DOCSLIB.ORG

SECOND LANGUAGE RESEARCH FORUM 2012 OCTOBER 18 - 21 HOSTED in PITTSBURGH, PA BY: University of Pittsburgh Carnegie Mellon University

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SECOND LANGUAGE RESEARCH FORUM 2012 OCTOBER 18 - 21 HOSTED in PITTSBURGH, PA BY: University of Pittsburgh Carnegie Mellon University SECOND LANGUAGE RESEARCH FORUM 2012 OCTOBER 18 - 21 HOSTED IN PITTSBURGH, PA BY: University of Pittsburgh Carnegie Mellon University SLRF 2012 | Building Bridges Between Disciplines PROGRAM CONTENTS Welcome Message........................................................................................................................................................ 3 Schedule Overview....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Sponsors........................................................................................................................................................................ 6 Organizing Committee.................................................................................................................................................. 7 Reviewers...................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Student Travel Abstract Awards.................................................................................................................................. 10 Workshops.................................................................................................................................................................. 11 Plenary Speakers......................................................................................................................................................... 14 Colloquia..................................................................................................................................................................... 18 Detailed Schedule....................................................................................................................................................... 36 Poster Sessions........................................................................................................................................................... 43 Paper Abstracts........................................................................................................................................................... 46 Poster Abstracts.......................................................................................................................................................... 88 Call for Proceedings.................................................................................................................................................. 105 Maps......................................................................................................................................................................... 109 1 SLRF 2012 | Building Bridges Between Disciplines WELCOME TO PITTSBURGH AND SLRF 2012 The SLRF 2012 Organizing Committee is pleased to welcome you to Pittsburgh for the 2012 Second Language Research Forum. Aside from its more widely recognized nickname of Steel City, Pittsburgh is also known as the City of Bridges. With three rivers and numerous hills and valleys, there are over 400 bridges within Pittsburgh city limits. We have used the prominence of these bridges to inspire the theme for SLRF 2012 – Building Bridges Between Disciplines: SLA in Many Contexts. SLA is, by nature, a highly-interdisciplinary field. We hope that this year’s SLRF will highlight the strengths of each individual discipline in which second language research is conducted, and will also provide a platform for open exchange between fields. To that end, the conference program includes second language research incorporating a wide variety of perspectives and methodologies. We hope that the diversity of presentation topics will encourage you to build bridges between your own area of second language research and others. We received a record number of submissions for SLRF 2012 and are expecting a record number of attendees. The program is very full, with three pre-conference workshops, four plenary talks, four invited colloquia, two refereed colloquia, 210 paper presentations, and 90 poster presentations. The pre-conference workshops represent a diverse range of SLA methods and approaches. Mark Davies (Brigham Young University) is conducting a workshop on practical, hands-on ways to use corpora for language teaching. Mariana Achugar, Barbara Johnstone, and John Oddo (Carnegie Mellon University) are conducting a workshop on using discourse analysis for second language research. Erik D. Reichle and Tessa Warren (University of Pittsburgh) are conducting a workshop about use of eye- tracking methods for studying L2 comprehension. We are very excited to have four plenary talks at SLRF 2012: Translation Ambiguity in Language Learning, Processing, and Representation (Natasha Tokowicz, University of Pittsburgh), Triangulating Theories, Methods, and Perspectives in SLA Research (Patricia A. Duff, University of British Columbia), Some Recent Research on Aptitude with Some Implications for Instructed SLA (Bill VanPatten, Michigan State University), and From Models to Methods: Linking L1 and L2 Acquisitional Theory (Brian MacWhinney, Carnegie Mellon University). These talks represent a variety of perspectives that exist in various disciplines of second language research. There are also four invited colloquia, chosen to cover a wide range of research programs and perspectives. These colloquia are: Second Language and Literacy Acquisition by Low-educated Adults organized by Martha Young- Scholten (Newcastle University), Functional and Formal Approaches to SLA organized by Alan Juffs and Yasuhiro Shirai (University of Pittsburgh), Developmental Perspectives on Second Language Writing organized by Dudley Reynolds (Carnegie Mellon University in Qatar), and Reading in a Second Language: Processes and Challenges organized by Charles Perfetti (University of Pittsburgh) and Keiko Koda (Carnegie Mellon University). In addition, we have chosen two additional refereed colloquia: L2 Speech Perception in Richly Informative Environments organized by Luca Onnis (University of Hawai’I at Mānoa) and Exploring the Links between Executive Function, Second Language Acquisition and Bilingual Language Processing organized by Anat Prior (University of Haifa) to complement the themes of the invited colloquia. SLRF 2012 would not have been possible without the generous support of our many sponsors at both the University of Pittsburgh and Carnegie Mellon University, listed on page 6 of this program. We would also like to thank our faculty advisers, Dick Tucker, Brian MacWhinney, Dawn McCormick, and Charles Perfetti; as well as Liz Rangel, José David Herazo, Francis Troyan, Nancy Monda, Marc Siskin, Marta Ortega-Llebaria, Andrew Phillips, and the many undergraduate student volunteers from the University of Pittsburgh and Carnegie Mellon University, without whom this conference would not be successful. We are proud to offer such a wide selection of presentations at SLRF 2012. We encourage you to take advantage of this diversity and work to build bridges between your own specialties and those of others who share an interest in the desire to better understand second language learning, acquisition, instruction, and use. SLRF 2012 Organizing Committee: Ryan T. Miller (Co-chair), Katherine I. Martin (Co-chair), Wenhao Diao, Chelsea M. Eddington, Ashlie Henery, Nausica Marcos Miguel, Alison Phillips, Alba Tuninetti, Eric Wallace, Dan Walter 3 SLRF 2012 | Building Bridges Between Disciplines SLRF 2012 Schedule Overview Thursday, October 18 Registration 9:00 am – 8:30 pm (Wean Commons) Pre‐Conference Workshops: Using Corpora for Language Learning and Teaching Introduction to Discourse Analysis for Second 10:00 am – 3:30 pm Language Research The Use of Eye Movements to Study L2 Comprehension Welcoming Remarks 5:00 pm (McConomy Auditorium) Plenary Talk I: Natasha Tokowicz 5:15 – 6:30 pm (McConomy Auditorium) Welcome Reception 6:30 – 8:30 pm (Rangos Ballroom) Friday, October 19 Registration 7:45 am – 6:00 pm (Wean Commons) Individual Paper Sessions 8:00 – 9:40 am Coffee Break 9:40 – 10:00 am (Hoch Commons) Colloquium I: L2 Speech Perception in Richly Informed Environments (Rangos 1) 10:00 am – 12:15 pm Individual Paper Sessions Lunch 12:15 – 2:00 pm Poster Session I 1:30 – 3:05 pm (Rangos 1) Colloquium II: Second Language and Literacy Acquisition by Low‐educated Adults (Rangos 2) Colloquium III: Functional and Formal Approaches 2:00 – 4:50 pm to SLA (McConomy Auditorium) Individual Paper Sessions Coffee Break 4:50 – 5:10 pm (Hoch Commons) Plenary Talk II: Patricia Duff 5:10 – 6:30 pm (McConomy Auditorium) Banquet 7:15 pm – 9:30 pm (Rangos Ballroom) 4 SLRF 2012 | Building Bridges Between Disciplines Saturday, October 20 Registration 7:45 am – 6:00 pm (Wean Commons) Individual Paper Sessions 8:00 – 10:50 am Colloquium IV: Exploring the Links between Executive Function, Second Language Acquisition, 8:35 ‐ 10:50 am and Bilingual Language Processing (McConomy Auditorium) Coffee Break 10:50 – 11:10 am Plenary Talk III: Bill VanPatten 11:10 am – 12:20 pm (McConomy Auditorium) Lunch 12:20 – 2:00 pm Poster Session II 1:30 – 3:05 pm (Rangos 1) Colloquium V: Developmental Perspectives on Second Language Writing (McConomy Auditorium) 2:00 – 4:50 pm Individual Paper Sessions Coffee Break 4:50 – 5:10 pm (Hoch Commons) Plenary Talk IV: Brian MacWhinney 5:10 – 6:30 pm (McConomy Auditorium) Sunday, October 21 Poster Session III 8:00 – 9:40 am (Rangos 1) Individual Paper Sessions
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2018 Year in Review
    2018 YEAR IN REVIEW www.cmu.edu/dietrich TABLE OF CONTENTS CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY’S DIETRICH COLLEGE OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 02 Message from the Dean 03 Facts and Figures 04 Student Experience 22 Research and Creative Projects 31 Board of Advisors 32 Alumni Spotlights 34 Achievements MESSAGE FROM THE DEAN t Carnegie Mellon University, the Dietrich College of Humanities and Social Sciences is the home for Aresearch and education focused on humanity. Our faculty and students take on problems that are important to the world. At the Dietrich College, faculty conduct foundational and deep disciplinary research, collaborate across disciplines, and share a passion for innovation in both research and teaching. Our students emerge from their experience at CMU able to communicate, think, learn and understand the world in ways that will serve them for the rest of their lives. This “year in review” is a sample of stories about the students, faculty, staff and alumni in the college that appeared on CMU websites, in the local press or the national media in 2018. In this publication, you can learn more about our newly launched Pittsburgh Summer Internship Program, our faculty members’ advocacy for the humanities in Washington, D.C., and research on autism risk-factors. The year was also full of milestones for our talented alumni, who now include a member of U.S. Congress and an Emmy Award winner. I am continually impressed by the contributions and accomplishments of our community, and even more so as we begin to reflect on the Dietrich College’s 50th anniversary, which we will celebrate in 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloaded for Free
    Salem State University From the SelectedWorks of Sovicheth Boun March 24, 2014 A Critical Examination Of Language Ideologies And Identities Of Cambodian Foreign-Trained University Lecturers Of English Sovicheth Boun Available at: https://works.bepress.com/sovicheth-boun/2/ Table of Contents General Conference Information ....................................................................................................................................................................... 3-­‐13 Welcome Messages from the President and the Conference Chair ........................................................................................................................ 3 Conference Program Committee .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Registration Information, Exhibit Hall Coffee Hours, Breaks, Internet Access, Conference Evaluation ................................................ 4 Strand Coordinators and Abstract Readers .................................................................................................................................................................. 5-­‐6 Student Volunteers, Individual Sessions and Roundtable Sessions Instructions ............................................................................................ 7 Conference Sponsors .............................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Language Education & Assessment the Effect of Cohesive Features In
    OPEN ACCESS Language Education & Assessment ISSN 2209-3591 https://journals.castledown-publishers.com/lea/ Language Education & Assessment, 2 (3), 110-134 (2019) https://doi.org/10.29140/lea.v2n3.152 The Effect of Cohesive Features in Integrated and Independent L2 Writing Quality and Text Classification RURIK TYWONIW a SCOTT CROSSLEY b a Georgia State University, USA b Georgia State University, USA EmAil: [email protected] EmAil: [email protected] Abstract Cohesion feAtures were cAlculAted for A corpus of 960 essAys by 480 test-tAkers from the Test of English As A Foreign LAnguage (TOEFL) in order to examine differences in the use of cohesion devices between integrated (source-based) writing And independent writing sAmples. Cohesion indices were meAsured using An AutomAted textual Analysis tool, the Tool for the AutomAtic Assessment of Cohesion (TAACO). A discriminant function Analysis correctly clAssified essAys As either integrated or independent in 92.3 per cent of cAses. Integrated writing wAs mArked by higher use of specific connectives And greAter lexicAl overlAp of content words between textual units, whereAs independent writing wAs mArked by greAter lexicAl overlAp of function words, especiAlly pronouns. Regression Analyses found that cohesive indices which distinguish tAsks predict writing quality judgments more strongly in independent writing. However, the strongest predictor of humAn judgments wAs the sAme for both tAsks: lexicAl overlAp of function words. The findings demonstrate that text cohesion is A multidimensional construct shaped by the writing tAsk, yet the meAsures of cohesion which Affect humAn judgments of writing quality Are not entirely different Across tAsks. These Analyses Allow us to better understAnd cohesive feAtures in writing tAsks And implicAtions for AutomAted writing Assessment.
    [Show full text]
  • People-Centric Natural Language Processing
    People-Centric Natural Language Processing David Bamman CMU-LTI-15-007 Language Technologies Institute School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University 5000 Forbes Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15213 www.lti.cs.cmu.edu Thesis committee Noah Smith (chair), Carnegie Mellon University Justine Cassell, Carnegie Mellon University Tom Mitchell, Carnegie Mellon University Jacob Eisenstein, Georgia Institute of Technology Ted Underwood, University of Illinois Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In Language and Information Technologies © David Bamman, 2015 Contents 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Structure of this thesis . .5 1.1.1 Variation in content . .5 1.1.2 Variation in author and audience . .6 1.2 Evaluation . .6 1.3 Thesis statement . .8 2 Methods 9 2.1 Probabilistic graphical models . .9 2.2 Linguistic structure . 12 2.3 Conditioning on metadata . 13 2.4 Notation in this thesis . 15 I Variation in content 16 3 Learning personas in movies 18 3.1 Introduction . 18 3.2 Data . 19 3.2.1 Text . 19 3.2.2 Metadata . 20 3.3 Personas . 21 3.4 Models . 22 3.4.1 Dirichlet Persona Model . 22 3.4.2 Persona Regression . 24 3.5 Evaluation . 25 3.5.1 Character Names . 25 i CONTENTS ii 3.5.2 TV Tropes . 25 3.5.3 Variation of Information . 26 3.5.4 Purity . 27 3.6 Exploratory Data Analysis . 28 3.7 Conclusion and Future Work . 29 4 Learning personas in books 33 4.1 Introduction . 33 4.2 Literary Background . 34 4.3 Data . 35 4.3.1 Character Clustering .
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the Workshop on Computational Linguistics for Linguistic Complexity, Pages 1–11, Osaka, Japan, December 11-17 2016
    CL4LC 2016 Computational Linguistics for Linguistic Complexity Proceedings of the Workshop December 11, 2016 Osaka, Japan Copyright of each paper stays with the respective authors (or their employers). ISBN 978-4-87974-709-9 ii Preface Welcome to the first edition of the “Computational Linguistics for Linguistic Complexity” workshop (CL4LC)! CL4LC aims at investigating “processing” aspects of linguistic complexity with the objective of promoting a common reflection on approaches for the detection, evaluation and modelling of linguistic complexity. What has motivated such a focus on linguistic complexity? Although the topic of linguistic complexity has attracted researchers for quite some time, this concept is still poorly defined and often used with different meanings. Linguistic complexity indeed is inherently a multidimensional concept that must be approached from various perspectives, ranging from natural language processing (NLP), second language acquisition (SLA), psycholinguistics and cognitive science, as well as contrastive linguistics. In 2015, a one-day workshop dedicated to the question of Measuring Linguistic Complexity was organized at the catholic University of Louvain (UCL) with the aim of identifying convergent approaches in diverse fields addressing linguistic complexity from their specific viewpoint. Not only did the workshop turn out to be a great success, but it strikingly pointed out that more in–depth thought is required in order to investigate how research on linguistic complexity and its processing aspects could actually benefit from the sharing of definitions, methodologies and techniques developed from different perspectives. CL4LC stems from these reflections and would like to go a step further towards a more multifaceted view of linguistic complexity. In particular, the workshop would like to investigate processing aspects of linguistic complexity both from a machine point of view and from the perspective of the human subject in order to pinpoint possible differences and commonalities.
    [Show full text]
  • Scott Fabius Kiesling
    Curriculum Vitae Updated May 2009 Scott Fabius Kiesling Department of Linguistics University of Pittsburgh 2816 Cathedral of Learning Pittsburgh, PA 15260 USA Phone: 412-624-5916 Fax: 412-624-6130 Email: [email protected] http://www.pitt.edu/~kiesling/skpage.html Education Ph.D., Linguistics, Georgetown University, 1996 Dissertation: Language, Gender, and Power in Fraternity Men’s Discourse M.S., Linguistics, Georgetown University, 1992 B.A., Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania, 1989 Academic Positions 2006-present Associate Professor, University of Pittsburgh, Department of Linguistics. 2006-2009 Chair, Department of Linguistics, University of Pittsburgh 2000-2006 Assistant Professor, University of Pittsburgh, Department of Linguistics. 2001-present Secondary appointment, Women's Studies Program, University of Pittsburgh. 2001-present Secondary appointment, Global Studies Program, University of Pittsburgh. 1999-2000 Postdoctoral Researcher, Departments of Psychology and Linguistics, The Ohio State University. 1996–1999 Lecturer, Department of Linguistics, University of Sydney, Australia. 1998: Contributor, Australian Linguistics Institute, University of Queensland, Australia. 1997: Acting Director, Sydney University Phonetics Laboratory 1993–1995: Teaching Assistant, Department of Linguistics, Georgetown University. Fellowships 1993-1996: Georgetown University Graduate Fellowship 1993: Linguistic Society of America Summer Institute Fellowship Curriculum Vitae Scott F. Kiesling Competitive Grants 2005 National Science Foundation,
    [Show full text]
  • Text Readability and Intuitive Simplification: a Comparison of Readability Formulas
    Reading in a Foreign Language April 2011, Volume 23, No. 1 ISSN 1539-0578 pp. 84–101 Text readability and intuitive simplification: A comparison of readability formulas Scott A. Crossley Georgia State University United States David B. Allen University of Tokyo Japan Danielle S. McNamara University of Memphis United States Abstract Texts are routinely simplified for language learners with authors relying on a variety of approaches and materials to assist them in making the texts more comprehensible. Readability measures are one such tool that authors can use when evaluating text comprehensibility. This study compares the Coh-Metrix Second Language (L2) Reading Index, a readability formula based on psycholinguistic and cognitive models of reading, to traditional readability formulas on a large corpus of texts intuitively simplified for language learners. The goal of this study is to determine which formula best classifies text level (advanced, intermediate, beginner) with the prediction that text classification relates to the formulas’ capacity to measure text comprehensibility. The results demonstrate that the Coh-Metrix L2 Reading Index performs significantly better than traditional readability formulas, suggesting that the variables used in this index are more closely aligned to the intuitive text processing employed by authors when simplifying texts. Keywords: readability, Coh-Metrix L2 Reading Index, simplification, psycholinguistics, cognitive science, computational linguistics, corpus linguistics When materials developers want to simplify texts to provide more comprehensible input to second language (L2) learners, they generally have two approaches: a structural or an intuitive approach (Allen, 2009). A structural approach depends on the use of structure and word lists that are predefined by level, as typically found in graded readers.
    [Show full text]
  • Second Language Research Forum 2020
    Second Language Research Forum 2020 C Colloquium P Paper Session L Plenary Speech S Poster Session W Work-in-Progress R Workshop OCTOBER 23 • FRIDAY S Pre-Poster Session Viewing (Access to SLRF Figshare Repository) PINNED This page provides access to Figshare, where all posters and supplementary materials are posted. We 12:00am – 11:59pm recommend attendees to preview the posters of interest before attending the live poster sessions with the presenters. The link to the database will be available October 15, 2020. 8:45am – 10:00am P Paper Session 1.C (Keywords: Morphology, Language processing, Language learning) Speakers: Jongbong Lee, Myeongeun Son, Alex Magnuson, Katherine Kerschen, Kevin McManus, Kelly Bayas, Yulia Khoruzhaya, Jingyuan Zhuang, Maria Kostromitina, Vedran Dronjic, Daniel Keller, Maren Greve, Tiana Covic, Tali Bitan, Mathieu Lecouvet [8:45 am - 9:00 am] Attention to Form and Meaning in Written Modality: Evidence from L2 Learners’ Eye Movements - Myeongeun Son & Jongbong Lee Motivated by a series of replication studies on simultaneous attention to form and meaning, this study revisits L2 learners’ online processing of text by using eye-tracking as an unobtrusive method to provide concurrent data. The L2 learners’ (a) responses to the comprehension questions and (b) reading behaviors reflected in eye movement data demonstrate that they attended to form and meaning simultaneously, consistent with previous studies. --- [9:00 am - 9:15 am] How Input Variability Affects the Learning of Case and Number Morphology - Vedran Dronjic, Daniel Keller, Maria Kostromitina, Maren Greve & Tiana Covic We trained English speakers to understand sentences featuring case (inessive, superessive) and number (singular, plural) inflection in three typologically distinct artificial languages.
    [Show full text]
  • Validity of a Computational Linguistics-Derived Automated Health Literacy Measure Across Race/Ethnicity: Findings from the ECLIPPSE Project
    Validity of a Computational Linguistics-Derived Automated Health Literacy Measure Across Race/Ethnicity: Findings from The ECLIPPSE Project Dean Schillinger, Renu Balyan, Scott Crossley, Danielle McNamara, Andrew Karter Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, Volume 32, Number 2, May 2021 Supplement, pp. 347-365 (Article) Published by Johns Hopkins University Press DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.2021.0067 For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/789674 [ Access provided at 27 Sep 2021 09:00 GMT with no institutional affiliation ] ORIGINAL PAPER Validity of a Computational Linguistics- Derived Automated Health Literacy Measure Across Race/ Ethnicity: Findings from The ECLIPPSE Project Dean Schillinger, MD Renu Balyan, PhD Scott Crossley, PhD Danielle McNamara, PhD Andrew Karter, PhD Abstract: Limited health literacy (HL) partially mediates health disparities. Measurement constraints, including lack of validity assessment across racial/ ethnic groups and admin- istration challenges, have undermined the field and impeded scaling of HL interventions. We employed computational linguistics to develop an automated and novel HL measure, analyzing >300,000 messages sent by >9,000 diabetes patients via a patient portal to create a Literacy Profiles. We carried out stratified analyses among White/non- Hispanics, Black/ non- Hispanics, Hispanics, and Asian/ Pacific Islanders to determine if the Literacy Profile has comparable criterion and predictive validities. We discovered that criterion validity was consistently high across all groups (c- statistics 0.82– 0.89). We observed consistent relation- ships across racial/ ethnic groups between HL and outcomes, including communication, adherence, hypoglycemia, diabetes control, and ED utilization. While concerns have arisen regarding bias in AI, the automated Literacy Profile appears sufficiently valid across race/ ethnicity, enabling HL measurement at a scale that could improve clinical care and popu- lation health among diverse populations.
    [Show full text]
  • EMPIRICAL STUDY Particle Placement in Learner Language
    Language Learning ISSN 0023-8333 EMPIRICAL STUDY Particle Placement in Learner Language Stefanie Wulff and Stefan Th. Gries University of Florida and University of California at Santa Barbara This study presents the first multifactorial corpus-based analysis of verb–particle con- structions in a data sample comprising spoken and written productions by intermediate- level learners of English as a second language from 17 language backgrounds. We annotated 4,911 attestations retrieved from native speaker and language learner corpora for 14 predictors, including syntactic complexity, rhythmic and segment alternation, and the verb framing of the speaker’s native language. A multifactorial prediction and deviation analysis using regression (Gries & Deshors, 2014), which stacks multiple regression analyses to compare native speaker and learner productions in identical con- texts, revealed a complex picture in which processing demands, input effects, and native language typology jointly shape the degree to which learners’ choices of constructions are nativelike or not. Keywords verb–particle construction; particle placement; learner corpus research; multifactorial regression; mixed-effects model; second language Introduction The acquisition of multiword units constitutes a challenging aspect of learning a language, be it a learner’s first language (L1) or second language (L2). One type of multiword unit in English is verb–particle constructions (VPCs; also called transitive phrasal verbs), that is, combinations of a verb and a particle such as pick up NP, take out NP, or throw away NP (where NP stands for a noun phrase). VPCs are particularly difficult to acquire for several reasons. For one, they, although ubiquitous in English, are not particularly frequent in non- Germanic languages, so many L2 learners of English do not benefit from having We are grateful to the three anonymous reviewers and to Associate Editor Scott Crossley for their helpful and insightful comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Mouton De Gruyter | IRAL 49-1 (2011) | 1St Proofs Scott Crossley and Thomas Lee Salsbury / [email protected], [email protected]
    Mouton de Gruyter | IRAL 49-1 (2011) | 1st proofs Scott Crossley and Thomas Lee Salsbury / [email protected], [email protected] The development of lexical bundle accuracy and production Please note: page- and linebreaks are temporary; overlong lines, orphans/widows, and split examples will be dealt with after your corrections have been incorporated; there is no need to mark split examples or bad page breaks. Typesetter’s notes/queries /1/ Article adapted to IRAL style sheet. There is a huge number of minor changes and corrections, please carefully check the file for errors. Preliminary page and line breaks 1-iral-49-1 — 2011/1/29 18:46—1— #2—ce Mouton de Gruyter The development of lexical bundle accuracy and production in English second language speakers SCOTT CROSSLEY AND THOMAS LEE SALSBURY Abstract Six adult, second language (L2) English learners were observed over a period of one year to explore the development of lexical bundles (i.e., bigrams) in nat- urally produced, oral English. Total bigrams produced by the L2 learners over the year of observation that were shared with native speakers were compared using a frequency index to explore L2 learner’s accuracy of use. The results of the study support the notion that bigram accuracy increases as a function of time spent learning English. This finding lends credence to the notion that the production of lexical bundles by L2 learners begins to develop in paral- lel with the frequency of lexical bundles used by native speakers. Like native speakers, L2 learners also begin to produce lexical bundles that serve prag- matic and syntactic functions.
    [Show full text]
  • Conference Schedule
    CONFERENCE SCHEDULE Monday, March 4 Pre-Conference Workshops Time Event 8:00am to 3:00pm Conference registration open 9:00am to Workshop 1 (Day 1): R & RStudio for Workshop 2: Constructing Measures: An 4:00pm Reproducible Language Test Analysis, Introduction to Analyzing Proficiency Test Research, and Reporting Data Using IRT with jMetrik Leaders: Geoffrey T. LaFlair, Duolingo and Leader: Troy L. Cox, Center for Language Daniel R. Isbell, Michigan State University Studies Location: Mary Gay C Location: Henry Oliver Tuesday, March 5 Pre-Conference Workshops & Events Time Event 8:00am to 7:00pm Conference registration open 9:00am to Workshop 1 (Day 2): R & RStudio for Workshop 3: Corpus-based development 4:00pm Reproducible Language Test Analysis, and validation of language tests: Using Research and Reporting corpora of and for language testing Leaders: Geoffrey T. LaFlair, Duolingo and Leaders: Darren Perrett, Cambridge Daniel R. Isbell, Michigan State University Assessment English and Brigita Séguis, Cambridge Assessment English Location: Mary Gay C Location: Henry Oliver Time Event 9:00am to 1:00pm Workshop 4: The Civil and Human Rights of Language: Guided Tour of the Atlanta Civil & Human Rights Museum Leaders: Elana Shohamy, Tel Aviv University and Tim McNamara, University of Melbourne Meeting Location TBD Time Event 11:00am to 3:30pm ILTA Pre-Conference Executive Advisory Board Meeting Location: TBD 4:00 to Newcomer & Strategic Planning Session 5:15pm Location: Decatur B CONFERENCE SCHEDULE Tuesday, March 5 Time Event 5:15 to Alan
    [Show full text]