Rank Key 3-grams

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50

THE LOW-ABILITY GROUP

THE HIGH-ABILITY GROUP
ONLINE WRITING TOOL
STRATEGY USE AND
SYNCHRONOUS ONLINE WRITING
METACOGNITIVE STRATEGY USE
COGNITIVE STRATEGY USE
IN OTHER WORDS
THE SYNCHRONOUS ONLINE
FOR THE LOW-ABILITY
THE RECAST GROUP
TOTAL EFFECT ON
OF GRAMMATICAL KNOWLEDGE
5 WORKING MEMORY
TASK 5 WORKING
WITH REGARD TO
A CRITICAL STANCE
HIGH- AND LOW-ABILITY
AS SEEN IN
THE UC QUESTION
AND PRAGMATIC KNOWLEDGE
FOR THE HIGH-ABILITY
DIRECT EFFECT ON
OF YES-NO QUESTIONS
GRAMMATICAL AND PRAGMATIC
TASK 4 ELICITED
SIGNIFICANT TOTAL EFFECT
THE PAST PROGRESSIVE
THE FOLLOWING SEGMENT
AND IMPLICIT KNOWLEDGE
4 ELICITED IMITATION
WITH THE HIGH-ABILITY
USE AND SLTP
APPROACH TO COGNITION
LANGUAGE TEST PERFORMANCE
THE NONRECAST GROUP
THE CRITICAL STANCE
OF PROMOTING SELF-DISCOVERY
SECOND LANGUAGE TEST
EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT
INVITATION TO REPLY
SOCIOLINGUISTIC SOCIOCULTURAL AND
SOCIOCULTURAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL
THE COMPETING VOICES
FOLLOWING SEGMENT THE
BETWEEN STRATEGY USE
SELINKER LAMENDELLA 1978
WITH THE LOW-ABILITY
COGNITION AND LANGUAGE
THE GIESSEN GROUP

Keyness Frequency
313
307
263
253
252
225
225
206
203
192
186
175
169
165
165
161
159
159
158
154
154
148
145
143
137
132
132
131
130
128
126
126
126
121
121
121
121
115
110
105
104
104
104
99
99
99
99
99
97
93

57
56
48
65
46
41
41
169
37
35
34
32
37
30
30
122
29
29
60
28
28
27
30
26
25
24
24
29
33
33
23
23
23
22
22
22
22
21
20
36
19
19
19
18
18
18
18
18
21
17

51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102

THE NEXT SEGMENT

PRAGMATIC KNOWLEDGE IN
CESSATION OF LEARNING
IN THIS TEST
THE HIGH- AND
BETWEEN EXPLICIT AND
ON RDG ABILITY
AND LOW-ABILITY GROUPS
YES-NO QUESTIONS IN
THE MONTEREY GROUP
PRESENT LEARNING SITUATION
DESIGNED TO MEASURE
OF LANGUAGE KNOWLEDGE
OF STRATEGY USE
TO THE TEACHER'S
THE UC QUESTIONS
ON L-G ABILITY
THE TEST TASKS
EFFECT ON RDG
SIGNIFICANT DIRECT EFFECT
AB INITIO LEARNERS
ELECTRONIC LITERACY SKILLS
IN THE INTERLANGUAGE
THE JAPANESE GROUP
AND LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT
THE TARGET LANGUAGE
TO COGNITION AND
FCE ANCHOR TEST
1 FREE RECALL
TO GRAMMAR ASSESSMENT
AND METACOGNITIVE STRATEGY
TRANSFERRING FROM L1
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN STRATEGY
THE FOSSILIZATION HYPOTHESIS
TASK 1 FREE
L2 ULTIMATE ATTAINMENT
THE SEGMENT BEGINS
THE TEACHER HAS
G AND F
RESEARCHERS E G
IN L2 ASSESSMENT
THE YES-NO QUESTION
TO SUPPORT CLAIMS
NO SIGNIFICANT DIRECT
TASK 3 NOTE-TAKING
OF MSU ON
ORIENTED TO BY
INTRODUCTION AND USE
USE AND SECOND
TASK 2 COMPREHENSION
THE TARGET FORM
THE SLA LITERATURE

93
93
93
93
92
92
88
88
88
88
88
86
85
84
83
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
80
80
80
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
74
74
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
70
67

17
17
17
26
20
24
16
16
16
16
16
29
21
25
24
15
15
15
15
15
15
21
24
19
20
95
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
17
24
23
24
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
25
21

103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154

SEEN IN FIGURE
AS THE TEACHER
THE TEST TAKERS'
LACK OF INTERFACE
TEST WILL INFLUENCE
LANGUAGE KNOWLEDGE COMPONENTS
THE PASSAGE COMPREHENSION
THE AE GROUP
OF SIPA STUDENTS
OF QUANTITATIVE METHODS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TH REDIRECTION
MINIMAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TH
LEOW ET AL
REVESZ'S 2012 STUDY
ON READING ABILITY
SEGMENT THE CLASS
OF THE TEACHER'S
BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES
COGNITIVE AND METACOGNITIVE
THE ABILITY TO
INTERPRETATION AND USE
THE ENGLISH PASSIVE
ON THE BOARD
OVER THE YEARS
JOURDENAIS ET AL
WRITING TOOL FOR
COGNITIVE-PROCESSING APPROACH TO
THE TEACHER'S CORRECTION
CONVEY A CRITICAL
ASSESSING THE SITUATION
AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEANINGS
WORKING MEMORY PROCESSING
EFFECT ON L-G
LINKING WITH PRIOR
IN INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
UC QUESTION IS
ELICITED IMITATION TONE
TO ITS COMPLETION
APPLIED LINGUISTICS RESEARCH
AS PREFERRING NO-PROBLEM
SUCH AS HOW
THE LANGUAGE CLASSROOM
ABILITY TO USE
TARGET LANGUAGE USE
OF LANGUAGE ABILITY
OF PRAGMATIC KNOWLEDGE
APPEARS TO BE
AS THE SEGMENT
IN THE DETAILS
OF CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK
SCORE INTERPRETATION AND
GRAMMATICAL KNOWLEDGE AND

66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
65
65
65
64
64
64
63
61
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
59
59
58
57
57
57
56
56
56
56
56

25
19
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
20
16
16
76
22
22
23
29
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
18
26
30
20
21
17
65
13
13
21
14
14

155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206

THAT FOSSILIZATION IS
METACOGNITIVE AND COGNITIVE
A COGNITIVE-PROCESSING APPROACH
USE AND PERFORMANCE
USE COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY
THE NON-INTERFACE POSITION
A SIGNIFICANT TOTAL
NEEDS OF SIPA
HIGH-ABILITY TEST TAKERS
THE PRESENT LEARNING
HIGH-ABILITY GROUP MODEL
HOW WAS YOUR
HAN AND PEVERLY
OF TENSE CONSISTENCY
IN REVESZ'S 2012
AND READING ABILITY
BELZ REINHARDT 2004
THE COGNITIVE STRATEGY
WORKING MEMORY STORAGE
OF THE UC
HAS JUST FINISHED
THE FCE ANCHOR
AND TASK 5
THE LEARNING PROBLEM
SECOND LANGUAGE TEACHER
STABILIZATION AND FOSSILIZATION
TO USE COMPUTER
OF LANGUAGE ASSESSMENTS
A COGNITIVE MECHANISM
LIZ AND SUSAN
L2 INITIAL STATE
OF L-G ABILITY
PROMOTING SELF-DISCOVERY IS
THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN
BACHMAN AND PALMER
THE SAME TOKEN
OTHER WORDS THE
LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION
BY THE TEACHER
THE INTERLANGUAGE OF
SCHACHTER AND RUTHERFORD
CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IS
A TEST WILL
IN THE NEXT
WITH THE TEACHER'S
AND PEVERLY 2007
AND INTERCULTURAL LEARNING
THE COGNITIVE MECHANISMS
THE COMP-MEM FACTOR
LANGUAGE TEST VALIDATION
AS HOW ARE
AT ACTIVITY BOUNDARIES

55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
54
54
54
53
53
52
51
51
51
51
51
49
49
49
49
49
49
49

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
35
20
22
42
20
39
15
18
12
12
46
14
9
9
9
9
9
9
9

207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258

AND TASK 3
ROLE IN HOW
AND RETRIEVAL PROCESSES
AND SENTENCE FORMATION
NO DIRECT EFFECT
A LARGE SIGNIFICANT
TEACHER IN LINE
FOSSILIZATION IS A
WITH THE CRITICAL
2 0 TOOLS
HAN LEW 2012
STUDENT TEACHERS IN
OF COGNITIVE STRATEGY
SHARWOOD SMITH 1991
UC QUESTIONS AS
ADEQUATE MOTIVATION TO
IN LINE 08
IN LINE 04
SELINKER AND LAMENDELLA
FOREIGN LANGUAGE NEEDS
FOREIGN LANGUAGE PLAY
SELINKER LAKSHMANAN 1992
OF FOSSILIZATION IS
THE ORAL DESCRIPTION
THE SELECTIVE FOSSILIZATION
ORAL DESCRIPTION TASK
BRONER TARONE 2001
THE METACOGNITIVE STRATEGY
CROSS-GROUP EQUALITY CONSTRAINTS
KNOWLEDGE AND PRAGMATIC
PLAY WITH IDENTITY
COMMUNITY ENGLISH PROGRAM
RECAST GROUP AND
DEGREE OF CONSISTENCY
ABILITY TO BE
THE PSEUDO-PASSIVE IS
THE NULL SUBJECT
TO BE ASSESSED
TO CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK
EVIDENCE OF VALIDITY
IN LINE 07
WITH PRIOR KNOWLEDGE
STRATEGY USE ON
BY MEANS OF
REGARD TO THE
EVIDENCE THAT THE
IN LANGUAGE USE
OF LANGUAGE PLAY
NOT LIMITED TO
OF THE PSEUDO-PASSIVE
TEN HAVE 2007
TECHNOLOGY FOR TEACHING

49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
48
47
46
46
46
46
46
46
46
45
45
45
44
44
44
44
44

9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
14
17
16
13
11
11
11
11
11
51
42
29
20
13
21
15
8
8

259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310

I E GRAMMATICAL
FOSSILISATION AS A
OF FOSSILIZATION AND
CONSEQUENCES OF USING
OF GRAMMATICAL FORM
ABILITY FOR THE
CHAIN OF INFERENCES
POST-EXPLANATION OR INSTRUCTION
SELINKER AND HAN
HOW STUDENT TEACHERS
A CONVERSATION ANALYTIC
GRAMMATICAL CONTROL AND
COMPETING VOICES IN
STUDENTS' MEDIA COMPETENCE
OVERLAP JEFFERSON 1983
WITHOUT ANY DELAY
STRATEGIC COMPETENCE APPROACH
STAGE WHERE INFORMATION
THE OZONE HOLE
4 VERY GOOD
YES-NO QUESTION IS
PASSAGE COMPREHENSION 0
A TYPICAL ERROR
MODELS OF STRATEGY
INVITATIONS TO REPLY
WAS YOUR WEEKEND
FOSSILIZATION IN THE
NATIVE-LIKE COMPETENCE IN
A PROCESS WHEREBY
A POSITIVE ASSESSMENT
WHERE INFORMATION IS
FREE RECALL AND
THE POST-COURSE QUESTIONNAIRE
TEST SCORE INTERPRETATION
ONE REVIEWER POINTS
TL USE SITUATION
REVIEWER POINTS OUT
LEEMAN ET AL
OF TEST-TAKER ABILITY
INFERENCES AND ASSUMPTIONS
THE COGNITIVE STRATEGIES
AND PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROPRIATENESS
EFFECT ON READING
PRODUCED AND TREATED
EFFECT OF MSU
THE INTERLANGUAGE CONSTRUCTION
ON LEXICO-GRAMMATICAL ABILITY
THE HIGH-ABILITY MODEL
THE INTENDED TEST
THE HIGH-ABILITY TEST
THE FL NEEDS
AND TASK 4

44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44

8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8

311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362

RESUMPTIVE PRONOUNS IN
QUANTITATIVE METHODS TO
OF THE IL
INPUT ADEQUATE MOTIVATION
OF MEDIA COMPETENCE
IN LINE 05
IN LINE 06
LOW-ABILITY GROUP MODEL
MEMORY AND RETRIEVAL
ACROSS ABILITY LEVELS
USE SITUATION ANALYSIS
UNDERLYING TEST CONSTRUCT
METACOGNITIVE STRATEGY QUESTIONNAIRE
IN LINES 01
THE RETRIEVAL PROCESSES
THE SCORING INFERENCE
SELECTIVE FOSSILIZATION HYPOTHESIS
CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK AS
OF PRAGMATIC MEANINGS
AND LAMENDELLA 1978
OF INFORMATION PROCESSING
OF THE TARGET
THE TEACHER IS
WHERE THE TEACHER
INTERNAL CONSISTENCY RELIABILITY
COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE ABILITY
THE TLU DOMAIN
SLA RESEARCH HAS
STRAUSS CORBIN 1998
IN THE TEACHER'S
OF L2 PROFICIENCY
THE NATURE OF
FOR THAT MATTER
EXPOSURE TO INPUT
COURSE OF ACTION
TECHNOLOGY IN THEIR
NATURE OF THE
A MODEL OF
MOTIVATION TO LEARN
AND RUTHERFORD 1979
OF THE CONSTRUCT
FORM AND MEANING
A VALIDITY ARGUMENT
ON THE PASSAGE
BILINGUAL HERITAGE SPEAKERS
THE TYPICAL ERROR
L1 THINKING FOR
CANDIDATES FOR FOSSILIZATION
THE RET PROCESSES
BY GAIL JEFFERSON
BASELINE MODELS OF
OF UC QUESTIONS

44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
43
43
43
43
42
42
42
42
42
41
41
41
41
41
40
40
40
40
40
39
39
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38

8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
12
62
24
13
13
13
14
12
12
12
27
82
13
11
11
11
69
21
14
14
19
18
10
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7

363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414

LANGUAGE KNOWLEDGE COMPONENT

THE TARGET CONSTRUCTION
ON TEACHER QUESTIONS
ON INPUT PROCESSING
BACHMAN AND PALMER'S
INPUT AND L1
THE LEARNER SITUATION
INQUIRIES SUCH AS
CONVEYED AND INTERPRETED
THE INTERLANGUAGE STRUCTURE
QUESTIONS ARE USED
INFERENCE BY INVESTIGATING
THE INTERPRETATIVE ARGUMENT
PRAGMATIC MEANINGS IN
OVER TIME OF
PARK AND HAN
THE RET FACTOR
CLAIMS OF VALIDITY
CONSISTENCY RELIABILITY ESTIMATES
CONTINUOUS EXPOSURE TO
COMP-MEM AND RET
THE NEXT LINE
MODEL OF STRATEGY
OF FOSSILIZATION SELINKER
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
WHAT LEADS TO
USE OF MEDIA
TYPE OF YES-NO
MIGHT COME FROM
METHODS IN LANGUAGE
NO SIGNIFICANT TOTAL
A PROFICIENCY EXAM
NOT SHOWN HERE
NON-NULL SUBJECT LANGUAGE
NATURE OF FOSSILIZATION
A THOROUGH INTRODUCTION
A PROPER SUBSET
A SIGNIFICANT DIRECT
AND RDG ABILITY
LEXICO-GRAMMATICAL ABILITY AND
AND HAN 2008
TO INPUT PROCESSING
THEIR PROFESSIONAL LIVES
THE UNDERLYING TEST
OF THE COLLABORATION
AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY
AND CLOZE 0
AND COGNITIVE STRATEGY
TRANSITIONAL OVERLAP JEFFERSON
TO THE UC
AND HAN 2001
LOW-ABILITY TEST TAKERS

38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38

7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7

415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466

TO THE SEGMENT
TO ROUTINE INQUIRIES
FOR THEIR PROFESSIONAL
IN THE ACTIVITY-BOUNDARY
THE FLOOR TO
TENSE CONSISTENCY IN
FOR THE AE
SEE TEN HAVE
SIPA AND THE
THE ACTIVITY-BOUNDARY CASES
TEACHER HAS JUST
FL NEEDS OF
TEACHER QUESTIONS IN
THE FL REQUIREMENT
IN PARTIAL OVERLAP
EQUIVALENT ACROSS THE
SCORE TO THE
SCHOOLS IN GERMANY
SEGMENT THE TEACHER
IN PROFESSIONAL CONTEXTS
TEST ADMINISTRATION CONDITIONS
IN RISING INTONATION
THE EIGHT CLASSES
FOR A THOROUGH
THE CHAIN OF
THE 14 YEAR-OLDS
STRATEGY USE IS
REDISTRIBUTING THE FLOOR
HER FLOOR SPACE
STRONG STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
THE INTERFACE HYPOTHESIS
DEFINE THE ABILITY
QUESTIONS AS PREFERRING
EXPLORATORY FACTOR ANALYSES
HAD LEARNED HOW
RECALL AND TASK
SUPPORT CLAIMS OF
STUDIES OF FOSSILISATION
DEVELOPED BY GAIL
SUSCEPTIBLE TO FOSSILIZATION
THE CLASS IS
FOR BOTH GROUPS
DIRECT IMPACT ON
FROM L1 TO
THE MEASUREMENT MODELS
AND CHALLENGES OF
THE TEACHER'S QUESTION
THE CLASS HAS
THE INTRODUCTION AND
FOR THE INTENDED
IN ORDINARY CONVERSATION
IN LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT

38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
37
37
36
36
36
36
36
36
35
34
34
34

7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
12
19
10
14
9
9
9
9
13
10
10
14

467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500

IN APPLIED LINGUISTICS
OF THE PAST
OF THE MEASUREMENT
THE EXISTING LITERATURE
ESL ENGLISH AS
LEARNED HOW TO
THE TEACHER IN
OF THE LEARNING
IN SO DOING
THE QUESTION IS
TO INPUT ADEQUATE
TO REPLY AND
TESTS OF INVARIANCE
THAT GRAMMATICAL KNOWLEDGE
OF SINGLE INSTANCES
SEGMENT BEGINS WITH
OF MIA STUDENTS
TO A COMPLETION
OF FORM MEANING
OF CROSS-GROUP EQUIVALENCE
TAKERS PERFORMED ON
SENTENCE FORMATION 0
OF FOSSILIZABLE STRUCTURES
STRATEGY USE THE
OF CLASSROOM TURN-TAKING
OF CAUSATIVE ALTERNATION
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT DIRECT
WITH THE METICULOUS
YES-NO QUESTIONS ARE
TEST TAKERS PERFORMED
OF INFERENCES AND
TRANSFER TO NOWHERE
TO WHAT'S UP
TO WHICH SCORES

34
34
34
34
34
34
34
34
34
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33

22
17
12
12
9
9
16
23
19
20
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6