| Abstract |
General academic vocabulary lists have been the subject of much debate. Because they focus on single words, they have been criticized for not considering “the importance of contextual environments which reflect different disciplinary practices” (Hyland & Tse 2007: 251). This study aims to provide insight into the reliability of such vocabulary lists by analyzing cross-disciplinary phraseological variation. To do so, I analyze the collocations and lexical bundles used with c. 30 academic verbs found in a 3-million-word corpus containing research articles in business, linguistics and medicine. The results seem to suggest that there are sufficient commonalities, both in terms of use and meaning, to justify the creation and use of general academic vocabulary lists. In addition to their discipline-specific uses, many of the verbs under focus also have general academic uses that relate to the core business of research, irrespective of the academic discipline (e.g. provide + information/insight and as can be seen in). The results of this study also demonstrate the benefit derived from adopting a bottom-up approach to phraseology, as it identified a considerable number of verb-based patterns that are not found in existing corpus-driven academic phraseology lists. |
| BibTex |
@InProceedings{ELX2018-060,
author={Natassia Schutz},
title={Verifying the General Academic Status of Academic Verbs: An Analysis of co-occurrence and Recurrence in Business, Linguistics and Medical Research Articles},
pages={735-748},
booktitle={Proceedings of the XVIII EURALEX International Congress: Lexicography in Global Contexts},
year={2018},
month={jul},
date={17-21},
address={Ljubljana, Slovenia},
editor={Jaka Čibej, Vojko Gorjanc, Iztok Kosem, Simon Krek},
publisher={Ljubljana University Press, Faculty of Arts},
isbn={978-961-06-0097-8}, } |
