Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory

Founded by Gries, Stefan Th. / Stefanowitsch, Anatol

Ed. by Wulff, Stefanie


IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 1.200
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.386

CiteScore 2017: 0.80

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.288
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.930

Online
ISSN
1613-7035
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Register variation by Spanish users of English: The Nijmegen Corpus of Spanish English

Huib Kouwenhoven / Mirjam Ernestus / Margot van Mulken
Published Online: 2018-04-06 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2013-0054

Abstract

English serves as a lingua franca in situations with varying degrees of formality. How formality affects non-native speech has rarely been studied. We investigated register variation by Spanish users of English by comparing formal and informal speech from the Nijmegen Corpus of Spanish English that we created. This corpus comprises speech from 34 Spanish speakers of English in interaction with Dutch confederates in two speech situations. Formality affected the amount of laughter and overlapping speech and the number of Spanish words. Moreover, formal speech had a more informational character than informal speech. We discuss how our findings relate to register variation in Spanish.

Keywords: ELF; non-native; register variation; formality; English; Spanish

References

  • Adamson, H. Douglas & Vera M. Regan. 1991. The acquisition of community speech norms by Asian immigrants learning English as a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 13(1). 1–22.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Batchelor, R. E. & Miguel Ángel San José. 2010. A reference grammar of Spanish. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Biber, Douglas. 2004. Conversation text types: A multi-dimensional analysis. In G. Purnelle, C. Fairon, & A. Dister (eds.), Le poids des mots: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on the statistical analysis of textual data, 15–34. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar

  • Biber, Douglas & Susan Conrad. 2009. Register, genre, and style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Biber, Douglas, Susan Conrad & Randi Reppen. 1998. Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Biber, Douglas, Mark Davies, James K. Jones & Nicole Tracy-Ventura. 2006. Spoken and written register variation in Spanish: A multi-dimensional analysis. Corpora 1(1). 1–37.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Boersma, Paul & David Weenink. 2012. Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 5.3.04, http://www.praat.org/ (accessed 16 January 2012).

  • Boletín Oficial del Estado. No 178, 26 July 2011. Sec. I, 84119–84138.

  • Coe, Norman. 2001. Speakers of Spanish and Catalan. In Michael Swan & Bernard Smith (eds.), Learner English: A teacher’s guide to interference & other problems, 2nd edn, 90–112. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • de Swaan, Abram. 2001. Words of the world: The global language system. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar

  • Dewaele, Jean-Marc. 2001. Activation or inhibition? The interaction of L1, L2 & L3 on the language mode continuum. In Jasone Cenoz, Britta Hufeisen & Ulrike Jessner (eds.), Cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition: Psycholinguistic perspectives (bilingual education and bilingualism 31), 69–89. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.

  • Dewaele, Jean-Marc. 2002. Variation, chaos et système en interlangue française. Acquisition et interaction en langue étrangère 17. 143–167.Google Scholar

  • Dewaele, Jean-Marc & Nathalie Wourm. 2002. L‘acquisition de la compétence sociopragmatique en langue étrangère. Revue française de linguistique appliquée 7(2). 139–153.Google Scholar

  • Ernestus, Mirjam, Iris Hanique & Erik Verboom. 2015. The effect of speech situation on the occurrence of reduced word pronunciation. Journal of Phonetics 48. 60–75.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Firth, Alan. 2009. The lingua franca factor. Intercultural Pragmatics 6(2). 147–170.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Garcia, Angela Cora. 2013. Understanding talk in formal and informal settings. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

  • Geeslin, Kimberly L. & Aarnes Gudmestad. 2008. Comparing interview and written elicitation tasks in native and non-native data: Do speakers do what we think they do? In Joyce Bruhn de Garavito & Elena Valenzuela (eds.), Selected proceedings of the 10th Hispanic linguistics symposium, 64–77. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.Google Scholar

  • Geeslin, Kimberly L. & Avizia Yim Long. 2014. Sociolinguistics and second language acquisition: Learning to use language in context. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Glenn, Phillip. 2010. Interviewer laughs: Shared laughter and asymmetries in employment interviews. Journal of Pragmatics 42(6). 1485–1498.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Granger, Sylviane. 2002. A bird’s-eye view of learner corpus research. In Sylviane Granger, Joseph Hung & Stephanie Petch-Tyson (eds.), Computer learner corpora, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching (language learning and language teaching 6), 3–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Granger, Sylviane. 2009. The contribution of learner corpora to second language acquisition and foreign language teaching. In Karin Aijmer (ed.), Corpora & language teaching (studies in corpus linguistics 33), 13–32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • House, Juliane. 2013. Developing pragmatic competence in English as a lingua franca: Using discourse markers to express (inter)subjectivity and connectivity. Journal of Pragmatics 59. 57–67.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kecskes, Istvan & Tünde Papp. 2000. Foreign language a mother tongue. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

  • Labov, William. 1966. The social stratification of English in New York City. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Lee, David Y. W. 2001. Genres, registers, text types, domains, and styles: Clarifying the concepts and navigating a path through the BNC jungle. Language Learning & Technology 5(3). 37–72.Google Scholar

  • MacWhinney, Brian. 2000. The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk, 3rd edn. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

  • Mauranen, Anna. 2003. The corpus of English as lingua franca in academic settings. TESOL Quarterly 37(3). 513–527.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Mauranen, Anna. 2011. Learners and users – Who do we want corpus from? In Fanny Meunier, Sylvie de Cock, Gaëtanelle Gilquin & Magali Paquot (eds.), A taste for corpora: In honour of Sylviane Granger (studies in corpus linguistics 45), 155–172. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Mauranen, Anna, Niina Hynninen & Elina Ranta. 2010. English as an academic lingua franca: The ELFA project. English for Specific Purposes 29. 183–190.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Romero-Trillo, Jesus. 2002. The pragmatic fossilization of discourse markers in non-native speakers of English. Journal of Pragmatics 34(6). 769–784.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2001. Closing a conceptual gap: The case for a description of English as a lingua franca. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 11(2). 133–158.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2010. Giving VOICE to English as a lingua franca. In Roberta Facchinetti, David Crystal & Barbara Seidlhofer (eds.), From international to local English – And back again (linguistic insights: studies in language and communication 95), 147–164. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

  • Tannen, Deborah. 2005. Conversational style: Analyzing talk among friends. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Thompson, Gregory. L. & Alan V. Brown. 2012. Interlanguage variation: The influence of monitoring and contextualization on L2 phonological production. VIAL, Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics 9. 107–132.Google Scholar

  • Tops, Guy A., J. Xavier Dekeyser, Betty Devriendt & Steven Geukens. 2001. Dutch speakers. In Michael Swan & Bernard Smith (eds.), Learner English: A teacher’s guide to interference & other problems, 2nd edn, 1–20. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Torreira, Francisco, Martine Adda-Decker & Mirjam Ernestus. 2010. The Nijmegen corpus of casual French. Speech Communication 52(3). 201–222.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • van Herk, Gerard. 2012. What is sociolinguistics? Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

  • Westin, Ingrid. 2002. Language change in English newspaper editorials. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2018-04-06

Published in Print: 2018-04-25


This work was partly funded by an ERC starting grant (284108) to the second author.


Citation Information: Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, Volume 14, Issue 1, Pages 35–63, ISSN (Online) 1613-7035, ISSN (Print) 1613-7027, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2013-0054.

Export Citation

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Huib Kouwenhoven, Mirjam Ernestus, and Margot van Mulken
International Journal of Bilingualism, 2016, Page 136700691667294

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in