Ädel, Annelie. 2006. Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Ädel, Annelie, & Erman, Britt. 2012. Recurrent word combinations in academic writing by native and non-native speakers of English: A lexical bundles approach. English for Specific Purposes 31(2): 81–92.Google Scholar

Albrechtsen, Dorte, Haastrup, Kirsten & Henriksen, Birgit. 2008. Vocabulary and writing in a first and second language: Processes and development. Basingstoke; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Altenberg, Bengt. 1998. On the phraseology of spoken English: The evidence of recurrent word combinations. In Cowie, Anthony P. (ed.), Phraseology: Theory, analysis and applications, 101–22. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar

Anthony, Laurence. 2007. AntConc (Version 3.2.4w) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Accessed www.laurenceanthony.net/software.Google Scholar

Arnon, Inbal, & Snider, Neal. 2010. More than words: Frequency effects for multi-word phrases. Journal of Memory and Language 62(1): 67–82.Google Scholar

Arnon, Inbal, & Christiansen, Morten H.. 2017. The role of multiword building blocks in explaining L1–L2 differences. Topics in Cognitive Science 9(3): 621–36.Google Scholar

Baird, Robert, Baker, Will & Kitazawa, Mariko. 2014. The complexity of ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 3(1). 171–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ball, Philip. 2018. Beyond weird: Why everything you thought you knew about quantum physics is different. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Barlow, Michael. 2013. Individual differences and usage-based grammar. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 18(4): 443–78.Google Scholar

Beckner, Clay, Blythe, Richard, Bybee, Joan, Christiansen, Morten H., Croft, William, Ellis, Nick C., Holland, John, Ke, Jinyun, Larsen-Freeman, Diane & Schoenemann, Tom. 2009. Language is a complex adaptive system: Position paper. Language Learning 59(s1): 1–26.Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas. 2006. University Language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written registers. Vol. 23. (Studies in Corpus Linguistics). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward. 1999. The Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Blumenthal-Dramé, Alice. 2012. Entrenchment in usage-based theories: What corpus data do and do not reveal about the mind. (Topics in English Linguistics). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

Bock, Kathryn J., & Brewer, William F.. 1974. Reconstructive recall in sentences with alternative surface structures. Journal of Experimental Psychology 103(5): 837–43.Google Scholar

Bolinger, Dwight. 1976. Meaning and memory. Forum Linguisticum 1(1): 1–14.Google Scholar

Brezina, Vaclav, & Gablasova, Dana. 2015. Is there a core general vocabulary? Introducing the New General Service List. Applied Linguistics 36(1): 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

British English 2006 corpus (BE06). 2006. Compiled by Paul Baker.Google Scholar

British National Corpus, version 3 (BNC XML Edition). 2007. Distributed by Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford, on behalf of the BNC Consortium. www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/.Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 2002. Sequentiality as the basis of constituent structure. In Givón, Talmy & Malle, Bertram (eds.), The evolution of language from pre-language, 109–32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 2010. Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Cambridge and Nottingham Corpus of Discourse in English (CANCODE). Developed as a joint project between the University of Nottingham and Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Carey, Ray. 2013. On the other side: Formulaic organizing chunks in spoken and written academic ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 2(2): 207–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carter, Ronald, & Michael, McCarthy. 2006. Cambridge grammar of English: A comprehensive guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Casasanto, Daniel, & Lupyan, Gary. 2015. All concepts are ad hoc concepts. In Margolis, Eric & Laurence, Stephen (eds.), The conceptual mind: New directions in the study of concepts, 543–66. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Cattell, James M. 1887. Experiments on the association of ideas. Mind 12, 68–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cheng, Winnie, Greaves, Chris & Warren, Martin. 2006. From n-gram to skipgram to concgram. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 11(4): 411–33.Google Scholar

Cheng, Winnie, Greaves, Chris, McH. Sinclair, John & Warren, Martin. 2009. Uncovering the extent of the phraseological tendency: Towards a systematic analysis of concgrams. Applied Linguistics 30(2): 236–52.Google Scholar

Christiansen, Morten H., & Arnon, Inbal (eds.). 2017. More than words: The role of multiword sequences in language learning and use. Topics in Cognitive Science, 9(3). Special Issue.Google Scholar

Cieri, Christopher, Miller, David & Walker, Kevin. 2004. The Fisher Corpus: A resource for the next generations of speech-to-text. LREC, 4: 69–71.Google Scholar

Clark, Andy. 2013. Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36(3): 181–204.Google Scholar

Clark, Herbert H. 1970. Word associations and linguistic theory. In Lyons, John (ed.), New horizons in linguistics, 271–86. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar

Clear, Jeremy. 1993. From Firth principles: Computational tools for the study of collocation. In Baker, Mona, Francis, Gill & Tognini-Bonelli, Elena (eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair, 271–92. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Conklin, Kathy, & Schmitt, Norbert. 2008. Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics 29(1): 72–89.Google Scholar

Cook, Vivian. 1999. Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly 33(2): 185–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cook, Vivian (ed.). 2002. Portraits of the L2 user (Second Language Acquisition). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Cowie, Anthony P. 1981. The treatment of collocations and idioms in learners’ dictionaries. Applied Linguistics 2(3): 223–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cowie, Anthony P. 1998. Introduction. In Cowie, Anthony P. (ed.), Phraseology: Theory, analysis, and applications, 1–20. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar

Coxhead, Averil. 2000. A new Academic Word List. TESOL Quarterly 34: 213–38.Google Scholar

Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2004. Language, mind and brain. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2012. Different speakers, different grammars Individual differences in native language attainment. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 2(3): 219–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2014. Recycling utterances: A speaker’s guide to sentence processing. Cognitive Linguistics 25(4): 617–53.Google Scholar

Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2015. Language in the mind and in the community. In Daems, Jocelyne, Zenner, Eline, Heylen, Kris, Speelman, Dirk & Cuyckens, Hubert (eds.), Change of paradigms – New paradoxes: Recontextualizing language and linguistics, 221–35. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

Dąbrowska, Ewa. Forthcoming. How writing changes language. In Mauranen, Anna & Vetchinnikova, Svetlana (eds.), Language change: The impact of English as a Lingua Franca. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Dąbrowska, Ewa, & Lieven, Elena. 2005. Towards a lexically specific grammar of children’s question constructions. Cognitive Linguistics 16(3): 437–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dąbrowska, Ewa, & Street, James. 2006. Individual differences in language attainment: Comprehension of passive sentences by native and non-native English speakers. Language Sciences 28(6): 604–15.Google Scholar

Davies, Mark. (2008–) The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): 520 million words, 1990–present. Accessed http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/.Google Scholar

de Bot, Kees, Lowie, Wander & Verspoor, Marjolijn. 2007. A Dynamic Systems Theory approach to second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 10(1): 7–21.Google Scholar

De Cock, Sylvie. 2000. Repetitive phrasal chunkiness and advanced EFL speech and writing. In Mair, Christian & Hundt, Marianne (eds.), Corpus linguistics and linguistic theory, 51–68. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar

De Cock, Sylvie. 2003. Recurrent sequences of words in native speaker and advanced learner spoken and written English. PhD dissertation, Catholique University Louvain.Google Scholar

Deese, James. 1965. The structure of associations in language and thought. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar

Dewaele, Jean-Marc. 2018. Why the dichotomy ‘L1 versus LX user’ is better than ‘native versus non-native speaker. Applied Linguistics 39(2): 236–40.Google Scholar

Divjak, Dagmar. 2017. The role of lexical frequency in the acceptability of syntactic variants: Evidence from that- clauses in Polish. Cognitive Science 41(2): 354–82.Google Scholar

Divjak, Dagmar, & Catherine, Caldwell-Harris. 2015. Frequency and entrenchment. In Da̜browska, Ewa & Divjak, Dagmar (eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics, vol. 39, 53–75. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dörnyei, Zoltán. 2005. The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Dörnyei, Zoltán. 2009. Individual differences: Interplay of learner characteristics and learning environment. Language Learning 59: 230–48.Google Scholar

Dörnyei, Zoltán, Henry, Alastair & MacIntyre, Peter D.. 2014. Motivational dynamics in language learning. Berlin, New York: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Dubois, Julien, & Adolphs, Ralph. 2016. Building a science of individual differences from fMRI. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 20(6): 425–43.Google Scholar

Durrant, Philip, & Doherty, Alice. 2010. Are high-frequency collocations psychologically real? Investigating the thesis of collocational priming. Corpus Linguistics & Linguistic Theory 6(2): 125–55.Google Scholar

Durrant, Philip, & Schmitt, Norbert. 2010. Adult learners’ retention of collocations from exposure. Second Language Research 26(2): 163–88.Google Scholar

ELFA 2008. The Corpus of English as a Lingua Franca in Academic Settings. Director: Anna Mauranen. Accessed www.helsinki.fi/elfa/elfacorpus.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C. 1996. Sequencing in SLA: Phonological memory, chunking and points of order. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18: 91–126.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C. 2002. Frequency effects in language acquisition: A review with implications for theories of implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24: 143–188.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C. 2006. Cognitive perspectives on SLA: The associative cognitive CREED. AILA Review 19: 100–121.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C. 2007. Language acquisition as rational contingency learning. Applied Linguistics 27(1): 1–24.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C. 2011. The emergence of language as a complex adaptive system. In Simpson, James (ed.), The Routledge handbook of applied linguistics. 666–79. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C. 2012. What can we count in language, and what counts in language acquisition, cognition, and use? In Gries, S. Th & Divjak, D. S. (Eds.) Frequency effects in language learning and processing. Vol. 1, 7–34. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C., & Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 2006. Language emergence: Implications for applied linguistics. [Introduction to the special issue]. Applied Linguistics 27(4): 558–89.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C., Simpson-Vlach, Rita & Maynard, Carson. 2008. Formulaic language in native and second language speakers: Psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and TESOL. Tesol Quarterly 42(3): 375–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ellis, Nick C., & Ferreira–Junior, Fernando. 2009. Construction learning as a function of frequency, frequency distribution, and function. The Modern Language Journal 93(3): 370–385.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C., & Frey, Eric. 2009. The psycholinguistic reality of collocation and semantic prosody (2): Affective priming. In Corrigan, Roberta, Moravcsik, Edith, Ouali, Hamid & Wheatley, Kathleen (eds.), Formulaic language (vol. 2): Acquisition, loss, psychological reality, and functional explanations [Typological Studies in Language, 83], 473–497. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C., Frey, Eric, & Jalkanen, Isaac. 2009. The psycholinguistic reality of collocation and semantic prosody (1): Lexical access. In Römer, Ute & Schulze, Rainer (eds.), Exploring the lexis-grammar interface [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 35], 89–114. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C., & Simpson-Vlach, Rita. 2009. Formulaic language in native speakers: Triangulating psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and education. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 5(1): 61–78.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C., O’Donnell, Matthew Brook & Römer, Ute. 2013. Usage-based language: investigating the latent structures that underpin acquisition. Language Learning 63: 25–51.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C., O’Donnell, Matthew Brook & Römer, Ute. 2014. The processing of verb-argument constructions is sensitive to form, function, frequency, contingency and prototypicality. Cognitive Linguistics 25(1): 55–98.Google Scholar

Ellis, Nick C., Römer, Ute & O’Donnell, Matthew Brook. 2016. Usage-based approaches to language acquisition and processing: Cognitive and corpus investigations of construction grammar. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Elman, Jeffrey L. 2009. On the meaning of words and dinosaur bones: Lexical knowledge without a lexicon. Cognitive Science 33(4): 547–582.Google Scholar

English Web corpus 2012 (EnTenTen12). Compiled by Sketch Engine.Google Scholar

Erman, Britt. 2009. Formulaic language from a learner perspective: What the learner needs to know. In Corrigan, Roberta et al. (eds.), Formulaic language (vol. 2): Acquisition, loss, psychological reality, and functional explanations, 323–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Erman, Britt, & Warren, Beatrice. 2000. The idiom principle and the open choice principle. Text 20(1): 29–62.Google Scholar

Esper, E. A. 1925. A technique for the experimental investigation of associative interference in artificial linguistic material. Language Monographs 1.Google Scholar

Esper, E.A. 1933. Studies in linguistic behavior. I: Characteristics of unstable verbal reactions. Journal of General Psychology 8: 346–81.Google Scholar

Evans, Mel. 2013. The Language of Queen Elizabeth I: A sociolinguistic perspective on royal style and identity. West-Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Evert, Stefan. 2004. The statistics of word co-occurrences: Word pairs and collocations. PhD dissertation, University of Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Evert, Stefan. 2008. Corpora and collocations. In Lüdeling, Anke & Kytö, Merja (eds.), Corpus Linguistics: An international handbook, 1212–48. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Farmer, Thomas A., Misyak, Jennifer B. & Christiansen, Morten H.. 2012. Individual differences in sentence processing. In Spivey, Michael, McRae, Ken & Joanisse, Marc (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of psycholinguistics, 353–364. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Farmer, Thomas A., Fine, Alex B., Misyak, Jennifer B. & Christiansen, Morten H.. 2017. Reading span task performance, linguistic experience, and the processing of unexpected syntactic events. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 70(3): 413–433.Google Scholar

Filppula, Markku, Klemola, Juhani, Mauranen, Anna & Vetchinnikova, Svetlana. 2017. Changing English: Global and local perspectives. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

Finn, Emily S., Shen, Xilin, Scheinost, Dustin, Rosenberg, Monica D., Huang, Jessica, Chun, Marvin M., Papademetris, Xenophon & Constable, R. Todd. 2015. Functional connectome fingerprinting: identifying individuals using patterns of brain connectivity. Nature Neuroscience 18(11): 1664–71.Google Scholar

Firth, John R. 1957. Modes of meaning. In Firth, John R., Papers in linguistics 1934 – 1951, 190–215. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Firth, John R. 1968 [1957]. A synopsis of linguistic theory, 1930–1955. In Palmer, Frank R. (ed.), Selected papers of J.R. Firth 1952–1959, 168–205. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Fitzpatrick, Tess. 2006. Habits and rabbits: Word associations and the L2 lexicon. EUROSLA Yearbook 6: 121–45.Google Scholar

Fitzpatrick, Tess. 2007. Word association patterns: Unpacking the assumptions. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 17(3): 319–31.Google Scholar

Fitzpatrick, Tess. 2009. Word association profiles in a first and second language: Puzzles and problems. In Fitzpatrick, Tess & Barfield, Andy (eds.), Lexical processing in second language learners: Papers and perspectives in honour of Paul Meara, 38–52. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Fletcher, William. 2002–2012. kfNgram. Accessed www.kwicfinder.com/kfNgram/kfNgramHelp.html.Google Scholar

Fox, Gwyneth.1987. The case for examples. In Sinclair, John McH (ed.), Looking up: An account of the COBUILD project in lexical computing, 137–49. London: Collins.Google Scholar

Francis, Gill, Hunston, Susan & Manning, Elizabeth. 1996. Collins COBUILD Grammar Patterns: Verbs. London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar

Francis, Gill, Hunston, Susan & Manning, Elizabeth. 1998. Collins COBUILD Grammar Patterns: Nouns and adjectives. London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar

Freiburg-Brown Corpus (Frown). Compiled by Christian Mair, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg.Google Scholar

Gahl, Susanne, & Yu, Alan C. L.. 2006. Introduction to the special issue on exemplar-based models in linguistics. The Linguistic Review 23: 213–16.Google Scholar

Galton, Francis. 1879. Psychometric experiments. Brain 2: 149–62.Google Scholar

Geeraerts, Dirk. 2010. Theories of lexical semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Gilner, Leah, & Morales, Franc. 2011. The ICE-CORE Word List: The lexical foundation of 7 varieties of English. Asian Englishes 14(1): 4–21.Google Scholar

Gilquin, Gaëtanelle. 2008. What you think ain’t what you get: Highly polysemous verbs in mind and language. In Lapaire, J.-R., Desagulier, G. and Guignard, J.-B. (eds.), Du fait grammatical au fait cognitif. From Gram to Mind: Grammar as Cognition Vol. 2, 235–55. Pessac: Presses Universitaires de Bordeaux.Google Scholar

Gilquin, Gaëtanelle, Granger, Sylviane & Paquot, Magali. 2007. Learner corpora: The missing link in EAP pedagogy. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 6: 319–35.Google Scholar

Gleick, James. 1987. Chaos: Making a new science. New York: Viking.Google Scholar

Godfrey, John J., Holliman, Edward C. & McDaniel, Jane. 1992. SWITCHBOARD: telephone speech corpus for research and development. [Proceedings] ICASSP-92: 1992 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, Vol. 1, 517–20.Google Scholar

Gomez, Rebecca L. 2001. Finding structure in language: Sometimes more variability is better. Presentation given at the annual meeting of the AAAS in the symposium: Tools Infants Might Use to Learn Language. San Francisco, February.Google Scholar

Gomez, Rebecca L., & Gerken, LouAnn 1999. Artificial grammar learning by 1-year olds leads to specific and abstract knowledge. Cognition 70: 109–35.Google Scholar

Gomez, Rebecca L., & Gerken, LouAnn. 2000. Infant artificial language learning and language acquisition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4: 178–86.Google Scholar

Götz, Sandra. 2013. Fluency in native and nonnative English speech. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Graddol, David. 2006. English next. Why global English may mean the end of ‘English as a foreign language’. London: British Council.Google Scholar

Granger, Sylviane. 1998. Prefabricated patterns in advanced EFL writing: Collocations and formulae. In Cowie, Anthony P. (ed.), Phraseology: Theory, analysis, and applications, 145–60. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar

Granger, Sylviane. 2009. The contribution of learner corpora to second language acquisition and foreign language teaching: A critical evaluation. In Aijmer, Karin (ed.), Corpora and language teaching, 13–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Granger, Sylviane, & Meunier, Fanny. 2008. Phraseology in language learning and teaching: Where to from here? In Meunier, Fanny & Granger, Sylviane (eds.), Phraseology in foreign language learning and teaching, 247–52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Granger, Sylviane, & Paquot, Magali. 2008. Disentangling the phraseological web. In Granger, Sylviane & Meunier, Fanny (eds.), Phraseology. An interdisciplinary perspective, 27–49. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Granger, Sylviane, & Paquot, Magali. 2009. Lexical verbs in academic discourse: A corpus-driven study of learner use. In Charles, Maggie, Pecorari, Diane & Hunston, Susan (eds.), Academic writing: At the interface of corpus and discourse, 193–214. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar

Greaves, Chris. 2009 ConcGram 1.0: A phraseological search engine. [Computer Software]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Gries, Stefan Th. 2013. 50-something years of work on collocations: What is or should be next …. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 18(1): 137–66.Google Scholar

Gries, Stefan Th., & Ellis, Nick C.. 2015. Statistical measures for usage-based linguistics. Language Learning 65(S1): 228–55.Google Scholar

Gurevich, Olga, Johnson, Matthew A. & Goldberg, Adele E.. 2010. Incidental verbatim memory for language. Language and Cognition 2(1): 45–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hall, Christopher J., Joyce, Jack & Robson, Chris. 2016. Investigating the lexico-grammatical resources of a non-native user of English: The case of can and could in email requests. Applied Linguistics Review 8(1): 35–59.Google Scholar

Hebb, Donald Olding. 1949. The organization of behavior: A neuropsychological theory. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Hernández, Mireia, Costa, Albert & Arnon, Inbal. 2016. More than words: multiword frequency effects in non-native speakers. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 31(6): 785–800.Google Scholar

Hoey, Michael. 2005. Lexical priming: A new theory of words and language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

van Horn, John Darrell, Grafton, Scott T. & Miller, Michael B.. 2008. Individual variability in brain activity: A nuisance or an opportunity? Brain Imaging and Behavior 2(4): 327–34.Google Scholar

Howarth, Peter. 1998. The phraseology of learners’ academic writing. In Cowie, Anthony P. (ed.), Phraseology: Theory, analysis, and applications, 161–86. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar

Howes, D., & Osgood, C. E. 1954. On the combination of associative probabilities in linguistic contexts. American Journal of Psychology 67: 241–58.Google Scholar

Hu, Marcella, & Nation, Paul. 2000. Unknown vocabulary density and reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language 13(1): 403–30.Google Scholar

Huang, Leesa V. 2011. Sequential processing. In Kreutzer, Jeffrey S., DeLuca, John, Caplan, Bruce (eds.), Encyclopedia of clinical neuropsychology, 2261–2. New York:Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Huddleston, Rodney, & Pullum, Geoffrey K.. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hulstijn, Jan H. 2012. Incidental learning in second language acquisition. In Chapelle, Carol A. (ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar

Hundt, Marianne, Mollin, Sandra & Pfenninger, Simone E.. 2017. The changing English language: Psycholinguistic perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hunston, Susan. 2002. Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hunston, Susan. 2007. Semantic prosody revisited. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 12(2): 249–68.Google Scholar

Hunston, Susan. 2008. Starting with the small words: Patterns, lexis and semantic sequences. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 13(3): 271–95.Google Scholar

Hunston, Susan. 2010. Starting with the small words. In Römer, Ute & Schulze, Rainer (eds.), Patterns, meaningful units and specialized discourses, 7–30. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Hunston, Susan, & Francis, Gill. 2000. Pattern grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2005. Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2008. Academic clusters: Text patterning in published and postgraduate writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 18(1): 41–62.Google Scholar

International Corpus of English (ICE). Corpus compilation coordinated by Gerald Nelson, Chinese University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar

International Corpus of Learner English (ICLE). Director: Sylviane Granger, the Centre for English Corpus Linguistics at the Université Catholique de Louvain.Google Scholar

Irujo, Suzanne. 1986. A piece of cake: Learning and teaching idioms. ELT Journal 40: 236–42.Google Scholar

Irujo, Suzanne. 1993. Steering clear: Avoidance in the production of idioms. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 31: 205–19.Google Scholar

Jastrow, J. 1894. Community and association of ideas: A statistical study. Psychological Review 1: 152–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer. 2013. English as a lingua franca in the international university: The politics of academic English language policy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer, Baker, Will & Dewey, Martin (eds.). 2017. The Routledge handbook of English as a Lingua Franca. (Routledge Handbooks in Applied Linguistics). Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Johns, Tim, & Scott, Mike. 1993. MicroConcord corpus (Collection B). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Jung, Carl G. 1910. The association method. American Journal of Psychology 21: 219–69.Google Scholar

Kanai, Ryota, & Rees, Geraint. 2011. The structural basis of inter-individual differences in human behaviour and cognition. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 12(4): 231–42.Google Scholar

Karwoski, T. F., & Berthold, F. 1945. Psychological studies in semantics: II. Reliability of free association tests. Journal of Social Psychology 22: 87–102.Google Scholar

Karwoski, T. F., & Schachter, J. 1948. Psychological studies in semantics: III. Reaction times for similarity and difference. Journal of Social Psychology 28: 103–20.Google Scholar

Karwoski, T. F., Gramlich, F. W., & Arnott, P. 1944. Psychological studies in semantics: I. Free association reactions to words, drawings, and objects. Journal of Social Psychology 20: 233–47.Google Scholar

Kaszubski, Przemek. 2000. Selected aspects of lexicon, phraseology and style in the writing of Polish advanced learners of English: A contrastive, corpus-based. PhD thesis. Poznań: Adam Mickiewicz University.Google Scholar

Kellerman, Eric. 1978. Giving learners a break: Native language intuitions as a source of predictions about transferability. Working Papers in Bilingualism 15: 309–15.Google Scholar

Kent, Grace Helen, & Rosanoff, A. J.. 1910. A study of association in insanity. Part I. American Journal of Insanity 67(1): 37–96.Google Scholar

Kiss, G. R. 1968. Words, associations and networks. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour 7: 707–13.Google Scholar

Kiss, G. R., Armstrong, C., Milroy, R. & Piper, J.. 1973. An associative thesaurus of English and its computer analysis. In Aitken, A. J., Bailey, R. W. & Hamilton-Smith, N. (eds.), The computer and literary studies, 153–65. Edinburgh: University Press.Google Scholar

Kjellmer, Goran. 1991. A mint of phrases. In Aijmer, Karin & Altenberg, Bengt (eds.), English corpus linguistics: Studies in honour of Jan Svartvik, 111–27. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen Corpus (LOB). 1970–1978. Compiled by Geoffrey Leech, Lancaster University, Stig Johansson, University of Oslo (project leaders), and Knut Hofland, University of Bergen (head of computing).Google Scholar

Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 1997. Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics 18(2): 141–65.Google Scholar

Larsen-Freeman, Diane, & Cameron, Lynne. 2008. Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Laufer, Batia. 2000. Avoidance of idioms in a second language: The effect of L1 – L2 degree of similarity. Studia Linguistica 54: 186–96.Google Scholar

Laufer, Batia, & Eliasson, Stig. 1993. What causes avoidance in L2 1earning: L1 – L2 difference, L1 – L2 similarity, or L2 complexity? Studies in Second Language Acquisition 15: 35–48.Google Scholar

Laufer, Batia, & Nation, Paul. 1995. Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics 16(3): 307–22.Google Scholar

Lehtonen, Minna, & Laine, Matti. 2003. How word frequency affects morphological processing in monolinguals and bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 6(3): 213–25Google Scholar

Levelt, Willem J. M. 2013. A history of psycholinguistics: The pre-Chomskyan era. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Lieven, Elena V. M., Pine, Julian M. & Baldwin, Gillian. 1997. Lexically-based learning and early grammatical development. Journal of Child Language 24(1): 187–219.Google Scholar

Lieven, Elena, Behrens, Heike, Speares, Jennifer & Tomasello, Michael. 2003. Early syntactic creativity: a usage-based approach. Journal of Child Language 30(2): 333–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lieven, Elena V., Salomo, Dorothé & Tomasello, Michael. 2009. Two-year-old children’s production of multiword utterances: A usage-based analysis. Cognitive Linguistics 20: 481–508.Google Scholar

Louvain Corpus of Native English Conversation (LOCNEC). The Centre for English Corpus Linguistics at the Université Catholique de Louvain.Google Scholar

Louvain Corpus of Native English Essays (LOCNESS). The Centre for English Corpus Linguistics at the Université Catholique de Louvain.Google Scholar

Louvain International Database of Spoken English Interlanguage (LINDSEI). The Centre for English Corpus Linguistics at the Université Catholique de Louvain.Google Scholar

Louw, Bill. 1993. Irony in the text or insincerity in the writer? The diagnostic potential of semantic prosodies. In Baker, Mona, Francis, Gill & Tognini-Bonelli, Elena (eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair, 157–76. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Louw, Bill. 2000. Contextual prosodic theory: Bringing semantic prosodies to life. In Heffer, Chris & Sauntson, Helen (eds.), Words in context: A tribute to John Sinclair on his retirement, 48–94. English Language Research Discourse Analysis Monograph no. 18, CD-ROM. Birmingham, AL: University of Birmingham.Google Scholar

MacDonald, Stuart W. S., Nyberg, Lars & Bäckman, Lars. 2006. Intra-individual variability in behavior: links to brain structure, neurotransmission and neuronal activity. Trends in Neurosciences 29(8): 474–80.Google Scholar

MacWhinney, Brian. 2000a. The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk: Vol. 1. Transcription format and programs (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

MacWhinney, Brian. 2000b. The CHILDES Project: Tools for analyzing talk: Vol. 2. The database (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Malkiel, Yakov. 1959. Studies in irreversible binomials. Lingua 8: 113–60.Google Scholar

Martinez, Ron, & Schmitt, Norbert. 2012. A Phrasal Expressions List. Applied Linguistics 33(3): 299–320.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 1993. Cultural differences in academic rhetoric. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2004. Where Next? A summary of the round table discussion. In Camiciotti, Gabriella Del Lungo & Tognini-Bonelli, Elena (eds.), Academic discourse: New insights into evaluation, 203–16. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2005. English as a Lingua Franca—an unknown language? In Cortese, Giuseppina & Duszak, Anna (eds.), Identity, community, discourse: English in intercultural settings, 269–93. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2009. Chunking in ELF: Expressions for managing interaction. Journal of Intercultural Pragmatics 6(2): 217–33.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2010. Features of English as a lingua franca in academia. Helsinki English Studies 6: 6–28.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2011. Learners and users: Who do we want corpus data from? In Meunier, Fanny, De Cock, Sylvie, Gilquin, Gaëtanelle & Paquot, Magali (eds.), A taste for corpora: In honour of Sylviane Granger, 155–71. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2012. Exploring ELF: Academic English shaped by non-native speakers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2017a. A glimpse of ELF. In Filppula, Markku, Klemola, Juhani, Mauranen, Anna & Vetchinnikova, Svetlana (eds.), Changing English: Global and local perspectives (Topics in English Linguistics), 223–53. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna. 2017b. Conceptualising ELF. In Jenkins, Jennifer, Baker, Will & Dewey, Martin (eds.), The Routledge handbook of English as a Lingua Franca (Routledge Handbooks in Applied Linguistics), 7–24. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna, & Vetchinnikova, Svetlana (eds.). Forthcoming. Language change: The impact of English as a Lingua Franca. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mauranen, Anna, & Vetchinnikova, Svetlana. 2017. Chunks in which we process speech. Paper presented at the 14th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference (ICLC), Tartu, July 10–14.Google Scholar

McCauley, Stewart M., & Christiansen, Morten H.. 2014. A computational model. Mental Lexicon 9(3): 419–36.Google Scholar

McCauley, Stewart M., & Christiansen, Morten H.. 2017. Computational Investigations of Multiword Chunks in Language Learning. Topics in Cognitive Science 9(3): 637–52.Google Scholar

McEnery, Tony, Xiao, Richard & Tono, Yukio. 2006. Corpus-based language studies: An advanced resource book. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Meara, Paul. 1983. Word associations in a second language. Nottingham Linguistics Circular 11: 28–38.Google Scholar

Meara, Paul. 1997. Towards a new approach to modelling vocabulary acquisition. In Schmitt, Norbert & McCarthy, Michael (eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy, 109–21. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Meara, Paul. 2009. Connected words: Word associations and second language vocabulary acquisition. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Meunier, Fanny, & Granger, Sylviane (eds.). 2008. Phraseology in foreign language learning and teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Michelbacher, Lukas, Evert, Stefan & Schütze, Hinrich. 2011. Asymmetry in corpus-derived and human word associations. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 7(2): 245–76.Google Scholar

Miller, Don. 2012. The challenge of constructing a reliable word list: An exploratory corpus-based analysis of introductory psychology textbooks. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ.Google Scholar

Miller, Don, & Biber, Douglas. 2015. Evaluating reliability in quantitative vocabulary studies: The influence of corpus design and composition. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 20(1): 30–53.Google Scholar

Mittwoch, Anita, Huddleston, Rodney & Collins, Peter. 2002. The clause: Adjuncts. In Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffrey K. (eds.), The Cambridge grammar of the English language, 663–784. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Molenaar, Peter C. M. 2004. A manifesto on psychology as idiographic science: Bringing the person back into scientific psychology, this time forever. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives 2(4): 201–18.Google Scholar

Molenaar, Peter C. M. 2008. On the implications of the classical ergodic theorems: Analysis of developmental processes has to focus on intra-individual variation. Developmental Psychobiology 50(1): 60–9.Google Scholar

Molenaar, Peter C. M. & Campbell, Cynthia G.. 2009. The new person-specific paradigm in psychology. Current Directions in Psychological Science 18(2): 112–17.Google Scholar

Mollin, Sandra. 2009a. “I entirely understand” is a Blairism: The methodology of identifying idiolectal collocations. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 14(3): 367–92.Google Scholar

Mollin, Sandra. 2009b. Combining corpus linguistic and psychological data on word co-occurrences: Corpus collocates versus word associations. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 5(2): 175–200.Google Scholar

Mollin, Sandra. 2014. The (ir)reversibility of English binomials: Corpus, constraints, developments. Vol. 64. (Studies in Corpus Linguistics). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Moon, Rosamund. 1998. Fixed expressions and idioms in English: A corpus-based approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Morley, John, & Partington, Alan. 2009. A few frequently asked questions about semantic or evaluative prosody. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 14(20): 139–58.Google Scholar

Morris, Charles W. 1938. Foundations of the theory of signs. In Neurath, Otto, Carnap, Rudolph & Morris, Charles W. (eds.), International encyclopedia of unified science, 77–138. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar

Moss, Helen, & Older, Lianne. 1996. Birkbeck word association norms. Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Mukherjee, Joybrato. 2005. English ditransitive verbs: Aspects of theory, description and a usage-based model. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar

Nation, Paul. 2001. Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Nation, Paul. 2006. How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? The Canadian Modern Language Review 63(1): 59–82.Google Scholar

Nation, Paul, & Heatley, Alex. 2002. Range: A program for the analysis of vocabulary in texts [Computer Software]. Wellington, NZ: LALS, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. Accessed www.victoria.ac.nz/lals/staff/paul-nation/nation.aspx.Google Scholar

Nation, Paul, & Beglar, David. 2007. A vocabulary size test. The Language Teacher 31(7): 9–13.Google Scholar

Nesselhauf, Nadja. 2004. What are collocations? In Allerton, David, Nesselhauf, Nadja & Skandera, Paul (eds.), Phraseological units: Basic concepts and their application, 1–21. Basel: Schwabe.Google Scholar

Nesselhauf, Nadja. 2005. Collocations in a learner corpus. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar

Oxford Dictionary of English 3ed. 2010. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Palermo, David S., & Jenkins, James J. 1964. Word association norms. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Paquot, Magali. 2007. EAP vocabulary in EFL learner writing: From extraction to analysis: A phraseology-oriented approach. Unpublished PhD thesis. Universite catholique de Louvain, Centre for English Corpus Linguistics.Google Scholar

Paquot, Magali. 2008. Exemplification in learner writing: A cross-linguistic perspective. In Meunier, Fanny & Granger, Sylviane (eds.), Phraseology in foreign language learning and teaching, 101–19. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Paquot, Magali. 2010. Academic vocabulary in learner writing: From extraction to analysis. London & New York: Continuum.Google Scholar

Paribakht, Sima T. & Bingham Wesche, Marjorie. 1993. Reading comprehension and second language development in a comprehension-based ESL program. TESL Canada Journal 11(1): 9–29.Google Scholar

Partington, Alan. 1998. Patterns and meanings: Using corpora for English language research and teaching. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar

Partington, Alan. 2004. “Utterly content in each other’s company”: Semantic prosody and semantic preference. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 9(1): 131–56.Google Scholar

Partington, Alan. 2006. The linguistics of laughter: A corpus-assisted study of laughter talk. London; New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Pawley, Andrew, & Syder, Frances H.. 1983. Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In Richards, Jack C. & Schmidt, Richard W. (eds.), Language and communication, 191–227. London: Longman.Google Scholar

PDFX v1.8 [Computer Software]. Accessed http://pdfx.cs.man.ac.uk/.Google Scholar

Perdue, Clive (ed.). 1993. Adult language acquisition: Crosslinguistic perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Peters, Ann M. 1983. The unit of language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Philip, Gill. 2011. Colouring meaning: Collocation and connotation in figurative language. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Pitzl, Marie-Luise. 2009. “We should not wake up any dogs”: Idiom and metaphor in ELF. In Mauranen, Anna & Ranta, Elina (eds.), English as a lingua franca: Studies and findings, 298–322. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press.Google Scholar

Pitzl, Marie-Luise. 2012. Creativity meets convention: idiom variation and re-metaphorization in ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 1(1): 27–55.Google Scholar

Pollio, H. R. 1966. The structural basis of word association behaviour. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar

Postman, Leo, & Keppel, Geoffrey (eds.). 1970. Norms of word association. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Poston, Dudley L., & Bouvier, Leon F.. 2010. Population and society: An introduction to demography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Rebuschat, Patrick, & Williams, John N.. 2012. Statistical learning and language acquisition. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

Renouf, Antoinette. 1987. Moving on. In Sinclair, John McH (ed.), Looking up: An account of the COBUILD project in lexical computing, 167–78. London: Collins.Google Scholar

Römer, Ute. 2011. Observations on the phraseology of academic writing: Local patterns – local meanings? In Herbst, Thomas, Faulhaber, Susen & Uhrig, Peter (eds.), The phraseological view of language: A tribute to John Sinclair, 211–27. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Saffran, Jenny R., Aslin, Richard N. & Newport, Elissa L.. 1996. Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science 274: 1926–8.Google Scholar

Sairio, Anni. 2010. ‘If you think me obstinate I can’t help it’: Exploring the epistolary styles and social roles of Elizabeth Montagu and Sarah Scott. In Pahta, Päivi, Nevala, Minna, Nurmi, Arja & Palander-Collin, Minna (eds.), Pragmatics & beyond. New Series, vol. 195, 87–109. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Sairio, Anni. 2016. ‘Like a pack-hors trying to copy after an antilope’: A case of eighteenth-century non-native English. In Russi, Cinzia (ed.), Current trends in historical sociolinguistics, 219–36. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Salazar, Danica. 2014. Lexical bundles in native and non-native scientific writing: Applying a corpus-based study to language teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2000. English abstract nouns as conceptual shells: From corpus to cognition. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Schmitt, Norbert. 1998a. Tracking the incremental acquisition of second language vocabulary: A longitudinal study. Language Learning 48(2): 281–317Google Scholar

Schmitt, Norbert. 1998b. Quantifying word association responses: What is native-like? System 26: 389–401.Google Scholar

Schmitt, Norbert (ed.). 2004. Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Schmitt, Norbert. 2010. Researching vocabulary: A vocabulary research manual. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Schmitt, Norbert, & Carter, Ronald. 2004. Formulaic sequences in action: An introduction. In Schmitt, Norbert (ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use, 1–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Schmitt, Norbert, Cobb, Tom, Horst, Marlise & Schmitt, Diane. 2017. How much vocabulary is needed to use English? Replication of van Zeeland & Schmitt (2012), Nation (2006) and Cobb (2007). Language Teaching 50(2): 212–26.Google Scholar

Schneider, Edgar W. Forthcoming. Calling Englishes as Complex Dynamic Systems: Diffusion, restructuring, exaptation. In Mauranen, Anna & Vetchinnikova, Svetlana (eds.), Language change: The impact of English as a Lingua Franca. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Scott, Mike, & Tribble, Christopher. 2006. Textual patterns: Key words and corpus analysis in language education. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Segalowitz, Norman, & Hulstijn, Jan. 2009. Automaticity in bilingualism and second language learning. In Kroll, Judith F. & de Groot, Annette M.B. (eds.), Handbook of bilingualism, 371–88. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2009. Accommodation and the idiom principle in English as a Lingua Franca. Intercultural Pragmatics 6(2): 195–215.Google Scholar

Seidlhofer, Barbara. 2011. Understanding English as a lingua franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Siegelman, Noam, Bogaerts, Louisa, Christiansen, Morten H. & Frost, Ram. 2017. Towards a theory of individual differences in statistical learning. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 372(1711).Google Scholar

Simpson, Rita C., Briggs, Sarah L., Ovens, J. & Swales, John M.. 2002. The Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English. Ann Arbor: The Regents of the University of Michigan.Google Scholar

Sinclair, John McH. 1982. Planes of discourse. In Rizvi, S. N. A. (ed.), The two-fold voice: Essays in honour of Ramesh Mohan, 70–91. India: Pitambar Publishing.Google Scholar

Sinclair, John McH. 1987. Collocation: A progress report. In Steele, Ross & Treadgold, Terry (eds.), Language topics: Essays in honour of Michael Halliday, 319–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Sinclair, John McH. (ed.). 1990. Collins COBUILD English grammar. London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar

Sinclair, John McH. 1991. Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Sinclair, John McH. 1996a. The search for units of meaning. Textus 9(1): 75–106.Google Scholar

Sinclair, John McH. 1996b. The empty lexicon. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 1(1): 99–119.Google Scholar

Sinclair, John McH. 1998. The lexical item. In Weigand, Edda (ed.), Contrastive lexical semantics, 1–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Sinclair, John McH. 2004. Trust the text. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Sinclair, John McH. 2007. Collocation reviewed. [Manuscript]. Tuscan Word Centre, Italy.Google Scholar

Sinclair, John McH. 2008. The phrase, the whole phrase and nothing but the phrase. In Granger, Sylviane & Meunier, Fanny (eds.), Phraseology. An interdisciplinary perspective, 407–10. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Sinclair, John McH, Jones, Susan, Daley, Robert & Krishnamurthy, Ramesh. 2004. English collocation studies: The OSTI report. [Including a new interview with John Sinclair conducted by Wolfgang Teubert]. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Sinclair, John McH., & Mauranen, Anna. 2006. Linear unit grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Siyanova-Chanturia, Anna. 2015. On the “holistic” nature of formulaic language. Corpus Linguistics & Linguistic Theory 11(2): 285–301.Google Scholar

Siyanova, Anna, & Schmitt, Norbert. 2007. Native and nonnative use of multi-word vs. one-word verbs. IRAL – International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 45(2): 119–39.Google Scholar

Siyanova, Anna, & Schmitt, Norbert. 2008. L2 learner production and processing of collocation: A multi-study perspective. Canadian Modern Language Review 64(3): 429–58.Google Scholar

Siyanova-Chanturia, Anna, Conklin, Kathy & Schmitt, Norbert. 2011a. Adding more fuel to the fire: An eye-tracking study of idiom processing by native and non-native speakers. Second Language Research 27(2): 251–72.Google Scholar

Siyanova-Chanturia, Anna, Conklin, Kathy & van Heuven, Walter J. B.. 2011b. Seeing a phrase “time and again” matters: The role of phrasal frequency in the processing of multiword sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 37(3): 776–84.Google Scholar

Siyanova-Chanturia, Anna & Martinez, Ron. 2015. The idiom principle revisited. Applied Linguistics 36(5): 549–69.Google Scholar

Sosa, Anna Vogel, & James, MacFarlane. 2002. Evidence for frequency-based constituents in the mental lexicon: Collocations involving the word of. Brain and Language 83(2): 227–36.Google Scholar

Stewart, Dominic. 2010. Semantic prosody: A critical evaluation. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

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

Stubbs, Michael. 2001. Words and phrases: Corpus studies of lexical semantics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Stubbs, Michael. 2007. Quantitative data on multi-word sequences in English: The case of the word world. In Hoey, Michael, Mahlberg, Michaela, Stubbs, Michael & Teubert, Wolfgang (eds.), Text, discourse and corpora: Theory and analysis, 163–89. London & New York: Continuum.Google Scholar

Stubbs, Michael. 2009. Memorial article: John Sinclair (1933–2007). The search for units of meaning: Sinclair on empirical semantics. Applied Linguistics 30(1): 115–37.Google Scholar

Stubbs, Michael. 2011. Sequence and order: The neo-Firthian tradition of corpus semantics. Paper presented at ICAME 32: Trends and Traditions in English Corpus Linguistics, in Honour of Stig Johansson, Oslo, June 1–5.Google Scholar

Swales, John. 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Teubert, Wolfgang. 2005. My version of corpus linguistics. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 10(1): 1–13.Google Scholar

Teubert, Wolfgang. 2010. Meaning, discourse and society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Thompson, Geoff, & Hunston, Susan. 2000. Evaluation: An introduction. In Hunston, Susan & Thompson, Geoff (eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse, 1–27. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Thumb, Albert, & Marbe, Karl. 1901. Experimentelle Untersuchungen uÈber die psychologischenGrundlagen der sprachlichen Analogiebildungen. Leipzig: Engelmann.Google Scholar

Tognini-Bonelli, Elena. 2001. Corpus linguistics at work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Tomasello, Michael. 1992. First verbs: A case study of early grammatical development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Trautscholdt, Martin. 1883. Experimentelle Untersuchungen über die Association der Vorstellungen. Philosophische Studien 1: 213–50.Google Scholar

Verspoor, Marjolijn, de Bot, Kees & Lowie, Wander. 2011. A dynamic approach to second language development: Methods and techniques. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Vetchinnikova, Svetlana. 2014. Second language lexis and the idiom principle. PhD thesis. University of Helsinki.Google Scholar

Vetchinnikova, Svetlana. 2015. Usage-based recycling or creative exploitation of the shared code? The case of phraseological patterning. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 4(2): 223–52.Google Scholar

Vetchinnikova, Svetlana. 2017. On the relationship between the cognitive and the communal: A complex systems perspective. In Filppula, Markku, Klemola, Juhani, Mauranen, Anna & Vetchinnikova, Svetlana (eds.), Changing English: Global and local perspectives (Topics in English Linguistics), 277–310. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Vetchinnikova, Svetlana, & Hiltunen, Turo. Forthcoming. ELF and language change at the individual level. In Mauranen, Anna & Vetchinnikova, Svetlana (eds.), Language change: The impact of English as a Lingua Franca. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Vetchinnikova, Svetlana, Mauranen, Anna & Mikušová, Nina. 2017. ChunkitApp: Investigating the relevant units of online speech processing. In INTERSPEECH 2017 – 18th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association, August 20–24, Stockholm, Sweden, Proceedings, 811–12.Google Scholar

Vihman, Marilyn M. 1982. Formulas in first and second language acquisition. In Obler, Loraine K. & Menn, Lise (eds.), Exceptional language and linguistics, 261–84. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Vilkaite, Laura, & Schmitt, Norbert. 2017. Reading collocations in an L2: Do collocation processing benefits extend to non-adjacent collocations? Applied Linguistics 40(2): 329–54.Google Scholar

Waring, Rob, & Nation, Paul. 1997. Vocabulary size, text coverage, and word lists. In Schmitt, Norbert and McCarthy, Michael (eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy, 6–19. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Warren, Martin. 2010. Identifying aboutgrams in engineering texts. In Bondi, Marina & Scott, Mike (eds.), Keyness in texts, 113–26. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Weinreich, Uriel. 1953. Language in contact: Findings and problems. New York: Linguistic Circle.Google Scholar

West, Michael. 1953. A general service list of English words. London: Longman, Green & Co.Google Scholar

Whitsitt, Sam. 2005. A critique of the concept of semantic prosody. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 10(3): 283–305.Google Scholar

Widdowson, Henry G. (2016). ELF, adaptive variability and virtual language. In Pitzl, Marie-Luise & Osimk-Teasdale, Ruth (eds.), English as a lingua franca: perspectives and prospects. Contributions in honour of Barbara Seidlhofer, 31–7. Boston & Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

Willems, Roel M. (ed.), 2015. Cognitive neuroscience of natural language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Wolfle, D. L. 1932. The relation between linguistic structure and associative interference in artificial linguistic material. Language 8. Language Monographs, Whole No. 11.Google Scholar

Wolter, Brent. 2002. Assessing proficiency through word associations: Is there still hope? System 30(3): 315–29.Google Scholar

Wray, Alison. 2002. Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Wray, Alison. 2012. What do we (think we) know about formulaic language? An evaluation of the current state of play. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 32: 231–54.Google Scholar

Wright, David. 2017. Using word n-grams to identify authors and idiolects. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 22(2): 212–41.Google Scholar

Yorio, Carlos A. 1989. Idiomaticity as an indicator of second language proficiency. In Hyltenstam, Kenneth & Obler, Loraine K. (eds.), Bilingualism across the lifespan, 55–72. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Zipf, George K. 1935. The psycho-biology of language: An introduction to dynamic philology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar