Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

FORMULAIC SEQUENCE(FS) CANNOT BE AN UMBRELLA TERM IN SLA: Focusing on Psycholinguistic FSs and Their Identification

  • Florence Myles (a1) and Caroline Cordier (a2)

Abstract

The term formulaic sequence (FS) is used with a multiplicity of meanings in the SLA literature, some overlapping but others not, and researchers are not always clear in defining precisely what they are investigating, or in limiting the implicational domain of their findings to the type of formulaicity they focus on. The first part of the article provides a conceptual framework focusing on the contrast between linguistic or learner-external definitions, that is, what is formulaic in the language the learner is exposed to, such as idiomatic expressions or collocations, and psycholinguistic or learner-internal definitions, that is, what is formulaic within an individual learner because it presents a processing advantage. The second part focuses on the methodological consequences of adopting a learner-internal approach to the investigation of FSs, and examines the challenges presented by the identification of psycholinguistic formulaicity in advanced L2 learners, proposing a tool kit based on a hierarchical identification method.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org 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 sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent 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.

      FORMULAIC SEQUENCE(FS) CANNOT BE AN UMBRELLA TERM IN SLA
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and 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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      FORMULAIC SEQUENCE(FS) CANNOT BE AN UMBRELLA TERM IN SLA
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and 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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      FORMULAIC SEQUENCE(FS) CANNOT BE AN UMBRELLA TERM IN SLA
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Florence Myles, Centre for Research in Language Development throughout the Lifespan, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester, CO4 3 SQ, United Kingdom. E-mail: fmyles@essex.ac.uk

References

Hide All
Bannard, C., & Lieven, E. (2012). Formulaic language in L1 acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 316.
Bannard, C., & Matthews, D. (2008). Stored word sequences in language learning: The effect of familiarity on children’s repetition of four-word combinations. Psychological Science, 19, 241248.
Brandt, S., Verhagen, A., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2011). German children’s productivity with simple transitive and complement-clause constructions: Testing the effects of frequency and variability. Cognitive Linguistics, 22, 325357.
Bybee, J. (2010). Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cameron-Faulkner, T., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2003). A construction-based analysis of child-directed speech. Cognitive Science, 27, 843873.
Carrol, G., & Conklin, K. (2015). Cross language lexical priming extends to formulaic units: Evidence from eye-tracking suggests that this idea “has legs.” Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, FirstView. doi:10.1017/S1366728915000103.
Chen, Y., & Baker, P. (2010). Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning and Technology, 14, 3049.
Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics, 29, 7289.
Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2012). The processing of formulaic language. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 4561.
Cordier, C. (2013). The presence, nature and role of formulaic sequences in English advanced learners of French: A longitudinal study (Unpublished PhD thesis). Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK: Newcastle University.
Cordier, C., & Myles, F. (forthcoming, a). Psycholinguistic formulaic sequences in advanced learners of French: Longitudinal development and effect on fluency.
Cordier, C., & Myles, F. (forthcoming, b). Psycholinguistic FS in advanced learners of French: Characterisation and implications for language and language acquisition.
Coulmas, F. (1994). Formulaic language. In Asher, R. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (pp. 12921293). Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
Cutting, J. C., & Bock, K. (1997). That’s the way the cookie bounces: Syntactic and semantic components of experimentally elicited idiom blends. Memory & Cognition, 25, 5771.
Dahlmann, I. (2009). Towards a multi-word unit inventory of spoken discourse (Unpublished PhD thesis). Nottingham, UK: University of Nottingham.
Diessel, H., & Tomasello, M. (2001). The acquisition of finite complement clauses in English: A corpus-based analysis. Cognitive Linguistics, 12, 97141.
Ejzenberg, R. (2000). The juggling act of oral fluency: A psycho-sociolinguistic metaphor. In Riggenbach, H. (Ed.), Perspectives on fluency (pp. 287314). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Ellis, N. C. (1996). Sequencing in SLA: Phonological memory, chunking, and points of order. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 91126.
Ellis, N. C. (2003). Constructions, chunking and connectionism. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 3368). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Ellis, N. C. (2012). Formulaic language and second language acquisition: Zipf and the phrasal teddy bear. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 1744.
Farghal, M., & Obiedat, H. (1995). Collocations: A neglected variable in EFL. International Journal of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 33, 315331.
Forsberg, F. (2009). Formulaic sequences: A distinctive feature at the advanced/very advanced levels of second language acquisition. In Labeau, E. & Myles, F. (Eds.), The advanced learner variety: The case of French. Bern: Peter Lang.
Foster, P. (2001). Rules and routines: A consideration of their role in the task-based language production of native and non-native speakers. In Bygate, M., Skehan, P., & Swain, M. (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching, testing (pp. 7594). London, UK and New York, NY: Longman.
Goldman-Eisler, F. (1964). Hesitation, information, and levels of speech production. In De Reuck, A. & O’Connor, M. (Eds.), Disorders of language (pp. 96111). London: J & A Churchill.
Goldman-Eisler, F. (1968). Psycholinguistics: Experiments in spontaneous speech. London, UK: Academic Press.
Griffiths, R. (1991). Pausological research in an L2 context: A rationale and review of selected studies. Applied Linguistics, 12, 345364.
Hickey, T. (1993). Identifying formulas in first language acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 20, 2741.
Irujo, S. (1993). Steering clear: Avoidance in the production of idioms. International Review of Applied Linguistics and Language Teaching, 31, 205219.
Jackendoff, R. (1983). Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Jiang, N., & Nekrasova, T. M. (2007). The processing of formulaic sequences by second language speakers. Modern Language Journal, 91, 433445.
Laufer, B., & Waldman, T. (2011). Verb-noun collocations in second language writing: A corpus analysis of learners’ English. Language Learning, 61, 647672.
Lin, P. (2010). The phonology of formulaic sequences: A review. In Wood, D. (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language (pp. 174193). London, UK: Continuum.
Lin, P., & Adolphs, S. (2009). Sound evidence: phraseological units in spoken corpora. In Barfield, A. & Gyllstad, H. (Eds.), Researching collocations in another language: Multiple interpretations (pp. 3448). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
MacWhinney, B. (2008) A unified model. In Robinson, P. & Ellis, N. C. (Eds.) Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 341371). New York, NY: Routledge.
Mitchell, R., & Martin, C. (1997). Rote learning, creativity and understanding in classroom foreign language teaching. Language Teaching Research, 1, 127.
Möhle, D. (1984). A comparison of the second language speech production of different native speakers. In Dechert, H. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Second language productions (pp. 2649). Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
Myles, F. (2004). From data to theory: The over-representation of linguistic knowledge in SLA. Transactions of the Philological Society, 102, 139168.
Myles, F., Hooper, J., & Mitchell, R. (1998). Rote or rule? Exploring the role of formulaic language in classroom foreign language learning. Language Learning, 48, 323362.
Myles, F., Mitchell, R., & Hooper, J. (1999). Interrogative chunks in French L2: A basis for creative construction? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 4980.
Nattinger, J. R., & DeCarrico, J. S. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Paquot, M., & Granger, S. (2012). Formulaic language in learner corpora. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 130149.
Pawley, A., & Syder, F. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In Richards, J. and Schmidt, J. (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 191266). London, UK: Longman.
Peters, A. M. (1983). The units of language acquisition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Peterson, R. R., Dell, G. S., Burgess, C., & Eberhard, K. M. (2001). Dissociation between syntactic and semantic processing during idiom comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology/Learning, Memory & Cognition, 27, 1223.
Pine, J. M., & Lieven, E. (1993). Reanalysing rote-learned phrases: Individual differences in the transition to multi-word speech. Journal of Child Language, 20, 551572.
Raupach, M. (1984). Formulae in second language speech production. In Dechert, H., Möhle, D., & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Second language productions (pp. 114137). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Rehbein, J. (1987). On fluency in second language speech. In Dechert, H. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Psycholinguistic models of production (pp. 97105). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Riggenbach, H. (1991). Toward an understanding of fluency: A microanalysis of nonnative speaker conversations. Discourse Processes, 14, 423441.
Schmitt, N., Grandage, S., & Adolphs, S. (2004). Are corpus-relevant clusters psycholinguistically valid? In Schmitt, N. (Ed.) Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp. 127151). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Segalowitz, N. (2010). Cognitive bases of second language fluency. New York, NY: Routledge.
Sinclair, J. M. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
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, 122.
Tabossi, P., Fanari, R., & Wolf, K. (2009). Why are idioms recognized fast? Memory and Cognition, 37, 529540.
Towell, R., Hawkins, R., & Bazergui, N. (1996). The development of fluency in advanced learners of French. Applied Linguistics, 17, 84120.
Underwood, G., Schmitt, N., & Galpin, A. (2004). An eye-movement study into the processing of formulaic sequences. In Schmitt, N. (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp. 153172). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Weinert, R. (1995). The role of formulaic language in second language acquisition: A review. Applied Linguistics, 16, 180205.
Weinert, R. (2010). Formulaicity and usage-based language: Linguistic, psycholinguistic and acquisitional manifestations. In Wood, D. (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language (pp. 120). London, UK: Continuum.
Wong-Fillmore, L. (1976). The second time around: Cognitive and social strategies in second language acquisition (Unpublished PhD thesis). Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
Wong-Fillmore, L. (1979). Individual differences in second language acquisition. In Fillmore, C. J., Kempler, D., & Wang, S.-Y. W.. (Eds.), Individual differences in language ability and language behavior (pp. 203228). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Wood, D. (2010). Formulaic language and second language speech fluency: Background, evidence and classroom applications. London, UK: Continuum.
Wood, D. (2015). Fundamentals of formulaic language: An introduction. London, UK: Bloomsbury.
Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Wray, A. (2008). Formulaic language: Pushing the boundaries. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Wray, A. (2009). Identifying formulaic language. In Corrigan, R., Moravcsik, E. A., Ouali, H., & Wheatley, K. M. (Eds.), Formulaic language (pp. 2751). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Wray, A. (2012). What do we (think we) know about formulaic language? An evaluation of the current state of play. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 231254.
Wray, A. & Namba, K. (2003). Formulaic language in a Japanese-English bilingual child: A practical approach to data analysis. Japan Journal for Multilingualism and Multiculturalism, 9, 2451.
Yorio, C. A. (1989). Idiomaticity as an indicator of second language proficiency. In Hyltenstam, K. & Obler, L. K. (Eds.), Bilingualism across the lifespan (pp. 5572). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

FORMULAIC SEQUENCE(FS) CANNOT BE AN UMBRELLA TERM IN SLA: Focusing on Psycholinguistic FSs and Their Identification

  • Florence Myles (a1) and Caroline Cordier (a2)

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed