Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T18:04:39.984Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phoebe M. S. Lin, The prosody of formulaic sequences: A corpus and discourse approach. London and New York: Bloomsbury, 2018. Pp. 248. ISBN 9781441100856.

Review products

Phoebe M. S. Lin, The prosody of formulaic sequences: A corpus and discourse approach. London and New York: Bloomsbury, 2018. Pp. 248. ISBN 9781441100856.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2020

David Wood
David Wood*
Affiliation:
School of Linguistics and Language Studies, Applied Linguistics & Discourse Studies, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, K1S [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Review
Information
English Language & Linguistics , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , June 2021 , pp. 409 - 413
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2020

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

Bybee, Joan. 2000. The phonology of the lexicon. In Barlow, Michael & Kemmer, Suzanne (eds.), Usage-based models of language, 65–85. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2002. Phonological evidence for exemplar storage of multiword sequences. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24, 215–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erman, Britt. 2007. Cognitive processes as evidence of the idiom principle. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 12(1), 25–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickey, Tina. 1993. Identifying formulas in first language acquisition. Journal of Child Language 20, 27–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hudson, Jean & Wiktorsson, Maria. 2009. Formulaic language and the relater category – the case of about. In Corrigan, Roberta, Moravcsik, Edith A., Ouali, Hamid & Wheatley, Kathleen M. (eds.), Formulaic language, vol. 1: Distribution and historical change, 77–96. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, Phoebe Min Sum. 2010. The phonology of formulaic sequences: A review. In Wood, David (ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: Acquisition and communication, 174–93. New York and London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Lin, Phoebe Min Sum & Adolphs, Svenja. 2009. Sound evidence: Phraseological units in spoken corpora. In Barfield, Andy & Gyllstad, Henrik (eds.), Researching collocations in another language: Multiple interpretations, 34–48. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, Ann M. 1977. Language learning strategies: Does the whole equal the sum of the parts? Language 53(3), 560–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, Ann M. 1983. Units of language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wood, David. 2015. Fundamentals of formulaic language: An introduction. London and New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Wray, Alison. 2002. Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wulff, Stefanie. 2008. Rethinking idiomaticity: A usage-based approach. London and New York: Continuum.Google Scholar