FEATURES OF LEXICAL VERBS IN THE DISCUSSION SECTION OF MASTERS' DISSERTATIONS

FAIZAH BINTI MOHAMAD NUSRI

FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTICS UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR

2018 FEATURES OF LEXICAL VERBS IN THE DISCUSSION SECTION OF MASTERS' DISSERTATIONS

FAIZAH BINTI MOHAMAD NUSRI

DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ENGLISH AS SECOND LANGUAGE

FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LINGUISTICS UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR

2018

UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA ORIGINAL LITERARY WORK DECLARATION

Name of Candidate: Faizah binti Mohamad Nusri I.C/Passport No: 860610-38-6394 Matric No: TGB 120045 Name of Degree: Master of English as Second Language Title of Project Paper/Research Report/Dissertation/Thesis (“this Work”): Features of Lexical Verbs in the Discussion Section of Masters’ Dissertations Field of Study: Corpus Linguistics

I do solemnly and sincerely declare that: (1) I am the sole author/writer of this Work; (2) This Work is original; (3) Any use of any work in which copyright exists was done by way of fair dealing and for permitted purposes and any excerpt or extract from, or reference to or reproduction of any copyright work has been disclosed expressly and sufficiently and the title of the Work and its authorship have been acknowledged in this Work; (4) I do not have any actual knowledge nor do I ought reasonably to know that the making of this work constitutes an infringement of any copyright work; (5) I hereby assign all and every rights in the copyright to this Work to the University of Malaya (“UM”), who henceforth shall be owner of the copyright in this Work and that any reproduction or use in any form or by any means whatsoever is prohibited without the written consent of UM having been first had and obtained; (6) I am fully aware that if in the course of making this Work I have infringed any copyright whether intentionally or otherwise, I may be subject to legal action or any other action as may be determined by UM.

Candidate’s Signature Date:

Subscribed and solemnly declared before,

Witness’s Signature Date:

Name: Designation:

ii

ii ABSTRACT

This study examines the use of lexical verbs in Discussion sections of Master’s

Degree Dissertations submitted to the Faculty of Languages and Linguistics of University of Malaya. Lexical verbs are known to be prevalent in academic discourse notably in modulating writers’ ideas and stances to the readers. In order to convey their thoughts and communicate well with the readers, precise and succinct use of lexical verbs is paramount. Building on this background, the primary focus of the paper is an investigation of the use of lexical verbs in advanced ESL writing. Lexical verbs found in the academic texts are examined to identify the nature of verbal use and knowledge among advanced ESL speakers by the basis of types of lexical verbs, verb forms and associated verb patterns. It is interesting to note that Mental-Emotive verbs are second most commonly used verbs, after Activity verbs. The results also indicate the writers’ tendency to employ passive voice in their writing, which is generally avoided by ESL and non-native writers in other studies despite its conventionalized use in academic discourse.

The key verb-based patterns examined in this paper are Passive+PP and V-that patterns in verb-based bundles. Passive voice is predominantly used in combination with PP in and by. This result indicates writers’ adherence to academic text objectivity and detachment conventions. Common V-that patterns examplify the writers’ confidence in their claims. Analysis of V-that pattern also show writers’ tendency to discriminate verb type according to animacy of the subject. This research highlights the use of accurate verb and importance of phraseological knowledge in academic writing and proposes analysis of academic verbs and common patterns as linguistic awareness exercise for advanced ESL learners.

Keywords: corpus linguistics, phraseology, ESL academic writing

iii ABSTRAK

Kajian ini menganalisa kata kerja leksikal di dalam bahagian perbincangan disertasi Ijazah Sarjana Fakulti Bahasa dan Linguistik Universiti Malaya. Kata Kerja leksikal adalah sangat penting dalam penulisan wacana akademik kerana ia dapat membentuk idea dan pendirian penulis supaya dapat difahami sepenuhnya oleh pembaca.

Untuk penyampaian idea dan komunikasi yang baik antara penulis dan pembaca, penggunaan kata kerja yang tepat patut diberi fokus. Atas sebab-sebab ini, fokus utama kajian ini adalah untuk mengkaji ciri-ciri penggunaan kata kerja leksikal oleh penulis ESL tahap tinggi. Kata kerja leksikal yang dikaji dalam teks akademik adalah dari segi jenis kata kerja, bentuk kata kerja dan pola kata kerja yang selalu digunakan. Kajian mendapati bahawa pengunaan kata kerja Mental-Emotif adalah yang kedua paling kerap selepas kata kerja Aktiviti. Dapatan juga mendapari penulis-penulis di dalam korpus ini juga lebih cenderung menggunakan ayat pasif dalam penulisan mereka walaupun telah diketahui berdasarkan kajian lalu yang teknik penulisan ini selalu dielak oleh penulis bukan natif.

Pola penggunaan kata kerja leksikal pula dikaji dalam bentuk Passive + Preposition dan

V-that. Ayat Pasif paling banyak digunakan dengan kombinasi preposisi in dan by. Ini menunjukkan pematuhan penulis-penulis kepada konvensi wacana akademik iaitu objektiviti. Pola penulisan V-that menunjukkan tahap keyakinan mereka terhadap kenyataan yang mereka. Analisis pola V-that juga menunjukkan penulis mendiskriminasi jenis kata kerja yang digunakan mengikut animasi objek, samaada hidup atau pun tidak.

Kajian ini turut menekankan kepentingan penggunaan kata kerja yang tepat dan rangkai kata dalam penulisan akademik dan mencadangkan analisis kata kerja dan pola biasa dalam penulisan akademik sebagai latihan kesedaran linguistik untuk pelajar ESL.

Kata kunci: linguistik corpus, fraseologi, ESL penulisan akademik

iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank Almighty Allah for giving me the opportunity, determination and strength to complete my research. His continuous grace and mercy were with me throughout my life and ever more during the tenure of my research. My enormous thanks also goes to my mother who has never stopped praying for my success. I also am deeply grateful for the exceptional help and guidance given by my supervisor Dr. Siti Zaidah

Zainuddin without whom this dissertation would not be complete. To my friends who have also provided with strength to persevere through this journey, I could not thank you enough.

v TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ...... iii

Abstrak ...... iv

Acknowledgements ...... v

Table of Contents ...... vi

List of Figures ...... ix

List of Tables...... x

List of Appendices ...... xi

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...... 1

1.1 Statement of the problem ...... 2

1.2 Background of ESL Status in Malaysia ...... 4

1.3 Research questions...... 7

1.4 Research objective ...... 8

1.5 Scope of the study ...... 8

1.6 Limitation of the study...... 10

1.7 Significance of the study ...... 10

1.8 Definition of terms ...... 11

1.9 Summary ...... 14

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 15

2.1 Introduction...... 15

2.2 Academic discourse ...... 17

2.3 Lexical Verbs ...... 23

2.3.1 Phrasal verb ...... 25

2.4 Study of corpus ...... 26

vi 2.5 Lexical verbs in academic discourse ...... 27

2.6 ESL Writers and Use of Lexical Verbs ...... 29

2.7 Verb Lemmas vs. Verb Forms ...... 33

2.8 Language Formulaicity ...... 39

2.9 Language Formulaicity; Phraseology and Collocation ...... 43

2.10 Summary ...... 47

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ...... 48

3.1 Introduction...... 48

3.2 Analysis of authentic language data ...... 48

3.3 Corpus Linguistics ...... 50

3.4 The corpus ...... 52

3.5 Data Collection Procedures ...... 53

3.6 Ethics of the study ...... 53

3.7 Data Analysis Procedures ...... 54

3.7.1 UCREL CLAWS Tagset ...... 55

3.7.2 WordSmith Tool 6.0 ...... 56

3.8 Summary ...... 59

CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS ...... 60

4.1 Types of lexical verbs ...... 60

4.2 Lexical Verbs and Verb Forms ...... 68

4.3 Verb forms ...... 70

4.3.1 Tense ...... 71

4.3.2 Aspect ...... 73

4.3.3 Infinitives and gerunds ...... 75

4.3.4 Passive and active voice ...... 76

vii 4.4 Associated patterns ...... 78

4.4.1 Passive verb + PP fragment ...... 79

4.4.1.1 Short passive and long passive ...... 82

4.4.2 (VP) + that clause fragment ...... 85

4.4.2.1 Tense of Reporting ...... 88

4.4.2.2 Animate vs Inanimate subjects ...... 94

4.5 Summary ...... 95

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSION ...... 97

5.1 Introduction...... 97

5.2 Types of verbs...... 97

5.3 Usage of verb forms...... 100

5.4 Analysis of Verb forms ...... 102

5.5 Tense and Aspect ...... 102

5.6 Common verb patterns ...... 104

5.7 Summary of discussion ...... 107

5.8 Pedagogical Implications ...... 108

5.8.1 Academic Wordlist ...... 108

5.8.2 Teaching of Grammar ...... 110

5.8.3 Explicit teaching of Phraseology and Collocation ...... 111

5.8.4 Consciousness-raising activity via data-driven learning (DDL) ...... 113

5.9 Conclusion ...... 116

References ...... 118

Appendix a ...... 129

viii LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 Recurring discourse of academic writing ...... 19

Figure 3.1 Example of text with Discussion subheading ...... 54

Figure 3.2 Example of text with POS-tags...... 55

Figure 3.3 WordSmith Tool Wordlist ...... 57

Figure 3.4 Example of concordance lines ...... 58

Figure 4.1 Percentage occurrence of lexical verbs in specific verb groups ...... 60

ix LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1 Verb-based structural classification ...... 9

Table 2.1 Parameters of phraseology in corpus linguistics ...... 46

Table 3.1 Summary of corpus ...... 52

Table 3.2 CLAWS Horizontal Output Abbreviation ...... 55

Table 3.3 Stages of corpus analysis ...... 59

Table 4.1 Verb phrase-based bundles and semantic meaning ...... 62

Table 4.2 Examples of Report Verbs with that Complementiser ...... 65

Table 4.3 Examples of Logical Semantic Verbs ...... 66

Table 4.4 Concordance Lines with Linking verbs ...... 68

Table 4.5 CLAWS Horizontal Output Abbreviation ...... 69

Table 4.6 Lemmas and Verb Form Breakdown ...... 70

Table 4.7 Verbs in Infinitives and Gerunds ...... 75

Table 4.8 Verb-based Lexical Bundles in Raw Frequency ...... 79

Table 4.9 Passive Verb + PP Fragment in Raw Frequency ...... 79

Table 4.10 Common Report Verbs ...... 85

Table 4.11 Categorization of Report Verbs as Epistemic Verbs ...... 87

Table 4.12 Subject of V_that construction by frequency ...... 94

Table 5.1 High Frequency verbs and synonyms ...... 101

Table 5.2 Stock Phrases for Report Verbs ...... 106

x LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A: Wordlist of the corpus sorted by 129 frequency………………………………………...

xi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Thesis writing is considered one of the most formidable tasks for many graduate students; even more so when the task needs to be written in a second language. Despite the expanding number of English as a Second Language (ESL) writers, many still consider the task as the ultimate challenge. ESL writers have commented that they could not seem to achieve the same rhetoric and linguistic repertoire as read in journal articles and academic writing, most written or edited by native speakers (Karim Sandengi, 2015).

The writers are not the only ones suffering in this regard, however. Similar sentiments have been echoed by both English for Academic Purpose (EAP) and English instructors as they struggled over the cryptic and ambiguous constructs produced by non-native writers (ESL or EFL (English as Foreign Language).

There are several contributing factors that could have caused this linguistic conundrum and one of them is the choice of lexical verbs. A study by Bloch (2010) has identified that non-native writers have had difficulties in choosing the verbs that could “satisfy both syntactic requirements of their sentences and, perhaps more importantly, to express their attitudes towards the claims” (p. 221). In many ways, choice of lexical reflects the writers’ stance and attitudes in their arguments. Limited exposure and understanding of the subtleties of verbs uses may have shaped this condition into what it is now. Observations of grammatical choices in rhetorical context have allowed writers to examine and pinpoint certain grammatical aspects that cannot be learned, but rather observed as a system of abstract rules. Realizing this, an examination of a large body of text (the corpus) has become a powerful pedagogical tools, especially for advanced learners. This study intends to describe features of lexical verbs by identifying categories of verbs used in the

ESL corpus created specifically to serve above-mentioned purposes. The examination of verb forms could also provide a deeper analysis of tenses and aspects, voice and

1 associated patterns favoured by the writers and common associated patterns of lexical verbs.

1.1 Statement of the problem

Over the course of ESL teaching and learning, learners will come to learn that the verb is perhaps one of the most crucial elements in any forms of text constructions (Quirk et al., 1985, as cited in Hinkel, 2004). Lexical verbs, especially, are embodiments of expressions of action, state and meaningful predicates in texts (Crystal, 2003). Granger and Paquot (2008, p. 1) argue that lexical verbs play predominant parts in EAP functions such as “expressing personal stance, reviewing the literature, quoting, expressing cause and effects, summarizing and contrasting”. The use of proper verbs also allows writer to argue their stands and establish their position within the related literatures. Argument structure, in any genres, is an abstract thought illustrated by varying grammatical constructs that must include a verb (Goldberg, 2013). The choice of verbs, in particular in non-native writing has been noted to be the main point of distinction from their native counterpart (Burrough-Boenisch, 2003). Verbs have been classified into quite a number of categories by researchers, but among the various categorization of verbs, ‘reporting verb’ has been under the most scrutiny (Charles, 2006; Zhang, 2008; Bloch, 2010). In general, EAP studies have tended to focus on one specific category of verbs rather than give a general overview of the use of lexical verbs in academic discourse. These studies, though undoubtedly enlightening, have yet to paint a complete picture of how learners employ lexical verbs in academic writing.

The present study reviews the use of verb categories and verb forms in Discussion sections as they are where the writers’ voice is the strongest. This is because in this specific section, writers are required to make statements of results, link results to previous

2 research, explain findings and make deductions and hypotheses among other things

(Swales, 1990). These processes needless to say depend on the writers’ ability to provide a personal yet convincing arguments that support their findings. Previous studies have remarked the challenging nature of the constructing the Discussion sections (Belcher,

2009; Parkinson, 2011 as cited in Safnil, 2013). Belcher (2009, as cited in Safnil, 2013) comments that Discussion section is the most difficult yet important part of an academic paper that proper arguments need to be structured with care or it will lead to rejection or misinterpretation on the part of the reader.

Despite ample studies of corpus-based and corpus-driven, the study focusing on

Discussion sections is quite scarce. To the author’s knowledge, there has yet a published paper focusing on Discussion sections with the exceptions of a number of writing guide and how-tos. In Discussion sections, the writers are required to report, cite, argue and defend their findings where verbs play a dominant, but complex role; whether in lexical choices (say or state), verb forms (mention or mentioned) and structures (Hunston argues that or It has been argued). Such nature of verbs can be problematic to ESL writers as academic constructs in particular tend to employ highly conventionalized tense and aspects (Swales, 1990). For example, Swales finds that while the perfect aspect can be employed in certain chapters of a paper, such as in introduction and literature review chapters, the progressive aspect is rarely, if ever, used in an academic prose. For these reasons, Min (2013) adds that the usage of English verb tense and aspect is notorious for being confusing and difficult for non-native students to learn and for teachers to explain, not only because it is complicated in its nature, but also because linguists and grammarians have defined, categorized, and described them in such diverse ways.

Corpus-based research focusing on examining and exploring ESL leaners’ lexical knowledge is still very small in number considering the long-standing interest by the

3 academic community. Despite the increased attention in the past two decades and continued interest in the matter on the global scale (Nesselhauf 2003,2005; Granger and

Paquot 2008; Henriksen, 2012), there seems to be very little response from within the

Malaysian linguistic community. A thorough search corpus–based for and corpus-driven studies has yielded only a handful of results consisting of Kamariah Yunus and Su’ad

Awab’s (2011) ‘Investigation of Collocational Competence among Law Undergraduates’ at a local university and Hong et al. (2011), a corpus-based ‘Error Analysis on Malaysian

Students’ Writing’. In addition to those, a study of reporting verbs in M.A theses was conducted in a local university by Manan and Mohd Noor (2014) who found that even advanced ESL writers tend to repeat the use of certain type of verbs. At this point, a majority of the research have chosen to examine collocational errors by novice to intermediate learners of English and only a very limited number has attempted to examine language use of advanced learners with the exception of Manan and Mohd Noor (2014).

As an effort to tackle these problematic areas, a study on phraseological patterns of verbs could be a starting point. The learning of highly recurrent verb patterns that are specific to academic prose can be seen as a means to a productive approach to teaching and learning salient verbs. This study intends to analyse advanced learners’ corpus that encompasses verbs used in academic writing that include the analysis of verb types, forms and associated patterns.

1.2 Background of ESL Status in Malaysia

The English Language status in Malaysia has come a long way since before our independence. During the British occupation, the English language was utilized as a medium of instruction in a majority of the public schools. As Malaysia gained her independence, the new government under the New Education Policy has taken a brave

4 step to convert the English schools into national schools. The conversion to national schools took a gradual pace. It began in 1970 and ended in 1983, with the repeal of the

Lower Certificate of Education (LCE) in 1978 and the Malaysian certificate of Education in 1980. It is a crucial step to promote national unity in a multilingual society through the use of Bahasa Malaysia. At the same time, English language is demoted to a second language status due to its status as the world’s lingua franca, which, if mastered, would allow the nation to be globally competent especially in the economic sector. This is because to operate competently in an open world market, competent use of communicative English is necessary. Accordingly, English language functions as a strong second language; “not a native language of the country but used for certain purposes and by certain people within the country” (Citravelu, Sithamparam and Teh,

2005, p. 12).

The ESL status in Malaysia has been a subject of much discussion among many scholars, as a result of the ever changing educational policy. In line with this, the

Malaysian Education system has allotted 300 minutes of English period in a week (under the KSSR programme) only second to Bahasa Malaysia with 360 minutes in a week which shows, if nothing else, that English is considered important as the nation’s second language. The aims of the English Language Curriculum for Primary schools are as follow;

“The English Language Curriculum for Primary Schools aims to equip pupils with basic language skills to enable them to communicate effectively in a variety of contexts that’s appropriate to the pupils’ level of development”.

(Curriculum Development Division, 2011).

5 One of the many scenarios that essentially explains the constant challenge to ESL status in Malaysia is described in the following anecdote. It would seem like ideally, anyone who has gone through six years of primary education, five years of secondary education and at least one semester of mandatory English language class in tertiary education should have guaranteed English competency among Malaysians. On the other hand, it seems like English has never been the nation’s second language, or maybe even a third, due to a number of handful other languages that are spoken and taught within their home and school environment. In Chinese and Tamil secular schools for example, English period is reduced to 180 minutes weekly. It would be much more interesting to observe learners in the rural areas whom exposure to the language is only limited to the classroom environment and possess very limited language skills. Adding to that is the continuous concern over university students’ English competency which does not at all reflect the time and effort put into helping them to master the language.

Despite many arguments regarding the decline of English competency and proficiency in Malaysia, Malaysians at large show higher proficiency compared to a foreign speaker of the same language. According to the English Profiency Index (2017) website, Malaysia ranks second in Asia and thirteenth among 80 countries. Furthermore,

English has been accorded to cover more communicative domains in Malaysia, especially in terms of being a medium of education and advertisements. Nowadays, English is also seen as a crucial tool for higher education and employment and thus a key to rise up the socioeconomic ladder. Based on these observations, we can say that English is still a second language in Malaysia.

6 1.3 Research questions

The research questions are as follows;

1. What are the types of lexical verbs used in Discussion sections in M.A

dissertations?

2. To what extent are the verb forms used in Discussion sections in M.A

dissertations?

3. What are the common associated patterns of lexical verbs used in Discussion

sections in M.A dissertations?

For the first research question, Top 100 verbs in term of frequency are categorized following Hinkel’s classification of verbs in academic writing. They are activity verbs, reporting verbs, mental/emotive verb, linking verbs and logico-semantic relationship verbs. This is achieved by using Wordsmith Tool software to list all the tokens by frequency and manually identifying the Top 100 verbs. Therefore, each verb will account to 1% of the overall percentage. The second research question requires analysis of the verb forms. To answer this, CLAW Tagset 5.0 is used to label all part-of-speech (noun, verbs, adjectives etc). The verbs (tagged VV*) by the software are later categorized into further classification (VVN, VVG and so on). Analysis by the basis of frequency will show which verb forms are most favoured by the population of the corpus. Examination of verb forms will also show usage of tense and aspect through analysis of verb forms labelled VVB (base form), VVD (past tense), VVZ (present tense) and VVN (past participle). The third research question is answered following the Verb-based structural classifications by Biber et al., 1999 (see Table 1.1) which has been used to examine word patterns. Frequencies of these patterns are recorded and select patterns are examined further.

7 1.4 Research objective

The main objective of this study is to find out how lexical verbs are used in discussion sections in M.A dissertations. The verbs are examined in three aspects; types of verbs, usage of verb forms and patterns in which the verbs are most commonly found. It is not the study’s aim to pinpoint errors made in verbal usage since the corpus’ population is of advanced L2 users. Rather the aim of the study is to highlight the features of verbal use by Malaysian ESL learners, with the benefit of empirical data and discover distinctive aspects of use that set apart our local constructs from the natives. The findings from this research can also benefit the growing numbers of ESL academic writers to be more proficient and articulate in the academic discussion.

1.5 Scope of the study

Verbs have been classified in many ways notably by Biber et al. (1999) and Hinkel

(2004). This study follows Hinkel’s classification of verbs namely activity verbs, reporting verbs, mental/emotive verb, linking verbs and logico-semantic relationship verbs. Verb forms are discussed in relation to tense, aspect and voice. These covers the present and past tense, including the present perfect and past perfect. Passive and active voice are a major point of analysis as the voices have somewhat contradictory opinions regarding choice of voice in academic genre.

This study also identifies the most recurring patterns involving lexical verbs from the corpus in order to answer RQ 3. This area of analysis, recurring patterns, is often linked to the study of phraseology. This is because the patterns involving lexical verbs are more often more exclusive in nature, in the sense that they appear more often in strict patterns with little rooms for deviations. The patterns are broadly referred to phraseology.

The patterns that emerge from the data of this study could be an interesting avenue for

8 research. Phraseology is a broad subject to explore and the different terms/approaches/ methods may yield varying results. To limit the scope of the study, not all types of phraseology are explored. The term phraseology itself is rather difficult to pinpoint but this paper will attempt to define it in accordance to the focus of this paper. The term is further discussed in Literature Review chapter. The phraseological patterns found in the corpus are classified based on the structural classification of lexical bundles, with focus on verb-based structures introduced in the Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written

English (Biber et al., 1999). The structural classification has been widely used in previous studies on word combinations and patterns (Cortes, 2002, 2004; Charles, 2006, Hyland,

2008a, 2008b, Chen and Baker, 2010). Table 1.1 shows the verb-based structural classification (Biber et al., 1999).

Table 1.1 Verb-based structural classification

1 copula be + NP/AdjectiveP 2 VP with active verb 3 anticipatory it + VP/adjectiveP + (complement-clause) 4 passive verb + PP fragment 5 (VP +) that-clause fragment 6 (verb/adjective +) to-clause fragment

Note that the structural classification has been modified to cater to the objectives of this study. Therefore, Verb-based clause with copula be + NP/AdjectiveP , anticipatory it

+ VP/adjectiveP + (complement-clause) and (verb/adjective +) to-clause fragment are not examined since they are mainly formed with be or copula verb. The use of active verbs, which also denotes tense markers provides a wealth of research opportunities on its own.

However, to fulfil the aim of this study, it will proceed to explore certain patterns of lexical verbs. RQ 3 focuses on two patterns/ bundles which are VP+ that and VP+ PP

(Prepositional Phrase).

9 1.6 Limitation of the study

The study examines the use of verbs in academic writing, specifically dissertations submitted to the Faculty of Languages and Linguistics which have been awarded the

Degree of Master of English as Second Language. The focus of examination is limited to

Discussion sections that are included in Chapter 5: Conclusion. This study views its limitations in two major points; corpus and methodology.

As mentioned previously, the selection of participants for this study is very particular and limited. Only 35 dissertations are selected and the writers share common

ESL background. Therefore, any future analysis should be done with this particular limitation in mind. In terms of methodology, corpus linguistics, while serving its purpose suitably for the present study, is also arguably riddled with shortcomings. However, considering that its purpose is to record occurrence of collocations, the only concern that should be clarified is the one voiced by Howarth (1996, p. 93). He views that this method is indeed hindered by technology, as it is ‘over-dependent on computational method’.

Consequently, it loses certain values that come with real-world qualities. However, these shortcomings should not undermine the value of corpus-based linguistics. Rather, they should serve as points of consideration and accountable for researchers and studies. That is to say that researchers to provide an analysis that is comprehensive that also takes into account other factors that could have affected the data rather than focusing solely on the data itself

1.7 Significance of the study

The advantage of corpus-based study such as this has enabled large quantity of natural language data to be processed in efficient and accurate method. This is especially true whereby large quantitative data provide generous insight into linguistic aspects in

10 any manner of linguistic research. Also parallel with advancement of computerised technology, corpus-based methodology has created a new pathway to linguistic research, with underlying theoretical approach to the subject (Leech, 1992).

For this study, the corpus collected is Discussion sections in M.A dissertations which are written by ESL authors. By using language processing software such as the

CLAW Tagger and WordSmith Tool, the study is able to examine specific word class

(verb) and their usage in both forms and patterns. The tokens amount to over 100, 000 units will explicitly provide an evident picture of how these discussion sections are shaped in relation to lexical verb usage. Previous research in this area have been more interested in looking at a specific type of verb, the report verbs (Charles, 2006; Zhang, 2008; Bloch,

2010). The significance of this study is that it should be able to present a comprehensive analysis of how verbs are employed as tools for discussion. The findings from this study can be utilised to bring to attention the vast learning opportunities of data-driven learning and to promote proficient verb usage in academic writing.

1.8 Definition of terms

In this section, this paper will attempt to clarify some of the terms used. Some of terms for example lexical verbs and phraseology appears to be too broad a notion to be tackled in such a simple research. Nonetheless, it is prudent that these terms are clarified to avoid confusion to the readers. Two of these terms are lexical verbs and phraseology.

Generally, lexical verbs can be described as full verbs or open class verbs excluding auxiliary verbs which enable writers to express action, state emotion and predicate meaning in a sentence of written text and there are literally dozens of common lexical verbs in English language (Biber et al., 1999), for instance 400 different verbs can

11 be generated from 20 times per million words which include daily terms such as fall, choose, throw and pull. Many studies on lexical verbs have been published in language corpora decades ago and most corpus-based linguistic studies (Altenberg, 1998) have been carried out during those times. Although corpora are important for providing natural paradigms of grammatical features or words in context, corpus linguistics provides an identical perspective due to the use of quantitative analysis that enables researchers to observe language patterns impossible to be ascertain before (Biber and Conrad, 2001).

Further examination of the lexical verbs leads the analysis of the verb forms. This is especially important if one is interested in having a thorough look into the use of verbs. to The English language has little in variety in term of verb forms, although they pose quite intimidating element to navigate for non-native users. There is the base form (write), third person present (writes), past tense form (wrote), infinitive form or the –ing form

(writing) and the past participle form (written).

It has been established that certain words tend to co-occur with a specific type of word which when observed, seem to create patterns of language use. This study intends to scrutinize patterns that are commonly associated with verbs, as outlined by Biber et, al.

(1999). These are patterns that are highly salient in academic writing, for example the combination of (VP +) that-clause fragment passive verb + PP fragment. Therefore, there are two patterns explored in this paper.

Another terms that is difficult to pinpoint is phraseology. This term has been under scrutiny and criticism by many researchers for as long as the matter has been under study

(Gries, 2008). Gries (2008) further argues that lack of effort in clarify these terms is a cause for concern. The effort for clarification of these terms may influence researchers and in future research in such a profound way.

12 The term phraseology can be used in distinctive ways by various scholars but various terminologies can be used to interpret the same notion or similar word of co- occurrence for instance the terms recurrent word combinations (Altenberg, 1998), clusters (Hyland, 2008), n-grams (Stubbs, 2007), phrasicon (De Cock et al., 1998) and lexical bundles (Biber and Barbieri, 2007). These terminologies (recurrent word combinations, clusters, n-grams, phrasicon and lexical bundles) actually predicates to continuous sequences of words acquired through corpus-driven method with distribution criteria and specified frequency and the sequences are utilized by the native language within specified contexts and are fixed multi-word units that possessed customary discourse functions or pragmatic functions (Granger and Paquot, 2008; Chen and Baker,

2010).

Going back to the issue at hand, the previous examples have shown how the terms are used almost interchangeably. As elaborated previously, there are several terms that researchers have used to describe these ‘chunks of words’. As mentioned earlier, a number of previous studies have used the clusters, recurrent word, phrasicon, n-grams, lexical bundles and formulaic sequence to refer to phraseology and one of the most prominent term is collocation. However, for the purpose of this study, the term phraseology will be used as the umbrella term to refer to these lexical combinations.

Phraseologism is defined by Gries (2008, p.6) as the ‘co-occurrence of a form or a lemma of a lexical item and one or more additional linguistic elements of various kinds which functions as one semantic unit in a clause or sentence and whose frequency of co- occurrence is larger than expected on the basis of chance’. He also outlines six elements that need to be taken into consideration when classifying phraseology under the paradigm of Corpus Linguistics which will be discussed in Chapter 2.

13 1.9 Summary

This chapter has outlined the statement of the problem, aim of the study, research questions, the limitation and the scope of the study. It has also provided a brief summary of ESL status in Malaysia. In the introduction, it is revealed that ESL writers face problems to construct rhetorically and linguistically competent academic prose. Studies have shown that choice of verbs is key to address these problems and the method requires analysis of their constructions in rhetorical context. The focus of this study is contextual uses of lexical verbs, or in other words a corpus-based analysis of lexical verbs of an ESL corpus which allows for further examination of tense and aspect, voice and also associated patterns. This study consists of five chapters: Chapter 1 is the introduction and it provides an overview of the study. Chapter 2 reviews previous studies related to the present study and discusses the definition of certain operational words. Chapter 3 describes the methodology of data collection, procedures taken and how data will be analysed and categorized. Chapter 4 consists of the results and discussion of the results. Chapter 5 includes a summary of the results and implications for future research and teaching.

14 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

English language is a globalized lingua franca which has always been a significant motivating factor in learning and particularly in literature writing (Murugesan, 2003); while simultaneously playing fundamental roles in binding a multicultural nation. It is utilized extensively in all aspects of daily lives, from education to business matters. In

Malaysia, English is utilized as an additional language to be in the education system in all levels namely primary, secondary and tertiary; as well as for professional global contacts of various sorts (Darmi and Albion, 2013). Malaysians mostly, even though proven to have obtained appropriate English education and excelled in national proficiency examinations; somehow due to differences in attitudes (Gobel et al., 2013), would not apply what they have learned into daily communication and academic writings.

It is not surprising to encounter such issues since it is a very common problem for countries who utilize English language as a second or foreign language (Souriyavongsa et al., 2013).

According to studies conducted by Samsiah and Aishah (2001), when inquired regarding their English language proficiency, the respondents (who are of supporting staffs at three public universities in peninsular Malaysia) mostly described their English speaking skills as the weakest, followed by reading and listening skills which they expressed as satisfactory respectively. English language is only to be utilized in daily duties such as records, filing and documentation, public relations, and communication with outsiders; which signifies that they do not really use English unless for writing purposes, administrative and academic records.

Malaysian students, graduates and workers in reality do possess relatively moderate and admirable English language proficiency, and it is well proven when it

15 comes to their writing skills. They, without questions, passed their mandatory written

English proficiency examinations but would face difficulties when it comes to daily communication and academic writing especially with in-depth use of lexical verbs.

Students learning English as a second language have experienced a wide range of contexts in which they have acquired their mother tongue, but have a much more restricted range of contexts in English (Tabors, 1997).

In addition, non-native speakers of English have shown interest and determination to compete in the global market by acquiring English as a lingua franca to ensure their voices were heard by the developed countries while still utilizing and keeping their mother language or home language for unison. As once an official statement by the

Chilean government stated that the quality of English we used nowadays may not be challenge the quality of the Shakespeare’s, but the important thing is the understanding of English and to utilize it as a tool of communication in the real world especially in academic writing (Rohter, 2004).

Throughout the globalization of economy and academics, we are interacting between cultures in which the importance of learning a second language becomes very significance to ensure strong communication and expand abilities and opportunities in the real world. Scientific studies also prove that learning a second language enhance brain activity and stimulates creativity allowing us to understand different cultures across the world and gain more appreciation of human society and the diversity of culture.

Nowadays, a great demand for English as a second language have risen as English become the gateway to the world of knowledge, literature, culture and commerce providing access to the real world in a way other language could not. English has become the key to the involvement in the global conversation and has become world’s most widely spoken second language surpassing other languages.

16 This section generally discussed the whole viewpoint of the research from the most fundamental issue to the related and relevance points supported by previous study by researchers and published facts. This section is divided into five subsections which consisted of clear description and definition of academic discourse and lexical verbs which is the vital point of this study. This chapter is further described and explained on the utilization of English as a second language in academic writing, listing out and discussed about lexical verbs in general and further focuses on lexical verbs in academic discourse. This section then elaborates on verb lemmas and verb forms, to define how big the role of lexical verbs in English as a second language in academic writing. This is done by reviewing the studies that are related to English as a second language writers and their use of verbs in academic writing. Lastly, all of the issues, facts and ideas stated in the subsections are summarized at the end of the chapter.

2.2 Academic discourse

The interdisciplinary study of academic discourse focuses on the successful communication among academic and non-academic discourse and their speakers and also successful communication between members of the academic institution or communities in distinguish cultures (Bennet, 1991). Academic discourse provides authors with the language tools that involved syntax and vocabulary that is essential to interpret the content using complete sentences which further allow authors to build structured texts and dialogues with meaningful context in appropriate academic language (Bennet, 1991;

Barton, 1994; Katnic-Bakarsic, 2004). Academic discourse can be defined as the framework of rhetorical strategies of written academic texts with or without the presence of expressive features and additional style of interpreting the idea and presenting the whole texts.

17 In some studies and the viewpoints of critical language stylistics and linguistics, the language utilized in academic discourse is considered as the language of authority and power which allow distinction between academic writing and different cultures of language, allow establishment of successful communication especially between writers and readers (Katnic-Bakarsic, 2004; Hyland, 2007). From the point of view of those interested in discourse studies, social semiotics and critical discourse analysis, the neutrality and objectivity of academic discourse are superficial while traditional linguists argue with the point of view and stated that academic discourse is a neglected stylistic in language studies and the fact that it is completely neutral category of discourse. Several authors constitute distinction in academic discourse created two kinds of readers which are outsiders and insiders and further explore facts in stylistic of academic discourse

(Katnic-Bakarsic, 2004).

The terminology of academic discourse could mean a broad range of oral and written genres in which some of the content may be close to administrative discourse, communication discourse and also news discourse and essays writing. It may also consist of conflict, tensions and contradiction such as academic discussions, doctoral dissertations and also colloquia. Meanwhile, scientific writing had been categorized as a type of narrative texts consist of sequence of events with emblematic narrative arrangement interpreting the whole content properly (Barton, 1994).

A study by White and Lowenthal (2011) on academic discourse and the development of an academic identity stated that the academic success of university students is largely influenced by their willingness to learn and apply academic discourse and their exposure towards the functionality of academic discourse which is expected by the academy that their graduates learn appropriate academic literacy. However, individuals that adopted English as a second language may view academic discourse as

18 complicated because people tends to cling their ways to their native language although they acknowledge the social pressure and academic pressure in adopting new discourses

(Gee, 2005; Gibson, 2005; White and Lowenthal, 2011).

Academic writing is a common activity and noted as integral culture at university however in a study by Hyland (2013), he argued that academic literacy is vital to every activity done in a university and that specialist forms of academic writing are all that matters in an academic institution. He stated that lecturers and students must increase their fluency in the conventions of English academic writing in order to effectively develop their learning, establishment of their careers and also to further understand their disciplines. One of the conventions mentioned by Hyland (2013) is the capability of a writer to apply the socially suitable features of marking stance in their academic discourse or discourse communities which can be further elaborated as the process of developing oneself identities through socially obtainable discourses (Davies and Harre, 1990).

Academic discourse is also known for its conventionalised style of writing, which features recurring characteristics. Four moves are highlighted as the recurring discourse of academic writing which are outlined in the Figure 2.1 below;

Establishing or introducing the topic and discussing its importance

Reviewing published (or other) sources of information

Preparing ground and reasoning to the present analysis and/or synthesis of information (or demonstrating how the present paper has achieved what has not been accomplished in previous studies

Introduce the present examination and stating its purpose

Figure 2.1 Recurring discourse of academic writing

(Source: Johns, as cited in Hinkel, 2004).

19 Out of the four moves, research has suggested that writers, especially non-native

(NNS), are finding it most difficult to reason and argue their analysis and state their findings in assertive manner. Hyland (1998) finds that non-native writers often face problems in maintaining self-assured position when defending and arguing their stance.

It is also noted that non-native writers tend to be vague and avoid making claims that requires ‘interpersonal and persuasive effects’.

Academic writing have always been related to postgraduate dissertations writing which sometimes not appropriately organized in terms of interpreting credible representations of themselves in their dissertation and Hyland (2002b) stated that most writers build their identities that are not supported by the discourses communities and out of practices or disciplines which brings to the issue of dissimilarities between writing disciplines and writing practices due to limited exposure to the actual discourse applied by the community.

In consideration of positioning themselves appropriately in conjunction to their work, students shall be disposed to explain the characteristics of stance marking explicitly. This indicates trying to comprehend the practices of real students interacting in real disciplines by portraying and analyzing appropriate texts. Hyland (2013) supports with an idea that states students can only systematize supports, point out collegiality and discuss agreement by making morphological characteristics which combine their texts with their disciplines. It is very important that it is cultivated through the extent of features for instance, writers can locate themselves the nearest to their work by applying the exclusive personal pronoun (I) or position themselves from their work by utilizing express point of view creation or the third person frame of reference. It was stated that the posture a writer believe, portrays the article of faith and epistemology of the discipline they come from (Tang and John, 1999; Stapleton, 2002). This kind of belief developed from the

20 viewpoint that written academic communication makes a bombastic appeal to reader, pursuing them to take the writer’s viewpoint alternatively than simply stating non- committal facts (Myers, 1990; Tang and John, 1999; Matsuda and Tardy, 2007) however this field of study is still underestimated, in which Hyland (2005) agree to the point that issues regarding writer stance is still new in academic research.

Writers’ posture is connected with the concept of averral and attribution. With reference to averral, writers are made-believe to aver the whole propositions in the text and therefore taking the charge for their veracity, except if they are attributed somewhere else (Hunston, 200). Additionally, when an attribution is fashioned, a proposition is held on to a source apart from the writer and amenability is assigned to that individual or being.

Therefore, it is the writer who selects whether, to which sources and when to attribute propositions. Allegedly writer stance in academic writing rests as an inadequate understood field. It is not comprehensible how writers shall assimilate their own attitudes, feelings, value appraisal or assessments in the texts that they come through. Nevertheless, the process of writing wraps up in creating a text that we consider the reader will recognize, be aware of and expect, and the process of reading includes drawing on acquisition about what the writer is trying to do (Hyland, 2013; Maroko, 2013).

Each of the academic text is written to be both understandable and accustomed and while either one of the goal is ever completely and absolutely certain, writers who can strongly presume something of what their readers will distinguish of their subject and anticipate of its demonstration are more likely to be persuasive. Hinged on their presumption of their readers and their former experiences with correlative texts, writers continually monitor their expansion discourse to forward these expectations, making eloquent choices which adjudicate proper explicitness and engagement. They identify where greater elaboration or exactitude is required, where readers will require help in

21 adapting points, where descriptions or examples are needed and so on. By way of explanation, arguments are predicated and supported by small affectations of propositional elaboration which serve to expand understanding, configure meanings more correctly to the writer’s goals, and connect statements to the reader’s knowledge-base, experience and processing needs (Hyland, 2007).

The latest research has highlighted that disciplines have different research practices, different views of knowledge and different sight of seeing the world and that these distinctness are portrayed in variety of forms of expression and argument (Hyland,

2000). Approximately, academic writing is not a single associated body of matter but an assortment of subject specified literacies. As a consequence, these literacy members of disciplines associate with their peers and students with their professors. Significant words they choose are ought to present their ideas in a variety of ways that make certain sense to their readers and generally involves adopting an appropriate identity. It is concurred with facts that most of the thing that we write conveys something about us and the variety of connection that we want to compose with our readers. Most unmistakably, anyhow, a writer’s identity is constructed by and displayed through the adoption or the absence of the I pronoun (Hyland, 2002a).

The means of learning to write at university usually involves the mechanism of creating a new identity (Fan Shen, 1988) which corresponds to the anticipations of the subject teachers who represent a student’s new discipline. The author’s explicit expressions in a text, or its absence works to generate a reasonable academic identity, and a voice with which to offer an argument. Composing such an identity, nevertheless, is commonly very difficult for second language students. This is partially because these identities may vary considerably from those they are well-known from their everyday lives, or past learning experiences (Cadman, 1997), and also because the reason that

22 students are not often taught that disciplinary conventions di.er (Lea and Street, 1999).

Concisely, if we utterly assume that academic writing is generally impersonal, we counterfeit variability, and this could have the consequences of restraining our students from approaching terms with the significant needs of their disciplines. Instead of supplying learners with the linguistic ways to achieve their bombastic invisibility, then, we are required to lead them towards knowledge of the alternatives that academic writing offers. The outcomes suggest that academic writing is not the formal faceless prose as it is normally thought to be, but demonstrate considerable differences between disciplines

(Hyland, 2002a).

2.3 Lexical Verbs

Generally, lexical verbs can be described as full verbs or the open class of verbs excluding auxiliary verbs which enable writers to express action, state emotion and predicate meaning in a sentence of written text and there are literally dozens of common lexical verbs in English language (Biber et al., 1999), for instance 400 different verbs can be generated from 20 times per million words which includes daily terms such as fall, choose, throw and pull

Additionally, the qualitative interpretation of corpus analysis allows writers to evaluate the function of lexical verbs for instance, the verbs get have various function while the verbs say, can only be apply for single function and it is related to an activity.

It is perceptible for learners to be exposed to both verbs as they may hear it and use it for daily interaction and communication among members of the community and the native speakers but most grammar books and references for English as a second language learner does not cover these verbs. As an alternative, most books will introduce activity verbs such as study, travel, run, work, play, eat and like. Although these activity verbs

23 encompass more tangible meanings relating to activity, these verbs are much less familiar.

Therefore, even simple quantitative analyses can offer imperative information that material writers and teachers can make use of to revise existing lessons materials (Biber et al., 1999; Biber and Conrad, 2001; Swales, 2004).

Furthermore, many researchers had been conducting corpus-based studies in a past few years in order to analyze connections between lexical items and grammatical features. Hence, it is a comparatively straightforward matter to verify whether there are connections between particular verbs and progressive aspect. In reality, especially during communication among members of discourse community, day to day conversation may involved a few lexical verbs for instance moaning, kidding, joking, starving, shopping, chasing and bleeding which applies most of the time along with progressive aspect.

Nonetheless, the use of norm in daily conversation allowed people to express verbs with the simple aspect. On the other hand, distinctive to the expectations generated by many popular grammars, verb phrases such as is always telling and I've been having are exclusions rather than the rule (Biber et al., 1999).

According to continuous studies by Biber (1988) and Biber and Conrad (2001), they illustrate the implications and insinuation of quantitative analysis towards pedagogical practice and further found out that corpus analyses provide better description and complex elaboration on lexico-grammatical information. They studied related field on the connections among grammatical features that tend to differentiate sets of words for instance nouns controlling to-clauses vs. that-clauses, adjectives, and the most common verbs. Academic discourse further analyzed corpus perspective in terms of the factors that favoring and influencing the preference of as a relative pronoun and preference among grammatical variants. Besides, in order to entertain new types of research questions regarding several issues that had formerly been considered intractable,

24 quantitative corpus-based techniques have been suggested by sociolinguists and they had long recognized that linguistic co-occurrence is fundamental to a perceptive of register variation, however they required more research techniques and approach to further identify and clarify the occurring linguistic characteristics. Quantitative corpus research nowadays has filled this breach in knowledge, by utilizing multivariate statistical methods to classify basic of co-occurring linguistic characteristics and to investigate the differences and similarities among registers with respect to those dimensions (Biber and

Conrad, 2001; Granger & Paquot, 2015).

2.3.1 Phrasal verb

Previous studies showed that phrasal verbs are notoriously complex for non-native learners to understand in which problems exacerbated and arise in the English language as a whole (Biber et al., 1999; Gardner and Davies, 2007). This problem further became more complex as many non-native English speakers decided to avoid utilizing phrasal verbs altogether especially those intermediate level of proficiency learners and also the beginners. Native language speakers also avoid using that forms of verbs during communication (Gardner and Davies, 2007).

Due to the great difficulty of phrasal verbs presented to language learners especially those who learn English as a second language or as a foreign language, the extremely high frequency of English language requires more studies on phrasal verbs and the fact that most beginners and intermediate level of English proficiency avoid using phrasal verbs are a huge problem to English language acquisition. Most reason of avoidance was the complexity of semantic structures and syntactic structures of phrasal verbs and cross-linguistics distinctions which makes most learners to be overwhelmed by enormous number of phrasal verbs. However, linguist must further investigate phrasal

25 verbs applications as proven that a very small group of lexical verbs make up a majority of phrasal verbs and as recorded in British National Corpus (BNC) data sources, a total of 100 items in the list of most frequent phrasal verbs, it comprised of top 20 phrasal verbs producing lexical verbs for instance the verbs take, get, go and come (Biber et al., 1999;

Gardner and Davies, 2007).

2.4 Study of corpus

In the past two decades, many educators and researchers have initiated efforts and attention towards vocabulary in second language education of English language especially in terms of multi-word vocabulary items (Folse, 2004). Huge electronic collections of actual language known as corpora, corpus and singular with robust software and high powered computers provide advanced classification and identification of

English elusive structures that may also be used to permeate other languages as well

(Stubbs, 2007; Granger and Paquot, 2008). However, it is clear that the surface of this complex issue has barely been scratched although corpus linguists have the capability to give more information related to this matter (Read, 2004).

One of the most essential element of corpus study is frequency, that is a study of corpus lean towards quantitative studies or more accurately comparative frequency

(Hunston, 2006). Comparative frequency analysis can be performed in many ways, comparing spoken and written word frequency or comparing frequencies of word usage among that of native and non-native speakers, which is quite favoured among corpus linguists in recent times (Wang & Shaw, 2008; Siyanova & Schmitt, 2008; Chen & Baker,

2010, Granger & Paquot, 2015).

26 Besides frequency, word processing softwares such as Wordsmith Tool and

AntConc are equipped with concordancing tools that enable researchers to examine concordance lines. The study of concordance lines allows researchers to look the context in which searched word is being used and significant co-occurrence of individual element.

At this point, researchers will be interested in looking at frequency of co-occurrence, a linguistic phenomenon that create proverbs, idioms, phrasal verbs among others.

The most significant field for advancement and progress in the knowledge gathering on multi-word items is English phrasal verbs and especially the use of lexical verbs in written texts. The study of corpus generates vital insights on recognizing multi- word middle ground between lexis and syntax which is important for applied linguist and implications for second language attainment (Gass and Selinker, 2001).

2.5 Lexical verbs in academic discourse

It is perceptible that drawing out lexical verbs from English for Academic

Purposes list of lexical verbs is difficult and frequently fail to provide any signal of word category membership. However, according to the Academic Word List (AWL) by

Coxhead (2000), the most popular EAP list are several words that can be verbs and nouns, such as function, survey, approach, focus and conduct and the fact that AWL excluded

General Service List (GSL), the top 2000 words in English language. The research further justify that academic discourse rarely utilized high frequency verbs in order to express actions, state facts and predicate meaning in a sentence.

Moreover, private verbs for instance verbs like hope, feel, like, want and love are usually utilized to express personal attitudes, emotions and thoughts, are rarely used in academic discourse but notably appropriate for communication and conversation (Biber,

27 1988). However, in some cases of academic discourse, several high frequency verbs have been utilized for academic discourse which turns out to be playing a major role in expressing thoughts and emotions and worthy of being included in EAP syllabuses in which study by Meyer (1997) include verbs like show and find allowing him to express ambiguities, polysemies and vagueness of daily language but are utilized to elaborate vital part of scholarly process and academic texts. Therefore, Paquot (2007) had included these verbs (absent from Coxhead’s AWL) into Academic Keyword List (AKL) verbs such as suggest, effect, claim, cause, argue and aim, as it is worthy to be covered in academic writing.

Additionally, Swales (2004) stated that a formal research report written in informal English might be regarded as too simplified although the actual data and the ideas are complex. Insufficient exposure of lexical verbs in academic writing is a critical handicap for writers and learners especially for those who learned English as a second language as insufficient exposure or knowledge may prevents them from appropriately expressing their emotions, thoughts and actions in all their shades and expressing them in the expected style (Granger and Paquot, 2015). By exposing the list of lexical verbs or

EAP verbs to the learners and writers, their thoughts and emotions and predicate meanings can be conveyed into written text and consequently without a doubt, an imperative first step, but unless it is set off with a detailed depiction of their use, outcomes are bound to be extremely unsatisfactory.

True to the ubiquitous nature of verbs, they have been classified under many labels which largely depend on the purpose that they serve. In relation to academic discourse, five main categories of verbs have been identified. Hinkel (2004) classifies them into the following five categories: activity verbs (give, take), reporting verbs (argue, report), mental/emotive verbs (see, write), linking verbs (appear,grow) and logico-semantic

28 relationship verbs (appear, cause). Certain category of verbs may be dominant in certain area of discourse. In academic writing for example, one may encounter very little emotive verbs and quite abundance of reporting verbs. Justifiably, ‘reporting verbs’ that has received the most attention in many research papers (Thompson & Yiyun, 1991; Charles;

2006b; Bloch, 2010). However, the five types of verbs are employed in an academic text, regardless of the frequency of use, and therefore need to be studied critically.

2.6 ESL Writers and Use of Lexical Verbs

The development and improvement of academic writing in English as second language learners raises issues of broad significance especially in terms of whether the discourse organization of academic writing in ESL learners and their underlying structures of academic knowledge is either universal or culture specific. The concept of bilingual proficiency must be taken into account along with academic elements of academic discourse throughout cultures and language boundaries. It is perceptible to state that most ESL learners possessed certain level of difficulties in English academic writing especially at sentence-level problems involving vocabulary, grammar and the usage of verb lemmas. Earlier study by Kaplan (1972) found that cross cultural distinctions in rhetoric is the main problem of academic writing by ESL learners and deviations from the expected proficiency of English academic discourse is largely contributed by negative transfer or interference from rhetorical organization of their first language. This subsection will further elaborate on previous studies of the use of verbs in academic writing by ESL writers.

Numerous studies in the field of Linguistic have been dedicated to investigate the perplexing notion of non-native (NNS) discordance from the native (NS) in their writing piece. As mentioned previously, a number of scholars have noted certain quandry that

29 NNS writers display in their written products, namely the difficulty to be assertive with the claims and arguing and defending their stance whilst a large number of findings contribute the cause of the phenomenon to be the choice of lexis in their construction of academic prose (Burrough-Boenisch, 2003; Hinkel, 2004). This paper proposes that these two are mutually related.

An academic author needs to be equipped with a repertoire of academic verbs and the knowledge to employ them appropriately in the discourse. One must be able to make use of different reporting verbs (prove, claim, state) as they serve different functions, hence colouring the sentences with particular affectations that are dependent to the writers’ intention. The writers’ ability to manipulate these verbs will provide the readers with correct interpretation of the writers’ attitude and stance towards the claims that they made (Manan, 2014). In previous studies, it was found that ESL writers were unable to decide on the proper reporting verbs to state their claims (Pecorari, 2008) and they were often found employing wrong and unnecessary reporting verbs. Bloch (2010) argued that

“even if the student can make grammatically correct choices, the rhetorical impact of their claims may suffer if the reporting verb is not appropriate.” Hyland (1998) found that one of the major problems that non-native English speakers (NNES) faced when producing academic writing is that they must hold the “definite and self- assured” stance without the sense of “fuzziness”. This shows that they do not dare to go beyond their boundary by using “rare” reporting verbs which they seldom use but opt to use the “usual” ones.

An observation that is shared by many scholars is that NNS writers often display limited vocabulary range to the point of repetition in compensation of their limited vocabulary and thinking in L2 whereas their Native counterpart are more prone to variation (Jin, 2008). Hinkel (2004) suggests that NNS writers’ texts tend to be built on restricted vocabulary range, to the point where their writing appears repetitive and

30 constrained. While it is true that some verbs tend to repeat itself in academic discourse, such as relatively simple verbs such as make, do and look, and some verbs are identified as the common academic verbs (e.g identify, apply, investigate), there are limits as to when it can appear overuse or underuse in an academic prose. Another study on lexical verbs, more specifically reporting verbs at a local university reveals that L2 writers are prone to repeat certain category of verbs (discourse act category) compared to other categories of reporting verb in their theses.

Another frustrating point for NNS writers when they are required to produce an academic piece is the tenses and aspects that exist within the English constructs. Quite a large number of studies have been dedicated to study erroneous uses on tense and aspects in NNS writing and they concluded that indeed this particular area of grammar is considered one of the most problematic (Amsberg, 1984; Ubol, 1981; Kim, 1983;

Meziani, 1984; Bryant, 1984; Richards, 1985; Hantrakul, 1990; Pongsiriwet, 2001 as cited in Min, 2013). Typical problems that arise with tense and aspects are inconsistent use, progressive aspects with nonprogressive verbs and the use of passive and active voice

(Hinkel, 2004). As the use of tenses and aspects are decoded through the forms of lexical verbs, a two-pronged analysis can be executed on a) the choice lexical verbs and b) verb forms where choice of tenses and aspects can be analysed.

Numerous studies in the field of Linguistic have been dedicated to investigate this perplexing notion and majority of the findings contribute the cause of the phenomenon to be the choice of lexis in their construction of academic prose (Burrough-Boenisch, 2003;

Hinkel, 2004). Hinkel (2004) suggests that ESL writers’ texts tend to be built on restricted vocabulary range, to the point where their writing appear repetitive and constrained.

While it is true that some verbs tend to repeat itself in academic discourse, such as relatively simple verbs like make, do and look, and some verbs are identified as the

31 common academic verbs for instance identify, apply, investigate there are limits as to when it can appear overuse or underuse in an academic prose.

Lexical verbs in academic discourse create a minefield of difficulties for writers and enable the writers to modulate the information through voice, mood, aspect and tense conveying into academic texts (Hinkel, 2002; Swales and Feak, 2004). Many studies have been conducted to highlight these difficulties particularly in terms of tense and aspect, and also the issue on transferability of General English rules to English for academic writing (Swales, 1990). Nevertheless, the issue of difficulties and transferability are not the only problem faced by writers in academic discourse as they also have to deal with the fact that EAP verbs required its own lexico-grammatical company, adverbs (such as; generally accepted, closely related, vary widely, widely used, apply equally, differ significantly), objects (such as; provide information, provide evidence, support hypothesis, support the view), viz subjects (such as; the evidence shows that, this study suggest that, these outcomes suggest that) and it also most likely to be use in routinized structures (such as; it should be noted that, there is little evidence that, as discussed in)

(Granger and Paquot, 2015). Generalities for instance ‘the passive is very frequent in academic discourse’ are not very accommodating as certain lexical verbs used in academic writing are scarcely ever utilized in the passive while others if not entirely, normally used in the passive (Swales, 2004).

Furthermore, lexico-grammatical restrictions in academic discourse are usually excluded in academic text in which normally present verbs independently from adverbs and nouns when in reality, the interaction between nouns and adverbs caused problems for learners (English as second language) as showed by recent analysis of learner corpus- based studies. Nesselhauf (2005) supported this statement because in his study that involved German-speaking English as a second language, most students misunderstood

32 the collocations in the combinations of verbs and nouns and congruently, Hyland (2008) stated that Cantonese-speaking English as a second language, on a study about the word clusters in academic writing, he found that most of the word clusters used in published academic writing are rarely used in the learners’ academic writing.

It is wise to say that most of the studies showed that most learners of English as a second language found most difficult on viz that include both much looser routinised sequences and highly fixed routinised sequences, it is phraseology in the broad sense.

Few of these phraseological difficulties are shared among novice native writers especially those related to discourse patterns and pragmatic appropriacy (Granger and Paquot,

2015). In a study by Hyland and Milton (1997), novice native writers and Cantonese- speaking English as a second language, usually mixed formal written forms and informal spoken forms and transfer conversational uses of academic discourses and congruently,

Neff et al. (2004) in their study conducted comparison analysis on the expression of writer stance within various corpora of argumentative texts among professional native writers, novice native writers and English as a second language learners, and the study found that native learners and non-native learners possessed the novice-writer feature of unnecessary visibility. However, we might underestimate the issue if we concluded that English as a second language learners and native student writers encounter the same difficulties in academic writing and can for that reason be regarded as belonging to one and the similar category of novice authors.

2.7 Verb Lemmas vs. Verb Forms

Generally, the fundamental function of verb lemma in corpus linguistic is to allow the corpus linguist to take a broad view of groups of words which in some cases their individual distinctions are irrelevant for instance in examining collocations or compiling

33 a word frequency list, we might concordance on a noun irrespective of whether it is in singular or the plural and we might want to treat all the verb forms together. These groups of words could be created and used when it is necessary such as by utilizing regular expressions (Knowles and Zuraidah, 2004). In the practice of corpus linguistic, inflection is the first category to be ignores as inflectional morphology largely regarded on grammatical class and the fact that verb lemma is known to be tied to conventional parts of speech, in case where we talk of the declension of pronouns and nouns and perhaps adjectives and also the conjugation of verbs (Knowles and Zuraidah, 2004).

According to Francis and Kucera (1982), lemma can be described as a set of lexical forms that possessed the similar stem and originated to the similar major word class with distinction only in spelling or inflection. However, this definition of verb lemma raises issues in terms of principle but we could not ignore the fact that it is essential in practice. The constraint to verb forms with the similar stem garner issues especially on what should we do with suppletive forms for instance went or go and the verb forms of be, and if the verb lemmas is see the verb forms are see, saw, seen. A criterion of a different order has been introduced by spelling variants where it is one thing to cluster dissimilar representations of what counts as exactly the identical linguistic item and it is another to cluster singular and plural as unique and different, but interrelated linguistic items (Knowles and Zuraidah, 2004).

Moreover, apparent connection can be observed between what lexicographers accomplish when they cluster word forms under headwords and what corpus linguists accomplish when clustering words under a single lemma. In a study by Crystal (1997), lemma has been defined as a dictionary headword or an abstract representation which further subsume all the formal lexical variations that may apply to the headword for instance the verb walk is subsume into walks, walking and walked but it is not all

34 understandable on the distinctions between a lexeme and lemma. Some researchers argue that defining lemma as a headword is certainly not meticulously definite theoretical concept because clustering words under headwords varies depend on the needs of the intended users and the size of the dictionary and also according to the need of a particular writer on what he decided to do about it. In some study for instance by Kennedy (1998), headwords and verb lemmas are treated similarly as it is typical to lemma the inflectional variants or to list under the same headword in corpus studies.

In terms of assigning group of words to lemmas and clustering words under headwords, researchers recognized the boundary between homonymy and polysemy that will affect the clustering of words for instance the metaphorical and concrete uses of crane (which may be refers to machine that lift heavy objects or types of bird) are most probably to be considered as independent words and elements of different lemmas while the metaphorical use of lion is probably to be considered as the same word. If it is not easy to cluster word meanings under headwords at the abstract level of the dictionary, it will be much more complex to cluster words in text unequivocally to their lemmas

(Crystal, 1997; Kennedy, 1998; Knowles and Zuraidah, 2004).

In a study by Biber et al. (1998), they utilized verb lemma casually to regard as the diverse forms of the word jointly with regard to frequency lists and they describe verb lemma rather loosely as the base form of a word which pays no attention to grammatical changes for instance plurality and tense. They further utilize small capitals to symbolize the verb lemma such as DEAL for deal, deals, dealt and dealing, which is a usual way of representing the name of a set of words and consider the small capital but highly significant, further step to describe the lemma as the name of a lexical set for example

DEAL = {deal, deals, dealt, dealing} (Kennedy, 1998; Knowles and Zuraidah, 2004).

35 Furthermore, in any corpus-driven studies of lexical verbs, it is important to think about the advantages and disadvantages of using verb lemmas or verb forms as units of scrutiny. If verb lemmas are used in the analysis therefore the different inflectional forms are merged for example claim, claims, claiming, claimed because it is a functional option if the aim of the study is to perceive patterns of use that intersect verb forms (for instance the use of a that-clause with the lemma CLAIM) and/or to provide a broad overview of learners’ lexical repertoire. On the other hand, Sinclair (1991) pointed out that lemmas are a generalization and an abstraction and merely using lemmas amounts to losing imperative information as every verb form has its unique individual patterning and he notices a potential for a new division of study that centralized on the inter-relationships of a lemma and its forms as it is not until now understood how meanings are dispensed among forms of a lemma. Sinclair (1991) suggested that lexicographers alter the conventional practice of utilizing the uninflected form or base as headword and instead, make use of the most frequently encountered form, a revolutionary view that has so far gone unheeded (Granger and Paquot, 2008).

Granger and Paquot (2005) previously conducted an automatic assessment between a similar-sized fiction corpus and a one-million-word corpus of academic writing by utilizing the criteria of frequency, keyness, range and evenness of distribution which then they identified 930 lexical items that figured more significantly in the academic corpus compared to in the fiction corpus. Other than that, the study found out that verbs frequently function as academic writing keywords in merely one or two inflectional forms as they illustrate in their results, approximately 47% or nearly half of the verbs emerge as unique academic discourse items in only one-word form and approximately 23% or almost a quarter of them in two word forms. A minority emerge in three or four or five word forms, respectively 19% and 11% which illustrate that the verb lemma ASSOCIATE,

BASE, CONFINE and LINK, emerge as unique academic writing item in only one-word form

36 which are associated, based, confined and linked (the –ed form). In a case where the verb lemma is LACK or COMPRISE, the verb forms is lacking and comprising (the –ing form) that is unique and for REVEAL and ENTAIL, the verb forms is reveals and entails (the –s form). This study explains that we need to be wary about claiming generality and simplification for families whose collocation environments and meanings may be at variance transversely, each inflected and derived word form, and this notion has been highlighted in many studies of lexical verbs in academic writing (Oakey, 2005; Hyland and Tse, 2007).

In addition, verb lemmas had been treated similarly as headwords and as cluster of inflectional variants in a study by Leech et al. (2001), but verb lemmas are represented as sets of lexical items in the main text with their members of verb forms listed in italics and they show differentiation between the simplex form and the lemma. The typical practice of lemmatizing of dealing to deal leaves the theoretical standing of deal unclear and indefinite which the only reasonable and logical explanation for this matter is to consider dealing as a member of the set DEAL. Consequently, this explanation leads to the fact that the lemma DEAL and the simplex form deal are logically distinct from one another and deal must be considered as a member of DEAL. Leech et al. (2001) is considered to be inconsistent in terms of using sets and spelling variants in a commonsensical manner (a member of lemma can be composed as a set of spelling variants) by listing realize and realise as separate lemmas but treating focused and focussed as members of verb focus (Knowles and Zuraidah, 2004). These diverse approaches formed what might be known as the traditional view of the lemma, assuming the lemma as a group of words that for realistic functions can be considered as variations of the same word. Conversely, it has turn out to be perceptible that individual members of the lemma can be treated separately and build up their own collocations and meanings, as linguists have started to scrutinize increasingly large corpora for instance provided is

37 the top participle of the verb provide but it has taken on entirely new function as a subordinating conjunction (Leech et al., 2001; Knowles and Zuraidah, 2004; Oakey,

2005; Hyland and Tse, 2007; Granger and Paquot, 2008).

Congruently, the verb can still be considered and clustered as the same member of lemma however from a reserved point of view, linguists have to be cautious about what conjectures and presumptions are drawn from lemma membership and linguists without doubt should make undeviating conjectures about meaning or distribution. According to

Sinclair (1987) which gathers major insights from several studies of the Birmingham school, as linguists scrutinize further data and focuses on more detail, they tend to generalize lemmas in a much less convincing way and they tend to not treated individual words meaning appropriately (Leech et al., 2001; Knowles and Zuraidah, 2004). A study by Stubbs (1996) elaborates on the collocations of words related to educate in which the most common word for educate is education, frequently related to higher education or institutions while the second most common word is educated, which habitually related with at and the name of a esteemed and influential institution for example educated at

Cambridge. At this point, whether or not education and educated fits in the same group of lemmas it is no longer an important issue.

In another study by Tognini-Bonelli (2001), she challenges the postulation that members of a lemma are bound to share similar meaning and vary only in their grammatical profile and she further highlights the application of words faced and facing, the former having only the metaphorical connotation for instance faced with a dilemma while the latter having a tangible connotation for instance facing forwards as well as to the metaphorical connotation of facing a dilemma). Besides, the solid implication of facing occurs in what she recognized as general English or also known as the Birmingham corpus, but not recognized in either Wall Street Journal corpus or the more specialized

38 Economist Journal corpus. Therefore, it is complex to see beyond pronunciation and spelling and the significant of generalizations that might be captured by assigning faced and facing to the lemma word FACE (Leech et al., 2001; Knowles and Zuraidah, 2004;

Oakey, 2005; Hyland and Tse, 2007; Granger and Paquot, 2008). Nowadays, the term lemma is applied to describe a number of concepts which might be inter-related with distinguish logic: spelling variants, the name of a set of lexical items, a set of paradigms, a set of inflectional variants, a dictionary headword and an ad hoc group of words. The notion of the lemma is mainly practical at a common level in highly abstract elaborations of a language, although it seems to be of uncertain value for comprehensive studies of real texts (Granger and Paquot, 2015).

2.8 Language Formulaicity

Language formulaicity, or phraseology is suggested by Wray (2002) to be pervasive in all language data. Upon his observation of daily language use, Sinclair (1991) commented that the majority of it consists of recycling common words in similar patterns and that most of these words actually lack exclusive meaning. He added that they can only be meaningful when used with a selection of words, with which they often appear together in a broader repertoire. During his study of academic writing consists of approximately 238,000 words, Howarth (1998) noted that 31–40% of the essays contained collocations and idioms and Altenberg (1998), in his analysis of the London-

Lund Corpus, reported that approximately 80% of the words that made up the corpus formed part of “recurrent word combinations”. A study by Conklin and Schmitt (2008) further indicates that collocations are indeed pervasive in language discourse and the diference in level of pervasiveness is that differentiate the speech and writing of native and non-native speakers. Such finding is supported by Erman and Warren (2000) study

39 who analysed native speakers’ written and spoken discourses. They found out that formulaic expressions or collocations make up 58.6% of the spoken English discourse and 52.3% of the written discourse. Additionally, Foster (2001, as cited in Conklin and

Schmitt, 2008), in their analysis of formulaic language in informal natives’ speech, reported that 32.3% of speech consists of formulaic expressions where the non-native counterpart makes significantly less formulaic language during a similar context.

A study of a science corpus also yields large number of collocations. A study of science corpus by Sujatha Menon & Jayakaran Mukundan (2012) have discovered a high percentage of Noun/noun and Adjective/Noun collocation and concludes with a suggestion of the importance of language learning in chuncks rather than individual words. The conclusions to which all these studies have arrived to is that formulaic language forms a large part of any discourse (Conklin & Schmitt, 2008) and that knowing these formulaic sequences can facilitate the process of language learning. Proponents of collocation agree that theory of formulaic language disputes Chomsky’s claim that language production is a description of the speakers’ and hearers’ intrinsic competence

(1965). The significance of language formulaicity is that it economised the language by subjecting itself to the basic of language principal but simultaneously remain simplistic in nature. Consequently, language production is no more reflective of the speakers’ or hearers’ actual language competence.

Due to the significantly ubiquitous nature of collocation, a large number of studies have concurred to the suggestion that the frequency-based language formulaicity which are largely found in native writing can be of great help to non-native writers to achieve a more native-like style of academic writing, and should thus be integrated into ESL/EFL curricula. A study by Ellis et.al (2008) further reaffirms the benefits of formulaic sequences whereby he also advocates the use of academic language formulas in EAP

40 instructions. In his study, he triangulates data from three different perspectives; psycholinguistics, education and ESL. Through that study, he successfully proves that the study of formulaic language is relevant from all three perspectives.

In the numerous literature this paper has reviewed, one article is particularly cautious of the use of of formulaic language. In his thesis, Kjellmer (1991, as cited in

Nesselhauf, 2005) proposed that the argument that learning and teaching of formulaic language can contribute to native-like writing is a persuasive one and he suggested that researchers as well as learner need to treat the hype with slight caution. Kjellmer’s point is more often than not, misundertood to have implied that learners will sound more like their native counterpart if they use formulaic language liberally in the ir speech and writing. However, that is not always the case. A study by Durrant & Schmitt (2010) found that although there are non-native writers who utilise high-frequency collocations, they still do not sound native-like at all. This is because while they use high-frequency collocations, they chose to underuse less frequent, strongly associated collocations, items which are probably highly salient for native speakers. These findings are consistent with

“usage-based models of acquisition” by Durrant & Schmiddt (2009) while accounting for the impression that non-native writing, lacks language formulaicity.

Similar observation is made by Sujatha Menon & Jayakaran Mukundan (2012) in their study of Science textbook in Malaysia, They strongly propose that “these patterns should not be over-represented”. Learner should only be taught of the frequent collocation patterns but need to be cautioned of the changeability and diversity of collocational patterns in scientific language. They note that that the flexibility of some patterns can be

“arbitrarily blocked by usage” and that these “arbitrary lexical patterning” pose a large hindrance for learners. However, these studies ultimately reveal the general consensus

41 that learners who does not possess adequate knowledge of formulaic language will equally possess lower language proficiency and fluency.

Considering the ubiquitous nature of language formulaicity based on previous literatures, one should think that ESL textbooks should also provide authentic language exposure that it similar to that of native environment. Surprisingly, however, this is not always the case. A number of textbook evaluation studies have shown that instead of teaching authentic language, they show the learner how the language should is used in formal contexts, not at all reflective of language use in authentic settings. Language use in authentic setting is often marked by frequent use of phrasal verbs, as they are often used by native speakers. A study of a national textbook by Faizah (2013) to examine the usage of phrasal verb in Year Three English Textbook published by the Dewan Bahasa

& Pustaka under the permission by Ministry of Education Malaysia for the new curriculum, Standard Curriculum for Primary School yield dissapointing results. The instances of phrasal verbs are identified and the frequency of usage are recorded and compared to the list of 50 Most Common Phrasal Verb. The results will indicate whether

Malaysian Year Three English Textbook primes young learners to the natural and authentic use of the English Language. Out of the 28 phrasal verbs, only 10, or 36% of them are repeated while the others are mentioned only one. These results reflected the findings of a study by Darwin and Gray (1999) who perform a comparison between a list of 20 most common phrasal verb of the BNC (British National Corpus) to that of a typical

ESL exercise book. They found that only three of all the phrases in the textbooks matched the 20 phrasal verbs on the list. It would seem like the ESL society have not caught up with these findings and the situation should be remedied soon.

42 2.9 Language Formulaicity; Phraseology and Collocation

Language knowledge is collocational knowledge (Gitsaki, 1996). The term phraseology and formulaic language or formulaic sequences (Granger and Meunier,

2008; Schmitt, 2008) are often used to elaborate the various kind of multi-words units and recent research shows studies using corpus data in order to highlight the significant of multi-word units in language had increase in these past few years. Altenberg (1998) in his study estimated approximately 80% of the words in the corpus produced part of intermittent word combinations while Wray (2002) found that learners face difficulties in terminology when explaining word co-occurrence. It also appears that these terms; language formulaicity, phraseology and collocation can and have been used interchangeably at large. The term phraseology can be used in distinctive ways by various scholars but various terminologies can be used to interpret the same notion or similar word of co-occurrence for instance the term recurrent word combinations (Altenberg,

1998), clusters (Hyland, 2008), n-grams (Stubbs, 2007), phrasicon (De Cock et al., 1998) and lexical bundles (Biber and Barbieri, 2007). These terminologies (recurrent word combinations, clusters, n-grams, phrasicon and lexical bundles) actually predicates to continuous sequences of words acquired through corpus-driven method with distribution criteria and specified frequency and the sequences are utilized by the native language within specified contexts and are fixed multi-word units that possessed customary discourse functions or pragmatic functions (Granger and Paquot, 2008; Chen and Baker,

2010).

In a chain of lexical bundle research by Biber et al.(1999), Biber et al. (2004) and

Biber and Barbieri (2007), academic prose and conversation present different distribution patterns of lexical bundles in which most lexical bundles in academic prose are phrasal while lexical bundles in conversation are clausal. Cortes (2002) studies lexical bundles in native freshman compositions and stated that novice writers utilized lexical bundles in a

43 different functional compared to published academic prose and in Cortes (2004) he found that native students rarely apply lexical bundles in academic writing and even if native students applied lexical bundles, it is applied in a different manner. Non-native competence in terms of collocational use can be observed from a number of sources.

Majority of previous studies have analysed real-life language production, in either written or spoken forms. Computerised analysis has enabled researchers to explore all aspects of phraseology occurring in a large body of texts.

It has been widely concurred by researchers and language teachers alike that phraseological knowledge plays a pivotal role in language learning (Nation, 2001). They agreed that the “appropriate use of collocations enables the learners to speak more fluently, makes their speech more comprehensible and helps them produce more native- like utterances” (Manan & Noor, 2014, p.2) and consequently is deemed profound in the process of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) (Durrant & Schmitt, 2010). Cortes

(2004), for instance has noted that the use of collocations and fixed expressions has been considered a marker of proficient language use, and agrees with Haswell (1991, p.236) report that “as writers mature they rely more and more on collocations”. Similarly, more recent studies by Nesselhauf (2005) and Kazsubki (2000) in which they explore the development of collocational knowledge in non-native writing have come into conclusion that there exists correlation between assumed increased proficiency with augmented use of common phraseology. In other words, it can be assumed that as the learner develop their linguistic proficiency, the frequency by which they use conventiona; collocations will increase as well.

It is established that native speakers share a substantial body of formulaic sequences thus it is the second language speaker's ability to gain phraseological knowledge that determines, in part, language learning success. Bearing the learners’ as

44 well as instructors’ needs in mind, researchers have been looking this aspect of language that could help non-natives achieve similar competency as their native counterparts.

Granted, achieving sufficient phraseological knowledge is not as simple as we would like to imagine. It is suggested that Language environment is what separates non-native speakers’ ability in utilising phraseology to their native counterpart (Wray, 2002). Native speakers are able to apply the collocational knowledge easily as they recognised the formulas as unit with clearly defined functions, due to vast exposure of the target language

(Ellis et al., 2008). Contrarily, non-native speakers, less exposed to the language, flounders in using phraseology. Non-native can only absorb this knowledge if they were immersed in a speaking community where they can observe and imitate (Wray, 2002).

Siyanova and Schmitt (2011) have conducted a study of the influence of native-speaking environment to non-native production of collocation and found that those who have spent more time in such environment are more inclined to use collocation. This finding, however striking does not provide a solution to the phraseological conundrum. Not everyone can manage the opportunity to spend extended time in native environment and the dilemma remains unresolved.

Considering the previous discussion, it can be observed that different researchers have adopted specific terms to refer to phraseology and to determine the most accurate terminology to use as an umbrella term is proved a very difficult endeavor. It is also noted that there has been very little effort contributed to achieve unified definition and criteria of select terms. In the face of this chaos, Gries (2008) attempts to clarify the term phraseology in effort to make it applicable to research in the area co-occurrence phenomena in the field of linguistics. Gries (2008) chooses the term phraseology as the umbrella term for word combination as it covers a very broad concept therefore allows present and future research to be influenced and identified with the terminology. He characterises phraseology according to three approaches to linguistics. In relation to this

45 study, the six parameters applied to characterise phraseology in the corpus linguistic paradigm are discussed. He noted that other terms which are also widely used in this paradigm are collocation, n-gram and cluster.

Table 2.1 Parameters of phraseology in corpus linguistics

nature of the elements words

number of elements n (usually, that means 'two or more')

frequency of occurrence sufficiently frequent to be recognized as a combined element

distance of elements for clusters/n-grams, the distance is usually 0 (i.e., the elements are immediately adjacent); for collocations, the distance between the elements involved can vary, but usually exhibits one or a few preferred distances

flexibility of the elements for clusters/n-grams, there is usually no flexibility; for collocations, one usually allows for some flexibility: the collocation of strong and tea would be instantiated both by strong tea or the tea is strong

semantics n-grams are usually retrieved for natural language processing purposes where the issue of non-compositional semantics is only sometimes relevant; for collocations, researchers differ as to whether they require some non- predictable behavior (strong tea is acceptable but powerful tea is not) or not.

Source: Gries , 2008 (p. 16)

46

2.10 Summary

This chapter has discussed at length various literature concerning academic genres, verbs in academic writing and ESL learners in their use of lexical verbs in academic prose. It is generally agreed that ESL writers face a challenge in composing a sound and cohesive piece of academic writing due to several reasons, mainly in choosing appropriate verbs to enhance their statements and claims and also lack of exposure to academic lexical bundles or stock phrases. There are also valid concerns regarding L1 transference to their L2 writing although these seem to affect novice writers more than the expert writers. The suggested solution to these conundrums appears to be by teaching or exposing learners to the frequently used phrases related to their genre. However, these matters need to be studied further with focus on verb usage, tense and aspect and phraseology in a collection of theses by advanced ESL writers. The methodology employed in this study will be discussed in further detail in Chapter 3.

47 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter describes in detail the procedure of collecting and analysing the data.

The rationales of the procedures are also explained. First, the methodology chosen for the present study is described and discussed, followed by the method for corpus selection, corpus size, method of analysis and the software used to assist analysis.

This study intends to describe features of lexical verbs by identifying categories of verbs used in the ESL corpus gathered. The examination of verbs forms could also provide a deeper analysis of tenses and aspects, voice and associated patterns favoured by the writers and common associated patterns of lexical verbs are also identified and examined. Phraseology are a lexical phenomenon that has linguistic and lexicographic status as well as utility for statistical natural language paradigms (McKeown & Redev,

2006). That is to say, phraseology itself is the result of language use and continuous research. In order to process large amount of data, researchers are now able rely on computational linguistics to extract patterns of phraseology from text corpora.

3.2 Analysis of authentic language data

Data on the phraseological aspects of non-native competence can be derived from various sources as there are several ways of directly investigating the use of collocations by learners utilised by previous studies. More often than not, it can be obtained by analysing the language production of learners, either written or spoken. A growing number of second language learner (L2) corpora have emerged in recent years; for example, the CALE (The Corpus of Academic Learners English) and the CLEC (Chinese

Learner English Corpus) and our very own The Malaysian Corpus of Learner English

(MACLE) as interest in this field continues to sustain.

48 In comprehensive measures, particular samples of L2 writing or speech are analysed with respect to all the collocations which occur in the available texts. Another method is to use corpora of non-native writing, in which case it is possible to analyse only specific, pre-selected collocations as they occur in a range of texts as done in a study by

Granger (1998). By obtaining concordances for the investigated items, the collocational patterns of non-native texts can be compared to those in texts produced by native speakers. The present study attempts to gather data through the mean of corpora based on advanced non-native academic writing. This method is referred to as corpus linguistics.

There have been some serious debates over the term corpus linguistics to this day a solid definition has yet to be concluded. One of the earliest definitions came from Leech

(1992) in which Corpus Linguistics is labelled as a new paradigm for computerized linguistic research. Corpus linguistics can be defined as “…the study of language based on examples of ‘real life language use” (McEnery and Wilson, 2001, p.1). Other researchers have defined corpus linguistics as "[ ...) a way of investigating language by observing large amounts of naturally-occurring, electronically-stored discourse, using software which selects, sorts, matches, counts and calculates." (Hunston and Francis,

2000, p. 14). As we can deduce from the definition, corpus linguistics in itself is not a branch of linguistics, like syntax and semantics. Rather, it is a methodology and technique for language study that can be used in any branch of linguistics. However, further arguments emerge in the face of diversity in practice of this so-called methodology. More recent argument is posed by McEnery and Gabrielotos (2006) in which they claim that the differences in practice of corpus linguistics are underlined by theoretical considerations as Teubert (2005, p.2) describes Corpus Linguistics as “a theoretical approach to the study of language”.

49 3.3 Corpus Linguistics

Corpus linguistics have been considered as a theory by many linguistic researchers (Teubert, 2005), whilst some consider corpus linguistics as a methodology

(Bowker and Pearson, 2002). The more widely accepted definition of corpus linguistics, however, is by McEnery et al. (2006) that describe corpus linguistics as a comprehensive system of techniques and principles on the approach to corpora application in language studies and language teaching and learning, and corpora certainly possessed theoretical status yet the theory is not in itself. Teubert (2005) elaborates corpus as a discipline or methodological commitment that is rather an assertion on being used with only real language information taken from discourse in a principled and standardized way and later assembled into a corpus.

Corpus-driven linguistics does not take traditional linguistics for granted but making full use of it as a discourse and not a language-peripheral taxonomy of linguistic units which will have to present the classifications and categories that are required to answer a prearranged research question (Teubert, 2005). On the other hand, corpus-based linguistics approached corpus data from the standpoint of moderate corpus-peripheral premises with the objective of improving, modifying and testing such theories and frequently utilized corpus annotation (Hardie & McEnery, 2010).

Corpus linguistics is not merely a simple recondite field of study within linguistics but it requires practical tools and methodologies to further analysed various aspects of language use, not least in areas related to learning and teaching foreign language or second language (Bolton & Tyne, 2013). The impact of corpora within linguistics study has been described as revolutionary as it facilitates the field of linguistic to show how language should be utilized in authentic communicative occurrences and have been influential in informing course materials, evaluation approaches, syllabuses, usage

50 manuals, books, grammar and dictionaries. Corpora can also be directly utilized for data- driven learning applied by learners and teachers, and especially those who believe that corpora provide learners with total control of how to look and what to look for, with one thing leads to another in an unintended manner (Bolton & Tyne, 2013).

Corpus can be described as a notion that compose of a radial characteristic of the similar kind as a polysemous word and constitute of prototypical exemplars by virtue of exhibiting few extensively acceptable characters and also constitute various exemplars that are less directly or related to the prototype, to other exemplars of the grouping by family similitude links (Cox, 2011). Studies by Bhatia et al. (2011) mentioned that corpus comprised of several characteristics which are one or more machine-readable Unicode text files, representative of specific type of language or variety or register or speaker as a whole with the sampling scheme in corpus analysis should indicates population variation that the analysis should represents. Other than that, corpus linguistics possessed character of balanced because corpus requires the sample size to be proportional in the study population, and it must contain information from natural communicative settings which refers to the purpose of producing language data in the corpus must be untainted by the collection of those data (Biber and Conrad, 2009).

Nowadays, the field of corpus linguistics has expanded into many traditional field of language analysis. For instance; sociolinguistic variation, diachronic linguistics and indeed, ESP. Seminal work remains as a theoretical reference of primary significance and the utilization of corpora in linguistics studies and applied linguistics in the modern days does not require defense but insight, proficient research skills and comprehensive method

(Benjamins, 2014).

51 3.4 The corpus

The general principle of collecting a learners’ corpus is that selection and compilation process needs to be made according to strict design criteria that controls the variables regarding the learner (e.g. gender, age, language background) (Dagneaux et al.,1998). This is because even in a homogenous language background such as ESL, a number of concerns involving other variables need to be addressed. This study concentrates on corpus-driven investigation of submitted Master’s theses to Faculty of

Language and Linguistics. Thirty-five Master’s theses are selected for this study, whereby the authors are considered to be advanced ESL writers of English due to the University’s requirements; undergone English medium undergraduate courses and a bachelor’s degree with CGPA of not lower than 3.0 or equivalent. The courses are also fully conducted in

English. These theses were accepted by the faculty and the writers were awarded Master of Arts between year 2010 to 2014 as part of the requirements for the degree of Master of

English as the Second Language or Master of Linguistics. Additionally, these theses were uploaded onto the university’s digital library for easy access. Only Discussion sections

(marked by subheading Discussion) are analyzed in this study. A whole discussion chapter would be a much ideal data for this study, however the majority of the theses are not compiled in that manner. The discussion is normally placed in Chapter 5 which takes only a section of that chapter, hence the data is collected as such. The population is also determined to be of ESL background by their Malaysian Identification Card number. The summary of the corpus is presented in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1 Summary of corpus

Type Number of text Years Total Words Master of Arts 35 2010-2014 55 252 dissertations (Discussion section)

52 3.5 Data Collection Procedures

The first step for data collection was to browse University Malaya’s repository website at http://www.diglib.um.edu.my/umtheses/ where electronic versions of theses and dissertations from all faculties are uploaded and stored. From there, the public are able to choose the faculty and download PDF formats of all the dissertations.

Dissertations are chosen based on these criteria;

1. The writers must be a Malaysian citizen to fulfill the characteristic of ESL

background. Identification card number is considered as evidence for this purpose.

2. The dissertation must have a heading or subheading Discussion in either Chapter

4 or 5 where the candidates discuss their findings of the study.

3.6 Ethics of the study

While ethical issues are deemed highly relevant to corpus linguistics as with any other branch of linguistics, McEnery & Hardie (2012) note that the literature in Corpus

Linguistics has paid little consideration to this aspect. They point out that reference textbooks related to the discipline written by the likes of Sinclair (1991), Biber (1998) and McEnery & Wilson (2001) did very little to address this issue. While the Corpus

Linguistics literature is mostly silent on ethical issues, it does generally embody good ethical practice as suggested by McEnery & Hardie (2012). On another note, following the guideline by Lancaster University (2012), if one collects data without seeking permission, distribution is not allowed. This way, there is no copyright breach. This study adheres to these rules of non-distribution, thus preventing copyright breach. In addition, only a few out of context sentences are shown as examples throughout the dissertation, especially in Chapter 4. It is impossible to reconstruct the content of the original text based on these disjointed examples alone. Therefore, even if the content is redistributed,

53 it is still not considered as copyright violation. In addition, the study also practices anonymity with regards to the authors of the corpus. The files are labelled in such a way

(ESL1-7) avoid usage of the original authors’ names.

3.7 Data Analysis Procedures

Each thesis portion is stored in PDF format in the online repository. They have to be converted to .txt format before the data can be analysed with the WordSmith Tools.

The software only processes data in .txt format because there are many hidden markups in other formats.

Figure 3.1 Example of text with Discussion subheading

The content marked with subheading Discussion (e.g 5.2 Discussion) is copied and saved as txt. format for further analysis. The txt. format files are collected in 35 separate files and later compiled into 7 files, labelled ESL 1 to ESL 7. The compilation allows for easier and faster tagging process as the software allows for a limit of 100 000 tokens per file. Each file is copied and pasted in the POS tagging software available at http://ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/claws/trial.html. Tagset 5 and horizontal output are chosen as

54 it has less tags (60) that enables it to process bigger set of data. The tagged files are then processed with WordSmith Tool software.

The_AT0 analysis_NN1 reveals_VVZ five_CRD significant_AJ0

findings_NN2 ._SENT -----_PUN

The_AT0 findings_NN2 and_CJC their_DPS implications_NN2

are_VBB discussed_VVN below_AV0 in_PRP the_AT0 order_NN1

of_PRF importance_NN1 ,_PUN from_PRP least_DT0 important_AJ0

to_PRP most_DT0 important_AJ0 ._SENT -----_PUN

Figure 3.2 Example of text with POS-tags

5.2.1_CRD Significant_AJ0 findings_NN2 The_AT0 first_ORD 3.7.1 UCREL CLAWS Tagset significant_AJ0 finding_NN1 shows_VVZ that_CJT reporters_NN2 The data is tagged and annoted using UCREL CLAWS Tagset software which is generally_AV0 present_VVB their_DPS reports_NN2 from_PRP available for free at Lancaster University website. Part-of-speech (POS) tagging is the only_AV0 one_CRD point_NN1 of_PRF view_NN1_PUN or_CJC most commonly used method for corpus annotation. The process in required in order to one_CRD particular_AJ0 stand_NN1 on_PRP the_AT0 issue_NN1 ._SENT identify the lexical verbs in the text. This software can expedite the process of identifying verbs in large body of data. CLAW Tagset C5 is utilised considering the large number of token. Similar tagset is also used for the BNS (British National Corpus). The software processes the text in three stages; pre-edit, automatic tag assignment and manual post- edit. Abbreviation forms in relation to verbs for CLAWS are listed in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2 CLAWS Horizontal Output Abbreviation

VVB base form of lexical verb e.g. SHOW,MAKE (except the infinitive) VVD past tense form of lexical e.g. SHOWED, verb MADE VVG -ing form of lexical verb e.g.SHOWING,MA KING

55 Table continued from page 55 VVI infinitive of lexical verb e.g to-SHOW, to- MAKE VVN past participle form of e.g. SHOWN, lexical verb MADE VVZ -s form of lexical e.g. SHOWS,

verb MAKES

The CLAWS system boasts a success rate up to 97% on written text thus ensures the reliability of the results.

3.7.2 WordSmith Tool 6.0

The text analysis software, WordSmith Tool is developed by Oxford University

Press since 1996. The software has undergone a number of upgrades which is now at version 6.0. It is ingeniously developed software, in terms of variety of analysis tools offered; Concordance line generator, Keywords extractor and WordList application. For the purpose of the study, the software is able to generate word lists according to its frequency order, and generate concordance lines to find collocations and show frequencies altogether with statistical tools. It can also compare different texts by showing their statistical significance level. The annoted corpora are later ran through the

WordSmith Tool 6.0 to generate wordlist and concordance lines.

The wordlist is created by listing the tokens by frequency. This method enables the study to identify the Top 100 verbs for RQ 1. The complete list of all the tokens is included in Appendix A.

56

Figure 3.3 WordSmith Tool Wordlist

The verbs are identified and listed manually based on the information from the

Wordlist. The categories for classification is Hinkel’s academic verb types which are activity verbs (give, take), reporting verbs, mental/emotive verbs, linking verbs and logico-semantic relationship verbs. The process takes into account the frequency of all forms of verbs (lemma). The list is scanned and analysed for verbs. Some verbs are quiet difficult to categorize. For example, the verb study could be categorised as a noun and verb. However, upon further inspection, the word is employed as a noun rather than as a verb as in the study shows.., thus eliminating them from the Top 100 list. The process of identifying and eliminating verbs that can also function as a noun is rather a tedious process and takes quite some time to be completed. For example, there are over five hundred entries of study and the author has to go through the concordance lines to examine the context. When the word has to be taken out of the list, another word has to be examined to be included in the list and the process repeats itself. One other major consideration that needs to be made is the frequency of the verbs. In a corpus as relatively

57 small is this, the raw frequency itself sometimes does not really seem significant. It can have a frequency of 30 or less and still makes it to the list. The author has considered including normalized frequency into the report but decided against it since this is not a comparative study. Other words such as write and teach can be either Activity verbs or

Report verbs. In this corpus especially, there are an abundance of write and teach used in particular referring to the act of writing and teaching that occur in a language classroom.

They are later categorised as Activity verbs after an examination of their usage in the sentences. During the process of data analysis, a large number of this type of issue is encountered; therefore, great caution needs to be taken during the process of categorisation. A lot of time and manpower has been dedicated into ensuring the list is valid and reliable data.

For RQ 2, the corpus is analysed via concordancing tool. The text is processed through

CLAW POS tagger before the concordance lines such as below can emerge. Upon entering VV* into the search bar, a list of verbs labelled of VV* will appear. There are six variation of VV* tags, as shown in table 3.2. The tags are later sorted based on frequency and further analysis on significant verb forms is carried out.

Figure 3.4 Example of concordance lines

58 RQ 3 is answered by focusing on verb-based structural forms which are (VP +) that- clause fragment passive verb + PP fragment. The process is performed by looking at VV* tags with that right collocates and examining VVN tags with PP tags as right collocates respectively.

In summary, the work flow is shown in the Table 3.3.

Table 3.3 Stages of corpus analysis

Stage Process Research type Stage 1 Selection of dissertations from university’s Corpus-based repository approach Stage 2 Formation of corpora from 35 dissertations Corpus-based approach Stage 3 Conversion of corpus into text format Corpus-based approach Stage 4 Automatic generation of frequency lists Descriptive analysis Stage 5 Identification of verb types and forms Corpus-based approach Stage 6 Application of statistical analyses across and within Corpus-based corpora approach Stage 7 Analysis of verb patterns Descriptive and Interpretative

3.8 Summary

In this chapter, we have reviewed the methods for real-life language data analysis which has since branched into an area of study itself called Corpus Linguistics. By employing computational method for data analysis, researchers have been able to explore larger size of data with minimal margin for errors. The process by which the corpus is examined are also described in systematic details. These are the standard procedure for many corpus linguistic analysis. As mentioned earlier, the softwares utilised during the analysis, WordSmith Tool and UCREAL POS-tagger are specifically tailored for linguistic analysis thus ensuring reliability of the results.

59 CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

The present chapter has been formulated to present the findings for the current research. It begins by mapping the overall picture of verbs which are categorised into five types of lexical verb- Activity, Report, Mental-Emotive, Linking and Logical-Semantic

Verbs. In this part, the study also looks at the verb forms used by ESL writers. This should provide insight into the tenses and lexico-grammatical choices made by the ESL writers.

In the second part of analysis, dominant patterns of the verb-based bundles are examined.

4.1 Types of lexical verbs

RQ1: What are the types of lexical verbs used in the discussion sections in M.A theses?

The first aim of the study is to list the lexical verbs following the categorisation established by Hinkel (2004). Identifying the lexical verbs into the categorisation set as the initial step of analysis is important because it will show the functions and purposes of the lexical verbs, whether they are used as report, linking verbs etc. The breakdown of

Top 100 lexical verbs found in the corpus can be visually seen in Figure 4.1.

LOGICAL SEMANTIC LINKING 9% 4% ACTIVITY REPORT ACTIVITY MENTAL/E 42% MENTAL/EMOTIVE MOTIVE LINKING 26% LOGICAL SEMANTIC REPORT 19%

Figure 4.1 Percentage occurrence of lexical verbs in specific verb groups

60 Figure 4.1 shows the Top 100 verbs found in the ESL corpus are categorised into five types; Activity, Report, Mental/Emotive, Linking and Logical-Semantic verbs. It shows that the Activity verbs appear with the highest variations compared to other types of verbs

(42%, n=42), followed by Mental/Emotive verbs (26%) and Report verbs (19%). The

Logical Semantic verbs (9%) and Linking verbs (4%) are used less commonly in the corpus.

The high percentage of activity verb found in the corpus is expected because

Activity verbs consists the largest class of verbs that they also include subclass of Activity verbs (Hinkel, 2004). The second most used verbs are the Mental-Emotive verbs.

Previous literature suggests that they are scarcely encountered in academic discourse which proves to be a significant contrast to the findings of current study. Further justification on this result is explained later in this chapter. On the other hand, Report verbs are very common in academic writing. The use of Report verbs allows the writers to cite other sources in a precise manner and for making a stance in the argument. As such, they are often identified in a greater number in the Literature Review chapter. This study finds Report verbs as the third most commonly used verb. The least frequent verbs are the Logical-Semantic and the Linking verbs. This finding is consistent with Hinkel’s findings that these two are not prevalent in terms of variety, in academic writing.

In order to discuss the types of lexical verbs in more detail, they are listed down below in order of frequency, Activity, Report, Mental/Emotive, Logical-Semantic and

Linking verbs. The following results show the most common verbs found in the present corpus, numbered according to frequency.

61 Activity verbs

Activity verb is the most frequent verb type used. It has 42% of occurrence in the top

100 verbs. The most common activity verbs registered in the corpus are listed below in decreasing frequency:

1. use 2. show 3. make 4. speak 5. take

6. help 7. produce 8. provide 9. employ 10. get

The list of Activity verbs found in the ESL corpus reflects those from Biber et al.’s findings such as make, give, take, use, show, produce, and provide. Activity verbs also include verbs that are predominantly used in a cluster or idiomatic forms (make, give, take). They can be used in a combination with various prepositions or other words to make up words with different meanings. For example, the verb make is most often found in a combination of the word use, and the verb take is most often found with place. It is important to note that the verbs include various forms and combinations with other words because they are highly effective when in use in the combination of two and three-word verbs. Verbs such as take are particularly prone to appear in idiomatic expressions or phrasal verbs, e.g: Verb take and possible forms. Table 4.1 shows examples of Activity

Verb combinations taken from the corpus.

Table 4.1 Verb phrase-based bundles and semantic meaning

Verb Verb combination Semantic meaning Example take-up register take up classes register for classes take take-place occur takes place in a classroom occurs in a classroom take-on undertake massive job to take on undertake a massive job

62 Analysis of the corpus shows that the writers tend to overuse the phrasal form make use which could more appropriately be replaced by the word utilize. This example is one of the many that indicate the corpus’ population’s tendency to utilize phrasal forms which is arguably too simplistic for academic writing. Similar findings were also shared by Pan, Reppen and Biber (2016) in their study of Chinese writers where they are prone to use verb phrase-based bundles when they can be replaced with ‘short, more concise and native-like ways’. There are a number of reasons that could have resulted in the use of verb phrase-based bundles such as translation (Halliday, 1989) or the more likely reason as Pan et. al (2016) suggests as lack of academic writing proficiency.

Students‘genres are more ̳phrasal than the research articles since students depend on using formulaic language (collocations in this study) in developing their arguments more than experts do (Hyland, 2008).

Mental/Emotive Verbs

The second most common verbs found in the corpus is the Mental/Emotive verbs. The most common Mental/Emotive verbs registered in the corpus are listed below in decreasing frequency:

1.find 2.see 3. compare 4. mean 5. observe

6. read 7. understand 8. view 9. identify 10. prove

The highest frequency Mental/Emotive verb is find, followed by see and compare.

In raw frequency, find occurs over 100 times, which appears to be used to the point of repetition. Although not listed in the top 10, the high usage of the verbs feel is another point of interest as they should not be found in an academic prose. One reason that could

63 justify use of Emotive verbs such as feel is because non-native writers are more exposed to informal, conversational discourse that they find it completely acceptable to use them in their academic writing (Hinkel, 2002, cited in Hinkel, 2004).

Most often, mental verbs are not used as frequently compared to report and activity verbs in academic writing and they represent approximately 0.42% of word count of a large English language corpus (Biber at al., as cited in Hinkel, 2004). It is interesting to note that, contrarily, the corpus produces a high frequency of Mental/Emotive verbs which makes it the second most frequent verb category. A number of reasons could contribute to the high frequency of Mental/Emotive verbs. This study proposes that the reasons could be twofold; the corpus’ field of study and the background of the corpus’ population.

Considering the population, it has been suggested that non-native writers tend to employ more Mental/Emotive verbs than their native counterparts (Johnson, 1989, as cited in Hinkel, 2004). Mental verbs are often considered as markers for subjective texts, as they are often used to indicate elements of tentativeness and uncertainty (Quirk et al.,

1985, cited in Hinkel, 2004). This observation is particularly parallel to the findings made by Hinkel (1997) where she noted that non-native writers tend to be ‘vague’ and

‘ambiguous’ compared to the native writers. In addition to influence of informal conversation discourse as mentioned earlier, non-native writers are noted to employ more

Mental/Emotive verbs in order to project hesitancy and tentativeness in their claim

The field of study could justifiably be the reason for the comparatively high number of Mental/Emotive verbs. Discussion in the field of Humanities is not based solely on facts but more of the writers’ interpretation of the findings that are made sensible via arguments and persuasion. To achieve a balance between over-claiming and weak statements, they have to rely largely on Mental/Emotive verbs.

64 Report Verbs

The most common report verbs registered in the corpus are listed below in decreasing frequency:

1.reveal 2.suggest 3. advise 4. discuss 5. report

6. support 7. say 8. write 9. mention 10. state

In this corpus, the most common Report verbs are employed to introduce indirect and reported statements. Indirect statements are given in the form of passive voice (It is revealed…). It was also found that reporting verbs are often followed by that complementiser. Instances where report verbs are employed with that complemetisers are shown in the table below.

Table 4.2 Examples of Report Verbs with that Complementiser

Report verb that complementiser

reveal the findings revealed that repressive humour..

demonstrate the results demonstrated that the speakers’ belief

believe she believes that the findings..

say four of them stated that they would

The examples in Table 4.2 exhibit use of report verbs with that complemetiser.

Two examples are shown with inanimate subjects (the findings, the results) while another two examples showcase animate subjects (she, four of them). It is assumed that the use of inanimate subjects with active verbs can seem ungrammatical although the notion is rebuked by Hinkle (2004). That is one of the reasons why a passive construct is more popular in academic prose. Further discussion on passive constructs and that-construction

65 clauses and subject animacy will be discussed later in the chapter under subheading

Animate Vs Inanimate subjects and (VP) + that clause fragment.

Logical Semantic Verbs

The most common Logical Semantic verbs registered in the corpus are listed below in decreasing frequency:

1.need (to) 2. represent 3. indicate 4. relate 5. illustrate

6. involve 7. lead (to) 8. increase

As with Activity verbs and select verbs in the previous categories, verbs in this category more often appear in chunks or collocates. Two out of the eight examples are employed with prepositions. Examples of usage of Logical Semantic verbs are shown below;

Table 4.3 Examples of Logical Semantic Verbs

Logical Example of usage

Semantic Verbs

represents The firm has cautioned that charity discourse represents an ideological movement designed to consolidate the power of transnational corporations. indicate The high regularity of imperative and hint occurrences indicate their appropriacy in the advice texts because society would rationally use commonly accepted and suitable expressions in daily interaction rather than unusual structures (Terkourafi, 2005).

66 Logical Semantic verbs allow writers to illustrate cause and/or effect by denoting the change in the state of affairs (Hinkel, 2004). In other words, writers employ Linking

Verbs to describe the construction of knowledge pertaining to one’s research. The patterns of lexical verbs are explored in the later part of this chapter.

Linking Verbs

The least used lexical verbs are the Linking verbs (4 %). It has to be noted that be copula is excluded in this study. The most common Linking verbs registered in the corpus are listed below in decreasing frequency:

1.appear 2. seem 3..become 4. portray 5. remain

As shown in the list, the variety of linking verbs found in the corpus is very limited. Linking verbs are not very pervasive in English texts, although their number of occurrences is more dominant in academic texts (Biber et al., 1999). Linking verbs serve as syntactic links that connect subject and subject complements on either side of the verbs

(Hinkel, 2004).

The most common Linking verbs are the be forms which occur over 20 times more than the other linking verbs (Biber et al., 1999). The list does not include the be verbs as they more often mark ‘stative constructions’ rather than mental processes and actions that take place in discussion sections. Linking verbs are commonly followed by adjectives or noun phrases, the former being more common that the latter. However, Hinkel (2004) voices concerns of overusing Linking verb + Adjective structure, as they may present the text as simplistic and too descriptive. The simple structures of Linking verbs can be

67 avoided if the informative phrase follows the subject while the adjective is attached before the subject.

Table 4.4 Concordance Lines with Linking verbs

among the many studies in various contexts, there seem to be other

seem others..

As explained earlier on, the data seemed to show that Cleo had…

Items in these areas also appear to be related to the notion of a

appear standard…

contribution generates laughter from the team members and appears

to be an effective strategy..

Table 4.3 shows examples of Concordance lines with Linking verbs taken from the corpus. They are often used in the present tense and employed as hedges (Hyland, 1998).

Linking verbs are associated with the process of reasoning, in which the writers do not want to appear too certain or conclusive. This method of hedging is commonplace in academic writing, and even more so in Humanities prose, where reports are made via persuasion.

4.2 Lexical Verbs and Verb Forms

RQ2: To what extent are the verb forms used in discussion sections in M.A dissertations?

There have been strong suggestions that the studies of verbs should take into consideration both lemma forms as well as verb forms. As proposed by Granger and

Paquot (2008, p. 17 ) “an exclusive focus on lemmas is liable to distort the picture and

68 hide some major differences between expert and learner use”. A further analysis into the use of verb types and forms can provide an insight into the differences in phraseological patterns favoured by either writer (Granger and Paquot, 2008). With heavy regard to such suggestions, the study also analyses the verbs in the verb form approach. Verbs forms can be analysed in five most basic forms; the VVB, VVN, VVG, VVI, VVZ and VVD.

35 31 30

25 23

20 14 15 12 11 9 10

5

0 VVB VVD VVG VVI VVN VVZ

Figure 4.2 Percentage (%) Breakdown of Verb forms

As seen in Figure 4.2, the writers employ verbs in VVN (31%) forms the most, followed by VVI (23%), VVG (14%), VVB (12%), VVZ (11%) and lastly VVD (9%).

VVN form indicates the use of past-participle form of the verbs (shown, seen) which can denote the use of either present perfect or past perfect tense. For reference, abbreviation forms in relation to verbs for CLAWS is also included in this chapter.

Table 4.5 CLAWS Horizontal Output Abbreviation

VVB base form of lexical verb e.g. SHOW,MAKE (except the infinitive) VVD past tense form of lexical e.g. SHOWED, verb MADE VVG -ing form of lexical verb e.g.SHOWING, MAKING

69 Table continued from page 69 VVI infinitive of lexical verb e.g to-SHOW, to-MAKE VVN past participle form of e.g. SHOWN, lexical verb MADE VVZ -s form of lexical e.g. SHOWS,

verb MAKES

4.3 Verb forms

The analysis of verb forms allows us to see important aspects of verb use that might otherwise be overlooked if the study only focuses on lemma forms. This is due to distortions that could manifest in two ways; lemmas with similar frequencies will hide overuse or underuse of certain verb forms, and underuse or overuse of certain verb forms affects the frequency of the lemmas (Granger and Paquot, 2008). In any case, an analysis of verb forms presents a more comprehensive measure in the analysis of verbs. Table 4.6 lists the five highest frequency verbs and the breakdown of the verb forms.

Table 4.6 Lemmas and Verb Form Breakdown

i. Lemmas ii. High usage iii. Low Usage iv. use v. VVI (to use) vi. VVB (use) show VVZ (shows) VVD (showed) find VVN (found), VVI (to find) VVB (find) see VVN (seen) VVZ (sees) make VVI (to make) VVZ (makes), VVB (make)

As seen in Table 4.6, certain verb forms are more prevalent than the others. The most popular verb forms are VVN followed by VVI for the Top 5 verbs. These verb forms appear to be used with high frequency in the corpus. VVZ, VVB and VVG are revealed to be underused. It is also revealed that certain verb forms are employed almost exclusively that no other forms of verbs are registered for that particular verb lemma. An example of this is the breakdown of lemma base, where the only verb form used for it is

70 VVN. The overall data on verb forms indicates that the writers’ partiality to VVN

(perfect) and VVI (infinitive) forms while severely underusing other forms.

4.3.1 Tense

It is suggested that most of the verb phrases are purposely tensed (Biber et al.,

1999). For example, in a corpus study of academic genre, the use of the present tense is exponentially prevalent than that of the past tense (Biber et al., 1999). One explanation for this occurrence is that of the functional value of the present tense in stating habitual and often repeated actions. Example 4.1 below illustrates the uses of the present tense for actions.

Example 4.1

1) The analysis depicts that the print media has taken the liberty to inform the

reader of the true nature of the report.

2) Kierzek (1996) proposes that a verb is a word that expresses action, existence

and occurrence by combining with a subject to make a sentence.

In an academic setting, the use of the present tense is viewed as commonplace as the research is not referred to in a specific time-continuum but rather seen as a continuing process that is neither in the past nor in the future. Rhetorical moves in the discussion sections such as reference to previous research, outcomes and explanation as well as making deductions based on the outcomes are relevant examples of the continuous process that develops in a study and thus the use of the present tense is prevalent in the academic writing; especially in the Discussion sections. In the present study, the present

71 tense is used in great frequency particularly with these verbs; show, suggest, appear, and state mainly for the purpose of stating the findings and outcomes, and referencing.

Concordance lines in present tense

Show Since the results show that L2 users are more motivated to use the

second language when their interlocutors do not switch to English,

classroom teachers can teach their students coping strategies for the

scenarios in which they do experience switches or how to avoid

experiencing switches altogether.

The use of legal borrowing shows the limitation of the Malay

language.

Suggest These results suggest that no one group had an advantage over the

other.

However, this finding suggests that the quality of sibling play may be

related to children's perception of their choice, which did correlate

positively with academic and social outcomes.

Appear However, it appears that for stress and pausing, the number of errors

decreased from the pre-test to the post-test.

On the contrary, questions asked to get information concerning the

identity of the prankster or the source appears towards the end of the

call once the prankster has informed the victim that he/she has

participated in a prank call.

72 State Meanwhile, Matthews also states that subordinating conjunctions

join dependent clauses to independent clauses.

Besides that, Wang (2006) also states that the Yes/No questions

restrict responses and impose more authority.

4.3.2 Aspect

The present perfect tense signals a continuous process of approaching the subject matter (Wallwork, 2011, as cited in Min, 2013). The perfect aspect can be used in the present and past tenses, but more notably in the present tense. A speaker of English uses a sentence in the present perfect when the information he is giving appropriately exemplifies or explains the topic of discourse (Inoue, 1979). An example is set out in

Example 4.2:

Example 4.2

The term often appears in a particular topic that is being discussed and presented in the text.

In Example 4.2, discuss is used in the present perfect to refer to the topic which has been discussed and presented earlier in the text. The present perfect is used to show how the problem has been approached from the past until the present day (Wallwork,

2011, as cited in Min, 2013). The present perfect tense indicates something that began in the past (i.e. when research first began in this area) and continues into the present.

The combination of the perfect aspect with a specific tense can create a complex verb form in meaning but one should bear in mind that only a few combinations of tenses and aspects are employed in academic prose. Specifically, according to Biber et al. (1999,

73 as cited in Hinkel, 2004) only 8% of all verb phrases in academic discourse are used in the perfect aspect. Various linguists have offered a number of explanations for the use of the perfect tense. Celce-Murcia & Larsen-Freeman (1999, as cited in Min, 2013) explains that the base meaning of perfect is ‘prior’ and they are often used in context to explain an activity in some other point in time. Examples in the form of concordance lines are shown below:

Example 4.3:

1) Another significant finding from the interviews is addressed by those dealing with

international students.

2) Furthermore, the essay writing that were administered in this study was an

argumentative essay which requires...

In both the examples given, the verb address and administer have been performed and completed at some point in the past, prior to when the writing of text takes place. In the ESL corpus, the perfect aspect is mostly used with actions that are necessary to be carried out in the process of conducting a study; for example, identifying and addressing problems, administering survey questions and measuring the scales of previous findings.

It appears that no distinction between the use of present and past perfect aspect has been made in the examples of their usage.

The quantitative variations of the verb forms indicate the writers’ partiality of different phraseological patternings. Clearly, ESL writers studied in the present corpus favour the VVN form, deviating from Biber’s (1999) observation as well as Granger and

Paquot’s (2008) study where the learners’ corpus (the ICLE), where the most frequently

74 used verb form is the VVI. VVI forms indicate the infinitive form of the lexical verbs (to see, to show). In the current learners’ corpus, the VVI is the second highest frequency verb form. The third verb form is the VVG (verb+ing). The least used form is the VVD.

Other than in historical or biographical texts, past tense verbs tend to occur in small numbers across academic fields (Quirk et al., 1985, cited in Hinkel, 2004).

4.3.3 Infinitives and gerunds

The percentage of verb forms in Figure 4.2 shows that VVI forms (infinitives) are more favoured compared to the VVG (forms). This is also true in the study by Granger and Paquot (2008) where it was found that the VVI forms generate more frequency than the VVG forms. Table 4.7 reveal common verbs for the highest frequency of VVI and

VVG forms respectively.

Table 4.7 Verbs in Infinitives and Gerunds

VVI (Infinitive) Frequency VVG (Gerund) Frequency

use 20 use 37

construct 18 make 28

produce 9 construct 26

The data shows that there are two verbs (use, construct) which are most frequently employed in both the VVI and VVG forms. As noted by Conti (2011), non-native writers especially, find the choice of the infinitive and the gerund as an ‘arduous grammar point’.

The findings from this study brings forth the old age question about whether to use the infinitive or the gerund for complements. Further analysis is performed through an examination of the concordance line for the verb, use.

75 Infinitive of use Gerund of use

The essay analysis showed that only According to the study, the

seven students attempted to use more than professionals are not able to practice

10% of the newspaper wordlist in their using the language.

writing.

They appear to have good The purpose of the advertisement

understanding in parts of speech and are is to enable the consumers to believe on

able to use the words correctly in the impact of using the products based on

elaborating their ideas. the positive language used.

Previous studies (Conti, 2011; Arseneau & Duffley, 2016) have noted that for certain purposes for the verb, use, the infinitive forms and gerund are generally interchangeable.

4.3.4 Passive and active voice

As discussed in the previous chapters, the use of the passive voice is generally seen as the convention in academic writing and much more common in academic prose although it is also noted that many academic writers are also partial to the active voice because it is more direct and concise (Biber et al., 1999). For example, a study of

Indonesian learners’ theses by Yannuar et al. (2014) shows that the active voice is used more frequently (64%) compared to the passive in the analysis of stance verbs (such as suggest, expect, show, predict and report). However, it must be noted that the rest of the stance verbs (36%) are constructed in the passive voice. In this study, the percentage of usage of both voices is almost equal. The percentage of the passive voice is calculated based on the occurrence of VVN forms while the active voice is identified by the use of

76 VVB, VVZ and VVD forms (refer to Figure 4.2) which amount to 31% and 32% respectively.

Biber et al. (1999) notes that both voices can be employed interchangeably, in which case the authors may choose a voice that can fulfil a certain purpose in discourse functions. In other words, both voices are useful and necessary and that academic writers need to equip themselves with the skills and the knowledge to apply both voices appropriately. The passive voice is constructed by placing the verb-to-be in the same tense as the active verb and replacing the active verb with the past participle form. The choice to use the passive voice also contributes to a greater frequency of the VVN form. Biber et al. (1999) remarks that academic writers are more partial to the active voice as they convey a direct and concise message while both voices are still considered useful and necessary in the academic context as they serve different purposes that could reflect the writers’ intent. Example 4.4 shows the concordance lines using the passive voice.

Example 4.4

1) Such variety has not reached a stabilised form of use accepted by all the members

in the speech community

2) The women will also try to look beautiful and gorgeous like what has been

depicted by the models in the television.

In both the examples, the passive voice is constructed by placing the verb-to-be in the same tense as the active verb. The active verb is changed into the past participle form. This method is often utilized to switch the subject of the verbs to become the agent of the passive verb. In many cases, the agent is introduced by using the preposition by.

77 As a rule of thumb, the passive voice is employed when the writer deems that the action is more important than the agent. This situation often occurs particularly in academic prose, reports and processes.

However, the more common reason to use the passive voice is to avoid mentioning the agent altogether. The agents in these instances are often the authors themselves, when, in the spirit of anonymity and conventionality chose the passive construct to avoid any reference to themselves. For these reasons, the use of the passive voice is generally considered as the ‘academic discourse convention’. Example 4.5 illustrates instances where the passive voice is employed in order to avoid mentioning the author.

Example 4.5

1) At the same time, such limitations cannot be avoided without incurring certain

cost.

2) These guidelines are a limitation to the framework as some of the categories

in the surface structure taxonomy cannot then be applied.

As mentioned previously, native writers tend to use the active voice more in their constructs despite their conventionalised use in academic writing. The frequent use of the passive voice could also indicate some cultural elements at play. Further discussion regarding cultural impact on academic writing will be discussed in Chapter 5.

4.4 Associated patterns

RQ 3: What are the associated patterns of lexical verbs used in discussion sections in M.A dissertations?

78 Further investigation of the verbs found in the corpus leads to the examination of the phraseological patternings that shape the verb clauses. As mentioned previously, the verbs tend to appear in phraseological forms. The structural patterns (based on Biber’s classification) that are observed in the present study are as shown in Table 4.8:

Table 4.8 Verb-based Lexical Bundles in Raw Frequency

Lexical bundle Raw Example of Concordance line frequency Passive verb + PP fragment 703 The theoretical framework was used in.. (VP) + that clause fragment 235 The findings shows that...

Table 4.8 shows verb-based lexical bundles in raw frequency. Note that for a relatively small corpus such as this, a raw frequency is often used (e.g., Altenberg, 1998;

De Cock, 1998, cited in Chen and Baker, 2010). Passive verb + PP fragment is more commonly used compared to the (VP) + that clause fragment.

While it is worthwhile to see that the raw frequency counts of each verb use and to compare the numbers in the three groups, the numbers themselves are preliminary for analyzing the patterns of ESL usage of the verb phrase without actual samples. Therefore, the tables should not be over-interpreted, but used as a complementary data, when scrutinizing the phenomena case by case with the actual student samples because only then, the numbers counted for each use would make sense.

4.4.1 Passive verb + PP fragment

Table 4.9 shows recurring pattern involving Passive verb + PP fragment.

Table 4.9 Passive Verb + PP Fragment in Raw Frequency

Cluster Frequency Example of Concordance line

79 Table continued from page 79

Passive verb + in 260 These factors were cited in....

Passive verb + by 226 Humor is often accompanied by...

Passive verb + to 128 It may have been aimed to....

Passive verb + on 89 The inference was based on...

As shown in Table 4.9, the verb-based pattern Passive verb + PP fragment is employed with a comparatively high frequency. The most common combination of

Passive verbs are with Preposition in followed by Preposition by, to and on. As noted earlier, passive constructs (VVN forms) are conventionalised in academic writing, as evidenced in the present corpus. Passive voice is commonly utilized in academic writing, to an extent that it can be seen that the academic discorse conventions are promoting such rhetorics (Hinkel, 2004b; Poole, 1991; Swales, 1990). Passive voice is used in academic writing as a platform that serves multiple textual functions in accordance to the author.

One of these is to project an academic indirectness, detachment, and objectivity that is requisite in English-language academic tradition, and particularly so in natural sciences and engineering (Hinkel, 1997, 1999, Johns, 1997). Based on a large number of corpus analyses of academic prose, the passive voice is ubiquitous and remains a prevalent feature of academic text in various disciplines (Biber, 1988; Hyland, 1996; Johns, 1997;

Swales, 1990). Example 4.6 shows the use of the Passive verb + PP fragment.

Example 4.6

1) The results in this study proved that code-switching is one of the appropriate

strategies to teach students with non-native English speaking background in the

school where the research was conducted.

2) Regarding the students interviews in this study, the findings are mostly in

accordance to the theory proposed by Crystal.

80 3) The first research question was formed to find out the types of questions that

are constructed in the Gotcha prank calls.

4) In the researcher’s opinion, this scenario could be associated with the

students’ self-perception of their own abilities.

It is important to note that the majority of the Passive verb + PP fragment combination is specially utilized to omit the agents or the subjects, with the exception of

Passive verb + by fragment. The concordance lines 1, 3 and 4 in Example 4.6 have chosen to omit the agent who are likely to refer to the researchers themselves which indicate detachment. Contrarily, concordance line 2 was clearly constructed to mention the agent.

The combination of Passive verb + in is most commonly used in the form of, cited in, by way of avoiding to mention the researcher. A similar approach is observed by using the Passive verb + to and the Passive verb + on where the most common combination is compared to and based on respectively. These patterns are commonly found in the academic genre; especially, the Humanities discipline where the academic prose tends to be persuasive and argumentative in nature, thus requires authors to compare and contrast their findings with previous works (Maroko, 2013).

Concordance line 2 in Example 4.4 presents a different approach in using the

Passive verb + PP fragment. In the example, the combination of Passive verb + by allows the writer to specify the agent by placing them as the objects instead of the subjects. It is interesting to note that the use of prepositions, including the by preposition in passive constructs indicates a somewhat contrary approach towards the agents of the phrase, but somehow to achieve the same goal; detachment and academic indirectness. On the one hand, in short passives with the preposition in such as shown in, the agents are not specified at all, though, by using the preposition by in a long passive, the authors are able

81 to specify an agent although it reduces the significance of the agents. In most cases of a research paper, the agent could refer to the researchers who are working the study, thus eliminating the need to mention them.

4.4.1.1 Short passive and long passive

Short passives generally recorded more use, compared to the long passive (Biber et al.,

1999) which can be employed in two forms; with two object prepositional verbs, corresponding to an indirect object of a ditransitive verb or prepositional object of one object prepositional verb. Example 4.7 shows a short passive with one prepositional object:

Example 4.7

1) The verbs are usually classified as lexical, copula and modal verbs.

2) They are given as an example of collocations.

3) The suggestion was received with mixed response.

In example 4.7, short passives are used with one prepositional object (example of collocation, mixed response). In the first example, lexical, copula and modal verbs are referred to as one prepositional object.

Ditransitive verbs are verbs that correspond with two objects, a direct and an indirect one. In the case of passive construction, it is possible to be formed by placing both the direct and indirect objects in the subject position. To make the explanation clearer, this study adopts Huddleston et al.’s (2002) classification of the objects which are first passive and second passive. The first passive is identified as the indirect object which is placed in the position of the subject while the second passive is identified when the direct object is placed in the position of subject. With the ditransitive verb structure,

82 Huddleston at al. (2002) propose that the first passive is more prevalent than the other.

Note that not all the verbs can be used as ditransitive verbs. The most common ditransitive verb found in the corpus is give. Example 4.8 exhibits concordance lines with ditransitive verbs.

Example 4.8

1) These repeating themes could have given Thelma the practice, experience

and ability to identify the forms that work best with specific problems and

questioners where they probably responded more positively to the advice

when imperatives and hints are used as Thelma manages to convey sincerity,

friendliness and formality simultaneously.

2) Mainly because very little attention have been given to the text producers’

choice of the words and the generic structure of the texts.

There could be a number of reasons why the writers have chosen to place the indirect object in such a away but it is generally seen that the formation of the first passive is seen to serve as an emphasis on the indirect object. Such emphasis could make readers more attune to the arguments the writers are making. In the example, it is seen that the writers choose to place the seemingly unimportant detail (These repeating themes, very little attention) as the subject but those details are actually the main point of the sentence.

Long passives (with a by-phrase) are used with less frequency than the Short passives, as they are much less common in academic constructs but evidently appear frequently in the present corpus. Long passives can easily be reconstructed with an active clause, although their use is much more motivated by these three principles: Information-

Flow Principle, End-Weight Principle and to place emphasis on an element of the clause

83 (Biber, 2006 p. 179). These principles assumed by Hinkel (2004) to serve as a cohesive chain where in context in which the agent is unknown or is rendered unimportant, the by- phrase can be omitted (in which case referred to as the Short Passive). Long Passives (as cohesive devices) taken from the corpus are shown in Example 4.9.

Example 4.9

1) vii...... vocabulary acquisition than those learners who are exposed to pre-modified

input only is confirmed by the findings of the study. All input conditions showed

reasonable level of receptive vocabulary...

2) ...features and the generic structure of the texts are significant resemblance of

the discourses drawn by the text producers in producing the texts. They create

the different schemas which are drawn not..

Example 4.9 presents the use of long passives as cohesive devices. Example 1, instead of placing the findings of the study as the subject, it is moved to the back as the object. In the next sentence, it is employed as the subject (all input) to ensure cohesion between the two sentences. A similar strategy is employed for Example 2 where the text producer is placed in object position and the next sentence starts with the pronoun they which refers back to the text producers.

A majority of the passive constructs are idiomatic, in this case, with the prepositions in and by which can be problematic for L2 learners, as noted by Atkinson

(1991) and Owen (1993, as cited in Hinkel, 2004). Contrarily, the advanced ESL writers in the present study appear to utilize both constructions in a similar frequency.

84 4.4.2 (VP) + that clause fragment

Among the patterns of verb forms, the (VP) + that clause fragment form has been a subject of interest for a large number of studies, in particular as part of Verb-based lexical bundles (Bal, 2010; Chen, 2010; Bungor 2016). It occurs predominantly in reporting clauses as noted by Charles (2006). The same observation was made by Hinkel

(2004) in all her examples of Report verbs followed by the complementiser that.

Previous studies on (VP) + that clause fragment have always focused on the writers’ stance and attitudes in reporting their claims (Hinkel, 2004; Charles; 2006; Liu,

2014). Therefore, this study also analyses the that construction from the reporting perspective. The table below lists the Report verbs that are most frequently used with that.

Table 4.10 Common Report Verbs

Report verb Raw frequency Report verb Raw frequency show 65 state 13 find 31 observe 9 reveal 30 prove 7 suggest 23

Table 4.8 shows the most common report verbs used with that construction found in the corpus. Note that the focus of this paper is the discussion section; hence, the smaller number and less variation of reporting verbs. The highest frequency report verb paired with that construction is show (n=65), followed by find, reveal and suggest. The high frequency of show in the corpus echoes concerns from previous studies that non-native writers are prone to repetition notably in verb use. Example 4.10 highlights the concordance line of show whose use is notably repetitive in the corpus.

85 Example 4.10

1) This shows that the minial use of emoticons in Twitter is in line with...

2) Their results showed that most of their subjects made errors in terms of

omission...

3) The present data shows that there is a difference on the length of tweets

by both writers

Examples 4.10 of concordance lines 1, 2 and 3 all reveal that show is commonly used to introduce data and findings i.e an inanimate subject. It also appears that the writers’ favour certain verbs to be paired with inanimate objects and vice versa. This phenomenon is explained in the later part of the chapter.

Hyland in his studies and publications (1999b, 2000b, 2002a, 2005, 2008) has been very keen to examine the writers’ stance and its relation to social interaction in academic writing, with specific focus on the analysis of reporting verbs. The examination of the writers’ stance is strongly associated with report verbs, as the verbs have to be chosen carefully in order to convey the writers’ rhetorical purposes. In the Discussion section, the writers are compelled to perform an evaluation of their own findings. In this case, an analysis of the Epistemic stance device (Biber, 2006, as cited in Ağçam, 2015) is most applicable, in particular the verb+ that clause. It was argued by Hyland (2004, as cited in Ağçam, 2015) that epistemic devices are salient elements in academic writing as they enable the writers to perform a self-evaluation of their own findings and statements and that readers are able to read the writers’ uncertainty of deference in subtext. Table

4.11 shows categorisation of the Report verbs into classification of Epistemic verbs.

86 Table 4.11 Categorization of Report Verbs as Epistemic Verbs

Certainty Likelihood

show, find, reveal, observe, state, Suggest

prove

In Table 4.11, the report verbs are categorised into 2 types of Epistemic verbs, one that conveys certainty and the other one that hints likelihood. 6 out of 7 verbs are categorised as certainty while the remaining suggest are placed in the likelihood category. It is safe to conclude that the population of the corpus is more partial to certainty verbs, which indicate their positive and confident attitude towards their own findings and statements.

Note that verbs feel and believe are also recorded in the form of that construction although they are not present in Biber’s (2004) register of Epistemic verbs. As discussed previously, ESL writers in this corpus are noted to use colloquialisms in the academic prose. Nevertheless, it could be an interesting endeavour to study deeper into this peculiarity. A similar finding was also observed in the study of Turkish Academic Corpus of English (TACE) by Ağçam (2015) in terms of a higher percentage of Certainty verbs and the presence of peculiar verbs such as believe. Example 4.11 shows concordance lines with verb feel and believe.

Example 4.11

1) The writers believe that the reason why errors were made in the subject verb

agreement...

2) The researcher feels that apart from the methodologies that can be used...

Further analysis into the concordance lines shows that the writers tend to use

Likelihood verbs to refer to their own statements, in the manner of hedging while

87 Certainty verbs, such as find and reveal are almost exclusively used to introduce hard facts such as findings and data. In humanities, the writers are obliged to make statements that could relate their findings to previous studies. This is especially true as remarked by

Hyland (2002, p. 11) in determining the distinction of citation and reporting culture of hard and soft sciences where the soft science is required to “engage in more recursive patterns of investigation which involve more diverse and less predictable and abstract subjects than those typically found in the sciences.” It has also been noted that non-native writers are more inclined to avoid strong verbs as to deflect from making ‘strong statements’. In this situation, it appears that both elements have come to play through the choice of the verbs feel and believe.

4.4.2.1 Tense of Reporting

Cluster patterns identification using WordSmith Tools (Scott, 1999) reveals that that is commonly paired with finite verbs which could indicate choice of tenses. Choice of tense signals varying attitudes and distance the writer projects based on their findings and statements (Swales, 1990). Tense alternation is also seen as a ‘strategic communicative device’ that allows writers to communicate their arguments to the readers (Sakita 2002, as cited in Chen, 2009). Subsequently, the choice of reporting tense may differ across chapters. In a study by Chen (2009) in a review of tense use in Literature review, it was found that the majority (70.6%) of the reporting verbs are in simple present forms, 8.9% in simple past and the other tenses account for 4.7%.

Table 4.10 Tenses of that construction Clause

Tense Raw Frequency Percentage (%) Present 169 57 Past 128 43

88 Table 4.10 shows a choice of tense for that construction in the Discussion sections of

M.A. dissertations. The simple present carries 57% while the simple past carries 43% respectively. Although the simple present is employed more frequently than the simple past, the difference is not very significant. Example 4.12 shows concordance lines with the simple present and the simple past.

Example 4.12

1) The second theme shows that perceptions of the local variety...

2) Most participants believed that some people have a natural tendency to..

The general convention of tense usage in citations and reporting may vary according to disciplines. Humanities favours the simple present and the Sciences tend to employ the past tense (Maroko, 2013). However, it is noted that academic construct requires the use of the present tense in the discussion of published theories and findings. Such published work is generally considered to be established knowledge and the use of the present simple reflects this (Wallwork, 2011). Example 4.13 identifies the use of the simple present tense.

Example 4.13

1) Therefore, this clearly shows that Malaysiakini provides a much more….

2) Swain (1995) argues that the processes involved in comprehending a

message…

The first concordance line exemplifies the use of the simple present across the corpus, as a conventionalized tense to report present data in their research. The second

89 example refers to the occurrence during an interview carried out by the author, in which case the simple past should be used. As remarked by Wallwork (2011, as cited in Min,

2013) “the past simple is required because the actions you describe took place in the past

(i.e. before you started to write your paper). The past simple also helps to distinguish what you did from what others have done”. The simple present is employed following the general convention of academic writing where it is used prominently across the corpus.

As identified in the second line in Example 4.12, the writer is referring to a published theory in the field of study, in which case the present tense is employed.

However, a high percentage of past tense use may be a point of concern. It appears that they also employ the past tense forms in a rather high frequency. It shows that the convention is not fully adhered to in this corpus. This finding supports Hinkel’s (2004) claim that non-native writers are partial to past tense narration when explaining and supporting their arguments. Example 4.13 exemplifies the use of both tenses in the discussion of their findings.

Example 4.14

1) In this study, the researcher was interested in investigating the reasons and

functions of code switching in a secondary school in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

The data was gathered from a questionnaire, observations and interviews that

elicit reasons and functions of code switching. The findings proved that teachers

and students used code switching in ESL classroom.

2) The premier objective of this study is to distinguish the different portrayal of two

90 different social actors in news reports of wife abuse, an issue of domestic violence.

The two social actors, who are the victims and the perpetrators, are being

portrayed differently by the text producers, who are reporting on the cases.

In Example 1, the writer chose to employ the simple past in the narration of her discussion. This writer’s choice may be explained that she follows the timeline, in which, the findings and the arguments are made during the process of data analysis, and not during the write up of the paper. Upon further examination, it was found that there has been an excessive generalization among renowned academic scholars with regards to the appropriate tense choice in academic writing. This view has been voiced by Min (2013) where she lists several generalizations regarding the use of the simple past in an academic context. On the one hand, Wallwork (2011) suggests that the simple past is used in the context of describing one’s findings. Other scholars such as Wray (2009) recommends that the simple past be used to refer to previous findings and statements in order to clearly situate the present study within the context of the established knowledge. Such a broad generalization is applicable across discourses and disciplines, and is often without specific examples in terms of discourse and verbs have left non-native writers to decide on sentence level tense alternation or paragraph level tense alternation (Min, 2013). In other words, writers may apply whichever tense they feel appropriate for a particular sentence or paragraph, often disregarding the consideration for discourse or context.

Example 4.15 highlights the occurrence of paragraph level tense alternation.

Example 4.15

1) Fairclough (1992b) claimed that, texts may be sincere as well as

manipulative. The disabled people have been positioned in limited ways which

echoes Croteau & Hoynes (2000:166) claim that the media engage in practices

91 that ‘define reality’. Social construction is a process of actively creating

meaning; media images do not simply reflect the world, they represent it

(Croteau & Hoynes, 2000) (cf. Section 1.7). Certain aspects of reality are

highlighted and others neglected in the process of text creation. Hence,

representations of the disabled can be incomplete and narrow. Sociologists,

social theorists and political economists building on the earlier works of such

as Marx, Weber, Habermas and Marcuse have cautioned on the increasing

penetration of the social by the economic in societies (Banarjee, 2006). To sum

up, Barnes (1997) considers the social model of disability being linked to two

traditions – social construction (cf. Section 1.7) and the ‘social creation’ of

industrial capitalism (Barnes, 1997:5) (cf. Section 2.5.2). Corbett’s (1996)

conclusion that the construction of social reality of the disabled community is

a social conditioning phenomenon and Foucault’s idea that disability is a form

of subjection (cf. Section 4.4.2) are in line with Fairclough’s claim that

language is a socially conditioned process, conditioned by other non-linguistic

parts of society.

2) Appeals to ethos were evidently employed at Introductory Stage though the

scammer still consistently maintained his credible persona throughout the

correspondence, especially by using language which connotes religious

orientation throughout the correspondence to maintain his religious persona,

as well as other appeals to logos to proof that he is trustworthy and reliable.

Essentially, this is expected as the moment the scammer loses the targets’ trust,

his entire scheme would end. His display credibility the form of trustworthiness,

high reputation and morally-upright attributes in the Introductory Stage also

92 serves the purpose of attracting the target (in addition to the other attractive

elements that he would have included in his fake online dating site profile).

In example 4.15, it is observable that the writer alternates the tenses with little consideration of the overarching discourse grammatical rules. In the first example, tense alternation occurs among verbs referring to previous studies. As mentioned earlier, it is generally proposed that the simple present is used to refer to previous literature as it implies the notion of established knowledge. However, in the first citation of the paragraph, it appears that the writer is using the past tense form while the following citations follow the discourse convention. The second example also exhibits a slight mix- up of tenses. While the writer seems to apply past tense to refer to his own findings, one verb lose is employed in present tense.

The perplexing ways scholars have outlined tense usage appears to cause confusion among the writers within this context. One needs to bear in mind that the broad generalization of tense usage in academic genre need to conform to the discipline in which they are employed. Otherwise, tense mix-up as highlighted in the examples could occur.

Other factors that could contribute to problematic tense use is lack of intuition on the writers’ part, primarily with writers from tenseless L1 background (Hinkel, 2004) such as the population in this corpus. In her study of speakers of tenseless languages such as

Chinese and Japanese, she identified that writers from such background find that the simple past is the easier tense of the English language to acquire, thus promoting their use in writing.

93 4.4.2.2 Animate vs Inanimate subjects

The v_that patttern is also indicative of reporting and referencing culture in the corpus population. In referencing, Hinkel (2004) argues that the animacy of the subject

(human or non-human) does not in any way affect the grammaticality of the reporting clause. However, for many writers, especially from the L2 background, citing an inanimate subject may be considered ungrammatical. The table below show breakdown of subjects of Report verbs into animate and inanimate subjects.

Table 4.12 Subject of V_that construction by frequency

Verb Raw Animate Inanimate frequency suggest 39 7 32 show 60 1 59 argue 9 8 1

Table 4.12 illustrates the choice of subject for select v_that phrases. The concordance lines from the corpus suggest writers’ inclination to pair verbs according to the animacy of the subjects. The corpus employ V (show) that with largely inanimate subjects, particularly referring to findings and tables. Argue are dominantly paired with animate subjects and suggest are used with both types of subjects as illustrated in Example

4.16.

Example 4.16:

1) Table 4.1 shows that there are certain..

2) Although Child (1992) argued that it was not easy for

3) The author suggested that formality at..

94 4) The data suggests that the person..

This result proposes that the writers do not have issues regarding the animacy of the subjects despite some researchers’ concerns, although they do discriminate the choice of verbs to use with either animate or inanimate subjects.

A further analysis of subject animacy and reporting verbs reveals a peculiar pattern of the V_that clause tense. The patterns show a link that indicate that the present tense is largely employed when reporting the present data (inanimate) while the past tense is used when citing previous works. The simple present in the citations could reflect the current state of knowledge and the present implications of research findings that form part of the character of knowledge construction in the humanities and social sciences.

However, it is noted that academic construct requires the use of the present tense in discussion of published theories and findings. Such published work is generally considered to be established knowledge and the use of the present simple reflects this

(Wallwork, 2011).

4.5 Summary

The chapter has presented the findings from the corpus. The findings are divided into three subchapters which are verb types, verb forms and verb patterns. Identification of verb types is based on Hinkel’s (2004) classification of academic verbs. The present study examined and analysed the use of lexical verbs in the Discussion section of M.A dissertations. The findings are parallel to previous research where Activity verbs are the most frequently used verbs. However, it differs greatly in high frequency of

Mental/Emotive verbs, followed by Report Verbs, Logical-Semantic verbs and Linking verbs. The analysis of the verb forms that the ESL writers in the corpus favoured showed that the VVN forms were the most favoured, followed by VVI, VVG, VVB, VVZ and

95 lastly VVD. The results indicate the writers’ tendency to employ the passive voice in their writing, which is generally avoided by ESL and other non-native writers in other studies despite its conventionalised use in the academic discourse. The verbs associated patterns were carried out through the analysis of Passive+PP and V-that clauses. It was found that the Passive voice is frequently followed by PP in and by. It indicates the writers’ differing methods of reducing the visibility of the subject and thus reducing its significance. In both instances of PP in and by, it is clearly presented that the writers employ this method to comply to conventions of academic writing which is objectivity and detachment on the writers’ part. The analysis of V_that pattern showed writers’ referencing and reporting culture of the corpus population. The corpus revealed a tendency to discriminate verb types according to the animacy of the subject. Common V_that patterns with verb SHOW,

ARGUE and SUGGEST revealed that SHOW is almost exclusively used with inanimate subjects, ARGUE is used with human subjects and SUGGEST is used with either types.

A more thorough discussion on significant findings from the analysis is provided in

Chapter 5 along with the impact of the findings and the pedagogical implications of the present study.

96 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSION

5.1 Introduction

This study focuses on examination of lexical verbs and lemmas as well as patterns highly associated with verbs. In the previous chapter, lexical verbs are classified into five types of verbs, verb forms are examined and common verb patterns are identified. Lexical verbs, while highly salient in any forms of writing, especially in academic writing has received considerably less focus. Lexical verbs are particularly relevant in use during discussion where arguments and persuasion are organized through manipulation of verbs.

The corpus, which consists of M. A dissertation, follows more subjective approach to making conclusion. Unlike the hard sciences, verbs are employed as tools to help readers to understand their arguments and to an extent, encourage them to agree with the authors.

Therefore, it is essential that use of verbs is examined closely to reveal how they make an impact to the discussion in corpus.

5.2 Types of verbs

The Top 100 verbs identified in the corpus are categorized into 5 types of verbs-

Activity, Report, Mental-Emotive, Logico-Semantic and Linking verb. The order of the most common verbs by category is Activity, Mental-Emotive, Report, Logico-Semantic and Linking Verbs.

It is concurred that Activity verbs are generally more prevalent in many genre of writing, this includes academic prose. Activity verbs are usually used to explain various process and procedures implemented during a study thus making them more salient particularly in the methodology chapter (use, employ, produce). In discussion section, these verbs are also quiet prominent. The highest frequency Activity verb is use, which is appears to be overused in the corpus. This is because the discussion follows certain

97 pattern in which they narrate the process occurring in the methodology section in order to describe their findings. It is also worth noting that the subject of study in most the dissertation are related to people and their language use, and these factor contribute to high usage if use ( ..use the language to..) Interestingly, the verb employ, which are essentially synonyms, are also highly common. Other synonyms of use such as apply and utilize did not make the list. Second most common Activity verb is show, which are used to refer to the findings and data from their own study. In Discussion section, it was found that simple Activity verbs such as make, take and get are not often used on their own but in collocational forms such as make sure, take place etc. Language scholars have cautioned against using this form of verbs, as they signify colloquialism and inaccuracy in reporting. Swales (2004, as cited in Granger and Paquot, 2008) argues that no matter how complex the data is, the use of informal English may render it too simplistic. This paper intends to question the motive behind using these phrases as they can be easily replaced by more succinct and precise verbs (make sure to ensure). However, it is not possible without interviewing the corpus population.

Mental-Emotive verbs occurs second in frequency after Activity and followed by

Report verbs. This particular finding in itself is quite alarming as Emotive-Mental verbs are noted to be sparsely used in academic construct (Biber, 2009). Academic piece should normally incite confidence in their findings and to register large number of such verbs can be a cause for concern. On the other hand, it appears that this phenomenon is rather a normal occurrence after taking into account these two variables; field of study and the corpus population.

Mental-Emotive verbs are noted as subjective markers and they can be manipulated to affect tentativeness and uncertainty. Aptly, the Humanities is the study of human and their idiosyncrasies, and in this the results and findings should not be taken as

98 definite. It is crucial that the arguments and conclusions are not presented too strongly as the results could easily be interpreted and manipulated in a different direction.

Researchers could make arguments and suggestions for their conclusions, though they are still subject to interpretation and persuasion.

The corpus population consists of Malaysian ESL writers; whom by all account and purpose are considered non-native writers. Non-native writers are found to have the tendency to be vague and ambiguous in their writing. The reason for this could be cultural; the Malaysian cultures frown upon appearing too confident and assertive. It could be that they worry that they might repel the readers if they appear too strong or they want to communicate their empathy. In this way, the mental-emotive verbs are great tools to make their discussion appear less assertive and more empathetic. The cause for concern for language teachers and instructors alike are the use of conversational verbs in academic writing. Verbs such as feel and believe are known as conversational verbs because they are almost exclusively used in conversations, and rarely in formal, academic prose.

Perhaps it is one of the method employ to gain readers’ empathy, or they are more exposed to informal language use that they find it acceptable employ these verbs in their academic writing. This paper suggests than the reason behind the use of conversational verb is the former rather than latter, considering the advanced ESL population of this corpus.

Logical-semantic verbs are employed to show relationship between actions and event or cause and effect (Halliday, 1994, as cited in Hinkel, 2004). As shown in the findings, this type of verbs often occurs in collocational expressions. This result is also shared by Hinkel (2004) in her list of Logical-Sematic verbs.

99 Verb Example of Expression

Cause Cause concern, cause problems, cause incovenience

Combine Combine to do xxx, combined effort/action, combined

with xxx

Develop Develop an idea, develop an illness, develop a

relationship

(Taken from Hinkel, 2004)

In view of this finding, Nation (2001) and Wray (2002) suggest learning of collocational expression in context. Contextually learning for verbs such as these is crucial as they are hardly encountered in other genres, to the extent that some expressions are only specifically found in academic texts.

Linking verbs are more prevalent in academic text than other written genres. However, the most popular form of linking verb is the be form. Due to this, there is little variety of linking verbs, although their use is dominant. The most common linking verbs are appear and seem, which are also widely used in this corpus. The linking verbs employed in this corpus appear to serve two purposes, as both linking verbs and hedges. Hedges are widely used in academic writing, even more so in the Humanities. Some scholars encouraged the use of hedges in order to minimize the overly strong suggestion and overgeneralization.

5.3 Usage of verb forms

Overusing and underusing certain verbs or verb forms are also an area of interest among language scholars, especially in non-native writing. As pointed out earlier, an observation that is shared by many scholars is that non-native writers often display limited vocabulary range to the point of repetition in compensation of their limited vocabulary

100 and thinking in L2 whereas their Native counterpart are more prone to variation (Jin,

2008). Based on her own study, Hinkel (2004) suggests that ESL writers’ texts tend to be built on restricted vocabulary range, to the point where their writing appears repetitive and constrained. While it is true that some verbs tend to repeat itself in academic discourse, such as relatively simple verbs such as make, do and look, and some verbs are identified as the common academic verbs (e.g identify, apply, investigate), there are limits as to when it can appear overuse or underuse in an academic prose. Another study on lexical verbs, more specifically reporting verbs at a local university by Manan and Mohd

Noor (2014) reveals by that non-native writers are prone to repeat certain category of verbs compared to other categories of reporting verb in their theses.

In this study, the most oft repeated verbs are from the Activity verb category; use and show. The higher frequency of use for these verbs indicate lack of variety of other synonyms which can easily replace these verbs. Table 5.2 exhibit synonyms for verbs use and show;

Table 5.1 High Frequency verbs and synonyms

Verb Synonyms

Use Appropriate, employ, adapt, utilize

Show demonstrate, display, exhibit, present, reveal, expose

(Taken from thesaurus.com)

Further reading into lexical choice of non-native writers reveals contrasting findings in previous literature. While some studies argue that the more specific words the writer uses, the more proficient they are, contrastive view states that as more time spent of in studying a language, the words used become less specific. To clear the contentious arguments, Crossley et al. (2011) counted the number of different words, which resulted

101 in the conclusion that advanced learners use more specific words and different ones, where beginners use general words and have limited lexical variety.

5.4 Analysis of Verb forms

Previous studies have suggested that writers from non-native background of various proficiency levels displayed the tendency to avoid certain verb forms and structures. As evidenced by a study by Hinkel (2004), novice learners tend to avoid VVN forms due to their more complex sentence structure. It is also possible to hypothesize that the higher the proficiency of the writer, they are able to employ more variety of verb forms. This paper suggests that this hypothesis could be true to an extent, as shown by the findings of the variety of verb forms used. The population of this corpus is of advances

ESL learners where they show no avoidance of any forms of verbs. They are also more partial to VVN forms, which involves complexity in structure but is generally considered academic prose convention. Although there appears to be underuse and overuse of certain verb forms, their use follows the genre rhetoric, where VVD forms are sparsely used. As such, the hypothesis is true to the extent that the frequency of verb forms are highly dependable to the rhetoric and conventions where in this case, avoidance of certain verb form does not necessarily indicative of level of proficiency but rather the intended meaning and function.

5.5 Tense and Aspect

Verb forms and lemmas are a source of great research analysis. Through verb forms, choice of tense, aspect and voice could be examined. It is acknowledged that present tense is more prevalent in academic writing. It is also true in this study where

102 Present tense is employed more frequently than Past tense. The Past Tense is almost exclusively used in historical piece or biographical texts and they tend to appear in very small number in academic text. The occurrence of Past Tense in this corpus is considerably high in number thus further analysis is carried out. It is found that the writers favor narration as part of their discussion process. For example, significant occurrences

(the interviewee suggested that…) during an interview is narrated in the discussion in order to create a cohesive discussion. This could have been avoided if the writer applies passive voice in place (It is suggested that…).

Choice of passive and active voice provides great research avenue. Many scholars have delved into this notion and a number previous research has arrived to contradictory conclusions. On the one hand, active voice is encouraged in academic writing due to its straightforward and precise nature. Contrarily, scholars consider passive voice to be the discourse convention. Passive voice enables writers to distance themselves from their writing, thus creating an illusion of objectiveness and detachment that shapes academic writing. It is suggested that novice writers, regardless of L1 background tend to create excessive writer visibly in their writing (Neff et al, 2004, as cited in Granger and Paquot,

2008). Writer’s visibility is to be avoided as the subject matter should the main focus.

Aside from creating an objective and indirect piece of academic prose, Passive voice also serves a textual function by forming cohesive links in sentences. This is achieved by using long passives. This method allows writers to use complex sentences while keeping the readers aware of the flow. Considering these arguments, writers should take deep consideration in which voice to use that is reflective of their intent. Previous literature has revealed that non-native writers tend to avoid using passive voice due to its more complex sentence structure. The fact in the present study finds the ESL writers in the corpus employ more passive voice renders the argument quite contentious. In any way, the findings could differ depending to many variable, one that include writers’ proficiency,

103 L1 background etc. It is more likely that novice writers tend to avoid passive voice while advanced writers, as are the population of this corpus, are able to apply both voices appropriately. For example, a study of Chinese learner by Hinkel (2002) noted that they face particular difficulty in constructing passive voice as the Chinese language does not have ‘syntactically-derived’ passive forms. Different voice may cater to specific discourse function, but in some cases they may very well interchangeable. It would be prudent for writers to equip themselves with knowledge and skills to apply both voice accordingly.

It is critical that the tense and aspect are employed consistently throughout the writing as consistency of tense and aspect generally the markers of highly proficient writers.

However, example of inconsistent use of tense and aspect is found in this corpus which is generally a more prevalent problem among lower proficiency writers. In a study of Thai

ESL writers, Pongsiriwet (2001) noted that inconsistency in verb structures, possibly caused by random change in verb structure for example inconsistent use of tense would cause understanding on the readers’ part, as well as alter the intended meaning of the verbs. These elements would undoubtedly cause irreparable damage to the overall quality of the writing. With regards to this scenarios, it is suggested that ESL writing instructors teach and have students practice making natural shifts and flow of the verb structures so as to make their writing more comprehensible.

5.6 Common verb patterns

Language patterns or phraseology has been studied extensively in recent years, due to its pervasive and salient nature. Learning language in chucks is seen as a more applicable method in language acquisition. In academic writing notably, extensive research, especially corpus-based has learned that language is more often appears in

104 phrases and collocates, thus led to compilation of academic collocations. In the scope of this study, Biber’s classification of verb-based bundles are employed, although after much deliberation (frequency of usage, focus of study), only two are examined; Passive

+ Preposition fragment and Verb + that construction.

It is very difficult to apply general patterns in use of EAP verbs. Although there are notably growing number of studies focusing on the lexico-grammatical patterning of

EAP vocabulary, they appear to be lacking suitability (Granger, 2006). On the one hand, some studies are very specific in their focus, such as study of colligation in specific field of ESP. On the other, there have been studies which identifies very broad number of linguistic patterns, such as patterns of tenses. As a result, learner and instructors alike are not able to apply the findings from these research pedagogically. In this manner, they lose their real-life application. Another point to note, as remarked by Granger (2006) is that phraseological studies have mostly focused on analysis of native-speakers use which another researcher has also voiced concern over. Flowerdew (1998, as cited in Granger,

2006) proposes that pedagogical implications of a study need to be in correspondence to the corpus population under analysis. This allows for adequate understanding of the population weakness or inadequacy where if measured properly, will only cause further problems. An example of possible scenario arising from mismatch implication is emphasis on teaching frequent patterns which learners are already familiar with, thus encouraging overuse on the learners’ part.

It is also proposed by Granger (2006) that learners use of verbs in academic writing are not mainly distinguished by the choice of verbs per se, but rather the combination of patterns in which the verbs are placed in. Studies have found that in some learner’s corpus,

(Nesselhauf, 2005; Granger, 2006) the lexico-grammatical patternings of highly salient verbs appears to quite distinctive compared to their native counterpart particularly in

105 active-passive alternation. Novice writers specifically are prone to use verbs in pattern.

It is important to bear in mind that these verbs have their own ‘preferred lexico- grammatical company’. For example, stock phrases for report verbs are almost consistently paired with that. Table 5.2 highlights these examples.

Table 5.2 Stock Phrases for Report Verbs

Report verbs Proposes that Suggest

Smith’ study Argues Reports (Adapted from Hinkel, 2004)

As discussed earlier, the writers in the corpus are more partial towards passive voice. Passive voice is used with various prepositions with combination of Passive + in being the most frequently used (as in cited in).

(VP) + that clause fragment occurs in relatively high frequency in the corpus. It is typically used in as reporting verb, as suggested by previous literature. Selection of verb in (VP) + that clause fragment could be interpreted in many directions. One of them is the link between choice of verbs as epistemic device. It is proposed that choice of verb could indicate the level of confidence (certainty vs likehood) of the writers in relation to their statements. Readers can also employ this knowledge to gauge writers’ feeling in regards to their choice of verbs. The study finds that certainty verbs occur more pervasively, although not by much. It is pointed out by Hyland (2002) the soft sciences are more partial to use likelihood verbs compared to the hard sciences. This is due to the patterns of reporting in the soft science in which findings need to be linked to previous studies. No two studies are the same thus arguments could only be made by persuasion.

106 Such nature that is related to the discipline, and the compounding factor of non-native writers have produced the unlikely verbs that are feel and believe. The present study has tried to investigate the link between the choice of Epistemic verbs and the source of report but no clear link has emerged. At first it would largely appear that the certainty verbs such as show may be exclusively paired with inanimate subject (data, finding etc) but findings based on the verb suggest deny that particular conclusion. However, it is prudent to conclude that while there are examples of likelihood verbs employed with inanimate subject, the combination of certainty verbs and inanimate subjects is more prevalent than the other way around.

5.7 Summary of discussion

The most common verbs employed in the corpus is the Activity verb, followed by

Mental-Emotive, Report, Logical Semantic and lastly Linking Verb. The higher occurrence of Emotive verbs raised concerns over the objectivity of academic prose. This finding, however, is also reflected in other studies where non-native writers are found to be more partial to use Emotive verbs. Analysis of verb forms allows us to see the tense and aspect favoured by the corpus population. In general, the corpus maintains the conventionalized use of passive voice in an effort to achieve academic detachment and objectivity. This finding is contrary to previous studies where they suggest that non-native writers tend to avoid complex sentences that characterize passive sentences. Regardless, overuse of passive voice could signal certain concerns when use of active voice more promoted for academic constructs that makes for more concise and profound read. Lastly, are identified as the most common verb-based patterns in the corpus. As discussed earlier, passive voice is the familiar voice in academic writing. Choice of preposition paired with passive voiced are relatively varied with highest combination with preposition in and by.

107 These two prepositions are most commonly used to refer to previous studies or the author themselves

.

5.8 Pedagogical Implications

The findings from the study could pinpoint to certain deficiencies in the current situation that needs further improvement. Note that these implications are based on analysis of small and very specific population of a corpus thus may not reflect the general scenario.

5.8.1 Academic Wordlist

Compilation of high-frequency academic words is has proven to be quiet in trend in recent years to cater to developing and expanding English academic writers. One of the most prominent academic wordlist is one created by Averil Coxhead for her M.A thesis in 2000. Others include Pearson Longman Academic Word List and New Academic

Word List. The Coxhead Academic Word List consists of 570 word families which are chosen based on frequency in the Academic corpus, across all academic fields. The list is designed to exclude most common English words. This method of compilation allows author to exclude words that are highly salient in daily conversation but hardly present in academic writing. The primary purpose of the Academic Wordlist is to serve students at tertiary level where the words are highly associated with academic learning and writing.

Similar wordlists are also very popular among learners where learner find them very useful to assist them in their academic pursuit. The list however does not provide indication of word category membership, for example words such as conduct, present or

108 study which can function as verbs and nouns. Therefore, it is critical that these lists include word categories or perhaps a list of academic verbs are specially compiled.

In response to the aforementioned issues, this paper is an attempt to address them in a pragmatic manner. One underlying characteristic of this this study is that it has chosen a specific population in mind. In this case, the writers are highly immersed in the academic setting, having to write up academic papers and dissertations. They also make for valuable research focus in which the results are likely to address some of the issues they are having.

Also, by focusing on more generic verb types and forms that are derived from the corpus itself, the findings will be more useful and reflective of the corpus. In this manner, this study distinctive from other studies whereby the focus is often solely on highly frequent

EAP words. Having discussed this matter at length earlier, the most frequent verbs found in the corpus do not necessarily coincide with the academic verb lists (believe, feel).

These sort of finding will prove to be invaluable source of examination in an effort to understand and eliminate the problem. The process of compiling academic verbs involves tenuous process of analyzing and categorizing large data. With the advancement of technology, larger data can be processed thus ensuring reliable results that are applicable to specific genre. However, there are certain issues the need fixing in order for the results to make great impact. As discussed previously, it is not a matter of lack of effort in compiling the most comprehensive EAP guideline, but there is a small problem in adjusting the balance of focus of the research so that they could make greater impact pedagogically. Insufficient knowledge of EAP verbs is a serious handicap for learners as it prevents them from expressing their thoughts in all their nuances and couching them in the expected style. By exposing the list of lexical verbs or EAP verbs to the learners and writers, their thoughts and emotions and predicate meanings can be conveyed into written text and consequently without a doubt, an imperative first step, but unless it is set off with a detailed depiction of their use, outcomes are bound to be extremely unsatisfactory.

109 Furthermore, the use of the list could benefit learners in avoiding repetition, as exhibited from the findings of this paper as well as previous studies.

5.8.2 Teaching of Grammar

The present study has noted some grammar inaccuracy and inconsistency that occurs even in advanced ESL writing. This occurrence has raised the of the old age question of whether grammar teaching is still applicable for ESL learners at tertiary education level or more specifically advanced ESL. It has been remarked by previous researchers that many ESL instructors have more concerns over content and structure of academic writing instead of going back to the basics of grammar which is assumed to have been exposed earlier in their L2 education. However, it is also safe to assume that some advance ESL learners might have received less than adequate of exposure in grammar rules, especially for academic genre which is notably more intricate and complex.

Bearing in mind of these dilemmas, it is prudent to conclude that grammar should be taught in accordance to the genre, in that specific curricula is tailored to the needs and requirements of academic genre. This paper suggests that grammar is viewed as part of the content and organization of an actual academic writing task.

As discussed in RQ 2, usage of tense and aspect of verbs in academic writing is reflection of the writers’ ability to modulate multiple meanings and functions, and choose the most discourse accurate verb forms. The outcomes of these complicated process is a coherent and cohesive piece of writing. In other words, teaching English verb tense and aspect in this case would not refer to simply teaching the grammatical concepts of each verb structure by defining each form, listing its usages, or having practice drills for

110 multiple choice questions. Rather, it would be linking verb usages to the discourse-level features and the content of the essay so as to help students build up logical and well- organized ideas in a coherent manner.

Familiarity with discourse-specific grammatical features will enable learners to create more sound and logical arguments, while avoiding ambiguous and vague structures. The open secret to achieve consistency in writing lies in the way the relationship is built between idea which involves modulation of verbs specifically. Witte & Faigley (1981) claims writing quality to depend greatly on the discourse-level features that “lie beyond sentence boundaries involving the underlying relations between ideas which allow a text to be understood” (as cited in Pongsiriwet, 2001, p.87). Therefore, it would be greatly beneficial for learners to be explicitly taught discourse-level verbs in terms of time, aspect and tone as they could shape the cohesive and coherentness of the end product. Thus, giving explicit instructions on understanding and using English verb tense and aspect would not be “teaching grammar” but would rather be a practical application of integrating grammar with content and structure which will improve NNS students’ writing proficiency.

5.8.3 Explicit teaching of Phraseology and Collocation

Previous chapter has described the enormity and ubiquitous nature of phraseology, and that there is no disputing the fact that it is essential in the process of language learning. As Gitsaki (1996) stated in her thesis, the importance of phraseological aspect of linguistics development and communicative competence for L2 learners have long been underscored by linguists and language teachers alike, very much so that they are endorsing teaching and learning of salient language patterns and collocations in a language classroom. On the other end of the spectrum, it is suggested

111 that non-native learners face particular difficulty in producing appropriate word combinations because of their lack of collocational knowledge (Howarth, 1998). An empirical study on the knowledge of collocations among different groups of ESL or EFL learners have confirmed their dilemma. A study by Li (2005) in a Taiwanese college of

EFL context found inconsistency in the collocational errors made and their perceived knowledge of collocations. Liu (1999b) found that the EFL students had difficulties in producing correct collocations is attributed to the lack of the concept of collocation.

Insufficient knowledge of collocation encourages learners to resort to strategies such as synonym, paraphrasing, avoidance, and transfer (Farghal and Obiedat, 1995). Fan (2009) claims that the ‘idiosyncratic’ nature of collocation is the cause for errors in ESL learners.

She cited Halliday’s (1996) example that ‘strong’ and ‘powerful’ are synomymous, one can only refer to ‘tea’ and ‘strong’ and not ‘powerful tea’.

Consequently, on a separate level, collocation has been considered as a separate level of vocabulary acquisition. Bolinger (1976) argues that we learn and memorise words in chunks and that most of our "manipulative grasp of words is by way of collocations". It has been argued that the teaching of collocations facilitates vocabulary building for University-bound ESL students (Smith 1983). Smith (1983), in his paper illustrates a type of exercise for the teaching of collocations that combines both paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations between words. Realising the foreign language learner's difficulties in learning vocabulary, Cowie (1978) stresses the importance of the compilation of English dictionaries "in which collocation and examples play a separate but complementary role". Cowie points out that "meaning is not the only determinant of the extent and semantic variety of collocating words.... The constraint may be situational".

Here he emphasized the role of semantic elements are not the only determining factors that define collocation but rather a factor among many others. A such, inclusion of

112 collocational items in the dictionary may provide for a wholesome learning experience for ESL learners.

5.8.4 Consciousness-raising activity via data-driven learning (DDL)

A contrary approach to teaching of phraseology could also be a handy approach for teaching in learning. It has been discussed preciously that explicit teaching and learning of phraseology could be a way to go but one could consider employing an implicit and subtle method in introducing phraseology through DDL.

One of the benefits of using corpus-based materials is discussed by Hunston and

Francis (2000, p. 268), "If the learner wishes to sound 'natural', 'idiomatic', or 'native-like', it is argued, he or she needs to use the collocations, the phraseologies and the patterns of

English that native speakers automatically choose". The knowledge of collocations has been widely recognised as an important aspect in language learning (Howarth, 1998;

Nation, 2001). They agreed that the “appropriate use of collocations enables the learners to speak more fluently, makes their speech more comprehensible and helps them produce more native-like utterances” (as cited in Hong et al., 2011, p. 2) and therefore plays a very important role in Second Language Acquisition (Sinclair, 1991; Howarth, 1998; Nation,

2001; Durrant & Schmitt, 2010). Cortes (2004), for example, notes that the proficient language use is marked by use of collocations and fixed expressions, and approvingly quotes Haswell’s (1991) claim that as writers grow more mature in terms of their writing, their use of collocations will grow in numbers as well. Similarly, in their studies of the development of collocational knowledge in non-native writers, both Nesselhauf (2005) and Kazsubski (2000) assume that increased proficiency will correlate with increased use of conventional collocations. It is established that native speakers share a substantial body of formulaic sequences thus it is the second language speaker's ability to gain

113 collocational knowledge that determines, in part, language learning success. Granted, achieving sufficient collocational knowledge is not as simple as we would like to imagine.

In addition, there are certain verb structures that are more complex than the others, which are also difficult to teach in a traditional classroom. Language environment is also one of the elements that separates non-native speakers’ ability in utilising collocations to their native counterpart. Native speakers are able to apply the collocational knowledge easily as they recognized the formulas as unit with clearly defined functions, due to vast exposure of the target language (Ellis et al., 2008). Contrarily, non-native speakers, less exposed to the language, flounders in using collocations. Non-native can only absorb this knowledge if they were immersed in a speaking community where they can observe and imitate (Wray, 2002).

At this juncture, it appears that DDL approach to phraseology could be the revolutionary step forward. Bearing the learners’ as well as instructors’ needs in mind, researchers have been looking this aspect of language that could help non-natives achieve similar competency as their native counterparts. Previous studies have concurred the suggestion that the frequency-driven formulaic expressions found in native expert writing can be of great help to learner writers to achieve a more native-like style of academic writing, and should thus be integrated into ESL/EFL curricula. A study by Ellis et.al

(2008) further reaffirms the benefits of formulaic sequences whereby he also advocates the use of academic language formulas in EAP instructions. In his study, he triangulates data from three different perspectives; psycholinguistics, education and ESL. Through that study, he successfully proves that the study of formulaic language is relevant from all three perspectives. In response to these findings, consciousness-raising activity can be beneficial especially for advance learners in improving their collocational knowledge.

Consciousness-raising’ is an important element in creating awareness with regard to collocations and this has been widely acknowledge and suggested by many previous

114 researchers (Howarth, 1996; Hill et al., 2000; Lewis, 2000; Woodlard, 2000). This type of activity is especially valuable in assisting learner to actively note and evaluate the forms and functions of lexical bundles and allow them to use the phrases in their own writing accurately and effectively. For novice writers, these activities can help them to notice the similarities and differences of these bundles to their first language, and avoid making errors related to interference of their L1. Use of corpora and concordance to assimilate learners to ‘real-worlds’ language use has been experimented on for many years and results have indicated positive developments towards teaching and learning of writing (Lu, 2002). In his study, it is noted that that subjects responded that DDL had improved their knowledge of the form, meanings, and actual usages of legal English sentences. DDL increased their knowledge of prepositional rules and the inductive learning activities helped them become more independent students.

Finding from previous studied have suggested that DDL method have helped them in increasing their awareness in the variety of meanings and usages collocations and colligations. The specific way that this is achieved is through explicit learning of concordance lines where their noticing skill is tested. These findings have led researchers such as Ellis et al. (2008) and Wray (2002) to remark the sustainability for research in these areas. However, currently there is still lack of notable research emerging from this area, particularly ones that provide empirical evidence to encourage further study.

Another researcher, Koosha and Jafarpour (2006) pinpoints the need of the study of phraseology and collocation to have tight link with L1. In other words, comparative study with L1 should be reference point for any studies in this area. Present study has taken this into consideration at earlier stage of research but it was not encouraged. However, as showed elsewhere in this study, this researcher does not deny the fact that some other factors, for example task types, learner proficiency, and level of education still play an influential role in influencing complete acquisition of phraseological knowledge.

115

5.9 Conclusion

This study has focused on lexical verb use among ESL advanced learners in a university in Malaysia. The results from this study highlights a few implications for EAP classrooms as well as suggestions for future research. The first suggestion that this paper would like to put forth to encourage the use of academic wordlists among L2 learners, particularly when they are writing their papers. There are a number of established academic wordlists, which are the results of rigorous research and analysis. The wordlists may be a general list that cover all fields of study or it could be a specific one that are tailored for certain field or chapters in an academic paper. The lists have been proven as a handy tool to have and use in EAP classrooms or during the process of writing. Another implication is a suggestion for EAP instructors and language teachers to consider going back to teaching grammar in language classrooms. They must not forget that some of their learners maybe lacking exposure to the proper teaching of grammar, especially the genre-related aspects. The research for the past twenty years have pointed out the importance of phraseology in writing. This research also highlights the importance of collocations in academic writing and proposes analysis of common patterns as linguistic awareness exercise for advanced ESL learners. The teaching and learning of phraseology can be approached in two contradictory manners, explicit and implicit teaching. Both methods have gained positive feedbacks from EAP communities especially the DDL method which could shape the pedagogical approach in EAP classrooms particularly and teaching and learning of language in general.

Although the Malaysian academic community is slowly gaining momentum in conducting research in corpus linguistics, it also seems that we are falling behind compared to other nationalities such as the Turkish, Chinese and German scholars.

116 Considering the huge benefits from corpus studies as well as the gap in academic input from the Malaysian scholars, this situation needs to be remedied soon. More importantly, taking into account the evident importance of verbs in academic writing, it is imperative that further study is conducted to further illustrate the characteristics of lexical verbs in academic discourse in Malaysia.

117 REFERENCES

Agçam, R. (2015). Author stance in academic writing: A corpus-based study on epistemic verbs. The Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes Vol. 3, No 1, 2015, pp. 9-20.

Altenberg, B. (1998). On the phraseology of spoken English: the evidence of recurrent word-combinations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Altenberg, B. & Granger, S. (2001). The Grammatical and Lexical Patterning of MAKE in Native and Non-Native Student Writing. Applied Linguistics, 22 (2), 173.

Ang Leng Hong, Hajar Abdul Rahim, Tan Kim Hua, Khazriyati Salehuddin. (2011). Collocations in Malaysian English learners’ writing: A corpus-based error analysis, 3L. The Southeast Asian journal of English language studies. Vol. 17(1), 31-44.

Duffley, P. & Arseneau, M. (2012). Tense and control interpretations in gerund-participle and to-infinitive complement constructions with verbs of risk. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique. 57. 31-50.

Barton, D. (1994). Literacy: An introduction to the ecology of written language. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Bahns, J. (1993). Lexical collocations: a contrastive view. English Language Teaching Journal, 47(1), 56-63.

Bahns, J., & Eldaw, M. (1993). Should we teach EFL students collocation? System, 21(1), 104-114.

Balikçi, Gözde (2011) The Use Of Collocations By Advanced Learners Of English: Noun –Noun And Adjective-Noun Collocations. In: 1st International Conference on Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (FLTAL’11), 5-7 May 2011, Sarajevo.

Benjamins, J. (2014). Corpus-informed research and learning in ESP. Issues and applications. Iberica, 27: 217-234.

Bennet, A. (1991). Discourses of power, the dialectics of understanding the power of literacy. New York: Bergin and Garvey.

Bernard, A. M. and Winnie, A. Y. L. (1985). Academic writing and Chinese students: Transfer and developmental factors. TESOL Quarterly, 19(3): 515-534.

Benson, M., Benson, E. & Ilson, R. (1986). Lexicographic description of English. John Benjamins Publication Company.

Bhatia, V.J., Sánchez Hernández, P. & Pérez- Paredes, P. (2011). Researching Specialized Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

118 Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Biber, D. and Barbieri, F. (2007). Lexical bundles in university spoken and written registers. English for specific purposes, 26: 263-286.

Biber, D. and Conrad, S. (2001). Variation in English: Multi-dimensional studies. London: Pearson.

Biber, D., Conrad, S. and Cortes, V. (2004). If you look at: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25(3): 371-405.

Biber, D., Conrad, S. and Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: University Press.

Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. and Finegan, E. (1999). The Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.

Biber, D. & Conrad, S. (2009). Register, Genre and Style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Biskup, D. (1992). L1 influence on learners’ renderings of English collocations: a Polish/German empirical study’in PJL Arnaud and H. BeÂjoint (eds.): Vocabulary and Applied Linguistics. Vocabulary and Applied Linguistics. 85-93.

Bloch, J. (2010). A concordance-based study of the use of reporting verbs as rhetorical devices in academic papers. Journal of Writing Research, 2 (2), 219-244

Bolinger, D. (1975) Aspects of Language, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Boulton, A. & Tyne, H. (2013). Corpus linguistics and data-driven learning: A critical review. Bulletin Suisse de linguistique appliqué, 97: 97-118.

Bowker, L. and J. Pearson (2002), Working With Specialized Language: A Practical Guide to Using Corpora. London: Routledge.

Burrough-Boenisch, J. (2003). Editing texts by non-native speakers of English. Science Editors' Handbook. 1-4.

Cadman, K. (1997). Thesis writing for international students: A question of identity?. English for Specific Purposes, 16(1): 13-14.

Callies, M. (2013). High-frequency nouns and their verbal collocates in academic learner writing. Learner Corpus Research 2013, 27-29 September 2013, Bergen, Norway.

Callies, M. & E. Zaytseva (2013) The Corpus of Academic Learner English (CALE) – A new resource for the assessment of writing proficiency in the academic register. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics 2(1): 126-132.

Charles, M. (2006). Phraseological patterns in reporting clauses used in citation: a corpus- based study of theses in two disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 25: 310- 331.

119

Chen, Y. H. and Baker, P. (2010). Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning and Technology, 14(2): 30-49.

Chomsky, N. (1965) Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. The MIP Press.

Citravelu, N. Sithamparam, S. and Teh, S. C., 2005. ELT methodology: principle and practice. 2nd ed. Shah Alam: Penerbit Fajar Bakti Sdn. Bhd.

Clarke, P. (2009). Supporting children learning English as a second language in the early years. Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority.

Conti, G. (2011). Defining a Rule for the Use of Infinitive and Gerund Complements. English Language Teaching Vol. 4:3.

Cortes, V. (2002). Lexical bundles in freshman composition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Cortes, V. (2004). Lexical bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: Examples from history and biology. English for Specific Purposes, 23: 397-423.

Cox, Christopher (2011). Corpus linguistics and language documentation: challenges for collaboration. In John Newman, R. Harald Baayen, & Sally Rice (eds.), Corpus- based studies in language use, language learning, and language documentation, 239-264. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Coxhead, A. (2000). A New Academic World List. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2): 213-238.

Crystal, D. (1997). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. Oxford: Blackwell. Fourth Edition.

Crystal, D. (2003). The Cambridge Encyclopaedia Of The English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Darmi, R., & Albion, P. (2013). English Lanuguage in the Malaysian Education System: Its Existence and Implications. 3rd Malaysian Postgraduate Conference, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, (July), 175–183.

Davies, B. and Harre, R. (1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 20(1): 43-63.

De Cock, S., Granger, S., Leech, G. and McEnery, T. (1998). An automated approach to the phrasicon of EFL learners. London: Longman.

Durrant, P. (2008). High frequency collocations and second language learning. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Nottingham, Nottingham.

Durrant, P., & Schmitt, N. (2010). Adult learners' retention of collocations from exposure. Second Language Research, 26(2), 163-188.

120 Ellis, N. C., Simpson-Vlach, R., & Maynard, C. (2008). Formulaic language in native and second-language speakers: Psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 41(3), 375-396.

Erman, B., & Warren, B. (2000). The idiom principle and the open choice principle. Text, 20(1), 29–62.

Fan Shen. (1988). The classroom and the wider culture: identity as a key to learning English composition. College Composition and Communication, 40: 459-466.

Farghal, M., & Obiedat, H. (1995). Collocations: A neglected variable in EFL. IRAL, 33(4),315-333. Retrieved 15 November, 2013 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/iral.1995.33.4.315

Firth, J. R. (1957). Modes of meaning. In Papers in linguistics 1934-1951 (pp. 190 -215). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Foster, P. (2001) “Rules and Routines: A Consideration of their Role in the Task -Based Language Production of Native and Non-Native Speakers” in Bygate, M., Skehan, P. and Swain, M. (Eds.) Researching Pedagogic Tasks: Second Language Learning, Teaching and Testing, London: Longman

Folse, K. S. (2004). Vocabulary myths: Applying second language research to classroom teaching. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Francis, N. and Kucera, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage: lexicon and grammar. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Gardner, D. and Davies, M. (2007). Pointing out frequent phrasal verbs: A corpus based analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2): 339-359.

Gass, S. M. and Selinker, L. (2001). Second language acquisition: an introductory course (2nd Eds.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gee, J. P. (2005). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. (2nd Ed). New York: Routledge.

Gibson, M. (2005). Promoting academic engagement among minority youth: Implications from John Ogbu’s Shaker Heights ethnography. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 18(5): 581-603.

Gitsaki, C. (1996) The development of ESL collocational knowledge. Unpublished PhD Thesis. University of Queensland.

Gobel, P., Thang, S. M., Sidhu, G. K., Oon, S. I., & Chan, Y. F. (2013). Attributions to success and failure in English language learning: A comparative study of urban and rural undergraduates in Malaysia. Asian Social Science, 9(2), 53–62.

Goldberg, A. E. (2013). Argument Structure Constructions versus Lexical Rules or Derivational Verb Templates. Mind & Language, 28, 435–465.

Granger, S. (Ed.) (1998) Learner English on Computer. Longman.

121

Granger, S. and Meunier, F. (2008). Phraseology: An interdisciplinary perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Granger, S. and Paquot, M. (2005). The phraseology of EFL academic writing: Methodological issues and research findings. Paper presented at AAACL6 & ICAME26, 12-15 May 2005, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Granger, S. and Paquot, M. (2008). Disentangling the phraseological web. In: Granger, S. and Meunier, F. (Eds.)., Phraseology: An interdisciplinary perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Granger, S. and Paquot, M. (2015). Lexical verbs in academic discourse: A corpus-driven study of learner use. In: H. Basturkmen. English for Academic Purposes. London: Routledge.

Gries, Stefan. (2008). Phraseology and linguistic theory: A brief survey. 3-25

Gries, S. Th. & Stefanowitsch. A. (2004a). Extending collostructional analysis: A corpus- based perspectives on 'alternations'. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 9.1:97-129.

Halliday, M.A.K. (1989) Language, Context, and Text: aspects of language in a Social- semiotic Perspective. Oxford University Press

Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). Introduction to Functional Grammar, 2nd edition, London: Edward Arnold.

Hardie, A. & McEnery, T. (2010), On two traditions in corpus linguistics, and what they have in common. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15: 384-394.

Haswell, R. (1991). Gaining ground in college writing: tales of development and interpretation. Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press.

Henriksen, B. (2012). Research on L2 learners’ collocational competence and development – a progress report. In Bardel, C., C, Lindqvist, & B. Laufer (Eds.). L2 vocabulary acquisition, knowledge and use. New perspectives on assessment and corpus analysis (pp. 29-56).

Hinkel, E. (2002). Second language writers’ text. Linguistic and rhetorical features. Mahwah, New Jersey and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hinkel, E. (2004). Teaching academic ESL writing: Practical techniques in vocabulary and grammar. Mahwah, New Jersey and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Howarth P. (1996): Phraseology in English Academic Writing: Some Implications for Language Learning and Dictionary Making, Tübingen

Hunston, S. (2000). Evaluation and the planes of discourse: Status and value in persuasive texts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

122 Hunston, S., & Francis, G. (2000). Pattern grammar. A corpus-driven approach to the lexical grammar of English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins

Huddleston, Rodney and Geoffrey K. Pullum (2002). The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hyland, K. (1998). Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic knowledge. TEXT 18 (3) pp. 349-382.

Hyland, K. (1999). Academic attribution: Citation and the construction of disciplinary knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 20: 341-367.

Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary Discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. London: Longman.

Hyland, K. (2002a). Options of identity in academic writing. ELT Journal, 56(4): 351- 358.

Hyland, K. (2002b). authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in cademic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 34: 1091-1112.

Hyland, K. (2005). Representing readers in writing: Students and expert practices. Linguistics, 16(4): 363-377.

Hyland, K. (2007). Applying a gloss: Exemplifying and reformulating in academic discourse. Applied Linguistics, 28(2): 266-285.

Hyland, K. (2008). Academic clusters: Text patterning in published and postgraduate writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18(1): 41-62.

Hyland, K. (2013). Writing in the university: Education, knowledge and reputation. Language Teaching, 46(1): 53-70.

Hyland, K. and Milton, J. (1997). Qualifications and certainty in L1 and L2 students writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6(2): 183-205.

Hyland, K. and Tse, P. (2007). Is there an Academic Vocabulary? TESOL Quarterly, 41(2): 235-253.

Ishikawa, S. (2013).The ICNALE and sophisticated contrastive interlanguage analysis of Asian learners of English. Learner Corpus Studies in Asia and The World 1:91- 118.

Jiang, N. (2000). Lexical representation and development in a second language. Applied Linguistics, 21(1): 47-77.

Jolita Horbačauskienė & Saulė Petronien. (2013). Verb Valency Patterns in Academic Register: Syntactic Approach. Studies about Languages 22, 11-16.

123 Kamariah Yunus & Su’ad Awab. (2011). Collocational competence among Malaysian Law undergraduate students. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research,7(1),151-202. Retrieved 15 November, 2013 from http://www.melta.org.my/Volume-7-1- 2011/q?cid=93&doit=showclass

Kaplan, R. (1972). The anatomy of rhetoric: prolegomena to a functional theory of rhetoric. Philadelphia: Center for Curriculum Development. (Concord, Massachusetts: Heinle and Heinle).

Katnic-Bakarsic, M. (2004). Discouse stylistic as contextualized stylistics. Journal for Philogical Research, 15(2): 37-48.

Kennedy, G. (1998). An introduction to corpus linguistics. London: Longman.

Knowles, G. and Zuraidah, M. D. (2004). The notion of a lemma: Headwords, roots and lexical sets. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 9(1): 69-81.

Lea, M. & Street, B. (1999). Writing as academic literacies: understanding textual practices in higher education. Harlow: Longman.

Leech, G. (1992). Corpora and theories of linguistic performance. In J.Svartvik (ed.). 105–122.

Leech, G. N., Rayson, P. and Wilson, A. (2001). Word frequencies in written and spoken English. London: Longman.

M. Koosha & A. Jafarpour.(2006). Data-driven learning and teaching collocation of prepositions: The case of Iranian EFL adult learners. Asian EFL Journal, 8 (8), pp. 64-82

Maroko, G. M. (2013). Learning about author positioning in written academic discourse. Argentinian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2): 47-60.

Matsuda, P. K. & Tardy, C. M. (2007). Voice construction in academic writing: The rhetorical construction of author identity in blind manuscript review. English for Specific Purposes, 26(2): 235-249.

McEnery,T. & Costas, G. (2006). English corpus linguistics. In B. Aarts and A. McMahon (eds.). The handbook of English linguistics, 33–71.Oxford: Blackwell.

McEnery, T., & Wilson. (2001). Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinbugh University Press.

McEnery, T., Xiao, R. & Tono, Y. (2006). Corpus-based Language Studies: An Advanced Resource Book. London: Routledge.

Meyer, P. G. (1997). Coming to know: studies in the lexical semantics and pragmatics of academic English. Tubingen: Gunter Narr Verlag Tubingen.

124 Min, Kyung Eun. (2013). How grammar matters in NNS academic writing: the relationship between verb tense and aspect usage patterns and L2 writing proficiency in academic discourse. (Unpublished Master's Thesis). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Murugesan, V. (2003). Malaysia Promotes Excellence in English. ESL Magazine, (March/April), 26–28.

Myers, G. (1990). Writing Biology: Texts in social construction of scientific knowledge. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

NA Manan, NM Noor (2014). Analysis of Reporting Verbs in Master's Theses. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences 134, 140-145

Neff, J., Ballesteros, F., Dafouz, E., Martinez, F. and Rica, J. P. (2004). The expression of writer stance in native and non-native argumentative texts. In: R. Facchinetti. And F. Palmer (Eds.), English modality in perspective. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. (pp.141-161).

Nesselhauf, N. (2003). The use of collocations by advanced learners of English and some implications for teaching. Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 223-242.

Nesselhauf, N. (2005). Collocations in a learner corpus. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Oakey, D. J. (2005). Academic vocabulary in academic discourse: The phraseological behavior of EVALUATION in Economics research articles. In: E. Tognini- Bonelli and G. Del Lungo Camiciotti (eds.), Strategies in Academic Discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Pan, F., Reppen, R., & Biber, D. (2016). Comparing patterns of L1 versus L2 English academic professionals:Lexical bundles in Telecommunications research journals. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 21,60-71.

Paquot, M. (2007). Exemplification in learner writing: A cross-linguistic perspective. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Read, J. (2004). Research in teaching vocabulary. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24: 146-161.

Rohter, L. (2004). Learn English, says Chile, thinking upwardly global. New York Times, (pp. A3).

Russell, K. M. (2015). A Comparison of Linguistic Features in the Academic Writing of Advanced English Language Learner and English First Language University Students. (Unpublished Master's Thesis) Portland State University

Sadeghi, Karim and Shirzad Khajepasha, Arash (2015). Thesis writing challenges for non-native MA students. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 20, 357-373. Routledge

125 Safnil Arsyad. (2013). A Genre-Based Analysis on Discussion Section of Research Articles in Indonesian Written by Indonesian Speakers. International Journal of Linguistics Vol. 5, No. 4

Schmitt, N. (2004). Formulaic sequences: acquisition, processing and use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Schutz, N. 2013. How Specific is English for Academic Purposes? A look at verbs in business, linguistics and medical research articles. In G. Andersen and K. Bech (eds.). English Corpus Linguistics: Variation in Time, Space and Genre. Amsterdam: Rodopi Publishers: 237-257.

Stubbs, M. (2001). Words & Phrases: Corpus Studies of Lexical Semantics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Sinclair, J. (1987). Looking up: an account of the COBUILD project in lexical computing. London and Glasgow: Collins.

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

Siyanova, A., & Schmitt, N. (2008). L2 learner production and processing of collocation: A multi-study perspective. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 64(3), 429- 458.

Souriyavongsa, T., Rany, S., Abidin, M. J. Z., & Leong, L. M. (2013). Factors Causes Students Low English Language Learning: A Case Study in the National University of Laos. International Journal of English Language Education, 1(1), 179–192.

Stapleton, P. (2002). Critiquing voice as a viable pedagogical tool in L2 writing: Returning the spotlight to ideas. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11(3): 177- 190.

Stubbs, M. (1996). Text and corpus linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.

Stubbs, M. (2001). Words & Phrases: Corpus Studies of Lexical Semantics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Wang, Y., & Shaw, P. (2008). Transfer and universality: Collocation use in advanced Chinese and Swedish learner English. ICAME Journal, 32, 201-232.

Stubbs, M. (2007). Quantitative data on multi-word sequences in English: The case of word ‘world’. London: Continuum.

Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis. English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Swales, J. (2004). Then and now: A reconsideration of the first corpus of scientific English. Iberica, 8: 5-21.

Swales, J. and Feak, C. (2004). Academic writing for graduate students. Essential task and skills. Ann Arbour: The University of Michigan Press.

126

Tabors, P. O. (1997). One child, Two Languages: A guide for Preschool Educators of Children Learning English as a second language. USA, Baltimore: Paul Brookes Publishing.

Tan, L. H., Hoosain, R. and Peng, D. (1995). Role of early presemantic phonological code inchinese character identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 21: 43-54.

Tang, R. and John, S. (1999). The “I” in identity: Exploring writer identity in student academic writing through the first person pronoun. English for Specific Purposes, 18(1): 23-39.

Teubert, W. (2005). My version of corpus linguistics, International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 10: 1-13.

Thomas, S. and Hawes, T. P. (1994). Reporting verbs in medical journals. English for specific Purposes, 13: 129-148.

Thompson, G. and Yiyun, Y. (1991), ‘Evaluation in the reporting verbs used in academic papers’. Applied Linguistics, 12, (4), 365-382.

Tognini-Bonelli, E. (2001). Corpus linguistics at work. Amsterdam: Benjamins

Wallwork, A. (2011). English for writing research papers. Springer Science+ Business Media.

White, J. W. and Lowenthal, P. R. (2011). Academic discourse and the formation of an academic identity: Minority college students and the hidden curriculum. Review of Higher Education, 34 (2): 1-47.

Williams, I. A. (1996). A contextual study of lexical verbs in two types of medical research reports: clinical and experimental. English for Specific Purposes, 15(3): 175-197.

Wilson, A. (2000). Conceptual glossary and index to the vulgate translation of the gospel according to John. Hildesheim: Olms-Weidmann.

Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Y.H. Chen, P. Baker, (2010). Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning & Technology, 14 (2) (2010), pp. 30–49

Wray, A. (2009). Future directions in formulaic language research. Journal of foreign languages, 32, 2-17.

Yannuar, Nurenzia et al. 2014. Active and Passive Voice Constructions by Indonesian Student Writers". Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 4, No. 7, pp. 1400-1408.

127 Zhang, X. (2008). A contrastive study of reporting in Master’s Theses in native Chinese and in Native English. Dissertation presented for the degree of MSc in Applied Linguistics. The University of Edinburgh.

128 APPENDIX A 48 WOULD 75 49 FINDINGS 74 50 HAS 74 Appendix A: Wordlist by Frequency 51 OTHER 72 52 MALAYSIA 71 53 I 70 54 REPORTS 70

55 SKILLS 70

56 CAN 64 N Word Freq. 57 WHAT 62 1 THE 2951 58 HER 61 2 OF 1212 59 WILL 61 3 AND 1058 60 ANALYSIS 59 4 TO 1004 61 SUCH 59 5 IN 963 62 AT 57 6 # 817 63 BEEN 56 7 IS 535 64 COURSE 56 8 THAT 490 65 MALAY 56 9 A 407 66 TEXT 56 10 AS 396 67 TERMS 55 11 ARE 321 68 LEGAL 54 12 THIS 285 69 MOST 54 13 BE 254 70 ORDER 54 14 IT 218 71 BECAUSE 52 15 FOR 214 72 NO 52 16 BY 193 73 BOTH 51 17 ON 191 74 HIGH 51 18 THEY 191 75 SINGAPORE 51 19 NOT 186 76 E 49 20 THEIR 185 77 HOWEVER 49 21 STUDENTS 166 78 WORDS 48 22 S 164 79 FORMS 47 23 WITH 164 80 GROUP 47 24 LANGUAGE 160 81 MAY 47 25 ENGLISH 156 82 NICOL 47 26 OR 155 83 TEST 46 27 HAVE 145 84 WHEN 46 28 WHICH 144 85 DO 45 29 FROM 128 86 THUS 45 30 WERE 114 87 BASED 44 31 ALSO 109 88 MALAYSIAN 44 32 USED 99 89 THELMA 44 33 THESE 95 90 ANXIETY 43 34 SOCIAL 93 91 RESEARCH 43 35 USE 91 92 READERS 42 36 WAS 91 93 THEREFORE 42 37 ALL 88 94 IF 41 38 TEXTS 88 95 SOCIETY 41 39 MORE 87 96 SOME 41 40 ADVICE 84 97 WELL 41 41 ONE 82 98 WHERE 41 42 WHO 82 99 WHILE 41 43 THERE 81 100 BETWEEN 40 44 STUDY 79 101 HIGHER 40 45 ESP 77 102 HOW 40 46 THEM 77 103 KNOWLEDGE 40 47 AN 75 104 NEWS 40

129 105 ONLY 40 162 INFORMATION 28 106 PARTICIPANTS 40 163 RESEARCHER 28 107 THAN 40 164 ALTHOUGH 27 108 THINKING 40 165 DISCOURSE 27 109 THROUGH 40 166 LEVEL 27 110 BUT 39 167 NEED 27 111 VICTIMS 39 168 PROFICIENCY 27 112 WOMEN 39 169 DISCUSSED 26 113 DISCUSSION 38 170 MADE 26 114 FRAME 38 171 NON 26 115 HAD 38 172 PROCESS 26 116 TWO 38 173 TOWARDS 26 117 DISABLED 37 174 ACCORDING 25 118 RESPONDENTS 37 175 COMPARED 25 119 SIGNIFICANT 37 176 MEANING 25 120 CHAPTER 36 177 CRIME 24 121 FOUND 36 178 DIRECT 24 122 GOVERNMENT 36 179 EXAMPLE 24 123 IMPERATIVES 36 180 FOUR 24 124 SPEAKING 36 181 GIVEN 24 125 ANY 35 182 LAWYERS 24 126 QUESTION 35 183 LOW 24 127 THREE 35 184 P 24 128 USING 35 185 POWER 24 129 BEING 34 186 PPSMI 24 130 MEDIA 34 187 PROCESSES 24 131 QUESTIONS 34 188 SUGGESTS 24 132 VOICES 34 189 CF 23 133 CONVERSATIONS 33 190 INTO 23 134 LEARNERS 33 191 ITS 23 135 LEARNING 33 192 LEAST 23 136 PROBLEM 33 193 REVEALED 23 137 RELATED 33 194 SINCE 23 138 SECOND 33 195 SPECIFIC 23 139 SHOULD 33 196 TOURISM 23 140 STAR 33 197 ANOTHER 22 141 COULD 32 198 CUES 22 142 SECTION 32 199 EXPERIENCE 22 143 SHE 32 200 FRAMES 22 144 SO 32 201 FULFILLMENT 22 145 NOUN 31 202 GROUPS 22 146 TEACHING 31 203 HINTS 22 147 TIME 31 204 ITEMS 22 148 ABOUT 30 205 MAKE 22 149 FIRST 30 206 QUESTIONERS 22 150 ISSUE 30 207 REPORT 22 151 NUMBER 30 208 STRUCTURE 22 152 TEACHERS 30 209 TYPES 22 153 ABLE 29 210 ACTORS 21 154 FINDING 29 211 COUNTRY 21 155 HIS 29 212 DID 21 156 OUT 29 213 DIFFERENT 21 157 SAME 29 214 DUE 21 158 SEEN 29 215 ERRORS 21 159 WRITING 29 216 INDIRECT 21 160 ACTIVITIES 28 217 MIGHT 21 161 HELP 28 218 PEOPLE 21

130 219 PHRASES 21 276 MANAGEMENT 17 220 SHOWS 21 277 PRANK 17 221 SPEECH 21 278 REPORTED 17 222 CERTAIN 20 279 SHOW 17 223 DURING 20 280 TEACH 17 224 ENTITY 20 281 THIRD 17 225 GOOD 20 282 TRANSLATION 17 226 INTERACTION 20 283 USES 17 227 LEXICAL 20 284 USUALLY 17 228 MANY 20 285 WAY 17 229 PRODUCERS 20 286 ADDITION 16 230 QUESTIONER 20 287 COMMUNICATION 16 231 REPRESENTATION 20 288 DATA 16 232 SUPPORT 20 289 EVENTS 16 233 TERKOURAFI 20 290 GENERAL 16 234 THEMSELVES 20 291 HAVING 16 235 UNIVERSITY 20 292 MALAYSIAKINI 16 236 UP 20 293 PRACTICE 16 237 YOU 20 294 SIMILAR 16 238 BM 19 295 THEN 16 239 BORROWING 19 296 VERY 16 240 CHINESE 19 297 ALWAYS 15 241 COURSES 19 298 BESIDES 15 242 EACH 19 299 CITED 15 243 FACE 19 300 DISABILITY 15 244 IMPORTANT 19 301 EITHER 15 245 LINGUISTIC 19 302 ESPECIALLY 15 246 MAXIMS 19 303 FACT 15 247 MUCH 19 304 FEAR 15 248 NEW 19 305 GENERALLY 15 249 PART 19 306 HENCE 15 250 PROBLEMS 19 307 IDEOLOGY 15 251 RESULTS 19 308 INDICATE 15 252 VARIOUS 19 309 LAW 15 253 VIEW 19 310 LESS 15 254 CALLS 18 311 LISTENING 15 255 DOES 18 312 NEGATIVE 15 256 EXAMPLES 18 313 Ø 15 257 HEADLINES 18 314 OFFICERS 15 258 HOSPITALITY 18 315 OTHERS 15 259 IMPERATIVE 18 316 PRESENT 15 260 LEVELS 18 317 PRODUCT 15 261 PROVIDE 18 318 QUANTIFIERS 15 262 PUBLIC 18 319 REPRESENTED 15 263 RATHER 18 320 RESPONSE 15 264 SEE 18 321 SENTENCES 15 265 SET 18 322 STAGE 15 266 SYSTEM 18 323 STATUS 15 267 TAKEN 18 324 TAKE 15 268 TEACHER 18 325 WRITTEN 15 269 BORROWINGS 17 326 ADVERTORIALS 14 270 C 17 327 APPEAR 14 271 DECISION 17 328 CONTEXT 14 272 DIFFERENCE 17 329 DIPLOMA 14 273 EVEN 17 330 DIRECTIVES 14 274 FORM 17 331 DONE 14 275 FURTHER 17 332 ELEMENTS 14

131 333 EXPERIMENTAL 14 390 GIVE 12 334 GRAMMATICAL 14 391 HE 12 335 LEE 14 392 ICONS 12 336 LOWER 14 393 LEAD 12 337 OBSERVED 14 394 LECTURERS 12 338 POST 14 395 MAHATHIR 12 339 PROBABLY 14 396 MEANINGS 12 340 QUOTE 14 397 PARAGRAPH 12 341 READING 14 398 PARTICULAR 12 342 RELATIONSHIP 14 399 PERCEPTION 12 343 REPORTER 14 400 PERPETRATORS 12 344 REPORTING 14 401 PRANKSTERS 12 345 SAID 14 402 PREFER 12 346 SEMANTIC 14 403 REPRESENTATIONS 12 347 SITUATIONS 14 404 SEEMS 12 348 STRUCTURES 14 405 SITUATION 12 349 THOSE 14 406 STUDIES 12 350 TYPE 14 407 TRAINING 12 351 VIEWS 14 408 UNDERSTAND 12 352 VOCABULARY 14 409 WIFE 12 353 WORD 14 410 WORLD 12 354 ADVERTS 13 411 YOUR 12 355 ALONG 13 412 ABOVE 11 356 APPROPRIATE 13 413 ACTUALLY 11 357 BEST 13 414 ADVERTISEMENTS 11 358 BETTER 13 415 BLOOM 11 359 CONSUMERS 13 416 CATEGORIES 11 360 DESPITE 13 417 CLAIM 11 361 EDUCATION 13 418 CLASS 11 362 EVIDENCE 13 419 CLEAR 11 363 FACTOR 13 420 COMMON 11 364 IDENTITY 13 421 CONTENT 11 365 ISSUES 13 422 CONVERSATION 11 366 JUST 13 423 CURRENT 11 367 LOCAL 13 424 DESCRIBING 11 368 MAJOR 13 425 DETERMINERS 11 369 NEWSPAPER 13 426 DISCURSIVE 11 370 PERSON 13 427 EVERY 11 371 POLICE 13 428 FACTORS 11 372 PRIOR 13 429 FEATURES 11 373 READ 13 430 FIELD 11 374 STRATEGIES 13 431 IDENTIFIED 11 375 SUBJECTS 13 432 IMAGE 11 376 VERBAL 13 433 INFLUENCE 11 377 VOICE 13 434 MENTIONED 11 378 ADJECTIVES 12 435 MODEL 11 379 AMONG 12 436 MUET 11 380 APART 12 437 NATIONAL 11 381 ARTICLES 12 438 OVER 11 382 AVOID 12 439 PASSPORT 11 383 CALL 12 440 PERSONALIZATION 11 384 CHOICES 12 441 PRESENTED 11 385 CONSTRUCTION 12 442 RESPONSES 11 386 CORBETT 12 443 STAGES 11 387 DAVID 12 444 STATED 11 388 EFFECTS 12 445 STRENGTHS 11 389 FIND 12 446 STUDIED 11

132 447 SUBJECT 11 504 AMOUNT 9 448 TAXONOMY 11 505 ANN 9 449 TERM 11 506 APPEARS 9 450 TIMES 11 507 AUTHORITATIVE 9 451 UNDERSTANDING 11 508 AWARE 9 452 WANT 11 509 BACKGROUND 9 453 WAYS 11 510 BIOGRAPHERS 9 454 AREA 10 511 CODE 9 455 BIOGRAPHIES 10 512 COMPETENT 9 456 CASE 10 513 DEGREE 9 457 CASES 10 514 DIFFICULT 9 458 CLIENTS 10 515 EFFECT 9 459 CONTROL 10 516 ENVIRONMENT 9 460 DEMONSTRATIVES 10 517 EVALUATION 9 461 DOMAIN 10 518 FAIRCLOUGH 9 462 EMPLOYED 10 519 FEATURE 9 463 ESTABLISHED 10 520 FOLLOWED 9 464 EXPRESSIONS 10 521 FREQUENCY 9 465 FRAMEWORK 10 522 FREQUENTLY 9 466 FRIENDS 10 523 FULFILLMENTS 9 467 IMBEDDED 10 524 FURTHERMORE 9 468 INDIRECTNESS 10 525 GET 9 469 INTERESTING 10 526 GRAMMAR 9 470 JULY 10 527 INAPPROPRIATE 9 471 LIKE 10 528 INDIVIDUAL 9 472 LOT 10 529 INDUSTRY 9 473 MAJORITY 10 530 INSTANCE 9 474 MOREOVER 10 531 LACK 9 475 NEEDS 10 532 LINE 9 476 NORMS 10 533 LOCALIZATION 9 477 OCCURRENCE 10 534 LOOK 9 478 OFTEN 10 535 MEN 9 479 OUR 10 536 MENTAL 9 480 PER 10 537 MESSAGE 9 481 PERCEIVED 10 538 METHOD 9 482 POINT 10 539 OBTAINED 9 483 POLITENESS 10 540 POLITICAL 9 484 PORTRAYAL 10 541 POSITIVE 9 485 PRACTICES 10 542 PRAGMATIC 9 486 REFERENT 10 543 READER 9 487 REVEAL 10 544 RESULT 9 488 SELF 10 545 SCORES 9 489 SIMILARLY 10 546 SIX 9 490 SPEAK 10 547 SKILL 9 491 STILL 10 548 TEASING 9 492 SYLLABUS 10 549 THOUGH 9 493 TABLE 10 550 TREATMENT 9 494 TRANSITIVITY 10 551 USAGE 9 495 VICTIM 10 552 WHOLE 9 496 WHETHER 10 553 WORK 9 497 WITHOUT 10 554 YEAR 9 498 WRITE 10 555 ADJECTIVE 8 499 ZONG 10 556 ADVERTISED 8 500 ACCOMPLISHMENT 9 557 AGREED 8 501 ACTION 9 558 ALMOST 8 502 ACTS 9 559 ANALYSING 8 503 AGAINST 9 560 ANSWER 8

133 561 APPENDIX 8 618 SOLICITED 8 562 APPROPRIACY 8 619 STYLE 8 563 ASSESSMENT 8 620 SWITCHING 8 564 BAHASA 8 621 SYNTACTIC 8 565 BELIEVE 8 622 TAMIL 8 566 BROWN 8 623 TASK 8 567 CHANGE 8 624 THINK 8 568 COLUMN 8 625 THREATENING 8 569 COMPONENT 8 626 THROUGHOUT 8 570 COUNTRIES 8 627 TOPICS 8 571 DIFFERENCES 8 628 TRANSLATED 8 572 DR 8 629 UNDER 8 573 ESSAYS 8 630 WE 8 574 ETC 8 631 WORKING 8 575 EXPLICIT 8 632 WRITERS 8 576 FELT 8 633 YES 8 577 FOCUSED 8 634 YET 8 578 FUNCTION 8 635 ACQUIRED 7 579 GENERIC 8 636 ACTIONS 7 580 GIVING 8 637 AFTER 7 581 GRADE 8 638 ANALYZED 7 582 GRICE 8 639 APPROACH 7 583 HEADLINE 8 640 ATTITUDE 7 584 HERE 8 641 BEFORE 7 585 IDEOLOGIES 8 642 BEHAVIOUR 7 586 IMPACT 8 643 BELOW 7 587 INDIAN 8 644 BILATERAL 7 588 INSTRUCTION 8 645 CANNOT 7 589 INTERACTIVE 8 646 CATEGORY 7 590 INTERVIEWED 8 647 CHARITY 7 591 KIND 8 648 CHILDREN 7 592 MAIN 8 649 CLASSROOM 7 593 MORPHOLOGICAL 8 650 CO 7 594 MOSTLY 8 651 COMMONLY 7 595 MUST 8 652 COMMUNITY 7 596 N 8 653 COMPREHENSION 7 597 NAME 8 654 CONCLUDED 7 598 OCCUR 8 655 CONSIDERED 7 599 OCCURRENCES 8 656 CONTRASTIVE 7 600 OFFENDERS 8 657 DEPICT 7 601 OPPOSITION 8 658 DESCRIBE 7 602 PERSONAL 8 659 DIFFERENTLY 7 603 POINTS 8 660 DISCUSSIONS 7 604 POLICY 8 661 ESSAY 7 605 PRE 8 662 FAR 7 606 PRODUCE 8 663 FLUENT 7 607 PUBLISHED 8 664 G 7 608 PUT 8 665 GENRE 7 609 RECORDED 8 666 GOTCHA 7 610 REFERENTS 8 667 HUMOR 7 611 REGULARITY 8 668 ILLUSTRATED 7 612 REVEALS 8 669 IMPRESSION 7 613 RIGHT 8 670 IMPROVE 7 614 ROLE 8 671 INSTEAD 7 615 SCHEMATIC 8 672 INSTITUTION 7 616 SENTENCE 8 673 INTENDED 7 617 SOCIETAL 8 674 INTERLOCUTORS 7

134 675 INTERPRETATION 7 732 BOOKS 6 676 INVESTIGATION 7 733 CHOICE 6 677 INVOLVED 7 734 COGNITIVE 6 678 ITSELF 7 735 COLUMNS 6 679 LEVINSON 7 736 COMMUNICATE 6 680 LIFE 7 737 COMPETENCY 6 681 LITTLE 7 738 CONCEPTS 6 682 LOOKING 7 739 CONDUCTED 6 683 MARKS 7 740 CONFIDENCE 6 684 MEAN 7 741 CONTACT 6 685 MEANS 7 742 CONTEXTS 6 686 NATIVE 7 743 CONVEY 6 687 NATURAL 7 744 CREATE 6 688 NOW 7 745 CULTURAL 6 689 OBSERVATION 7 746 DAILY 6 690 OFFER 7 747 DISSENTING 6 691 ONES 7 748 DISTANCE 6 692 ORAL 7 749 DOMINANT 6 693 PERFORM 7 750 DONG 6 694 PERFORMANCE 7 751 DOWN 6 695 PHYSICAL 7 752 ENABLE 6 696 PLAYS 7 753 EQUALLY 6 697 PORTRAYED 7 754 EQUIVALENT 6 698 POSITION 7 755 ERVIN 6 699 PRANKSTER 7 756 ESSENTIAL 6 700 PREFERRED 7 757 EVIDENT 6 701 PRODUCTS 7 758 EXISTING 6 702 REGARDING 7 759 EXPLANATION 6 703 RELATION 7 760 EXPRESS 6 704 RELEVANT 7 761 EXTENT 6 705 REQUEST 7 762 FACILITATE 6 706 SCHEMA 7 763 FEEL 6 707 SCORED 7 764 FOCUS 6 708 SEEM 7 765 FOOD 6 709 SERVICE 7 766 FORCE 6 710 SHOWN 7 767 FOUNDATION 6 711 SOLVE 7 768 GEORGALIDOU 6 712 SPEAKER 7 769 HIGHLIGHTED 6 713 STORY 7 770 HIGHLY 6 714 SYNTHESIS 7 771 HOTEL 6 715 TAKING 7 772 HOURS 6 716 TALK 7 773 HOUSE 6 717 UNUSUAL 7 774 IMPORTANCE 6 718 UPON 7 775 INCLUDED 6 719 WEAK 7 776 INDICATES 6 720 WHY 7 777 KEY 6 721 WISPA 7 778 KNOW 6 722 WITHIN 7 779 KROLAK 6 723 ABILITY 6 780 LARINA 6 724 ABOLISH 6 781 LAST 6 725 ACADEMICIANS 6 782 LECTURER 6 726 ACHIEVEMENTS 6 783 MAINTAIN 6 727 AGAIN 6 784 MALAYSIANS 6 728 APPLICATION 6 785 MANNER 6 729 ATTRIBUTED 6 786 MASTER 6 730 AUTHENTIC 6 787 MATTER 6 731 BALANCED 6 788 MODULE 6

135 789 NEVERTHELESS 6 846 ADDED 5 790 NOUNS 6 847 AGE 5 791 OPPORTUNITIES 6 848 ALLOWED 5 792 ORIGINAL 6 849 ANALYSES 5 793 OVERALL 6 850 APPLY 5 794 PARTS 6 851 ARISES 5 795 PASSIVE 6 852 ASIAN 5 796 PATTERN 6 853 ATTENTION 5 797 PERFORMED 6 854 ATTRIBUTION 5 798 PERHAPS 6 855 AVAILABLE 5 799 PLAY 6 856 BASICALLY 5 800 PLURAL 6 857 BELIEF 5 801 POSSIBLE 6 858 BELIEFS 5 802 PRESENCE 6 859 BIOGRAPHICAL 5 803 PRODUCED 6 860 BIOGRAPHY 5 804 PRODUCING 6 861 CAREER 5 805 PROFESSIONAL 6 862 CATEGORISED 5 806 PROFICIENT 6 863 CHALLENGE 5 807 PROGRAMME 6 864 CLAIMED 5 808 PROVIDED 6 865 CLARITY 5 809 QUITE 6 866 CLEARLY 5 810 QUOTES 6 867 CLOSE 5 811 REASONS 6 868 COATES 5 812 RECEIVED 6 869 COLLECTED 5 813 RECORDINGS 6 870 COMFORTABLE 5 814 REFERENCE 6 871 COMPONENTS 5 815 REFERRED 6 872 COMPULSORY 5 816 REPEATEDLY 6 873 CONCERNED 5 817 REPORTERS 6 874 CONCERNS 5 818 RESULTED 6 875 CONCLUSION 5 819 RIVALRY 6 876 CONNECTION 5 820 RUDNICKA 6 877 CONSISTS 5 821 SARCASM 6 878 CONSTRUCTED 5 822 SCIENCE 6 879 CORRECT 5 823 SHAKESPEARE 6 880 CURRENTLY 5 824 SHARED 6 881 DAY 5 825 SHORT 6 882 DEFINITELY 5 826 SHOWED 6 883 DEPICTIONS 5 827 SKIN 6 884 DESCRIBED 5 828 SMALL 6 885 DESCRIPTIVE 5 829 SOLIDARITY 6 886 DETAILS 5 830 STATE 6 887 DEVELOP 5 831 STATEMENT 6 888 DEVELOPMENT 5 832 SUFFICIENT 6 889 DIRECTLY 5 833 TITLE 6 890 DIRECTNESS 5 834 TOGETHER 6 891 DISCOVERED 5 835 TOO 6 892 DRAWN 5 836 TOOK 6 893 ECONOMIC 5 837 TOPIC 6 894 EFFECTIVELY 5 838 TRIPP 6 895 EFFORT 5 839 TRUTH 6 896 ENSURE 5 840 UTILIZED 6 897 EVENT 5 841 UTTERANCE 6 898 EXPECTED 5 842 VIA 6 899 EXPERT 5 843 VISUALS 6 900 EYE 5 844 ACCEPT 5 901 FACED 5 845 ACTIVE 5 902 FIFTH 5

136 903 FINAL 5 960 REAL 5 904 FOLLOWING 5 961 REALITY 5 905 FRIENDSHIP 5 962 REFLECT 5 906 FUNCTIONS 5 963 RELATIONSHIPS 5 907 FUTURE 5 964 REQUIRED 5 908 GAIN 5 965 RESEARCHERS 5 909 GOALS 5 966 RESPECT 5 910 HAND 5 967 ROBBERIES 5 911 HELPS 5 968 SCORE 5 912 HYMES 5 969 SEEK 5 913 IDEAL 5 970 SELECTION 5 914 IDENTIFICATION 5 971 SINGULAR 5 915 IDENTIFY 5 972 SPOKEN 5 916 IDEOLOGICAL 5 973 SQUASH 5 917 INCORPORATE 5 974 STEREOTYPING 5 918 INCREASE 5 975 STRONG 5 919 INDICATORS 5 976 SUBSEQUENTLY 5 920 INTERVIEW 5 977 SUGGEST 5 921 INVARIANT 5 978 SUGGESTED 5 922 IRONY 5 979 SUITABLE 5 923 JUDGES 5 980 SUPPORTING 5 924 K 5 981 TARGET 5 925 KUAN 5 982 TEND 5 926 LEARN 5 983 TERMINOLOGY 5 927 LESSONS 5 984 TERTIARY 5 928 LIKELY 5 985 UNIVERSITIES 5 929 LINES 5 986 UNLIKE 5 930 LINGUISTICS 5 987 UPHOLD 5 931 LONG 5 988 UTTERANCES 5 932 LONGER 5 989 VALUE 5 933 LOVE 5 990 VALUES 5 934 MAINLY 5 991 VAN 5 935 MAKING 5 992 WHEREAS 5 936 MALAYA 5 993 WHEREBY 5 937 MALE 5 994 WORKS 5 938 MANAGED 5 995 WRITER 5 939 MATERIAL 5 996 YEARS 5 940 MAXIM 5 997 YEW 5 941 NAGAPPAN 5 998 ABOLISHMENT 4 942 NAMELY 5 999 ABUSE 4 943 NATURE 5 1000 ACCEPTABILITY 4 944 NEWSPAPERS 5 1001 ACHIEVED 4 945 NORMAL 5 1002 ACROSS 4 946 OPEN 5 1003 ACTOR 4 947 PERCEPTIONS 5 1004 ADDRESSEE 4 948 PERTAINING 5 1005 ADVERTORIAL 4 949 PHENOMENON 5 1006 AFFECT 4 950 PLACE 5 1007 ALBEIT 4 951 PREPARED 5 1008 ALTERNATIVE 4 952 PRESENTATION 5 1009 ANGLE 4 953 PRINCIPLE 5 1010 ASMAH 4 954 PRINCIPLES 5 1011 ASPECTS 4 955 PROVED 5 1012 ASSOCIATION 4 956 PURPOSE 5 1013 ASSUMED 4 957 PURSUING 5 1014 AVERAGE 4 958 QUANTIFIER 5 1015 B 4 959 QUANTITATIVE 5 1016 BACKGROUNDED 4

137 1017 BALANCES 4 1074 FOURTH 4 1018 BARISAN 4 1075 FRIENDLINESS 4 1019 BEAUTIFUL 4 1076 GAME 4 1020 BEHAVIOURAL 4 1077 GENDER 4 1021 BEHAVIOURS 4 1078 GIVER 4 1022 BENNY 4 1079 GUNNING 4 1023 BRANCA 4 1080 HARD 4 1024 BRIEFLY 4 1081 HATRED 4 1025 BUILDING 4 1082 HEARD 4 1026 BUSINESS 4 1083 HEGEMONY 4 1027 CAMARADERIE 4 1084 HIGHEST 4 1028 CANDIDATE 4 1085 HIGHLIGHT 4 1029 CARE 4 1086 HINT 4 1030 CERTAINLY 4 1087 HOSTILITY 4 1031 CLASSROOMS 4 1088 HOUSES 4 1032 COME 4 1089 HUGE 4 1033 COMPETENCE 4 1090 HUMAN 4 1034 CONDUCT 4 1091 ILLOCUTIONARY 4 1035 CONFIDENT 4 1092 ILLUSTRATES 4 1036 CONFUSION 4 1093 IM 4 1037 CONSEQUENTLY 4 1094 IMAGES 4 1038 CONSTANTLY 4 1095 IMPLEMENTED 4 1039 CONTAINED 4 1096 IMPLICATIONS 4 1040 CONTRAST 4 1097 IMPLIES 4 1041 CONTRIBUTES 4 1098 IMPORTANTLY 4 1042 CONVENTIONALLY 4 1099 IMPOSE 4 1043 CP 4 1100 IMPOSING 4 1044 CREATED 4 1101 IMPROVING 4 1045 CRIMES 4 1102 INCLUDE 4 1046 CULTURE 4 1103 INCLUDES 4 1047 DECLARATIVE 4 1104 INDEED 4 1048 DELIVER 4 1105 INDICATED 4 1049 DEPENDS 4 1106 INDIRECTLY 4 1050 DEPICTED 4 1107 INPUT 4 1051 DETERMINE 4 1108 INSTITUTIONAL 4 1052 DIALOGICALITY 4 1109 INTERPELLATED 4 1053 DISCOURSES 4 1110 INTERROGATIVES 4 1054 DISTINCTION 4 1111 INTRODUCED 4 1055 ECONOMY 4 1112 ITEM 4 1056 EFFECTIVE 4 1113 JIAO 4 1057 ELEMENT 4 1114 KEEP 4 1058 EMPHASIS 4 1115 KIAN 4 1059 ENOUGH 4 1116 KNOWN 4 1060 EXISTENTIAL 4 1117 KRESS 4 1061 EXPERIENCING 4 1118 L 4 1062 EXPERIENTIAL 4 1119 LANGUAGES 4 1063 EXPOSED 4 1120 LARGE 4 1064 EXPRESSES 4 1121 LAYMAN 4 1065 FABRICATED 4 1122 LEADING 4 1066 FAMILIAR 4 1123 LECTURES 4 1067 FAMILY 4 1124 LETTERS 4 1068 FAVOUR 4 1125 LIMITATION 4 1069 FEELINGS 4 1126 LINGUISTICALLY 4 1070 FIGURE 4 1127 LOCHER 4 1071 FINALLY 4 1128 MAKES 4 1072 FIVE 4 1129 MARKED 4 1073 FOREIGN 4 1130 MASS 4

138 1131 MATCH 4 1188 REGULAR 4 1132 MATERIALS 4 1189 RELATIONAL 4 1133 MATHEMATICS 4 1190 RELATIONS 4 1134 MATHS 4 1191 RELEVANCE 4 1135 MEMBERS 4 1192 RELIABLE 4 1136 METHODS 4 1193 REMARKS 4 1137 MINIMAL 4 1194 REPRESENTING 4 1138 MINISTRY 4 1195 RESOURCES 4 1139 MR 4 1196 SAMPLES 4 1140 MUHAMAD 4 1197 SCHOOL 4 1141 MUHYIDDIN 4 1198 SEASON 4 1142 NARRATIVE 4 1199 SENIOR 4 1143 NARROWED 4 1200 SEQUENCE 4 1144 NASIONAL 4 1201 SESSIONS 4 1145 NECESSARY 4 1202 SEVERAL 4 1146 NEGOTIATION 4 1203 SHY 4 1147 NEUTRALITY 4 1204 SICK 4 1148 NEXT 4 1205 SIDES 4 1149 NORM 4 1206 SIGNAL 4 1150 NORMALLY 4 1207 SIMULTANEOUSLY 4 1151 NOTED 4 1208 SOCIALLY 4 1152 OBJECTIVE 4 1209 SOLVED 4 1153 OBJECTIVITY 4 1210 SOMETHING 4 1154 OCCASIONALLY 4 1211 SOURCE 4 1155 OLD 4 1212 SPACE 4 1156 ONCE 4 1213 STAFF 4 1157 ONG 4 1214 STAGED 4 1158 OPENS 4 1215 STAND 4 1159 OREAL 4 1216 STRENGTH 4 1160 ORTHOGRAPHIC 4 1217 STUDENT 4 1161 PARTICULARLY 4 1218 SUBSEQUENT 4 1162 PASSIVATED 4 1219 SUBSTANTIATES 4 1163 PAST 4 1220 SUPERIOR 4 1164 PEDAGOGICAL 4 1221 SUPPORTIVE 4 1165 PEDRA 4 1222 SURE 4 1166 PELAJAR 4 1223 TALKING 4 1167 PENANGITE 4 1224 TEXTUAL 4 1168 PERSPECTIVE 4 1225 THEORY 4 1169 PICK 4 1226 TRAINED 4 1170 PLANNING 4 1227 TRUE 4 1171 PLAYER 4 1228 UNDERLYING 4 1172 POLITICALLY 4 1229 UNION 4 1173 PORTRAY 4 1230 UNMARKED 4 1174 PREFERENCE 4 1231 USUAL 4 1175 PROFESSIONALS 4 1232 VENN 4 1176 PROGRAMMES 4 1233 VERBS 4 1177 PROPERTIES 4 1234 VINE 4 1178 PROVIDES 4 1235 WATTS 4 1179 QUALITY 4 1236 WEEK 4 1180 QUOTED 4 1237 WODAK 4 1181 R 4 1238 WOMAN 4 1182 RATIONALITY 4 1239 WRITINGS 4 1183 REALISE 4 1240 YULE 4 1184 RECEIVE 4 1241 ZHU 4 1185 REDUCE 4 1242 ABUNDANCE 3 1186 REFERRING 4 1243 ACCEPTED 3 1187 REGARD 4 1244 ACCURACY 3

139 1245 ACHIEVE 3 1302 COMMAND 3 1246 ACHIEVEMENT 3 1303 COMPARATIVE 3 1247 ACQUIRE 3 1304 COMPARING 3 1248 ADMITTED 3 1305 COMPARISON 3 1249 ADVERSE 3 1306 COMPLETE 3 1250 ADVERTISEMENT 3 1307 COMPREHENDING 3 1251 AFFAIRS 3 1308 CONCERNING 3 1252 AFFECTED 3 1309 CONDITIONED 3 1253 AGENTS 3 1310 CONDITIONING 3 1254 AID 3 1311 CONSIDERATION 3 1255 ALLOW 3 1312 CONSIDERING 3 1256 ANALYSE 3 1313 CONSISTENT 3 1257 ANALYSED 3 1314 CONSTRUCT 3 1258 ANSWERS 3 1315 CONTAINS 3 1259 APPLIED 3 1316 CONTESTED 3 1260 AREAS 3 1317 CONTINUUM 3 1261 ARGUMENTS 3 1318 CONTRARY 3 1262 ASKED 3 1319 CONVERSATIONAL 3 1263 ASSIST 3 1320 COOPERATIVE 3 1264 ASSOCIATED 3 1321 CORE 3 1265 ATTEMPT 3 1322 CORRECTLY 3 1266 ATTITUDES 3 1323 COVERAGE 3 1267 ATTRIBUTE 3 1324 COVERING 3 1268 AWAY 3 1325 CREATES 3 1269 BACK 3 1326 CREATING 3 1270 BARRIER 3 1327 CREATION 3 1271 BASIC 3 1328 CRITERIA 3 1272 BECOME 3 1329 CRITICALLY 3 1273 BECOMES 3 1330 CRUCIAL 3 1274 BECOMING 3 1331 DATE 3 1275 BEGIN 3 1332 DEALING 3 1276 BEGINS 3 1333 DEFINITION 3 1277 BELIEVES 3 1334 DELIBERATELY 3 1278 BELONGED 3 1335 DELIN 3 1279 BERSIH 3 1336 DEMONSTRATE 3 1280 BINTI 3 1337 DEMONSTRATIVE 3 1281 BITTERNESS 3 1338 DEPENDENT 3 1282 BODIED 3 1339 DEPICTING 3 1283 BORROWED 3 1340 DESCRIPTION 3 1284 BRIDGE 3 1341 DESCRIPTIONS 3 1285 BRIEF 3 1342 DESIGNED 3 1286 BRUMARK 3 1343 DETAIL 3 1287 CALLED 3 1344 DETERMINED 3 1288 CARDINAL 3 1345 DETERMINES 3 1289 CARRIED 3 1346 DETERMINING 3 1290 CARRIES 3 1347 DEVELOPING 3 1291 CARRY 3 1348 DIFFICULTIES 3 1292 CAUSES 3 1349 DIFFICULTY 3 1293 CHALLENGING 3 1350 DIRECTION 3 1294 CHANGES 3 1351 DISCRETE 3 1295 CHARACTER 3 1352 DISCUSSES 3 1296 CHOOSE 3 1353 DISGUISE 3 1297 CIRCLE 3 1354 DISTRIBUTION 3 1298 CIRCUMSTANTIAL 3 1355 DOMAINS 3 1299 CLAIMS 3 1356 DORNELLES 3 1300 CLASSIFICATION 3 1357 DRAW 3 1301 COGNITION 3 1358 EARLIER 3

140 1359 EASIER 3 1416 INTERACTIONS 3 1360 ECHOIC 3 1417 INTERPRET 3 1361 EFFORTS 3 1418 INTERVIEWS 3 1362 EMOTIONAL 3 1419 INTRODUCE 3 1363 EMPHASIZE 3 1420 INTRODUCTION 3 1364 ENCOURAGED 3 1421 INVESTING 3 1365 ENHANCEMENT 3 1422 ISOLATION 3 1366 ENHANCING 3 1423 JANUARY 3 1367 ENTIRE 3 1424 JOKE 3 1368 EQUALS 3 1425 JOKING 3 1369 ERROR 3 1426 JUSTICE 3 1370 ESTABLISH 3 1427 KESHAVARZ 3 1371 ETHNIC 3 1428 KNOWING 3 1372 EVENTUALLY 3 1429 KONG 3 1373 EXAMINATIONS 3 1430 LAH 3 1374 EXCLUDING 3 1431 LARGEST 3 1375 EXCLUSIVELY 3 1432 LASH 3 1376 EXPECTATIONS 3 1433 LATER 3 1377 EXPLAIN 3 1434 LAUGHTER 3 1378 EXPLAINS 3 1435 LEADS 3 1379 FACILITIES 3 1436 LEGITIMATE 3 1380 FAMILIARITY 3 1437 LENGTH 3 1381 FEMALE 3 1438 LIMITED 3 1382 FILL 3 1439 LITERAL 3 1383 FINANCIAL 3 1440 LIVE 3 1384 FLOUTED 3 1441 LOAN 3 1385 FOREGROUND 3 1442 LOANBLENDS 3 1386 FORMED 3 1443 LOWEST 3 1387 FREE 3 1444 MAN 3 1388 FRONT 3 1445 MASCARA 3 1389 FULFILL 3 1446 ME 3 1390 FULL 3 1447 MERIT 3 1391 GAP 3 1448 MIND 3 1392 GARCEZ 3 1449 MISINTERPRETATION 3 1393 GOING 3 1450 MK 3 1394 GRASP 3 1451 MODELS 3 1395 GRATEFUL 3 1452 MODIFIED 3 1396 HEDGING 3 1453 MORPHOLOGY 3 1397 HISTORICAL 3 1454 MOTIVATING 3 1398 HISTORY 3 1455 MY 3 1399 HONEST 3 1456 NATION 3 1400 HONG 3 1457 NATURALISATION 3 1401 HOTS 3 1458 NEGATIVITY 3 1402 HYPOTHESIS 3 1459 NONE 3 1403 IDEA 3 1460 NONETHELESS 3 1404 IDEAS 3 1461 NUMBERS 3 1405 INCLUDING 3 1462 OBJECTS 3 1406 INCOMPETENCE 3 1463 OBLIVIOUS 3 1407 INCOMPREHENSIBILITY 3 1464 OBVIOUS 3 1408 INCORPORATED 3 1465 OFFERS 3 1409 INCREASING 3 1466 OFFICER 3 1410 INFERIOR 3 1467 OPINION 3 1411 INFLUENCED 3 1468 OPINIONS 3 1412 INFORMED 3 1469 OPTION 3 1413 INSTITUTIONS 3 1470 ORDERLY 3 1414 INTEGRITY 3 1471 OUTCOME 3 1415 INTERACT 3 1472 OVERT 3

141 1473 OWN 3 1530 SINGLE 3 1474 PAGE 3 1531 SITES 3 1475 PARAGRAPHS 3 1532 SMOOTHLY 3 1476 PARTICIPATED 3 1533 SOCIETIES 3 1477 PARTIES 3 1534 SOMEONE 3 1478 PARTY 3 1535 SPEAKERS 3 1479 PASS 3 1536 SPECIAL 3 1480 PASSED 3 1537 STABLE 3 1481 PATROL 3 1538 STAKEHOLDERS 3 1482 PATTERNS 3 1539 STANDARDISED 3 1483 PERCENTAGE 3 1540 STATEMENTS 3 1484 PERSONALITY 3 1541 STATISTICALLY 3 1485 POPULAR 3 1542 STRAITS 3 1486 POSITIONED 3 1543 STRANGENESS 3 1487 POSITIVELY 3 1544 STRENGTHEN 3 1488 POWERFUL 3 1545 STRONGLY 3 1489 PRACTICING 3 1546 SUBJECTION 3 1490 PRECEDING 3 1547 SUBSTANTIATE 3 1491 PRECISE 3 1548 SUCCESS 3 1492 PRECISELY 3 1549 SUGGESTIONS 3 1493 PREPARE 3 1550 SUM 3 1494 PREPARING 3 1551 SUPER 3 1495 PRESIDENT 3 1552 SUPERIORITY 3 1496 PROBLEMATIC 3 1553 SUPPORTS 3 1497 PROMINENT 3 1554 SYMPATHY 3 1498 PROPOSED 3 1555 TANNEN 3 1499 PROVE 3 1556 TAUGHT 3 1500 PROVEN 3 1557 TEXTBOOK 3 1501 PURPOSES 3 1558 THEMES 3 1502 PUZZLE 3 1559 TONES 3 1503 REALIZE 3 1560 TOTAL 3 1504 REALIZED 3 1561 TOURNAMENTS 3 1505 REALLY 3 1562 TRADITIONAL 3 1506 REASON 3 1563 TS 3 1507 REFER 3 1564 TYPICALLY 3 1508 REFLECTED 3 1565 UNDESIRABLE 3 1509 REFLECTS 3 1566 UPDATE 3 1510 RELATE 3 1567 UPDATED 3 1511 REMAIN 3 1568 USEFUL 3 1512 REPETITION 3 1569 VERSION 3 1513 REPRESENT 3 1570 VICIOUS 3 1514 REPUTATION 3 1571 VIOLATION 3 1515 REQUIREMENTS 3 1572 VIOLENCE 3 1516 RESPONDENT 3 1573 VISITS 3 1517 RESPONSIBILITIES 3 1574 WHENEVER 3 1518 SAFETY 3 1575 WORDLIST 3 1519 SALIENT 3 1576 ZAREI 3 1520 SAY 3 1577 ABOLISHED 2 1521 SCHOOLS 3 1578 ABUSIVE 2 1522 SEEKING 3 1579 ACADEMIC 2 1523 SEILHAMER 3 1580 ACCEPTABLE 2 1524 SEQUENCES 3 1581 ACCESS 2 1525 SEVEN 3 1582 ACCOMPANIED 2 1526 SHARE 3 1583 ACCOMPLISHING 2 1527 SIDE 3 1584 ACCOUNTS 2 1528 SIGNIFICANTLY 3 1585 ACCURACIES 2 1529 SILENT 3 1586 ACHIEVING 2

142 1587 ACQUISITION 2 1644 AUTHORITIES 2 1588 ACT 2 1645 AUTHORITY 2 1589 ACTIVATED 2 1646 BAD 2 1590 ACTIVITY 2 1647 BADLY 2 1591 ADDRESS 2 1648 BAND 2 1592 ADDRESSES 2 1649 BARLOW 2 1593 ADDS 2 1650 BARNARJEE 2 1594 ADHERENCE 2 1651 BARNES 2 1595 ADI 2 1652 BECAME 2 1596 ADILA 2 1653 BEGINNING 2 1597 ADJUSTED 2 1654 BELIEVED 2 1598 ADT 2 1655 BELIEVING 2 1599 ADVANCE 2 1656 BELONGS 2 1600 ADVANTAGE 2 1657 BENEFACTORS 2 1601 ADVERBS 2 1658 BIG 2 1602 ADVISING 2 1659 BILINGUAL 2 1603 ADVOCACY 2 1660 BIOGRAPHER 2 1604 AFFAIR 2 1661 BIOLOGICAL 2 1605 AFFECTIVE 2 1662 BODY 2 1606 AFFIRMED 2 1663 BORED 2 1607 AFFORDED 2 1664 BORROW 2 1608 AFTERMATHS 2 1665 BOTHER 2 1609 AGENCIES 2 1666 BOUND 2 1610 AGREE 2 1667 BREAKDOWN 2 1611 AGREEMENT 2 1668 BREWING 2 1612 AHMAD 2 1669 BRING 2 1613 AIDS 2 1670 BROCHURES 2 1614 AKMA 2 1671 BUSINESSES 2 1615 AL 2 1672 CALLERS 2 1616 ALERT 2 1673 CALLING 2 1617 ALLIANCE 2 1674 CARDS 2 1618 ALONE 2 1675 CATEGORIZED 2 1619 ANDERSON 2 1676 CAUSED 2 1620 ANIMATE 2 1677 CAUTIONED 2 1621 ANNOUNCE 2 1678 CENT 2 1622 ANNOUNCING 2 1679 CERTAINTY 2 1623 ANNOYING 2 1680 CHAMPION 2 1624 ANONYMOUS 2 1681 CHANCES 2 1625 ANSWERED 2 1682 CHAOS 2 1626 ANSWERING 2 1683 CHARACTERISED 2 1627 ANYMORE 2 1684 CHARACTERISTICS 2 1628 APPARENT 2 1685 CHARACTERS 2 1629 APPEARED 2 1686 CHENG 2 1630 APPLICABLE 2 1687 CHOSE 2 1631 APPREHENSION 2 1688 CHOSEN 2 1632 ARISE 2 1689 CHRISTINA 2 1633 ARRAY 2 1690 CHRISTINE 2 1634 ARTICLE 2 1691 CITIZEN 2 1635 ASSAULTING 2 1692 CLAIMING 2 1636 ASSIGN 2 1693 CLARIFY 2 1637 ASSIGNING 2 1694 CLASSIFIER 2 1638 ASSUMPTION 2 1695 CLEVER 2 1639 ASSUMPTIONS 2 1696 CLOSENESS 2 1640 ATHLETES 2 1697 CLUES 2 1641 ATTEMPTS 2 1698 COERCIVE 2 1642 ATTRACTS 2 1699 COLLOCATES 2 1643 AUDIENCE 2 1700 COMES 2

143 1701 COMMENTED 2 1758 DECIDES 2 1702 COMMUNICATED 2 1759 DECISIONS 2 1703 COMMUNICATIVENESS 2 1760 DECREASE 2 1704 COMPASSION 2 1761 DEFAULT 2 1705 COMPETING 2 1762 DEFENSIVE 2 1706 COMPLAINTS 2 1763 DELIBERATE 2 1707 COMPLEX 2 1764 DELIVERING 2 1708 COMPOSERS 2 1765 DEMAND 2 1709 COMPREHEND 2 1766 DEMONIZED 2 1710 COMPRISING 2 1767 DEMONSTRATES 2 1711 COMPROMISED 2 1768 DENOTE 2 1712 COMPUTER 2 1769 DEPENDING 2 1713 CONCEDED 2 1770 DEPLOYED 2 1714 CONCENTRATION 2 1771 DESCRIBES 2 1715 CONCEPTUALISED 2 1772 DEVICES 2 1716 CONDITION 2 1773 DICTIONARY 2 1717 CONFERENCE 2 1774 DIFFER 2 1718 CONFIDENTIAL 2 1775 DIFFERENTIATION 2 1719 CONFIDENTLY 2 1776 DIJK 2 1720 CONFIRMATION 2 1777 DIRECTIVE 2 1721 CONFIRMED 2 1778 DISAGREEMENT 2 1722 CONFUSED 2 1779 DISAPPROVAL 2 1723 CONNECTIONS 2 1780 DISCOVER 2 1724 CONSCIOUS 2 1781 DISCUSSING 2 1725 CONSCIOUSLY 2 1782 DISPLAYED 2 1726 CONSENT 2 1783 DISRESPECTFUL 2 1727 CONSIST 2 1784 DISSIMILAR 2 1728 CONSISTENTLY 2 1785 DISTINGUISH 2 1729 CONSTANT 2 1786 DISTORTED 2 1730 CONTAIN 2 1787 DISTRUST 2 1731 CONTINUE 2 1788 DIVIDE 2 1732 CONTINUOUS 2 1789 DIVORCE 2 1733 CONTINUOUSLY 2 1790 DIVORCED 2 1734 CONTRADICTION 2 1791 DOHA 2 1735 CONTRADICTS 2 1792 DOMESTIC 2 1736 CONTRIBUTE 2 1793 DOMINANCE 2 1737 CONTRIBUTING 2 1794 DOMINATED 2 1738 CONVENIENT 2 1795 DOWNGRADING 2 1739 COOPERATION 2 1796 DRAWING 2 1740 COSTLY 2 1797 DUA 2 1741 COUNTERPARTS 2 1798 DUTY 2 1742 COUPLES 2 1799 EARLY 2 1743 COURT 2 1800 EASY 2 1744 COVERT 2 1801 ECONOMICALLY 2 1745 CREATIVE 2 1802 ECOTOURISM 2 1746 CRITICAL 2 1803 EDITOR 2 1747 CRITICISES 2 1804 EIGHTH 2 1748 CRITICISM 2 1805 ELABORATES 2 1749 CRITICISMS 2 1806 ELECTRONIC 2 1750 CROTEAU 2 1807 EMBEDDED 2 1751 CULTURES 2 1808 EMERGE 2 1752 DAMAGING 2 1809 EMPHASISING 2 1753 DARK 2 1810 EMPHASIZED 2 1754 DBP 2 1811 ENABLED 2 1755 DEAR 2 1812 ENABLING 2 1756 DEATH 2 1813 ENACTED 2 1757 DEBATE 2 1814 ENCOUNTER 2

144 1815 END 2 1872 GOES 2 1816 ENFORCE 2 1873 GONE 2 1817 ENHANCE 2 1874 GOVERNING 2 1818 ENHANCER 2 1875 GRADES 2 1819 ENJOYED 2 1876 GRADING 2 1820 EQUIP 2 1877 GREEK 2 1821 ESTABLISHMENT 2 1878 GURU 2 1822 ET 2 1879 HANDLE 2 1823 EVERYDAY 2 1880 HANDLING 2 1824 EXACT 2 1881 HANDOUTS 2 1825 EXAMINATION 2 1882 HAPPENING 2 1826 EXCLUSION 2 1883 HARM 2 1827 EXERTED 2 1884 HARRISON 2 1828 EXPECT 2 1885 HAUGH 2 1829 EXPERIENCED 2 1886 HEAD 2 1830 EXPERIENCES 2 1887 HEALTHCARE 2 1831 EXPRESSING 2 1888 HEAR 2 1832 EYES 2 1889 HEARER 2 1833 FACES 2 1890 HEARERS 2 1834 FAKE 2 1891 HEART 2 1835 FASTER 2 1892 HEDGE 2 1836 FATHER 2 1893 HEDGES 2 1837 FAVOURED 2 1894 HEGEMONIC 2 1838 FEDERATION 2 1895 HELPFUL 2 1839 FEELS 2 1896 HELPLESS 2 1840 FIELDS 2 1897 HERO 2 1841 FILTER 2 1898 HESITATED 2 1842 FINISH 2 1899 HIERARCHY 2 1843 FIXED 2 1900 HIGHLIGHTS 2 1844 FLAWLESS 2 1901 HIM 2 1845 FLOUTING 2 1902 HOGUE 2 1846 FOCUSES 2 1903 HOLD 2 1847 FOLD 2 1904 HOME 2 1848 FOLLOW 2 1905 HOPED 2 1849 FORCEFUL 2 1906 HOPING 2 1850 FOREGROUNDED 2 1907 HOYNES 2 1851 FORMAL 2 1908 HURT 2 1852 FORMALITY 2 1909 HUTCHINSON 2 1853 FORMER 2 1910 IDENTIFYING 2 1854 FRAMED 2 1911 IDEOLOGICALLY 2 1855 FREQUENCIES 2 1912 IDIOT 2 1856 FRIENDLY 2 1913 IELTS 2 1857 FRIGHTEN 2 1914 II 2 1858 FULLY 2 1915 IMPAIRMENT 2 1859 FUNCTIONAL 2 1916 IMPLICATURE 2 1860 FUNCTIONALITY 2 1917 IMPLICATURES 2 1861 GAMES 2 1918 IMPLICIT 2 1862 GENERALISATION 2 1919 IMPOLITE 2 1863 GENERATE 2 1920 IMPOLITENESS 2 1864 GENRES 2 1921 IMPOSSIBLE 2 1865 GETS 2 1922 IMPROVED 2 1866 GIRLFRIEND 2 1923 IMPROVEMENT 2 1867 GIVERS 2 1924 INABILITY 2 1868 GIVES 2 1925 INACCURACY 2 1869 GLOBALIZATION 2 1926 INCONSISTENT 2 1870 GO 2 1927 INDICATION 2 1871 GOAL 2 1928 INDICATOR 2

145 1929 INDIVIDUALS 2 1986 LOCASTRO 2 1930 INFERENTIAL 2 1987 LOCATION 2 1931 INFERRED 2 1988 LOOKS 2 1932 INFORMAL 2 1989 MACROPROPOSITIONS 2 1933 INI 2 1990 MAINTAINING 2 1934 INITIALLY 2 1991 MALAYSIA'S 2 1935 INITIATE 2 1992 MANAGES 2 1936 INJURING 2 1993 MANDATE 2 1937 INSERTS 2 1994 MANGLISH 2 1938 INSTABILITY 2 1995 MANIPULATE 2 1939 INSTANCES 2 1996 MARGINALIZATION 2 1940 INSUFFICIENT 2 1997 MARGINALIZED 2 1941 INTEGRATE 2 1998 MARITAL 2 1942 INTELLECTUAL 2 1999 MARK 2 1943 INTENSIVE 2 2000 MARRY 2 1944 INTENTION 2 2001 MASHUDI 2 1945 INTER 2 2002 MASING 2 1946 INTERACTIONAL 2 2003 MASTERING 2 1947 INTERESTS 2 2004 MASTERS 2 1948 INTERNATIONAL 2 2005 MAXIMUM 2 1949 INTERNATIONALLY 2 2006 MEDIATING 2 1950 INTERNET 2 2007 MEDIUM 2 1951 INTERPELLATE 2 2008 MEETINGS 2 1952 INTERPRETING 2 2009 MENU 2 1953 INTERRELATED 2 2010 MESS 2 1954 INTERTEXTUALITY 2 2011 METHODOLOGIES 2 1955 INTERVIEWEES 2 2012 MINISTER 2 1956 INTRODUCES 2 2013 MISREPRESENTATION 2 1957 INVESTIGATIONS 2 2014 MITIGATED 2 1958 INVESTMENT 2 2015 MODAL 2 1959 INVOLVES 2 2016 MODE 2 1960 IRRELEVANT 2 2017 MOTHER 2 1961 ISSUING 2 2018 MOTHERS 2 1962 ITU 2 2019 MOVE 2 1963 JUDGMENT 2 2020 MUHAMMAD 2 1964 JUSTIFIED 2 2021 MULTIPLE 2 1965 KA 2 2022 MUNUSAMY 2 1966 KAN 2 2023 MUSIC 2 1967 KASUMA 2 2024 MUTUAL 2 1968 KIEW 2 2025 NARROW 2 1969 KIM 2 2026 NATIONHOOD 2 1970 KINDS 2 2027 NECESSITIES 2 1971 KNEW 2 2028 NECESSITY 2 1972 KOBAYASHI 2 2029 NEEDED 2 1973 KOHNEN 2 2030 NEGLECT 2 1974 KOWALSKI 2 2031 NEGOTIATE 2 1975 KRISHNA 2 2032 NEUTRAL 2 1976 KULASINGAM 2 2033 NEVER 2 1977 LAB 2 2034 NIK 2 1978 LATE 2 2035 NINTH 2 1979 LAWYER 2 2036 NORSYAHIDA 2 1980 LEEUWEN 2 2037 NOTE 2 1981 LESSER 2 2038 NOTICED 2 1982 LIGHT 2 2039 NOTION 2 1983 LIM 2 2040 NOWADAYS 2 1984 LING 2 2041 OBSERVATIONS 2 1985 LITERATURE 2 2042 OBSERVE 2

146 2043 OBSERVER 2 2100 PRODUCES 2 2044 OCCURRING 2 2101 PROFESSION 2 2045 OFFENCE 2 2102 PROFESSIONALISM 2 2046 OFFERED 2 2103 PROGRESSION 2 2047 OMAR 2 2104 PROJECTION 2 2048 ONLINE 2 2105 PROMOTE 2 2049 ONTO 2 2106 PROOF 2 2050 OPPOSE 2 2107 PROPORTIONATE 2 2051 OPPOSING 2 2108 PROTESTERS 2 2052 ORGANIZATION 2 2109 PROVES 2 2053 OSHIMA 2 2110 PROVING 2 2054 OURSELVES 2 2111 PSYCHOMOTOR 2 2055 OVERCOME 2 2112 PUBLISHING 2 2056 OVERGENERALISATION 2 2113 PURPORTED 2 2057 PACE 2 2114 PURSUE 2 2058 PAIR 2 2115 PURSUIT 2 2059 PAMPHLETS 2 2116 QUALITATIVE 2 2060 PARCEL 2 2117 QUANTIFY 2 2061 PARENTS 2 2118 RAMAI 2 2062 PARTICIPANT 2 2119 RANGE 2 2063 PARTISAN 2 2120 RANKED 2 2064 PASSING 2 2121 RAPID 2 2065 PATRONAGE 2 2122 RATIONAL 2 2066 PEACEFUL 2 2123 RATIONALLY 2 2067 PEI 2 2124 RATUSAN 2 2068 PERCENTAGES 2 2125 RAZALI 2 2069 PERFECT 2 2126 RAZLINA 2 2070 PERFORMATIVE 2 2127 REACHED 2 2071 PERFORMING 2 2128 REACT 2 2072 PERSONS 2 2129 READS 2 2073 PERSPECTIVES 2 2130 RECEIVER 2 2074 PERSUASIVE 2 2131 RECIPIENTS 2 2075 PHYSIOLOGICAL 2 2132 RECOGNIZED 2 2076 PICTURES 2 2133 RECONTEXTUALISATION 2 2077 PING 2 2134 RECORD 2 2078 PLOT 2 2135 REDUCED 2 2079 PLURALITY 2 2136 REDUCES 2 2080 POLICIES 2 2137 REGISTER 2 2081 POLISH 2 2138 REGRET 2 2082 POLITE 2 2139 REID 2 2083 POLITICIAN 2 2140 REINFORCED 2 2084 POON 2 2141 REMAINED 2 2085 POPULATION 2 2142 REMAINS 2 2086 PORTRAYING 2 2143 RENEGOTIATE 2 2087 POSITIONS 2 2144 RENEGOTIATION 2 2088 POSSESSED 2 2145 REPEATING 2 2089 POSSIBILITY 2 2146 REPRESENTS 2 2090 PRACTICAL 2 2147 REPRODUCTION 2 2091 PRANKS 2 2148 REQUIRE 2 2092 PREFERABLY 2 2149 RESIDENT 2 2093 PREPARATION 2 2150 RESPONDED 2 2094 PRESENTATIONS 2 2151 RESPONSIBILITY 2 2095 PRESS 2 2152 RESPONSIBLE 2 2096 PRIME 2 2153 REST 2 2097 PRIVACY 2 2154 RESTRICTED 2 2098 PRO 2 2155 RESULTING 2 2099 PRODUCER 2 2156 RETAINING 2

147 2157 REVERSE 2 2214 SLANGS 2 2158 REVIEWED 2 2215 SLIGHTLY 2 2159 RIBU 2 2216 SMALLER 2 2160 RID 2 2217 SMITH 2 2161 RINNERT 2 2218 SOFTEN 2 2162 RISE 2 2219 SOLELY 2 2163 ROBBED 2 2220 SOLUTION 2 2164 ROOM 2 2221 SOLUTIONS 2 2165 RUBI 2 2222 SOMETIMES 2 2166 RUDE 2 2223 SOO 2 2167 RUDELY 2 2224 SOPKI 2 2168 RUN 2 2225 SOUND 2 2169 RUNDQUIST 2 2226 SOUNDS 2 2170 SABRI 2 2227 SOVEREIGNTY 2 2171 SADISTIC 2 2228 SPELLING 2 2172 SAFIAH 2 2229 SPOKE 2 2173 SARCASTIC 2 2230 SPOKESPEOPLE 2 2174 SATISFACTORY 2 2231 SPOKESPERSON 2 2175 SCENARIO 2 2232 SPONTANEOUS 2 2176 SCENARIOS 2 2233 SPORT 2 2177 SCHEDULED 2 2234 STABILITY 2 2178 SCHEMAS 2 2235 STAGING 2 2179 SCIENCERELATED 2 2236 STICK 2 2180 SCOPE 2 2237 STORIES 2 2181 SEARLE 2 2238 STRANGERS 2 2182 SEEKOR 2 2239 STRATEGY 2 2183 SEEKS 2 2240 STRESSED 2 2184 SEEMED 2 2241 STRIVE 2 2185 SEES 2 2242 STRUCTURED 2 2186 SEJUTA 2 2243 STRUCTURING 2 2187 SELECTS 2 2244 STRUGGLE 2 2188 SELFISH 2 2245 STUPID 2 2189 SEMESTER 2 2246 STYLES 2 2190 SEPARATED 2 2247 SUBJECTED 2 2191 SERIES 2 2248 SUBJECTING 2 2192 SERIOUS 2 2249 SUBMISSIONS 2 2193 SERVE 2 2250 SUBSTITUTE 2 2194 SESSION 2 2251 SUBURBAN 2 2195 SETTING 2 2252 SUFFER 2 2196 SEX 2 2253 SUGGESTING 2 2197 SEXUALISATION 2 2254 SUIT 2 2198 SEXUALISED 2 2255 SUMMARY 2 2199 SHAHID 2 2256 SUPPORTED 2 2200 SHAIDATUL 2 2257 SUPPOSED 2 2201 SHAPE 2 2258 SURPRISE 2 2202 SHAPED 2 2259 SURPRISING 2 2203 SIDELINED 2 2260 SURROUNDINGS 2 2204 SIEH 2 2261 SUSPICION 2 2205 SIMILARITIES 2 2262 SWITCH 2 2206 SIMPLE 2 2263 SYSTEMATIC 2 2207 SIMPLY 2 2264 TAG 2 2208 SIN 2 2265 TAN 2 2209 SINCERITY 2 2266 TARGETED 2 2210 SITUATIONAL 2 2267 TEAM 2 2211 SIXTH 2 2268 TECHNIQUES 2 2212 SKEWIS 2 2269 TELEVISION 2 2213 SL 2 2270 TELL 2

148 2271 TENGKU 2 2328 WATERS 2 2272 TENSE 2 2329 WEAPONS 2 2273 TENURE 2 2330 WEARING 2 2274 TERRITORY 2 2331 WELFARE 2 2275 THEME 2 2332 WHATEVER 2 2276 THEORIES 2 2333 WHEREIN 2 2277 THESIS 2 2334 WHOSE 2 2278 THOMAS 2 2335 WITNESSES 2 2279 THREAT 2 2336 WONG 2 2280 TIAN 2 2337 WORDED 2 2281 TIAP 2 2338 WORRIED 2 2282 TONGUE 2 2339 WORRY 2 2283 TOOL 2 2340 WRITES 2 2284 TOPSY 2 2341 XIII 2 2285 TOUCHES 2 2342 YAN 2 2286 TR 2 2343 YAP 2 2287 TRACED 2 2344 YATES 2 2288 TRANSLATORS 2 2345 YIELD 2 2289 TREATS 2 2346 ZERO 2 2290 TREND 2 2347 ZULKIFLI 2 2291 TRIGGER 2 2348 ABIDING 1 2292 TRIVIALIZATION 2 2349 ABLED 1 2293 TRIVIALIZED 2 2350 ABROAD 1 2294 TRUSTWORTHY 2 2351 ABSORB 1 2295 TRUTHFUL 2 2352 ACCENTUATED 1 2296 TRY 2 2353 ACCEPTING 1 2297 TURVY 2 2354 ACCESSIBLE 1 2298 TUTORIAL 2 2355 ACCIDENTAL 1 2299 TUTORIALS 2 2356 ACCOMMODATE 1 2300 TYRANT 2 2357 ACCOMPLISH 1 2301 UNBEATEN 2 2358 ACCOMPLISHED 1 2302 UNCHALLENGED 2 2359 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 1 2303 UNCONSCIOUSLY 2 2360 ACCORDANCE 1 2304 UNCOUNTABLE 2 2361 ACKNOWLEDGE 1 2305 UNDERGONE 2 2362 ACQUAINTANCES 1 2306 UNDERGRADUATE 2 2363 ACQUIRING 1 2307 UNDERMINE 2 2364 ACTIVELY 1 2308 UNDERREPRESENTED 2 2365 ACTRESSES 1 2309 UNDERSTOOD 2 2366 ACTUAL 1 2310 UNDERTAKING 2 2367 ADAPT 1 2311 UNIQUE 2 2368 ADDITIONAL 1 2312 UNLESS 2 2369 ADEQUATE 1 2313 UNSTABLE 2 2370 ADEQUATELY 1 2314 URBAN 2 2371 ADHERE 1 2315 US 2 2372 ADHERES 1 2316 VIEWED 2 2373 ADJUST 1 2317 VIEWPOINT 2 2374 ADMINISTRATION 1 2318 VISITING 2 2375 ADMITTING 1 2319 VITAL 2 2376 ADOPTS 1 2320 VOCABULARIES 2 2377 ADVANCEMENT 1 2321 VOCAL 2 2378 ADVERSELY 1 2322 VOLUME 2 2379 ADVERTISES 1 2323 VS 2 2380 ADVISOR 1 2324 WALK 2 2381 ADVOCATING 1 2325 WALLAT 2 2382 ADVOCATOR 1 2326 WANG 2 2383 AFFECTS 1 2327 WANTS 2 2384 AFFILIATIONS 1

149 2385 AFFIRMATION 1 2442 ASSIGNED 1 2386 AFRAID 1 2443 ASSIMILATING 1 2387 AGENDAS 1 2444 ASYMMETRICAL 1 2388 AGGRAVATED 1 2445 ATIQAH 1 2389 AGREEABLE 1 2446 ATTACHMENT 1 2390 AGREES 1 2447 ATTACKING 1 2391 AIM 1 2448 ATTEMPTED 1 2392 AIMED 1 2449 ATTEMPTING 1 2393 AIMS 1 2450 ATTORNEY 1 2394 ALAN 1 2451 ATTRACTIONS 1 2395 ALERTS 1 2452 ATTRIBUTES 1 2396 ALIVE 1 2453 AU 1 2397 ALLEGATIONS 1 2454 AUDIBLE 1 2398 ALLEGED 1 2455 AUGUST 1 2399 ALLEGES 1 2456 AUTHORISED 1 2400 ALLOWS 1 2457 AVENUE 1 2401 ALPHABET 1 2458 AVOIDANCE 1 2402 ALREADY 1 2459 AVOIDED 1 2403 ALTERNATE 1 2460 AWANG 1 2404 AMENITIES 1 2461 AWARENESS 1 2405 ANALOGIES 1 2462 BANARJEE 1 2406 ANALYZE 1 2463 BANTER 1 2407 ANALYZING 1 2464 BANTERING 1 2408 ANG 1 2465 BANYAK 1 2409 ANGER 1 2466 BATTLE 1 2410 ANIMAL 1 2467 BAZAAR 1 2411 ANOMALY 1 2468 BEARS 1 2412 ANXIOUS 1 2469 BEATEN 1 2413 ANYONE 1 2470 BEAUTY 1 2414 ANYTHING 1 2471 BEFOREHAND 1 2415 APPEARANCE 1 2472 BEGAN 1 2416 APPENDICES 1 2473 BEHAVER 1 2417 APPLAUDED 1 2474 BEHAVING 1 2418 APPLYING 1 2475 BEHAVIORS 1 2419 APPROACHES 1 2476 BEHIND 1 2420 APPROPRIATELY 1 2477 BEINGS 1 2421 APPROXIMATELY 1 2478 BELONGINGS 1 2422 ARCHAIC 1 2479 BENEFIT 1 2423 ARDI 1 2480 BERIBU 1 2424 ARENA 1 2481 BESIDE 1 2425 ARFAH 1 2482 BHARATHI 1 2426 ARGUE 1 2483 BIASED 1 2427 ARGUED 1 2484 BLACK 1 2428 ARGUMENT 1 2485 BLAMES 1 2429 ARISING 1 2486 BLENDABLE 1 2430 ARMED 1 2487 BLENDED 1 2431 AROUND 1 2488 BLURRED 1 2432 ARRANGEMENTS 1 2489 BOKHORST 1 2433 ARREST 1 2490 BOND 1 2434 ARRIVE 1 2491 BONDS 1 2435 ARTS 1 2492 BORING 1 2436 ASCERTAIN 1 2493 BORN 1 2437 ASIA 1 2494 BORNE 1 2438 ASKING 1 2495 BOUNDARIES 1 2439 ASPECT 1 2496 BRED 1 2440 ASPIRATION 1 2497 BREEDING 1 2441 ASSERTED 1 2498 BROAD 1

150 2499 BROOKS 1 2556 CLOSER 1 2500 BRUTALLY 1 2557 COHEN 1 2501 BUILD 1 2558 COHERENTLY 1 2502 BUILT 1 2559 COHESIVELY 1 2503 BULK 1 2560 COINED 1 2504 BURDHARDT 1 2561 COLLABORATES 1 2505 BURLY 1 2562 COLLABORATION 1 2506 BUSY 1 2563 COLLABORATIVE 1 2507 BYPASSING 1 2564 COLLAPSE 1 2508 CALLER 1 2565 COLLEAGUES 1 2509 CAME 1 2566 COLLECTING 1 2510 CAPABILITIES 1 2567 COLLECTION 1 2511 CAPABILITY 1 2568 COLLECTIVELY 1 2512 CAPACITY 1 2569 COLLEGES 1 2513 CAPITALISM 1 2570 COLLOCATIONS 1 2514 CAPTURED 1 2571 COLLOQUIAL 1 2515 CARBON 1 2572 COLONIALISM 1 2516 CAREERS 1 2573 COMBINING 1 2517 CAREFUL 1 2574 COMFORT 1 2518 CAREGIVERS 1 2575 COMFORTABILITY 1 2519 CARING 1 2576 COMMENT 1 2520 CARRIER 1 2577 COMMENTARY 1 2521 CARTER 1 2578 COMMENTS 1 2522 CASUAL 1 2579 COMMERCIAL 1 2523 CATCHER 1 2580 COMMODITY 1 2524 CATCHING 1 2581 COMMUNICATIONS 1 2525 CAUSAL 1 2582 COMMUNICATIVE 1 2526 CAUSE 1 2583 COMMUNITIES 1 2527 CAUTIOUS 1 2584 COMPANIES 1 2528 CENTRAL 1 2585 COMPARABLE 1 2529 CENTRE 1 2586 COMPARISONS 1 2530 CENTRES 1 2587 COMPETENTLY 1 2531 CENTURIES 1 2588 COMPETITION 1 2532 CENTURY 1 2589 COMPETITIVENESS 1 2533 CHAMBERS 1 2590 COMPLAINANTS 1 2534 CHANCE 1 2591 COMPLETED 1 2535 CHANGED 1 2592 COMPLETING 1 2536 CHANGING 1 2593 COMPLICATED 1 2537 CHAPTERS 1 2594 COMPLIES 1 2538 CHARGE 1 2595 COMPROMISE 1 2539 CHEER 1 2596 CONCENTRATE 1 2540 CHEN 1 2597 CONCEPT 1 2541 CHOY 1 2598 CONCEPTUAL 1 2542 CIRCLES 1 2599 CONCEPTUALISES 1 2543 CIRCULATED 1 2600 CONCERTED 1 2544 CITE 1 2601 CONCLUDES 1 2545 CLARIFICATION 1 2602 CONCLUDING 1 2546 CLASSIFICATIONS 1 2603 CONCRETE 1 2547 CLASSIFIED 1 2604 CONCUR 1 2548 CLASSIFIERS 1 2605 CONCURS 1 2549 CLASSIFY 1 2606 CONFINED 1 2550 CLASSIFYING 1 2607 CONFIRM 1 2551 CLEO 1 2608 CONFIRMS 1 2552 CLICK 1 2609 CONFORM 1 2553 CLIENT 1 2610 CONFORMISTS 1 2554 CLING 1 2611 CONFUSING 1 2555 CLOSELY 1 2612 CONNECTED 1

151 2613 CONNOTES 1 2670 D 1 2614 CONSCIOUSNESS 1 2671 DALINA 1 2615 CONSIDER 1 2672 DANGER 1 2616 CONSIDERS 1 2673 DAS 1 2617 CONSISTENCY 1 2674 DATO 1 2618 CONSISTING 1 2675 DAVIS 1 2619 CONSOLIDATE 1 2676 DAYS 1 2620 CONSTITUTE 1 2677 DEAL 1 2621 CONSTITUTED 1 2678 DEALINGS 1 2622 CONSTRUCTING 1 2679 DEALS 1 2623 CONSULT 1 2680 DEARTH 1 2624 CONSUMPTION 1 2681 DECADES 1 2625 CONTEMPORARY 1 2682 DECIDED 1 2626 CONTENTION 1 2683 DECODE 1 2627 CONTEXTUAL 1 2684 DECODER 1 2628 CONTEXTUALIZATION 1 2685 DEDUCED 1 2629 CONTINUAL 1 2686 DEEMED 1 2630 CONTINUED 1 2687 DEEP 1 2631 CONTRADICTORY 1 2688 DEEPLY 1 2632 CONTRASTING 1 2689 DEER 1 2633 CONTRIBUTED 1 2690 DEFENDING 1 2634 CONTROLLED 1 2691 DEFINE 1 2635 CONVENIENCE 1 2692 DEFINED 1 2636 CONVENTIONAL 1 2693 DELIVERED 1 2637 CONVERSING 1 2694 DELIVERY 1 2638 CONVEYED 1 2695 DEMANDS 1 2639 CONVEYING 1 2696 DEMONSTRATED 1 2640 COOPERATE 1 2697 DENIAL 1 2641 COOPERATING 1 2698 DENOTED 1 2642 CORPORATE 1 2699 DENY 1 2643 CORPORATIONS 1 2700 DEPART 1 2644 CORRESPONDENCE 1 2701 DEPENDENCY 1 2645 CORRESPONDS 1 2702 DEPICTION 1 2646 COUNCIL 1 2703 DEPLOYMENT 1 2647 COUNTER 1 2704 DEPTH 1 2648 COUNTERING 1 2705 DERIVE 1 2649 COUPLE 1 2706 DESERVING 1 2650 COURTROOM 1 2707 DESIDERATION 1 2651 COURTS 1 2708 DESIGNATE 1 2652 CRANK 1 2709 DESIGNATED 1 2653 CREATIONS 1 2710 DETAILED 1 2654 CREATIVELY 1 2711 DETER 1 2655 CREOLISATION 1 2712 DETERMINISM 1 2656 CRIMINAL 1 2713 DETRIMENTAL 1 2657 CRITICISE 1 2714 DEVALUED 1 2658 CRITICISING 1 2715 DEVELOPED 1 2659 CRITICIZED 1 2716 DEVICE 1 2660 CROSS 1 2717 DEVIKAMANI 1 2661 CROWN 1 2718 DIALOGUE 1 2662 CRUX 1 2719 DIFFERENTIAL 1 2663 CSR 1 2720 DIFFERENTIATED 1 2664 CURRICULAR 1 2721 DIGNITY 1 2665 CURRICULUM 1 2722 DIRE 1 2666 CURTAIL 1 2723 DIRECTIONS 1 2667 CURTIN 1 2724 DIRECTOR 1 2668 CUSTOMS 1 2725 DISABILITIES 1 2669 CUT 1 2726 DISAGREEMENTS 1

152 2727 DISCLOSE 1 2784 EMPOWERED 1 2728 DISCLOSES 1 2785 ENABLES 1 2729 DISCONNECTED 1 2786 ENACT 1 2730 DISCOURSAL 1 2787 ENACTING 1 2731 DISCOVERS 1 2788 ENACTS 1 2732 DISCUSS 1 2789 ENALIZA 1 2733 DISEMPOWER 1 2790 ENCAPSULATED 1 2734 DISEMPOWERED 1 2791 ENCODER 1 2735 DISMISS 1 2792 ENCOUNTERED 1 2736 DISORDER 1 2793 ENCOURAGE 1 2737 DISORDERLY 1 2794 ENDEAVOUR 1 2738 DISPENSED 1 2795 ENFORCEMENT 1 2739 DISRUPT 1 2796 ENGAGE 1 2740 DISTANT 1 2797 ENHANCED 1 2741 DISTINCT 1 2798 ENSURES 1 2742 DISTRESS 1 2799 ENTERS 1 2743 DIVERSE 1 2800 ENTIRELY 1 2744 DIVERSITY 1 2801 ENTITLEMENT 1 2745 DIVERT 1 2802 ENTRENCH 1 2746 DIVIDING 1 2803 EPISODE 1 2747 DOCUMENTATION 1 2804 EQUAL 1 2748 DOING 1 2805 EQUALITY 1 2749 DOMINATING 1 2806 EQUIPPED 1 2750 DOMINO 1 2807 ERA 1 2751 DOORSTEP 1 2808 ESSENCE 1 2752 DOUBLY 1 2809 ESSENTIALLY 1 2753 DOWNTURN 1 2810 ESTABLISHES 1 2754 DREW 1 2811 ESTABLISHING 1 2755 DRIVEN 1 2812 ETHICAL 1 2756 DROP 1 2813 ETHICS 1 2757 DUTIES 1 2814 EUPHEMISTIC 1 2758 DYNAMICS 1 2815 EVALUATE 1 2759 EASILY 1 2816 EVALUATING 1 2760 ECHOED 1 2817 EVALUATIVE 1 2761 ECHOES 1 2818 EVENLY 1 2762 ECK 1 2819 EVER 1 2763 ECONOMISTS 1 2820 EVERYONE 1 2764 EDITORS 1 2821 EVIDENCED 1 2765 EDU 1 2822 EXACTLY 1 2766 EDUCATE 1 2823 EXAGGERATED 1 2767 EDUCATED 1 2824 EXAMINE 1 2768 EDUCATES 1 2825 EXAMINED 1 2769 EFFECTIVENESS 1 2826 EXAMINING 1 2770 EFFICIENTLY 1 2827 EXCEEDED 1 2771 ELABORATE 1 2828 EXCELLENT 1 2772 ELABORATING 1 2829 EXCHANGES 1 2773 ELECTED 1 2830 EXCLUDE 1 2774 ELECTION 1 2831 EXCUSES 1 2775 ELSE 1 2832 EXECUTED 1 2776 ELUCIDATE 1 2833 EXEMPTED 1 2777 EMBARRASSMENT 1 2834 EXERCISED 1 2778 EMBRACE 1 2835 EXHIBIT 1 2779 EMBRACING 1 2836 EXHIBITS 1 2780 EMERGED 1 2837 EXIST 1 2781 EMERGES 1 2838 EXISTENCE 1 2782 EMOTION 1 2839 EXISTENT 1 2783 EMPHASISE 1 2840 EXPAND 1

153 2841 EXPANDING 1 2898 FOWLER 1 2842 EXPECTATION 1 2899 FRACTIONS 1 2843 EXPLAINED 1 2900 FRAGILITY 1 2844 EXPLAINING 1 2901 FRAMING 1 2845 EXPLICABLE 1 2902 FRANK 1 2846 EXPLOITED 1 2903 FRESH 1 2847 EXPLORE 1 2904 FRIEND 1 2848 EXPOSE 1 2905 FRIENDLIER 1 2849 EXPRESSION 1 2906 FRUITFUL 1 2850 EXTENSION 1 2907 GAINED 1 2851 FABRICATE 1 2908 GAPS 1 2852 FACEBOOK 1 2909 GATE 1 2853 FACETED 1 2910 GATHER 1 2854 FACIAL 1 2911 GAVE 1 2855 FACING 1 2912 GENDERS 1 2856 FACTORED 1 2913 GENERALIZED 1 2857 FACTS 1 2914 GENERATED 1 2858 FAILED 1 2915 GEOGRAPHICAL 1 2859 FAILING 1 2916 GETTING 1 2860 FAIR 1 2917 GHABANCHI 1 2861 FAIRNESS 1 2918 GIDDENS 1 2862 FALL 1 2919 GIFTS 1 2863 FALLEN 1 2920 GIRSAI 1 2864 FAMOUS 1 2921 GLOBALISATION 1 2865 FASCINATING 1 2922 GLOSSARY 1 2866 FAWCETT 1 2923 GOFFMAN 1 2867 FEMININITY 1 2924 GOLD 1 2868 FEW 1 2925 GONNA 1 2869 FEWER 1 2926 GOODERS 1 2870 FIELDWORK 1 2927 GORGEOUS 1 2871 FIGHT 1 2928 GOVERNANCE 1 2872 FINEGAN 1 2929 GOVERNED 1 2873 FINER 1 2930 GOVINDASAMY 1 2874 FIRSTLY 1 2931 GRAMMATICALLY 1 2875 FIT 1 2932 GREAT 1 2876 FLEXIBLE 1 2933 GREATER 1 2877 FLOURISH 1 2934 GREATLY 1 2878 FLOUT 1 2935 GREER 1 2879 FLOUTS 1 2936 GROUND 1 2880 FLOW 1 2937 GROW 1 2881 FLUENCY 1 2938 GROWING 1 2882 FOCUSING 1 2939 GROWN 1 2883 FOCUSSING 1 2940 GROWTH 1 2884 FOLKSY 1 2941 GUIDE 1 2885 FORCED 1 2942 GUIDELINES 1 2886 FOREIGNERS 1 2943 GUNS 1 2887 FOREWARNING 1 2944 HABERMAS 1 2888 FORFEITURE 1 2945 HAIRED 1 2889 FORGED 1 2946 HALF 1 2890 FORGETTING 1 2947 HAMDAN 1 2891 FORMATION 1 2948 HANDICAPPED 1 2892 FORMULATE 1 2949 HANDICAPS 1 2893 FORTH 1 2950 HANDLED 1 2894 FORUMS 1 2951 HAPPENED 1 2895 FORWARD 1 2952 HAPPENS 1 2896 FOUCALDIAN 1 2953 HAPPY 1 2897 FOUCAULT 1 2954 HARDER 1

154 2955 HARDLY 1 3012 INCLINED 1 2956 HARNESS 1 3013 INCLUSIVE 1 2957 HARVEY 1 3014 INCOMPLETE 1 2958 HEADS 1 3015 INCREASES 1 2959 HEALTHY 1 3016 INDEFINITE 1 2960 HEAVIER 1 3017 INDEPENDENT 1 2961 HELD 1 3018 INDUSTRIAL 1 2962 HELPING 1 3019 INEVITABLE 1 2963 HENG 1 3020 INEXPEDIENT 1 2964 HERITAGE 1 3021 INFER 1 2965 HESITANT 1 3022 INFERENCES 1 2966 HIDDEN 1 3023 INFERIORITY 1 2967 HIERARCHIES 1 3024 INFLUENCING 1 2968 HIGHLIGHTING 1 3025 INFORM 1 2969 HINDER 1 3026 INFORMALLY 1 2970 HINDRANCE 1 3027 INFORMATIONAL 1 2971 HITCHES 1 3028 INFORMING 1 2972 HITTING 1 3029 INFORMS 1 2973 HJ 1 3030 INFRASTRUCTURAL 1 2974 HODGE 1 3031 INFRASTRUCTURE 1 2975 HOLDING 1 3032 INITIATED 1 2976 HONESTY 1 3033 INITIATION 1 2977 HOPE 1 3034 INITIATOR 1 2978 HTTP 1 3035 INITIATORS 1 2979 HUB 1 3036 INJURE 1 2980 HUGHES 1 3037 INJURIES 1 2981 HUMOROUS 1 3038 INSECURE 1 2982 HUMOUR 1 3039 INSIGHT 1 2983 HUMPHRIES 1 3040 INSIGNIFICANT 1 2984 HUNDREDS 1 3041 INSTANTLY 1 2985 IAN 1 3042 INSTINCTS 1 2986 IBID 1 3043 INSTRUCTED 1 2987 IBRAHIM 1 3044 INSTRUCTORS 1 2988 IDEALISES 1 3045 INSUFFICIENTLY 1 2989 IDENTITIES 1 3046 INTELLIGIBLE 1 2990 IGNORE 1 3047 INTEREST 1 2991 III 1 3048 INTERESTINGLY 1 2992 ILLUSTRATE 1 3049 INTERFERENCE 1 2993 ILLUSTRATIONS 1 3050 INTERGROUP 1 2994 IMAGERY 1 3051 INTERPELLATES 1 2995 IMMEDIATE 1 3052 INTERPELLATING 1 2996 IMPAIRING 1 3053 INTERPLAY 1 2997 IMPERFECTIONS 1 3054 INTERPRETED 1 2998 IMPERIAL 1 3055 INTERPRETERS 1 2999 IMPLEMENT 1 3056 INTERTEXTUAL 1 3000 IMPLEMENTS 1 3057 INTERTWINED 1 3001 IMPLICITLY 1 3058 INTERVENTION 1 3002 IMPLYING 1 3059 INTERVIEWEE 1 3003 IMPORT 1 3060 INTIMACY 1 3004 IMPOSED 1 3061 INTIMIDATED 1 3005 IMPRACTICAL 1 3062 INTRINSICALLY 1 3006 IMPRESSIVE 1 3063 INVERTED 1 3007 INANIMATE 1 3064 INVEST 1 3008 INAUTHENTIC 1 3065 INVESTIGATE 1 3009 INCAPABLE 1 3066 INVESTMENTS 1 3010 INCIDENTAL 1 3067 INVOLVE 1 3011 INCIDENTALLY 1 3068 IRRATIONALLY 1

155 3069 IRREGULAR 1 3126 LEGENDARY 1 3070 ISAACS 1 3127 LEGISLATIVE 1 3071 ISLANDS 1 3128 LEGITIMACY 1 3072 IV 1 3129 LEONG 1 3073 JAMBUNATHAN 1 3130 LESSON 1 3074 JEOPARDISE 1 3131 LET 1 3075 JEWELRY 1 3132 LEUWEEN 1 3076 JOB 1 3133 LEWIS 1 3077 JOHN 1 3134 LEXICOSEMANTIC 1 3078 JOINT 1 3135 LI 1 3079 JONES 1 3136 LIFTS 1 3080 JOT 1 3137 LIGHTLY 1 3081 JOURNAL 1 3138 LINKED 1 3082 JUDGMENTS 1 3139 LIPSTICK 1 3083 JUNCTURE 1 3140 LIST 1 3084 JUSTIFICATION 1 3141 LISTING 1 3085 JUSTIFIES 1 3142 LIVING 1 3086 JUSTIFY 1 3143 LOANBLEND 1 3087 KAMARUZZAMAN 1 3144 LOBOV 1 3088 KANESAN 1 3145 LOCALITY 1 3089 KAVITASRI 1 3146 LOCALIZED 1 3090 KEDUA 1 3147 LOCALLY 1 3091 KEEN 1 3148 LOGICAL 1 3092 KEEPING 1 3149 LOOKED 1 3093 KEEPS 1 3150 LORIN 1 3094 KHALID 1 3151 LOST 1 3095 KLIEN 1 3152 LOTS 1 3096 KNIFE 1 3153 LUCK 1 3097 KNOWLEDGEABLE 1 3154 LUMPUR 1 3098 KOO 1 3155 MACINTYRE 1 3099 KOREAN 1 3156 MAGAZINE 1 3100 KRASHEN 1 3157 MAGISTRATE 1 3101 KUALA 1 3158 MAHKAMAH 1 3102 KUT 1 3159 MAINSTREAM 1 3103 LABELLED 1 3160 MAINTAINED 1 3104 LABELLING 1 3161 MALAYS 1 3105 LACED 1 3162 MALEY 1 3106 LACKADAISICAL 1 3163 MANDLER 1 3107 LACKING 1 3164 MANFAAT 1 3108 LACKS 1 3165 MANIFESTED 1 3109 LADY 1 3166 MANIPULATION 1 3110 LAMENT 1 3167 MANIPULATIVE 1 3111 LANGUE 1 3168 MARCUSE 1 3112 LARGER 1 3169 MARGINALISED 1 3113 LASHES 1 3170 MARKEE 1 3114 LATTER 1 3171 MARTIAL 1 3115 LAUFER 1 3172 MARX 1 3116 LAUGHED 1 3173 MASCULINITY 1 3117 LAUGHING 1 3174 MASQUERADE 1 3118 LAWS 1 3175 MATCHES 1 3119 LAY 1 3176 MATERIALLY 1 3120 LEADERS 1 3177 MATTERS 1 3121 LEANERS 1 3178 MAYBE 1 3122 LEARNER 1 3179 MEANINGFUL 1 3123 LEARNT 1 3180 MEANT 1 3124 LEAVE 1 3181 MEANWHILE 1 3125 LEFT 1 3182 MEASURE 1

156 3183 MEASURED 1 3240 NEATLY 1 3184 MEASUREMENTS 1 3241 NECESSARILY 1 3185 MEASURES 1 3242 NEEDINESS 1 3186 MECHANISM 1 3243 NEGATIVELY 1 3187 MEDAL 1 3244 NEGLECTED 1 3188 MEDIATED 1 3245 NEIGHBOURHOOD 1 3189 MEET 1 3246 NEIGHBOURS 1 3190 MEETING 1 3247 NETWORKS 1 3191 MEMORISED 1 3248 NICENESS 1 3192 MENON 1 3249 NICOLE 1 3193 MENTALITY 1 3250 NICOL'S 1 3194 MENTALLY 1 3251 NIE 1 3195 MERELY 1 3252 NIGHT 1 3196 MESSAGES 1 3253 NINE 1 3197 METAPHORICAL 1 3254 NONEXISTENT 1 3198 METAPHORS 1 3255 NOOR 1 3199 METHODOLOGY 1 3256 NOR 1 3200 MEYER 1 3257 NOTES 1 3201 MICHAEL 1 3258 NULL 1 3202 MID 1 3259 NUMEROUS 1 3203 MINDED 1 3260 NURSUHAILA 1 3204 MINDS 1 3261 OBJECTIFICATION 1 3205 MINORITY 1 3262 OBSERVABLE 1 3206 MIRANDA 1 3263 OBSERVERS 1 3207 MIRROR 1 3264 OBTAIN 1 3208 MISCONCEPTIONS 1 3265 OCCASIONS 1 3209 MISTAKES 1 3266 OCCURRED 1 3210 MISUNDERSTANDING 1 3267 OCCURS 1 3211 MIXED 1 3268 OCTOBER 1 3212 MODELLED 1 3269 OFF 1 3213 MODELLING 1 3270 OFFEND 1 3214 MODERN 1 3271 OFFENDER 1 3215 MODERNISATION 1 3272 OFFERING 1 3216 MODEST 1 3273 ONESELF 1 3217 MODIFY 1 3274 OPAQUE 1 3218 MOMENT 1 3275 OPENLY 1 3219 MOMENTS 1 3276 OPERATE 1 3220 MONOLOGUE 1 3277 OPERATES 1 3221 MONOLOGUES 1 3278 OPERATING 1 3222 MORALITY 1 3279 OPPOSED 1 3223 MORALLY 1 3280 OPT 1 3224 MORPHOLOGICALLY 1 3281 OPTIONAL 1 3225 MOTIVATE 1 3282 ORDINARY 1 3226 MOTIVATED 1 3283 ORGANISED 1 3227 MOTIVES 1 3284 ORGANIZATIONAL 1 3228 MOVEMENT 1 3285 ORGANIZING 1 3229 MULTI 1 3286 ORIENTATED 1 3230 MUSCLES 1 3287 ORIGIN 1 3231 MUTED 1 3288 ORIGINALITY 1 3232 MUTTY 1 3289 ORTHOGRAPHICALLY 1 3233 NAMING 1 3290 OTHERING 1 3234 NASH 1 3291 OTHERWISE 1 3235 NASOM 1 3292 OUGHT 1 3236 NATURALISE 1 3293 OURS 1 3237 NATURALISED 1 3294 OUTBURSTS 1 3238 NATURALLY 1 3295 OUTLINED 1 3239 NEAR 1 3296 OUTSIDE 1

157 3297 OUTSIDER 1 3354 PICTURE 1 3298 OUTSIDERS 1 3355 PIDGINISATION 1 3299 OUTWEIGHS 1 3356 PIECE 1 3300 OVERLAPS 1 3357 PLACED 1 3301 OVERUSING 1 3358 PLAIN 1 3302 PACKED 1 3359 PLAYED 1 3303 PAINTED 1 3360 PLAYERS 1 3304 PARA 1 3361 PLEADED 1 3305 PARADOX 1 3362 PLEASE 1 3306 PARALLELS 1 3363 PLENTY 1 3307 PARANG 1 3364 PLURALISING 1 3308 PARIS 1 3365 POLITICSØ 1 3309 PARTIAL 1 3366 POOR 1 3310 PARTICIPATE 1 3367 POPULARITY 1 3311 PARTICLE 1 3368 PORTION 1 3312 PARTITIVES 1 3369 POSSESS 1 3313 PARTLY 1 3370 POSTULATED 1 3314 PASSIVITY 1 3371 POSTULATING 1 3315 PATERNALISM 1 3372 POSTULATION 1 3316 PATERNALISTIC 1 3373 POTENTIALLY 1 3317 PATH 1 3374 POWERS 1 3318 PATHOS 1 3375 PRACTISE 1 3319 PATRICIA 1 3376 PRACTITIONERS 1 3320 PAUSE 1 3377 PRAGMATICS 1 3321 PAVES 1 3378 PRAISEWORTHY 1 3322 PEACE 1 3379 PRANKED 1 3323 PECKING 1 3380 PRECEDES 1 3324 PEERS 1 3381 PRECISION 1 3325 PELBAGAI 1 3382 PREDICTABLE 1 3326 PELUCUTHAKAN 1 3383 PREMIER 1 3327 PENDAKWAAN 1 3384 PREREQUISITE 1 3328 PENETRATION 1 3385 PRESCRIBED 1 3329 PENJENAYAH 1 3386 PRESENTING 1 3330 PENNY 1 3387 PRESERVE 1 3331 PEOPLE'S 1 3388 PRESSURES 1 3332 PERCEIVES 1 3389 PRESTIGE 1 3333 PERCEPTUAL 1 3390 PRESUMED 1 3334 PERFECTION 1 3391 PRESUPPOSED 1 3335 PERFECTLY 1 3392 PRESUPPOSITION 1 3336 PERMITS 1 3393 PRESUPPOSITIONS 1 3337 PERPETUALLY 1 3394 PREVAILING 1 3338 PERPETUATION 1 3395 PREVALENT 1 3339 PERSISTS 1 3396 PREVENT 1 3340 PERSONALISATION 1 3397 PREVIOUS 1 3341 PERSONNEL 1 3398 PRIMARILY 1 3342 PERTAINS 1 3399 PRINTED 1 3343 PERTIGA 1 3400 PRIORITY 1 3344 PERTINENT 1 3401 PROBES 1 3345 PERUMAL 1 3402 PROBLEMATICAL 1 3346 PG 1 3403 PROCEDURES 1 3347 PHENOMENA 1 3404 PROCEEDINGS 1 3348 PHOEBE 1 3405 PRODUCTION 1 3349 PHONETICS 1 3406 PRODUCTIVE 1 3350 PHONOLOGICAL 1 3407 PROF 1 3351 PHONOLOGICALLY 1 3408 PROFILE 1 3352 PHOTOGRAPHS 1 3409 PROFITS 1 3353 PHYSICALITY 1 3410 PROGOVERNMENT 1

158 3411 PROGRAMS 1 3468 RATE 1 3412 PROGRESS 1 3469 RATED 1 3413 PROJECTING 1 3470 RATES 1 3414 PROMISING 1 3471 RATING 1 3415 PROMOTES 1 3472 RE 1 3416 PRONE 1 3473 REACTED 1 3417 PRONOUN 1 3474 READY 1 3418 PRONOUNCED 1 3475 REALISING 1 3419 PROPAGATED 1 3476 REALISTIC 1 3420 PROPER 1 3477 REALIZATION 1 3421 PROPERLY 1 3478 REALIZATIONS 1 3422 PROPOSE 1 3479 RECEIVING 1 3423 PROPOSITION 1 3480 RECENT 1 3424 PROPOSITIONS 1 3481 RECIPROCATES 1 3425 PROSECUTING 1 3482 RECOGNISABLE 1 3426 PROSECUTION 1 3483 RECOGNIZE 1 3427 PROTECT 1 3484 RECOMMENDATIONS 1 3428 PROTECTED 1 3485 RECORDING 1 3429 PROTECTION 1 3486 RECOUNTS 1 3430 PROTEST 1 3487 REDUPLICATION 1 3431 PROVIDING 1 3488 REFLECTION 1 3432 PROVISION 1 3489 REFUTE 1 3433 PROVOCATION 1 3490 REGION 1 3434 PROXIMITY 1 3491 REJECTED 1 3435 PSYCHOLOGICALLY 1 3492 REJECTION 1 3436 PUBLICATION 1 3493 RELATES 1 3437 PUBLICITY 1 3494 RELATING 1 3438 PUBLICLY 1 3495 RELATIVELY 1 3439 PUNCHING 1 3496 RELATIVISATION 1 3440 PUNCTUATION 1 3497 RELIES 1 3441 PUPIBM 1 3498 RELUCTANT 1 3442 PURELY 1 3499 REMAINING 1 3443 PURISTS 1 3500 REMARK 1 3444 PURPOSELY 1 3501 REMEMBERING 1 3445 PURSUITS 1 3502 REMINDED 1 3446 PUSHED 1 3503 REMINDERS 1 3447 PUTERI 1 3504 REMINDING 1 3448 PUTTING 1 3505 REMINDS 1 3449 PUZZLEMENT 1 3506 RENDER 1 3450 QUALITIES 1 3507 RENDERS 1 3451 QUANTITY 1 3508 REPAIRS 1 3452 QUEEN 1 3509 REPETITIONS 1 3453 QUERIES 1 3510 REPRESENTATIVE 1 3454 QUESTIONED 1 3511 REPRESENTATIVES 1 3455 QUICK 1 3512 REPUBLIC 1 3456 QUICKLY 1 3513 REPUTATIONS 1 3457 QUO 1 3514 REQUIRES 1 3458 RACE 1 3515 RESEMBLANCE 1 3459 RADIANCE 1 3516 RESHAPE 1 3460 RADIKA 1 3517 RESIDE 1 3461 RADIO 1 3518 RESIDENTIAL 1 3462 RAIMEI 1 3519 RESORTED 1 3463 RAMAKRISHNAN 1 3520 RESOURCE 1 3464 RAMPS 1 3521 RESPECTIVELY 1 3465 RAMY 1 3522 RESPECTS 1 3466 RANDOM 1 3523 RESPOND 1 3467 RAPED 1 3524 RESTRICT 1

159 3525 RESTRICTS 1 3582 SENSER 1 3526 RETAIN 1 3583 SENSITIVE 1 3527 RETRIEVE 1 3584 SENSITIZE 1 3528 REVAMPED 1 3585 SEORANG 1 3529 REVERT 1 3586 SEPARATE 1 3530 REVIEWING 1 3587 SEPARATION 1 3531 REVISED 1 3588 SEPARUH 1 3532 REVISIONS 1 3589 SEPULUH 1 3533 REVISIT 1 3590 SERVED 1 3534 RIANTO 1 3591 SERVES 1 3535 RIBUAN 1 3592 SERVICES 1 3536 RICHARDSON 1 3593 SETENGAH 1 3537 RIDICULOUS 1 3594 SETIAP 1 3538 ROB 1 3595 SEXES 1 3539 ROLES 1 3596 SEXUALITY 1 3540 ROMAN 1 3597 SHADES 1 3541 ROOTED 1 3598 SHADOW 1 3542 ROSLINA 1 3599 SHAIKH 1 3543 ROYAL 1 3600 SHALINI 1 3544 RQ 1 3601 SHARP 1 3545 RUNS 1 3602 SHEARER 1 3546 SADLY 1 3603 SHEEP 1 3547 SAFE 1 3604 SHIFT 1 3548 SAH 1 3605 SHIFTS 1 3549 SAIBAH 1 3606 SHOCKING 1 3550 SARASON 1 3607 SHORTCUT 1 3551 SARCEVIC 1 3608 SHORTER 1 3552 SATU 1 3609 SHOTS 1 3553 SAVING 1 3610 SHOWING 1 3554 SAYER 1 3611 SHYNESS 1 3555 SAYING 1 3612 SIGNALING 1 3556 SAYS 1 3613 SIGNIFIED 1 3557 SCALE 1 3614 SIGNIFY 1 3558 SCAN 1 3615 SIGNS 1 3559 SCANNING 1 3616 SILENCING 1 3560 SCHOLARS 1 3617 SIMPLEST 1 3561 SCISSORS 1 3618 SIMULTANEITY 1 3562 SE 1 3619 SINCERE 1 3563 SEARCH 1 3620 SINGAPOREANS 1 3564 SEATWORK 1 3621 SINGAPORE'S 1 3565 SEBIJI 1 3622 SITTING 1 3566 SEBUAH 1 3623 SITUATED 1 3567 SECONDLY 1 3624 SIZE 1 3568 SECTIONS 1 3625 SIZED 1 3569 SECTOR 1 3626 SKIM 1 3570 SEDIKIT 1 3627 SKINS 1 3571 SEEMINGLY 1 3628 SLICE 1 3572 SEGALA 1 3629 SLIGHT 1 3573 SEHELAI 1 3630 SMOOTH 1 3574 SEKALIAN 1 3631 SOCIOLOGISTS 1 3575 SELURUH 1 3632 SOLD 1 3576 SEMANTICALLY 1 3633 SOLID 1 3577 SEMANTICBASED 1 3634 SOURCES 1 3578 SEMINARS 1 3635 SOUTH 1 3579 SEMUA 1 3636 SP 1 3580 SENDER 1 3637 SPACES 1 3581 SENSE 1 3638 SPANNED 1

160 3639 SPECIFICATIONS 1 3696 SUPREME 1 3640 SPECIFIED 1 3697 SURFACE 1 3641 SPECIFY 1 3698 SURPASSES 1 3642 SPECTRUM 1 3699 SURPRISINGLY 1 3643 SPERBER 1 3700 SURVEY 1 3644 SPIVAK 1 3701 SUSPECT 1 3645 SPONSORS 1 3702 SUSPECTS 1 3646 SPORTING 1 3703 SUSPICIOUS 1 3647 SPREAD 1 3704 SUSTAIN 1 3648 SPREADS 1 3705 SUSTAINABILITY 1 3649 STAGNANT 1 3706 SYNCHRONISES 1 3650 STANDARD 1 3707 SYNTAX 1 3651 STANDARDIZED 1 3708 SYSTEMIC 1 3652 STANDING 1 3709 TABLES 1 3653 STARTING 1 3710 TACTICS 1 3654 STATES 1 3711 TAGS 1 3655 STEER 1 3712 TANDEM 1 3656 STEREOTYPICAL 1 3713 TARAF 1 3657 STIFF 1 3714 TASKS 1 3658 STIGMA 1 3715 TEASE 1 3659 STOP 1 3716 TECHNIQUE 1 3660 STRATA 1 3717 TECHNOLOGICAL 1 3661 STRESS 1 3718 TENDS 1 3662 STRIDE 1 3719 TERRIFYING 1 3663 STRIFE 1 3720 TESTED 1 3664 STRIKING 1 3721 TESTING 1 3665 STRIVES 1 3722 TESTS 1 3666 STROKES 1 3723 TEXTBOOKS 1 3667 STRUCTURALIST 1 3724 THANASAYAN 1 3668 SUAI 1 3725 THEORISTS 1 3669 SUB 1 3726 THEORIZED 1 3670 SUBALTERN 1 3727 THERAPIES 1 3671 SUBALTERNS 1 3728 THEREBY 1 3672 SUBDIVISIONS 1 3729 THESES 1 3673 SUBRAMANIAM 1 3730 THING 1 3674 SUBSTANTIAL 1 3731 THINGS 1 3675 SUBSTITUTED 1 3732 THINKERS 1 3676 SUBSTITUTING 1 3733 THINKS 1 3677 SUBTYPES 1 3734 THIRDS 1 3678 SUCCEEDED 1 3735 THOUGHT 1 3679 SUCCESSFULLY 1 3736 THOUSANDS 1 3680 SUCCESSION 1 3737 THREATENED 1 3681 SUDDENLY 1 3738 THREATS 1 3682 SUFFERS 1 3739 THRIVE 1 3683 SUFFICES 1 3740 TIDAK 1 3684 SUFFICIENTLY 1 3741 TIDILY 1 3685 SUGGESTION 1 3742 TIED 1 3686 SUGGESTIVE 1 3743 TIGHTS 1 3687 SUMMARISE 1 3744 TL 1 3688 SUMMARISED 1 3745 TODAY 1 3689 SUMMARIZE 1 3746 TOILETS 1 3690 SUPERIORS 1 3747 TOKEN 1 3691 SUPERLATIVE 1 3748 TONE 1 3692 SUPERSTAR 1 3749 TOOLS 1 3693 SUPPLEMENT 1 3750 TOP 1 3694 SUPPLEMENTARY 1 3751 TORTURED 1 3695 SUPREMACY 1 3752 TOTALLY 1

161 3753 TOURNAMENT 1 3810 VARIES 1 3754 TRADITIONS 1 3811 VARÓ 1 3755 TRAGEDY 1 3812 VARY 1 3756 TRAILING 1 3813 VAST 1 3757 TRAIN 1 3814 VENTING 1 3758 TRANSCRIPTS 1 3815 VERB 1 3759 TRANSFORMATION 1 3816 VERBIAGE 1 3760 TRANSFORMED 1 3817 VERIFICATION 1 3761 TRANSITIVE 1 3818 VERIFY 1 3762 TRANSLATE 1 3819 VERNACULAR 1 3763 TRANSMISSION 1 3820 VERSIONS 1 3764 TRANSNATIONAL 1 3821 VESTED 1 3765 TRANSPORT 1 3822 VICTIMISED 1 3766 TRAUMA 1 3823 VIEWINGS 1 3767 TREMENDOUS 1 3824 VIGILANT 1 3768 TRENDS 1 3825 VIOLATED 1 3769 TRIBULATIONS 1 3826 VIOLATIONS 1 3770 TROPHY 1 3827 VISIBLE 1 3771 TROUDI 1 3828 VISIT 1 3772 TRUTHFULNESS 1 3829 VIZ 1 3773 TSUI 1 3830 VOLUNTARILY 1 3774 TURN 1 3831 VOLUNTARY 1 3775 TWELVE 1 3832 VOLUNTEERED 1 3776 TWITTER 1 3833 VOSOOGHI 1 3777 TYPICAL 1 3834 WALKWAYS 1 3778 ULTIMATE 1 3835 WAN 1 3779 UNABLE 1 3836 WANTED 1 3780 UNBELIEVABLE 1 3837 WANTING 1 3781 UNCERTAINTY 1 3838 WATER 1 3782 UNDENIABLY 1 3839 WATERPROOF 1 3783 UNDERNEATH 1 3840 WEAKER 1 3784 UNDOUBTEDLY 1 3841 WEAKNESSES 1 3785 UNEXPECTEDLY 1 3842 WEALTH 1 3786 UNFAMILIAR 1 3843 WEBER 1 3787 UNFAVOURABLE 1 3844 WEI 1 3788 UNFINISHED 1 3845 WEIGHT 1 3789 UNILATERALLY 1 3846 WEISBURD 1 3790 UNIMPORTANT 1 3847 WELCOMED 1 3791 UNITS 1 3848 WENG 1 3792 UNITY 1 3849 WESTERN 1 3793 UNIVERSITI 1 3850 WHITE 1 3794 UNNATURAL 1 3851 WIDDOWSON 1 3795 UNRESOLVED 1 3852 WIDELY 1 3796 UPGRADE 1 3853 WIDER 1 3797 UPGRADED 1 3854 WILLING 1 3798 UPHOLDS 1 3855 WILSON 1 3799 UPPER 1 3856 WISE 1 3800 UPRIGHT 1 3857 WISH 1 3801 USERS 1 3858 WITHHELD 1 3802 UTILISED 1 3859 WITNESS 1 3803 UTILIZE 1 3860 WON 1 3804 UTMOST 1 3861 WORDLISTS 1 3805 UTTERED 1 3862 WORKSHEETS 1 3806 VAGUE 1 3863 WORKSHOPS 1 3807 VALUABLE 1 3864 WORSE 1 3808 VARIATION 1 3865 WRONGDOING 1 3809 VARIED 1 3866 WU 1

162 3867 YASOTHA 1 3868 YEE 1 3869 YIELDED 1 3870 YIELDS 1 3871 ZAINUDDIN 1 3872 ZAMAN 1 3873 ZAWANI 1 3874 ZONE 1 3875 ZUBAIDAH 1

163