Cover not available
Part of
Challenges in Corpus Linguistics: Rethinking corpus compilation and analysis
Edited by Mark Kaunisto and Marco Schilk
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 118] 2024
► pp. 55–67

Challenges in the compilation, annotation, and analysis of learner corpus data

| University of Bremen
This chapter highlights and discusses the special characteristics of learner corpus data and the challenges they may present for corpus compilation, annotation, and analysis. Because learner corpus and SLA researchers use their data to study L2 production and development, it is of utmost importance that the data are valid, that is, they represent “authentic” L2 production, which means that the data must stem from the studied learners’ own language production. I discuss challenges in three areas: (1) multilingual practices and metalinguistic language use, (2) lexical and constructional bias, often brought about by the wording of task instructions or writing prompts that learners are asked to respond to, and (3) learner corpus annotation in view of the “discourse of deficit” in SLA. For each of these challenges solutions as to how they can be met are offered.
Keywords: learner corpus, compilation, analysis, annotation, multilingualism, lexical bias, task instruction, writing prompt, discourse of deficit, lexical innovation
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction and general remarks
  • 2.Challenges and how to respond to them
    • 2.1Multilingual practices and metalinguistic language use
      • Response
    • 2.2Task effects
      • Response
    • 2.3“Discourse of deficit” and learner corpus annotation
      • Response
  • 3.Summary and conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.118.04cal
References (26)
References
Alexopoulou, Theodora, Geertzen, Jeroen, Korhonen, Anna & Meurers, Detmar. 2015. Exploring big educational learner corpora for SLA research: Perspectives on relative clauses. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 1(1): 96–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Callies, Marcus. 2008. Easy to understand but difficult to use? Raising constructions and information packaging in the advanced learner variety. In Linking Contrastive and Learner Corpus Research [Language and Computers, Studies in Practical Linguistics Series 66], Gaëtanelle Gilquin, Szilvia Papp & María Belén Díez-Bedmar (eds), 201–226. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. Towards a process-oriented approach to comparing EFL and ESL varieties: A corpus-study of lexical innovations. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 2(2): 229–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2023. Errors and innovations in L2 varieties of English: Towards resolving a contradictory practice. In Contradiction Studies – Exploring the Field, Gisela Febel, Kerstin Knopf & Martin Nonhoff (eds), 201–214. New York NY: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Callies, Marcus & Wiemeyer, Leonie. 2017. Multilingual speakers, multilingual texts: Multilingual practices in learner corpora. In Challenging the Myth of Monolingual Corpora [Language and Computers 80], Arja Nurmi, Tanja Rütten & Päivi Pahta (eds), 80–94. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Callies, Marcus & Hehner, Stefanie. 2021. Konstruktionen mit Partikelverben in Varietäten des Englischen: Zum Spannungsfeld von Präskription und Innovation an der Schnittstelle von Sprachwissenschaft, Fremdsprachendidaktik und Unterrichtspraxis. In Sprachwissenschaft und Fremdsprachendidaktik: Konstruktionen und Konstruktionslernen, Christoph Bürgel, Paul Gévaudan & Dirk Siepmann (eds), 81–93. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Gilquin, Gaëtanelle. 2015. From design to collection of learner corpora. In Cambridge Handbook of Learner Corpus Research, Sylviane Granger, Fanny Meunier & Gaëtanelle Gilquin (eds), 9–34. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2022. The Process Corpus of English in Education: Going beyond the written text. Research in Corpus Linguistics 10(1): 31–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gilquin, Gaëtanelle, De Cock, Sylvie & Granger, Sylviane (eds). 2010. The Louvain International Database of Spoken English Interlanguage. Handbook and CD-ROM. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar
Gilquin, Gaëtanelle & Laporte, Samantha. 2021. The use of online writing tools by learners of English: Evidence from a process corpus. International Journal of Lexicography 34(4): 472–492. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Granger, Sylviane, Meunier, Fanny & Gilquin, Gaëtanelle (eds). 2015. Cambridge Handbook of Learner Corpus Research. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hartwell, Kelly & Aull, Laura. 2023. Editorial introduction: AI, corpora, and future directions for writing assessment. Assessing Writing 57: 1–4. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ishikiwa, Shin’ichiro. 2023. The ICNALE Guide An Introduction to a Learner Corpus Study on Asian Learners’ L2 English. New York NY: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaszubski, Przemysław. 2005. Typical errors of Polish advanced EFL learner writers. <[URL]> (currently not accessible).
König, Alexander, Frey, Jennifer-Carmen, Stemle, Egon W., Glaznieks, Aivars & Paquot, Magali. 2022. Towards standardizing LCR metadata. Paper presented at the 6th International Conference for Learner Corpus Research (LCR 2022), Padova, 22–24 September.
Lozano, Cristóbal & Mendikoetxea, Amaya. 2010. Interface conditions on postverbal subjects: A corpus study of L2 English. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 13(4): 475–497. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lüdeling, Anke & Hirschmann, Hagen. 2015. Error annotation systems. In The Cambridge Handbook of Learner Corpus Research, Sylviane Granger, Gaëtanelle Gilquin & Fanny Meunier (eds), 135–158. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nelson, Gerald. 2002. International Corpus of English. Markup Manual for Written Texts. <[URL]> (15 March 2024).
O’Donnell, Matthew Brook, Römer, Ute & Ellis, Nick C. 2013. The development of formulaic language in first and second language writing: Investigating effects of frequency, association, and native norm. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 18: 83–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ortega, Lourdes. 2013. SLA for the 21st century: Disciplinary progress, transdisciplinary relevance, and the bi/multilingual turn. Language Learning 63(1): 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selinker, Larry. 1972. Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics 10: 209–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, John McH. 2005. Corpus and text – Basic principles. In Developing Linguistic Corpora: A Guide to Good Practice, Martin Wynne (ed.), 1–16. Oxford: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar
SPLLOC Transcription Guidelines 2008. <[URL]> (1 August 2022).
Tracy-Ventura, Nicole & Paquot, Magali (eds). 2021. The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition and Corpora. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wiemeyer, Leonie. 2022. Intertextuality in Foreign-language Academic Writing in English. A Mixed-methods Study of University Students’ Writing Products and Processes in Source-based Disciplinary Assignments. PhD dissertation, University of Bremen.