lagoch 3

8/13/2019 lagoch 3

1/9

G

2 J A N U A R Y 2 0 0 3 E N G L I S H T E A C H I N G F O R U M

Marianne Celce-Murc ia and Nina Yoshida

U N I T E D S T A T E S

IVEN THE DOMINANCE OF THE COMMUNICATIVE APPROACH IN LANGUAGE TEACHING,

we assume that grammar explanations and grammar exercises will be well con-

textualized and discourse-based (Celce-Murcia and Olshtain 2000). There is also

the expectation that such explanations and exercises will not be based primarily

on the intuitions of the materials writers or of the teachers who prepare gram-

mar lessons; they will be based on a solid understanding of when and how native

speakers use a given structure. Such an understanding can only be arrived at by

examining many authentic tokens of the target form occurring in natural con-

texts and by doing a discourse analysis of these tokens.

AlternativesTOCurrent PedagogyFOR

Teaching thePresent PerfectProgressive

8/13/2019 lagoch 3

2/9

In order to gain a better understanding ofwhen and how the present perfect progressive(PPP) tense-aspect combination is used in Eng-lish, we collected 250 contextualized tokens ofthe PPP and subsequently carried out a quali-

tative discourse analysis of the results. In thisarticle, we apply our findings to an evaluationof the presentation and teaching of this formin five widely used, recently published ESL/EFL grammar textbooks. We then proposesome alternative ways of teaching the PPPbased on our analysis.

Analysis of the

present perfect progressive

The 250 tokens we analyzed were collectedfrom spoken and written samples of adultnative speakers of American English. The cor-pus includes data from oral corpora compiledfrom the following four sources:

an oral corpus developed at the University ofCalifornia, Los Angeles (UCLA), which con-sists of narratives, academic lectures, radioshow phone calls from listeners, formal con-versations between professionals, informalconversations between friends, and class-room teacher-student interactions

academic counseling sessions (from He1993, 1998)

Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken AmericanEnglish(2000)

The White House Transcripts(1974)

The written data include letters to the DearAbby and Ann Landers advice columns; arti-cles from Newsweek;and comic strips, cartoons,and articles appearing in Los Angeles Times.

There are five major findings of ourdata-based analysis of the PPP:

1. The PPP is a highly context-dependent form.

Whether the activity described is complet-ed just before, at, or after the moment ofspeech depends on the context. All of thesepossibilities occur in our data. Also, be-cause the PPP is so context dependent, itoccurs frequently with first and second per-son pronouns as subjects.

2. The PPP often occurs with a time adverbialbut does not have to. When no overt adver-bial occurs, there may be temporal framingin an earlier sentence in the discourse, or

there may be a default time expressed, suchas recently or lately.

3. The PPP is typically part of a three-move

structure with the first move providing back-ground (in present or present perfect tense),

the second and most crucial move high-lighting an ongoing activity of concern (inPPP), and the third move giving some eval-uation or follow-up (in present tense).1

4. The PPP normally does not occur repeat-edly over several adjacent clauses in a pieceof discourse. It tends to occur once, pre-

ceded and followed by simpler tenses.2

5. The discourse context, the semantics of theentire verb phrase, and any accompanyingtemporal adverbials are all part of the

meaning conveyed by the PPP.

In the examples we cite in this article, thePPP forms are in bold face to assist the reader.

Review of five recent grammar texts

In light of our qualitative analysis of these250 tokens of the PPP tense-aspect form, we

examined five current ESL/EFL grammartexts that are in their second or third editions,which means these are successful and widely

used textbooks. We looked specifically at thepresentation and treatment of the PPP in thefollowing texts:

Azar, B. S. 1999. Understanding and usingEnglish grammar. 3rd ed.

Elbaum, S. N. 2001. Grammar in context.3rd ed.

Maurer, J. 2000. Focus on grammar. 2nd ed.

Murphy, R. with W. R. Smalzer. 2000.Grammar in use: lntermediate. 2nd ed.

Riggenbach, H. and V. Samuda. 2000.Grammar dimensions 2. Platinum ed.

Problematic explanations of the PPPNone of these five texts makes it clear that

the meaning of the PPP depends in part on themeaning of the verb phrase and/or time adver-bials that this tense-aspect form combines with.

In other words, the five texts did not explicitlystate that the PPP normally signals an ongoingactivity with duration but it can also signal iter-

ative or repeated action if the meaning of theverb phrase is punctual (no overt adverbial offrequency is necessary):

E N G L I S H T E A C H I N G F O R U M J A N U A R Y 2 0 0 3 3

8/13/2019 lagoch 3

3/9

Example 1

D: His partners have been nippingat him,but Herb is tough now.(The White House Transcripts, p. 89)

In example 1, the meaning of nip is iterative.

By contrast, in the present perfect, with whichthe PPP is often compared, verbs are iterativeonly if there is some overt indication of repeti-tion in an adverbial:

Example 2

His partners have nipped at him (fivetimes), but Herb is tough now.(our modification of example 1)

Without an adverbial of frequency such asfive times, only a single nip is signaled whenthe present perfect is used in example 2. Thus,

as we shall explain, a determination of whetherthe verb phrase expresses an activity, a state,a punctual action,3 or an accomplishment(Vendler 1967) is a critical element in theinterpretation of the PPP or any other tense-aspect combination, for that matter.

All five texts suggest that there is little or nodifference between the PPP and the presentperfect with verbs like live, work, teach, study,etc. when for or since phrases are used astime adverbials.4 This is not always correctbecause in a job interview one might list rele-

vant past experiences in the present perfectusing these types of time adverbials. Theseexperiences are not understood as being ineffect at the moment of speech unless this isexplicitly specified (i.e., with a time adverbialsuch as [for] the past five years). Also, we donot know whether or not there is any simul-taneity or overlap in these past experiences:

Example 3

Ive taught high school English for one year,ESL for four years, and word processing fortwo years. (constructed example)

If the speaker uses the PPP instead of thepresent perfect, then the implication is thatall of these teaching activities are simultane-ous and either in effect at the moment ofspeech or completed shortly before themoment of speech:

Example 4

Ive been teachinghigh school English forone year, ESL for four years, and word pro-cessing for two years. (constructed example)

What happens in such examples if the verb islive, meaning reside? In such a case, only thepresent perfect seems possible since people donot normally reside in different places at thesame time:

Example 5aIve lived in New York for two years, Chi-cago for five years, and Los Angeles forthree years.

Example 5b

? Ive been living in New York for twoyears, Chicago for five years, and Los Ange-les for three years. (constructed examples)

Clearly, there are some differences that mustbe taken into account when the use of thesetwo tense-aspect forms is compared using

verbs like live, work, teach, etc. followed byfor and since phrases.Four of the five texts (Azar 1999, p. 15, 42;

Elbaum 2001, p. 635; Maurer 2000, p. 56;Murphy with Smalzer 2000, p. 20c) state thatstative or non-action verbs like know, hear,mean, see, and want cannot occur with thePPP. This is not accurate because tokens suchas the following occurred in our database:

Example 6

Ive been hearingabout an Internet col-lapse since 1977, he says. (Newsweek,

9/16/96, p. 96)Finally, Riggenbach and Samuda (2000,

p. 232) present a dialogue that encouragesrepetitive sequential use of the PPP by elicitingnumerous tokens of PPP in adjacent clauses ina way that would not occur in authentic data,where normally only one clause, and no morethan two successive clauses have the PPP. Aspointed out in endnote 2, our data indicatethat two successive clauses occur only underspecial circumstances.

Good explanations of the PPP

Three of the textbooks (Elbaum 2001, p.45; Maurer 2000, p. 38; Murphy with Smalz-er 2000, p. 22c) tell the learner not to use thePPP with adverbials like always and/ornever. This may be a useful rule-of-thumbbecause we did not find any tokens of PPPco-occurring with always or never in ourdatabase.7 We think this is generally truebecause the PPP typically expresses very con-crete actions and times whereas always andnever are used to generalize actions over a


8/13/2019 lagoch 3

4/9

period of time. The forms thus seem seman-tically incompatible.

In some cases, one textbook gives an accurateand insightful explanation that is not offered inthe other four. For example, Azar (1999, p. 42)

is the only text of the five to state that when thePPP occurs without a time adverbial, it express-es a general activity in progress and that latelyor recently are the adverbial meanings impliedin such cases. This observation agrees with manytokens in our database. For example, tokens 7through 9 strongly imply recently/lately eventhough no overt adverbial occurs:

Example 7

We are pretty sure this will be our last SantaClaus Christmas because the boys havebeen askinga lot of questions and making

comments about the existence of Santa.(letter to Ann Landers advice column, Los

Angeles Times, 11/25/96, section E, p. 6)

Example 8

HP: We havent been bringingit over herefor security reasons. (The White HouseTranscripts, p. 743)

Example 9

Wendy:Weve been takinga lot of stuff toher. (Santa Barbara Corpus, file 13,15781580)

The Riggenbach and Samuda textbook(2000, pp. 228230) is the only one of the fivethat has exercises showing the learner that theactivity occurring with the PPP may or may notbe completed at the present time (at the momentof speech). This also agrees with our data, whichshow that the discourse context is what deter-mines whether a verb phrase signals a complet-ed action or an ongoing action at the momentof speech. Here is a token where the action hasjust been completed at the time of speech:

Example 10

Hes been lookingeverywhere for that toy!(Context: He has just found it by trippingover it.) (Heathcliff cartoon, Los AngelesTimes, 2/17/98, section E, p. 4)

Here is a token where the action clearly con-tinues beyond the moment of speech:

Example 11

How many years have you been teachinghere? (UCLA oral corpus, p. 326 line17560)

The Murphy with Smalzer text (2000)shows that the contrast between the PPP andthe present perfect is sometimes usefullyviewed as one of activity versus result:

Example 12a

Lings clothes are covered with paint. Shehas been paintingthe ceiling. (activity)

Example 12b

The ceiling was white. Now it is blue. Shehas painted the ceiling. (result) (examplesfrom Murphy with Smalzer 2000, p. 20)

This observation agrees with our database forthose tokens with verb phrases that express theaccomplishment of something. Example 13expresses an activity with PPP, but when theverb form changes to present perfect in exam-

ple 14, the result of the action, or an accom-plishment, is emphasized.

Example 13

D: I have been preparingthe answers forthe briefing book. (activity) (The WhiteHouse Transcripts, p. 96)

Example 14

I have prepared the answers for the briefingbook. (completed result) (constructedexample based on example 13)

Maurer (2000, p. 3334) presents use of the

PPP in appropriate authentic texts but does notfully exploit the data to focus on and teach theuse of the PPP. He includes an error correctionactivity (p. 43) and an information gap activity(pp. 4446) but these activities provide verylimited practice of the PPP because so manyother verb forms are also practiced with noform receiving any special focus.

Riggenbach and Samuda (2000, p. 228)present the use of the PPP to talk about anactivity that was happening very recently, theeffect or results of which can still be observed

or sensed:Example 15

A: Why are your hands green?

B: I have been paintingmy room.

This also agrees with some tokens we havefound in our database:

Example 16

K: How are you feeling?

P: Finea little tiredIve been working


8/13/2019 lagoch 3

5/9

very hard as you can imagine. (The WhiteHouse Transcripts, p. 446)

The grammar texts did not adequatelyelaborate their exercises for use of the PPP toreflect the three-part structure we typically

found in our database: Background

Activity of focus/concern (with PPP)

Evaluation

Azar (1999, p. 4243), however, has one exer-cise that reflects this three-part structure.Unfortunately, the exercise focuses only onerror analysis and correction, rather than pro-ductive use of the PPP:

Example 17Instructions: Correct the errors in verb

tense usage.

The boys are playing soccer right now.

They are playing for almost two hours.

They must be getting tired.(Azar 1999, p. 42)

The learners are supposed to change are play-ing in the second sentence to have beenplaying, but if they have not seen enoughauthentic examples of the three-part structurethat appropriately use the PPP, they may notbe able to do this successfully.

Related to our observations of a three-partstructure, McCarthy (1998, p. 5354), whoalso advocates the use of authentic discourse toteach grammar, points out that the interlocu-tors follow-up (evaluation) is the part mostoften omitted in pedagogical treatments ofmany structures. In fact, Murphy with Smalz-er (2000, pp. 1825) present many well con-textualized exercises; however, they consistent-ly omit the evaluation move that occurs sofrequently in our data. Below is an example ofan exercise from Murphy with Smaltzer

(2000, p. 19) that requires learners to com-plete the blank with the PPP:

Example 18

The rain started two hours ago. Its stillraining now. (background)

It ________________ for two hours.

Answer: It has been rainingfor two hours.(activity of focus with PPP)

We suggest adding a third step, an evaluativefollow-up to exercises of this type, such as we

provide in example 19, to more closely simulatetokens of the PPP found in natural discourse.

Example 19

The rain started two hours ago. Its stillraining now. (background)

Its been rainingfor two hours. (activity ofconcern with PPP)

I wish it would stop. (evaluative follow-up)

In our data, the follow-up in the third stepcould come either from the speaker of the sec-ond step or from the interlocutor, asMcCarthy (1998) suggests.

Summary of reviewWhile all of the texts we reviewed had

some strong points, they also had problems.We found that the Murphy with Smalzer text(2000) and the Riggenbach and Samuda text(2000) include a variety of exercises and activ-ities; however, the instructor must judiciouslyuse and carefully supplement them to reflectactual use of the PPP. Maurer (2000) is themost text-based of the books, but it doesntzero in on target forms adequately. However,his texts could provide useful materials forteachers to adapt for purposes of teaching thePPP or other tense-aspect forms.

An alternative pedagogy:

Teaching the PPP through discourse

In addition to adapting the exercises andexplanations in the textbooks they already usegrammar teachers can exploit authentic textsthat contain tokens of the PPP, such as tran-scribed speech, letters to advice columnists,and comic strips. For example, we have usedthe following transcript of a segment from aradio talk show to present and practice thePPP with our students:

Example 20

Host: Im Dr. Mary Smith8 and youre ontalk radio. Hello?

Guest: Good afternoon, Dr. Smith. ImLucy and Im 59. Id just like to share a pos-itive thing that I have found in the last yearor so. Ive been hikingand find that this isa wonderful way to keep your weight downand meet some people and just really feelgood. (UCLA Oral Corpus, p. 94)

After our students have listened to the record-ing several times and asked questions about


8/13/2019 lagoch 3

6/9

any grammar or vocabulary they dont under-stand, we show them the transcript and pointout that there is a typical pattern, with a pre-dictable sequence of tense-aspect forms, inthe segment:

First move: present context + past informa-tion (present or present perfect tense)

Second move: activity of focus, special con-cern of speaker (with PPP)

Third move: evaluation/follow-up (presenttense)

The students identify the statements in thetranscript for each move and then work inpairs or small groups to practice telling theclass about something they have been doing.The first thing they should do is identify an

activity they have been engaging in. Our stu-dents have suggested statements such as: Ivebeen jogging three times a week, Ive beenswimming almost every day, Ive been play-ing tennis with a friend, and Ive been ridingmy bicycle to school. The discourse-level taskis to develop a monologue like Lucys; the stu-dents pretend they have called the radio talkshow. Another possibility is to write a shortconversation where the first move is the ques-tion What have you been doing lately? Hereis an example:

Example 21Student 1: What have you been doinglately?

Student 2: Ive been jogging, and it helpskeep me in shape. (an answer that com-bines the second and third move)

Student 1: Thats nice. (additional fol-low-up from the interlocutor)

Another situation where we found the PPPfrequently used is complaints. Role plays lendthemselves very well to practicing complaints.We use Hawkins (1985) model situation with

minor modifications to adapt it for use as arole play activity. One of the situationsHawkins used pedagogically, drawing on datareported in Schaefer (1982), is the following:

You take a morning off from work to go tothe doctor because of a medical problemcausing you pain. For two hours you sit inthe waiting room. During your wait, youcheck occasionally with the woman at thefront desk to find out when you will becalled to see the doctor. She keeps saying,

In a few minutes. You have to be back atwork in one hour (at noon). What do youtell the woman at the desk?

One of the responses elicited from a nativeEnglish speaker is then used as a model for a

role play.Example 22

Excuse me. I have a problem. Ive been wait-ingtwo hours to see the doctor, and I have tobe back at work at noon. Can you help me?9

In going over the situation with students,focusing on the complaint and its response, itis useful to show the steps and the forms thespeaker uses. Note that the first and lastmoves, which are marked with asterisks, aresocially motivated additions to the three-partstructure we have been describing:

*Opener (polite, formulaic): Excuse me.

Context/orientation (in present tense): Ihave a problem.

Complaint (with PPP): Ive been waitingfor two hours to see the doctor.

Justification (in present tense): I have to beback at work at noon.

*Request for remedy (modal yes-no ques-tion): Can you help me?

The moves and forms used to realize the steps

should be reviewed by the students who canthen ask questions about anything that is notclear. It should be pointed out that thisresponse is relatively polite as far as complaintsgo. Often complaints are much more directand the steps that are asterisked above couldbe absent or take a different form. Time per-mitting, the teacher might ask the students ifthe complaint response would take a differentform in their language(s).

The class can be given other role play situ-ations for practicing the PPP in complaints.Working in pairs or small groups, they canwrite a complaint dialogue. Here is a situationabout waiting in line:

You wait in line for one hour to buy ticketsto see a new movie with some friends. Ayoung man cuts into the line in front ofyou. What do you say to him?

Once the pairs or small groups have drafted acomplaint dialogue, they compare their stepsand forms with what one native speaker saidin this situation:


8/13/2019 lagoch 3

7/9

Example 23

Hey, Ive been waitingin line a long time,

and I dont appreciate you cutting in here.

Note that the situation has provided the con-

text, so example 23 has only two steps, or

moves, the complaint with the PPP and theevaluation. If they wish, the students can make

minor modifications to their dialogues before

they perform their role plays, which are then

discussed by the whole class in terms of appro-

priateness, steps, and language use.The third situation that we recommend for

teaching the PPP involves explanations or ac-

counts that describe immediate and specific out-

comes. Depraetere and Reed (2000) and Bous-

caren, Chuquet, and Danon-Boileau (1992) of-

fer the following constructed examples to show

how an ongoing activity is described using thePPP and a specific outcome is presented in

simple present:

Example 24

Ive been making three cakes. (ongoing

activity as explanation in PPP)

Thats why Im covered in flour. (outcome

in simple present) (Depraetere and Reed

2000, p. 112)

Example 25

Ive been running. (ongoing activity asexplanation with PPP)

Thats why Im so tired. (outcome in sim-

ple present) (Bouscaren, Chuquet, and

Danon-Boileau (1992, p. 31)

Note that in both these examples the outcome

is in simple present. In our naturalistic data the

tense can also be past or future and the order-ing of the two steps can vary:

Example 26

That wasnt hard for me at all. (outcome in

simple past)

Ive been doing that since I was about 3years old. (ongoing activity as explanationin PPP) (Newsweek, 10/21/96, p. 88)

Note that the two uses of that in this exam-ple refer to the activity of writing about ones

personal experiences.We found that this function of the PPP, in

explanations that describe outcomes, was aslikely to occur in written as in spoken sourcesand there is often an evaluative or follow-upmove that also occurs. We recommend the useof a letter to an advice column to illustrate thisuse in context:

Example 27

Dear Ann:My husband and I have two sons, aged 11and 8. (background in simple present)We are pretty sure this will be our lastSanta Claus Christmas (predicted outcomein future tense)because the boys have been askinga lot ofquestions about the existence of Santa.(ongoing activity as explanation in PPP)We are thankful they have believed so long,but now we are stumped. (evaluation inpresent perfect and simple present)

(adapted from a letter to Ann Landers ad-vice column, Los Angeles Times, 11/25/96,

section E, p. 6)Once the students have read and discussed theexample, they should work in pairs to write aletter asking for advice regarding an activitysomething that they do or that someone elsedoeswhich is of concern to them. It is help-ful to have some prior discussion to generatepossible scenarios, such as the examples in thetable below.

It should be pointed out that one can eitherstate the activity first and the outcome secondor vice versa, and that the two statements can

be in separate sentences or combined with a


Activity/explanation

Youve been working outdoors

Your roommate has been smoking

Your mother has been readingyour diary

Immediate outcome

Youre sunburned

The apartment smells bad

You are angry

8/13/2019 lagoch 3

8/9

subordinator like because. The pairs shoulddecide what activity and outcome they willwrite about and which grammatical strategywill work best for the letter they write to theadvice columnist. The pairs should write their

letters on overhead transparencies or on theboard so the entire class can see them to discussthe accuracy and effectiveness and to speculateon the response the letter might elicit from anadvice columnist.

Conclusion

The PPP verb form nicely illustrates thatgrammar is a resource speakers and writers useto shape their oral and written communica-tion. For grammar pedagogy in general,research indicates that while some focus onform in ESL/EFL classrooms is helpful

(Doughty and Williams 1998), not all types ofgrammar instruction are equally useful. To beoptimally effective, grammar instructionshould be based on what actually occurs inauthentic discourse. Activities for understand-ing how grammar works and for practicinggrammar should be pragmatic and draw onnaturalistic data. Exercises should not be arti-ficially created simply to force learners to prac-tice a given structure; learners benefit greatlyfrom having a context that realistically moti-vates the use of the target structure.

We hope that our study of the PPP hasshown how qualitative analysis of target struc-tures based on a large number of tokens drawnfrom authentic discourse can provide ESL/EFLteachers and textbook writers with useful infor-mation that will help improve grammarinstruction. The increasing availability of largelanguage corpora accessible by computershould ease the task of teachers and textbookwriters who wish to analyze and use a largenumber of authentic tokens when developinggrammar teaching activities.

Notes

1. The first and/or third move are notalways overtly expressed; they may only beimplied if there is sufficient contextual inputor shared background knowledge amonginterlocutors. Also, the order of moves canoccasionally be changed for stylistic effect.

2. Conversational design, such as a ques-tion and answer pair or some sort of coordi-nating conjunction or parataxis, are the excep-tions to this generalization:

Example 1

A: What have you been doing?

B: Ive been jogging.

Example 2

To get some exercise, Ive been hikingonweekends, and Ive been swimming too.(constructed examples)

In such cases, our data indicates that it is pos-sible to have two PPP tokens in succession.

3. Vendler (1967) refers to punctual actionsor events as achievements, but we find his ter-minology potentially misleading and thus havemodified it to a term more commonly used fordescribing such verbs.

4. Maurer (2000), however, notes that useof the PPP suggests a shorter or more tempo-

rary action than the use of the present perfect.We are skeptical of this observation, given themany tokens we have found of the PPP occur-ring with time adverbials that mark a long spanof time, suggesting that this is not a useful gen-eralization, for example:

But its been goingon since time immemo-rial. (The White House Transcripts, p. 771)

Ive watched my father, hes been flyingfor40 years (UCLA oral corpus, p. 282 line152067)

5. Elbaum (2001, p. 63) gives the following

bad example to make the point that the PPPcannot be used with non-action verbs: She hasbeen absent a lot lately. To be absent is not astative verb but an adjectival predicate and thuscannot possibly take progressive aspect.

6. To give credit to Maurer (2000, pp. 37,39), however, he does add, When stative verbsoccur in the progressive, they generally havedifferent meanings.

7. Even though we had no examples in ourdatabase, we are still not convinced that it isabsolutely impossible to use PPP with always

or never. We think examples such as the fol-lowing are possible in informal conversation:

You know, Ive always been wonderingabout that.

A: Has Tom been by the office lately?

B: Hes never been comingby this office,thats for sure!

8. All proper names in our naturalistic oraldata have been changed to protect the identi-ty of the speakers.


21

8/13/2019 lagoch 3

9/9

teaching and learning. In addition to language

learning, in the trusting environment of tutori-

als, true communication can occur.

References

Flowerdew, J., D. Li, and L. Miller. 1998. Attitudestowards English and Cantonese among HongKong Chinese University lecturers. TESOLQuarterly, 32, 2, pp. 201231.

Flowerdew, J. and L. Miller. 1992. Student percep-tions, problems and strategies in L2 lectures.RELC Journal, 32, 2, pp. 6080.

Homolova, E. 2002. What every EFL teachershould know about using the mother tongue.English as a Foreign Language Newsletter, 21, 2,pp. 12.

Jin, L. and M. Cortazzi. 1998. The culture thelearner brings: A bridge or a barrier? In Language

learning in intercultural perspective: Approachesthrough drama and ethnography, eds. M. Byramand M. Fleming. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-versity Press, pp. 98118.

Palmer, P. J. 1993. To know as we are known: A spir-ituality of education. San Francisco: Harper andRow.

Savignon, S. J. 1983. Communicative competence:Theory and classroom practice. Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Shaw, V. 1992. Community building in the class-room. San Juan Capistrano, CA: Kagan Cooper-ative Learning. z

Kirsten Schaetzel is an assistant professor

at the National Institute of Education in Sin-

gapore.

Chan Ho is a lecturer in English at the Uni-

versity of Macao.


A lternat ives | Celce-Murcia & Yoshidacontinued from page 9

9. The situation and response originallyreported in Hawkins (1985) are reproducedin Celce-Murcia and Olshtain (2000: pp.224225).

References

Azar, B.S. 1999. Understanding and using Englishgrammar(3rd ed.). White Plains, NY: PearsonEducation Longman.

Bouscaren, J., J. Chuquet and L. Danon-Boileau.1992. Introduction to a linguistic grammar of Eng-lish: An utterer-centered approach. Paris: Ophrys.

Celce-Murcia, M. and E. Olshtain. 2000. Dis-course and context in language teaching: A guidefor language teachers. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press

Depraetere, I. and S. Reed. 2000. The present per-fect progressive: Constraints on its use withnumerical object NPs. English Language andLinguistics, 4, 1, pp. 97114.

Doughty, C. and J. Williams. 1998. Focus on formin classroom second language acquisition. Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press.

Elbaum, S. N. 2001 Grammar in context(3rd ed.).Boston: Heinle and Heinle.

Hawkins, B. 1985, February. Learning to complainthrough experience. Paper presented at the Sec-ond Language Research Forum, University ofCalifornia, Los Angeles.

He, A. W. 1993. Reconstructing institutions throughtalk: A discourse study of academic counseling ses-sions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, LosAngeles: University of California, Los Angeles.

He, A. W. 1998. Reconstructing institutions: Lan-guage use in academic counseling encounters.Stamford, CT: Ablex.

Maurer, J. 2000. Focus on grammar(2nd ed.). WhitePlains, NY: Pearson Education Longman.

McCarthy, M. 1998. Spoken languages and appliedlinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-

sity Press.Murphy, R. with W. R. Smalzer. 2000. Grammar in

use: Intermediate (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cam-bridge University Press.

Riggenbach, H. and V. Samuda. 2000. Grammardimensions 2. (Platinum ed.). Boston: Heinleand Heinle.

Santa Barbara corpus of spoken American English,Part 1. 2000. Collected by the University of Cal-ifornia Center for the Study of Discourse.Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.

Schaefer, E. 1982. An analysis of the discourse andsyntax of oral complaints in English. UnpublishedM.A. thesis, Los Angeles: University of Califor-nia, Los Angeles.

Vendler, Z. 1967. Linguistics and philosophy. Ithaca,NY: Cornell University Press.

The White House Transcripts. 1974. New York: Bal-lantine Books. z

Marianne Celce-Murcia is Professor Emerita

in the Applied Linguistics and TESL Depart-

ment at the University of California, Los

Angeles (USA).

Nina Yoshida is a doctoral student in East

Asian Languages and Cultures at the Uni-

versity of California, Los Angeles (USA).

lagoch 3

Documents