Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T09:12:06.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experimental and Intervention Studies on Formulaic Sequences in a Second Language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2012

Frank Boers  and
Seth Lindstromberg
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article we review experimental and intervention studies published since 2004 on formulaic sequences in a second language (L2). There is plenty of evidence that learners have a lot to gain from building a sizable repertoire of L2 formulaic sequences language, but formulaicity is an area where learners are known to be slow to close the gap on native speakers. Pedagogical treatments proposed to help close that gap can be divided into three groups: (a) drawing learners’ attention to formulaic sequences as they are encountered, (b) stimulating lookups in dictionaries and the use of corpus tools, and (c) helping learners commit particular formulaic sequences to memory. We gauge the efficacy of treatments in these three categories by reviewing the (quasi-) experimental studies that put them to the test, and we refer to Laufer and Hulstijn's involvement load hypothesis to frame the discernible trends. The article concludes by suggesting avenues for much needed further research.

Type
SECTION B: FORMULAIC LANGUAGE AND PEDAGOGICAL ISSUES
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 32 , March 2012 , pp. 83 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

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

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Boers, F. (2011). Cognitive semantic ways of teaching figurative phrases: An assessment. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9, 227–261.

This is a critical review of a collection of intervention studies informed by cognitive semantics and conceptual metaphor theory. Most of the studies focus on figurative idioms or on phrasal/prepositional verbs. (For a shorter review, see Boers [in press]).

Ellis, N. C., Simpson-Vlach, R., & Maynard, C. (2008). Formulaic language in native and second language speakers: Psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 42, 375–396.

It is experimentally demonstrated in this article that formulaicity facilitates processing in both native and nonnative participants, but word strings that fulfill this facilitative role for natives do not necessarily do so for learners.

Laufer, B., & Girsai, N. (2008). Form-focused instruction in second language vocabulary learning: A case for contrastive analysis and translation. Applied Linguistics, 29, 694–716.

This article reports a classroom experiment comparing retention of L2 words and collocations under three conditions. Two conditions in which the students did vocabulary-focused exercises resulted in better retention than a condition which relied on incidental uptake. A condition where students focused on vocabulary via translation practice was found particularly conducive to learning.

Lindstromberg, S., & Boers, F. (2008b). Phonemic repetition and the learning of lexical chunks: The mnemonic power of assonance. System, 36, 423–436.

This article presents further support for the thesis that formulaic sequences displaying sound patterns such as alliteration (e.g., slippery slope) and assonance (e.g., high time) have a mnemonic potential that is relatively easy to unlock, and that is applicable to a non-negligible number of word partnerships.

Martinez, R., & Murphy, V. A. (2011). Effect of frequency and idiomaticity on second language reading comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 45, 267–290.

The authors illustrate how adequate text comprehension hinges not only on knowledge of individual words but also on knowledge of scores of idiomatic expressions, many of which are made up of words that learners are likely to be familiar with as single items (e.g., He's over the hill) but whose combined idiomatic meaning they may fail to recognize.

Millar, N. (2010). The processing of malformed formulaic language. Applied Linguistics, 32, 129–148.

This article reports a self-paced reading experiment the results of which indicate that significantly more processing effort is required of native speakers when they are confronted with so- called malformed collocations (e.g., cheap cost instead of low cost). This finding suggests that inaccurate use of formulaic language by learners can put a strain on communication with native-speaker interlocutors.

Webb, S., Newton, J., & Chang, A. C. S. (in press). Incidental learning of collocation. Language Learning.

This article demonstrates that incremental learning of L2 collocations from reading is possible, provided the same collocation is encountered sufficiently often in a relatively short time span. It is suggested that graded readers could be adapted to provide better opportunities also for learning collocations, in addition to single words.

REFERENCES

Anderson, J. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Arnon, I., & Snider, N. (2009). More than words: Frequency effects for multi-word phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 62, 67–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2009). Conventional expressions as a pragmalinguistic resource: Recognition and production of conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics. Language Learning, 59, 755–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barcroft, J. (2002). Semantic and structural elaboration in L2 lexical acquisition. Language Learning, 52, 323–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beréndi, M., Csábi, S., & Kövecses, Z. (2008). Using conceptual metaphors and metonymies in vocabulary teaching. In Boers, F. & Lindstromberg, S. (Eds.), Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology (pp. 65–99). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow, UK: Longman.Google Scholar
Bishop, H. (2004). The effect of typographic salience on the look up and comprehension of unknown formulaic sequences. In Schmitt, N. (Ed.), Formulaic sequences (pp. 227–247). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boers, F. (2000). Metaphor awareness and vocabulary retention. Applied Linguistics, 21, 553–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boers, F. (2011). Cognitive semantic ways of teaching figurative phrases: An assessment. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9, 227–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boers, F. (in press). Cognitive Linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary: Assessment and integration. Language Teaching: Surveys and Studies.Google Scholar
Boers, F., Demecheleer, M., Coxhead, A., & Webb, S. (in press). Gauging the effectiveness of exercises on verb-noun collocations. Language Teaching Research.Google Scholar
Boers, F., Demecheleer, M., & Eyckmans, J. (2004). Etymological elaboration as a strategy for learning figurative idioms. In Bogaards, P. & Laufer, B. (Eds.), Vocabulary in a second language: Selection, acquisition and testing (pp. 53–78). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., Eyckmans, J., Kappel, J., Stengers, H., & Demecheleer, H. (2006). Formulaic sequences and perceived oral proficiency: Putting a lexical approach to the test. Language Teaching Research 10, 245–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., Eyckmans, J., & Stengers, H. (2006). Means of motivating multiword units: Rationale, mnemonic benefits, and cognitive-style variables. In Foster-Cohen, S. (Ed.), Eurosla Yearbook 6 (pp. 169–190). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Boers, F., Eyckmans, J., & Stengers, H. (2007). Presenting figurative idioms with a touch of etymology: More than mere mnemonics? Language Teaching Research, 11, 43–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., & Lindstromberg, S. (2005). Finding ways to make phrase learning feasible: The mnemonic effect of alliteration. System, 33, 225–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., & Lindstromberg, S. (2009). Optimizing a lexical approach to instructed second language acquisition. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., Lindstromberg, S., & Eyckmans, J. (2012). Are alliterative word combinations comparatively easy to remember for adult learners? RELC Journal, 43, 127–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., Lindstromberg, S., Littlemore, J., Stengers, H., & Eyckmans, J. (2008). Variables in the mnemonic effectiveness of pictorial elucidation. In Boers, F. & Lindstromberg, S. (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology (pp. 189–216). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., & Stengers, H. (2008). A quantitative comparison of the English and Spanish repertoires of figurative idioms. In Boers, F. & Lindstromberg, S. (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology (pp. 355–374). Berlin, Germany: Mouton De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., Piquer Píriz, A.M., Stengers, H., & Eyckmans, J. (2009). Does pictorial elucidation foster recollection of idioms? Language Teaching Research, 13, 367–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. (2002). Phonological evidence of exemplar storage of multiword sequences. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 215–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, S. K., & Olson, K. M. (2012). Are pictures good for learning new vocabulary in a foreign language? Only if you think they are not. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 92–101.Google Scholar
Cermak, L. S., & Craik, F. I. M. (1979). Levels of processing in human memory. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Chan, T.-P., & Liou, H.-C. (2005). Effects of web-based concordancing instruction on EFL students’ learning of verb-noun collocations. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18, 231–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cieslicka, A. (2006). Literal salience in on-line processing of idiomatic expressions by second language learners. Second Language Research, 22, 115–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins COBUILD Advanced Learner's English Dictionary (6th ed.). (2008). Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage Learning; Glasgow, Scotland: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Columbus, G. (2010). Processing MWUs: Are MWU subtypes psycholinguistically real? In Wood, D. (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: Acquisition and communication (194–210). New York, NY: Continuum.Google Scholar
Condon, N. (2008). How Cognitive linguistic motivations influence the learning of phrasal verbs. In Boers, F. & Lindstromberg, S. (Eds.), Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology (pp. 133–158). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics, 29, 72–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cortes, V. (2006). Teaching lexical bundles in the disciplines: An example from a writing intensive history class. Linguistics and Education, 17, 391–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dai, Z., & Ding, Y. (2010). Effectiveness of text memorization in EFL learning of Chinese students. In Wood, D. (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: Acquisition and communication (pp. 71–87). New York, NY: Continuum.Google Scholar
De Jong, N., & Perfetti, C. A. (2011). Fluency training in the ESL classroom: An experimental study of fluency development and proceduralization. Language Learning, 61, 533–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Ridder, I. (2002). Visible or invisible links: Does the highlighting of hyperlinks affect incidental vocabulary learning, text comprehension and the reading process? Language Learning & Technology, 6, 123–146.Google Scholar
Ding, Y. (2007). Text memorization and imitation: The practices of successful Chinese learners of English. System, 35, 271–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durrant, P. (in press). Formulaic morphology in an agglutinating language: The case of Turkish. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory.Google Scholar
Durrant, P., & Doherty, A. (2010). Are high-frequency collocations psycholinguistically real? Investigating the thesis of collocational priming. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 6, 125–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durrant, P., & Schmitt, N. (2009). To what extent do native and non-native writers make use of collocations? International Review of Applied Linguistics, 47, 157–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durrant, P., & Schmitt, N. (2010). Adult learners’ retention of collocations from exposure. Second Language Research, 26, 163–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dziemianko, A. (2010). Paper or electronic? The role of dictionary form in language reception, production and the retention of meaning and collocations. International Journal of Lexicography, 23, 257–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dziemianko, A. (2011). Does dictionary form really matter? In Akasu, K. & Uchida, S. (Eds.), Asialex 2011 Proceedings. Lexicography: Theoretical and practical perspectives. (pp. 92–101). Kyoto, Japan: The Asian Association for Lexicography.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., Frey, E., & Jalkanen, I. (2009). The psycholinguistic reality of collocation and semantic prosody (1): Lexical access. In Römer, U. & Schulze, R. (Eds.), Exploring the lexis-grammar interface (pp. 89–114). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C., Simpson-Vlach, R., & Maynard, C. (2008). Formulaic language in native and second language speakers: Psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 42, 375–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erten, İ. H., & Tekin, M. (2008). Effects on vocabulary acquisition of presenting new words in semantic sets versus semantically unrelated sets. System, 36, 407–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eyckmans, J. (2007). Taking SLA research to interpreter training: Does knowledge of phrases foster fluency? In Boers, F., Darquennes, J., & Temmerman, R. (Eds.), Multilingualism and applied comparative linguistics: Pedagogical perspectives (pp. 89–104). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Eyckmans, J., Boers, F., & Stengers, H. (2007). Identifying chunks: Who can see the wood for the trees? Language Forum, 33, 85–100.Google Scholar
Finkbeiner, M., & Nicol, J. (2003). Semantic category effects in second language word learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 369–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forsberg, F. (2010). Using conventional sequences in L2 French. IRAL, 48, 25–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gatbonten, E., & Segalowitz, N. (2005). Rethinking communicative language teaching: A focus on accuracy and fluency. Canadian Modern Language Journal, 61, 325–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giora, R. (1997). Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics, 7, 183–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gries, S.T. (2011). Phonological similarity in multiword units. Cognitive Linguistics, 22, 491–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gürsoy, E. (2008). The noticing of formulaic sequences by Turkish learners of English. (Unpublished master's thesis). Cukurova University, Adana, Turkey.Google Scholar
Hamilton, M., & Rajaram, S. (2001). The concreteness effect in implicit and explicit memory tests. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 96–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoey, M. (2005). Lexical priming: A new theory of words and language. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hsu, J.-Y. (2010). The effects of collocation instruction on the reading comprehension and vocabulary learning of Taiwanese college English majors. Asian EFL Journal, 12, 47–87.Google Scholar
Hsu, J.-Y., & Chiu, C.-Y. (2008). Lexical collocations and their relation to speaking proficiency of college EFL learners in Taiwan. Asian EFL Journal, 10, 181–204.Google Scholar
Hu, Y.-H., & Fong, Y.-Y. (2010). Obstacles to conceptual-metaphor guided L2 idiom interpretation. In De Knop, S., Boers, F., & De Rycker, T. (Eds.), Fostering language teaching efficiency through cognitive linguistics (pp. 293–317). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 258–286). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iwashita, N., Brown, A., McNamara, T., & O'Hagan, S. (2008). Assessed levels of second language speaking proficiency: How distinct? Applied Linguistics, 29, 24–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, N., & Nekrasova, T. M. (2007). The processing of formulaic sequences by second language speakers. The Modern Language Journal, 91, 433–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, M., & Haywood, S. (2004). Facilitating the acquisition of formulaic sequences: An exploratory study. In Schmitt, N. (Ed.), Formulaic sequences (pp. 269–300). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kasahara, K. (2011). The effect of known-and-unknown word combinations on intentional vocabulary learning. System, 39, 491–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keshavarz, M. H., & Salimi, H. (2007). Collocational competence and cloze test performance: A study of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17, 81–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Y. (2011). The role of task-induced involvement and learner proficiency in L2 vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 61, 100–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Komuro, Y. (2009). Japanese learners’ collocation dictionary retrieval performance. In Barfield, A. & Gyllstad, H. (Eds.), Researching collocations in another language: Multiple perspectives (pp. 86–98). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z., & Szabó, P. (1996). Idioms: A view from cognitive semantics. Applied Linguistics, 17, 326–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuiper, K. (1996). Smooth talkers: The linguistic performance of auctioneers and sportscasters. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Kuiper, K., Columbus, G., & Schmitt, N. (2009). Acquiring phrasal vocabulary. In Foster-Cohen, Susan (Ed.), Advances in language acquisition (pp. 216–240). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuiper, K., Van Egmond, M.-E., Kempen, G., & Sprenger, S. (2007). Slipping on superlemmas: Multiword lexical items in speech production. Mental Lexicon, 2, 313–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laufer, B. (2005). Focus on form in second language vocabulary acquisition. In Foster-Cohen, S. (Ed.), EUROSLA Yearbook 5 (pp. 223–250). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Laufer, B. (2011). The contribution of dictionary use to the production and retention of collocations in a second language. International Journal of Lexicography, 24, 29–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laufer, B., & Girsai, N. (2008). Form-focused instruction in second language vocabulary learning: A case for contrastive analysis and translation. Applied Linguistics, 29, 694–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement, Applied Linguistics, 22, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laufer, B., & Roitblat-Rozovski, B. (2011). Incidental vocabulary acquisition: The effects of task type, word occurrence and their combination. Language Teaching Research, 15, 391–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laufer, B., & Waldman, T. (2011). Verb-noun collocations in second language writing: A corpus analysis of learners’ English. Language Learning, 61, 647–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laurent, J.-P., Denhières, G., Passerieux, C., Iakimova, G, & Hardy-Baylé, M.-C. (2005). On understanding idiomatic language: The salience hypothesis assessed by ERPs. Brain Research, 1068, 151–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lea, D., Crowther, J., & Dignen, S. (Eds.). (2002). Oxford collocations dictionary for students of English. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, M. (1993) The lexical approach. Hove, UK: LTP.Google Scholar
Lewis, M. (1997). Implementing the lexical approach. Hove, UK: LTP.Google Scholar
Li, T. F. (2009). Metaphor, image, and image schemas in second language pedagogy. Köln, Germany: Lambert Academic.Google Scholar
Li, J., & Schmitt, N. (2010). The development of collocation use in academic texts by advanced L2 learners: A multiple case study approach. In Wood, D. (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: Acquisition and communication (pp. 22–46). New York. NY: Continuum.Google Scholar
Lindstromberg, S., & Boers, F. (2005). From movement to metaphor with manner-of-movement verbs. Applied Linguistics, 26, 241–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindstromberg, S., & Boers, F. (2008a). The mnemonic effect of noticing alliteration in lexical chunks. Applied Linguistics, 29, 200–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindstromberg, S., & Boers, F. (2008b). Phonemic repetition and the learning of lexical chunks: The mnemonic power of assonance. System, 36, 423–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littlemore, J., Chen, P.T., Koester, A., & Barnden, J. (2011). Difficulties in metaphor comprehension faced by international students whose first language is not English. Applied Linguistics, 32, 408–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (5th ed.). (2009). Harlow, UK: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
Martinez, R., & Murphy, V. A. (2011). Effect of frequency and idiomaticity on second language reading comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 45, 267–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millar, N. (2010). The processing of malformed formulaic language. Applied Linguistics, 32, 129–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moon, R. E. (1992). There is reason in the roasting of eggs: A consideration of fixed expressions in native-speaker dictionaries. In Tommola, H., Varantola, K., Salmi-Tolonen, T., & Schopp, J. (Eds.), Euralex ‘92 Proceedings (pp. 493–502). Tampere, Finland: University of Tampere Department of Translation Studies.Google Scholar
Mueller, C. M. (2011). English learners’ knowledge of prepositions: Collocational knowledge or knowledge based on meaning? System, 39, 480–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nekrasova, T. M. (2009). English L1 and L2 speakers’ knowledge of lexical bundles. Language Learning, 59, 647–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nesselhauf, N. (2005). Collocations in a learner corpus. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Peters, E. (2009). Learning collocations through attention-drawing techniques: A qualitative and quantitative analysis. In Barfield, A. & Gyllstad, H. (Eds.), Researching collocations in another language: Multiple perspectives (pp. 194–207). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, E. (2012). Learning German formulaic sequences: The effect of two attention-drawing techniques. Language Learning Journal, 40, 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petchka, K. (2010). Input enhancement, noticing, and incidental vocabulary acquisition. Asian EFL Journal, 13, 228–255.Google Scholar
Peters, E., Hulstijn, J. H., Sercu, L., & Lutjeharms, M. (2009). Learning L2 German vocabulary through reading: The effect of three enhancement techniques compared. Language Learning, 59, 113–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qi, Y., & Ding, Y. (2011). Use of formulaic sequences in monologues of Chinese EFL learners. System, 39, 164–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sadoski, M. (2005). A dual coding view of vocabulary learning. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 21, 221–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuels, S. J. (1970). Effects of pictures on learning to read, comprehension and attitudes. Review of Educational Research, 40, 397–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, N. (Ed.) (2004). Formulaic sequences. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, N., Jiang, X., & Grabe, W. (2011). The percentage of words known in a text and reading comprehension. Modern Language Journal, 95, 26–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siyanova, A., & Schmitt, N. (2007). Native and nonnative use of multi-word vs. one-word verbs. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45, 119–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siyanova, A., & Schmitt, N. (2008). L2 learner production and processing of collocation: A multi-study perspective. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 64, 429–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2011). Adding more fuel to the fire: An eye-tracking study of idiom processing by native and non-native speakers. Second Language Research, 27, 251–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K., & van Heuven, W. (2011). 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, 776–784.Google ScholarPubMed
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Skoufaki, S. (2008). Conceptual metaphoric meaning clues in two idiom presentation methods. In Boers, F. & Lindstromberg, S. (Eds.), Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology (101–132). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprenger, S. A., Levelt, W. J. M., & Kempen, G. (2006). Lexical access during the production of idiomatic phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 161–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Staehr, L. S. (2009). Vocabulary knowledge and advanced listening comprehension in English as a foreign language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 577–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinel, M. P., Hulstijn, J. H., & Steinel, W. (2007). Second language idiom learning in a paired-associate paradigm: Effects of direction of learning, direction of testing, idiom imageability, and idiom transparency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29, 449–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stengers, H., Boers, F., Housen, A., & Eyckmans, J. (2010). Does “chunking” foster chunk-uptake? In De Knop, S., Boers, F., & De Rycker, A. (Eds.), Fostering language teaching efficiency through cognitive linguistics (99–117). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stengers, H., Boers, F., & Housen, A., & Eyckmans, J. (2011). Formulaic sequences and L2 oral proficiency: Does the type of target language influence the association? International Review of Applied Linguistics, 49, 321–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szczepaniak, R., & Lew, R. (2011). The role of imagery in dictionaries of idioms. Applied Linguistics, 32, 323–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tabossi, P., Fanari, R., & Wolf, K. (2009). Why are idioms recognized fast? Memory & Cognition, 37, 529–540.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tinkham, T. (1997). The effects of semantic and thematic clustering on the learning of second language vocabulary. Second Language Research, 13, 138–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tremblay, A., Derwing, B., Libben, G., & Westbury, C. (2011). Language Learning, 61, 569–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tribble, C., & Jones, G. (1997). Concordances in the classroom: A resource book for teachers. Houston, TX: Athelstan.Google Scholar
Underwood, G., Schmitt, N., & Galpin, A. (2004). The eyes have it: An eye-movement study into the processing of formulaic sequences. In Schmitt, N. (Ed.), Formulaic sequences (pp. 153–172). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waring, R. (1997). The negative effects of learning words in semantic sets: A replication. System, 25, 261–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waring, R. & Takaki, M. (2003). At what rate do learners learn and retain new vocabulary from reading a graded reader? Reading in a Foreign Language, 15, 130–163.Google Scholar
Webb, S., & Kagimoto, E. (2009). The effects of vocabulary learning on collocation and meaning. TESOL Quarterly, 43, 55–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, S., & Kagimoto, E. (2011). Learning collocations: Do the number of collocates, position of the node word, and synonymy affect learning? Applied Linguistics, 32, 259–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, S., Newton, J., & Chang, A. C. S. (in press). Incidental learning of collocation. Language Learning.Google Scholar
Wood, D. (2006). Uses and functions of formulaic sequences in second language speech: An exploration of the foundations of fluency. Canadian Modern Language Review, 63, 13–33.Google Scholar
Wood, D. (2009). Effects of focused instruction of formulaic sequences on fluent expression in second language narratives: A case study. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12, 39–57.Google Scholar
Wood, D. (2010). Formulaic language and second language speech fluency: Background, evidence and classroom applications. New York, NY: Continuum.Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wray, A. (2004). “Here's one I prepared earlier”: Formulaic language learning on television. In Schmitt, N. (Ed.), Formulaic sequences (pp. 249–268). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wray, A. (2008). Formulaic language: Pushing the boundaries. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wray, A., & Fitzpatrick, T. (2010). Pushing learners to the extreme: The artificial use of prefabricated material in conversation. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 4, 37–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, S., Witten, I. H., & Franken, M. (2010). Utilizing lexical data from a web-derived corpus to expand productive collocation knowledge. ReCALL, 22, 83–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamashita, J., & Jiang, N. (2010). L1 influence on the acquisition of L2 collocations: Japanese ESL users and EFL learners acquiring English collocations. TESOL Quarterly, 44, 647–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yasuda, S. (2010). Learning phrasal verbs through conceptual metaphors: A case of Japanese EFL learners. TESOL Quarterly, 44, 250–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yu, X. (2009). A formal criterion for identifying lexical phrases: Implications from a classroom experiment. System, 37, 689–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zyzik, E. (2011). Second language idiom learning: The effects of lexical knowledge and pedagogical sequencing. Language Teaching Research, 15, 413–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar