MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388989785 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v13n6p55

From Corpus to Classroom: Teaching Semi-technical Business English Vocabulary

2023· article· en· W4388989785 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lidan Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSecond Language Acquisition and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGuangdong Office of Philosophy and Social Science
KeywordsCorpus linguisticsComputer scienceVocabularyCollocation (remote sensing)CocaBusiness EnglishFocus (optics)LinguisticsNatural language processingArtificial intelligencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Semi-technical vocabulary has been considered a challenging and neglected area of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) instruction. This paper employs AntConc to extract a keyword list of a self-compiled business English textbook corpus (BETC). Through manual identification from corpus keywords, we focus on semi-technical vocabulary, addressing the fundamental question of “how to identify”. We also draw upon pedagogical materials from the academic sub-corpora within the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) to design a corpus-based language pedagogy (CBLP) lesson. This lesson serves as a model for instructing the multifaceted meanings and diverse patterns of the semi-technical word “default” across various disciplines and contexts, addressing the question of “how to teach”. Our research leverages the rich resources provided by pedagogical corpora, offering in-depth analysis, including collocation, colligation, semantic preference, and semantic prosody, as effective teaching aids. In doing so, it promotes interdisciplinary, comparative, and exploratory teaching and learning of semi-technical business English vocabulary. By bridging the gap between corpus analysis and classroom instruction, it provides innovative strategies for educators in the field of business English, and by implication, in various ESP disciplines.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.112
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.112
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicSecond Language Acquisition and LearningFrench-language works237,207