CREATING a CORPUS BASED LEGAL ACADEMIC WORD LIST FOR STUDENTS AND TEACHERS OF ENGLISH FOR LAW AT HANOI LAW UNIVERSITY

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION
***

GRADUATION PAPER

CREATING A CORPUS-BASED LEGAL
ACADEMIC WORD LIST FOR STUDENTS AND
TEACHERS OF ENGLISH FOR LAW AT HANOI
LAW UNIVERSITY

Supervisor: Cấn Thị Chang Duyên, MA
Student: Phạm Huyền Trang
Course: QH2017.F1.E2.SPCLC

HÀ NỘI – 2021


ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA HÀ NỘI
TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ
KHOA SƯ PHẠM TIẾNG ANH

KHÓA LUẬN TỐT NGHIỆP

XÂY DỰNG SỔ TAY TỪ VỰNG TIẾNG ANH CHO
SINH VIÊN VÀ GIẢNG VIÊN CHUYÊN NGÀNH
TIẾNG ANH PHÁP LÝ TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC LUẬT
HÀ NỘI

Giáo viên hướng dẫn: ThS Cấn Thị Chang Duyên

Sinh viên: Phạm Huyền Trang
Khóa: QH2017.F1.E2.SPCLC

HÀ NỘI – 2021


ACCEPTANCE PAGE
I hereby state that I: Pham Huyen Trang, class 17E2, being a candidate for the
degree of Bachelor of Arts accept the requirements of the College relating to the
retention and use of Bachelor’s Graduation Paper deposited in the library.
In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my paper deposited in the
library should be accessible for the purposes of study and research, in accordance
with the normal conditions established by the librarian for the care, loan or
reproduction of the paper.
Signature

4th May 2021


Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I would like to send my deep gratitude to my supervisor,
Ms. Can Thi Chang Duyen for having been the light that guided me throughout the
days of completing this research. I am extremely grateful for the valuable
suggestions, constructive comments and guidance that she has provided me to
amend my writing. She has shown me the direction and motivated me to finish this
research.
Additionally, this study could have not been done without the support of the
teacher from Hanoi Law University (HLU). She has provided me with great insight
into the learning and teaching of legal English in general and particularly in HLU
since the beginning. Thanks to her, I have been more confident with the work I am

doing and also with the final product. Furthermore, I would like to thank the
participants of this research, the lawyers and students, who have made enormous
contribution to the completion of the study.
I am also thankful that I have my family as an invaluable source of
encouragement for me during the last few months. Especially, I would like to send
my heartfelt thanks to my brother, who has lent me his laptop and supported me
with all the technical issues.
Last but not least, I would like to express my great appreciation to my
beloved friends: Chim, Phu, Thao, Vor, Do and particularly Lan Phuong, who have
always been by my side and given me tremendous mental support in this long and
challenging journey. These incredible individuals have motivated me and raised me
up whenever I wanted to give up. Had it not been for their accompany along the
way and throughout the sleepless nights, I would not have managed to overcome
insurmountable difficulties that I encountered along the way.

i


Abstract
The present research is conducted with a view to developing an annotated Legal
Academic Word List (LAWL) to serve pedagogical purposes for teachers, course
designers and students at Hanoi Law University. This corpus-based lexical study
consists of three phases which began with the creation of a legal corpus compiled
from the two textbooks used in the subject Advanced Legal English (ALE) 1, 2. The
corpus consists of 42,052 running words belonging to eight topics studied in ALE
1, 2. In the second phase, the LAWL was produced and finally annotated. Two
softwares namely Anthony’s AntConc (3.5.9) and AntWordProfiler (1.5.0)
(Anthony, 2020, 2021) were employed to produce the word list. Based on the range
and frequency criteria, a word list of 236 lemma forms was created and served as a
base for the annotated LAWL. From the interviews with HLU’s teachers and

students and some legal practitioners, words and aspects of each entry word to be
included in the annotated LAWL have been identified. The final version of the
annotated LAWL contains 100 legal terms of which there are 37 academic terms
with specialised meanings, 34 exclusive words (not included in either the AWL or
GSL) and 29 additional chunks/phrases. The annotated list shows the following
features of the words: phonetics, part of speech, definition, collocations, related
phrases, sample sentence and topic. The availability of this list has significant
pedagogical contributions to the learning and teaching of students and teachers at
HLU.

Keywords: ESP, Legal English, LAWL, Corpus-based

ii


List of figures, tables and abbreviations
List of figures
Figure 1. Continuum of ELT course type

9

Figure 2. Word list development process

25

Figure 3. Proportion of words in the LAWL

37

Figure 4. Sample of the annotated word list

43

List of tables
Table 1. How the textbooks are used in Advanced Legal English 1, 2

26

Table 2. Interview protocol

32

Table 3. The coverage comparison of the GSL and AWL in the
corpus

33

Table 4. The top 40 lemma forms in LAWL

35

Table 5. Summary of main findings

44

List of abbreviations

ESP

English for Special Purposes

LAWL

Legal Academic Word List

AWL

Academic Word List
iii


GSL

General Service List

ALE

Advanced Legal English

HLU

Hanoi Law University

ILE

International Legal English: A course for classroom or
self-study use

PEIU-L

Professional English in Use – Law

LE

Legal English

iv


TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

Acknowledgements
Abstract
List of figures, tables and abbreviations

i
ii
iii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1.
1.2.
1.3.
1.4.
1.5.

Statement of the research problem
Research aims & Research questions

Scope of the study
Significance of the study
Organization of the study

1
4
4
4
5

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. English for Specific Purposes
2.1.1. Definition
2.1.2. Classification
2.1.3. Legal English
a.
Definition
b.
Characteristics of English Legal Language

7
7
8
10
10
11

2.2. Vocabulary in ESP teaching and learning
2.2.1. Types of vocabulary
2.2.2. Legal terminologies

2.2.3. Selection of the appropriate vocabulary for teaching and learning

12
12
13
14

2.3. The lexical approach

14

2.4. Corpus Linguistics
2.4.1. Definition
2.4.2. Types of corpora
2.4.3. The building of a corpus
a.
Text selection
b.
Criteria of a corpus
c. The building of a specialised corpus
d.
Procedure of building a corpus
2.4.4. Analysis of a corpus
2.4.5. Evaluation lists of high-frequency words
2.5. Review of previous studies

15
15
16
18

18
19
20
20
221
23
23

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
v


3.1. Research context

25

3.2. Creating a Legal Academic Word List (LAWL)
3.2.1. Corpus design
3.2.2. Data collection for the corpus
3.2.3. Data processing (Analysis of the corpus)
3.2.4. Wordlist annotation
3.2.5. Wordlist validation

26
27
27
28
30
31

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS & DISCUSSION
4.1. Results and Findings
35
4.1.1. Research question 1: What are the most frequent academic content
words in the corpus of legal english textbooks that are not among the first
2000 words of English as represented in the GSL (West, 1953) based on
frequency criteria?
35
4.1.2. Research question 2: What are the most frequently used words that
are exclusive to the Legal Academic Word List?
36
4.1.3. Research question 3: What are the words to be included in the
annotated Legal Academic Word List?
38
4.1.4. Research question 4: What aspects can be included in the annotation
for each word entry from the word list?
40
4.2. Discussions
4.3. Summary of chapter 4

42
45

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION
5.1. Summary
5.2. Pedagogical implications
5.3. Limitations and suggestions for future research
References
Appendices
Appendix A: Legal Academic Word Corpus

Appendix B: 236 Words in Legal Academic Word List
Appendix C: The annotated Legal Academic Word List (LAWL)

47
49
50
5151
577
57
96
9999

vi


CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
This chapter is going to provide a brief description of the topic, the research
problems, the objectives, four questions that will be addressed, the significance and
the scope of this study. Furthermore, an overview of this paper is presented in the
first chapter.
1.1.

Statement of the research problem

In the context of globalization and international integration, English has been
rapidly growing as one of the most popular languages in the world (Graddol, 1997).
As an international language, English is used for various purposes, from general to
more specific ones focusing on a particular discipline such as medicine, pharmacy,
IT, economics, and law.
With regard to the sections of law, the use of English for legal purposes has

become critical in both professional and academic contexts. Specifically, the
unprecedented rise in international business transactions requires legal professionals
to get involved in activities conducted in English, such as coming into contact with
international clients, dealing with exotic documents, and doing translations (Snyder,
2004). Therefore, English has become a vital requirement in law firms as well as
national and international organisations. For law students, it can be seen that the
ability to understand and use English in legal contexts plays a crucial role in helping
them not only extend their legal knowledge and improve academic performances
but also prepare for their future careers. Such a high demand for language use in the
legal field has highlighted the need for English for Specific Purposes (ESP).
ESP refers to the teaching and learning of English as a second language
where learners aim at using English in a particular domain (Coxhead, 2003). It has
been a prominent area reflected in the rising number of ESP courses around the
world. In Vietnam, ESP has gained greater attention, especially in the field of law.
As a leading law school in the country, Hanoi Law University has offered a program
for students majoring in English for Law in the Department of English since 2014.
The students are obliged to complete four subjects relating to Basic and Advanced
1


Legal English in their third and fourth year. One of the focuses of these courses is
to provide the students with sufficient legal vocabulary.
Vocabulary plays a vital role in language as they are “the building blocks”
of a language (Thornbury, 2002). Robinson (1991, p.4) also states, “It may often be
thought that a characteristic or even a critical feature of ESP is that a course should
involve specialist language (especially terminology) and content”. The role of
vocabulary is emphasised in reading comprehension (Bin Baki & Kemali, 2013;
Golkar & Yamini, 2007) and written communication (Lee, 2003; Yang, 2013).
Therefore, the learning of legal vocabulary is essential for HLU students to read and
understand legal texts, write common legal text types, comprehend spoken English

in legal topics, and improve their speaking skills in a range of speaking situations
typical of legal practice.
Considered one of the most visible traits of legal language, legal vocabulary
is also one of the most challenging parts of learning legal English. The obstacles in
learning the vocabulary stem from the fact that legal English is often very different
from ordinary English and other conventional technical languages (Hart, 1954).
According to Lã Nguyễn Bình Minh and Nhạc Thanh Hương (2017) in an
orientation document for first-year students majored in English for law, the nature
of legal English, including legal terminologies and complex grammatical structures,
pose many challenges for the students when learning the language. The authors
listed three main problems with the learning and teaching of legal terminologies in
HLU: the differences in legal systems, the large number of semi-technical
vocabulary, and the use of archaic words, doublets, and triplets in legal English.
Besides, the students’ lack of legal background knowledge and motivation also
hinders them from acquiring the vocabulary effectively.
To assist the teaching and learning of the English vocabulary, Nation (2001)
suggests using word lists as the primary source of vocabulary learning. There are
pre-compiled word lists derived from various corpora developed from millions of
words. Word lists, namely GSL (West, 1953), UWL (University Word List) (Xue
2


and Nation, 1984), and AWL (Academic Word List) (Coxhead, 1998), have been
proven to be beneficial to English teachers and learners. However, for ESP learning,
discipline-specific word lists are becoming increasingly essential as different
disciplines would show different registers (Hyland & Tse, 2007). Over the past
decades, there have been research focusing on a particular discipline such as
medicine (Baker, 1988; Chen & Ge, 2007; Wang et al., 2008), engineering
(Mudraya, 2006; Ward, 2009), and business (Konstantakis, 2007). These word lists
have shown their importance in facilitating the teaching and learning of domainspecific vocabulary. This has become one of the driving forces for the researcher to

develop a word list in law for the students at HLU, called the Legal Academic Word
List (LAWL) in this paper. Furthermore, according to Nation (1997, p.17),
frequency is one measure of usefulness to a word as it “provides a rational basis for
making sure that learners get the best return for their vocabulary learning effort”.
Hence, the words in LAWL are listed by frequency of occurrence within the given
text corpus of two legal textbooks. Wordlist by frequency is necessary for the
students’ vocabulary acquisition and for teachers and curriculum designers (Nation,
1997, p.17).
Nevertheless, few detailed studies exclusively on the use of word lists in
learning legal vocabulary have been found. Skier and Vibulphol have stated in their
research called Development and Use of a Corpus Tailored for Legal English
Learning (2016) that corpora can be an essential tool for both teachers and learners
of legal English; however, the use of corpora remains uncommon. In HLU, no
corpus-informed word lists have been created to help the students learn legal
vocabulary effectively.
For all the presented conditions, the researcher is motivated to conduct a
study on “Creating a corpus-based Legal Academic Word List for students and
teachers of English for Law at Hanoi Law University” The LAWL will be annotated
to provide the students and teachers with more information on how the words are
used in the contexts of the given corpus.
3


1.2.

Research aims and Research questions

The research aims to create a word list that is developed from a corpus from
the two textbooks used by 4th-year students at HLU. The research also investigates
the perspectives of students, teachers, and lawyers towards the use of the designed

word list in academic and professional settings.
Accordingly, the current study seeks to answer the following research
questions:
Research question 1: What are the most frequent academic content words in the
corpus of legal english textbooks that are not among the first 2000 words of English
as represented in the GSL (West, 1953) based on frequency criteria?
Research question 2: What are the most frequently used words that are exclusive
to the Legal Academic Word List?
Research question 3: What are the words to be included in the annotated Legal
Academic Word List?
Research question 4: What aspects can be included in the annotation for each word
entry from the word list?
1.3.

Scope of the study

This study only focuses on building a word list for 4th-year students who
major in English for Law, studying the main textbooks International Legal English:
A course for classroom or self-study use by Amy Krois-Lidner and Trans. Legal and
Professional English in Use – Law by Gilian D. Brown and Sally Rice. The word
list only consists of vocabularies compiled from written texts in the textbook (i.e.,
spoken texts have been excluded). As the word list is built on a specialised corpus,
the use in a different context is not recommended.
1.4.

Significance of the study

Overall, the research is expected to provide readers an insight into the process
of creating a word list from a specialised corpus, which can be a source of helpful
information for the students, teachers, course designers and researchers interested

in a related research topic.
4


As for the students, the study hopes to provide them with helpful instruction
and a focused material that could assist their learning of legal vocabulary in the
program. The word list will become a potent tool for them to master Advanced Legal
English.
This research can also support the teachers in targeting and teaching essential
vocabulary since the corpus and word list can be used as data for material design,
lesson planning, and classroom activities.
Regarding other researchers, they can find reliable information for their
related study.
1.5.

Organisation of the study

This thesis comprises five chapters.
Chapter 1: Introduction – reveals the research problem, research aims,
research questions, scope, significance, and the organization of the study.
Chapter 2: Literature Review – reviews relevant literature to this research
work, including the definitions of some terms, followed by a description and
selection, evaluation and analyis of a corpus. This chapter discloses the framework
of the study.
Chapter 3: Research Methodology – explains the research methods, the
context, and participants of the study, together with the data collection and data
analysis procedure.
Chapter 4: Findings and Discussion – offers the research results and the
discussions about the findings to provide answers to four research questions.
Chapter 5: Conclusions – summarises the significant findings, provides the

recommendations for students, ESP lecturers, and ESP course designers, as well as
highlights some limitations of the study, and suggests directions for the future
research area.

5


6


CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
The second chapter is going to review the theories and existing information
relavant to the research problem. That includes materials related to English for
Specific Purposes (ESP), Vocabulary in ESP teaching and learning, The lexical
approach, Corpus Linguistic, and The review of previous studies.
2.1.

English for Specific Purposes

2.1.1. Definition
The definition of ESP varies among researchers. According to Hutchinson
and Waters (1987), ESP is based on designing courses to meet learners’ needs. The
authors define ESP as an approach to language teaching in which “all decisions as
to content and method are based on the learner's reason for learning" (p.19) rather
than a product. That is because ESP cannot be classified as a particular language or
methodology and does not contain specific types of teaching materials.
Strevens (1988) defines ESP by making a distinction between (1) absolute
characteristics and (2) two-variable characteristics. Absolute characteristics
mention the language that is designed to meet specified needs of the learner; the
relation in content to particular disciplines, occupation and activities; the

centredness of appropriate language in terms of syntax, text, discourse, etc. and
discourse analysis; and the contrast with General English. Regarding two variable
characteristics, ESP may be restricted to language skills and may not be taught
according to any pre-ordained methodology. Robinson’s (1991) definition of ESP
is based on two criteria which are (1) ESP is “normally goal-directed” and (2) ESP
courses develop from a needs analysis. Considering the validity and weakness of
previous definitions, Dudley-Evans and St John (1998) modified Strevens’
definition of ESP (1988) and developed a more complete one (1988).
“Absolute Characteristics
1. ESP is defined to meet the specific needs of the learners,
2. ESP makes use of underlying methodology and activities of the discipline
it serves,
7


3. ESP is centered on the language appropriate to these activities in grammar,
lexis, register, study skills, discourse, and genre.
Variable Characteristics
1. ESP may be related to or designed for specific disciplines,
2. ESP may use, in specific teaching situations, a different methodology from
that of General English,
3. ESP is likely to be designed for adult learners, either at a tertiary level or
in a professional work situation. It could, however, be for learners at the secondary
school level,
4. ESP is generally designed for intermediate or advanced students,
5. Most ESP courses assume some basic knowledge of the language
systems”. (Dudley-Evans& St John, 1998, p.4)
The definitions of ESP offered by the authors mentioned above show some
critical features of ESP. First, it is based on the analysis of the students’ needs and
tailor-made to fulfill these needs. Second, it may be different from other general

language courses in terms of skills selection, themes, situations, functions, language
and methodology. Third, it aims at preparing the learners for successful language
performance in occupational or educational environments without narrowing down
the learner’s age and level.
2.1.2. Classification
Generally, ESP is divided into EOP and EAP/EEP; nevertheless, different
authors have different ways of presenting ESP types.
David Carver (1983) identified three types of ESP. The first one, known as
English as a restricted language, refers to the language that is strictly limited and
can be accurately determined situationally. The second type of ESP is English for
academic and occupational purposes, which will then be broken down by
professional area.
The third type of ESP, as identified by Carver (1983) is English with specific
topics, which concerns anticipated future needs of English.
8


Hutchinson and Waters (1987) represent the relationship between ESP and
ELT in the form of a tree, which shows that standard divisions have been made in
ESP. There are two main types of ESP differentiated according to the learners’
purposes for learning English. The learners may require English for academic study
(EAP: English for Academic Purposes), for work (EOP/EVP/VESL: English for
Occupational Purposes/English for Vocational Purposes/Vocational English as a
Second Language). This way of classifying ESP is similar to the second type of ESP
offered by Carver (1983). People can work and study simultaneously and there are
cases that the language learnt for immediate use in an academic environment that
will be needed later in a working context. Hence, Hutchinson and Waters (1987)
suggest that there is no clear-cut distinction between EAP and EOP. Another way
to distinguish ESP courses, according to Hutchinson and Waters (1987), is based on
the general nature of the learners’ specialism, which can be separated into three

large categories: EST (English for Science and Technology), EBE (English for
Business and Economics) and ESS (English for the Social Sciences).
Robinson (1991) also divides ESP into two main areas but based on
experience or when it takes place. These distinctions are believed to play an
important role in deciding the specificity appropriate for the course. For example,
specific work related to actual discipline will be ruled out in a pre-experience or prestudy course.
However, Bojovic (2006) raises the concern that the division of ESP
courses results in various issues as it fails to “capture fluid nature of the various
types of teaching and the degree of overlap between “common – core” EAP and
EBP and General English”. Consequently, she suggests the continuum of ELT
course types by Dudley-Evans and St John (1998) that runs from general courses
to more specific ones, as illustrated as the graph below:

9


Figure 1
Continuum of ELT course type

Even though the classification of ESP may overlap and cause potential
confusion; however, it is important to define and classify what is meant by ESP
(Dudley-Evans and St John, 1988)
2.1.3. Legal English
a. Definition
Identified as a branch of ESP, the term Legal English (LE) has been
understood in variable ways. Some people refer to LE as legalese, a traditional legal
writing style that is not readily comprehensible to lay readers (Oates & Enquist,
2009, p.127.) because it is cluttered, wordy, indirect and may contain redundant
technical words or phrases. Meanwhile, other people may consider Legal English
10

as a shortcut for Anglo-American law. Such differences in interpretation have led
the ESP practitioners to replace the term LE with English for legal purposes (ELP)
or other terms accounting for different subsets such as EALP (English for academic
legal purposes), EOLP (English for occupational legal purposes) and EGLP
(English for general legal purposes). (Paltridge and Starfield, 2013)
Legal English is referred to as a “sublanguage” since it is different from
ordinary English (Tiersma, 1999). Therefore, the study of legal language can be
regarded as learning a second language with a specialized use of vocabulary, phrases
and syntax that facilitates communication (Ramsfield, 2005). Similar to this idea, In
the Handbook of English for Specific Purposes, Northcott (2009) defines the term
Legal English in more detail as “English language education to enable L2 law
professionals to operate in academic and professional contexts requiring the use of
English” (p.166).
b. Characteristics of English Legal Language
Generally, the characteristics of English Legal Language can be summarised
into the following points: Archaisms and borrowings; long and complex sentences;
passivization, subordination, nominalization; legal doublets; impersonal style –
avoiding personal pronouns; particular usage of modal verbs and legal “shall” –
imposing an obligation or duty on someone; technical vocabulary and repetition of
words.
Legal English learners may encounter difficulties in learning the language
firstly because of its writing conventions. David Crystal (2004) proposed an
influence in styles upon English legal language. This has caused the lack of
transparency and obscurity in legal discourse, with its frequent use of formal words,
expressions with different meanings, extreme precision, and complex grammar
structure (e.g., Danet, 1980; Mellinkoff 1963). The influence in style results from
the developments in the history of the English language. Medieval French has led
to long, complicated sentences in LE, while Anglo-Saxon has given alliterative

phrases, which is an oral tradition.
11


Another issue with legal language is compounded by its system-bound
nature, which means many legal terms can only be understood by reference to the
particular legal system. However, LE has traditionally been the preserve of lawyers
from English-speaking countries, which share common law systems. Therefore,
learners, including both students and practicing lawyers from countries, including
Vietnam, whose legal systems are based on civilian law, will encounter many
difficulties in understanding legal terms.
The most challenging part when learning LE is a large number of difficult
words and phrases, categorized into four groups by Haigh (2009): legal terms of art,
legal jargon, words with legal meaning differing from the general meaning and
words used in apparently peculiar contexts. Other key features of LE that cause
obstacles such as the use of unfamiliar preforms (e.g.. the same, the said, the
aforementioned, etc.), the use of pronominal adverbs (e.g., hereof, hereto, etc.) and
the use of phrasal verbs in quasi-technical sense (e.g. parties enter into contracts,
put down deposits, etc.) can also be added.
2.2.

Vocabulary in ESP teaching and learning

Vocabulary acquisition is regarded as a fundamental and important
component in the course of most second language learners. The students must have
suitable strategies to deal with specific vocabulary. Paul Nation (2001) suggests that
to overcome the obstacles of specialized usage of vocabulary, different types of
vocabulary should be distinguished.
2.2.1. Types of vocabulary
Vocabulary can be divided into the following subtypes:

1. Spoken and Written Vocabulary: The written vocabulary, according to
Cambridge International Corpus (CIC) (Schmitt and McCarthy, 1997) mainly
comprises lexical/ non-lexical words while spoken one tends to be made up of
lexical words. The study shows that spoken language is the central source of
contact to communicative language, while written language is a fundamental
source for input (Schmitt and McCarthy, 1997).
12


2. Core and non-core vocabulary: The former refers to words that occur frequently
and are more central to the language, while subject-specific vocabulary can be
considered the latter one.
3. Discourse Structuring Vocabulary and Procedural Vocabulary: Discourse
structuring vocabulary includes abstract nouns with little independent lexical
content (e.g., assumption, variety, etc.). Meanwhile, procedural vocabulary is
commonly used in dictionaries to provide definitions.
4. Technical, semi-technical and general vocabulary: Two broader categories have
been proposed by Dudley-Evans and St John (1998), which include semitechnical vocabulary (i.e., the one that is used in general language but has a
higher frequency of occurrence in specific and technical descriptions and
discussion), and technical vocabulary (i.e. one that has specialized and restricted
meanings in specific disciplines and may vary in meaning across disciplines)
5. Academic vocabulary: According to Dudley-Evans and St John (1998),
academic vocabulary and semi-technical vocabulary should be prioritised in the
teaching and learning of ESP because these types of vocabulary do not only
appear in general life contexts but also scientific and technical descriptions and
discussions.
2.2.2. Legal terminologies
Cambridge English Dictionary defines terminology as special words and
expressions used concerning a particular subject or activity. As words and
expressions are “building blocks” of language (Thornbury, 2002), it is noted that

legal lexicons and legal jargons are the based components of the language used in
legal settings (Ma and Nguyen, 2019).
Berukstiene (2016) divides legal vocabulary into (1) purely technical
vocabulary, (2) semi-technical vocabulary (common terms with uncommon
meanings), and (3) shared, common or unmarked vocabulary. The first group
contains extensive use of archaic vocabulary, doublets and triplets, Latin phrases
(e.g. pari passu, de jure, de facto and pro bono, etc.) and other words such as herein
13


and hereto. The second group refers to the common terms with special meanings in
legal contexts. Cao (2007) defines this type of term as ‘legal technical terms that
carry special legal significance’. The last type of legal terminology is related to the
words that are also widely used in non-legal settings. Some examples of
performative English legal lexicons can include agree, claim, represent, certify, and
declare, etc.
Haigh's (2009) division of legal terminology is mostly similar to
Berukstiene’s. However, he adds another classification of legal terms, which
mentions legal terms of art and legal jargon. Legal terms of art are “technical words
and phrases that have precise and fixed legal meanings and which cannot usually be
replaced by other words.” (p.4). Some of them may be familiar to laypersons (e.g.,
patent, share, royalty) while others are only known to lawyers (e.g. bailment,
abatement). On the other hand, legal jargon, ranging from near slang to almost
technically precise words, is only known to lawyers.
2.2.3. Selection of the appropriate vocabulary for teaching and learning
To learn vocabulary effectively, it is recommended that teachers and learners
should use word lists as the main source of vocabulary learning (Nation, 2001).
Derived from various corpora, pre-compiled word lists are greatly useful as they
facilitate teachers’ selection of words to teach and allow learners to have a
systematic study. However, teachers should follow some criteria when choosing

words to be appropriate for the contexts and students. First, the word lists must
contain words representing the varieties of words they are intended to reflect.
Second, the words selected should be found across a range of different text types.
Finally, some vocabulary items with multi-units such as so far, good night, and all
right, should be considered to be regarded as a whole and included in the teaching
list.
2.3. The lexical approach
Lexis or lexicon is the vocabulary of a language as different from the
grammar. The lexicon consists of frequently produced chunks of a language
14


combining to create coherent communication (Lewis, 1993). The lexical approach
is a method of teaching foreign languages proposed by Lewis in 1993. It is based on
the basic principle is that "Language is grammaticalised lexis, not lexicalised
grammar" (Lewis, 1993). This means that lexis is central in creating meaning and
grammar serves as a subservient managerial part. Nattinger & DeCarrico (1992)
also agrees that it is the learners’ ability to use lexical phrases that help them to
speak fluently. The prefabricated speech offers more efficient retrieval and permits
speakers (and learners) to direct their attention to the larger structure of the
discourse.
Central to the approach is the idea of collocation. Collocation is part of
“lexical chunk” defined as pairs of groups of words commonly found together (e.g.
by the way, up to now, etc.). However, collocation is a phrase that combines lexical
content words (e.g., basic principles). It is said that identifying chunks and
collocations is based on intuition unless access to a corpus is available.
Corpus analysis facilitates the learning of lexis by showing the actual use of
a term, locating words found in close proximity and displaying set phrases. As in
The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics, a corpus can provide information
about (1) lexis and the lexicon (the general lexicon and word formation); (2)

Phraseology and phrases (collocation and patterning; fixed expressions and idioms);
(3) meaning (context and meaning, polysemy, metaphor, connotation and ideology);
(4) sets and synonyms; (5) antonyms and opposites. These types of information are
considerably useful for language learning, especially to non-native speakers.
Therefore, corpus linguistics has been recommended by Lewis (1997) as a tool to
implement the lexical approach.
2.4.

Corpus Linguistics

2.4.1. Definition
Corpora, as broadly defined by The Expert Advisory Group on Language
Engineering Standards (EAGLES), can comprise any type of texts, not only prose,
newspapers, poetry, drama but also word lists, dictionaries, etc. However, Meyer
15


(2002) defines a corpus as “a collection of texts or parts of texts upon which some
general linguistic analysis can be conducted” (p.7). Corpus is a collection of
computer-readable texts compiled for linguistic purposes (e.g., Wynne, 2005
and Aston, 1996). Hence, corpus linguistics is generally considered as a
methodology for doing linguistic analysis (Meyer, 2002; O’Keeffe & McCarthy,
2010). Similarly, Cotos (2017) refers CL to the study of large quantities of authentic
language using computer-assisted methods.
There are two major analytical approaches to corpus linguistics: corpusbased and corpus-driven. A corpus-based approach relies on corpora that are
balanced and representative, can be either small or large and are usually annotated.
Meanwhile, corpus-driven studies are not necessarily balanced and reprensentative
and they are required to be dependent on large corpora. Furthermore, corpus-driven
studies are not essentially annotated. Considering the small scope of this study, the
corpus-based approach has been employed.

2.4.2. Types of corpora
The commonly-used and readily available corpora can be divided into the
following categories:
 Corpora of General English
 Monitor corpora
 Corpora of Spoken English
 Corpora of Academic English
 Corpora of Professional English
 Corpora of Learner English (First and Second Language Acquisition)
 Historical (Diachronic) Corpora of English
 Corpora in other languages
 Parallel Corpora/Multilingual Corpora
Two opposing trends have appeared in the compilation of corpora. Corpora
are getting either larger, with “mega-corpora” (e.g., Bank of English and the
16