Reading Prompt 9 reply

Corpus linguistics is defined the same by Barbierie and Conrad, with Conrad going into a great deal more detail. In its simplest definition it’s “the study of language that relies on computer-assisted techniques to analyze large, principled databases of naturally occurring language”. Conrad delves further and comments its changing grammar research. Corpus-based research looks at grammatical patterns as they vary across registers. It also can be used to research connections between grammar and the lexicon—lexicogrammatical connection. Conrad mentions a third use of corpus linguistics is that it will allow grammar teaching to become more focused on conditions of use.
I didn’t see in either article discussion teacher excitement about corpus linguistics. Rather Conrad’s excitement about it was seen throughout her article. Her examples were great illustrations of the value of corpora. She makes a good point that corpora research could give teachers and texts a clearer understanding of typical uses of words/clauses, rather than having to rely on judgments of grammatical accuracy. Another good point is that teachers and teachers-in-training need to be targeted more to spread the word of “corpus-based research”.
I could envision using corpora to supplement textbook series based-lessons and classroom activities. My corpus-based research could focus on register variation of target words that can be confusing to my learners. Or perhaps frequency patterns could be analyzed to help me decide if emphasis is needed in the classroom. For advanced level students, viewing corpora could be learning lessons themselves. Depending on the target word(s)/clause, objectives could be conditions of use, register variation or frequency patterns. After reading both articles, corpus linguistics definitely has a place in the TESOL arena. It is a new view of grammar and should be infused into grammar teaching, as a compliment, but not a replacement of such.