Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics

Intensification strength in speech: language-specific preferences and differences between native and learner language

Isa Hendrikx, Kristel Van Goethem, Natacha Buntinx — Thu, 14 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0100

In this article we analyse the use of intensification in the spoken productions of French-speaking learners of Dutch and English. We compare the strength of intensifiers used by learners in their first language (L1) and in their additional language (AL), and contrast these results with data from control groups of L1 speakers. Our corpus results indicate that L1 English speakers tend to intensify more frequently but opt for weaker intensifiers, while L1 French speakers intensify less frequently but use stronger intensifiers. L1 Dutch speakers take the middle position in both aspects. The analysis of the learner corpora reveals overall more similarities between AL English and L1 English than between AL Dutch and L1 Dutch, confirming the trends observed in previous studies on the same learners (Hendrikx, 2019).

Taming our Wild Data

Tue, 26 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0100

Many research questions in the field of applied linguistics are answered by manually analyzing data collections or corpora: collections of spoken, written and/or visual communicative messages. In this kind of quantitative content analysis, the coding of subjective language data often leads to disagreement among raters. In this paper, we discuss causes of and solutions to disagreement problems in the analysis of discourse. We discuss crucial factors determining the quality and outcome of corpus analyses, and focus on the sometimes tense relation between reliability and validity. We evaluate formal assessments of intercoder reliability. We suggest a number of ways to improve the intercoder reliability, such as the precise specification of the variables and their coding categories and carving up the coding process into smaller substeps. The paper ends with a reflection on challenges for future work in discourse analysis, with special attention to big data and multimodal discourse.

Diamond is a scientist’s best friend

Thu, 14 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0100

The field of applied linguistics is increasingly adopting open science practices. As open access publication gains traction, ethical issues emerge that need to be addressed by the field. This viewpoint paper addresses the concern that open science is not equally open for everyone. This paper describes how open access publication is increasingly being commercialized and explains how open access publication coincides with systemic inequality. We offer the following viewpoints for the field to consider:

We are morally obligated to make our research output accessible.
Hybrid, Gold, and Green open access publishing lead to systemic inequality in open access publishing, benefiting commercial publishers and those working in research-intensive universities and rich countries.
Diamond open access publication removes the systemic inequalities; hence, Diamond open access should be prioritized over Hybrid, Gold, and Green open access publication models.
We should move away from publish-and-read agreements and Green open access publishing, because they prevent system change.
Through our choices in our work as researchers, editors, reviewers, authors and teachers, we can contribute to the transition towards truly equitable open access publishing practices.
Senior researchers are in the position and have the moral obligation to be drivers of these changes.