CHAPTER 4: Collocations and Natural Word Combinations

Primary Skill: Recognizing and using collocational patterns to select correct answers

Learning Objective: The learner can identify the collocational requirements of a gap (what type of word combination is expected), evaluate whether each option forms a natural collocation with the surrounding words, and eliminate options that violate collocational patterns.

Prerequisites: Chapters 2 and 3

Why This Skill Matters: Collocational knowledge is one of the most decisive factors in PTE Fill in the Blanks. A word can be grammatically correct and semantically plausible but still wrong because it doesn't collocate naturally. For example, in "The study ___ strong evidence," both "provided" and "offered" are grammatically correct and semantically reasonable, but "provided strong evidence" is the more standard academic collocation. Research on collocational knowledge in second-language learners (Nesselhauf, 2005; Boers & Lindstromberg, 2012) consistently shows that collocations are difficult to acquire through implicit exposure alone and benefit from explicit instruction. While direct research on collocations in PTE gap-fill tasks is limited, the principle that collocational competence supports accurate word selection is well-established.

Key Concepts:

1. What Collocations Are: Habitual combinations of words that native speakers use with high frequency. They exist on a continuum from completely fixed ("by and large") to strongly preferred ("make a decision") to loosely associated ("fast car" / "quick car" — both acceptable, but "fast" is more common with "car").

2. Major Collocation Types Relevant to PTE:

   Type	Pattern	Examples
   Verb + Noun	V + N	conduct research, make a contribution, reach a conclusion, draw attention, raise concerns, pose a threat
   Adjective + Noun	Adj + N	strong evidence, significant impact, profound effect, growing concern, compelling argument, key factor
   Noun + Noun	N + N	research findings, government policy, climate change, health care, market economy
   Verb + Adverb	V + Adv	firmly believe, strongly suggest, clearly indicate, significantly increase
   Adverb + Adjective	Adv + Adj	highly significant, deeply concerned, critically important, widely accepted
   Verb + Preposition	V + Prep	depend on, consist of, result in, contribute to, result from, apply to
   Adjective + Preposition	Adj + Prep	responsible for, associated with, relevant to, susceptible to, consistent with
   Noun + Preposition	N + Prep	approach to, impact on, effect on, solution to, attitude towards

3. Dependent Prepositions: These deserve special attention because they are highly constrained. If the gap follows or precedes a specific preposition, the options narrow considerably. For example:

   • "The impact ___ the environment" → "on" (not "in" or "at")
   • "Consistent ___ the findings" → "with" (not "to" or "in")
   • "Contributed ___ the problem" → "to" (not "for" or "in")

   Evidence note: Dependent preposition knowledge is partly collocational and partly grammatical. The distinction matters less for PTE purposes than the practical outcome: recognizing these patterns eliminates options quickly.

4. Academic Collocations: PTE passages are typically academic. Learners should be familiar with common academic collocations such as:

   • "empirical evidence," "theoretical framework," "statistical analysis"
   • "draw a conclusion," "reach a consensus," "establish a connection"
   • "play a role," "have an effect," "make a difference"
   • "broadly defined," "widely recognized," "increasingly common"

5. Collocational Strength: Not all collocations are equally strong. The learner should recognize that:

   • Strong collocations (almost no substitution possible): "commit a crime" (not "do a crime")
   • Medium collocations (one or two alternatives): "make/do/undertake a study" (all possible, but with different frequencies and nuances)
   • Weak collocations (many alternatives): "big/large/great/enormous city"

   For PTE purposes, strong and medium collocations are the most decisive.

Step-by-Step Reasoning Process:

1. From Chapter 2 and 3 analysis, determine the part of speech needed.
2. Look at the words immediately surrounding the gap. Identify the collocational partner (the word the gap must combine with).
3. Ask: "What words naturally combine with [collocational partner] in this way?" For example, if the gap is a verb and the following word is "evidence," what verbs naturally take "evidence" as an object? (provide, support, gather, present, etc.)
4. Check each option: does it form a natural collocation with the partner word?
5. Eliminate options that don't collocate naturally.

Common Mistakes and Misconceptions:

• Error: Accepting any grammatically possible combination as a collocation. → "Make a crime" is grammatically possible but collocationally wrong. Learners need to develop sensitivity to what sounds "natural."
• Error: Over-generalizing L1 collocational patterns. → Learners may transfer collocations from their first language (e.g., in some languages, you "open" a discussion rather than "raise" it).
• Error: Not checking collocations at all, relying only on meaning. → A semantically plausible word that doesn't collocate is likely wrong.
• Misconception: "Collocations can't be learned; you just have to read a lot." → While extensive reading helps, explicit study of common collocations is effective and efficient (Boers & Lindstromberg, 2012).

Mastery Criteria:

• Initial mastery: 80% accuracy on independent collocation-based selection exercises
• Discrimination mastery: 75% accuracy on similar-meaning-different-collocation exercises
• Application mastery: 75% accuracy on mixed exercises requiring POS identification + collocation

Connection to Later Chapters: Chapter 5 teaches meaning-based checking, which is the next filter after collocation. Chapters 6–10 use collocational knowledge as a critical elimination tool. Collocations become especially important in Chapter 7 when choosing between plausible options.