Article published In:
Asia-Pacific Language Variation
Vol. 3:1 (2017) ► pp.6794
References
Arnon, Inbal, & Snider, Neal
(2010) More than words: Frequency effects for multi-word phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 62(1), 67–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bannard, Colin, & Lieven, Elena
(2012) Formulaic language in L1 acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 321, 3–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffery, Conrad, Susan, & Finegan, Edward
(1999) Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Essex, UK: Longman.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan
(1985) Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam; Philidelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) Usage-based grammar and second language acquisition. In Peter Robinson & Nick C. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 216–236). New York; Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2010) Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chen, Yu-Hua, & Baker, Paul
(2010) Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning and Technology, 14(2), 30–49.Google Scholar
Conklin, Kathy, & Schmitt, Norbert
(2012) The processing of formulaic language. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 321, 45–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corbett, Grevile, Hippisley, Andrew R., Brown, Dunstan, & Marriott, Paul
(2001) Frequency, regularity, and the paradigm: A perspective from Russian on a complex relation. In Joan Bybee & Paul Hopper (Eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure (pp. 201–226). Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cowan, Nelson
(2010) The magical mystery four: How is working memory capacity limited, and why? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(1), 51–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Durrant, Philip, & Doherty, Alice
(2010) Are high-frequency collocations psychologically real? Investigating the thesis of collocational priming. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 6(2), 125–155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fratini, Viviana, Acha, Joana, & Laka, Itziar
(2014) Frequency and morphological irregularity are independent variables. Evidence from a corpus study of Spanish verbs. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 10(2), 289–314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stephan Th., Hampe, Beate, & Schönefeld, Doris
Haspelmath, Martin
(2008) Frequency vs. iconicity in explaining grammatical asymmetries. Cognitive Linguistics, 19(1), 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hay, Jennifer
(2001) Lexical frequency in morphology: Is everything relative? Linguistics, 39(6), 1041–1070. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heffernan, Kevin
(2012) Kansaiben kōpasu no shōkai [An introduction to the Corpus of Kansai Vernacular Japanese ]. Sōgōseisaku Kenkyū, 411, 157–164.Google Scholar
Heffernan, Kevin, & Hiratsuka, Yusuke
in press). Morphological relative frequency impedes the use of stylistic variants: Evidence from a corpus of vernacular Japanese. Asia Pacific Language Variation.
Hoey, Michael
(2005) Lexical priming: A new theory of words and language. Stroud, UK: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Horio, Kei
(2014) Wakamono kotoba ni mirareru gengo henka ni kan suru kenkyū [Research on language change in Japanese youth language]. Doctoral dissertation, Kyushu University, Japan. Retrieved October 1, 2016, from [URL]Google Scholar
Horasawa, Shin
(2011) Wakamonotachi ga shiyō suru ‘bokashi kotoba’: ‘Kana, mitaina’ to ‘ttekanji’ no goyōronteki kinō [The prgamatic function of the ambigious expressions ‘kana / mitaina’ and ‘ttekanji’ among young people]. Gifu daigaku chiiki kagakubu kenkyū hōkoku, 281, 41–49.Google Scholar
Hoshino, Yuko
(2009) Komyunikēshon sutoratejī toshite no in’yō hyōgen: Hatsuwamatsu no ‘mitai-na’ no hyōgen kōka. [Direct quotations as a communication strategy: The expressive functions of utterance-final ‘mitai-na’]. Ningen bunka sōsei kagaku ronsō, 111, 133–142.Google Scholar
Iwasaki, Mariko
(2012) ‘Mitai’ no shiteki hensen [On the diachronic change of the expression ‘mitai’]. Okayama Daigaku Daigakuin Shakaibunka Kagaku Kenkyūka Kiyō, 341, 163–182.Google Scholar
Juknevičienė, Rita
(2009) Lexical bundles in learner language: Lithuanian learners vs. native speakers. Kalbotyra, 61(3), 61–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kayne, Richard S.
(2005) Movement and silence. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuiper, Koenraad
(1996) Smooth talkers: The linguistic performance of auctioneers and sportscasters. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Matsutomo, Etsuko, Miyamoto, Jun, & Wakuri, Masako
(2007) Essential Japanese expressions includes English, Chinese, and Korean translations. Tokyo: Aruku.Google Scholar
Maeda, Naoko
(2004) Bunmatu hyōgen ‘mitaina’ no kinō [The pragmatic function of the sentence-final expression mitai-na]. Gekkan Gengo, 33(10), 54–57.Google Scholar
Meyer, David E., & Schvaneveldt, Roger W.
(1971) Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: Evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90(2), 227–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michel, Jean-Baptiste, Shen, Yuan Kui, Aiden, Aviva P., Veres, Adrian, Gray, Matthew K., The Google Books Team, …Aiden, Erez L.
(2011) Quantitative analysis of culture using millions of digitized books. Science, 331(6014), 176–2182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, George A.
(1956) The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ohba, Mihoko
(2009) Bunmatsu ni mochiirareru ‘mitai-na’ [On the expression mitai-na used at the end of a sentence]. Nihongo to Nihongo Kyōiku, 371, 43–59.Google Scholar
Pawley, Andrew, & Syder, Frances H.
(1983) Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In Jack C. Richards & Richards W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 191–225). London, UK: Longman.Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg
(2017) A framework for understanding linguistic entrenchment and its psychological foundations. In Hans-Jörg Schmid (Ed.), Entrenchment and the psychology of language learning (pp. 9–35). American Psychology Association and Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Siyanova-Chanturia, Anna
(2015) On the ‘holistic’ nature of formulaic language. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 11(2), 285–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siyanova-Chanturia, Anna, Conklin, Kathy, & van Heuven, Walter J. B.
(2011) Seeing a phrase “time and again” matters: The role of phrasal frequency in the processing of multiword sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Language, Memory and Cognition, 37(3), 776–784. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stefanowitsch, Anatol, & Gries, Stefan Th.
(2003) Collostructions: Investigating the interaction of words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 8(2), 209–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tabossi, Patrizia, Fanari, Rachele, & Wolf, Kinou
(2009) Why are idioms recognized fast? Memory & Cognition, 37(4), 529–540. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, Michael
(2003) Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
(2009) The usage-based theory of language acquisition. In Edith L. Bavin (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of child language (pp. 69–88). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tremblay, Antoine, & Baayen, Harald
(2010) Holistic processing of regular four-word sequences: A behavioral and ERP study of the effects of structure, frequency, and probability on immediate free recall. In David Wood (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: Acquisition and communication (pp. 151–173). London, UK: The Continuum International Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Tremblay, Antoine, Derwing, Bruce, Libben, Gary, & Westbury, Chris
(2011) Processing advantages of lexical bundles: Evidence from self-paced reading and sentence recall tasks. Language Learning, 61(2), 569–613. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wray, Alison
(2002) Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) What do we (think we) know about formulaic language? An evaluation of the current state of play. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 321, 231–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

FILE‐MURIEL, RICHARD J.
2023. Phonetics, Phonology, and Usage‐Based Approaches. In The Handbook of Usage‐Based Linguistics,  pp. 107 ff. DOI logo
Heffernan, Kevin & Yusuke Hiratuka
2017. Morphological relative frequency impedes the use of stylistic variants. Asia-Pacific Language Variation 3:2  pp. 200 ff. DOI logo
Heffernan, Kevin, Yusuke Imanishi & Masaru Honda
2018. Showcasing the interaction of generative and emergent linguistic knowledge with case marker omission in spoken Japanese. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 3:1 DOI logo
Satyanath, Shobha
2017. Editorial. Asia-Pacific Language Variation 3:2  pp. 123 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.