helianlingzi

What is Corpus Linguistics?
Corpus linguistics is an approach to the empirical study of language that relies on computer-assisted techniques to analyze large, principled databases of naturally occurring language (corpora). the study of language relying on computer-assisted techniques to analyze large, principled databases of naturally occurring language.

And why are some language teachers so excited about it?
Susan Conrad states that in the 21st century, three changes prompted by corpus-based studies of grammar have the potential to revolutionize the teaching of grammar: 1. Monolithic descriptions of English grammar will be replaced by register-specific descriptions. 2. The teaching of grammar will become more integrated with the teaching of vocabulary. 3. Emphasis will shift from structural accuracy to the appropriate conditions of use for alternative grammatical constructions.
From these changes, teachers can get a great deal of information about the use of linguistic features, and teaching materials could be designed according to this frequency of use. Learner corpora helps teacher analyze how learners amply language. Some programs, such as concordancing, present every instance of a certain word or phrase, which integrates the teaching of grammar and vocabulary.

What applications can you envision for your current or future classroom?
I would like teach words using Corpus linguistics. Language is a tool to communicate and record, it will verify with the change of circumstance and times. Multiple instances of using make the language rich and words vivid. To help students understand and use the language freely.

The following paragraph is cited from a webpage:
Chinglish (also Chingrish) is a portmanteau of the words Chinese and English and refers to spoken or written English which is influenced by Chinese[1]. There are an estimated 300 to 500 million users and/or learners of English in the People's Republic of China[2].

The term "Chinglish" is mostly used in popular contexts and may have pejorative or derogatory connotations[3]. The terms "Chinese English" and "China English" are also used, mostly in the academic community, to refer to developing Chinese varieties of English[4] .

Chinglish, at the most fundamental level, is bad English printed or spoken by Chinese people. There is no connection between Pidgin English and Chinglish: 19th century Chinese Pidgin English was a language that could be learned, and enabled Chinese and Westerners to communicate.

Therefore, I would like use Corpus linguistics to help students recognize what they are likely to speak or write English by mistake. Actually, I think I can benefit a lot from these techniques because I believe I must have spoke Chinglish, and now and in the future, I am and I will. Corpus can help avoid more mistakes.

What are some of the technologies used for CMC? What are some of the promising features of CMC for language learning. Comment on any of your uses of these technologies, in particular if you have used any of them for language learning or practice purposes.

CMC is broadly used in language teaching and learning. People usually categorize CMC as either synchronous or asynchronous. Synchronous CMC include chatting, classroom discussions, and Moos. Asynchronous CMC includes mailing lists/bulletin board systems, bulletin boards, and email/short-messaging system. Conferencing can take one of two different forms. “It can include synchronous chat or it can include audio and visual messages transferred by the computer.”

Face-to-face conversation exercise is good for me, but sometimes it is somewhat difficult because some factors such as my listening, lack of vocabulary, can’t organize sentence in short time, or confusion by some use of words, make me nervous when I talk with others in English. Therefore, sometimes I’d like to chat on line using. If I feel difficult in understanding some sentences, I ask them type it because I have more time to think what I should answer and make sure what others talk. This type of CMC helps me improve my English in grammar and spoken English.
Example 1, once a time, my friend typed “Well I wont be there at 815 exactly because I have to walk from my class it ends then”. If we talk face-to-face, I must could not hear “then”. In this situation, I can understand better and learn the use of “then”.
Example 2, another time, she said “nope no problem”. I haven’t heard this sentence before, but because we are chatting on line, I have time look for it in dictionary.
Example 3, once I said “Would you like have dinner with me”? She said “You mean lunch right”?
So I understand when I should use “dinner”.
In a word, no matter talking or typing, chatting on line is really helpful for me to practice English.
Finally, comment on the findings of Dr. Sauro's research, and what the implications may be for future practice.
Dr. Sauro’s research indicates both types of corrective feedback support gains but no significant advantage for either feedback type on immediate or sustained gains in target form knowledge. However, the metalinguistic group shows significant immediate gains relative to the control condition. Therefore, appropriate feedback is really helpful in teaching and learning. However, the teacher should think which type and what time to give feedback is suitable.
Actually, what I am interested in is that which kind of metalinguistic feedback is more helpful. The fist kind of metalinguistic feedback which is list in the article doesn’t indicate clearly which error occurs for learners. Learners need more time to find it, which may make them remember it for a long time and improve their ability to edit writing by themselves.
And I am thinking if there is difference for any type of feedback when teachers correct different errors. For some simple or complex errors, explicit or implicit errors, there may have different effects under those types of feedback.

What did Grgurović & Hegelheimer find with regards to using subtitles and transcripts to help ESL students develop listening skills in English? What are some of the implications for instruction?
The results of this study showed that the participants used the subtitles more frequently and for longer periods of time than the transcript. The subtitles were also the preferred help option before and after the activity, and it appears that the participants picked the help option they were predisposed to in daily life. The higher proficiency group also used subtitles more frequently and for longer amounts of time than the lower proficiency group although both groups exhibited very similar behavior on the transcript. Overall, the results show that the participants spent less time interacting with help options than was anticipated when the study was set up. In the course of the activity, the participants exhibited great variation in the time spent on help, and a large variation was also noted in frequency of help page openings and instances of useful interaction with help.
This research also identified four patterns of participants’ interaction with help options (subtitles, transcript, non-interaction, and mixed interaction pattern) and described behavior of participants following those patterns. The analysis showed major differences between subtitles and transcript groups on one side and the non-interaction group on the other in terms of performance help page openings, and instances of useful interaction with help. While the subtitles and the transcript groups performed similarly on comprehension questions during and after the activity as well as on time and frequency of help use, the non-interaction group varied the most in behavior and performance from all other groups, probably due to task difficulty and lack of motivation.
The fact that students preferred subtitles and used subtitles more than the transcript calls for making subtitles the help option in multimedia listening materials of this kind. However, offering transcripts in addition to subtitles is likely the best solution because it provides learners with a choice. Also, the authors argue for giving users more control over the choice of help by introducing the option to skip help altogether to accommodate different learning styles and preferences.
CALL designers could implement software demos and tutorials that would promote the use of help. Teachers could prompt the use of help for both in-class (use of lecture transcripts, subtitled digital video) and out-of-class listening (captioned TV program, subtitled movies on DVD). They could also create CALL tasks that would require the use of help, as well as observe students using help to encourage an effective use of learning strategies. Finally, learners could be trained by teachers to use help options to their advantage (Hubbard, 2004).
From your reading of Levy, comment on one or more of the issues related to the practice dimension of CALL what you would want to take into consideration for your own classroom.
As Levy notes, “designing and using CALL materials effectively depends on setting clear learning goals, deciding which language skills and areas are to be targeted through CALL-based activities, and determining what types of activities are appropriate in achieving these goals”. If my students are the future English teachers, all of the skills are important. If they are students who will study abroad to English countries, listening, reading and writing are more occupy central places because of the need of learning. If my students take classes just for preparing short-time visiting to other countries, I’d like focus the training on speaking. If my students will use English as the second language in learning or working in the future, all the skills are equally essential because none of them is dispensable and the mastery of them are interdependent and mutually promotive.