ed definitions of writing fluency and accuracy are reviewed. In brief, the frameworkof this paper is collocation theory and error analysis.
2.1 The Definition of Collocation
The term “collocation”, originated from the verb “collocate”, denotes the conceptionthat “to arrange or to set orderly” (Martyriska, 2004, p. 2). J. R. Firth, the father ofcollocation theory, first explicitly coins the technical term “collocation” (cited inNesselhauf, 2005). Various opinions on the notion of “collocation” have been proposedsince then. It is claimed that there always exist two types of approaches dealing with theissue of collocation. One approach is the “frequency-based approach” (Nesselhauf, 2005,p. 136), which presents that a collocation is referred to as the co-occurrence of wordcombinations in the space. It is employed with respect to computation linguistics andcorpus linguistics. The primary representatives are J. R. Firth, M. A. K. Halliday, R.Hason and J. Sinclair. The other way is the “phraseological approach” (Nesselhauf, 2005,p. 137), which indicates that collocations are considered to be a kind of lexis. Russianphraseology has a great effect on it. This approach is applied in the aspect of languagepedagogy and lexicography. A.P. Cowie and P. Howarth mainly carry out this type ofapproach (Gyllstad, 2007).The two types of opinions on behalf of two approaches are manifested in thefollowing aspects. In the field of “frequency-based approach”, Firth gives the definitionof often-cited term of collocation as the company words keep, which is indicative of themeaning that a word collocates with another word and words habitually co-occur in acontext. The “company” is expressed as “syntagmatic relation”, which signifies thecompetence of lexis to co-occur. A good case in point is the word “water”.
...........
2.2 The Categories of Collocation
Since there are varieties of approaches to defining collocations, the categories ofcollocations are presented from diverse perspectives. In the light of the degree ofcollocation restrictions, collocation can be categorized as free collocation, restrictedcollocation and idiom (Howarth, 1998). According to Benson, Benson and Ilson (1986),the collocation can be categorized into grammatical collocation and lexical collocation interms of their features.In the view of Howarth (1998), semantic transparency, degree of substitutability andstructural variability are recognized as the criteria for falling into collocations. Wordcombinations can be operated as a continuum from completely free to completelyauthentic and invariable, which stands for the two ends. As Figure 2-1 shows, on the leftside of the continuum are free collocations which become the most transparent insemantics, the most energetic concerning substitutability of items and the most variable instructures. Idioms administered on the other side of the continuum are the moststructurally invariable, the most semantically opaque and the hardest to be substituted.Moreover, it is shown that there exists no explicit boundary between free collocation,restricted collocation and idiom. Likewise, the three of them are interrelated concepts. Wetake the verb “buy” for example that have the medium semantic transparency andcollocate with various nouns. We present from “weak” collocation such as “buy a table/house/ a car” to the “stronger” collocation of “buy time” (Howarth, 1998). All the wordcombinations, including the ends of the continuum, is referred to as collocation. Based onthe degree of collocation restrictions, it can be classified into free collocation, restrictedcollocation and idiom.
.........
Chapter Three Methodology.......20
3.1 Research Questions...........20
3.2 Subjects..... 20
3.3 Instruments............20
3.4
