Analyzing late interlanguage with learner corpora: Québec replications of three European studies
Abstract
The characterization of learner interlanguage has been largely confined to the early acquisition of speech in a second language (L2), with later acquisition not commonly analyzed in this framework for lack of theory, lack of data, and the fact that late acquisition is intermeshed with the acquisition of literacy. The current trend to electronic submission of classroom writing relieves the data problem, defines steps in the acquisition of literacy, and may even contribute to the growth of theory. When assembled by teachers or researchers into a learner corpus (LC) of suitable size and character, such a corpus provides the empirical means to discover what advanced learners know and do not know about their L2. A strong tradition of LC analysis has emerged in Europe; the present study introduces this work and tests its applicability to a North American context.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
CSL learners are likely to 'talk written down'.
“It has been suggested that the CSL learners are likely to “talk written down,” which has been revealed in previous studies of English interlanguage (Petch-Tyson, 1998; Cobb, 2003).”
From Syntactic Networks of Interlanguage Across L2 Modalities and Proficiency Levels (2021) · cites this paper as Cobb, 2003
Cites
Formulaic Language and the Lexicon
Wray, A. (2002) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511519772 · Cited by 2,873 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Computing the vocabulary demands of L2 reading
Cobb, T. (2007) · Language Learning & Technology · doi:10.64152/10125/44117 · Cited by 238 · see citing works
Self-citationSyntactic Networks of Interlanguage Across L2 Modalities and Proficiency Levels
Hao, Y., Wang, X., Wu, M., & Liu, H. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.643120 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
“It has been suggested that the CSL learners are likely to “talk written down,” which has been revealed in previous studies of English interlanguage (Petch-Tyson, 1998; Cobb, 2003).”
Background
- Authors
- Cobb, T.
- Corresponding author
- Cobb, Tom
- ORCID
- Cobb, Tom
- Venue
- The Canadian Modern Language Review
- Published
- 2003-03-01
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 393-424
- ISSN
- 0008-4506 (ISSN-L)
- 1710-1131
- OpenAlex
- W1978242712
- Cited by
- 112
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 5.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Canadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Linguistic Studies and Language Acquisition
- Keywords
- learner corpus, second language acquisition, advanced learners, literacy acquisition, classroom writing, replication study
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