Structure, content and functions of calls for conference abstracts 
(17) Some highlights already planned for the program include [...] (HIST–9)
(18) Additional event [sic] at the conference include, for example, a special ses-
sion of film journal editors to talk with participants about publication op-
portunities and goals [...] (HIST–12).
\Goal\ points out what the conference aims to achieve and/or who it is for. It is
marked by the employment of nouns or adjectives (e.g. aim, goal, purpose, objec-
tive, devoted), or verbs (e.g. seek, intend, hope, would like, wish, want) and verb
forms (i.e. will-future) encoding the notion of ‘orientation to a final, purposeful
result’; these then introduce the methodological, social and/or scientific goals that
officially justify the organisation of the conference; e.g.:
(19) The workshop intends to bridge gaps and difficulties (BIO–9)
(20) We would like to bring forth [...] (COMP–20)
(21) The major objective is to start exploring [...] (HIST–24)
(22) The objective of the symposium is to bring the linguists, computational lin-
guists and the computer scientists together who are working on Indian lan-
guages in different parts of India and its neighboring countries (LING–3)
(23) The workshop will furthermore serve to connect [...] (LING–15).
\History\ is a descriptive account of the conference, which reports on its (regular)
past activities and/or those of its promoting association. It combines terms denot-
ing the unfolding, or chronological context of events (e.g. last, previous, former,
first, after, follow, take place) with the use of present perfects and past tenses; e.g.:
(24) This successful series first started [...] (BIO–10)
(25) The first [...] workshop took place [...] (COMP–4)
(26) The scope [...] has been broadened since the inaugural 2005 event
(COMP–6)
(27) The call for papers is posted internationally, and speakers have been
known to come from across Western Canada, the United States, and
Europe. Non- presenting attendees usually include local students and fac-
ulty. The venue rotates on a four year cycle, between [...] (LING–1).
\Introduction\ is an announcement about the decision to hold the conference. The
text segment encoding it, indeed, conveys such notions as ‘announcing, opening,
hosting’ or ‘organising’, followed by reference to ‘the conference’ as a newsworthy
topic. \Introduction\ is always realised as a clause and occurs after \Notice\
(see below); e.g.:
(28) [...] we are extremely happy to host [...] (BIO–15)

UrgentiAS, a lexical database for medical students in clinical placements 
‘significant encounters’ with the target vocabulary (Buyse & Thiry 2008: 110). Al-
though in our experience medical students generally acquire vocabulary more
quickly than the average student does (the average student is able to acquire about
five to twelve words per class for productive use, and twice as many for receptive
use), learners’ vocabulary acquisition potential should not be overestimated
(see a.o. Cervero & Castro 2000 and Schmitt & McCarthy 1997). Systematic vo-
cabulary teaching is certainly necessary, incidental learning (e.g. by reading, from
the media, from native speakers) does not suffice: intentional learning is necessary
as well, since “un mot vu n’est pas un mot su”, or as it is said in English “vocabulary
will not take care of itself ”. Cognitive anchoring (deep level processing, see Schmitt
2000) plays a very important role in vocabulary integration: in order to store new
vocabulary in the memory, learners need to be exposed to it or to be confronted
with it four to seven times on average (the exact number is subject to discussion).
Learners need to encounter the new vocabulary several times in a relatively short
time span, in various ways (e.g. in other contexts, in different class components,
types of learning material, transferring it from active to passive use and vice versa)
and always in significant and different contexts (see a.o. Schmitt 2000, Hulstijn &
Laufer 2001, Lewis 2000). Learners remember new words more easily when they
have pronounced, read and written them than when they were just repeated ten
times (ibidem). In brief, vocabulary is not acquired through accumulation but via
intermediary stages, through progressive, non-linear structuring.
The entries for the four languages (Dutch, English, French and Spanish) are
linked for concepts present in all monolingual corpora. However, UrgentiAS also
reflects the specificity, and to a lesser extent the culture, of each language. For in-
stance, as English medical terms are more difficult to pronounce compared with
the same terms in Spanish or French, audio archives with pronunciation were
added to the English component (App. 3). On the other hand, the Spanish corpus
reflects the geographical variety in the Hispanic world and the opposition between
the more “scientific” tendencies in Romance languages versus the “vulgarizing”
Germanic languages (e.g. “otite / otitis” versus “keelontsteking / inflammation of
the ear”).
In try-out sessions UrgentiAS proved to be a valuable learning tool and refer-
ence work suitable for use in the classroom (where the medical terms can be further
contextualised) as well as for self-study. A certain amount of well-organised self-
study saves classroom time for communicative activities in a setting of task-based
language learning and content and language integrated learning12, using a part of
12. Task-based language learning (TBLL), also known as task-based language teaching (TBLT) or
task-based instruction (TBI) “focuses on the use of authentic language and on asking students to
do meaningful tasks using the target language. Such tasks can include visiting a doctor, conducting