocational processing: A comparison of congruent and incongruent collocations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 451–482. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263113000107
  • Wolter, B., & Yamashita, J. (2015). Processing collocations in a second language. A case of first language activation? Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 1193–1221. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716414000113
  • Wolter, B., & Yamashita, J. (2018). Word frequency, collocational frequency, L1 congruency, and proficiency in L2 collocational processing: What accounts for L2 performance? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 395–416.
There are 44 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Language Studies
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Hakan Cangır 0000-0003-2589-2466

Cumhur Kuzu 0000-0002-6291-4807

Publication Date December 31, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2022 Volume: 33 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Cangır, H., & Kuzu, C. (2022). Collocational Links in the Multilingual Mind: Frequency Intuitions and Association Strength Measures. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 33(2), 191-219. https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.1083480

88x31.png

This work is licensed under a

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND) International License.


Journal DOI: 10.18492/dad