Volume 34, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0774-5141
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9676
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



This article explores the possibility of identifying mentally stored constructions in writing process data, that is, data that reproduce the process through which a text is written. The unit that serves as a basis for the identification of constructions is the burst of writing, which corresponds to a chunk of text produced between two pauses. Bursts are examined in L1 French and L2 English keylogging data from the Process Corpus of English in Education and their potential constructional status is considered.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Abdel Latif, Muhammad M. Mahmoud
    2013 “What Do We Mean by Writing Fluency and How Can It Be Validly Measured?” Applied Linguistics34 (1): 99–105. 10.1093/applin/ams073
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams073 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bencini, Giulia M. L. , and Adele E. Goldberg
    2000 “The Contribution of Argument Structure Constructions to Sentence Meaning.” Journal of Memory and Language43 (4): 640–651. 10.1006/jmla.2000.2757
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2000.2757 [Google Scholar]
  3. Boas, Hans C.
    2013 “Cognitive Construction Grammar.” InThe Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, ed. by Thomas Hoffmann , and Graeme Trousdale , 233–252. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bybee, Joan , and Paul Hopper
    (eds) 2001Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.45
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.45 [Google Scholar]
  5. Cappelle, Bert , and Natalia Grabar
    2016 “Towards an N-Grammar of English.” InApplied Construction Grammar, ed. by Sabine De Knop , and Gaëtanelle Gilquin , 271–302. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110458268‑011
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110458268-011 [Google Scholar]
  6. Cappelle, Bert , Yury Shtyrov , and Friedemann Pulvermüller
    2010 “Heating Up or Cooling Up the Brain? MEG Evidence That Phrasal Verbs Are Lexical Units.” Brain and Language115 (3): 189–201. 10.1016/j.bandl.2010.09.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2010.09.004 [Google Scholar]
  7. Chenoweth, N. Ann , and John R. Hayes
    2001 “Fluency in Writing: Generating Text in L1 and L2.” Written Communication18 (1): 80–98. 10.1177/0741088301018001004
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088301018001004 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cislaru, Georgeta , and Thierry Olive
    2017 “Segments répétés, jets textuels et autres routines. Quel niveau de pré-construction?” Corpus17. doi:  10.4000/corpus.2846
    https://doi.org/10.4000/corpus.2846 [Google Scholar]
  9. 2018Le processus de textualisation. Analyse des unités linguistiques de performance écrite. Louvain-la-Neuve: De Boeck Supérieur. 10.3917/dbu.cisla.2018.01
    https://doi.org/10.3917/dbu.cisla.2018.01 [Google Scholar]
  10. Croft, William
    1998 “Linguistic Evidence and Mental Representations.” Cognitive Linguistics9 (2): 151–173. 10.1515/cogl.1998.9.2.151
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1998.9.2.151 [Google Scholar]
  11. Dahlmann, Irina , and Svenja Adolphs
    2009 “Spoken Corpus Analysis: Multimodal Approaches to Language Description.” InContemporary Corpus Linguistics, ed. by Paul Baker , 125–139. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Gilquin, Gaëtanelle
    2015 “The Use of Phrasal Verbs by French-Speaking EFL Learners. A Constructional and Collostructional Corpus-Based Approach.” Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory11 (1): 51–88. 10.1515/cllt‑2014‑0005
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2014-0005 [Google Scholar]
  13. 2018 “Exploring the Spoken Learner English Constructicon: A Corpus-Driven Approach.” InSpeaking in a Second Language, ed. by Rosa Alonso Alonso , 127–152. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aals.17.06gil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.17.06gil [Google Scholar]
  14. 2021 “Hic Sunt Dracones: Exploring Some Terra Incognita in Learner Corpus Research.” InVariation in Time and Space: Observing the World through Corpora, ed. by Anna Čermáková , and Markéta Malá , 65–86. Berlin: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. . Forthcoming. “Constructing Learner Speech: On the Use of Spoken Data in Applied Construction Grammar.” InDirections for Pedagogical Construction Grammar: Learning and Teaching (with) Constructions ed. by Hans Boas . Berlin: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Goldberg, Adele E.
    1995Constructions. A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 2003 “Constructions: A New Theoretical Approach to Language.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences7 (5): 219–224. 10.1016/S1364‑6613(03)00080‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00080-9 [Google Scholar]
  18. 2006Constructions at Work. The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hampe, Beate
    2011 “Discovering Constructions by Means of Collostruction Analysis: The English Denominative Construction.” Cognitive Linguistics22 (2): 211–245. 10.1515/cogl.2011.009
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2011.009 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hare, Mary L. , and Adele E. Goldberg
    1999 “Structural Priming: Purely Syntactic?” InProceedings of the Twenty First Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, ed. by Martin Hahn , and Scott C. Stoness , 208–211. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Hilpert, Martin , and Samuel Bourgeois
    2020 “Intersubjectification in Constructional Change: From Confrontation to Solidarity in the Sarcastic Much? Construction.” Constructions and Frames12 (1): 96–120. 10.1075/cf.00036.hil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00036.hil [Google Scholar]
  22. Leijten, Mariëlle , and Luuk Van Waes
    2013 “Keystroke Logging in Writing Research: Using Inputlog to Analyze and Visualize Writing Processes.” Written Communication30 (3): 358–392. 10.1177/0741088313491692
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088313491692 [Google Scholar]
  23. Sandra, Dominiek , and Sally Rice
    1995 “Network Analyses of Prepositional Meaning: Mirroring Whose Mind – the Linguist’s or the Language User’s?” Cognitive Linguistics6 (1): 89–130. 10.1515/cogl.1995.6.1.89
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1995.6.1.89 [Google Scholar]
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): burst of writing; construction grammar; keylogging; writing process
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error