Abstract
Bu makale, derlem dilbiliminin sosyal bilimlerdeki kuramsal, yöntemsel ve epistemolojik dönüşüm gücünü kapsamlı biçimde ele almaktadır. Derlem dilbilimi, dilin yalnızca yapısal yönünü değil, aynı zamanda toplumsal, kültürel ve ideolojik boyutlarını da inceleyerek, dili insan davranışının, düşünce biçimlerinin ve toplumsal düzenin ampirik bir kaydı hâline getiren bilimsel bir yaklaşım olarak tanımlar. Bu bağlamda, corpus-based ve corpus-driven yaklaşımların temel farkları açıklanmış; KWIC, eşdizimlilik, sıklık, tematik ve anlamsal ağ analizleri gibi yöntemlerin sosyal bilimler alanında nasıl uygulandığı ayrıntılı biçimde gösterilmiştir. Sinclair, McEnery, Hardie, Stubbs, Teubert, Biber ve Wodak gibi öncü araştırmacıların katkıları, derlem yöntemlerinin sezgisel ve yoruma dayalı analizlerden ampirik ve tekrarlanabilir veri analizlerine geçişte oynadığı belirleyici rolü ortaya koymuştur. Makalede ayrıca medya söylemi, toplumsal cinsiyet temsilleri, siyasal iletişim, eğitim ve dinî metin incelemelerinde derlem yöntemlerinin nasıl kullanıldığı örneklerle açıklanmıştır. Bunun yanında temsiliyet sınırlılığı, aşırı nicelcilik, anlamsal belirsizlik, veri etiği ve teknolojik önyargı gibi konular eleştirel bir bakış açısıyla tartışılmış; derlem dilbiliminin yalnızca teknik bir yöntem değil, etik sorumluluk ve kültürel farkındalık gerektiren bir epistemolojik çerçeve sunduğu vurgulanmıştır. Sonuç olarak çalışma, derlem dilbiliminin sosyal bilimlerde veri temelli düşünme biçimini kurumsallaştırdığını, anlamın ölçülebilirliğini artırdığını ve dili toplumsal bilginin nesnel bir temsiline dönüştürdüğünü ileri sürmektedir. Böylece derlem dilbilimi, dijital beşerî bilimler çağında nitel ve nicel yöntemleri birleştiren, kültürel belleği dijital düzleme taşıyan ve bilimsel araştırmada yeni bir paradigma inşa eden bütüncül bir yaklaşım olarak değerlendirilmektedir.
Keywords
Derlem Dilbilimi Sosyal Bilimler Söylem Analizi Dijital Beşerî Bilimler Epistemolojik Dönüşüm
References
- Baker, P. (2006). Using corpora in discourse analysis. London: Continuum.
- Baker, P. (2010). Using corpora in discourse studies. London: Routledge.
- Baker, P., & Egbert, J. (2019). Triangulating methodological approaches in corpus-assisted discourse studies. London: Routledge.
- Baker, P., & McEnery, T. (2015). Corpora and discourse studies: Integrating discourse and corpora. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Baker, P., Gabrielatos, C., & McEnery, T. (2013). Discourse analysis and media attitudes: The representation of Islam in the British press. Cambridge University Press.
- Bender, E. M. (2013). Linguistic fundamentals for natural language processing. San Rafael, CA: Morgan & Claypool.
- Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2009). Register, genre, and style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Cameron, D. (1992). Feminism and linguistic theory. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Cameron, D. (1995). Verbal hygiene. London: Routledge.
- Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.
- Davies, M. (2009a). The corpus of contemporary American English (COCA): Design, architecture, and linguistic insights. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University.
- Davies, M. (2009b). The 400 million word corpus of contemporary American English (COCA). Provo, UT: Brigham Young University.
- Dukes, K. (2010a). Integrated knowledge resources for the Arabic language: The Quranic Arabic Corpus. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC) (p. 16). Valletta, Malta.
- Dukes, K. (2010b). The Quranic Arabic Corpus: Linguistic and semantic annotation. In Proceedings of LREC 2010 (p. 17). Valletta, Malta.
- Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. London: Longman.
- Fairclough, N. (1995a). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman.
- Fairclough, N. (1995b). Media discourse. London: Edward Arnold.
- Firth, J. R. (1957). A synopsis of linguistic theory, 1930–1955. In Studies in Linguistic Analysis (pp. 1–32). Oxford: Philological Society.
- Firth, J. R. (1957). Papers in linguistics 1934–1951. Oxford University Press.
- Firuzabadi, M. b. Y. (2011). el-Kâmûsu’l-Muhît. Beyrut: Daru’l-Kütübi’l-İlmiyye.
- Francis, W. N., & Kučera, H. (1964). A standard corpus of present-day edited American English. Providence, RI: Brown University.
- Gries, S. T. (2009). Quantitative corpus linguistics with R. London: Routledge.
- Habash, N. (2010). Introduction to Arabic natural language processing. San Rafael, CA: Morgan & Claypool.
- Habash, N., & Dukes, K. (2010). The Quranic Arabic Corpus: Using linguistic and semantic annotation to analyze the Quran. Language Resources and Evaluation, 44(1), 123–138.
- Habash, N., & Rambow, O. (2005). Arabic tokenization, part-of-speech tagging and morphological disambiguation in one fell swoop. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) (pp. 41–47). Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Computational Linguistics.
- Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
- Halliday, M. A. K. (1991). Corpus studies and probabilistic grammar. In K. Aijmer & B. Altenberg (Eds.), English corpus linguistics (pp. 30–43). Longman.
- Hasan, R. (1985). The structure of a text. In M. A. K. Halliday & R. Hasan (Eds.), Language, context and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective (pp. 52–69). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Hanks, P. (1990). Corpus evidence and lexicography. International Journal of Lexicography, 3(3), 137–146.
- İbn Manzur, M. b. M. (1999). Lisânu’l-Arab (15 cilt). Beyrut: Dâru Sadir.
- Johns, T. (1991). From printout to handout: Grammar and vocabulary teaching in the context of data-driven learning. ELR Journal, 4(New Series), 27–46.
- Kilito, A. (2008). Arabe et le Coran: Études linguistiques. Paris: Maisonneuve.
- Kučera, H., & Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
- Leech, G. (1979). Corpora and theories of linguistic performance. Linguistics, 17, 7–26.
- Leech, G. (1981). Semantics: The study of meaning (2nd ed.). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
- Mauranen, A. (2009). Features of data-driven research. Corpora, 4(2), 23–44.
- McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse analysis for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- McEnery, T., Baker, P., & Hardie, A. (2012). Corpus linguistics and social change. Journal of English Linguistics, 40(1), 5–28.
- McEnery, T., & Hardie, A. (2012). Corpus linguistics: Method, theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- McEnery, T., & Wilson, A. (1996). Corpus linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
- Michel, J.-B., Shen, Y. K., Presser Aiden, A., Veres, A., Gray, M. K., The Google Books Team, ... & Lieberman Aiden, E. (2011). Quantitative analysis of culture using millions of digitized books. Science, 331(6014), 176–182.
- Nesi, H. (2000). The use and abuse of EFL dictionaries. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
- Partington, A., Duguid, A., & Taylor, C. (2013). Patterns and meanings in discourse: Theory and practice in corpus-assisted discourse studies (CADS). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
- Raskin, V. (1985). Semantic mechanisms of humor. Dordrecht: Reidel.
- Scott, M. (2018). WordSmith Tools (Version 8) [Computer software]. Oxford: Lexical Analysis Software.
- Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Sinclair, J. (2004). Trust the text: Language, corpus and discourse. London: Routledge.
- Stubbs, M. (1997). Text and corpus analysis: Computer-assisted studies of language and culture. Oxford: Blackwell.
- Teubert, W. (2005). Meaning, discourse and corpora. Applied Linguistics, 26(2), 113–136.
- Tognini-Bonelli, E. (2001). Corpus linguistics at work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
- Wodak, R. (2015). The politics of fear: What right-wing populist discourses mean. London: Sage.
- Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2016). Methods of critical discourse studies (3rd ed.). London: Sage.
- Wodak, R., & Reisigl, M. (2001). Discourse and discrimination: Rhetorics of racism and antisemitism. London: Routledge.
Abstract
This article comprehensively examines the theoretical, methodological, and epistemological impact of corpus linguistics on the field of social sciences. Corpus linguistics does not merely study the structural properties of language but also investigates its social, cultural, and ideological dimensions. It conceptualizes language as an empirical record of human behavior, thought patterns, and social organization. Within this framework, the distinctions between corpus-based and corpus-driven approaches are clarified, and the application of methods such as KWIC, collocation, frequency, thematic, and semantic network analyses in social research is explained in detail. The contributions of leading scholars—Sinclair, McEnery, Hardie, Stubbs, Teubert, Biber, and Wodak—have played a decisive role in transforming corpus linguistics from an intuition-based interpretive discipline into a data-driven and replicable science. The paper also illustrates how corpus methods are applied in analyzing media discourse, gender representation, political communication, education, and religious texts. Moreover, critical discussions are presented on limitations such as representativeness, excessive quantification, semantic ambiguity, data ethics, and technological bias. The study emphasizes that corpus linguistics is not only a technical method but also an epistemological framework that requires ethical responsibility and cultural sensitivity. The findings suggest that corpus linguistics institutionalizes data-driven reasoning within the social sciences, enhances the measurability of meaning, and transforms language into an objective representation of social knowledge. Ultimately, corpus linguistics emerges as an integrative paradigm that bridges qualitative and quantitative methods, revitalizes cultural memory in the digital sphere, and redefines the epistemic foundation of contemporary research. As a result, the discipline provides not merely a methodological tool but a holistic and ethical approach for understanding the interaction between language, society, and knowledge in the digital humanities era.
Keywords
Corpus Linguistics Social Sciences Discorce Analysis Dijital Humanities Epistemological Transformation
References
- Baker, P. (2006). Using corpora in discourse analysis. London: Continuum.
- Baker, P. (2010). Using corpora in discourse studies. London: Routledge.
- Baker, P., & Egbert, J. (2019). Triangulating methodological approaches in corpus-assisted discourse studies. London: Routledge.
- Baker, P., & McEnery, T. (2015). Corpora and discourse studies: Integrating discourse and corpora. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Baker, P., Gabrielatos, C., & McEnery, T. (2013). Discourse analysis and media attitudes: The representation of Islam in the British press. Cambridge University Press.
- Bender, E. M. (2013). Linguistic fundamentals for natural language processing. San Rafael, CA: Morgan & Claypool.
- Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2009). Register, genre, and style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Cameron, D. (1992). Feminism and linguistic theory. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Cameron, D. (1995). Verbal hygiene. London: Routledge.
- Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.
- Davies, M. (2009a). The corpus of contemporary American English (COCA): Design, architecture, and linguistic insights. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University.
- Davies, M. (2009b). The 400 million word corpus of contemporary American English (COCA). Provo, UT: Brigham Young University.
- Dukes, K. (2010a). Integrated knowledge resources for the Arabic language: The Quranic Arabic Corpus. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC) (p. 16). Valletta, Malta.
- Dukes, K. (2010b). The Quranic Arabic Corpus: Linguistic and semantic annotation. In Proceedings of LREC 2010 (p. 17). Valletta, Malta.
- Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. London: Longman.
- Fairclough, N. (1995a). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman.
- Fairclough, N. (1995b). Media discourse. London: Edward Arnold.
- Firth, J. R. (1957). A synopsis of linguistic theory, 1930–1955. In Studies in Linguistic Analysis (pp. 1–32). Oxford: Philological Society.
- Firth, J. R. (1957). Papers in linguistics 1934–1951. Oxford University Press.
- Firuzabadi, M. b. Y. (2011). el-Kâmûsu’l-Muhît. Beyrut: Daru’l-Kütübi’l-İlmiyye.
- Francis, W. N., & Kučera, H. (1964). A standard corpus of present-day edited American English. Providence, RI: Brown University.
- Gries, S. T. (2009). Quantitative corpus linguistics with R. London: Routledge.
- Habash, N. (2010). Introduction to Arabic natural language processing. San Rafael, CA: Morgan & Claypool.
- Habash, N., & Dukes, K. (2010). The Quranic Arabic Corpus: Using linguistic and semantic annotation to analyze the Quran. Language Resources and Evaluation, 44(1), 123–138.
- Habash, N., & Rambow, O. (2005). Arabic tokenization, part-of-speech tagging and morphological disambiguation in one fell swoop. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) (pp. 41–47). Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Computational Linguistics.
- Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
- Halliday, M. A. K. (1991). Corpus studies and probabilistic grammar. In K. Aijmer & B. Altenberg (Eds.), English corpus linguistics (pp. 30–43). Longman.
- Hasan, R. (1985). The structure of a text. In M. A. K. Halliday & R. Hasan (Eds.), Language, context and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective (pp. 52–69). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Hanks, P. (1990). Corpus evidence and lexicography. International Journal of Lexicography, 3(3), 137–146.
- İbn Manzur, M. b. M. (1999). Lisânu’l-Arab (15 cilt). Beyrut: Dâru Sadir.
- Johns, T. (1991). From printout to handout: Grammar and vocabulary teaching in the context of data-driven learning. ELR Journal, 4(New Series), 27–46.
- Kilito, A. (2008). Arabe et le Coran: Études linguistiques. Paris: Maisonneuve.
- Kučera, H., & Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
- Leech, G. (1979). Corpora and theories of linguistic performance. Linguistics, 17, 7–26.
- Leech, G. (1981). Semantics: The study of meaning (2nd ed.). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
- Mauranen, A. (2009). Features of data-driven research. Corpora, 4(2), 23–44.
- McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse analysis for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- McEnery, T., Baker, P., & Hardie, A. (2012). Corpus linguistics and social change. Journal of English Linguistics, 40(1), 5–28.
- McEnery, T., & Hardie, A. (2012). Corpus linguistics: Method, theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- McEnery, T., & Wilson, A. (1996). Corpus linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
- Michel, J.-B., Shen, Y. K., Presser Aiden, A., Veres, A., Gray, M. K., The Google Books Team, ... & Lieberman Aiden, E. (2011). Quantitative analysis of culture using millions of digitized books. Science, 331(6014), 176–182.
- Nesi, H. (2000). The use and abuse of EFL dictionaries. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
- Partington, A., Duguid, A., & Taylor, C. (2013). Patterns and meanings in discourse: Theory and practice in corpus-assisted discourse studies (CADS). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
- Raskin, V. (1985). Semantic mechanisms of humor. Dordrecht: Reidel.
- Scott, M. (2018). WordSmith Tools (Version 8) [Computer software]. Oxford: Lexical Analysis Software.
- Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Sinclair, J. (2004). Trust the text: Language, corpus and discourse. London: Routledge.
- Stubbs, M. (1997). Text and corpus analysis: Computer-assisted studies of language and culture. Oxford: Blackwell.
- Teubert, W. (2005). Meaning, discourse and corpora. Applied Linguistics, 26(2), 113–136.
- Tognini-Bonelli, E. (2001). Corpus linguistics at work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
- Wodak, R. (2015). The politics of fear: What right-wing populist discourses mean. London: Sage.
- Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2016). Methods of critical discourse studies (3rd ed.). London: Sage.
- Wodak, R., & Reisigl, M. (2001). Discourse and discrimination: Rhetorics of racism and antisemitism. London: Routledge.
Details
| Primary Language | Turkish |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Communications and Media Policy |
| Journal Section | Research Article |
| Authors | |
| Submission Date | November 3, 2025 |
| Acceptance Date | December 2, 2025 |
| Publication Date | December 25, 2025 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2025 Volume: 4 Issue: 2 |
ISSN: 2980-1540
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The International Journal of Current Social Science (CUSOS) is indexed by the following field-specific databases: