Linguistic variation in the lexical episodes of university classroom talk

Language in Use: Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics series

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 150-162

  Csomay, Eniko ^a  

^a SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33744937214     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (19)

1. Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. -. 1995. Dimensions of register variation: A cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. -. 2003. Variation among university spoken and written registers: A new multi-dimensional analysis. In Corpus analysis: Language structure and language use, ed. C. Meyer and P. Leistyna, 47-70. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
4. Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.
5. Biber, Douglas, Susan Conrad, Randi Reppen, Patricia Byrd, and Marie Helt. 2002. Speaking and writing in the university: A multidimensional comparison. TESOL Quarterly 36:9-48.
6. Biber, Douglas, Eniko Csomay, James K. Jones, and Casey Keck. 2004. Vocabulary-based discourse patterns in university registers. In Corpora and discourse, ed. Allen Partington, John Morley, and L. Haarman. Bern: Peter Lang.
7. Csomay, Eniko. 2000. Academic lectures: An interface of an oral/literate continuum. NovELTy, 7, no. 3:30-48.
8. -. 2002a. Variation in academic lectures: interactivity and level of instruction. In Using corpora to explore linguistic variation, ed. Randi Reppen, Susan Fitzmaurice and Douglas Biber, 203-24. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
9. -. 2002b. Episodes in university classrooms: A corpus-linguistic investigation. Ph. D. diss., Northern Arizona University.
10. DeCarrico, Jeanette, and James R. Nattinger. 1988. Lexical phrases for the comprehension of academic lectures. English for Specific Purposes 7:91-102.
11. Fox, Barbara A. 1987. Discourse structure and anaphora. Written and conversational English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. Hansen, Christa. 1994. Topic identification in lecture discourse. In Academic listening: research perspectives, ed. John Flowerdew. New York: Cambridge University Press.
13. Hearst, Marti A. 1997. TextTiling: Segmenting text into multi-paragraph subtopic passages. Computational Linguistics 23, no. 1:33-64.
14. Mann, William C., Christian M. Matthiessen, and Sandra A. Thompson. 1992. Rhetorical structure theory and text analysis. In Discourse description: Diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text, ed. William C. Mann and Sandra A. Thompson. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
15. Poole, Deborah. 2003. Linguistic connections between co-occurring speech and writing in a classroom literacy event. Discourse Processes 35, no. 2:103-4.
16. Reppen, Randi, Susan Fitzmaurice, and Douglas Biber, eds. 2002. Using corpora to explore linguistic variation. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
17. Tyler, Andrea. 1995. Patterns of lexis: How much can repetition tell us about discourse coherence? In Linguistics and the education of language teachers: Ethnolinguistic, psycholinguistic, and sociolinguistic aspects, ed. J. E. Alatis, C. A. Straehle, B. Gallenberger, and M. Ronkin. Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics. Washington, D. C.: Georgetown University Press.
18. Youmans, Gilbert. 1991. A new tool for discourse analysis: The Vocabulary Management Profile. Language 67:763-89.
19. Young, Lynne. 1994. University lectures-macro-structure and micro-features. In Academic listening: Research perspectives, ed. John Flowerdew, 159-76. New York: Cambridge University Press.