Tag Archives: English

COBUILD English Usage 4th Edition: Mental Health and Disability

In our fourth blog post about the new edition of COBUILD English Usage, Julie Moore looks at some more of the changes in language usage that emerged from research for the new edition. In this post, she explores how language shifts reflect changing ideas about mental health and disability.

As I identified in my last post, our survey of current usage for the new edition of COBUILD English Usage uncovered evidence that new words, new combinations of words and new uses have developed in recent years to better describe the diversity that exists in contemporary society. In this post, I explore this idea of diversity and inclusion further, looking at the areas of mental health and disability.

When researching the topic of language and mental health, the most striking change is the frequency with which it’s now talked about. Having been a relatively taboo topic just a few years ago, the phrase mental health has more than doubled in frequency when you compare the older Bank of English section of the Collins Corpus with the ‘New Monitor’ corpus (which contains recent material from news and social media websites). There’s also evidence of a slight increase in the use of the phrase mental ill health reflecting a recognition that all of us have varying degrees of mental health in the same way that we have different degrees of physical health. This can be seen as part of normalizing the topic of mental health and removing the previous stigma.

One in five Australians experience mental ill health in any year.

In general, women are more likely than men to seek professional help for mental ill health.

When talking about anyone with a health condition, be that mental or physical, most groups of people and the charities which represent them advocate referring to the person first and then the condition or disability. For example, they advocate referring to a person experiencing mental health issues or a person with a disability rather than a mental patient or a disabled person.

Completely new words have sprung up too around the idea of normalizing people who were previously ‘othered’ or seen as in some way ‘abnormal’. Among the autistic community, for example, people who are not autistic – and would previously have been labelled ‘normal’ – are now referred to as neurotypical. And people with autism are informally referred to as being on the spectrum (short for ‘the autistic spectrum’), a conversational expression that indicates more ease around talking about autism.

Too many studies concerning autism and empathy are designed by neurotypical researchers.

Most people on the spectrum have incredible focus and imagination.

The world of sport has also provided a flurry of new terms using the prefix para– to refer to sports people with disabilities.  Although the Paralympics – a parallel event to the Olympics for athletes with disabilities – has been around for many years, in recent years, para-sport has developed a higher profile and with greater coverage has come more widespread use of terms like para-athlete, para-cycling, para-swimming, etc.

It seems to have become increasingly socially unacceptable to label anyone who doesn’t conform – because of their gender identity, sexuality, mental or physical health – as ‘other’ or ‘abnormal’.  This has led to a need for more diverse, less loaded language to refer both to varied types of individuals and groups (gender-fluid, on the spectrum, para-athlete) and new terms to better talk about those who were previously described by default using language that benchmarked them as ‘normal’ (cisgender, neurotypical).

COBUILD English Usage 4th Edition: Gender and Identity

In the next two blog posts about the new edition of COBUILD English Usage, Julie Moore looks at some of the changes in language usage that emerged from research for the new edition. In this post, she explores how language shifts reflect changing ideas about gender and identity.

Traditionally, identify has been used predominantly as a transitive verb; you identify someone or something:

Police identified the man from CCTV images.

We correctly identified several of the plants.

Our survey of current usage for the new edition of COBUILD English Usage has shown that a new use has become widespread within the past 10 years; identify as something meaning to view yourself as a member of a particular group. The ‘something’ can describe an ethnic, cultural, religious or political group: identify as a feminist / liberal / Arab / Christian / atheist

Most markedly though, people identify as something in terms of their gender or sexuality, reflecting that this categorization is no longer seen by many as fixed or given, but a personal choice.

Teenagers who do not identify as male or female will be able to opt out.

Sam began identifying as a woman four years ago.

This and similar developments reflect the wider concerns of a society as it progresses and adapts to the modern social climate.

Gender, in particular, has seen a proliferation of new terms to describe a range, or spectrum, of possible gender identities including gender-neutral, gender-fluid and non-binary gender. New words have also emerged to distinguish these new identities from traditional concepts of binary gender or cisgender.

When it comes to sexuality, many people will be familiar with the LGBT acronym which has been used for many years to refer to the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender communities. This has been extended over recent years to encompass and recognize more groups; LGBT + Q (queer) + I (intersex) + A (asexual). There is sometimes also a + sign added at the end to recognize other possible groups.

In a more gender-fluid society though, the question of gendered pronouns still seems to remain unsettled. While there have been attempts to introduce new gender-neutral pronouns (such as ze or xe), our survey suggests that these remain somewhat limited in use, appearing mostly in discussions specifically about gender-neutral pronouns or within relatively small communities. More widespread  is the use of they/them. They has long been used as a gender-neutral pronoun to refer to any person:

If anyone has any questions, they can ask me later.

It is now, however, becoming more commonly used to refer to a specific individual who identifies as gender-neutral:

Jo lives in London. They work in marketing.

All these possible new labels and uses can seem like something of a minefield for anyone who is unsure about the best way to address or refer to different groups of people. To get around this issue, another new trend has emerged for individuals to signal how they prefer to be addressed. An increasing number of people are showing their preferred pronouns as part of their social media profile (e.g. Jo Bloggs (she/her) @jobloggs) or face to face via preferred pronoun badges (or ‘pins’).


COBUILD English Usage 4th Edition: Changes in vocabulary and grammar

In the second of our blog posts about the new edition of COBUILD English Usage, Penny Hands details some of the findings that came out of the team’s research into the ways in which new words and uses are created.

The second stage of the COBUILD English Usage update involved a survey of the current state of various aspects of the English language. It was carried out specially for this edition using the constantly updated Collins Corpus, as well as social media research and crowdsourcing.

It’s all very well having billions of words of corpus, but how do you find new words in it? It’s for this reason that a linguist’s job is a 24-hour one, constantly on the lookout for new words and uses. Corpora allow us to track these changes and to look for different ways that they are used, and to establish who uses them and in what context.

One really useful source of data is the Language Observatory Group (LOG) facebook page, set up by Mike McCarthy, where members add their observations about changes in the language.

The aim is not to gripe about ‘annoying’ things we hear people say, but some members care about that happening more than others. Mike has a certain refreshing tolerance for people expressing their preference for, or dislike of, certain neologisms, taking the view that a lot of fashions in clothes, music, etc, seemed odd or silly when they came out (and then do again when we look back on them).

New words are created all the time, often coming into the language via younger people. Occasionally we see a completely new word appear apparently from nowhere; more often, though, new words come about by people recycling existing ones so that they are used in a slightly different way.

The resulting findings hopefully provide a handy reference guide to new words and uses, but they also represent a fascinating snapshot of today’s society with all its attitudes and preoccupations.

Comparing the Bank of English section of the Collins Corpus with the ‘New Monitor’ corpus (which contains recent material from news and social media websites), we explored the ways in which language has evolved, looking at content from social media sites and news articles produced over the last 10 years.

Firstly, based on data from Collins’ new words database, we looked at some of the most popular ways of creating new language.

Common ways of doing this include adding a prefix or a suffix to an existing word, combining words, or using words in new ways, perhaps by giving them a new function or part of speech.

So the first thing we did was to follow up some hunches we had about new-word creation. As predicted, a lot of the new words we were seeing coming through in our dictionary department were ones created from existing words, combined with prefixes and suffixes.

Here are some of the most prominent innovations that came up in our survey of the current state of the language.

Prefixes

Common examples were:

crowd

crowdsourcing

crowdlending

crowdwritten

crowdworking

crowdfinancing

crowdsharing

upand down

upthread, upvote, uptick

downthread, downvote

Suffixes

Common examples were:

-less cashless, contactless, driverless, paperless

free traffic-free, GMO-free, carbon-free, meat-free, lactose-free

Verbing

This one was flagged up among others on the LOG facebook page by Gavin Dudeney, who spotted the use of ‘sciencing’ on Radio 4.

The new probe is due to touch down on Mars soon and will be ‘sciencing’ as soon as it does.

This observation led us to investigate the current craze for verbing.

What we found, on investigating the social media sections of the Collins corpus, was a multitude of verbs based on brands.

Brand names have always been a rich source of verbing – hoovering, xeroxing, googling – but they seem to be proliferating in our current climate. I wonder if that’s because of the way that we all feel part of the action – we have agency over what gets bought and sold on these sites.

Why are you asking this here when you can just google the answer?

Jen snapchatted the whole thing.

Now we usually netflix it or chill at home with some good food.

We also found plentiful examples of airbnbing, eBaying, Instagramming and Ubering.

Adjectives as nouns

The next tendency we investigated was the sudden increase we had noticed in the use of adjectives as nouns.

Spread the happy. (Nutella®)

Committed to great since ’78. (Ben & Jerry’s®)

Find your fabulous.

And, by extension, a HarperCollins book …

‘Because’ as a preposition

Finally, we observed the repurposing of because as a preposition:

Why bother discussing this? Because language.

Not bothering with this. Because lazy.

Not going out tonight. Because working.

Here’s a snapshot of the concordance for ‘Because language’:

Note the line from the 2018 social media corpus containing the acronym ‘nsfw’, which stands for ‘not safe for work’, often used as a warning for an email subject line or social media post when sharing a link to potentially inappropriate content:

‘… hilarious nsfw because language.’

See also below a Twitter user’s use of ‘Because’ + adjective:

Note the use of a full stop to create a pause for emphasis.

Finally, if you’re interested in looking into this type of research further, take a look at Jack Grieve’s inaugural lecture, ‘The Future of Language Change’ at the University of Birmingham in December, 2018.

Professor Grieve shows how the study of language change is fast becoming a data science, and demonstrates what can be done with social media and high-level analysis tools.

He shows a series of graphs to demonstrate how we can now track usage from its initial use on social media and its exact location. We can see on what days certain words are typically used, where a brand-new coinage starts, and its pattern of diffusion over time. We can even home in on a particular city or neighbourhood, and see in which district a word emerges.

In the past, linguists used to say that you can never know where a word started because you’re not there to notice them. But now that isn’t true, at least for language used on social media. Language change research is making huge strides – and we’re the lucky ones who are here to see it.

COBUILD English Usage 4th Edition: updating the examples

In the first of our blog posts about the new edition of COBUILD English Usage, Penny Hands details some of the changes she made to the examples to ensure they reflect changes in society, and ponders on how future-proof these changes are likely to be.

One of our aims for this edition was to have a really close look at the example sentences, as our hunch was that society has changed so dramatically since the last overhaul that there would be work to do bringing things up to date.

Looking back at the brief for the last edition in 2011, I see that we were worried about authentic examples being too complex – a common criticism levelled at the COBUILD range in its earlier years, and which we were still ironing out.

As I was going through the examples, I took notes and categorised the outdated material. This would help us, I hoped, identify areas to focus on when we formulated new topic pages. These would be added to the resource to guide students and teachers in various aspects of language use that might have changed in the last ten years.

Here are the categories into which the outdated examples I identified sorted themselves:

  • technology
  • women
  • old-fashioned language
  • toilets
  • American English/British English

Technology

Unsurprisingly, in the area of technology, we found a large number of examples that needed to be changed. For example:

Some tech items, such as tape recorder and portable computer were obviously outdated, but others seemed to be just starting to look anachronistic because they related to things we do less and less often.

Since one of the aims of the update was to future-proof the book to an extent, I used my gut feeling to make interventions where they might not seem to be altogether essential at the moment. Examples of such amendments were as follows (underlining shows which word was being illustrated by the example sentence):

  • Is there a phone anywhere? I changed this to: Is there a place to eat anywhere round here? as asking casually for a phone didn’t seem to be something we would need to do very much these days.
  • You can take money out at any branch of your own bank. I changed this to: You can take money out at any cash machine.*
  • I’ll take my phone with me. I changed this to: I’ll keep my phone switched on because most people always take their phone with them; sometimes, though, we do turn our phones off, for example, if we’re in the cinema.
  • clock/radio à singer/songwriter (to illustrate the of use of the forward slash)
  • When you get your daily paper, which page do you read first? I changed this to: When you start up your computer, which application do you go to first?

* By the next edition, money in the form of notes – and as a result, cash machines – may well be on their way out, but I did feel that cash machines are still common enough to warrant a mention.

Women

I found numerous references to women that, while not necessarily offensive, were just starting to make me flinch a bit. In the following examples, the replacement material is shown after the arrow.

  • … three beautiful young girls à … three adventurous young girls
  • I think a woman has as much right to work as a man. à I think a child has as much right to respect as an adult.
  • He arrived accompanied by his wife. à Children under 14 must be accompanied by an adult.
  • These days more women become managers. à These days friends tend to send messages rather than call each other.
  • She’s over 40 but she still dresses like a teenager. à The organisers advised people to dress appropriately.
  • Every businesswoman would have a secretary if she could. à Every pregnant woman wants the best care she can get.
  • Women must have equal status. à All citizens must have equal status.

Looking at the way I updated the examples referring to women gave me pause: I had frequently replaced woman/women with child/children. This prompted me to consider how things are changing from a hierarchical point of view. When we come to our next round of updates, will the examples with child no longer be acceptable? What will I need to replace them with next?

Old-fashioned language

The next category that came out of the analysis was that of ‘old-fashioned language’. Here are some of the words and phrases that jumped out.

American English/British English

Then there were the inevitable items that were labelled as Americanisms, which can hardly be referred to as such any more.

References to lavatories, ladies’ and gents’, air travel being ‘easy these days’, newsagents, letters, and an ‘Indian gentleman’ also all got reworded or expunged from the text.

So, what will future updates bring?

Much as I’ve tried to future-proof the examples, I’m going to make a perhaps rather rash prediction that all my new examples with children will have to be thrown out in ten years’ time, with dogs taking their place. But even then, anyone who has watched the TV programme ‘Supervet’, or the equivalent in their own country, and observed the status of the pet in many families, will have doubts about even that. Robot-servants, maybe?

Grammar or vocabulary? A blurry line


This article has been written by Julie Moore, who is an ELT materials developer and lexicographer.

Most language learning coursebooks include grammar activities and vocabulary activities. As teachers, we talk about ‘teaching grammar’ and ‘teaching vocabulary’. Grammar and vocabulary are two of the key strands of language learning, yet are they really as separate as we tend to view them? In this post, I’ll look at three ways in which the line between grammar and vocabulary can get blurred and consider whether we should actually be thinking of them more as two ends of a continuum with large areas of overlap in the middle.

Word grammar

If you look in a dictionary, the archetypal vocabulary resource, you’ll find plenty of information about grammar, usually in the form of labels; N-UNCOUNT, V n, usu ADJ n, etc. That’s because individual lexical items – words, phrases, phrasal verbs – typically behave in particular ways; they have grammatical features associated with them. Teaching about these lexico-grammatical features straddles the line between grammar and vocabulary.

So in many coursebooks, you’ll find the topic of countable and uncountable nouns labelled as ‘grammar’, but it’s almost always taught alongside a vocabulary set, often food (bread, pasta, apples, carrots, etc.) That’s because the two can’t be separated; you can’t easily talk about the concept of countable and uncountable nouns, especially at low levels, without looking at specific instances.  So, for example, in the Collins COBUILD English Grammar, an uncountable noun is described as a noun which refers to “general things such as qualities, substances, processes, and topics rather than to individual items or events”, but that explanation only really makes sense because it’s followed by example sentences and a list of common uncountable nouns.

Similarly, you can only understand the concept of transitive and intransitive verbs with reference to specific examples – you always achieve something or provide something, but you just arrive or hesitate. Or when we teach about stative verbs, verbs which describe a state, such as exist, know, belong, we have to explain both which verbs they are – a set of vocabulary – and also how they behave grammatically, i.e. that they aren’t generally used in progressive forms.

Grammar patterns

Why is it that you delay doing something, but you wait to do something? It’s a matter of verb form and sentence structure; when two main verbs occur together, there’s a choice to be made about the form of the second verb. So is this a question of grammar? Well, it feels a bit like grammar, but when it comes down to explaining these types of patterns, you find that actually it’s more about the individual verbs: the vocabulary.

Many of the choices we make about form and structure are actually determined by our choice of vocabulary: particular words are typically used together with particular patterns and structures. This isn’t only true of two verbs that occur together, but also of noun + verb combinations in noun phrases:

his decision to postpone the meeting
an urgent need to recruit more staff
long delays in processing applications

And these patterns aren’t just about verb forms. When words (nouns, verbs, and adjectives) are followed by a prepositional phrase, then the choice of preposition is often determined by the individual word it follows:

access to the internet
allergic to cats
increased demand for consumer goods
capable of winning
restrictions on travel
fraught with danger
suspected links with criminal groups
lacking in detail

Clearly, none of these patterns can be taught as a one-off set of ‘rules’; instead they need to be seen as part of ongoing vocabulary development. They need to be highlighted – either individually or in small sets – as part of the process of deepening students’ understanding of vocabulary; going beyond surface meaning and thinking about how words behave in sentences.

Functions

The final area where grammar and vocabulary overlap is when we think about what we want to do with language; functions. If I want to express uncertainty about my plans for the weekend, I could say:

I might go to the cinema on Saturday.
Maybe I’ll go to the cinema on Saturday.
I was thinking of going to the cinema on Saturday.

In each example, I’ve used a different linguistic feature to express roughly the same idea – a modal verb (might), an adverb (maybe), and an expression (be thinking of doing something). And, of course, if I want to ramp up my level of uncertainty further, I can combine them:

I was thinking, I might possibly go to the cinema on Saturday, if there’s nothing else going on.

Which of these features would typically be taught as part of a grammar syllabus and which as vocabulary? When we speak (or write), we use whatever linguistic resources seem to fit best at the time. Sometimes these are grammatical choices, sometimes they’re more down to vocabulary.

This isn’t just the case with modality, although it’s an interesting area which we’ll return to in a future post. All kinds of functions can be fulfilled by either grammatical or lexical choices. If I want to say that two things are similar, I can say:

London is roughly as warm as Beijing in summer.
London is a bit like Beijing in terms of summer temperatures.
The weather in London and Beijing in summer is much the same.

Does it matter how we label language?

So does it really matter whether we label the language and linguistic features we teach as grammar or vocabulary? Well, for the most part, it probably doesn’t – if we teach language in a clear and engaging way, then the heading at the top of the page isn’t massively significant. We tend to label activities as ‘grammar’ or ‘vocabulary’ as a convenient way of categorizing what we do in class. It makes it easier to match lessons up to a syllabus and to keep track of what we’ve covered when it comes to assessment. However, sticking with this traditional grammar-vocabulary split does have some risks. We risk some key features of language being undertaught and falling through the gaps simply because they don’t fit neatly within either the grammar or the vocabulary syllabus. And we don’t want to limit our students’ language choices by labelling a topic or function as either grammar or vocabulary. They need to be able to make linguistic choices based on what they want to express, not on the part of the syllabus we’re teaching. In short, we perhaps need to be a bit more flexible with our linguistic boxes.

Explore this topic in greater detail with our free guided worksheet.

 

Collins COBUILD English Grammar: a functional grammar

 


This article has been written by Penny Hands, who is one of the contributors to the Collins COBUILD English Grammar.

 

Most people who study and use a language are interested in how they can do things with the language – how they can express their feelings and wishes, get attention, influence people, and learn about the world. They are interested in the grammatical structure of the language as a way of getting things done.

 

What is a functional grammar?

A grammar that puts together the patterns of the language and the things you can do with them is called a functional grammar; that is, it is based on the relation between the structure of a language and the various functions that the language performs.

If you’ve done any reading around different ways of describing the grammar of a language, you will, no doubt, have come across Halliday’s An Introduction to Functional Grammar, now in its fourth edition, but originally published in 1985. (He’s still going strong, by the way, aged 91.)

In many ways, Halliday’s functional grammar seems to be very well suited to language teaching and learning. Functional grammar is all about language use. It’s about communicative grammar that learners can use in the typical situations that they find themselves in as they go about their daily lives. Moreover, it’s an approach in which grammar is not seen as a set of rules, but rather as a communicative resource.

As Halliday himself says, ‘A functional grammar is essentially a “natural” grammar, in the sense that everything in it can be explained, ultimately, by reference to how language is used.’ (Halliday, 1994, p. xiii).

Anyone who has read Halliday’s seminal work will know that his ‘systemic functional grammar’ is a broad and very rich description of the systems and uses of English grammar – to the point that it is considered by some as being rather too broad and too rich for teaching and learning.

 

Where does COBUILD come in?

This is where Collins COBUILD English Grammar (2017) takes up the reins. It has taken the essence of Halliday’s theories and repackaged them so that teachers and learners can get the most benefit from the functional approach. In Collins COBUILD English Grammar, sections are built around functions of language, such as ‘describing people and things’, ‘expressing time’, and ‘reporting what people say and think’. Each of these functions is regularly expressed in English by a particular structure. For example, to describe people and things, we usually use adjectives. Similarly, reporting what people say or think typically involves a reporting verb such as say, followed by a clause beginning with that or a clause with quotation marks around it.

Collins COBUILD English Grammar follows up each major statement (often called a ‘rule’ in other grammars) with a detailed description of the uses surrounding it. The scope of the original function may then be extended. For example, the basic, central function of reporting verbs (Chapter 7) is to state what someone has said, for example:

  • He said he would be back soon.

This can easily be extended to include what someone has written, as in:

  • His mother wrote that he had finally arrived home.

Then it can be widened to include thoughts and feelings:

  • The boys thought he was dead.

From this, we can see that the reporting clause is simply a way of introducing another clause.

Similarly, instead of opting for a traditional treatment of tenses, Collins COBUILD English Grammar concerns itself with ‘expressing time’. This allows for a far more intuitive description of the various functions of different verb forms than any traditional grammar is able to provide. For example, under ‘Expressing future time’, there are sections entitled ‘indicating certainty’, ‘indicating duration’, and ‘planned events’. Structures with will are demonstrated according to function alongside more lexical realizations of future concepts such as be due to, be about to, and be going to:

Certainty:

Don’t worry; Nancy will arrange it.

Duration:

By the end of this week, I will have been working here for exactly a year.

Intention:

Thanks for the offer but Ian is going to take me.

Planned event:

The work is due to start this summer.

Happening soon:

About 385 people are about to lose their jobs.

 

The grammar of social and cultural contexts

A functional grammar is also concerned with how language is used in a range of social and cultural contexts. Collins COBUILD English Grammar adheres to this approach in a variety of ways. For example, the section on plural forms of you explains that you guys and you lot are more frequent in informal English. Similarly, in the section on using generic they and their to refer back to indefinite pronouns (e.g. Someone’s forgotten their coat), readers learn that:

In more formal English, some people prefer to use he, him, his, or himself to refer back to an indefinite pronoun, but many people dislike this use because it suggests that the person being referred to is male:

Everyone has his dream.

And in the section relating to determiners:

In informal spoken English, people sometimes use this and these in front of nouns, even when they are mentioning someone or something for the first time:

At school we had to wear these awful white hats.

Collins COBUILD English Grammar further embraces the concept that grammar is closely related to the situation in which it occurs by focusing on two main contexts in which English is used as a lingua franca throughout the world – business and academic English. Two supplementary sections identify the principal areas of grammar that learners need to master if they wish to communicate effectively in business and academic contexts.

The section on the grammar of business English looks at typical structures used in such contexts as sharing information, negotiating, and giving presentations. The academic English section covers such areas as explaining results, reviewing research, and reporting findings. Extensive cross-referencing allows the user to refer back to the main text, where structures are discussed in greater detail.

 

The grammar of discourse

Finally, functional grammar is concerned with how the various items of language in a text work together as part of a larger system. Collins COBUILD English Grammar goes beyond a focus on ‘well-formed sentences’ to help students use language effectively in a range of discourse contexts. Chapter 10, entitled ‘Making a text hold together’, describes how ‘referring back’ and ‘referring forward’ can create cohesion in a text, and how sentences and different parts of a conversation are linked together. What is not said is considered to be just as important as what is said, and so the section on ‘Leaving words out’ (or ‘ellipsis’) explains how speakers omit words rather than repeat them – another way of creating cohesion within a text.

 

Conventional terminology

Collins COBUILD English Grammar does not, however, throw common sense out with the bathwater. A learner who looks up ‘personal pronouns’ or ‘subordinate clauses’, for example, will find them both in the index and referred to by name in the main text. Students and teachers can still find references to such conventional concepts as tenses, different types of noun (countable, uncountable, compound, abstract, etc.), comparative and superlative forms of adjectives, and the subjunctive.

What is notable about Collins COBUILD English Grammar is (1) the way it organizes the information and (2) its pragmatic approach. It describes how language can be used to write and speak more appropriately and effectively, and provides us with tools for describing how language is used in a wide range of real-life contexts. As a functional grammar, it offers students a way of seeing how meaning and form are related, focusing on language as a resource rather than a set of rules.

 

Explore this topic in greater detail with our free guided worksheet.


Halliday, M. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press