Survey Study on the Use of Lexical Chunks in High School Students’ English Writing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54691/ppj0py59Keywords:
Lexical Chunks; English Writing; High School Students.Abstract
The study aims to investigate the use of lexical chunks in English compositions among Grade 2 students at a high school in Pan Zhihua, Sichuan Province, involving 100 students. Research instruments encompassed student writing samples, questionnaires, and interviews. The study employed AntConc, EXCEL, and SPSS 26.0 for data analysis. The research questions addressed are: (1) What types of lexical chunks are employed by high school students in their English writing, and what is the frequency of their usage? (2) In comparison to the English Curriculum Standard (2017 Edition, 2020 Revised Edition) for high schools, which lexical chunks are underutilized in students' English writing? Findings reveal that senior high school students predominantly utilize four types of lexical chunks in their English compositions: discourse organizers, stance bundles, topic chunks, and institutionalized expressions. Among these, topic chunks and stance bundles are the most frequently used, while discourse organizers are the least utilized. Furthermore, in comparison to the English Curriculum Standard (2017 Edition, 2020 Revised Edition) for high schools, these lexical chunks are underused, primarily due to high repetition rates, monotony, and misapplication by students. These issues reflect deficiencies in language fluency, accuracy, diversity, and authenticity.The main reasons for students' inadequate use of lexical chunks include lack of motivation, learning strategies, influence of prior learning experiences, and teaching methods. In light of these challenges, this study proposes corresponding teaching strategies with the aim of informing English instruction.
Downloads
References
Alloç, A. B., Qin, J. & Karabacak, E. The effects of explicit instruction of formulaic language on EFL argumentative writing quality[J]. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2018, 8(2): 358-368.
Becker, J. The phrasal lexicon[A]. Cambridge, Mass: Bolt, Beranek and Newman, 1975.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., Finegan, E. & Quirk, R. Longman Grammar of Spokenand Written English[M]. Harlow: Pearson, 1999.
Biber, D. Conrad S. & Cortes, V. If you look at...: lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks[J]. Applied Linguistics, 2004, 25(3): 371-405.
Butler, C. S. Multi-word sequences and their relevance for recent models of functional grammar[J]. Functions of Language, 2003(10): 179-208.
Conklin, K. & Schmitt, N. Formulaic sequences: are they processed more quickly than non-formulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? [J]. Applied Linguistics, 2008, 29(1): 72-89.
Ellis, R. The Study of Second Language Acquisition[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 1999.
Erman, B. Formulaic language from a learner perspective[J]. Formulaic Language, 2009, 2: 323-346.
Harwood, N. Taking a lexical approach to teaching: principles and problems[J]. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2008, 12(2): 139-155.
Hou, J., Loerts, H. & Verspoor, M. H. Chunk use and development in advanced Chinese L2 learners of English[J]. Language Teaching Research, 2018, 22(2): 148-168.
Lewis, M. The Lexical Approach [M]. Hove: Language Teaching Publications, 1993.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.




