Since the introduction of computers in corpus linguistics, analyses of language has transformed into a more reliable guide to language than native speaker intuition. When disagreements between speakers’ intuition arise over the meaning and usage of words, an analysis of corpora can provide further insight on the characteristics of the words in question. In this study, a corpus analysis is conducted to investigate the similarities and differences in the use of cute, pretty and beautiful using the Bank of English (BoE). The investigation specifically looked at the frequency, collocation, semantic preference, semantic prosody and phraseology of the adjectives. The results show that similarities found between pretty and beautiful, according to these aspects, indicate that these two words may be the most synonymous pair of the three. However, the findings suggest that pretty and beautiful are far from being completely synonymous and do not have the same usage in all contexts. The analysis demonstrates that uncertainties a speaker may have regarding language use may be clarified by referring to corpora.

Keywords: corpus; frequency; collocation; semantic preference; semantic prosody

Beng, C. O. S. & Keong, Y. C. (2015). Functional types of lexical bundles in reading texts of Malaysian University English test: A corpus study. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies. 15(1), 77-90.

Crafter, A. & Jung, C. K. (2014). A corpus investigation of the similarities and differences between think about and think of. Korean Journal of Linguistics. 39(2), 337-354.

Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hunston, S. (2007). Semantic prosody revisited. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics. 12(2), 249-268.

Hunston, S. & Francis, G. (2000). Pattern Grammar: A Corpus-driven Approach to the Lexical Grammar of English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

Jung, C. K. & Wharton, S. (2012). Finding textual examples of genres: Issues for corpus users. Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics. 12(1), 129-148

Khamis N. & Ho-Abdullah, I. (2015). Exploring word associations in academic engineering texts. 3L: Language Linguistics Literature, Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies. 21(1), 117-131.

O’Keeffe, A. & McCarthy, M. (2010). The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics. Oxford: Routledge.

Moon, R. (2010). What can a corpus tell us about lexis? In A. O’Keeffe & M. McCarthy (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics (pp 197-211). Oxford: Routledge.

Owen, C. (1996). Do concordances require to be consulted? ELT Journal. 50(3), 219-224.

Partington, A. (1998). Patterns and Meanings: Using Corpora for English Language Research and Teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

Partington, A. (2004). Utterly content in each other’s company: Semantic prosody and semantic preference. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics. 9(1), 131-156.

Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, Concordances, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sinclair, J. (1998). The lexical item. In E. Weigand (Ed.), Contrastive Lexical Semantics (pp 1-24). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

Sinclair, J. (1999). A way with common words. In H. Hasselggard & S. Oksefjell (Eds.), Out of Corpora: Studies in Honour of Stig Johansson (pp 157-179). Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Sinclair, J. (2004). Trust the Text. London: Routledge.

Sinclair, J., Jones, S. & Daley, R. (1970). English Lexical Studies. Birmingham, UK: University of Birmingham for the Office for Scientific and Technical Information.

Stubbs, M. (1995). Collocations and semantic profiles: On the cause of the trouble with quantitative studies. Functions of Language. 2(1), 23-55.

Stubbs, M. (2001). Words and Phrases: Corpus Studies of Lexical Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Stubbs, M. (2009). The search for units of meaning: Sinclair on empirical semantics. Applied Linguistics. 30(1), 115-137.

Wolfson, N. (1984). Pretty is as pretty does: A speech act view of sex roles. Applied Linguistics. 5(3), 236-244.