*

1 2

( 1 201620; 2 200240)

NEW JDEST

H0 A 1004 6038 2013 04 0062 05

1 NEW-JDEST

Sinclair 2004a 82
terminological tendency

1
phraseolog- 2

ical tendency 3

2 NEW-JDEST
Stubbs 2009 119 NEW-JDEST



JDEST 2000 2006

41

NEW-JDEST
Sinclair19912004b 1
202 181 33341
2006 Stubbs
2001
2009 Tognini-Bonelli
2001 Hunston
2002 6831693
2009 Biber et al 2004 Hoey2005 Teubert2005
2008 208
410 1
1 NEW-JDEST
Granger M eunier
2008
text samples 1202 Av w ord length 5 08
range of text size 181 33341 Sentences 223615
average text size 5683 Sent length 25 96
tokens 6831693 Std sent length 19 00

types 208410 Paragraphs 18367

type / token ratio 3 05 Para Length 104 76
standardized type / token 40 40 Std para length 288 95


Hoey2005 Sinclair2006 Stubbs 2010 45
M I
2009

NEW-JDEST 55527
2 6 1
283
368

* 11D11402
11D11412

62
+G E F H L KIM N K G J F M
. 74 55% 22 10%
- 3 03% 0 30% 0 02% Hunston Francis
+ 2 2000 270 NEW-JDEST
.
*
, DET DATA V that
data suggest thattable # shows that
figure
:@A9=;? >6?;D6;9B 6?8 C<9=A C967<=?;

2 # illustrates DET theourthese

% % V BE showreveal
2 31724 56 83 956798 74 55 reportpresentindicatesuggest DATA
3 19879 35 61 283659 22 10 data evidencetablefigureexpla-
4 3456 6 19 38859 3 03 nationreasonanalysisexperimentobservation
5 425 0 76 3774 0 30 DATA paradigmatic parallels
6 43 0 08 278 0 02 NEW-JDEST DATA 4
55527 100 1283368 100 tablefiguredataevidence 12
3
3
3
Firth 1957 contextual theory of meaning
DATA
Table Figure Data Evidence
V

1 show 128 74 47 9

2 summarize 41 0 0 0

3 report 11 0 11 0

4 present 70 0 0 1

63 5 list 26 0 0 0
6 indicate 27 13 35 15
7 illustrate 0 73 1 0
8 reveal 5 4 12 0
9 suggest 1 0 62 81
NEW-JDEST 10 support 0 0 12 18
11 point to 0 0 0 7

12 plot 0 9 0 0

show indicate
4

report 2 table11 data11
summarize table 41
table 309
show presentsummarizeindicate 8
3 1 evidence
131 suggest
3


1 3 table# presents that figure# illustrates that evi-
dence points to

table
# illustrates that figure # points toevidence presents that

2


number ofthe amount of DET + ADJ + N +

of the ability tothe answer tothe approach to
DET + ADJ + N + to


NEW- the topic ofan introduction
JDEST
to the topic toan introduction
of

DET + ADJ + N + of
1 This PAPE Vs this paper describesthis pa- a number ofa couple ofa w ay ofa small portion of
per / study aims tothis paper is dev oted toChapter # discus- DET aan
sesthe / this study examines the of number
2 AC I / we MODAL V in this sectionwe will dis- couplew ay small portion
cussin this paperwe intend toin section / chapter #we exam-
inein this paperw e ex pect to
Sw ales 1990 160
2 1
NEW-JDEST

1 this paper is devoted to 2
in this paperwe expect to
this paper expects to in this paperwe
are devoted to
Sinclair
2004a 116 Kent
2000 393
Williams
collocational framew ork

NEW-
Hunston Francis
2000 31
JDEST

2008 28 Sinclair

1991 7

DET +


ADJ + N + ofDET + ADJ + N + to
3 2
4

4



DET + ADJ + N + of a couple of 61
NEW-JDEST
a number of 1511

a small portion of 21

a w ay of 151

the amount of 621
the topic of 49
DET + ADJ + N + to the ability to 455 note that it is important / interesting to note
the answ er to 60 that
the approach to 32 note
the attempt to 48 it
the introduction to 79
the key to 93 note that hard-

4 knowledge discipline
a couple ofa it is important / interesting to

64
+G E F H L KIM N K G J F M
. note that soft-knowledge disci-
- pline personal
+ involvement we can see that
.
*

, We MODAL V that we can see that we as-
sume thatwe can say thatwe can find out
:@A9=;? >6?;D6;9B 6?8 C<9=A C967<=?;

We M ODAL V that we
M ODAL can V
seefindsayassumeunderstand
We

We
Hyland 2002 3 3


reader-oriented hedge




This PAPE
we can see that Vs
88
5
5 w e can see ( that)
T0058TP3B1974TH From the fundamental this paper describesthe / this article examines
1 w e can see that
our discussion above reasons fo this paper has
2
Within an enhanceddee-
w e can see that
it makes sense to describedthe / this article has examined
65 per investigation study th

In looking at the text w ords like Gover-
3 w e can see that 1 paperarticlebook
show n in Figure 4 nor and
the purpose of this paperthe objective of this article
116 Israeli executives the most important
4 w e can see that the aim of this book the purpose of this paper
From the analysis practic
r example w ith managers according to Table 2
5 w e can see that
A B and C First 3alth studyprojectprogram the
he frame format of Token some similarities purpose of this study the purpose of this study
6 w e can see
ing Fig 3 13 to Ethernet a
the objective of this studythe aim of this project NEW-JD-
ts If w e consider these be- other possibilities EST the purpose of this paper 28
7 w e can see that
liefs briefly also h

27
successful attempt Loo- The Love
8 w e can see that the purpose of this paper is to
king at the index Song of J Alfr
truction Looking back up- the Grant adminis-

9 w e can see that
on this episode tration f
Figure 3 From a popula- these larger trends
10 w e can see
tion standpoint as w ell as the purpose of this study
5 we can see that 22
17 6 11
shown in Figure 4 3 according to Table 3 the purpose of this
5 Fig 3 13 6 Looking at the index study was to
8 From our discus-
sion above 1 Within an enhanceddeeper investiga-
tion 2 From the analysis 4 Looking back
upon this episode 9 we can see study
that
5 6 10




4HoeyM 2005 Lexical Priming A New Theory of LanguageM

London outledge

5HunstonS G Francis 2000 Pattern G rammar A Corpus-driven
Approach to the Lexical G rammar of EnglishM Amsterdam /
Philadelphia John Benjamins
6Hunston S 2002 Pattern grammar
language teaching and linguistic var-

iationA In eppenM Fitzmanurice D Biber eds Using

Corpora to Explore Linguistic VariationC Amsterdam Benjamins
4 7HunstonS 2008 Starting w ith the small w ords Patternslexis and
semantic sequencesJ International Journal of Corpus Linguistics


3 271 295
8HunstonS 2009 The usefulness of corpus-based descriptions of

English for learners The case of relative frequencyA In K Ai-
jmer ed Corpora and Language TeachingC Amsterdam /

Philadelphia John Benjamins Publishing Company

9HylandK 2002 Authority and invisibility Authorial identity in aca-

demic w ritingJ Journal of Pragmatics 8 1091 1112
10KentA J Williams 2000 Encyclopedia of Microcomputers

Vol 25 M New York Marcel Dekker Inc

11SinclairJ 1991 CorpusConcordance and CollocationM Ox-

ford Oxford University Press
12SinclairJ 2004a Progress and prospects in corpus linguisticsJ
Modern Foreign Languages 2 114 128
13SinclairJ 2004b Trust the Text LexisCorpusDiscourseM
London outledge
NEW-JDEST Firth

14SinclairJ 2006 Linear Unit G rammar Integrating speech and

Firth writingM Amsterdam / Philadelphia John Benjamins Publishing
1957 7 Company
15SinclairJ 2008 The phrasethe w hole phraseand nothing but the

phraseA In S Granger F Meunier eds Phraseology An
Interdisciplinary Perspective C Amsterdam / Philadelphia John
Sin- Benjamins Publishing Company
16StubbsM 2001 Words and Phrases Corpus Studies of Lexical Se-
clair 2008 409
manticsM Oxford Blackw ell Publishers
17StubbsM 2009 The search for units of meaning Sinclair on em-
pirical semanticsJ Applied Linguistics 1 115 137
18Sw alesJ 1990 G enre AnalysisM Cambridge Cambridge Uni-

versity Press
19Tognini-BonelliE 2001 Corpus Linguistics at WorkM Amster-
dam / Philadelphia John Benjamins Publishing Company
a central descriptive mechanism of language in use 20TeubertW 2005 My version of corpus linguisticsJ Internation-
Stubbs 2009 119 al Journal of Corpus Linguistics 1 1 13
21 2010
most of w ords have no meaning in isolationor at least J 2 45 49
are very ambiguousbut have meaning w hen they occur in a particular 22 2008 J 2
phraseology Hunston Francis 2000 270 23 32
# table # table 1
table 10table 4 1
Abstract Based on the NEW-JDEST corpusthis paper describes
There is ultimately no distinction betw een form and mean-
and generalizes the co-selection mechanism in English academic
ing Sinclair1991 7
texts The corpus evidence suggests that co-selection is at the
KolbD 1981 Learn-
ing styles and disciplinary differencesA In A Chickering ed The very heart of choosing language forms to realize experiential
Modern American CollegeC San Francisco Jossey Bass stanceand organizational meanings in academic text produc-
The complete meaning of a w ord is alw ays contextual tion Conventionality prevails into every aspect of language use
and no study of meaning apart from a complete context can be taken and co-selection is going on at three levels the lexico-grammati-
seriously Firth1957 7 cal levelthe research discipline leveland the meta-discoursal
level The co-selection mechanism may provide strong indica-
tions that formmeaning and context are essentially an integrated
1BiberD S Conrad V Cortes 2004 If you look at Lexical w hole and also lend support to the justifiability and applicability
bundles in university teaching and textbooksJ Applied Linguis-
of the extended units of meaning The co-selection also re-
tics 3 371 405
veals that the phraseological sequenceas the normal primary
2Firth J 1957 Papers in Linguistics 1934 1951M London Ox-
carrier of meaning in academic textsis actually the place w here
ford University Press
3GrangerS F Meunier 2008 Phraseology An Interdisciplinary structures are engineered to allow meanings to take shape
PerspectiveM Amsterdam / Philadelphia John Benjamins Publish- Key Words co-selection language form mechanism of meaning
ing Company realization phraseological sequence phraseological patterning

66