Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 257

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Testing the limits of data-driven learning: language proficiency and training

Open access
Boulton, Alex·2009·ReCALL

Abstract

The potential for corpora in language learning has attracted a significant amount of attention in recent years, including in the form of data-driven learning (DDL). Careful not to appear to over-promote the field, enthusiasts have urged caution in its application, in particular with regard to lower-level learners, and have argued that extensive learner-training in corpus techniques is an essential condition for DDL to be successful. Such limits seem eminently reasonable, but there is a notable dearth of empirical studies to support them. This paper describes a simple experiment to see how lower-level learners cope with corpus data with no prior training. The language focus here is on linking adverbials in English, which are renowned to be difficult to teach using traditional methods. The subjects are 132 first-year students at an engineering college in France of roughly intermediate and lower levels of English. They were divided into random groups to compare their ability to deal with the target items using traditional sources (extracts from a bilingual dictionary or a grammar/usage manual) or corpus data (short contexts or truncated concordances). Performance was tested prior to the experiment, subsequently to check ability to use the different information sources as a reference, and later to test recall. No evidence was found that traditional sources promote better recall, and corpus data seemed to be more effective for reference purposes. While the results of any single experiment must be treated with caution, these findings suggest the need for more empirical studies to complement the theoretical arguments and qualitative data which currently dominate the discussions of DDL.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0958344009000068

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 39 references

Cited by

See all 257

Metadata

Authors
Boulton, A.
Venue
ReCALL
Published
2009-01
Volume
21
Issue
1
Pages
37-54
ISSN
  • 0958-3440 (ISSN-L)
  • 1474-0109
OpenAlex
W2134659443
Cited by
257
References
39
FWCI
19.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Testing the limits of data-driven learning: language proficiency and training. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0958344009000068
The paper
Boulton, A. (2009). Testing the limits of data-driven learning: language proficiency and training. ReCALL. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0958344009000068

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.