Topic: A Corpus-Based Contrastive Study of Adverb + Verb Collocations in Chinese Learner

English and Native Speaker English

Student Name

Student ID
Introduction:

The collocations from English language, particularly the collocations of adverbs are assumed to

be the most difficult pattern in this language. It is not only difficult in learning but also difficult in

teaching, as the collocations in language are not predictable and hard to recall when required (Huo,

2014). The advanced level of information about the collocations are required for communicating

with other in English Language. Many of the non-native speakers of English have faced the

problems in learning collocations in their language, as the collocations cannot be directly translated

to their first language. There are not much equivalent words available for English collocation in

other non-native English languages. For Chinese who are learning the language, they use

collocations in their writings, they consider it very difficult. In recent years, the usage of

collocations and the errors in it in Chinese learners’ written productions have attracted the attention

of many researchers and teachers. A previous study by Huo (2014) has shown that it is particularly

challenging for Chinese learners to produce native like collocations (Huo, 2014).

One of the main reason for difficult in adopting the collocation is that learning and understanding

of English Collocation are considered to be disrespectful in China. The Chinese –English

Dictionary is only representing the type of V + N and N + V collocations, and this completely

ignore the adverb and adjective collocations (Li, 2015). It is likely that Chinese learners of English

have difficulty in attaining target-like adverb + verb collocations.

This is difficulty is due to the difference between the two languages i.e. English and Chinese. As

there is huge difference between the English language and Mandarin Chinese, both have different

writing expressions and also the knowledge of collocations are different. Also the functions of

Adverbs are limited in Chinese, but in English language the Adverbs have wide range of meanings

and functions. As already mentioned there are not sufficient direct translations available for
Chinese. Therefore, when Chinese learners use adverb collocations in English, they are likely to

choose the adverbs that have direct equivalents in Chinese, such as really and still, but to ignore

other types of adverbs. It is obvious that research on adverb collocations in learner English remains

a largely neglected area. This raises a series of questions, such as: How are adverb + verb

collocations used by the learners? What are the differences in using adverb + verb collocations

between Chinese learners and native English speakers?

One of the particular approach towards these questions is to consider particular examples in a large

number of data which is already existing. This research study have evaluated and interpreted the

existing stream of data for company the linguistic details in two languages i.e. Chinese Mandarin

and Native English Language.

Theoretical Background

The theoretical background depicts that few concepts upon which this study is based. Few of the

definitions that are introduced in this literature are collocation, second definition is semantic

preference and third concept is semantic prosody. All these concepts will be explained according

to the references used in the previous studies. Also along with above described concepts adverb +

verb collocations in English and in Chinese will be further defined and explained through

examples. There will be a short section of transfer. Lastly the theoretical background would

include the comparison between the collocations in learner English and native speaker English.

Collocation:

Definition: The terminology of collocation was first time explained by Firth in 1957. Firth defined

this concept and wrote that he has made an effort to show this term as a technical term, explained

the meaning of the test and also introduced the collocability test. The habitual or usual places

statements of given word is known as collocations. However, Xiao (2016) also described in his
study that the interpretation of terminology of “habitual” is vague and has been operationalized in

different linguistics research in different ways. Therefore, it can be concluded that different

linguistics research studies have their own definition for the term of collocation.

In addition to this literature Robins (2000) has also provided the definition of collocation as the

casual association of one word in linguistics to other specific words in a sentence. Later in 2001

Halliday and Hasan also defined collocation as a term for the consistency that is the outcome of

co-occurring of lexical words which are specifically associated with one another, because they

tend to occur in similar environments”. For example the word night is closely related to terms like

darkness etc.

Collocation is also defined as the group of words that have strong chances of being used together

in one sentence (Sinclair, 1991). There is no specific rule which could justify the occurrences of

these words for example the words rules and regulations are often used together but when we say

we break rules but we never says that we break the regulations. Similarly we use funeral and burial

together but we hold a funeral but not a burial (Sinclair, 1991).

In the field of corpus linguistics Mcenery, Xiao & Tono (2006) explained the term of collocation

as the characteristic of co-occurring patterns of words, the words which are typically co-occur in

corpus data. Further Xiao defined collocation as sequence of words or terms that co-occur more

frequently than it is expected. Collocation words are usually either verbal or grammatical. Bahns

(1992) explained collocations as the combination of open class words such as verbs, nouns or

adjectives which are combined preposition or a grammatical structure for example, switch of the

fan. McEnery, Xiao & Tono defined the term of collocation with more practical point of view.

This is a significant definition of the term collocation which is used in the present study.

The Semantic Features of Collocation:

Stubbs (2002) assumed in his research that there is always a semantic relations between the node

and collocates and the collocations. The terminology of node is represented as a word. Xiao (2006)

mentioned in his research work that there are two differentiating and distinctive meanings of

independent collocational i.e. semantic prosody and also sematic preferences. Begagic (2016)

explained in his research that “semantic preferences are defined as the relationship between a

random word with other semantically related set of words, on the other hand the semantic prosody

of a given word or phrase usually occurs in the framework of the specific lexical item with other

words or phrases”. Details of this definition are explained in the next section.

Semantic Preferences and Semantic Prosody:

Within the corpus linguistics the terms of sematic preferences and semantic prosody are two

important concepts that have been analyzed and evaluated in detail over a period of time. Xiao

(2016) mentioned in his study that these two terms have distinctive and independent collocation

meanings but they are also closely related to each other. Stubbs (2001) mentioned that difference

between these two terms is not clear. This is the matter of listing of collocates, there might be a

possibility that list all words in English for quantities and sizes. Below are mentioned some of the

significant discussion pointed related to these two terms.

Stubbs (2002) defines the term of semantic preferences as the relation not between the individual

words but it is a relation between the semantically related words. More precisely Stubbs (2001)

explained that the meaning originated from the semantic features of a related word is referred as

the semantic preference for those related word. The other definition for semantic preferences is

“a verbal group of words which are frequently occurring collocates which share some semantic

feature (Stubbs, 2002). Begagic (2013) investigated in his report that Stubb has evaluated

approximately 200 million word corpus and found out that at least 25% pf the 56,000 occurrences
of large collocated with words for qualities and sizes. Some of the examples for these words are

numbers, parts, scales, quantities etc. This is elaborated with the example that the words co-occurs

with a semantically specific group of objects with are united by a common semantic feature that

is described as “the relative extent of something”.

The semantic prosody is defined as “a meaning of word which is developed through the existence

of consistent sequence of collocates (Louw, 2000). The basic purpose of semantic prosody is to

express the attitude or expression of the speaker or writer. In most of the cases the semantic

prosodies has negative meanings, very few of these has positive meaning (Xiao, 2016). Sinclair

(1991) explained another example for explaining the term of semantic prosody is as he observed

that lexico-grammatical setting of the phrasal verb set for utilizing the corpus of around 7.3 million

words and he noticed that the verb is related to unpleasant events. On the basis of his research

results he concluded that different uses of words and phrases have a chance of occurrence in a

specific semantic environment, considering an example the word “happen” is associated to the

unpleasant events like accidents or mishaps.

The Relationship between Semantic Preferences and Semantic Prosody:

Partington (2004) described semantic body as the special case of semantic preferences. It is known

as the sub divided form of semantic preferences. The semantic prosody is used for the items shows

the preferences to co-occur with items that can be described as word bad: these can be worst,

unpleasant and nasty etc. or words for good could be pleasant, pleasurable and enjoyable. The

major difference the two terminologies is that they different in their operating scopes (Partington,

1998). It is also noticed in different research studies that semantic preferences is used to connect

one node item to another item from a particular semantic set, on the other hand semantic prosody
can influence the rich vocabulary of text. Semantic preferences are considered to be the component

of collocations whereas semantic prosody is a feature of node word.

2.2 Adverb & Verb Collections:

Adverb in English:

The collocations of Adverb + Verb or Verb + Adverbs are developed by putting these two entities

together. There is a need for defining the term of adverb further. Many different adverbs are

exaggerators that describe the quality of the action. The exaggerators also known as intensifiers

are further divided into semantic categories known as emphasisers, amplifiers and downtoners

(Quirk et. Al. 1985). The intensifier identify the intensity of the idea or concept i.e. either it is high

or low. The emphasizers are adverbs which support to make its presence stronger such as certainly,

indicating the surety of the incident. The emphasizers reinforce the true value of the clause or part

of clause to which they are applied. The second category of intensifier is amplifier. The amplifiers

are adverbs than enhance or enlarge the meaning of the verb. Zhang (2013) described in his report

that considering the amplifiers and maximizers, they are extreme cases, for example, the terms like

completely, absolutely etc. these are the words which shows that nothing is more or greater than

this, while on the other hand the boosters are something referred as highly or enormously, showing

that something is happening with great intensity, but there is still a capacity of increased intensity

of these words. Quirk et al (1985) assumed that the scale of intensity of amplifiers may vary, they

contract as downtoners or they could scale upwards as an assumed norm. The downtoners usually

have a lower impression as compared to assumed norm which has scaled up. In order to remain

specific, downtomers can be divided into four major forms:

1. Approximators: these words express the approximation for a degree or force of verb used

in a sentence
 2. Compromisers: these have slightly low impression

3. Diminshers: these are the words which have a low scale, consider the verb has small extent

of implementation or execution

4. Maximizers: these are negative maximizers, which does not show any extent of the verb in

a given sentence.

In linguistics it is assumed that the use of rules for English adverbs are complicated. In the next

section we will consider the co-occurrence restrictions with predications.

Adverb & Verb Collocation in English:

When considering the adverb + verb collocations in English, it is observed that co-occurrence

restrictions which are named as emphasizers. In general, the emphasizers can occur with

predications without any rule restriction, but there are some co-occurrence restrictions for

emphasizers. Quirk (1985) has mentioned some of the examples of this concept. In example 1 and

2 it is observed that emphasizers require some suggestion of exaggeration in predications. On the

other hand, the emphasizer tends to collocate with verbs for showing the cognition behavior, as it

is depicted in third example of Quirk’s+ (1985) research study. When we have to collocate with

gradable verbs, then it that situation emphasizers are working as boosters and have a scaling effect,

this is shown by the example four of the study. The examples are mentioned as following:

1. When she is angry, she absolutely screamed at boy.

2. When she is angry, she fairly spoke to him.

3. They honestly admired her courage

4. I indeed appreciate your support and help.

It is clear that amplifiers will primarily co-occur with certain verbs, for example, entirely will co-

occur with agree, badly with need and completely with forget. Sometimes it’s the case that
semantic class of verb might have collocated with verbs which have favorable implications for

example the adverb of “deeply” is collocate with a verb which is representing the attitude. Different

research studies also depict that amplifiers usually co-occur with semantically definable classes of

verbs. The amplifiers have many different subtypes, therefore, the situation may be even more

complicated when restrains to co-occurrence of amplifiers exist. For example: they wounded him

deeply.

The downtoners are divided into four different groups, they are divided according to the scale of

gradable verbs. As mentioned the four groups are approximators, compromisers, diminishers and

minimizers, which are depicting the true value or grade of the verbs. Except for approximators,

the other three types are often co-occur with the stative verb.

1. I almost resigned from my job.

2. I partly agree with you.

3. She hardly knows about me.

Adverb in Chinese Mandarin:

The definitions for Chinese adverbs varies in research studies of different scholars. The Chinese

adverbs are applied for modifying adjectives and verbs, they are play the role of content words

that shows the manner, degree and tone of the statements or sentences. It was also mentioned in

the research studies that Chinese adverbs will never be included as core elements in a sentence,

this means they would never be shown as subject or predicate in any sentence. Some research

scholars also mentioned that Chines adverbs can be used for modifying the nouns. Therefore,

according to Feng (2012), the application of Chinese adverbs is classified into two main categories:

one is to modify adjectives and verbs, the other category is to modify the nouns. Further the

Chinese adverbs are divided into five main categories:

 1. temporal adverbs conveying meaning about the fact of time,

2. degree adverbs which are distributed over a scale of degree

3. scope adverbs showing the scope within which the predicate is applied

4. negation adverbs when the clause is negated in a sentence

5. stance adverb: this adverb representing the stance or viewpoint of the speaker

These forms of adverbs in Chinese can also function as adjectives at the same time they can be

used in some particular contexts (Wang & Sun, 2018). In terms of function and collocation, the

Chinese adverbs are more complex.

Adverb + Verb Collocation in Chines Mandarin:

In Chinese Mandarin degree adverbs are specifically used to modify adjective ranging from low

degree of any expression to the high degree and moving towards an excessive degree.

There are some mental verbs like henxihuan which means “like very much” (Wang & Sun, 2014).

The scope adverbs are commonly collocated with different verbs in Chinese Mandarin.

The terms used for universal coverage are also included in the subtype of scope adverb, the

examples for these words in Chinese are “dou” all, “yigong” altogether, the words for minimum

coverage are zhi “only”, guang “just alone”, there are also adverbs for minimum coverage

including approximately “dayue” etc.

The usage of Chinese adverbs always not very defined and explained. Many of the Chinese adverbs

are functioning as adjectives and adverbs are the same time. Some of these words are depicted as

connectives in a clause. Lastly when we compare with English Adverbs, it is clearly shown that

Chinese Mandarin does not have ample vocabulary of Chinese Adverbs. Considering the example

word “tai” which is representing many of the adverbs like extremely, excessively etc. This shows

that the direct or word to word translation of Chinese Mandarin is not possible.
Literature Review from previous research studies:

In many research studies still there is not detailed research about the collocation in Chinese Learner

English Language. The research studies are about comparison between the adverbs collocations in

other learner English linguistics and native speaker English.

Osborne (2008) conducted a research in which he compared the placing of different adverbs in the

written production for different levels of English learners. His sample was extracted from variety

of L1 backgrounds and also the native speakers of English. His results clearly depicted that peole

with Spanish, Italian and French as their first language shows the tendency to use V-Adv-O order,

it is also observed that they people with other first languages do not use this pattern. The reason

for not using this pattern is they have L1 background. For Native speakers of English the pattern

of S-V-Adv were appropriate and sequences in English up to the 16th century, often containing the

same associations to verb-adverb.

Osborne (2008) also contributed to the idea that there a strong and weak relationship between the

adverbs and their collocation verbs. Considering the example of take seriously, was assumed as

the collocation which has a strong association between an adverb and its verb because it is obvious

that when we will omit the adverb then the sentence become meaningless or it would change the

meaning of the sentence. Osborne (2008) also indicated that there are strong collocational links

present among different adverbs and verbs and also he indicated that adverbs cannot be placed on

the left of the verb.

The semantic association between the adverbs and verbs is dependent on the semantic categories

of verbs and adverbs in collocations. However, it seems clear that classifying the nature of adverb

+ verb / verb + adverb combinations is problematic, as Osborne (2008) believed no study has

attempted to do so.
The Government has now taken serious action to research about this subject. On the other hand it

is shown that semantic bonding between the verb and adverb play a significant role in determining

the NP shift. The results in the research work has shown that NP shift takes place when the

weightage of NP exceeds four words burden, for example, takes the issue of communication

seriously, but could not take defense of Spanish independence seriously. These are not systematic

characteristics, these are just possibilities.

Considering the relationship between the semantic prosody and semantic preferences of

collocations, there are not m any studies available in this regard. There is no comparison available

for adverb collocations in learner English and Native speaker English.

Begagic (2013) conducts a study which analyzed semantic preference and semantic prosody of

one of the most common V+N collocations make sense in different genres, which could be used

as a starting point of the present study. In addition, Begagic (2013) tests make sense in a newspaper

sub corpus and academic sub corpus in the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA),

investigating the environments of make sense and dividing them into different categories, such as

negative, positive, possible, difficult and neutral environments. The results of the study depict that

this formation is usually exist when the environment is negative in the newspaper corpus: this kind

of environment exist when making sense is in negative form. Although Begagic was very

successful in distinguishing between the two entities known as semantic preferences and semantic

prosody.

The possible reason for her failure in this regard was that she divided the environments into two

main categories. Some environments like difficult or possible are neither negative nor positive.

The present study will focus on all three forms of environment: negative, positive and neutral

environment.
Syntactic features

Basic purpose of this study is to investigate the particular deviation in terms of settlement of

adverbs in collocation between Chinese learners English and NS English. Patterns with frequencies

of F (L) and F (R) will not be discussed in this section as they would discuss later. It is unnecessary

to say that chines have the problem of placement of adverbs because there is different between the

Chinese’s Mandarin and English language. This can be further elaborated with the following given

example. Here analysis has been performed to adverb-adverb collocation by using synthetic

approach. Here are the figures presented in the following table.

Table # 05

In table no 05, it’s clear that adverb V-O sequence is randomly in Chinese learners English. More

specifically, less systematic evidence suggests that one main type of Adverb V-O sequences
contains a downtowner with a verb of Perception. These are just penchants rather than systematic

characteristics. Some of examples of this evidence are discussed below

1- After the careful analysis of this study, I have partially agreed with the above mentioned

statement.

2- The only thing they need is mutual understanding

3- There is generation gap between parents and children and this generation gap is the basic

reason for this variation.

4- It can be noticed that the S-Adverb-V sequence remains highly frequent in Chinese.

In learners English, evidences have shown clearly that one type of S- adverse sequence contains

multiple amplifiers with verb of different process. Here, since we only discuss the level of surface

structure and the S-adverb- V sequences will be treated as the passive construction of the course.

There are also intransitive verbs that do not actually require objects in passive constructions, which

also fall into this category.

Moreover, passive constructions occurring in the S-Adverb-V sequence or the S-V-Adv sequence

seem to be common in the academic genre. This is further elaborated with the help of following

given examples.

 Emails are using at larger and broad level of field of business and education

 Here another problem arises, when the type of examination is abolished completely, it gives

birth to another problem.

 Mobile phones have been so widely spread in recent years that nearly each of is owns one

or more.

It has been observed that the adverbs are frequently used in the final position than in initial one.

This is more specific in the S-V- adverb sequences and happens in the NS English.
Up till present situation, it has been suggested that the S-V-Adverb sequence occurs frequently in

NS English, especially in British Academic English.

After the careful analysis and taking in account of all the other discussion on the genre chosen for

the study, it can conclude that reasonable passive constructions such as the S-Adverb-V sequence

arise with a high frequency compared with other constructions in NS English. All of these facts

are highlighted in tale.

Above discussion does not mean to highlight or criticize that native English speakers do not

consider the adverb-V-O order sequence rather they implement this sequence in the native as well

as formal part of English speaking. Some particular patterns, where native English

Presenters choose the Adverb-V-O order, form different sequences in Chinese Learner English.

For this purpose, writer has taken the cases and examples of different patterns and presented them

to make idea more clear. For this purpose, different examples have been taken from syntactic

structure and Chinese NS English to elaborate the difference.

This has been discussed several times that Chinese learners of English have difficulty in

accomplishing target like placement of adverbs in collocations. It can be seen that some particular

patterns in Chinese Learner English have different F (L) and F (R) compared to other one. This

can be seen in the tables very clearly.

Examples in these tales are showing that both constructions include the verbs, adverbs and

combinations. This is the adverb position attested in the learners’ collocations. This concept is

further highlighted with the following examples.

Patients with cancer, we see different patients with cancer. They have different intensity of disease.

People from different places have different intensity of cancer. Before working, we should
continue to study to 15 at least. We will also see clearly the need of work by learning further and

deeply. They see clearly the reason for the men’s behavior.

In case of other example, Reflect and only, we must believe that a degree certificate just can reflect

only one's academic achievements but not all abilities essential for successful career. But others

insist that it can reflect only one's academic achievements. It can reflect only your academic career.

Some of these are appropriate target-like others might assault a native speaker as strange. Looking

at the same patterns in the two native speakers corporate, we can notice from concordance lines

that the adverb-verb combination is highly preferred in NS English.

Here, it is debated that native speakers would choose V-Adverb-O sequences when combining see

and clearly. According to research conducted in 2008, strong systematic evidence shows that V-

Adverb-O sequences such as see clearly were common in English. In another example of

combination of clearly and see, we can most clearly see her protesting given models of black

middle class domesticity Based in consumerism by locating her in conversation with the popular

stories of her era, we can conclude the result.

Results have shown that DB & CFR plan is much more superior to the other 3 alternatives. At

present, humans can clearly see the negative consequences of a relentlessly growing population

and its effects on the environment.it can be seen clearly that there is difference in decision-making

and thought processes.

In the example of only + reflect, we can observe the analysis can only reflect the employment

undercurrents of the portion of workforce that is allied to good trading. On the other hand, sterility

reasons only reflect the "acceptable work environment". Her memories only reflect upon ways in

which her culture made her stand out from others in school.
This can be concluded that clear evidence shows that Chinese learners prefer the V-Adverb-O

sequence when combining the cognation/perception verbs see and reflect with emphasizers and

Downtowners, on the other hand, while native speakers actually prefer the Adverb-V-O sequence

in those patterns. In relation to word types, it appears less reasonable to conclude that

cognation/perception verbs with emphasizers always occur in V-Adverb-O sequences in

Chinese Learner English since there are also emphasizers and other cognation/perception

collocations in Adverb-V-O sequences.

It is worth noting here that for some of the pattern, where it is preferred to give Chinese pattern or

sequence, Chinese always prefer to have the pattern of V-O-adverb pattern. In order to proper

display and play of the pattern, native speakers would prefer a different structure.

This phenomenon can be highlighted further with the help of following discussed examples,

 E-dictionary is helpful, only if we use it correctly, we can make the best of it.

 People should know how to use electronic dictionaries properly.

 Many young people can't use computer properly.

If I talk about my opinion, I would strongly recommend using the electronic dictionary instead of

manual. Therefore, in my opinion, we should use E-dictionary properly. It has to be admitted that

the pattern use appropriately seems with extremely low frequencies in two NS corpora, which

indicates that such a pattern might not be preferred in NS English.

If one has detailed comparison of Chinese learners an native speakers, we would come to know

that they Prefer to use that pattern in a passive construction.it has been discussed several times that

sequence in question is S-V-Adv. Some of examples of the above mentioned and discussed case

are given below

 If advertising is used right, it is the most actual way.

  When cure disease is used properly, it can be dangerous

 Both methods have inevitable drawbacks, and they are only helpful if they are used

properly.

 It is likely that Chinese learners prefer the V-O-Adverb sequence when combining action

verbs such as use and play with the emphasizer properly, while native English speakers

seem to rarely use this combination.

In both of the case, evidences are showing the case the systematic evidences hat shows the NP

shifts trends in the combination of Verbs and adverbs combination. Chinese Learner English,

systematic proof shows that NP shift inclines to take place in these combinations even though they

are not heavy NPs. Again, it can be seen that Chinese learners do not commonly place adverbs to

the left of verbs in the combinations. Hence, it is possible to conclude that those combinations are

considered having strong collocation links in Chinese Learner English, which also implies that

these kinds of collocations have a strong semantic association between adverbs and their verbs in

Chinese Learner English.

Whole discussion can be concluded with the conclusion that overall, it is possible to acknowledge

that the Adverb-V-O sequence appears more often in Chinese Learner English than in NS English.

It is further discussed in past studies that one main type of Adverb-V-O sequences comprises a

downtowner with a verb of cognition. In contrast, the S-Adverb-O sequence is highly preferred in

NS English. This conflict can be removed with proper understanding only.

Semantic Preference or Semantic Prosody:

Considering the concordance lines which are mentioned below, it can be extracted that in NS

English language, this pattern in utilized for strong semantic preferences for
In other words, looking at concordance lines listed below, it can be posited that in NS English this

pattern is often used with a strong semantic preference for ‘a particular procedure for approaching

something especially a systematic or established one’. Therefore, it is possible to say that although

the pattern occurs in similar environments in Chinese Learner English and NS English, it co-occurs

with different words that belong to different semantic sets. It seems that native speakers do not

often use the pattern to modify high technology items and languages, and there is no evidence that

the pattern is used to describe insecticide or daily commodities such as plastic bags in NS English.

These measures are widely used and as the authors point out.

46. Efficiency measurements are widely used in various industries to benchmark performance.

47. The Bose-Hubbard model is widely used and studied in recent experiments.

48. The algorithm is also widely used in our every day's life.

49. Although large quantities of statistics are widely used, there are limitations.

Let us look at another frequently used pattern in NS English clearly see/see clearly. As mentioned

above, in Chinese Learner English, the pattern see clearly is used with a high frequency. Here, we

will ignore their structures, instead focusing on the phenomena that they describe. It is interesting

to note that most items that see clearly/clearly see is used to describe are basically visible; for

example, they are all about charts, graphs, figures, and directions which can be directly perceived

with eyes. On the other hand, it seems true that the pattern is used less frequently to describe mental

objects such as ideas and concepts in Chinese Learner English.

As mentioned at the beginning of the present study, the learning of English collocations is

completely ignored in China. Thus, as Huo (2014) pointed out, it is challenging for Chinese

learners of English to produce native-like collocations. Due to the differences in education

systems, it is hard for Chinese learners of English to learn how to use English collocations in the

classroom. Hence, the present study would like to contribute the idea that English collocations

such as adverb collocations can be learned with the help of corpus-based activities in the

classroom. Learning collocations such as adverb collocations or adjective collocations is difficult

because the use of such collocations sometimes very much depends on linguistics contexts; for

instance, see clearly or see () clearly is correct in one context but maybe incorrect in another

context.

It seems that there is no clear rule to explain how to use such collocations. In order to acquire the

knowledge of collocations and lexical competence in English, the learners have to practice a lot

and slowly improve in a long period of time. Thus, it is necessary to think of the role of corpora in

written instructions: corpus-based activities such as the use of concordancing provide the learners

with natural contexts. Anthony (2006) also mentions this idea that learners should investigate the

way in which language is used in natural contexts. His results show that “exposing L2 learners to

language via context is more beneficial than just presenting language to them out of context”.

More importantly, the use of concordancing would help the learners in approaching their writing

process, as Yoon (2008) demonstrated in his research, “concordancing could increase the

knowledge of collocations of L2 learners and also concordancing helped them solve their writing

problems”. In particular, the learners enable to search particular items in NS corpora, producing

concordance lines to observe the correct semantic preference or prosody and syntactic features of

the items, which can be seen as a kind of implicit and consciousness raising learning. Furthermore,
advanced learners could use more specific corpora such as academic English corpora to identify

the lexical collocations of certain patterns in English across disciplines. In other words, corpus-

based activities can be designed in many different ways in the classroom to effectively help the

learners to learn the use of English collocations and to enhance their writing skills.

Discussion:

On the basis of findings of this study we can conclude that there are number of differences between

Chinse Learner English and Native Speaker English in using adverb + verb and verb + adverb

collocation according to the given frequencies, and according to the placement of adverbs and

semantic features. In this section we will discuss why the Chinese learners are using different

patterns for collocation in Chinese Learner English and Native English Learner. Also these

differences in terms of L1 background. There are also some recommendations for learning and

understanding the native like collocations in the report.

As there is huge difference between the English language and Mandarin Chinese, both have

different writing expressions and also the knowledge of collocations and lexical competence are

different. Laufer (2013) realized that the terminology of “knowledge” refers to the information

about a specific word that is present in mental lexicon, like having in grammatical properties,

different meanings and syntagmatic relations with other words. The lexical competency is simply

referred as lexical knowledge which is utilized. When there is a Chinese learner who is producing

English Collocations then he will be influences by his previous knowledge of collocation and also

lexical knowledge from L1 background. For example when the Chinese Learner of English uses

collocation knowledge of word like “guang fan de” (widely) in Mandarin Chinese is known that
this phrase will be supported by “guang fan de shi yong” (widely use) in Chinese. Therefore, the

learner would be able to say that “widely use” in English language.

Moreover, as shown in the results, the pattern widely spread (‘guang fan de chuan bo’) has a

particular negative semantic prosody in Chinese Learner English. A search for the pattern in

Chinese guang fan de chuan bo (‘widely spread’) in the CCL Center for Chinese Linguistics corpus

clearly shows that the pattern is sometimes used to collocate with negative events, such as disease.

This strongly suggests that the Chinese learners use the pattern in English with negative collocates

because of the influence of L1 lexical competence.

Also in the current research it is suggested that Chinese learners are using the patterns like clearly

see and see clearly and is also accepted around the region with different semantic sets as we

compare to the Native English speakers. In Mandarin Chinese the verb is used just for an object

which can be visualize by human eye according to the Chinese dictionary, whereas according to

the definition of Oxford University, the verb is also known for understanding which shows that

verb is applied for discussing both visual objects and mental or perceived objects. Something

similar happens to another pattern widely accept. Hence, it is also possible to say that the Chinese

learners prefer to use such patterns to discuss different objects than native speakers due to the

influence of L1 lexical knowledge.

In L2 context, the lexical transfer plays a vital role in learners’ production. Ringbom (1983)

depicted in his research work that lexical transfer is applied to the learning hypothesis which is

stated as lexical items are equivalents to or they have the same semantic features which Learner’s

L1 or any other language the learner knows very well. It is already discussed that there is limited

function of adverb in Mandarin Chinese, also the adjectives in this language are used for altering

or modifying the verbs. Considering the fifteen frequently used adverb-verb collocation produced
by Chinese learners of English, it is observed that except for three adverbs i.e. still, only and just,

all other adverbs are used as the adjectives when we directly translate them to Mandarin Chinese.

This shows that function and semantic features of adverbs in English many be developed on the

model of Chinese equivalents: adjectives in Mandarin Chinese. Ringbom (1983) also mentioned

that this is known as mapping of words on the ideas that are already prevailing in one’s mind.

Additionally lexical transfer somehow led to syntactic transfer as well. As can be noticed from

Adv-V-O sequences appear often in Chinese Learner English. In Mandarin Chinese, adjectives

must be placed before verbs they modify; also passive constructions are not preferred in Mandarin

Chinese (Feng, 2012), which could explain why the learners prefer Adv-V-O sequences in

English.

As mentioned in the results, some particular features such as using emphasizer collocations or

cognition verbs in English can be considered difficult and problematic for Chinese learners,

because they are different from the learners’ native language, which is what Lado called cross-

linguistics differences. However, there are serious criticisms have been expressed about Lado’s

notion of language transfer because leaning difficulties do not always arise from cross-linguistics

differences. It is true that there is evidence of other matters that affect learners’ production in L2

contexts, such as interlanguage grammar.

There is another phenomenon that affects the learners’ production in L2 contexts. The use of such

patterns are also influenced by the interlanguage development of the learner in his or her

environment. The term interlanguage is referred as the language system which is developed on at

any point in learner’s development phase (Ortega, 2009). Based on the findings of the study, some

patterns produced by Chinese learners such as play () properly and reflect only are different from

the target language, and also different from the grammar representations available in the learners’
first language, which suggests that such productions can be considered interlanguage solutions that

the learners end up with. Some external factors such as the education system should also be taken

into account. As mentioned at the beginning of the present study, the learning of English

collocations is completely ignored in China. Thus, as Huo (2014) pointed out, it is challenging for

Chinese learners of English to produce native-like collocations.

Due to the differences in education systems, it is hard for Chinese learners of English to learn how

to use English collocations in the classroom. Hence, the present study would like to contribute the

idea that English collocations such as adverb collocations can be learned with the help of corpus-

based activities in the classroom. Learning collocations such as adverb collocations or adjective

collocations is difficult because the use of such collocations sometimes very much depends on

linguistics contexts; for instance, see clearly or see () clearly is correct in one context but maybe

incorrect in another context.

It seems that there is no clear rule to explain how to use such collocations. In order to acquire the

knowledge of collocations and lexical competence in English, the learners have to practice a lot

and slowly improve in a long period of time. Thus, it is necessary to think of the role of corpora in

written instructions: corpus-based activities such as the use of concordancing provide the learners

with natural contexts. Anthony (2006) also mentions this idea that learners should explore the

method in which language is utilized in natural contexts. His findings conclude that the learners

should be given exposure to language using the context is more advantageous as compared when

they are presented to the language content which is out of context.

Yoon (2008) explained in his research work that the use of concordance would facilitate the

learners in analyzing their writing process. He concluded that concordance would enhance the

knowledge of collocations of L2 learners and also concordance support them in solving their
writing issues. Specifically, the learners facilitate to search particular items in NS corpora, showing

concordance lines to detect the correct semantic preference or prosody and syntactic features of

the items, which can be seen as a kind of implicit and consciousness raising learning. Furthermore,

advanced learners could use more specific corpora such as academic English corpora to identify

the lexical collocations of certain patterns in English across disciplines. In other words, corpus-

based activities can be designed in many different ways in the classroom to effectively help the

learners to learn the use of English collocations and to enhance their writing skills.
References:

Anthony, L. (2006). Developing a freeware, multiplatform, corpus analysis toolkit for the

technical writing classroom. Ieee Transactions on Professional Communication, 49(3), 25-

32.

Bahn, J. & Eldaw, M. (1993). Should We Teach EFL Students Collocations? System, 21, 101

- 114.

Begagic, M. (2013). Semantic preference and semantic prosody of the collocation make sense.

Iezikoslovlje journal, Zenica: University of Zenica: 403-416.

Feng, Q. (2012). Syntactic-semantic analysis of Modern Chinese with left-associative

grammar. Faculty of Social Sciences and Theology. The Friedrich-Alexander-University

of Erlangen Nuremberg Press.

Huo Y. (2014). Analyzing collocation errors in EFL Chinese learners’ writings based on

corpus, Nanchong, China: School of Foreign Languages China West Normal University.

Laufer, B. (2013). The influence of L2 on L1 collocational knowledge and on L1 lexical

diversity in fee written expression. Effects of the second language on the first, 19-31.

Li, X. (2015). Corpora and collocations in Chinese-English dictionaries for Chinese users.

Guanghzou, China: Guangdong University of Foreign Studies.

Louw, B. (2000). Contextual prosodic theory: Bringing semantic prosodies to life. In C. Heffer,

H. Sauntson, and G. Fox (Eds.), Words in context: A tribute to John Sinclair on his

retirement. Birmingham: University of Birmingham.

McEnery, T., Xiao, R., & Tono, Y. (2006). Corpus-based language studies: An advanced

resource book. London/ New York: Routledge.

Ortega, L. 2009. Understanding second language acquisition. Great Britain: Hodder

Education.

Osborne, J. (2008). Adverb placement in post-intermediate learner English: a contrastive study

of learner corpora. Linking up contrastive and learner corpus research, Amsterdam, 127-

146.

Partington, A (2004). “Utterly content in each other’s company”: Semantic prosody and

semantic preference. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics: 131–156.

Partington, A. (1998). Patterns and meaning: Using corpora for English language research

and teaching. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.

Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (eds.) (1985). A Comprehensive grammar

of the English language. London: Longman.

Ringbom, H. (1983). Borrowing and lexical transfer. Applied Linguistics, 4 (3), 207-212.

Robins, R. H. (2000). General linguistics (4th ed.). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and

Research Press.

Sinclair, J.McH. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Stubbs, M. (2002). Two quantitative methods of studying phraseology in English.

International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 7(2), 215–44.

Wang W. S-Y & Sun C. (2014). The Oxford handbook of Chinese linguistics. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Xiao, R. (2016). Collocation: The Cambridge handbook of English corpus linguistics.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Xiao, R. (2016). Collocation: The Cambridge handbook of English corpus linguistics.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Yoon, H. (2008). More than a linguistic reference: The influence of corpus technology on L2

academic writing. Language Learning & Technology, 12(2), 31–48.

Yoon, H. (2008). More than a linguistic reference: The influence of corpus technology on L2

academic writing. Language Learning & Technology, 12(2), 31–48.

Zhang, R. (2013). A Corpus-based Study of Semantic Prosody Change: The Case of the

Adverbial Intensifier. Tianjing: Tianjin University of Science and Technology.