Adverbs In Expressions of Disagreement: a Corpus Study

This study examined the occurrences of expressions of disagreement in the textbook and corpora namely Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) and British National Corpus (BNC). Besides, this study scrutinized the concordance lines in which disagreement occur to obtain other language functions that were usually used together in expressions of disagreement. It also studied the used of adverbs in expressions of disagreement. They were categorized based on semantic categories develop by Biber, et al. (1999). Some expressions of disagreement given in the textbook were not found in BNC. The findings from the corpora showed that the speakers tend to give opinions and reasons in stating disagreement. They, moreover, showed direct respect to the interlocutors in order to manage the relationship. These language functions were not found in the expressions of disagreement in the textbook. The adverbs that belonged to the categories of degree and stance were more salient than any other categories. The adverbs intensified the level of disagreement and represent speakers’ certainty. Furthermore, the adverbs indicate speakers’ attitude toward the issues of disagreement. It seemed that adverbs played a role in stating disagreement. However, no expressions of disagreement in the textbook contained adverbs.


A. Introduction
A textbook plays a vital role in English learning in the class. As a source of learning, it provides texts whether spoken or written texts. All texts are intended to help students learn English. By exploring the texts, the students notice how English works. They get the models of what expressions the speakers use to carry particular functions. They get the model of language use through textbooks.
The issue of modeling language is also an important issue in language teaching. The language in the textbook is expected to represent the language used in communication. To do so, language used in the textbook can be checked in the corpus. Corpus is defined as a group of texts that was kept electronically. 2 Analyzing corpus can be one of the ways to decide what language should be given as a language model in the textbook. It is a part of developing materials for students. It, moreover, can be used in evaluating the textbook. Language in the textbook can be examined to see the similarities and differences of language use in the textbook and corpora. It can enrich the language use in the textbook. It makes the language in the textbook becomes more natural. Having exposed to natural language makes the students able to understand language in the real communication. The language that the students produce also will be natural. Thus, it supports the students for using language in communication.
The present study focuses on expressions of disagreement. It aims at checking whether expressions of disagreement in the textbook can be found in the corpora. When the expressions of disagreement in the textbook can be found in the corpora, it means the expressions are used in communication.
Previous study shows that adverbs tend to occur when the speakers produced expressions of disagreement. Some adverbs represent to what extend the speakers agree or disagree. It shows how intense the speakers deliver his agreement is. 3 It seems that the adverbs carry particular functions in expressions of disagreement. Thus, this study also shows what language functions related to the existences of adverbs that occur in stating disagreement. In addition, the adverbs were categorized based on the semantic classification to find their roles in expressions of disagreement.
Expressions of disagreement are used in the dialogues in which the speakers disagree with the interlocutors. Carrying this function of course would potentially make the interlocutors give negative responses. It would be possible for the interactions to be damaged because the owners of the ideas feel their ideas are not accepted. Therefore, the speakers must manage the language carefully in order to convey their disagreement without potentially having conflicts with the interlocutors. In modeling expressions of disagreement, this function also needs to be considered. The expressions of disagreement in the textbook need to carry this aspect. Then, the students will notice it and practice to use the language. By doing so, it is expected that the students get the real model of language use that equip them for communication. Previous study that applied corpus study to analyze language use namely expressions of agreement in the five textbooks and corpus has been conducted by. 4 The corpus is Hong Kong Corpus of Spoken English (HKCSE). Out of 54 expressions, there are only 7 expressions that were found in HKCSE. Expressions in the the textbook occur in 1-10 words. However, expressions commonly found in HKCSE only consist of one word. Based on the findings from HKCSE, it also gives other expressions that are potentially used to express agreement.
In studying similarities and differences of a textbook, there are some available corpora that can be applied such as COCA (Corpus of Contemporary American English) and BNC (British National Corpus). Those corpora have different characteristics. The language in the corpora represents language produced by the speakers in different areas. BNC shows how speakers in the UK use English while COCA covers how speakers in the USA speak and write in English. The size of BNC is smaller than COCA. They also have different registers. However, both corpora have sections on spoken and written language.
In a corpus study, it is common to find the patterns of particular word(s). The words might tend to come with other words. If the words form grammatical aspects, they are called as colligation. For example, the word stop tend to occur with smoking. It creates the principle of gerund. If the co-occurences do not create grammatical aspects, they are defined as collocations for instance the word conduct collocates with research and form conduct research. The word which is investigated might appear as a chunk. This chunk can be called as a bundle or an-n-gram. N here means the numbers of words in a chunk such as three, four, or five. The phrase the research was conducted is a chunk that consists of four words. The phrase the research was conducted in is a chunk of five words. Besides, one of the principles of corpus study is counting the frequency. The words with high frequency in the corpus usually gets special attention. It shows that the words are commonly used in real life. Such words or phrases would be considered in developing materials for language learning.
In doing a corpus study, the words to be searched can be set from the beginning. The words are related to the topic of analysis. The possible words and phrases to be set as the basis of analysis of expressions of disagreement are disagree and not agree. The words that tend to occur with them show how the speakers used the expressions in communication. They also might carry other language functions that are still related to disagreement. The functions might be used by the speakers to make the expressions of disagreement sound polite. It does not contain rejection. It tries to give more positive nuance to the conversation.
This study aims at studying the expressions of disagreement in the textbook for university students. It sought to answer the research questions below.
1. Do the expressions of disagreement in the textbook exist in COCA and BNC?
2. What are language functions that exist related to the co-occurences of adverbs and disagree and not agree?
3. To what semantic categories do the adverbs belong?
The findings of the study can be used to improve the language used in the textbook to be more natural. In addition, it sheds light on the characteristics of conversation in which expressions of disagreement exist by describing what language functions tend to occur with them. It gives insight what aspects to be considered to represent the real use of communication in expressing disagreement.
The study applies a corpus study in which COCA and BNC were used as comparison corpora. Corpus study is useful to see patterns that are hard to observed through manual text analysis. 5 The textbook which is a source of data is a student's handbook used only for students in a private university in Jakarta. It consists of spoken and written texts. Disagreement is one of the language points on the textbook. The expressions occur in the spoken language. Because of this, the sub-section of corpora chosen in doing the analysis is spoken language. It was done to create a balance comparison. Therefore, the language studied in the textbook and corpora is spoken language.
Adverbs function to modify verbs, adjectives, and other adverbs (Pullum & Huddleston, 2002 Adverbs that show additive means addition of something. It can be carried by too and also. Restrictive adverbs direct the participants in discourse to notice one element such as especially and only.
Adverbs that carry stance can be classified as epistemic, attitude, and style. Epistemic can carry the sense of certainty such as probably and definitely, reality such as actually and really, evidence such as apparently and reportedly, limitation such as mainly and typically, and hedges such as kind of and like. Adverbs that show attitude describe attitudes of the speakers towards particular issue such as surprisingly and curiously.
Adverbs that show stance have a function to report the way the speakers utter the issue. It can be realized through honestly and frankly.
Adverbs that carry the functions of linking connect one part of discourse to another one. They are not discussed in this paper because the scope of current study does is not on the level of discourse.
The study is a corpus study with the focus of comparing and contrasting. First, the expressions of disagreement in the textbook were found. Then, those expressions were checked in COCA and BNC. The frequency was counted. To investigate the adverbs, the adverbs that tend to occur with the words disagree and not agree were searched. The words are those that occur four words to the left and right of disagree and not agree. Four words are considered as the ideal length of. 7 Because COCA and BNC have different sizes, the minimum frequency in searching disagree and not agree in COCA and BNC differ. The minimum frequency for COCA is ten while the least frequency for BNC is two. The adverbs included in the analysis is only the adverbs that modify disagreement in the sentences. An analysis of concordance lines, thus, was conducted. In doing so, the utterances surrounding the expressions of disagreement were also explored. It reveals what other language functions that tend to occur in stating disagreement. It shows how the speakers carry the functions to support their disagreement.

B. Discussion
There are four expressions of disagreement given as the models of language use found in the textbook.

Collocations of disagree and adverbs in COCA
The adverbs that tend to appear with COCA were founds. After that, the concordance lines were examined. When the adverbs do not modify disagreement itself, the adverbs were excluded from the analysis. The results of adverbs that tend to occur on the right sides of disagree can be seen in the table below. Well, I disagree with that entirely. I think he is a role model.
After the speakers produced utterances of disagreement, they gave their opinions shown by the phrases I think … . It is also possible to occur with conjunction because. They gave explanation to the interlocutors why they disagreed.
Adverb more has the highest frequency among other adverbs as can be seen in the examples below.
I couldn't disagree more. I think there is no chance of a problem.
No, I couldn't agree more. I couldn't disagree more, I'm sorry.
Again, the speaker gave his opinion to explain his disagreement. In the second example, the speakers produced the utterances I couldn't disagree more twice. This repetition shows the speaker heightened his disagreement. Then, the expression of apologizing follows. It might be speaker's way to show politeness and respect to whom he disagree with.
Disagree and strongly tend to be followed by the expressions of I think/ I don't think to show opinion as in the following concordance lines. Adverb very also functions to intensify the disagreement. It is followed by other adverbs. This case can be seen in the following examples.
I disagree very strongly. I really think there's a crisis.
Well, again, I would disagree very seriously in that I think it is a very serious impediment.
Like the previous case, the speakers also produced I (…) think… to show opinions.
It might occur with much to show level of disagreement as follows: I do disagree with polls very much.
In this case, the speaker used auxiliary do to form do disagree. It emphasizes the sense of disagreement that the speaker conveyed. The sense becomes stronger when the speaker used very much to modify do disagree.
To emphasize disagreement, the speakers might produce two utterances in which the speakers delivered the ideas of disagreement in both utterances. The examples can be seen in the following sentences. In the first, second, and third examples, the speaker mentioned disagreement which is not modified by adverbs in the first utterances. Then, they produced disagreement with adverbs completely and totally. The level of disagreement is higher in the second utterances in each example. In the third example, the speaker gave his opinion before stating disagreement. In the last example, expression of disagreement in which disagree is followed by adverb occurs first. Then, the speaker mentioned disagreement in the next utterance by using the verb don't agree.
Other adverbs such as politically and actually that do not show the level of disagreement also occur as follows: I disagree with him politically, but he's --he's --he's very … .
I disagree, actually, with that point that you raised, that it wasn't … .
In the first example above, the speaker used contrastive conjunction but. It seems that the speaker tried to deliver good point in spite of his disagreement. The adverb actually in the second example shows how the speaker softens his disagreement.
There are more adverbs that occur on the left sides of disagree. It can be seen in the following table. From the examples above, it can be seen that the speakers also mentioned their opinions and reasons and contrasted. Giving opinions can be seen from the phrase I think. However, it is possible for the speaker to give opinion without using such phrase like in the last example. Giving reason is shown by conjunction because. Contrasting is conducted by conjunction but. When the speakers used contrasting, he tried to see good points in spite of disagreement.
One of the adverbs that collocates with disagree is strongly. It potentially makes the interlocutors feel being attacked or rejected when the words disagree collocates with strongly were used. To avoid such situation, the speakers show respect by showing the respect directly as can be seen in the sentences below.

I --I have a lot of respect for Joe, even though I strongly disagree with him on a lot of things. I respect their views; I just strongly disagree with them.
With all due respect I have to strongly disagree.

I -even though I respect your guest's opinion, I strongly disagree with it.
In the first sentence above, the speaker intensified the respect that he mentioned by mentioning a lot of respect. In another case, the speaker shows that he accepts the thing even though he disagreed strongly as in the following sentence.
While I strongly disagree with the court's decision, I accept it.
In the other case, the speaker mentioned the reason as a detail description after he stated his disagreement as in the example below.
And I strongly disagree. One reason I disagree is because … .
The speaker tried to be reasonable to the interlocutors. By doing so, he expected the interlocutors to understand why he strongly disagreed. In the first example above, the speaker used the clause I think before stating disagreement. It does not make disagreement sound so strong. The speaker softened the language. In the second example above, the speaker used auxiliary do. In the first and last examples, the speakers mention their opinions in relation to disagreement.
Expressing respect in disagreement can be realized through the adverb respectfully as in the following examples.

Let me say this, I respectfully disagree with my colleague Mr. Friedman for the following reasons.
You know, I regretfully, regretfully and respectfully disagree with the, with former President Clinton.
I respectfully disagree with his policies, but I respect the office.
In the first example, the reasons were mentioned after disagreement. In the second example, the speaker used the adverb regretfully also. It shows that disagreement was delivered in a polite manner in order to reduce negative impression that might be felt by the interlocutors.
Adverbs might occur to show time as in the following example.

I'm afraid I have to still disagree with the president of the United States.
In this example, the speaker used the clause I'm afraid to avoid disagreement sound frontal.
To show probability, the speakers used adverbs probably and maybe as can be seen in the following examples.
John and I probably will disagree as to why people feel the way they do.
And maybe I'll disagree with you, but New York is a place that respects diversity.
In the last example, the speaker shows contrast by using the clause which begins with but. In this clause, the speaker described that it is acceptable to have disagreement. In the examples above, the expressions of politeness namely showing respect and apologizing occur. The speaker, moreover, gave his opinion.
The adverb that shows certainty occurs as in of course as in the example below.
Of course, we disagree. I wouldn't call it argue.
After expressing disagreement, the speaker tried to create comfortable condition by saying I wouldn't call it argue. He realized that disagreement might trigger uncomfortable condition between him and the one whom he disagreed. To anticipate, he mentioned that disagreement is not an argument.
It is also possible that the speaker mentioned two times the disagreement by producing two utterances that shows disagreement as in the following example.

I disagree. I completely disagree.
I totally disagree with that. I absolutely disagree with that, that Putin is irrelevant.

I don't think that, I disagree. I totally disagree.
In the first and third examples, the speaker intensified his disagreement. It was done by using the adverb completely in the first example. In the second example, both utterances use adverbs. And both adverbs (totally and absolutely) show high level of disagreement. Furthermore, giving opinion can be found in the last example.
Other adverbs are fundamentally and personally. Like the others, giving opinions and reason co-occurs with expressions of disagreement as in the following examples.
I just fundamentally disagree with. I don't think it's right … .
As far as being disruptive to the process, I personally disagree with him on that. I think any candidate with a good idea ought to … .

Collocations of not agree and adverbs in COCA
There is only one adverb, more that fulfills the criteria of minimum frequency in COCA. Adverb more occurs for 12 times. It reveals the highest level of disagreement.

I must say I could not agree more with what you're saying.
Oh, I could not agree with you more, Bill, because most crime is committed by repeat offenders.
Like in other examples, the speakers gave a reason to support his disagreement.

Collocations of disagree and adverbs in BNC
After checking the concordance lines, there is no adverb that occurs on the right sides of BNC that fulfils the criteria. There are some adverbs that collocate to the left side of disagreement as can be seen in the table below. The collocations of not agree and adverbs in BNC that have at least two occurrences were not found in BNC.
Based on the study of concordance lines, giving opinion is one of the language functions co-occur in stating disagreement shown by the phrase of I think. To find more evidence of this finding, the collocation of I think and disagree were found in COCA and BNC. There are 154 occurences in COCA and 2 occurences in BNC of this collocation. The figure below shows the concordance lines of I think and disagre

Semantic categories of adverbs
The adverbs above were categorized based on the classification developed by. 8 The adverbs were categorized in seven categories namely time, manner, degree, additive/ restrictive, epistemic stance, and attitude stance. More adverbs belong to category of degree. The categorization can be seen in the table below. Adverb still in the category of time shows the time of event from the past up to now as can be seen in the example below.

And I still disagree with that. It's very clear that this is group mentality.
The adverb contains information of time position. It refers to disagreement that started in the past and continues up to now.
The adverb strongly indicates that the speaker carry the sense of disagreement in a strong way as in the example below.

I respect their views; I just strongly disagree with them.
Adverb strongly occurs with just which functions to direct the listener to particular element in the utterance. Thus, just plays role to make the listener focus on the phrase strongly disagree. Before stating this utterance, the speaker shows that he still respects in spite of disagreement.
The adverb obviously might modify the verb disagree as in the example below.

Well, I obviously disagree with Nancy Pelosi's call for more tax increases.
It is also possible to occur with very much as in the following example.
We obviously very much disagree on certain policy and certain things.
The phrase very much itself carries high level of disagreement. When it occurs with obviously and forms obviously very much, it makes the level of disagreement become higher.
Category of degree contains adverbs that belong to intensifiers namely more, much, very, really, profoundly, totally, completely, and absolutely. Totally, completely, and absolutely create the maximum sense of disagreement.
Adverbs more always occur with couldn't disagree or could not disagree. According to Cambridge dictionary online, 2017, this expression refers to high level of disagreement. This phrase is a formal language to express disagreement. The concordance lines of couldn't disagree/could not disagree (…) more can be seen as in the figure 3. Disagree and more might come as a bundle to form disagree more. It is also possible for disagree occurs as disagree with. The phrase disagree with was followed by pronoun. Then, more comes as in the first line of concordance lines (couldn't disagree with Paul more).
Furthermore, it might occur with the adverb just as an emphasizer as follows: I just couldn't disagree with your guest more, and many people that have shared his reaction.
In both examples, more are not followed by adjectives. However, there are some occurrences in which adverbs namely strenuously and profoundly as follows.
Bill, I just can not disagree with you more strenuously.
I couldn't disagree more profoundly.
The phrase couldn't disagree more itself means the maximum level of disagreement. The sense becomes higher when the adverb absolutely occurs as follows.
I absolutely couldn't disagree more.
Very might be followed by much, clearly, respectfully, strongly, and hard as in the example below.
Well, I very respectfully disagree with my good friend, whom I respect enormously, John McCain.
Adverb very occurs with respectfully. It might be caused that whom the speaker disagreed is his good friend.
To maintain their relationship in spite of disagreement, he used the phrase very respectfully. Even, the speaker still addressed the one he disagreed as whom I respect enormously. It can be seen that the speaker tries hard to convey his respect to the interlocutor.
Adverb really might occur with fundamentally to emphasize the way of disagreement as in the following example.
We really fundamentally disagree with.
It might appear to emphasize disagreement itself as the example below.
Well, Tom, I really disagree with you on that. I think that our Congressmen are increasingly out of touch.
Adverb much might be proceeded by the adverbs very or pretty I pretty much disagree with everything you say and do.
The level of disagreement conveyed by pretty is not as high as very.
Adverb totally might occur with adverb just which functions to emphasize the maximum level of disagreement as follows.
See, I just totally, I just totally disagree with that type of thinking.
Adverbs completely might be preceded by two adverbs such as in the following case.
We just literally completely disagree about abortion.
The adverb completely shows the highest level of disagreement. By using several adverbs, the speaker emphasized that it is true that they have the highest level of disagreement.
Adverbs absolutely and profoundly collocate with disagree and it never occurs with other adverbs.
Adverb slightly is the only one that belongs to a downtoner. It functions to give low level of disagreement. Slightly always precedes the verb disagree as follows.
Let me slightly disagree with Cliff.
Adverbs just and simply belong to the category of restrictive. Other adverbs such as totally, fundamentally, respectfully, and strongly tend to collocate with just as follows.
I just totally disagree with that.
In the example above, it was used to direct interlocutor's attention to high level of disagreement. The adverb just might also occur with the phrase agree to disagree as in the following example.
We just agree to disagree on a lot of the issues.
Both parties realize that is impossible to make agreement. To emphasize this condition, they agree to disagree.
Adverb simply might come as the only adverb in the sentence or it might collocate with adverb just as follows.
Well, I just simply disagree with that conclusion.
Some adverbs that are categorized as epistemic stance are actually, certainly, probably, maybe, course, and kind.
The speakers emphasize that the disagreement is true by using actually as in the example below.
I actually disagree though.
It seems that the interlocutors did not think or predict that the speaker disagreed.
To notice this thing, the speaker used actually in his disagreement.
Some adverbs exist to describe to what extend the speakers are certain such as certainly, probably, and maybe. Certainly shows high level of certainty and it can occur with another adverb i.e. personally as in the following sentence.
I certainly personally disagree with hunters in many ways.
Probably and maybe do not have level of agreement as high as certainly. Probably might occur with just and obviously as follows.
Doug and I probably just disagree.
However, maybe never occurs with any other adverbs as follows.
Well, I think there maybe Duncan and I disagree.
Of course might occur with totally as in the example below.
Of course, I disagree totally with the comments from San Francisco.
The speaker shows high level of disagreement which is emphasized by the adverb of course.
Adverb kind of delivers the sense of imprecision of disagreement as in the example below.
I actually kind of disagree with because the border wall that Trump appears to be giving up.
Adverbs that show writers' stance are respectfully, fundamentally, personally, and obviously. Respectfully might occur with adverbs just and regretfully. In the following example, the speaker shows his attitude of respect.
Miss Shalala, respectfully, I disagree with you.
Fundamentally might be preceded by adverbs really, just, and honestly as in the example below.
Gerri, I honestly fundamentally disagree with you.
Honestly can be categorized as the adverb of style. It means the speaker used the language in stating disagreement in honest way. The speaker uttered the sentence which shows his attitude of fundamental towards disagreement in honest way of speaking.
Personally can be preceded by just. It also can occur with more as follows.
I personally couldn't disagree more.
Obviously can be used to deliver how the speaker shows the attitude as in the example below.
Obviously, I disagree with the judge because I think it would have been helpful to show that … .
The speaker also used the language to show his attitude towards disagreement by using the adverb politically as follows.
Now you and I disagree with each other politically, but would you throw me a kidney, Jedediah?
Pollitically can be mentioned as adverbs that represent speakers' point of view (Pullum and Huddleston, 2002).

Implication to language teaching
All main expressions of disagreement given in the textbook occur in COCA. It shows that those expressions used in daily life for doing communication in English speaking community. However, I can't agree and I tend to disagree were not found in BNC. It seems this expression is less common. It could be better if other expressions which have higher frequency in COCA and BNC are used as language models in the textbook.
Other expressions which tend to occur with expressions of disagreement are giving opinions, giving reasons, and showing respect. The speakers do not wait until the interlocutors ask for opinions and reasons. They directly give them to support their disagreement. Their disagreement will sound more logic and they expect the interlocutors understand their disagreement by knowing their logic. Because expressions of disagreement is likely trigger the interlocutors to feel negative emotions such as shames or angry, the speakers try to show respect in expressing disagreement. Showing contrast by using but is also intended to prove that the speakers see good points even though they disagree. The description above reveals the nature of disagreement in conversation. It is suggested that this nature should be accommodated in the expressions of disagreement in the textbook.
The occurrences of adverbs in utterances of disagreement indicate that it is the characteristic of disagreement. In one utterance, two adverbs might occur at the same time. More adverbs of manner were found in expressions of disagreement and most of them function to intensify degree of disagreement. It can be said that most of disagreement modified by adverbs of manner show high level of disagreement. For the speakers, it is necessary to let the interlocutors know the level of disagreement.
Adverbs that carry the function of restrictive indicate that the speakers make disagreement as the focus of utterances and they would like the interlocutors realize this issue. Stating level of certainty also becomes the concern of the speakers. Another concern is telling their attitude in giving disagreement. The speakers also show attitudes of respect. It is also possible for them to tell that disagreement is their personal point of view. Furthermore, they might mention how fundamental the disagreement is.

C. Conclusion
Studying expressions of disagreement modeled in the textbook in relation to their co-occurences in corpora gives more insight on how expressions of disagreement occur in natural communication setting. Some expressions of disagreement in the textbook are less common in real life. It might be better to find more frequently used expressions and make these expressions as the models in the textbook. These expressions will be more likely to find in communication.
Giving such expressions in the lessons will equip the students with skills of disagreeing in communication. In addition, other language functions accompany expressions of disagreement such as giving opinions, reasons, and respect. All of them support the function of disagreeing and maintain relationship with the interlocutors. Expressions of disagreement tend to occur with adverbs. The adverbs were used to show time, manner, degree, restrictive, and stance (epistemic and attitude). In some cases, two adverbs might occur. Sometimes two utterances that contain expressions of disagreement were produced at the same time to prove how strong the level of disagreement is.
Further study can investigate on how the interlocutors respond the expressions of disagreement. Particularly, it might study whether disagreement with different level gets different responses from the interlocutor. It will obtain more characteristics on the nature of expressions of disagreement. Such findings will give richer input for