本文旨在探討如何利用語料庫的資料增進台灣學生英文動詞，造句和作文的寫作能力的應用。本文分為兩部分。第一部份探討雙語語料庫的應用。前人研究較少討論英文動詞使用的教學與英文主動/被動語態的教學。本文第一部份先調查與分析學生的錯誤。實驗證明兩個雙語語料庫 (光華雜誌與香港立法局) 可以提供大量的中英對比句子，幫助學生觀察英文動詞在句子中出現的語境，瞭解英文動詞如何使用，進而降低錯誤。另外還發現雙語語料庫可以幫助學生自己從雙語對比句觀察到兩個語言間語言使用習慣的不同，領會到兩個語言的文法不同。
第二部分探討由網路收集到的 20,409 篇的英文摘要對於英文造句與作文的應用。英文動詞BASE 在語料庫裡屬第二高頻的動詞, 總共出現 8,768 次，也是英文最常以被動形式出現的詞彙之一。然而在我們的調查裡，初級程度與低中級程度的研究生與大學生不太認識該詞並使用該詞造句。因此動詞 BASE 被當成研究的題材。實驗證明單語摘要語料庫可以幫助學生辨識近義詞，擴大英文動詞詞彙習得，增進英文造句的能力。本文另外發現使用英文辭典可以彌補單語語料庫的不足，輔助BASE 與 BASIS這類近義詞的辨識。
在英文作文的應用方面，我們調查學生使用五大類英文動詞寫英文作文，發現學生英文動詞使用非常貧乏，文章結構不佳。實驗證明單語摘要語料庫可以使學生的作文運用到更多的英文動詞，並增進學生TOEFL iBT獨立練習題的英文作文能力。另外還發現英文寫作結構筆記可以增進學生英文作文的結構與組織。本文的研究發現有潛力延伸至英文動詞教學與英文造句作文教學的教材。

This article is concerned with the application of corpus-derived materials to improve Taiwanese students’ English writing in verbs, sentences and compositions. This study is divided into two parts. Since the previous studies have fewer discussions on verb voice errors and verb usage errors, the first part of this study investigates and analyzes learners’ verb errors and accordingly proposes using large bilingual parallel corpora, Sinorama and Hong Kong Laws, to provide EFL learners with complete bilingual authentic examples, to help them to know how a word is used within real contexts so as to reduce the errors. The second part of this study explores the application of a monolingual corpus of our own compilation, the 20,409 abstracts collected from the web source CiteSeer. Verb BASE ranks as the top two high-frequency verb (occurring 8,768 times) in the corpus. BASE is one of the English verbs predominantly used in the passive voice. However, our survey showed that our participants including both EFL graduates and undergraduates at beginning and low-intermediate levels of proficiency can hardly recognize and produce it. On the other hand, a survey revealed a shortage of verb usage of five lexical verb classes and digressive structures in students’ in-class free compositions. It proposes using the monolingual abstract corpus to help EFL learners improve near-synonym distinction, make sentences with target words, expand EFL learners’ range of accessible academic verbs and improve their writing proficiency. Empirical results have proved that the methods proposed are effective. Besides, it found that different cultural expressing conventions can be self-learned via bilingual parallel corpora data. Dictionary definitions assist in near-synonym distinction, and a writing organizational structure note helps students’ compositions to be more well-organized. The findings of this study have potential to spread to teaching materials and especially textbooks for foreign language writing.

Contents

Abstract
Acknowledgments
1 Introduction………………………………………………………………….………1

2 Literature Review………………………………………………….……………..….5
2.1 Contrastive Analysis and Error Analysis………………………….……….…….5
2.2 Corpus use in the teaching of L2 writing……………………………………….10

3 Verb Voice Errors and Verb Usage Errors………………………………………….12
3.1 Introduction………….. ……………………………..……………..….…....…..12
3.2 Method……..………………………………..………………………….……....14
3.2.1 Participants……………………………………………..…….…………..14
3.2.2 Survey Procedures…………………………………..……………………15
3.2.2.1 The Pretest………………………………………………….………..15
3.2.2.2 The Posttest………………………………………………….………16
3.3 Results and Discussion………………………………………………………17
3.3.1 The Pretest………………………………………………………...………17
3.3.1.1 Active/ Passive Voice………………………………………….…….17
3.3.1.2 Preposition Collocations and Near-synonyms………………………18
3.3.1.3 Commonly Confused Verb/Noun Pairs……………….……………..18
3.3.1.4 Error Causes..………………………………………………………..20
3.3.2 The Posttest………………………………………………..……………22
3.3.2.1 Test Scores………………………………………………..…………22
3.3.2.2 Evaluation of Learning Effects…………………….……….……….23
3.3.2.3 Passive Voice: a Case Study of Verb BASE……….…….….………25
3.3.2.4 Usefulness………………………………………..………………….27
3.4 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………...28

4 Near-synonym Distinction and Passive Sentence Patterns: A Corpus-based Exploration of the English Verb ‘BASE’………………………………………...29
4.1 Introduction……………………………………………………….………….29
4.2 Method………………… …………………………………………..………..31
4.2.1 Stage One of Experiment 4: Verb Extraction……..……….………...….32
4.2.2 Stage Two of Experiment 4: Sentence-making Survey...…….……..…..33
4.2.2.1 Participants …………………...……………………..……………..33
4.2.2.2 Survey Procedures……………….…………………..…..…………34
4.2.2.3 Results of Stage Two of Experiment 4 ……………….…...……….34
4.2.2.3.1 Preference of Selecting Verbs for Sentence-making….……….34
4.2.2.3.2 Follow-up interviews for BASE and BASIS……………..……36
4.2.2.3.3 EFL Learners’ Errors in Verb BASE……………………..……36
4.2.3 Stage Three of Experiment 4…………………………………….….…38
4.2.3.1 Participants…………………………………………………….….38
4.2.3.2 Pretest and Test……..……...………………………...………...…38
4.2.3.3 Results of Stage Three of Experiment 4……………..….……..….42
4.3 Discussion………..……………………………………………….…………43
4.4 Conclusion……..……………………………………………….……………48



5 Verb Production and Textual Organization in EFL Learners’ TOEFL-iBT
Independent Writing Task……………………………….………………………..50
5.1 Introduction..…...…………………………………..………………………..50
5.2 Method...…..……………………………………….………………………..53
5.2.1 Stage One of Experiment 5………………………………...…………………54
5.2.1.1 Participants..……………………………….………….….……………54
5.2.1.2 Design of Stage One of Experiment 5…………………..….………….54
5.2.1.3 Results of Stage One of Experiment 5…………………..………….…55
5.2.2 Stage Two of Experiment 5……………………………….………….……..55
5.2.2.1 Participants…………………………………………..………………57
5.2.2.2 Design of Stage Two of Experiment 5………………..……………..58
5.2.2.3 Results of Stage Two of Experiment 5………..……..…………....…61
5.2.2.4 Evaluation of Organization Learning Effects…………..……………64
5.2.2.4.1 Inter-rater Reliability...………………………………..……………64
5.2.2.4.2 Independent t-test ………………………………………………….65
5.2.2.4.3 Usefulness …………………………………………………………68
5.3 Discussion………….………………………………….…....……………….68
5.4 Conclusion………………….………………………….……………………75

6 Concluding Remarks……………………………………………………………..77
6.1 Overview………………………………………………..….………..………77
6.2 Directions for Future Research…………………………..…….…………….78
6.2 Pedagogical implications ………………………………..……..…..………..80

Notes………………………………………….………………….…………..……….82
References………………………………….……………………………..….………82
Appendices……………………………………….………………………...….……..93
Appendix 3.A: Survey Form of the Pretest……………………………….…….……93
Appendix 3.B Ungrammatical sentences made by students in the pretest…...…….94
Appendix 3.B .1 Verb Voices and Usage……………………………………..……94
Appendix 3.B.2 Overgeneralization of the English Passive Rule………….………95
Appendix 3.B.3 Verb/Noun Alternatives………………………………….……….96
Appendix 3.C Survey Form of the Posttest……………………………..………….97

Appendix 4.A: Survey Form of Stage Two of Experiment 4……………….………101
Appendix 4.B: BASE sentences made by students in Stage Two…..………..……..101
Appendix 4.B.1 Nouns……………………………………………………..……..101
Appendix 4.B.1.1 Noun BASE…………………………………………………...101
Appendix 4.B.1.2 BASIS………………………………………….……………...102
Appendix 4.B.2 Verb BASE……………………………………………..………..102
Appendix 4.B.2.1 Sentences made by graduate students…………………………102
Appendix 4.B.2.2 Sentences made by undergraduate students………………...…103
Appendix 4.C: Survey Forms of Stage Three of Experiment 4………….…………103
Appendix 4.C.1: Pretest Survey Form……………………………………...………103
Appendix 4.C.2: Test Survey Form…………………………………..…………….104

Appendix 5.A: Verb List and Survey Form of Stage One of Experiment 5...…...…106
Appendix 5.B: Composition Examples of Stage One…..…………………………..107
Appendix 5.B.1: Argumentative Examples of Stage One…… ……………..……...107
Appendix 5.B.2: Narrative Examples of Stage One…………………………….…..110
Appendix 5.C: Verb Handout of Experiment 5……..…..……………..……………111
Appendix 5.D: Organizational Structure Note of Experiment 5..……………….….113
Appendix 5.E: Independent Writing Practice Questions of Experiment 5……...…..114
Appendix 5.F: Composition Examples of Experimental Group in Stage Two of Experiment 5………………………………………………………115
Appendix 5.F.1: Complete Structure….…………...……………………..…………115
Appendix 5.F.2: Indirect type …………………………...………………………………117
Appendix 5.G: Composition Examples of Control Group in Stage Two of
Experiment 5……………………………………………….…..….118
Appendix 5.G.1: Lack of Thesis statement and Conclusion………..………………118
Appendix 5.G.2: Lack of Thesis statement.……….………………………………..119
Appendix 5.G.3: Lack of Conclusion……………………………………………….120
Appendix 5.G.4: Digressive Conclusion……………………………………………121
Appendix 5.H: ETS TOEFL- iBT Test Independent Writing Scoring Standards.….122

List of Tables
Table 3.1: Student Numbers of the Pretest and Posttest……………….…….……….15
Table 3.2: Percentage of Verb Voice Errors…………………………….…….………17
Table 3.3: Percentage of Preposition Errors and Near-synonym Errors……….…….18
Table 3.4: Words which students treat as verbs/nouns………………………….……19
Table 3.5: Words which students treat as adjectives…………………………………20
Table 3.6: Overall Test Score of Verb Voice & Usage in Part I of the Posttest….….22
Table 3.7: Overall Test Score of Verb/Noun Pairs in Part II of the posttest……..…..22
Table 3.8: The Pretest Scores and Posttest Scores…………………………….……..23
Table 3.9: Results of the Paired t-test for Comparison of Pretest Scores and Posttest
Scores ………………………………………………………….………….28
Table 3.10: Percentage of Detecting BASE Difference between Chinese and English in Part III of the posttest…………………………………………….………25
Table 3.11: Percentage of Usefulness………………………………………………..27

Table 4.1. Frequency of Occurrences of Top 40 High-frequency Verbs in Descending
Order…………………………………………………………………..……….32
Table 4.2 Frequency of Preference of the Verbs selected by Students for Sentence-making…………………………………………………………..34
Table 4.3 Results of the pretest……………………………………………….……42
Table 4.4 Overall results of the test………………………………………………...43
Table 4.5 Usefulness results of the test………………………………..………..….43
Table 4.6 Frequency of occurrences of BASE patterns in the corpus………...……43

Table 5.1: The Frequencies of Verbs selected by students for compositions …….….55
Table 5.2: The Distribution of the Questions selected by students for compositions..61
Table 5.3: The Preferences of the Question types selected by students for compositions…………………………………………………….………..61
Table 5.4: The Frequencies of verbs within the handout selected by experimental group………………………………………………………………….…..62
Table 5.5: The Frequencies of verbs within the handout selected by control group…63
Table 5.6: The Percentages of Incomplete Structure…………………………………63
Table 5.7: The Percentages of Main ideas of Main statements in the compositions including thesis statement and conclusion……..……………………..…….64
Table 5.8: Results of Reliability Analysis…………………….………………..…….65
Table 5.9: Independent t-test results of Question 3 for Comparison of Experimental group and Control group…………………………………….…………….65
Table 5.10: Independent t-test results of Question 9 for Comparison of Experimental group and Control group……………………………………….………….66
Table 5.11: Overall results of the Independent t-test for Comparison of Experimental group and Control group….………………………………………….……67
Table 5.12: Percentage of Usefulness of experimental group…………………….….68
Table 5.13: Frequency Increase (FI) of verbs…………………………….…………..69

List of Figures
Figure 4.1 Frequency of Preference of the Verbs selected by Students for Sentence-making……………………………………………….……….35
Figure 5.1 Mean Scores Contrast between experimental group and control group..74

Alderson. J.C. (2009). Test review: Test of English as a Foreign LanguageTM: Internet-based Test (TOEFL iBT). Language Test, 26(4), 621-631.
Alderson, J.C., & Wall, D. (1993). Does washback exist? Applied Linguistics, 14, 115-129.
Astika, G. (1993). Analytical assessment of foreign students writing. RELC Journal,
24(1), 61-72.
Bloomfield. L. (1933). Language. New York: Henry Holt.
Bresnan, J. (1982). The passive in lexical theory. In Bresnan (Ed.), The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations (pp.3-86). Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Bresnan, J. (2001). Lexical-functional syntax. Blackwell Publishers Inc.
Bruner, J. S. (1986). Actual minds, possible words (p. 93). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Canning, Deborah. (1986). Common Mistakes of Chinese Students in English Usage. Second Edition. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., LTD.
Carrol, D. W. (1999). Language, culture, and cognition psychology of language (pp. 363-382) (Third Edition). Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
Celce-Murcia, M., and Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher’s course (Second edition). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Chen, C.C. (1979). An Error Analysis of English Composition Written by Chinese Students in Taiwan. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.
Chen, Fred J. (2006). Contrastive Research & Crosslinguistic Influence. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co., LTD.
Chklovski ,Timothy and Pantel ,Patrick (2004).VERBOCEAN: Mining the Web for Fine-Grained Semantic Verb Relations. In Proceedings of Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-04). Barcelona, Spain.
Chiang, T.H. (1981). Error Analysis: A Study of Errors Made in Written English by Chinese Learners. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co., LTD.
Chujo, Kiyomi and Oghigian, Kathryn. (2009). How many words do you need to
know to understand TOEIC, TOEFL & EIKEN? An examination of text
coverage and high frequency vocabulary. The Journal of ASIA TEFL, 6(2),
121-148.
Chomsky, N. (1959). Review of Verbal Behaviour by B.F. Skinner. Language
35:26-58.
Coady, J., & Huckin, T. (1997). Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition: A
Rationale for Pedagogy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, A. D. (1994). Assessing Language Ability in the Classroom. (2nd ed.). Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Corder, S.P. (1967). The Significance of Learners’ Errors. IRAL, Vol. V/4, 1967.
Corson, D. (1997). The learning and use of academic English words. Language Learning, 47, 671-718.
Coxhead, A. (2006). Essentials of teaching academic vocabulary. Boston, U.S.: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL QUARTERLY, 34 (2), 213-238.
Crystal, D. (1997). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Fourth Edition. Blackwell Publishers Inc.
Danei M., and Di Pietro, R.J. (1991). Contrastive analysis for the cotemporary second language classroom. Toronto, Ontario: OISE Press.
Dulay, H., and Burt, M. (1972). Goofing: An indication of children’s second language learning strategies. Language Learning ,22, 235-52.
Dulay, H., and Burt, M. (1974). Natural sequence in child second language acquisition. Language Learning , 24, 37-53.
Dulay, H., Burt, M., and Krashen, S. (1982). Language Two. New York: Oxford University Press.
Elbow, P. (1996). Writing Assessment in the 21st century: A Utopian View. In L. Z. Bloom, D. A. Daiker & E. M. White (Eds.), Composition in the 21st Century: Crisis and Change, (p. 83-100). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Ellis, R. (2001). Introduction: Investigation form-focused instruction. Language Learning, 51(Suppl.1), 1-46.
Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ferris, D. (2007). Preparing teachers to respond to student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 165-193.
Fotos, S., & Hindel, E. (2007). Form-focused instruction and output for second
language writing gains. In S. Fotos & H. Nassaji (Eds.), Form-focused
instruction and teacher education (pp. 131-143). Oxford: Oxford university Press.
Fujii , Y .(2008). The Asymmetrical Relationship Between the Active and Passive Voice: Implications for Teaching Japanese-to-English Translation of Specialized Scientific Texts. The Linguistics Journal, 3 (1), 40-74.
Fries, C. (1945). Teaching and learning English as a foreign language. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Gass, S. M. (1983). Language transfer and universal grammatical relations. In S. Gass and L. Selinker (Eds.), Language transfer in language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
George, H.V. (1972). Common Errors in Language Learning Insights from English. Rowley, MA.: Newbury House.
Gilquin, G. (2001). The Integrated Contrastive Model: Spicing up your data. Languages in Contrast, 3(1 ), 95-123. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Givon, T. (1993). English Grammar: A Function-Based Introduction. John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
Gonzalez, V., Chen, C.Y., & Sanchez, C. (2001). Cultural thinking and discourse organizational patterns influencing writing skills in a Chinese English-as-a-Foreign-Language (EFL) Learner. Bilingual Research Journal, 25(4).
Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R.B. (1989). Writing in a second language: Contrastive rhetoric. In D.M. Johnson and D.H. Roen (Eds.), Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students. New York, NY: Longman.
Granger, S. (1996). From CA to CIA and back: An integrated approach to computerized bilingual and learner corpora. In Aijmer K., Altenberg B. and Johansson M. (Eds.), Languages in Contrast. Text-based cross-linguistic studies. Lund Studies in English ,88 ,37-51. Lund: Lund University Press.
Greenbaum, S., & Quirk, R. (1990). A student’s grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
Haines, C. (2004). Assessing students’ written work: Marking essays and reports. London: Routledge Falmer.
Hamp-Lyons, L. (1995). Rating nonnative writing: the trouble with holistic scoring. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 759–62.
Hinds, J. (1983). Contrastive rhetoric: Japanese and English. Text 3 (2), 183-195.
Hinkel, E. (2004). Teaching Academic ESL Writing Practical Techniques in Vocabulary and Grammar. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Huang, Shiao-ling. (2001). Error Analysis and Teaching Composition. Master Degree Dissertation, Taiwan: National Tsing Hua University.
Huttner, J. (2008). The genre(s) of student writing: developing writing models. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18(2).
Hyland, K. (2008). As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes, 27, 4-21.
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2007). Is there an ‘academic vocabulary’? TESOL Quarterly, 41, 235-253.
Hyltenstam. (1977). Implicational patterns in interlanguage syntactic variation. Language Learning, 27, 383-411.
Hymes, D. (1972). Editorial Introduction to language in society. Language in Society 1, 1-14. London: Cambridge University.
James, C. (1980). Contrastive analysis. London: Longman.
James, C. (1994). Don’t Shoot my Dodo: on the Resilience of Contrastive and Error Analysis. IRAL, 32(3), 179-200.
Kaplan, R.B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. Language Learning ,16, 1-20.
Johnson, K.E., Jordan, S.R.,& Poehner, M.E. (2005). The TOEFL trump card: An investigation of test impact in an ESL classroom. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies: An International Journal, 2, 71-94.
Kaplan, R.B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in inter-cultural education. Language Learning, 16(1), 1-20.
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Laufer, B., & Girsai, N. (2008). Form-focused instruction in second language vocabulary learning: A case for contrastive analysis and translation. Applied Linguistics, 29(4), 694-716.
Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 302-322.
Lee, C. and Liu, J. (2009). Effects of Collocation Information on Learning Lexical Semantics for Near Synonym Distinction. Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing, 14 (2), 205-220.
Lee, D.Y.W., & Chen, S.X. (2009). Making a bigger deal of the smaller words:
Functions and other key items in research writing by Chinese learners. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18, 149-165.
Lee, S. L., & Munice, J. (2006). From respective to productive: Improving ESL learners’ use of vocabulary in a postreading composition task. TESOL Quarterly, 40 (2), 295-320.
Lightbown, P.M. & Spada, N. (1993). How Languages are Learned. Oxford University Press.
Liao, P. (2008). Collocations for the Writing of English Research Papers. Taipei: Jong Wen Books Co., Ltd.
Long, M. (2000). Focus on form in task-based language teaching. In R. Lambert & E. Shohamy (Eds.), Language policy and pedagogy: Essays in honor of A. Ronald Walton. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Lougheed, L. (2010). Writing for the TOEFL iBT. Traditional Chinese edition.
Omnibook Publishers Co., Ltd.
Malloy, I.A.S. (2007). How to enable students to become more independent essay writers. Encuentro, 17, 62-67.
Marmaridou, S. (1991). Contrastive analysis at discourse level and the communicative teaching of language. In J. Fisiak (Ed.), Further insight into contrastive analysis (pp. 561-571). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Matalene, C. (1985). Contrastive Rhetoric: An American Writing Teacher in China. College English, 47 (8): 789-808.
Mindt, D. (1996). English corpus linguistics and the foreign language teaching syllabus. In Jenny Thomas and Mick Short (Eds.), Using Corpora for Language Research (pp. 232-247). Longman Group UK Limited.
Mohan, B.A., and Lo, W.A. (1985). Academic writing and Chinese students: Transfer and developmental factors. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 515-534.
Mukundan, J. & Ahour. T. (2009). Perceptions of Malaysian school and university ESL instructors on writing assessment. Jurnal Sastra Inggris, 9(1).
Nassaji, H., & Fotos, S. (2007). Issues in form-focused instruction and teacher education. In S. Fotos & H. Nassaji (Eds.), Form-focused instruction and teacher education (pp. 7-16). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nation, I.S.P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Odlin, T. (2001). With the dictionary and beyond. In D. Belcher & A. Hirvela (Ed.), Linking literacies: Perspectives on L2 reading-writing connections (pp. 271-290). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer: Cross-linguistic influence in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Perkins, K. (1983). On the use of composition scoring techniques, objective measures, and objective tests to evaluate ESL writing ability. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 651–671.
Piaget, J. (1983). Piaget’s theory. In W. Kessen (Ed.), Handbook of child psylchology, vol. 1: History, theory, and methods (pp. 105-128). New York: Wiley.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive
grammar of the English language. New York: Longman.
Radford, A. (1988). Transformational Grammar: A First Course. Cambridge University Press.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129-159.
Schuler, K. K. (2005). VerbNet: A Broad-Coverage, Comprehensive Verb Lexicon. Ph D thesis, Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania.
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics (IRAL) 10:209-241.
Selinker, L., and Douglas, D. (1985). Wrestling with 'context' in interlanguage theory.
Applied Linguistics, 6, 190-204.
Sinclair, J.M. (1984). ‘Lexicography as an academic subject.’, In R.R.K. Hartmann(ed.) LEXeter 83 proceedings, Lexicographica Series Major No 2, Tubingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 3-12.
Sinclair, J.M. (1991). Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stockwell, R., and Bowen, J. (1965). The sounds of English and Spanish. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Tao, H. (2001). Discovering the usual with corpora: The case of remember. In R.
Simpson & J. Swales (Eds.), Corpus linguistics in North America: Selections from the 1999 symposium (pp. 116-144). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Tarone, E. (1979). Interlanguage as chameleon. Language Learning 29(1), 181-191.
Tono, Y. (2009). Corpus-Based Research and its Implications for Second Language Acquisition and English Language Teaching. In Proceedings of LTTC International Conference on A New Look at Language Teaching & Testing: English as Subject & Vehicle.
Tran-Thi-Chau. (1975). Error analysis, CA, and students’ perception: A study of difficulty in second-language learning. International Review of Applied Linguistics (IRAL) 13 (2), 119-143.
Tsao, F. F. (1993). Contrastive Analysis and Error Analysis: Taking sentential structure of English and Chinese as an example. Explorations in Applied Linguistics: Papers in Language Teaching and Sociolinguistics. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Turton, N. (1995). ABC of Common Grammatical Errors. Macmillan Publishers Limited.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Weijen, D.V., Bergh, H.V.D., Rijlaarsdam, G. & Sanders, T. (2009). L1 use during L2 writing: An empirical study of a complex phenomenon. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18, 235-250.
Weinreich, U. (1953). Language in contact. Linguistic Circle of New York.
West, M. (1953). A general service list of English words. London: Longman, Green.
White, E. M. (1984). Holisticism. College Composition and Communication, 35(4), 400-409.
White, E. M. (1985). Teaching and assessing writing. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wu, Yu-His. (1978). Error Analysis and Teaching of Chinese Conversation. Ph. D. dissertation, Florida State university college of Education.
Yang, Wen-Xian. (2006). An Analysis of Written Errors in Taiwanese High School Students’ Compositions. Taipei: Showwe Information Co., Ltd.
Yeh, C.C. (2009). Student perceptions of an EFL undergraduate research writing project. RELC, 40(3), 314-332.
Yoon, H. & Hirvela, A. (2004). ESL student attitudes toward corpus use in L2 writing.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 257-283.
Zareva, A. (2005). What is new in the new TOEFL-iBT 2006 test format? Electronic
Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 2(2), pp. 45-57.
Zhang, Uen-Guo and Zhang, Neng-Fu. (2003). Ancient Chinese Grammar. Ba-Shu.