# Collocation



## winklepicker

I've noticed that some fellow foreros tend to use the word _collocation_ in their posts. I searched the English forum for it and found that (as far as I could tell) it is only ever used by non-natives, and almost exclusively those from Asian countries. 

I had to look it up in the dictionary when I first saw it. I wonder if it appears in ESL books for Japanese and Chinese speakers? Or is it a translation of a word they regularly use? Or is this just a deficiency in my vocabulary?

So question for non-natives (esp users of this word): where did you learn it and what do you use it for?

Question for natives: do you use this word a lot? Have you ever used it?


----------



## xrayspex

Only in the sense that I keep my servers on the premesis of an Internet Service Provider.  They are then said to be "co-located".


----------



## la reine victoria

Speaking as a native, Winklepicker, I have never used it.  I need to look it up in the dictionary right now!

LRV


----------



## Siberia

It is used quite a lot in linguistics, generally meaning a juxtaposition of words in a sentences or words occuring in a sentence at the same time.  I only use it if I have to write essays or articles on linguistics.


----------



## Macunaíma

Yes, Winklepicker, the ESOL books use the term a lot. Mine says: 

"collocation is concerned with the way words occur together, often in unpredictable ways"

The rules of collocation are dictated by use, not by grammar ( here I'm not sure whether the verb _dictate _collocates with _rule_  ). It's the "rule" which says that we must say "the real thing" or "the genuine article" instead of "the genuine thing" and "the real article", although the meanings of _real _and _genuine _are pretty much the same.

Collocation is what makes or breaks you when producing in a foreign language. Once you have mastered it, you don't make so many awkward sentences and you sound really fluent.

Cheers.


----------



## elroy

According to a forum search, I've used this word about ten times in the forums. Considering that this is a language forum and that I've submitted almost 14,000 posts, that doesn't strike me as a whole lot (many of my posts are not in English, but still).

It's not an everyday word, but - as Siberia said - it's quite common in discussions of linguistics. It never occurred to me that this word was used disproportionately by non-natives.


----------



## Loob

I think I've only used it in linguistics essays, too.  But it's actually quite a useful concept, as it describes patterns of usage: for example, the fact that we tend to say "grow old" "turn blue" "get annoyed" etc - all with the meaning of 'become'. 

Loob


----------



## El Sicario

Well, down here in South America the word "collocation" *does* appear in Grammar books of every level, you know. The only way to get familiar with these, I was told, is read the papers or talk with English-spoken folks, since there aren't any dictionaries where you can look up if two words collocate or not, as in "time flies."


----------



## mgarizona

I believe I have posted using collocation. (Is there some way to look that up?)

Native speaker here.


YEP, I have. Including in the famous "being charming to the king" thread. Memories!


----------



## Celestianpower

I agree with the others who say they've never used it; as a native speaker, I had to look it up too. I don't really know what I might use instead - "fit well together"? "work well next to eachother"? "go well"?

CP


----------



## panjandrum

I had never come across this word until I found it here.
Co-location, yes, but collocation, no.
I've used it ~14 times.


----------



## Macunaíma

The WR dictionary defines collocation as _"a grouping of words in a sentence"_. The Cambridge Online defines it as a word or phrase which is frequently used with another word or phrase, in a way that sounds correct to people who have spoken the language all their lives, but might not be expected from the meaning. The spelling _collocation_ is considered correct by both dictionaries. It's a term we, students of English as a foreign language, are quite familiar with. I remember opening a thread to ask which adverbs _collocate with_ *mistaken* best. *Sadly mistaken* was one of the responses, so *sadly *_collocates with_ *mistaken*, but probably not with *deluded*, for instance. By learning these collocations we, foreign speakers, can acquire a greater fluency in the language and use it more effectively. Ignoring collocation rules is sometimes what makes us sound _"correct, but awkward", _as we often see it phrased.

Macunaíma


----------



## helendeformsa

The ideas of collocations are essentially significant for non-native speakers when learning English. For example, in my mother tongue, we eat rice, meals, and medicine, and we open the door, the light, the TV, the computer,...etc. Thanks to the rules of collocations, we can avoid the wrong usuage of many common terms, but there are still many we can't avoid. That's mainly because there are just too many different collocations between two different languages.


----------



## Porteño

Like most of the native speakers, I had never heard of this word before. A most enlightening discussion.


----------



## omgbanana

I am with xrayspex. I have only used "collocation" in context of servers.


----------



## Macunaíma

Natives are not acquainted with it because they don't have to study it. We acquire it naturaly in our native languages. Besides, some terms we, foreign learners, use to describe features of the English language are often unknown to natives. I remember an American friend of mine telling me he didn't know what _phrasal verbs_ were. We, foreign students, study these verbs as groups. Like: we don't study the verb _to put_, but we study _to put away_(food in the cupboard), _put out_ (a cigarette) _put up with_ someone ( I remember the first time I saw the latter used, I thought of a brick layer refusing to work with a mate _"_I can't put up with him"_).

Now you natives know what we mean by collocation when we use the term.

.


----------



## Porteño

I have to admit that when I heard the term 'phrasal verb', some 25 years ago here in Argentina, I thought it was a mistake. The same way that, until I began teaching and had to study my own language, I had no idea what the 'Present Perfect' was!


----------



## emma42

I have never used it.  It's a specialised word.  I am surprised that I haven't seen it more in the Forums, though, from non-native learners.


----------



## LeonTheOutsider

helendeformsa said:


> The following are a few unique collocations in our mother tongue; could you guess what they mean in English? Have fun.
> 
> 1. Horse horse tiger tiger
> 2. No three no four
> 3. a wine-and-meat friend


 
Interesting, Helen. I'm from Taiwan, too.

It's so natural that the native English speakers here on this forum seldom see the word collocation. They will do when they start to learn a foreign language. In Mandarin for instance, we never say "eat soup" as the native English speakers do. If they come to Taiwan and say "eat soup" in Mandarin (吃湯), they may cause a burst-out of laughters from people hearing it.


----------



## winklepicker

LeonTheOutsider said:


> It's so natural that the native English speakers here on this forum seldom see the word collocation. They will do when they start to learn a foreign language.


 
Assume nothing, Leon! I have studied to a greater or lesser degree at least half a dozen languages (including French to A level) and never heard it before.


----------



## LeonTheOutsider

winklepicker said:


> Assume nothing, Leon! I have studied to a greater or lesser degree at least half a dozen languages (including French to A level) and never heard it before.


 

Ok, ok, winklepicker, you're quite an exception and you win. It's not the point my post assumed. Collocation, whether heard or not, is important for learning any language. That's the point.


----------



## Celestianpower

LeonTheOutsider said:


> Ok, ok, winklepicker, you're quite an exception and you win. It's not the point my post assumed. Collocation, whether heard or not, is important for learning any language. That's the point.



Yes, it certainly wasn't taught in Spanish, German or French at my school.

CP


----------



## panjandrum

It appears that non-English students of English are much more familiar with *collocation* than are English students of other languages.

Does that mean that learning correct/incorrect collocations is more complex in English than in other languages?  Does English offer more choice with only some of those choices "acceptable"?

And a small aside: as others have noted above, co-locate (hyphen and one l) and related forms are frequently used to mean "put in the same place".  It's rather as if those who are looking for a word with this meaning have never heard of collocate.


----------



## elroy

I have to say, I'm a little surprised to find out that this word is so unusual to native speakers.

I've been speaking English almost my whole life - on a first-language basis - and I can't even remember when and where I learned this word, but it certainly wasn't in an ESL textbook or anything like that because I didn't learn English as a foreign language.

It could have to do with the fact that I've learned many languages, which means I've come across more language-learning materials than I could count. The word probably appeared in one of them. Or maybe I did in fact learn it through the forum but didn't realize it.


----------



## cuchuflete

I learned the word in this forum, about two years ago, from a student of linguistics. When I first saw it, and before asking that fellow forum member to explain it to me, it reminded me of a similar sounding Spanish word I knew, 'colocar', which is to place something in its proper place or order.  I hadn't realized that there was a similar word in English. I don't know if I've ever used the word, but thanks to these forums, I now understand it.


----------



## El Sicario

cuchuflete said:


> When I first saw it, and before asking that fellow forum member to explain it to me, it reminded me of a similar sounding Spanish word I knew, 'colocar', which is to place something in its proper place or order.


 
    cuchuflete...

When we were first taught that word, in English, our teacher was terrified by the looks on our faces, so she had to be a *little bit* more didactic than to explain its meaning to us in Spanish.

She just went and brought a puzzle and showed it very graphically, by trying to fit two pieces correctly, *"Do you see? These two pieces collocate..."*


----------



## maxiogee

I have never encountered the word outside of WordReference (in the so-called 'real world' ) and don't tend to use the word. I prefer to use 'construction' when referring to how a phrase is put together —> "I don't use that construction myself, I tend to say _qwerty uiop_ instead."


----------



## mgarizona

I remember that I first learned the word in French, possibly in a linguistics text, I'm not sure.

I'm not at all surprised that native anglophones are not familiar with the concept given the shoddy respect we tend to give our own tongue. I've never met more than a handful of English speakers in my life for whom "that's just the way we say it" was not answer enough to any structural query.

And I'm not entirely exempting myself. Many times my replies on this forum have taken the form of "I would say ___________. Don't ask me why, it just sounds right."

In such an environment, maxiogee's "construction"--- which serves, in an unexacting way--- is likely the best approximation of 'collocation' that ESL-students can expect.


----------



## nikkieli

Being a non-native speaker, and having some knowledge on the usage of English language, I got acquainted with the word 'collocation' as early at the first stages of my English courses. This is a particularly slippery area which baffles the language user, I think, more than any grammar principles. For instance, I am at cross purposses (am I not misplacing something) if I have to choose between 'suitable experience' instead of 'relevant experience'. This one' easy, but I come across similar misconception all the time. And what if I have to explain to s.b. what exactly the difference or the thrifference) is? 
I've been trying to find a decent 'dictionary of collocation', but this hasn't been successful so far. I think, a large part of this forum consists of threads on awkward collocations subject to correction. So, thank you for being here for us!


----------



## Macunaíma

Take a listen to this audio file available on the BBC Learning English website on the topic of collocation:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/radio/specials/1535_questionanswer/page57.shtml

And then you can try the quiz:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/quizzes/quiznet/quiz122.shtml

By the way, that website is wonderful.


----------



## winklepicker

mgarizona said:


> Many times my replies on this forum have taken the form of "I would say ___________. Don't ask me why, it just sounds right."


 
Brilliant, MG! In future we have a get-out clause: instead of saying _'it just sounds right'_ we can just say airily,_ 'it's a collocation'_.

_Which means the same thing but sounds oh so much cleverer!_


----------



## El Sicario

Macunaíma said:


> And then you can try the quiz:


 
 Awesome, Macunaíma! 

I scored 4 out of 6.

I screwed up #2. Which of the following words cannot fill the gap? A stiff breeze blew off the sea.


cooling
stiff
strong
windy 


And also #4. Which noun does NOT go with the adjective 'mild'

mild cheese
mild cigarette
mild weather
mild tea


----------



## cuchuflete

Thanks Macunaíma.  I was well and truly amazed to learn that well and truly is part of a set phrase in BE.
It is not in AE.

It may come as no surprise that some collocations don't cross borders easily, they get tangled up in customs---



> *well and truly*completely. Many people remained in their hiding places until they were sure the war was *well and truly* over.
> See also: truly, well
> _Cambridge International Dictionary of Idioms_ © Cambridge University Press 1998
> 
> 
> 
> *well and truly*
> completely. Most Australians would say that Australia has been *well and truly* independent since the beginning of the 20th century.
> See also: truly, well
> _Cambridge Dictionary of American Idioms_ © Cambridge University Press 2003


----------



## emma42

I am well and truly amazed to learn that well and truly is not a set phrase in AE.  It well and truly amazes me that Americans and Brits ever understand anything the others say

I am well and truly sorry, this is a bit off-topic.


----------



## panjandrum

Hang on a minute - is it enough to say "it is a collocation" to explain a common association of words - such as *well and truly*.  Isn't *well and honestly* also a collocation - an unidiomatic collocation?

In simple terms, does collocation imply that the words are naturally used together or does it need to be qualified so we know if it is a normal collocation or an abnormal collocation, or an impossibile collocation?


----------



## Macunaíma

Panjandrum, I think the collocation mentioned in the BBC article was not that of the words *well *and *truly*, but that of the expression *well and truly* with the adjective *stuck*.
..............

Collocations are merely a description of what is usual in the language at a certain time, and I guess it evolves, changes and varies from place to place.

Going back to an example I mentioned in a previous post, the adjective *mistaken*. In Brazil the adverb which most frequently collocates with *mistaken *is _redondamente_ ( *roundly* ). So, we say that someone is *roundly mistaken*. But this combination of *roundly* and *mistaken* seems to be less frequent in Portugal, so that is mostly a Brazilian Portuguese collocation. Thus, it's natural that some collocations which are common in BrE may not be so common in AmE.


----------



## maxiogee

panjandrum said:


> Hang on a minute - is it enough to say "it is a collocation" to explain a common association of words - such as *well and truly*.  Isn't *well and honestly* also a collocation - an unidiomatic collocation?
> 
> In simple terms, does collocation imply that the words are naturally used together or does it need to be qualified so we know if it is a normal collocation or an abnormal collocation, or an impossibile collocation?



Chambers dictionary uses the expression 'the habitual placing together of one specific word with one or more other specific words'. This would give me the impression that a true collocation is one in which the words are rarely if ever used without one another - does anyone ever speak of a "last will" without using "~ and testament"? To me, expressions like *well and truly* don't qualify as they can be habitually used *without *each other - "I am well pleased with the work I produced!" and "I am truly honoured by the reception I have received here." express the exact same meaning as if they were both to use 'well and truly'.


----------



## Macunaíma

The concept of collocation doesn't make sense to native speakers. I cannot cite more than half a dozen collocations in Portuguese, as they are so natural to me to the point of being unconcious. But it's essential for foreign speakers to be aware of them, and I'd even go further and say that being unfamiliar with collocation is sometimes the last barrier that prevents an advanced student of a foreign language from reaching a near-native level of proficiency.


----------



## winklepicker

Macunaíma said:


> being unfamiliar with collocation is sometimes the last barrier that prevents an advanced student of a foreign language from reaching a near-native level of proficiency.


 
Very good point.


----------



## panjandrum

I expect I'm simply being thick about this, but I'm even more confused than I was before. Based on the use of collocation in this forum, I thought I understood it and how it is used, but now I'm not sure. 

(1) Is the collocation the placing together of two words or is it the phrase formed by the two words? 
I have used it to mean both - is this correct?
_Special *fees* are *provided* for_ _- it's the *collocation* of fees with provided that makes me uncomfortable._
_bumps and grinds_ - _It is a very strange *collocation* to use in relation to an aeroplane._

(2) Is collocation inherently positive or is it neutral? 
I have assumed it to be neutral, see examples above, and here are two more examples (not mine this time).
_Panj, if good and evil go together in your mind, does that mean that good and bad is considered as wrong *collocation*?_
_What intensifying adverb best *collocates* with the adjective mistaken._

(3) To be a collocation, or a good collocation, is it necessary that the two parts of the collocation be rarely seen apart - like last will and testament (see Tony's suggestion)?
I didn't think so - again, look at the examples above.

(4) What has all this to do with turkey, cold roast beef, thick sliced York ham, tongue, and pickles?
This is a trick question. Every time I see this word I think of cold collations.


----------



## Frajola

panjandrum said:


> (1) Is the collocation the placing together of two words or is it the phrase formed by the two words?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Panjandrum, you can actually have multi-word collocations. And collocation refers to the placing of words together, the phenomenon itself, while the phrases that are formed are referred to as 'collocate'.
> 
> So, "to place an order" and "to make up for lost time" are _*collocates*_.
> 
> As stated elsewhere on this thread, the focus of learning collocation is to take vocabulary acquisition beyond the learning of separate 'words'.
> 
> The ideal thing for students would be to look for bigger chunks of language to see recurring patterns of lexis, or words. For example:
> 
> _a moment's thought / it had a huge impact on / It's nice to get out in the fersh air / has come to play a central role in_
> 
> If you think about those sentences, they all appear together as if they were a unit frequently enough to justify teaching them as such.
> 
> If we look at what some posters have stated here, we will also be albe to spot some recurring chunks of language.
> 
> For example:
> 
> (mgarizona) _I'm not at all surprised that native anglophones are not familiar with the concept. _
> 
> (winklepicker) _I had to look it up in the dictionary when I first saw it._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (2) Is collocation inherently positive or is it neutral?
> I have assumed it to be neutral, see examples above, and here are two more examples (not mine this time).
> _Panj, if good and evil go together in your mind, does that mean that good and bad is considered as wrong *collocation*?_
> _What intensifying adverb best *collocates* with the adjective mistaken._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't think it's about being positive or negative as much as it is about sounding natural.
> 
> So, if someone were to come along and tell you that you did a "_bright job_" on their resumé, you sure would point out to them that they should say a _brilliant job_ instead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (3) To be a collocation, or a good collocation, is it necessary that the two parts of the collocation be rarely seen apart - like last will and testament (see Tony's suggestion)?
> I didn't think so - again, look at the examples above.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A good collocation is one that sounds natural. A bad collocation is one that doesn't. The more frequently together the words appear, the better people will understand you.
> 
> Non-native speakers of English living in the US may still present a strong accent after having spent so many years speaking English. Still, their ability to produce natural speech (among which, high-frequency collocations) enables them to be widely understood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (4) What has all this to do with turkey, cold roast beef, thick sliced York ham, tongue, and pickles?
> This is a trick question. Every time I see this word I think of cold collations.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

 
That indeed is a tricky one!



Most specialists and writers of collocation come from English-speaking countries. This accounts for collocation being such a common feature of ELT in comaparison to other languages, which are now beginning to catch up.


----------



## panjandrum

Thank you Frajola, that's really helpful  

You described collocations as natural or unnatural - so *natural collocation* is a natural collocation, *positive collocation* is an unnatural collocation?


----------



## susantash

El Sicario said:


> Well, down here in South America the word "collocation" *does* appear in Grammar books of every level, you know. The only way to get familiar with these, I was told, is read the papers or talk with English-spoken folks, since there aren't any dictionaries where you can look up if two words collocate or not, as in "time flies."


There Is!!! Believe me! I've got one and it's the best thing i could have bought. I don't think I'm allowed to give you its name, but look for it in bookshops and you'll find it!


----------



## cuchuflete

susantash said:


> There Is!!! Believe me! I've got one and it's the best thing i could have bought. I don't think I'm allowed to give you its name, but look for it in bookshops and you'll find it!



We do not allow commercial promotion, but there is no problem in directing learners to a good resource.  Feel free to give Author, Title, Publisher, Date and Place of publication.  We do not allow links to booksellers' web pages.


----------



## Frajola

panjandrum said:


> Thank you Frajola, that's really helpful
> 
> You described collocations as natural or unnatural - so *natural collocation* is a natural collocation, *positive collocation* is an unnatural collocation?


 

I'd say, yes! And that's a nice one, panjandrum. 



Keep reading about collocation and before you know it you'll begin to see the world in word chunks.

Cheers!


----------



## winklepicker

Thanks to Frajola for his superb post - I really understand it now.

This link has a list of suitable dictionaries. And here is the _Oxford Collocations Dictionary for Students of English._

Whilst I'm doing book reviews (!), there is also an _Oxford Idioms Dictionary for Learners of English_ (maybe some overlap with collocations) and an _Oxford Phrasal Verbs Dictionary for Learners of English_ (ditto).


----------



## Frajola

winklepicker said:


> Thanks to Frajola for his superb post - I really understand it now.
> 
> 
> 
> You're more than welcome, winklepicker
> 
> 
> 
> A note on the side -- regular English dictionaries for learners have for many years drawn on the concept of collocation by featuring in their example sentences the most common collocates -- thus exposing learners to the most natural choices of words right off the bat.


----------



## emma42

I really wish this word was hyphenated.  I am with Panj.  It makes me think of "cold collations".


----------



## El Sicario

susantash said:


> There Is!!! Believe me! I've got one and it's the best thing i could have bought. I don't think I'm allowed to give you its name, but look for it in bookshops and you'll find it!


 
Oh? *Great!! *susantash,I was nearly thrown out of every book store for *"harassing"* vendors about the existence or not of such dictionaries; no hype... It's just I find it odd there weren't any books like these published.

Thanks, susan. 



cuchuflete said:


> We do not allow commercial promotion, but there is no problem in directing learners to a good resource. Feel free to give Author, Title, Publisher, Date and Place of publication. We do not allow links to booksellers' web pages.


 
I'm *desperately* waiting for the details on this book, susantash, please?

Thank you, cuchuflete, for this clarification.


----------



## timpeac

I first came across "collocation" while studying A level French. I remember the teacher giving the English examples of this being the fact that you say "black and white" but not "white and black". He drew a distinction between that and idioms such as "raining cats and dogs", the collocation being "words that tend to go together" - you split hairs, for example, you don't part or divide them.


----------



## maxiogee

timpeac said:


> I first came across "collocation" while studying A level French. I remember the teacher giving the English examples of this being the fact that you say "black and white" but not "white and black". He drew a distinction between that and idioms such as "raining cats and dogs", the collocation being "words that tend to go together" - you split hairs, for example, you don't part or divide them.


 
I have less and less hair on my head the older I get (or should that be 'fewer and fewer hairs on my head'? It's getting to being countable!!!) and I do 'part' it/them!


----------



## timpeac

maxiogee said:


> I have less and less hair on my head the older I get (or should that be 'fewer and fewer hairs on my head'? It's getting to being countable!!!) and I do 'part' it/them!


You don't part your hairs, you part your hair (no matter how countable the individual hairs are becoming!) Similarly, Moses did not divide the red sea. Are we still parted on the issue?

Methinks you are splitting hairs.


----------



## mgarizona

Timpeac gives an excellent example in Moses "parting" the Red Sea. The collocation at work here is why we can generalize the allusion to "parting the waters" and still know exactly what is being referred to. If someone said "separating the waters" I would picture bottles of Perrier being segregated from bottles of Volvic. "Dividing the waters"? I guess I'd see those bottles being divvied up.

If a new translation of the Bible used a different verb in that place, it would simply feel wrong, no matter how denotatively correct. That's collocation.


----------



## Siberia

Other examples of collocation with a verb - to interpret a dream;
with an adjective  - a disturbing dream.
Not to be confused with idioms - to dream your life away.


----------



## El Sicario

winklepicker said:


> This link has a list of suitable dictionaries. And here is the _Oxford Collocations Dictionary for Students of English._


 
Thanks for your PM regarding this, winklepicker!  
I haven't seen your post.

I'm going to order that book right away!


----------



## maxiogee

mgarizona said:


> Timpeac gives an excellent example in Moses "parting" the Red Sea. The collocation at work here is why we can generalize the allusion to "parting the waters" and still know exactly what is being referred to. If someone said "separating the waters" I would picture bottles of Perrier being segregated from bottles of Volvic. "Dividing the waters"? I guess I'd see those bottles being divvied up.
> 
> If a new translation of the Bible used a different verb in that place, it would simply feel wrong, no matter how denotatively correct. That's collocation.



I don't know if a biblical expression is a true collocation - would it not be a quotation? The phrase you are thinking of. and there are many like it, occurs only once in the bible and as you say it would be very wrong to change it/them - even when the language used is seriously outdated.


----------



## Macunaíma

A set phrase or even a famous quotation from a text which has been incorporated into the language fits the description of a collocation, i.e., a group of words which, used together,  _sounds right_ to speakers who have used the language all their lives.

Another biblical collocation: _work miracles_.


----------



## timpeac

Macunaíma said:


> A set phrase or even a famous quotation from a text which has been incorporated into the language fits the description of a collocation, i.e., a group of words which, used together, _sounds right_ to speakers who have used the language all their lives.
> 
> Another biblical collocation: _work miracles_.


I think that's a good way to put it. Like we say even in English you know when you hear "le mot juste", "the right word", or even more you know when it's not used. If someone spoke of "rubbing the cat" or "tapping the dog" instead of "stroking" and "patting" you would understand what they meant, but equally you would have to assume they weren't native speakers, although there's no reason you shouldn't use those verbs, at the end of the day you just _don't_.


----------



## panjandrum

maxiogee said:


> I don't know if a biblical expression is a true collocation - would it not be a quotation? The phrase you are thinking of. and there are many like it, occurs only once in the bible and as you say it would be very wrong to change it/them - even when the language used is seriously outdated.


This triggers a very profound thought.  I wish whoever had it would post it here.

A phrase may well have appeared for the first time in, say, the King James Bible or Shakespeare.
It will then have been quoted, deliberately.
Over time, it came to have an identity independent as a recognisably-familiar collocation.
Would you have known that a dish fit for the gods was a Shakespeare quote? - eaten out of house and home? - a sea change? - primrose path?
Oh, well, perhaps I'm the only Shakespeare ignoramus around  
(For more of those, CLICK HERE)

Maybe these are outside the scope of what linguists call collocations?


----------



## timpeac

panjandrum said:


> This triggers a very profound thought. I wish whoever had it would post it here.
> 
> A phrase may well have appeared for the first time in, say, the King James Bible or Shakespeare.
> It will then have been quoted, deliberately.
> Over time, it came to have an identity independent as a recognisably-familiar collocation.
> Would you have known that a dish fit for the gods was a Shakespeare quote? - eaten out of house and home? - a sea change? - primrose path?
> Oh, well, perhaps I'm the only Shakespeare ignoramus around
> (For more of those, CLICK HERE)
> 
> Maybe these are outside the scope of what linguists call collocations?


Yes - I think these are outside the scope of collocations. I think of collocations being the use of words which keep their primary meaning, but just happen to be used together. So I would consider "to play devil's advocate", for example, to be an idiom. We are in no way suggesting that you are providing legal advice to lucifer. However, in "to toss a coin" (you can also say "flip" which is another valid collocation) each word has its full value and this is what we say instead of "to throw a coin" or "to launch a coin" etc. I think there is bound to be a grey area to some extent in all this.


----------



## hownow

Collocation seems to have gained more visibility in the last 20 years, as a result of language teaching/learning focus on "chunks." Truth be told, I don't remember hearing about this term even in linguistics studies before that.


----------



## MonaArg

Hello, Everybody!
I've been reading this forum for the last 2 hours and you can't imagine what a great experience it's been. You are amazing!

I'd like to add some comments to what you've been discussing. Therefore, I'll pretend to be an elementary student.

"I'd like to *do* a comment"-->MAKE
"I didn't *make/haven't made* my homework"-->DO/DONE
"A: Have you heard that there's been an accident....?"
"B: I *listened* it on the radio" -->HEARD
"I never *use* boots"-->WEAR

The point of learning collocations is to sound natural. Would native speakers understand any of these sentences? I think so (hope so , but the speaker would not sound very natural. I've listed some wrong collocations that are typical, especially for Spanish speakers. We have just one verb for Do/Make="Hacer", listen/hear is a problem, sometimes, even in Spanish. "Usar" is used both with clothes and objects. 

Trends in Methodology/Linguistics, etc. have changed. Before we (non-native speakers) were taught/trained to be accurate, no matter how fluent you were. Anyway, we learned a lot of collocations because we would study everything the dictionary said. Nowadays, there's a balance between accuracy and fluency. We spend much more time practising vocabulary, not doing dictionary work. Therefore, the importance of learning collocations.

As to dictionaries and books on collocations, I'd like to mention that there are 2 more dictionaries:
a. The BBI Combination Dictionary of English
b. Dictionary of Selected Collocations
c. The Oxford, mentioned in a previous thread. 
d. I've just bought the 2006 edition of the Collins Cobuild Dictionary with CD-Rom. It's wonderful! You can even check collocations in BE and AE.

Book to practise collocations:
English Collocations in Use

I hope this information is useful!

Thank you all for your explanations and your sense of humor!
Mona - Argentina


----------



## winklepicker

MonaArg said:


> The point of learning collocations is to sound natural. Would native speakers understand any of these sentences? I think so (hope so , but the speaker would not sound very natural. I've listed some wrong collocations that are typical, especially for Spanish speakers. We have just one verb for Do/Make="Hacer", listen/hear is a problem, sometimes, even in Spanish. "Usar" is used both with clothes and objects.  ook to practise collocations: English Collocations in Use


 Thank you Mona - that is a very helpful post for people like me who aren't quite sure what a collocation is! And so is your book suggestion. Here is a bit of blurb from the last one which helps to clarify what collocations are and why they should be learnt (my emphasis):

A good knowledge of *collocations (typical word combinations)* is essential for fluent and natural-sounding English. Using collocations will improve your style of written and spoken English, and knowledge of collocations is often tested in examinations such as Cambridge FCE, CAE, CPE and IELTS. Learning correct word combinations will also help you avoid common learner errors. _English Collocations in Use_ presents and practises hundreds of collocations in typical contexts.


----------



## zeJKL

I am writing my background assignment on collocation. I have been teaching English in Colombia for the last five years. Most of my TEFL qualified colleagues have no idea of what collocation is, but they keep wondering why their students sound so unnatural and misleading. Typical Spanish collocations in English: I have lost my exam. Teacher, can you make me a test. You have reason. I have hunger.

Collocation is present in any language. If you are not aware of collocation, you will never sound natural in any language. In Russian, for example, you say "opening of America" instead of "discovery", in Spanish "I am taking coffee" instead of "drinking", etc.

Most native speakers of English are quite mediocre learners of other languages. My Spanish is an exception, though, I learnt it without learning it. Therefore, it is very natural - I have never used translation.

Collocations range from strong/restricted "blond hair" to weak/loose "drink coffee".

For more information on collocation read Michael Lewis and Arthur McCarthy. 

As for those who have never heard the word before ... ignorance is bliss.

NB: "I *listened* it on the radio" is not a collocation error, it's a wrong word or limited vocabulary


----------



## Orange Blossom

I first saw the term collocation on this forum also.  I did some searching on the internet to find out just what that meant, and I must say that I wish my ESL teaching training had taught us that term.  Besides avoiding unusual word combinations, knowing the collocations of a language helps speakers and writers to avoid long unwieldy sentence constructions to say what they mean.

An example:

physically disabled <-- common collocation in the United States.

If someone doesn't know this phrase a sentence such as this might result:

There was man with a permanent condition which affected his ability to move so that he had to use a wheelchair to get around.

Orange Blossom


----------



## moo mouse

I work for a publishing house and we are planning to publish a book called 'Natural English Collocations'. In our first meeting about it, the editor responsible for commissioning the book had to explain to all present what a natural English collocation was! So you see it is not a well known expression among native speakers, but I would have thought that linguists (ie students of any language) would be more likely to be familiar with it as it is a technical term whch you would never normally need to learn in your development of your own language as collocations are picked up automatically. Don't worry I'm not trying to promote our book! (But perhaps some would find it useful!)


----------



## majlo

Someone mentioned here that there weren't many collocation dictionaries. Well, I don't know if there are many, but there _is _at least onefor sure. That's the one I use.

http://www.oup.com/elt/catalogue/isbn/0-19-431243-7?cc=global


----------



## Mr Bones

majlo said:


> Someone mentioned here that there weren't many collocation dictionaries. Well, I don't know if there are many, but there _is _at least onefor sure. That's the one I use.
> 
> http://www.oup.com/elt/catalogue/isbn/0-19-431243-7?cc=global


 

I use this one too, and I think it's great. Bones.


----------

