Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T15:15:22.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Series:   Elements in Corpus Linguistics

Shaping Writing Grades

Collocation and Writing Context Effects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 July 2022

Lee McCallum  and
Philip Durrant
Lee McCallum
Affiliation:
Coventry University
Philip Durrant
Affiliation:
University of Exeter

Summary

This Element explores relationships between collocations, writing quality, and learner and contextual variables in a first-year composition (FYC) programme. Comprising three studies, the Element is anchored in understanding phraseological complexity and its sub-constructs of sophistication and diversity. First, the authors look at sophistication through association measures. They tap into how these measures may tell us different types of information about collocation via a cluster analysis. Selected measures from this clustering are used in a cumulative links model to establish relationships between these measures, measures of diversity and measures of task, the language background of the writer and individual writer variation, and writing quality scores. A third qualitative study of the statistically significant predictors helps understand how writers use collocations and why they might be favoured or downgraded by raters. This Element concludes by considering the implications of this modelling for assessment.
Get access

Keywords

collocationphraseological complexitywriting qualitymixed modelsfirst year-writing
Type
Element
Information
Series: Elements in Corpus Linguistics
Online ISBN: 9781009070461
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication: 08 September 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackermann, K., & Chen, Y. H. (2013). Developing the academic collocation list (ACL): A corpus-driven and expert-judged approach. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(4), 235–47.Google Scholar
Appel, R., & Wood, D. (2016). Recurrent word combinations in EAP test-taker writing: Differences between high and low proficiency levels. Language Assessment Quarterly, 13(1), 55–71.Google Scholar
Aull, L. L. (2015). First-Year University Writing: A Corpus-Based Study with Implications for Pedagogy. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Aull, L. L. (2017). Corpus analysis of argumentative versus explanatory discourse in writing task genres. Journal of Writing Analytics, 1, 1–47.Google Scholar
Aull, L. L. (2019). Linguistic markers of stance and genre in upper-level student writing. Written Communication, 36(2), 267–95.Google Scholar
Baayen, H., Davidson, D., & Bates, D. (2008). Mixed effects modelling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412.Google Scholar
Barkaoui, K. (2008). Effects of scoring method and rater experience on ESL essay rating processes and outcomes. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Benson, M., Benson, E., & Ilson, R. (2009). The BBI Combinatory Dictionary of English: Your Guide to Collocations and Grammar. John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Berzak, Y., Kenney, J., Spadine, C. et al. (2016). Universal dependencies for learner English. In Erk, K. & Smith, N. A., eds.. Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 737–46.Google Scholar
Bestgen, Y. (2017). Beyond single-word measures: L2 writing assessment, lexical richness and formulaic competence. System, 69, 65–78.Google Scholar
Bestgen, Y., & Granger, S. (2014). Quantifying the development of phraseological competence in L2 English writing: An automated approach. Journal of Second Language Writing, 26, 28–41.Google Scholar
Brezina, V. (2018). Statistics for Corpus Linguistics. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brezina, V., McEnery, T., & Wattam, S. (2015). Collocations in context: A new perspective on collocation networks. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 20(2), 139–73.Google Scholar
Brock, G., Pihur, V., Datta, S., & Datta, S. (2008). clValid: An R package for cluster validation. Journal of Statistical Software, 25(4), 1–22.Google Scholar
Brown, J. D. (1991). Do English and ESL faculties rate writing samples differently? TESOL Quarterly, 25, 587–603.Google Scholar
Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2014). Conceptualizing and measuring short-term changes in L2 writing complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 26, 42–65.Google Scholar
Bychkovska, T., & Lee, J. J. (2017). At the same time: Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 university student argumentative writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 30, 38–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, S., & Bridgeman, B. (1986). Testing ESL student writers. In Greenberg, K. L., Weiner, H. S., & Donovan, R. A., eds., Writing Assessment: Issues and Strategies. Longman, pp. 126–52.Google Scholar
Chen, W. (2019). Profiling collocations in EFL writing of Chinese tertiary learners. RELC Journal, 50(1), 53–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, J., Zhang, M., & Bejar, I. I. (2017). An investigation of the e-rater® automated scoring engine’s grammar, usage, mechanics, and style microfeatures and their aggregation model. ETS Research Report Series, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12131Google Scholar
Christensen, R. H. B. (2019). Ordinal: Regression Models for Ordinal Data. R package version 2019.12-10. www.cran.r-project.org/package=ordinal/Google Scholar
Church, K., & Hanks, P. (1990). Word association norms, mutual information and lexicography. Computational Linguistics, 16, 22–9.Google Scholar
Council of Writing Program Administrators (CWPA), National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE), & National Writing Project (NWP). (2011). Framework for success in postsecondary writing. https://wpacouncil.org/aws/CWPA/pt/sd/news_article/242845/_PARENT/layout_details/falseGoogle Scholar
Council of Writing Program Administrators (CWPA). (2014). Outcomes statement for first-year composition (3.0). https://wpacouncil.org/aws/CWPA/pt/sd/news_article/243055/_PARENT/layout_details/falseGoogle Scholar
Crawley, M. J. (2013). The R Book (2nd ed.). Wiley.Google Scholar
Crossley, S. A. (2020). Linguistic features in writing quality and development: An overview. Journal of Writing Research, 11(3), 415–43.Google Scholar
Crossley, S. A., Cai, Z., & McNamara, D. S. (2012). Syntagmatic, paradigmatic and automatic n-gram approaches to assessing essay quality. In McCarthy, P. M. & Youngblood, G. M., eds., Proceedings of the 25th International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference. The AAAI Press, pp. 214–19.Google Scholar
Daller, H., Turlik, J., & Weir, I. (2013). Vocabulary acquisition and the learning curve. In Jarvis, S. & Daller, H., eds., Vocabulary Knowledge: Human Ratings and Automated Measures. John Benjamins, pp. 185–218.Google Scholar
De Marneffe, M. C., & Manning, C. D. (2008). The Stanford typed dependencies representation. In Coling 2008: Proceedings of the Workshop on Cross-Framework and Cross-Domain Parser Evaluation. pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
Debusmann, R. (2000). An introduction to dependency grammar. Hausarbeit fur das Hauptseminar Dependenzgrammatik SoSe, 99, 1–16.Google Scholar
Dunning, T. (1993). Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence. Computational Linguistics, 19(1), 61–74.Google Scholar
Durrant, P. (2019). Formulaic language in English for academic purposes. In Siyanova-Chanturia, A. & Pellicer-Sanchez, A., eds., Understanding Formulaic Language: A Second Language Acquisition Perspective. Routledge, pp. 211–28.Google Scholar
Durrant, P. (2020). Association measure calculator. https://phildurrant.net/association-measure-calculator/Google Scholar
Durrant, P., & Brenchley, M. (2021). The development of academic collocations in children’s writing. In Szudarski, P. & Barclay, S., eds., Vocabulary Theory, Patterning and Teaching. Multilingual Matters, pp. 99–120.Google Scholar
Durrant, P., Brenchley, M., & McCallum, L. (2021). Understanding Development and Proficiency in Writing: Quantitative Corpus Linguistics Approaches. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Durrant, P., Moxley, J., & McCallum, L. (2019). Vocabulary sophistication in freshman composition assignments. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 24(1), 31–64.Google Scholar
Durrant, P., & Schmitt, N. (2009). To what extent do native and non-native writers make use of collocations? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 47, 157–77.Google Scholar
Eckstein, G., & Ferris, D. (2018). Comparing L1 and L2 texts and writers in first-year composition. TESOL Quarterly, 52(1), 137–62.Google Scholar
Eguchi, M., & Kyle, K. (2020). Continuing to explore the multidimensional nature of lexical sophistication: The case of oral proficiency interviews. The Modern Language Journal, 104(2), 381–400.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2008). Phraseology: The periphery and the heart of language. In Meunier, F. & Granger, S., eds., Phraseology in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching. John Benjamins, pp. 1–13.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Ferreira-Junior, F. (2009). Constructions and their acquisition: Islands and the distinctiveness of the occupancy. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7, 187–220.Google Scholar
Evert, S. (2004). The statistics of word cooccurrences: Word pairs and collocations. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation. University of Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Evert, S. (2009). Corpora and collocations. In Lüdeling, A. & Kytö, M., eds., Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook (Vol. 2). Walter de Gruyter, pp. 1212–48.Google Scholar
Field, A., Miles, J., & Field, Z. (2012). Discovering Statistics Using R. Sage.Google Scholar
Firth, J. R. (1957). Papers in Linguistics 1934–1951. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Firth, J. R. (1968). A synopsis of linguistic theory, 1930–55. In Palmer, F. R., ed., Selected Papers of J.R. Firth 1952–1959. Longman, pp. 168–205.Google Scholar
Gablasova, D., Brezina, V., & McEnery, T. (2017a). Collocations in corpus-based language learning research: Identifying, comparing and interpreting the evidence. Language Learning, 67, 155–79.Google Scholar
Gablasova, D., Brezina, V., & McEnery, T. (2017b). MI-score-based collocations in language learning research: A critical evaluation. Paper presented at the Corpus Linguistics conference at the University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
Garner, J., Crossley, S., & Kyle, K. (2019). Ngrams and L2 writing proficiency. System, 80, 176–87.Google Scholar
Garner, J., Crossley, S., & Kyle, K. (2020). Beginning and intermediate L2 writer’s use of ngrams: An association measures study. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 58(1), 51–74.Google Scholar
Granger, S., & Bestgen, Y. (2014). The use of collocations by intermediate vs. advanced non-native writers: A bigram-based study. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 52(3), 229–52.Google Scholar
Granger, G., & Paquot, M. (2008). Disentangling the phraseological web. In Granger, S. & Meunier, F., eds., Phraseology: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. John Benjamins, pp. 27–49.Google Scholar
Granger, G., & Paquot, M. (2009). Lexical verbs in academic discourse: A corpus-driven study of learner use. In Charles, M., Pecorari, D., & Hunston, S., eds., Academic Writing: At the Interface of Corpus and Discourse. Continuum, pp. 193–214.Google Scholar
Gries, S. T. (2013a). 50-something years of work on collocations: What is or should be next. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 18(1), 137–65.Google Scholar
Gries, S. T. (2013b). Statistics for Linguists with R: A Practical Introduction (2nd revised ed.). De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Gries, S. T. (2015). The most under-used statistical method in corpus linguistics: Multi-level (and mixed effects) models. Corpora, 10(1), 95–126.Google Scholar
Gries, S. T., & Durrant, P. (2021). Analysing co-occurrence data. In Gries, S. & Paquot, M., eds., A Practical Handbook of Corpus Linguistics. Springer, pp. 141–59.Google Scholar
Gries, S. T., & Ellis, N. C. (2015). Statistical measures for usage-based linguistics. Language Learning, 65(S1), 228–55.Google Scholar
Guo, L., Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2013). Predicting human judgements of essay quality in both integrated and independent second language writing samples: A comparison study. Assessing Writing, 18, 218–38.Google Scholar
Haberman, S. J., & Sinharay, S. (2010). The application of the cumulative logistic regression model to automated essay scoring. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 35(5), 586–602.Google Scholar
Hawkins, J. A., & Filipovic, L. (2012). Criterial Features in L2 English: Specifying the Reference Levels of the Common European Framework. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Henriksen, B. (2013). Research on L2 learners’ collocational competence and development: A progress report. In Bardel, C., Lindqvist, C., & Laufer, B., eds., L2 Vocabulary Acquisition, Knowledge and Use: New Perspectives on Assessment and Corpus Analysis. EuroSLA, pp. 29–56.Google Scholar
Hoey, M. (1991). Patterns of Lexis in Text. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hoey, M. (2005). Lexical Priming: A New Theory of Words and Language. Routledge.Google Scholar
Hosmer, D. W., & Lemeshow, S. (2000). Applied Logistic Regression. Wiley.Google Scholar
Hou, J., Verspoor, M., & Loerts, H. (2016). An exploratory study into the dynamics of Chinese L2 writing development. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(1), 65–96.Google Scholar
Hox, J. (2002). Multilevel Analysis: Techniques and Applications. Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Huang, J., & Foote, C. J. (2010). Grading between lines: What really impacts professors’ holistic evaluation of ESL graduate student writing? Language Assessment Quarterly, 7(3), 219–33.Google Scholar
Huang, Y., Murakami, A., Alexopoulou, T., & Korhonen, A. (2018). Dependency parsing of learner English. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 23(1), 28–54.Google Scholar
Jeffery, J. V., & Wilcox, K. C. (2013). How do I do it if I don’t like writing? Adolescents’ stance toward writing across disciplines. Reading & Writing, 27(6), 1095–117.Google Scholar
Jiang, J., Bi, P., Xie, N., & Liu, H. (2021). Phraseological complexity and low-and intermediate-level L2 learners’ writing quality. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2019-0147Google Scholar
Jones, S., & Sinclair, J. M. (1974). English lexical collocations: A study in computational linguistics. Cahiers de Lexicologie, 24, 15–61.Google Scholar
Kim, J. (2014). Predicting L2 writing proficiency using linguistic complexity measures: A corpus-based study. English Teaching, 69(4), 27–51.Google Scholar
Kim, M., Crossley, S. A., & Kyle, K. (2018). Lexical sophistication as a multidimensional phenomenon: Relations to second language lexical proficiency, development and writing quality. The Modern Language Journal, 102(1), 120–41.Google Scholar
Kyle, K. (2020). The relationship between features of source text use and integrated writing quality. Assessing Writing, 45, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100467Google Scholar
Kyle, K. (2021). Natural language processing for learner corpus research. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 7(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.00019.intGoogle Scholar
Kyle, K., & Crossley, S. A. (2016). The relationship between lexical sophistication and independent and source-based writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 34, 12–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kyle, K., Crossley, S. A., & Berger, C. (2018). The tool for the analysis of lexical sophistication (TAALES): Version 2.0. Behavior Research Methods, 50(3), 1030–46. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0924-4Google Scholar
Kyle, K., Crossley, S., & Verspoor, M. (2021). Measuring longitudinal writing development using indices of syntactic complexity and sophistication. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43(4), 781–812. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263120000546Google Scholar
Kyle, K., & Eguchi, M. (2021). Automatically assessing lexical sophistication using word, bigram, and dependency indices. In Granger, S., ed., Perspectives on the Second Language Phrasicon: The View from Learner Corpora. Multilingual Matters, 126–151. www.multilingual-matters.com/page/detail/?k=9781788924863Google Scholar
Lee, J. (2019). A comparison of writing tasks in ESL writing and first-year composition courses: A case study of one university. Language Teaching Research, 25(3), 1–18.Google Scholar
Levshina, N. (2015). How to Do Linguistics with R: Data Exploration and Statistical Analysis. John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Liu, X. (2016). Applied Ordinal Logistic Regression Using Stata: From Single-level to Multilevel Modeling. Sage.Google Scholar
Llanes, À., Tragant, E., & Serrano, R. (2018). Examining the role of learning context and individual differences in gains in L2 writing performance: The case of teenagers on an intensive study-abroad programme. The Language Learning Journal, 46(2), 201–16. DOI:10.1080/09571736.2015.1020332Google Scholar
Loerts, H., Lowie, W., & Seton, B. (2020). Essential Statistics for Applied Linguistics: Using R or JASP. Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Lorenzo, F., & Rodríguez, L. (2014). Onset and expansion of L2 cognitive academic language proficiency in bilingual settings: CALP in CLIL. System, 47, 64–72.Google Scholar
Maechler, M., Rousseeuw, P., Struyf, A., Hubert, M., & Hornik, K. (2015). Cluster: Cluster analysis basics and extensions. R package version 2.0.1.Google Scholar
Manning, C. D., Surdeanu, M., Bauer, J. et al. (2014). The Stanford CoreNLP natural language processing toolkit. In Bontcheva, K.., & Zhu, J., eds., Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 55–60.Google Scholar
Marcus, M., Marcinkiewicz, M., & Santorini, B. (1993). Building a large annotated corpus of English: The Penn Treebank. Computational Linguistics, 19, 313–30.Google Scholar
Matsuda, P. K., Saenkhum, T., & Accardi, S. (2013). Writing teachers’ perceptions of the presence and needs of second language writers: An institutional case study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22, 68–86.Google Scholar
McCallum, L. (2019). Modelling score variation in student writing with a big data system: Benefits, challenges, and ways forward. Journal of Writing Analytics, 3, 286–311.Google Scholar
McCallum, L. (2021). The role of lexical collocations and learner and course variables in determining writing quality in assignments from a first year composition programme. Unpublished EdD thesis. University of Exeter.Google Scholar
Michigan Corpus of Upper-Level Student Papers (MICUSP). (2009). MICUSP Fair Use https://micusp.elicorpora.info/Google Scholar
Moore, T., & Morton, J. (2005). Dimensions of difference: A comparison of university writing and IELTS writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(1), 43–66.Google Scholar
Moxley, J. M., & Eubanks, D. (2015). On keeping score: Instructors’ vs. students’ rubric ratings of 46,689 essays. Writing Program Administration, 39(2), 53–80.Google Scholar
Nesselhauf, N. (2005). Collocations in a Learner Corpus. Studies in Corpus Linguistics (Vol. 14). John Benjamins.Google Scholar
O’Connell, A. A. (2006). Logistic Regression Models for Ordinal Response Variables. Sage.Google Scholar
Öksuz, D., Brezina, V., & Rebuschat, P. (2021). Collocational processing in L1 and L2: The effects of word frequency, collocational frequency, and association. Language Learning, 71(1), 55–98.Google Scholar
Osgood, C. E. (1952). The nature and measurement of meaning. Psychological Bulletin, 49, 197–237.Google Scholar
Paquot, M. (2018). The phraseological dimension in interlanguage complexity research. Second Language Research, 35(1), 121–45.Google Scholar
Paquot, M. (2019). Phraseological competence: A useful toolbox to delimitate CEFR levels in higher education? Insights from a study of EFL learners’ use of statistical collocations. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 29–43.Google Scholar
Pecina, P. (2005). An extensive empirical study of collocation extraction methods. In Proceedings of the ACL Student Research Workshop. pp. 13–18.Google Scholar
Pecina, P. (2010). Lexical association measures and collocation extraction. Language Resources & Evaluation, 44, 137–58.Google Scholar
Picoral, A., Staples, S., & Reppen, R. (2021). Automated annotation of learner English: An evaluation of software tools. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 7(1), 17–52.Google Scholar
University of South Florida (USF). (2018). Points of Pride USF. www.usf.edu/about-usf/points-of-pride.aspxGoogle Scholar
Quellmalz, E. S., Capell, F. J., & Chov, C. P. (1982). Effects of discourse and response mode on the measurement of writing competence. Journal of Educational Measurement, 19, 241–58.Google Scholar
R Core Development Team. (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. www.R-project.orgGoogle Scholar
Römer, U. (2009). English in academia: Does nativeness matter? Anglistik: International Journal of English Studies, 20, 89–100.Google Scholar
Römer, U., & O’Donnell, M. B. (2011). From student hard drive to web corpus (part 1): The design, compilation and genre classification of the Michigan Corpus of Upper-level Student Papers (MICUSP). Corpora, 6(2), 159–77.Google Scholar
Ruth, L., & Murphy, S. (1988). Designing Writing Tasks for the Assessment of Writing. Ablex.Google Scholar
Schmitt, N., & Schmitt, D. (2020). Vocabulary in Language Learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schneider, U. (2020). ΔP as a measure of collocation strength: Considerations based on analyses of hesitation placement in spontaneous speech. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 16(2), 249–74.Google Scholar
Seretan, V. (2011). Syntax-Based Collocation Extraction: Text, Speech and Language Technology Series (Vol. 44). Springer Science and Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0134-2_4Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. M. (1987). Collocation: A progress report. In Steele, R. & Threadgold, T., eds., Language Topics: Essays in Honour of Michael Halliday (Vol. 2). John Benjamins, pp. 319–31.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Pellicer-Sánchez, A. (2019). Formulaic language: Setting the scene. In Siyanova-Chanturia, A. & Pellicer-Sánchez, A., eds., Understanding Formulaic Language. Routledge, pp. 1–15.Google Scholar
Smadja, F. (1993). Retrieving collocations from text: Xtract. Computational Linguistics, 19(1), 143–77.Google Scholar
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2014). Using Multivariate Statistics (6th ed.). Pearson Education Limited.Google Scholar
Tedick, D. (1990). ESL writing assessment: Subject-matter knowledge and its impact on performance. English for Specific Purposes, 9, 123–43.Google Scholar
Treffers-Daller, J., Parslow, P., & Williams, S. (2018). Back to basics: How measures of lexical diversity can help discriminate between CEFR Levels. Applied Linguistics, 39(3), 302–27.Google Scholar
Verspoor, M., Lowie, M., Chan, H. P., & Vahtrick, L. (2017). Linguistic complexity in second language development: Variability and variation at advanced stages. Recherches en didactique des langues et des cultures, 14(1), 1–28.Google Scholar
Ward, J. (2007). Collocation and technicality in EAP engineering. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(1), 18–35.Google Scholar
Weigle, S. C. (1999). Investigating rater/prompt interactions in writing assessment: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. Assessing Writing, 6, 145–78.Google Scholar
Wiechmann, D. (2008). On the computation of collostruction strength: Testing measures of association as expressions of lexical bias. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 4(2), 253–90.Google Scholar
Winter, B. (2020). Statistics for Linguists: An Introduction Using R. Routledge.Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2006). Formulaic language. In Brown, K., ed., Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (Vol. 4). Elsevier, pp. 590–7.Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2019). Concluding question: Why don’t second language learners more proactively target formulaic sequences? In Siyanova-Chanturia, A. & Pellicer-Sánchez, A., eds., Understanding Formulaic Language. Routledge, pp. 248–69.Google Scholar

Save element to Kindle

To save this element to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Shaping Writing Grades
Available formats
×

Save element to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Shaping Writing Grades
Available formats
×

Save element to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Shaping Writing Grades
Available formats
×