Volume 23, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1384-6655
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9811
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



O’Donnell et al. (2013) considered four measures of formulaicity and reported that they produced different results concerning the effects of expertise and first/second language status on formulaic sequence usage in academic writing. The current study explores several additional methodological issues using the same dataset from O’Donnell et al. (2013). We first motivate the need for criterial consistency and investigate whether frequency- and association-based measures yield different results when they are both obtained using corpus-internal criteria. The informativeness of the diversity dimension of formulaic sequence use is then gauged by comparing the results of phrase-frame type-token ratio against those of other measures. Finally, we profile formulaic sequence distribution across quartiles of different measures to assess the effect of variable measure thresholds. Our findings highlight the criticality of issues of criterial consistency, formulaic sequence diversity, and threshold variation in formulaic language research.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Bannard, C., & Lieven, E.
    (2012) Formulaic language in L1 acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 3–16.10.1017/S0267190512000062
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190512000062 [Google Scholar]
  2. Biber, D.
    (2006) University Language: A Corpus-Based Study of Spoken and Written Registers. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.23
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.23 [Google Scholar]
  3. (2009) A corpus-driven approach to formulaic language in English: Multi-word patterns in speech and writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 14(3), 275–311.10.1075/ijcl.14.3.08bib
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.14.3.08bib [Google Scholar]
  4. Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V.
    (2004) If you look at …: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25(3), 371–405.10.1093/applin/25.3.371
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.3.371 [Google Scholar]
  5. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E.
    (1999) The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. New York/London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N.
    (2012) The processing of formulaic language. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 45–61.10.1017/S0267190512000074
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190512000074 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cortes, V.
    (2004) Lexical bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: Examples from history and biology. English for Specific Purposes, 23(4), 397–423.10.1016/j.esp.2003.12.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2003.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  8. Coxhead, A.
    (2000) A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213–238.10.2307/3587951
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3587951 [Google Scholar]
  9. Durrant, P., & Doherty, A.
    (2010) Are high-frequency collocations psychologically real? Investigating the thesis of collocational priming. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 6(2), 125–155.10.1515/cllt.2010.006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt.2010.006 [Google Scholar]
  10. Ellis, N. C.
    (2012) Formulaic language and Second Language Acquisition: Zipf and the phrasal Teddy Bear. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 17–44.10.1017/S0267190512000025
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190512000025 [Google Scholar]
  11. Eskildsen, S. W.
    (2009) Constructing another language – Usage-based linguistics in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30(3), 335–357.10.1093/applin/amn037
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amn037 [Google Scholar]
  12. Eskildsen, S. W., & Cadierno, T.
    (2007) Are recurring multi-word expressions really syntactic freezes? Second language acquisition from the perspective of usage-based linguistics. InM. Nenonen & S. Niemi (Eds.), Collocations and Idioms 1: Papers from the First Nordic Conference on Syntactic Freezes (pp.86–99). Joensuu: Joensuu University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Evert, S.
    (2008) Corpora and collocations. InA. Lüdeling & M. Kytö (Eds.), Corpus Linguistics. An International Handbook (pp.1212–1248). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Fletcher, W. H.
    (2007) KfNgram [Computer software]. Annapolis, MD: USNA.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Granger, S.
    (1996) From CA to CIA and back: An integrated approach to computerized bilingual and learner corpora. InK. Aijmer, B. Altenberg & M. Johansson (Eds.), Languages in Contrast: Paper from a Symposium on Text-based Cross-linguistic Studies (pp.37–51). Lund: Lund University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. (2003) The International Corpus of Learner English: A new resource for foreign language learning and teaching and second language acquisition research. TESOL Quarterly, 37(3), 538–546.10.2307/3588404
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3588404 [Google Scholar]
  17. Granger, S., & Meunier, F.
    (2008) Phraseology: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/z.139
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.139 [Google Scholar]
  18. Gries, S., & Wulff, S.
    (2005) Do foreign language learners also have constructions? Evidence from priming, sorting, and corpora. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 3, 182–200.10.1075/arcl.3.10gri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.3.10gri [Google Scholar]
  19. Herbst, T.
    (2011) Choosing sandy beaches – collocations, probabemes and the idiom principle. InT. Herbst, S. Faulhaber & P. Uhrig (Eds.), The Phraseological View of Language (pp.27–57). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110257014.27
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110257014.27 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hyland, K.
    (1998) Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.54
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.54 [Google Scholar]
  21. (2012) Bundles in academic discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 150–169.10.1017/S0267190512000037
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190512000037 [Google Scholar]
  22. Laufer, B., & Nation, P.
    (1995) Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 307–322.10.1093/applin/16.3.307
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/16.3.307 [Google Scholar]
  23. Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M.
    (2008) Children’s first language acquisition from a usage-based perspective. InP. Robinson & N. C. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook on Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition (pp.168–196). New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. McEnery, T., & Hardy, A.
    (2014) Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Manning, C., & Schütze, H.
    (1999) Foundations of Statistical Natural Language Processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. McEnery, T., & Wilson, A.
    (2004) Corpus Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Mel’čuk, I.
    (1998) Collocations and lexical functions. InA. P. Cowie (Ed.), Phraseology: Theory, Analysis, and Applications (pp.23–53). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Nesselhauf, N.
    (2005) Collocations in a Learner Corpus. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.14
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.14 [Google Scholar]
  29. O’Donnell, M., Römer, U., & Ellis, N. C.
    (2013) The development of formulaic sequences in first and second language writing: Investigating effects of frequency, association, and native norm. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 18(1), 83–108.10.1075/ijcl.18.1.07odo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.18.1.07odo [Google Scholar]
  30. Paquot, M. B., & Granger, S.
    (2012) Formulaic language in learner corpora. Annual review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 130–149.10.1017/S0267190512000098
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190512000098 [Google Scholar]
  31. Pawley, A., & Syder, F. H.
    (1983) Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. InJ. Richards & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and Communication (pp.191–225). New York/London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Pivovarova, L., Kormacheva, D., & Kopotev, M.
    (2017) Evaluation of collocation extraction methods for the Russian language. InM. Kopotev, O. Lyashevskaja & A. Mustajoki (Eds.), Quantitative Approaches to the Russian Language. New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Römer, U.
    (2010) Establishing the phraseological profile of a text type: The construction of meaning in academic book reviews. English Text Construction, 3(1), 95–119.10.1075/etc.3.1.06rom
    https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.3.1.06rom [Google Scholar]
  34. 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), 159–177.10.3366/cor.2011.0011
    https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2011.0011 [Google Scholar]
  35. Schmitt, N., & Carter, R.
    (2004) Formulaic sequences in action. An introduction. InN. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic Sequences (pp.2–22). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/lllt.9.02sch
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.9.02sch [Google Scholar]
  36. Scott, M.
    (2014) WordSmith Tools 6.0 [Computer software]. Liverpool: Lexical Analysis Software.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Simpson-Vlach, R., & Ellis, N. C.
    (2010) An academic formulas list: New methods in phraseology research. Applied Linguistics, 31(4), 487–512.10.1093/applin/amp058
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp058 [Google Scholar]
  38. Sinclair, J.
    (1991) Corpus Concordance Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Tomasello, M.
    (2003) Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Upton, G., & Cook, I.
    (1996) Understanding Statistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Wood, D.
    (2015) Fundamentals of Formulaic Language: An Introduction. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Wray, A.
    (2002) Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511519772
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519772 [Google Scholar]
  43. (2008) Formulaic Language: Pushing the Boundaries. Oxford: Oxford University Presss.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

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