CLLT ‘versus’ Corpora and IJCL: a (half serious) keyness analysis
-
Stefanie Wulff
und
Stefan Th. Gries
Abstract
In this introduction to the special issue celebrating CLLT’s 20th anniversary, we look back and forward in time. To look back, we present the results of a (tongue-in-cheek) corpus-linguistic analysis of about 10 years worth of data of research published in CLLT, IJCL, and Corpora in order to distill the “essence” of CLLT for the reader. As an added bonus, we use the opportunity to discuss ways to improve established ways of performing keyness analyses. To look forward, we asked six (teams of) researchers who all have shaped corpus linguistics and thus the journal to give us their take on what the most significant developments in the field have been, and where they see the most impactful opportunities and challenges arise. This introduction briefly summarizes their contributions.
References
Baker, Paul. 2004. Querying keywords: Questions in difference, frequency, and sense in keyword analysis. Journal of English Linguistics 32(4). 346–359. https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424204269894.Suche in Google Scholar
Baron, Alistair, Paul Rayson & Dawn Archer. 2009. Word frequency and keyword statistics in historical corpus linguistics. Anglistik: International Journal of English Studies 20(1). 41–67.Suche in Google Scholar
Brezina, Vaclav & Miriam Meyerhoff. 2014. Significant or random? A critical review of sociolinguistic generalisations based on large corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 19(1). 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.19.1.01bre.Suche in Google Scholar
Cvrček, Václav & Masako Fidler. 2022. No keyword is an island: In search of covert associations. Corpora 17(2). 259–290. https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2022.0256.Suche in Google Scholar
Dunning, Ted. 1993. Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence. Computational Linguistics 19(1). 61–74.Suche in Google Scholar
Egbert, Jesse & Douglas Biber. 2019. Incorporating text dispersion into keyword analyses. Corpora 14(1). 77–104. https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2019.0162.Suche in Google Scholar
Gabrielatos, Costas. 2018. Keyness analysis: Nature, metrics and techniques. In Charlotte Taylor & Anna Marchi (eds.), Corpus approaches to discourse: A critical review, 225–258. London & New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315179346-11Suche in Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. 2021. A new approach to (key) keywords analysis: Using frequency, and now also dispersion. Research in Corpus Linguistics 9(2). 1–33. https://doi.org/10.32714/ricl.09.02.02.Suche in Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. 2022. What do (some of) our association measures measure (most)? Association? Journal of Second Language Studies 5(2). 171–205. https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.21028.gri.Suche in Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. to appear. Frequency, dispersion, association, and keyness: Revising and tupleizing corpus-linguistic measures. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Suche in Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. under review. Cultural keywords in varieties research. World Englishes.Suche in Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam. 1997. Using word frequency lists to measure corpus homogeneity and similarity between corpora. In Proceedings 5th ACL workshop on very large corpora, 231–245.Suche in Google Scholar
Millar, Neil & Brian S. Budgell. 2008. The language of public health – a corpus-based analysis. Journal of Public Health 16(5). 369–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-008-0178-9.Suche in Google Scholar
Paquot, Magali & Yves Bestgen. 2009. Distinctive words in academic writing: A comparison of three statistical tests for keyword extraction. In Andreas Jucker, Daniel Schreier & Marianne Hundt (eds.), Corpora: Pragmatics and discourse, 247–269. Amsterdam: Rodopi.10.1163/9789042029101_014Suche in Google Scholar
Rayson, Paul & Amanda Potts. 2020. Analysing keyword lists. In Magali Paquot & Stefan Th. Gries (eds.), Practical handbook of corpus linguistics, 119–139. Berlin & New York: Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-46216-1_6Suche in Google Scholar
Schmidt, Ben & Jian Li. 2015. wordVectors: Tools for creating and analyzing vector-space models of texts. R package. Available at: https://github.com/bmschmidt/wordVectors.Suche in Google Scholar
Scott, Mike & Christopher Tribble. 2006. Textual patterns: Key words and corpus analysis in language education. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.22Suche in Google Scholar
Scott, Mike. 1997. PC analysis of key words – and key words. System 25(2). 233–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0346-251x(97)00011-0.Suche in Google Scholar
Stubbs, Michael. 1996. Text and corpus analysis: Computer-assisted studies of language and culture. Oxford: Blackwell.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- CLLT ‘versus’ Corpora and IJCL: a (half serious) keyness analysis
- Corpus linguistics meets historical linguistics and construction grammar: how far have we come, and where do we go from here?
- Register and the dual nature of functional correspondence: accounting for text-linguistic variation between registers, within registers, and without registers
- Corpus-based discourse analysis: from meta-reflection to accountability
- Learner corpus research: a critical appraisal and roadmap for contributing (more) to SLA research agendas
- Corpus linguistics and the social sciences
- The wompom
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- CLLT ‘versus’ Corpora and IJCL: a (half serious) keyness analysis
- Corpus linguistics meets historical linguistics and construction grammar: how far have we come, and where do we go from here?
- Register and the dual nature of functional correspondence: accounting for text-linguistic variation between registers, within registers, and without registers
- Corpus-based discourse analysis: from meta-reflection to accountability
- Learner corpus research: a critical appraisal and roadmap for contributing (more) to SLA research agendas
- Corpus linguistics and the social sciences
- The wompom
