Formulaicity and Usage-based Language: Linguistic, Psycholinguistic and Acquisitional Manifestations

Perspectives on Formulaic Language: Acquisition and Communication

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 1-20

  Weinert, Regina ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84860633983     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (74)

1. Aitchison, J. (1987). Words in the mind. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
2. Akhtar, N. (1999). Acquiring basic word order: Evidence for data-driven learning of syntactic structure. Journal of Child Language, 26, 339–56.
3. Akhtar, N., & Tomasello, M. (1997). Young children’s productivity with word order and verb morphology. Developmental Psychology, 33, 952–65.
4. Barlow, M,. & Kemmer, S. (2000). (Eds.), Usage-based models of language. Stanford CA: Centre for the Study of Language and Information.
5. Bod, R. (to appear). Exemplar-based syntax: How to get productivity from examples. The Linguistic Review, Vol. 23, Special Issue on Exemplar-Based Models of Language.
6. Bolander, M. (1989). Prefabs, patterns and rules in interaction? Formulaic speech in adult learners’ L2 Swedish. In K. Hyltenstam & L. Obler (Eds.), Bilingualism across the lifespan: Aspects of acquisition, maturity and loss (pp. 73–86). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Brandt, S, Diessel, H., & Tomasello, M. (2008). The acquisition of German relative clauses. Journal of Child Language, 35 (2), 325–48.
8. Brooks, P., Tomasello, M., Lewis, L., & Dodson, K. (1999). Young children’s overgeneralisations with fi xed transitivity verbs. Child Development, 70, 1325–37.
9. Butler, C. (1998). Multi-word lexical phenomena in Functional Grammar. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses, 36, 13–36.
10. Bybee, J. (2002). Sequentiality as the basis of constituent structure. In T. Givón & B. F. Malle (Eds.), The evolution of language out of pre-language (pp. 107–34).Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
11. Bybee, J. (2006). Frequency of use and the organization of language. New York/ Oxford: Oxford University Press.
12. Calude, A. (2008). Demonstrative clefts in spoken English. Doctoral Thesis, University of Auckland.
13. Childers, J. B., & Tomasello, M. (2001). The role of pronouns in young children’s acquisition of the English transitive construction. Developmental Psychology, 37, 739–48.
14. Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly that non-formulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics, 29 (1), 72–89.
15. Cowie, A. P. (1998), (Ed.). Phraseology: Theory, analysis and application. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
16. Dabrowska, E. (2004a). Language, mind and brain. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
17. Dabrowska, E. (2004b). Rules or schemas? Evidence from Polish. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 225–71.
18. Dabrowska, E. (2006). Low-level schemas or general rules? The role of diminutives in the acquisition of Polish case infl ections. Language Sciences, 28, 120–35.
19. Dabrowska, E., & Lieven, E. (2005). Towards a lexically specifi c grammar of children’s question constructions. Cognitive Linguistics, 16, 437–74.
20. de Bot, K. (1992). A bilingual production model: Levelt’s ‘speaking’ model adapted. Applied Linguistics, 13, 1–25.
21. De Cock, S. (2000). Repetitive phrasal chunkiness and advanced EFL speech and writing. In C. Mair & M. Hundt (Eds.), Corpus linguistics and linguistic theory. (pp. 51–68). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
22. Diessel, H. (2004). The acquisition of complex sentences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23. Durrell, M. (2002). Hammer’s German grammar and usage. Fourth edition. London: Arnold.
24. Erman, B., & Warren, B. (2000). The idiom principle and the open choice principle.Text, 20, 29–62.
25. Gibbs, R. (1985). On the process of understanding idioms. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 14 (5), 465–72.
26. Gibbs, R., Bogadanovich, J., Sykes, J., & Barr, D. (1997). Metaphor in idiom comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 141–54.
27. Granger, S. (1998). Prefabricated patterns in advanced EFL writing: Collocations and formulae. In A. P. Cowie (Ed.), Phraseology: Theory, analysis and application (pp. 145–60). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28. Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
29. Howarth, P. (1998). The phraseology of learners’ academic writing. In A. P. Cowie (Ed.), Phraseology: Theory, analysis and application (pp. 161–86). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
30. Iwamura, S. G. (1980). The verbal games of pre-school children. London: Croom Helm.
31. Kasper, G. (2001). Four perspectives on L2 pragmatic development. Applied Linguistics, 22 (4), 502–30.
32. Kecskes, I. (2002). Situation-bound utterances in Ll and L2. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
33. Kitzinger, C. (2000). How to resist an idiom. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33 (2), 121–54.
34. Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol 1. Theoretical pre requisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
35. Langacker, R. W. (2000). A Dynamic usage-based model. In M. Barlow & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Usage-based models of language (pp. 1–63). Stanford CA: Centre for the Study of Language and Information.
36. Miller, J., & Weinert, R. (1998). Spontaneous spoken language: Syntax and discourse.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
37. Moon, R. (1998). Fixed expressions and idioms in English. Oxford: Clarenden Press.
38. Myles, F., Hooper J., & Mitchell, R. (1998). Rote or rule? Exploring the role of formulaic language in classroom foreign language learning. Language Learning, 48 (3), 223–363.
39. Myles, F., Mitchell, R., & Hooper, J. (1999). Interrogative chunks in French L2. A basis for creative construction? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 49–80.
40. Nattinger, J. R., & DeCarrico, J. S. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
41. O’Keeffe, A., McCarthy M., & Carter, R. (2007). From corpus to classroom: language use and language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42. Pawley, A., & Syder, F. H. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: nativelike selection and nativelike fl uency. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 191–226). New York: Longman.
43. Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of verb-argument structure. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
44. Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct. Harmondsworth: Allen Lane, Penguin Press.
45. Pinker, S., & Prince, A. (1991). Regular and irregular morphology and the psychological status of rules in grammar. Proceedings of the 17th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 230–51). Berkeley, CA: BLS.
46. Raupach, M. (1984). Formulae in second language speech production. In H. Dechert, D. Möhle, & M. Raupach (Eds.), Second language productions (pp. 114–37) Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
47. Rehbein, J. (1987). Multiple formulae. Aspects of Turkish migrant workers’ German in intercultural communication. In K. Knapp et al. (Eds.), Analysing intercultural communication (pp. 215–48). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
48. Saffran, J. R., Alsin, R. N., & Newport, E. L. (1996). Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science, 274, 1926–1928.
49. Schmitt, N. (2004). (Ed.) Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
50. Schmitt, N., Grandage, S., & Adolphs, S. (2004). Are corpus-based recurrent clusters psycholinguistically valid? In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp. 127–51). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
51. Schmitt, N., & Underwood, G. (2004). Exploring the processing of formulaic sequences through a self-paced reading task. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp. 173–72). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
52. Sinclair, J. McH. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
53. Siyanova, A., & Schmitt, N. (2008). L2 learner production and processing of collocation: A multi-study perspective. Canadian Modern Language Review, 64 (3), 429–58.
54. Sosa, A. V., & MacFarlane, J. (2002). Evidence for frequency-based constituents in the mental lexicon: Collocations involving the word of. Brain and Language, 83 (2), 227–36.
55. Stubbs, M. (1995). Collocations and cultural connotations of common words. Linguistics and Education, 7 (4), 379–90.
56. Tomasello, M. (1992). First verbs: A case study of early grammatical development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
57. Tomasello, M. (2000). Do young children have adult syntactic competence? Cognition, 74, 209–53.
58. Tomasello, M. (2002). The emergence of grammar in early child language. In T. Givón & B. F. Malle (Eds.), The evolution of language out of pre-language (pp. 309–28). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
59. Tomasello, M. (2003), Constructing a language. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.
60. Tomasello, M., & Brooks, (1999). Early syntactic development: A construction grammar approach. In M. Barrett (Ed.), The development of language (pp. 161–90). Hove: Psychology Press.
61. Underwood, G., Schmitt, N., & Galpin, A. (2004). The eyes have it. An eye-movement study into the processing of formulaic sequences. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp. 153–72). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
62. v. Polenz, P. (1993). Die Sprachrevolte in der DDR im Herbst 1989. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik, 21, 127–49.
63. Van Lancker, D., Canter, G. J., & Teerbeek, D. (1981). Disambiguation of ditropic sentences: Acoustic and phonetic cues. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 24, 330–35.
64. Vollmer, H. J., & Ohlstain, E. (1989). The language of apologies in German. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood: Ablex.
65. Weinert, R. (1994). Some effects of a foreign language classroom on the development of German negation. Applied Linguistics, 15 (1), 76–101.
66. Weinert, R. (1995). The role of formulaic language in second language acquisition: A review. Applied Linguistics, 16 (2), 80–205.
67. Weinert, R. (2007). Demonstrative and personal pronouns in formal and informal conversations. In R. Weinert (Ed.), Spoken Language Pragmatics: An analysis of form-function relations (pp. 1–28). London/New York: Continuum.
68. Weinert, R. (to appear). German free word order – reality or myth? The front-fi eld in spoken main clauses.
69. Weinert, R., & Miller, J. (1996). Cleft constructions in spoken language. Journal of Pragmatics, 25, 173–206.
70. Weismer, S. E. (2004). Memory and processing capacity. In R. M. Kent (Ed.), MIT encyclopedia of communication disorders (pp. 349–52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
71. Woodin, J. (2007). Intercultural positioning: tandem conversations about word meaning. In R. Weinert (Ed.), Spoken Language Pragmatics: An analysis of formfunction relations (pp. 208–28). London/New York: Continuum.
72. Wray, A. (1992). The focusing hypothesis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
73. Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
74. Wray, A. (2008). Formulaic language: Pushing the boundaries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.