Week7
Oct. 15
IBLT 2012
Ae
Hyang Shin
Reinhardt
(2010)
Undoubtedly
authentic input is one of the most important factors to facilitate L2 learners’
linguistic competence. Corpus-based
research allows L2 learners to be aware of the salience of linguistic features
of a given text. Some L2 learners who
have specific purpose have become advocating corpus-informed pedagogy. Furthermore, data-driven learning (DDL) was
used in L2 classroom by Tim Johns (1991).
DDL is able to enhance L2 learners’ ability of analysis, improving
certain knowledge of L2, and critical language awareness. The data of L2 learners’ productions help L2
learners enhance their awareness of their output which promises them to improve
their language competence (Swain, 1995).
According to the research, the doctoral students were asked to analysis
and compile corpora of their writing.
The result showed that there was improvement of using rhetorical
consciousness (Lee & Swales, 2006).
On the other hand, there are criticisms towards to corpus-informed L2
pedagogy. First, L2 learner might be overwhelmed
by gigantic information. Secondly, the
words cannot contain phraseology therefore L2 learners might comprehend them as
a standardized manner. The
corpus-informed pedagogy seems to me only high proficiency of L2 learners can
use it successfully since DDL treats words equally. Moreover, there are many ways to notice L2
learners’ productions.
Perez-Paredas
(2011)
The
purpose of the research is to see whether L2 learners’ interaction with
corpus-based resources differs in different corpus conditions. The researchers focused on the students’
behaviors while completing activities through corpus-based resources rather
than learners’ opinions and productions.
Two groups of EFL participated in the research and they were not
familiar with the corpus. The
researchers set two different conditions one was experimental group (EG) and
the other group was control group (CG). The
researcher gave them basic guide line to CG whereas EG received explicit
explanation. The research was influenced
by data-driven hypotheses (Sinclair, 2203).
The result does not show that specific difference results between EG and
CG. Even CG had more production
comparing to counterpart. This research
does not show clear evidences how two different condition groups’ behaviors are
different.
Compare/
Contrast:
The
two readings show how corpus can be used in second language class. Reinhardt (2010) insists that corpus is able
to help L2 learners to be aware of their productions. Knowing their performance could improve their
language proficiency. This is reading
also shows limitation and potential of using corpus in second language class. Perez-Paredas
(2011) conducted study over EFL students to see the learners’ behaviors in
different conditions. However, the study
does not show supportive example of the result.
Reinhart shows readers general information of corpus and what the technology
can be used in a certain situation.
Perez-Paredas tries to show corpus can be used as an interactive way
through the research.
Clarification
Question
None
Application
Question
According to Perez-Paredas
(2011), EG would have caught up an eventually outperformed CG. What hypothesis supports the statement?
5. Sip and Breathe
