The BNC Handbook

Linguistics has drawn on the large quantities of authentic data contained in language corpora for several decades now. While debates continue regarding the nature and interpretation of such data, it is generally accepted that corpus methodologies offer a valuable perspective on language, one that complements the introspective and elicited data used in different sub-fields of linguistics. Increasingly, language corpora can be searched or downloaded over the Internet, and are now therefore very readily accessible. Many also include demographic or textual metadata that make them invaluable as data for sociolinguistics. While existing corpora may have some drawbacks (e.g. where the corpus design is not ideally suited to the study in hand, or available corpora do not have appropriate mark-up), they offer great savings in time and effort compared to creating a new corpus. Moreover, especially given the increasing availability of spoken texts in corpora, they constitute excellent resources for students of different levels, for teachers looking for a quick way to demonstrate a feature of language, and for researchers testing linguistic hypotheses.

Motivation for using corpus linguistics in English language teaching is partly related to the inconsistencies found between the use of lexical items and grammatical structures in the corpora and those in traditional language textbooks that are often largely based on the personal judgments of the materials writers. This lack of fit between the language in the textbook and authentic language use has been reported in many studies; yet, an overview of this aspect has not been carried out. The purpose of this study is twofold: 1) to discuss the importance of corpus linguistics for the development of English language teaching materials, and 2) to present a survey of studies carried out in the last ten years, with particular reference to the mismatches found between the language in various corpora such as Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English (LSWE) and British National Corpus (BNC) and that used in Finnish EFL textbooks, Malaysian ESL textbooks and Hong Kong secondary textbooks to name a few. The implication of this study is to provide L2 teachers with useful information about pedagogical corpus and the ways in which they can make optimal use of a textbook’s strong points, recognizing the shortcomings of certain exercises, tasks, or entire texts and to show how they can improve the textbook and adapt their teaching materials accordingly.

This paper highlights the potential benefits of software application to teaching and learning of synonymy in higher education. Synonymy is often misconstrued as a ubiquitous area of knowledge among language teachers and learners. However, further scrutiny reveals limitless possibilities which teachers appear to have taken for granted, especially in their use of technology in the teaching process. The research methodology comprises questionnaires administered to English language teachers in selected schools. Linguistic data was collected from the British National Corpus (BNC) using search words which are near synonyms (as taught in schools) to investigate the relatedness of these words. The outcome indicates significant differences in the results of synonyms generated on BNC compared with those taught by teachers in the classrooms. The study showed that using ICT in language teaching and learning has potential and valuable evidence to show that the adoption of software to concepts in English language teaching and learning is an opportunity to acquire new technology and enhance the pleasure of learning. The increased learning possibilities which the adoption of ICT in this way will engender have transformative potentials in teaching and learning English in Higher Education. DOI: 10.5901/ajis.2015.v4n2p357

The article deals with the application of corpus-based direction in English language teaching of university students, suggested by Ukrainian scholars. The most representative corpus for English language teaching (ELT) is the British National Corpus (BNC), which offers many opportunities (e.g. search for specific word forms, search for word forms by lemmas, search for groups of word forms in the form of syntagms, etc.). The article presents the methodological algorithm of university students' work with the BNC during English classes based on the verbs denoting human emotional states. The methodology of work with BNC consists of three stages: 1) a student has to compile the initial lexicographic register of basic verb denoting emotional states; 2) a student has to measure the frequency of each unit in the corpus usage; and 3) a student has to analyse, described and record all corpus calculations. The main benefits of the findings for the future relevant studies may be described in the following way: the work with corpus tools in ELT is aimed at students performing the following successive steps: 1) processing concordances, 2) calculating the absolute frequency, 3) analysing the left and right valence, and 4) modelling clusters to build cognitive-semantic profiles of the studied units, which will allow university students to understand the essence of every grammatical, lexical, and syntactical unit.

The meaning of a word can be established, in part, by looking at the words frequently collocating with it. The present study establishes and compares the various senses and meanings of three apparently synonymous adjectives - tiny, small, and minute - by examining their immediate right collocates. The study draws upon the British National Corpus (BNC), comprising 100 million words. The corpus was accessed through English-corpora.org. The results reveal that the three selected adjectives differ not only in their frequencies and register distribution but also in their sense and meaning. Out of the three adjectives, small is most frequently used in the BNC. Moreover, the positive forms of all three adjectives are most commonly used in the BNC as compared to their comparative and superlative forms. As regards the meaning, although there are some similarities, each of the three adjectives conveys certain sense(s) which are not shared by the others. The study conclude that the three selected adjectives are not strict synonyms and cannot be used interchangeably in all contexts. The findings of this corpus-based investigation were also compared with the definitions and illustrations of the three selected adjectives in Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (2010). The results of the present study have implications for lexicography and English language teaching.

In this digital era, the role of computer technology as a resource for instruction of foreign language learners is increasing as educators recognise the ability of computer technology to produce both independent and collaborative learning environments. Computer technologies, for example the Internet, multimedia, and hypermedia have been introduced in English Language Learning and Teaching (ELLT) to foster language learning process, all of which fall under the category of Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL). Corpus linguistics is a systematic analysis of the actual (real) production of language (either spoken or written), in which texts are assembled using computer technology (concordancer) to form a large collection of authentic texts, called a corpus (plural-corpora) that comes in various sizes. However, despite immense research on corpus linguistics in these recent decades, the potentials and limitations of Data-Driven Learning (DDL), the application of corpus linguistics in English Language teaching (ELLT) have not been widely discussed. Hence, this chapter aims to review the potentials and limitations of DDL as a means of opening up opportunities for further studies. The pedagogical application of DDL was instantiated in the chapter for indicating the differences between DDL and non-DDL approaches. This insightful information is highlighted as a means of promoting DDL and producing independent learners in the 21st century classroom. The DDL type of learning also trains learners to be independent, self-corrective, constructive, and autonomous especially in finishing the communicative tasks.

Abstract: This paper explores the pedagogical implications of contrastive analyses of light verb constructions containing get and take in English and Spanish based on electronic corpora, the British National Corpus (BNC) and the Corpus de Referencia del Espanol Actual (CREA). The main tenets of collocations from a contrastive perspective-and the points of contact and departure between both languages-are discussed prior to examining the commonest types of verb+ noun combinations (i.e., take a bath, take advantage of), verb+ adjective (i.e. get ready, get worse, get angry), verb+ participle (i.e., get married, get dressed) as significant cases of so-called light, empty, thin, or verbs. A quantitative and qualitative-oriented case study is accordingly conducted, determining the weight of get and take in stretched collocations in the BNC and of the Spanish equivalent verbs constructions within the CREA. Based on empirical data obtained this way, this paper provides relevant insights for more accurate translations, helping to enhance the collocational competence of L2 students, who tend to avoid constructions including empty verbs in favour of full verb forms. The findings in this study shed light on the potential of corpora resources for improving the collocational usage of foreign-language learners, as quantitative and qualitative comparisons of collocations serve to highlight the similarities and, more importantly, the lexical, cognitive and typological differences between these phraseological constructions in the two languages, thereby substantiating the very useful role that analysis may play for teaching in general and for collocational knowledge and proficiency in particular.Keywords: Collocations, Light Verb Constructions, Translation, Teaching PhraseologyIntroductionStretched Collocations at the Crossroads in English and Spanish PhraseologyPhraseology is definitely concerned with the study of those chunks which, be they collocations or idioms, constitute some crucial cognitive, textual and pragmatic tools to be mastered by the learner. As Sokolik (2001: 487) underlines in her overview of Computer- Assisted Language Learning (CALL), corpus linguistics and concordancing can help provide the data and tools that students and instructors need to make sense out of usage. CALL applications and phraseology may thus provide invaluable resources for the student's knowledge of multiword units such as delexicalized verb constructions. These semi-compositional verb-noun constructions have been investigated under various labels in the different linguistic traditions. Other terms that are in use to denominate such constructions, parts of them, or a superset of semi-compositional expressions which will be used in this study are light verbs, operator verbs, complex predicates, support verb constructions and others. There is no consensus among the authors about what structures are admissible and different studies investigate non-identical structures. Despite this proviso, in English linguistics, the common ground is that the structures should be non-compositional and consist of a semantically low-content, inflected verb and a predicate noun (Nickel, 1968; Wierzbicka, 1982).Prior to undertaking a detailed case study exploring this phenomenon and its implications for learning, some remarks will be made on CALL, phraseology and their interface.CALL and its Role in Improving L2 LearningCALL has become a new, but well-established, scholarly domain researching the pedagogical possibilities provided by computers and the Internet for increasing learners' communicative skills (Warschauer and Kern, 2000; Warschauer, 2001; Blake, 2001; Davies, 2002; Godwin-Jones, 2005; Oster et al., 2006). CALL may be broadly defined as any process in which a learner uses a computer and, as a result, improves his or her language (Beatty, 2003: 248). …

Technology plays a pivotal role in the ESL teaching and education sector. In language teaching, gender and language research mostly favors the idea of potential differences in language use between men and women. This paper explores different indicators of gender in the writing of males and females in a large subset of the British National Corpus (BNC) covering the domain of fiction with the application of the Corpus tool. Robin Lakoff's four key linguistic terms that mark female language have been used as benchmarks against which the study has been conducted. Previous researchers like Argamon, Koppel, and Shimoni claim that females use more pronouns and a smaller number of nouns as compared to men. The hits and frequencies of Lakoff's terms and researchers' claims have been checked on BNC to get at the empirical findings. Taking general corpus BNC, corpus research method has been used to answer the research questions. The study found a substantial difference in the documents authored by male and female written text. It was also found that females use many more pronouns and males use many more nouns. Assumptions made regarding Lakoff's terms have been partially substantiated since the results vary a little concerning the use of empty adjectives like 'cute' and 'divine'. The work is a valuable addition to the existing corpus of knowledge about gender differences in language and it provides space for researchers to work in even broader perspectives.

At a time when the use of the world wide web as a source of data for linguistic description is beginning to be explored by corpus linguists, this paper considers insights which can be gained from an existing structured corpus, and possible implications for our understanding of the nature of language learning. The British National Corpus (BNC) is used as a source of data to explore semantic relations which may underlie certain multi-word sequences identified in the corpus. The analysis focuses on collocations containing verbs or amplifiers. It is suggested that the richness of the data in the BNC is still somewhat under-exploited for the description of English, and for exploring the nature of language learning and teaching.

iSpring is one of various software which is benefit in English language teaching and learning. There are numerous researches that bring up the use of iSpring to support the material and quiz development. This research aims at providing comprehensive literature review about iSpring in English language teaching and learning. This research’s objectives are investigating; 1) the roles of iSpring in English language teaching and learning and 2) the effectiveness of iSpring in English language teaching and learning. Qualitative research method with library research approach was used in this research. The data consists of 3 theses, 4 conference proceedings, 5 journal articles that taken mostly from Google Scholar. The data then analysed using content analysis to match the objective of this research. The findings showed that iSpring has several important roles for English language teaching and learning such as; making English teaching and learning activities becomes easier; helping students to learn English language; creating interest, motivation, confident, concentration, and independence for students in English learning; supporting all types of learning styles and various level of students in English learning; providing effective English teaching and learning activities; and also accommodating various English teaching methods. Besides that, this research also showed that iSpring was effective for foreign language distance learning, improving students’ independence on self-evaluation, improving receptive skill, and productive skills as well. Therefore, iSpring is suitable to be used in education, especially to support the English language teaching and learning.

Reviewed by: Patterns and meanings: Using corpora for English language research and teaching by Alan Partington Dirk Noël Patterns and meanings: Using corpora for English language research and teaching. By Alan Partington. (Studies in corpus linguistics 2.) Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1998. Pp. ix, 162. Such has been the influence of a theory which relieved linguists of the need to look for data beyond their own and their friends’ intuitions that nearly 40 years after the first large corpus was made available for everyone to consult (the Brown corpus of American English, released in 1964), corpus linguists are still busying themselves explaining not just that intuitions need to be checked against ‘real’ data, but that this checking process often generates new intuitions that were completely unsuspected. Clearly, though corpus research may now have ‘been accepted into the mainstream of linguistic practice’ (148), books like this one, illustrating ‘the variety of different language areas which may be looked at through corpus analysis’ (148), would not be written if the use of corpora had become self-evident. However, the recently released second edition of the British National Corpus—the so-called ‘World Edition’ because unlike the first it is available worldwide—and the arrival of the American National Corpus, currently being developed, may truly bring about the paradigm shift some are already talking about. This book, ‘essentially a set of suggestions for future research’ (149), may not only serve as a source of inspiration to the many more that will soon turn to corpora but can also inform them about the considerable expertise already built up in Europe in this area. Basically, what corpus linguists do is look for recurring ‘patterns’, so-called ‘collocations’, in a ‘concordance’, a list of unconnected lines of text at the center of which is the item being studied. Ch. 1 offers a brief history of thought about collocation, outlines its role in discourse building and comprehension and its importance in language acquisition, and ends with a brief overview of different types of collocation. The next seven chapters each contain a case study exemplifying how the examination of collocations can shed light on various aspects of meaning on different structural levels. Chs. 2–4 focus on words and phrases, showing how corpus analysis can be employed to differentiate between near synonyms in the same language, to identify false friends in different languages, and to reveal the connotations associated with certain items. Queries for words like if allow you to move beyond the phrase level to the sentence, and Ch. 5 demonstrates how a corpus analysis of if constructions can uncover that the rules of didactic grammars are merely a model for, rather than a constraint on, natural language production: The majority of such constructions do not conform to any of the three types of conditional sentence usually presented in student grammars. Ch. 6 moves up yet another level to the text, investigating the cohesive role of general nouns like move, labelling nouns like allegation and claim, and general verbs like happen and occur. The seventh case study looks into metaphor, more particularly as used in business and financial journalism, confirming that language is heavily metaphorical, but questioning that thought is as well since most metaphor is of the dead or dying kind, i.e. has become literal. In the last illustration, ‘unusuality’ is explored, the way ‘authors exploit the framework of habit that collocation imposes on language’ for literary and humorous effects, the psychological implication of which is that the mental lexicon contains not just discrete lexical items, but also patterns. A final chapter very succinctly addresses some criticisms and limitations of corpus study. This is a thin book spanning a wide range of phenomena, but undoubtedly the discipline is still in need of pamphlets, and as such it is inspiring for the researcher and teacher alike. Dirk Noël Ghent University Copyright © 2002 Linguistic Society of America

This study examined how creative strategies such as artificial intelligence (AI) tools, collaborative writing, and digital storytelling activities impacted the enhancement of academic writing skills of English learners at the university level. The research sought to understand the writing problems that were most common, evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of the measures, and monitor the students' reception to the measures being implemented. A quantitative approach using surveys was used with a sample of 346 students from different fields of study. Structured questionnaires which had been tested in a pilot study (Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.792) were used to gather data and were then processed in SPSS (Version 28). Descriptive statistics and cross tabulation were used to analyse the data and find the patterns pertaining to difficulties in writing, use of tools, and outcomes. The most critical findings were the remaining issues: grammar was a problem for 62.5%, coherence for 55.2%, and vocabulary for 49.4% of the students. In spite of this, self-reported use of innovative strategies was still high such as: AI tools usage (69.7%) and peer collaboration (65.4%) as well as engaging interactive methods (82.6%). Additionally, there was strong support for institutional adoption, with 87% of participants in favour; however, there was less support for advanced digital storytelling techniques (39.3% engagement). The ethical considerations such as anonymity and voluntary participation were followed. Testing in the pilot phase reduced bias and no personal information was stored. This study addresses the gap in the integration of technology and collaborative teaching processes in the teaching of academic writing. It provides empirical data on the effectiveness of modern approaches while also revealing gaps in adoption across levels of proficiency and disciplines. The results make it possible for curriculum developers and decision makers to take tangible steps toward solving the discrepancies between offer and demand in the context of use. References Abahussain, M. O. (2020). Investigating EFL learners’ perceptions of collaborative writing. International Journal of English Linguistics, 10(3), 32–47. Alawaji, N. N. M. (2020). Students' perceptions of collaborative summary writing. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 10(6), 700–707. Belyaeva, E. G. (2022). Methodological model of teaching academic writing to undergraduate students. Focus on Language Education and Research, 3(1), 36–51. Butt, S. (2023). Employees’ perception regarding in-house training programs in Pakistani organizations. Journal of Workplace Behavior, 4(1), 35–50. Butt, S., & Yazdani, N. (2023). Implementation of quality management practices and firm’s innovation performance: Mediation of knowledge creation processes and moderating role of digital transformation. Pakistan Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 11(4), 3881–3902. Butt, S., Umair, T., & Tajammal, R. (2024). Nexus between key determinants of service quality and students’ satisfaction in higher education institutions (HEIs). Annals of Human and Social Sciences, 5(2), 659–671. Chiew, M. T. L., & Ismail, H. H. (2021). Exploring vocabulary learning strategies in a second language setting: A review. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11(12), 1298–1309. Chubko, N., Morris, J. E., McKinnon, D. H., Slater, E. V., & Lummis, G. W. (2020). Digital storytelling as a disciplinary literacy enhancement tool for EFL students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 3587–3604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09833-x Davoodifard, M. (2022). An overview of writing process research: Using innovative tasks and techniques for a better understanding of L2 writing processes in assessment contexts. Studies in Applied Linguistics and TESOL, 21(2). Dodigovic, M., & Jeaco, S. (2021). Technology in applied linguistics. International Journal of TESOL Studies, 3(2), 1–5. Ferris, D. R. (2023). What error correction can (not) accomplish for second language writers: Dispelling myths, discussing options. University of Michigan Press. Ferris, D. R., & Hedgcock, J. S. (2023). Teaching L2 composition: Purpose, process, and practice (4th ed.). Routledge. Flowerdew, L. (2021). Learner corpora for disciplinary writing. In Research questions in language education and applied linguistics: A reference guide (pp. 475–479). Springer. Flowerdew, L., & Petrić, B. (2024). A critical review of corpus-based pedagogic perspectives on thesis writing: Specificity revisited. English for Specific Purposes, 76, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2024.01.001 Hinkel, E. (2022). Teaching academic L2 writing: Practical techniques in vocabulary and grammar (2nd ed.). Routledge. Hyland, K. (2024). Ken Hyland's essential bookshelf: Academic writing. Language Teaching, 57(3), 399–407. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444824000109 Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2019). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. Kang, E. Y., & Han, Z. (2021). Written corrective feedback. In The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and writing (pp. [page range]). Routledge. Karim, K., & Nassaji, H. (2020). The effects of written corrective feedback. Instructed Second Language Acquisition, 3(1), 28–52. Kessler, G. (2020). Professionalizing your use of technology in English language teaching. In Professionalizing your English language teaching (pp. 163–173). Springer. Kessler, M. (2023). Written corrective feedback in an online community: A typology of English language learners’ requests and interlocutors’ responses. Computers and Composition, 67, 102752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2023.102752 Kim, N. J., & Kim, M. K. (2022). Teacher’s perceptions of using an artificial intelligence-based educational tool for scientific writing. Frontiers in Education, 7, 755914. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.755914 Li, J. (2017). Automated writing evaluation: A pedagogical tool. TESOL Quarterly, 51(2), 427–432. Li, M. (2021). Researching and teaching second language writing in the digital age. Palgrave Macmillan. Li, M., & Zhang, M. (2023). Collaborative writing in L2 classrooms: A research agenda. Language Teaching, 56(1), 94–112. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444821000318 Mihaylova, M., Gorin, S., Reber, T. P., & Rothen, N. (2022). A meta-analysis on mobile-assisted language learning applications: Benefits and risks. Psychologica Belgica, 62(1), 252–267. Mulyono, H., & Saskia, R. (2021). Affective variables contributing to Indonesian EFL students’ willingness to communicate within face-to-face and digital environments. Cogent Education, 8(1), 1911282. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.1911282 Poole, R. (2022). “Corpus can be tricky”: Revisiting teacher attitudes towards corpus-aided language learning and teaching. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(7), 1620–1641. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1868533 Reagan, D., Fell, E., & Mackey, A. (2023). Applied linguistics in the age of anxiety. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 43, 1–6. Reppen, R. (2022). Building a corpus: What are key considerations? In The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics (pp. 13–20). Routledge. Storch, N. (2021). Theoretical perspectives on L2 writing and language learning in collaborative writing and the collaborative processing of written corrective feedback. In The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and writing (pp. 22–34). Routledge. Ullah, A., & Usman, M. (2023). Role of libraries in ensuring quality education at higher education institutions: A perspective of Pakistan. Inverge Journal of Social Sciences, 2(4), 13–22. Ullah, A. (2024). Analyzing the students’ attitudes and behavior towards traditional classes and technology-enhanced online learning. International Journal of Social Science Archives. https://www.ijssa.com/index.php/ijssa/article/view/498 Usman, M., Asif, M., Ullah, A., & Ullah, W. (2024). User’s habits and attitudes towards Chinese books reading in Pakistan. Inverge Journal of Social Sciences, 3(2), 11–28. Wei, W., Cheong, C. M., Zhu, X., & Lu, Q. (2024). Comparing self-reflection and peer feedback practices in an academic writing task: A student self-efficacy perspective. Teaching in Higher Education, 29(4), 896–912. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2024.2316724 Wiboolyasarin, W., Wiboolyasarin, K., Suwanwihok, K., Jinowat, N., & Muenjanchoey, R. (2024). Synergizing collaborative writing and AI feedback: An investigation into enhancing L2 writing proficiency in wiki-based environments. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100228 Woodrow, L. (2022). Introducing researching English for specific purposes. Routledge. Xu, L., Naserpour, A., Rezai, A., Namaziandost, E., & Azizi, Z. (2022). Exploring EFL learners’ metaphorical conceptions of language learning: A multimodal analysis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 51(2), 323–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-022-09842-2 YALA, A. (2022). The use of mobile-assisted language learning to foster students’ self-editing in sentence writing: Case of 1st year EFL students at Setif 2 University [Doctoral dissertation, Université de Batna 2]. Zhang, Y. O., & Hyland, K. (2021). Elements of doctoral apprenticeship: Community feedback and the acquisition of writing expertise. Journal of Second Language Writing, 53, 100835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100835

This is a review article on the application of digital humanities and corpus lin-guistics in language teaching and learning. Corpus linguistics studies linguis-tic phenomena by constructing and analyzing large-scale text corpora, while digital humanities is an emerging cross-research field that applies computer and digital technologies to traditional humanities research and teaching. Combining the two to analyze their application in language teaching and learning can en-rich the research methodology of language teaching and learning, and also pro-vide digital humanities with powerful tools for language analysis. The purpose of this paper is to comprehensively analyze the current status, achievements, challenges, and future development trends of the application of digital humanities and corpus linguistics in language teaching and learning, so as to provide systematic references for language teaching and learning research and practice.

Contents: Introduction. Part I: Important Social Contexts in Research on Second Language Teaching and Learning. Introduction. M.E. Brisk, Bilingual Education. M.R. Hawkins, ESL in Elementary Education. P.A. Duff, ESL in Secondary Schools: Programs, Problematics, and Possibilities. D.E. Murray, ESL in Adult Education. S. Carkin, English for Academic Purposes. P. Master, English for Specific Purposes. C. Roberts, English in the Workplace. B. Tomlinson, English as a Foreign Language: Matching Procedures to the Context of Learning. Y. Kachru, Teaching and Learning of World Englishes. Part II: Methods in Second Language Research. Introduction. L. Harklau, Ethnography and Ethnographic Research on Second Language Teaching and Learning. L. van Lier, Case Study. A. Lazaraton, Quantitative Research Methods. D. Nunan, Classroom Research. A. Burns, Action Research. Part III: Applied Linguistics and Second Language Research. Introduction. T. Pica, Second Language Acquisition Research and Applied Linguistics. S.L. McKay, Sociolinguistics and Second Language Learning. J. Zuengler, K.M. Cole, Language Socialization and Second Language Learning. G. Kasper, C. Roever, Pragmatics in Second Language Learning. J.P. Lantolf, Sociocultural and Second Language Learning Research: An Exegesis. N. Markee, Conversation Analysis for Second Language Acquisition. R.B. Kaplan, Contrastive Rhetoric. S. Conrad, Corpus Linguistics and L2 Teaching. Part IV: Second Language Processes and Development. Introduction. G. Ioup, Age in Second Language Development. R. DeKeyser, A. Juffs, Cognitive Considerations in L2 Learning. Z. Han, L. Selinker, Fossilization in L2 Learners. M. Swain, The Output Hypothesis: Theory and Research. E. Tarone, Speaking in a Second Language. M. Rost, L2 Listening. T.G. Wiley, Second Language Literacy and Biliteracy. P. Byrd, Instructed Grammar. D.E. Eskey, Reading in a Second Language. I.S.P. Nation, Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. J.S. Hedgcock, Taking Stock of Research and Pedagogy in L2 Writing. E. Hinkel, Analyses of Second Language Text and What Can Be Learned From Them. Part V: Methods and Curricula in Second Language Teaching. Introduction. S.J. Savignon, Communicative Language Teaching: Strategies and Goals. S. Fotos, Traditional and Grammar Translation Methods for Second Language Teaching. J. Williams, Form-Focused Instruction. M.A. Snow, A Model of Academic Literacy for Integrated Language and Content Instruction. R. Ellis, Instructed Language Learning and Task-Based Teaching. M. Celce-Murcia, E. Olshtain, Discourse-Based Approaches: A New Framework for Second Language Teaching and Learning. C.A. Chapelle, Computer-Assisted Language Learning. N.J. Anderson, L2 Learning Strategies. Part VI: Second Language Testing and Assessment. T. McNamara, Introduction. A.J. Kunnan, Language Assessment From a Wider Context. A. Davies, C. Elder, Validity and Validation in Language Testing. M. Chalhoub-Deville, C. Deville, A Look Back at and Forward to What Language Testers Measure. T. Lumley, A. Brown, Research Methods in Language Testing. D. Douglas, Testing Languages for Specific Purposes. C. Leung, Classroom Teacher Assessment of Second Language Development: Construct as Practice. Part VII: Identity, Culture, and Critical Pedagogy in Second Language Teaching and Learning. Introduction. T. Ricento, Considerations of Identity in L2 Learning. M. Byram, A. Feng, Teaching and Researching Intercultural Competence. S. Canagarajah, Critical Pedagogy in L2 Learning and Teaching. Part VIII: Language Planning and Policy and Language Rights. R.B. Baldauf, Jr., Introduction. R.B. Baldauf, Jr., Language Planning and Policy Research: An Overview. T. van Els, Status Planning for Learning and Teaching. A.J. Liddicoat, Corpus Planning: Syllabus and Materials Development. R.B. Baldauf, Jr., R.B. Kaplan, Language-in-Education Planning. D.E. Ager, Prestige and Image Planning. S. May, Language Planning and Minority Language Rights.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is changing many aspects of education and is gradually being introduced to language education. This article reviews the literature to examine main trends and common findings in relation to AI technologies and applications for second and foreign language learning and teaching. With special reference to computer-assisted language learning (CALL), the article explores natural language processing (NLP), data-driven learning (DDL), automated writing evaluation (AWE), computerized dynamic assessment (CDA), intelligent tutoring systems (ITSs), automatic speech recognition (ASR), and chatbots. It contributes to discussions on understanding and using AI-supported language learning and teaching. It suggests that AI will be continuously integrated into language education, and AI technologies and applications will have a profound impact on language learning and teaching. Language educators need to ensure that AI is effectively used to support language learning and teaching in AI-powered contexts. More rigorous research on AI-supported language learning and teaching is recommended to maximise second and foreign language learning and teaching with AI.