Cover not available
Article published In:
ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 165:1 (2014) ► pp.19–45

How big is the positive effect of assonance on the recall of L2 collocations?

| Hilderstone College, United Kingdom
| Ghent University, Belgium,
High proficiency in L2 partly depends on acquiring many formulaic sequences (FSs), yet post-childhood learners find this difficult. Ways of accelerating the acquisition of FSs would be welcome. Small-scale studies have indicated that assonance (e.g., strong bond) makes studied FSs especially retrievable if, during exposure, assonance is made the object of teacher-instigated awareness-raising and attention direction. However, questions remain about effect size and duration. In two new experiments a mnemonic effect of assonance was detected after 5–10 minutes. This was despite a sorting task thought likely to direct participants’ attention particularly to the control collocations. The effect appeared to fade over an hour and disappear after a day. A small-scale meta-analysis indicates the effect is initially of medium size. We discuss how short-term operation of such an effect could facilitate the fuller acquisition of partly learned assonant FSs. We propose avenues for research into means whereby the mnemonic effect of assonance might be exploited in learning materials. We touch on effects of item frequency, mutual information, and concreteness-imageability of meaning.
Keywords: episodic recall, assonance, L2 collocations, frequency, concreteness-imageability, attention-direction, mutual information
Published online: 6 June 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.165.1.02lin
References (54)
Boers, F., Deconinck, J., & Lindstromberg, S. (2010). Choosing motivated chunks for teaching. In De Knop, S., Boers, F., & De Rycker, T. (Eds.), Fostering language teaching efficiency through cognitive linguistics (pp. 239–256). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., & Lindstromberg, S. (2009). Optimizing a lexical approach to instructed second language acquisition. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012). Experimental and intervention studies on formulaic sequences in a second language Annual Rev. of Applied Linguistics, 321, 83–110. DOI:DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., Lindstromberg, S., & Eyckmans, J. (2012). Are alliterative word combinations comparatively easy to remember for adult learners? RELC J., 43(1), 85–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013). Is alliteration mnemonic without awareness-raising? Language Awareness. DOI:DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boers, F, Lindstromberg, S., & J. Eyckmans. (2014a). When does assonance make L2 lexical phrased memorable? The European Journal of Applied Linguistics and TEFL, 3(1): 93–107.
Boers, F., Lindstromberg, S., & Eyckmans, J. (2014b). Some explanations for the slow acquisition of L2 collocations. Vigo International Journal of Linguistics, 111: 41–62.Google Scholar
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L., Higgins, J., & Rothstein, H. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester: Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cao, R. (2012). The word frequency and list length effects on cued recall. Ohio State University research thesis. [URL] (5 July 2013).Google Scholar
Church, K., & Hanks, P. (1991). Word association norms, mutual information and lexicography. Computational Linguistics, 161, 22–29.Google Scholar
Criss, A., Aue, W., & Smith, L. (2011). The effects of word frequency and context variability in cued recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 641, 119–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cumming, G. (2011). ESCI meta-analysis. Exploratory software for confidence intervals. Retrieved from [URL]Google Scholar
2012). Understanding the new statistics: Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta-analysis. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Davies, M. (2008 to present). The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). [URL] (Accessed Oct. 2012 – July 2013).Google Scholar
DeLosh, E., & McDaniel, M. (1996). The role of order information in free recall: Application to the word-frequency effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 221, 1136–1146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dunlap, W., Cortina, J., Vaslow, J., & Burke, M. (1996). Meta-analysis of experiments with matched groups or repeated measures designs. Psychological Methods, 11, 170−177. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N., Simpson-Vlach, R., & Maynard, C. (2008). Formulaic language in native and second-language speakers: Psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 411, 375–396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, P. (2010). The essential guide to effect sizes: Statistical power, meta-Analysis, and the interpretation of research results. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Evert, S., & Krenn, B. (2001). Methods for the qualitative evaluation of lexical association measures. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics , Toulouse, France, 188–195. [URL] (18 July 2013).
Fliessbach, K., Weis, S., Klaver, P., Elger, C., & Weber, B. (2006). The effect of word concreteness on recognition memory. NeuroImage, 321, 1413–1421. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forsberg, F. (2010). Using conventional sequences in L2 French. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 481, 25–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friendly, M., Franklin, P., Hoffman, D., & Rubin, D. (1982). The Toronto Word Pool: Norms for imagery, concreteness, orthographic variables, and grammatical usage for 1,080 words. Behavior Research Methods, 141, 375–399. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gregg, V., Montgomery, D., & Castaño, D. (1980). Recall of common and uncommon words from pure and mixed lists. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 191, 240–245. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, S. (2011). Phonological similarity in multi-word symbolic units. Cognitive Linguistics, 221, 491–510. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grissom, R., & Kim, J. (2012). Effect sizes for research: Univariate and multivariate applications (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Howell, D. (2010). Statistical methods for psychology (7th ed.; International edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Jaccard, J., & Turrisi, R. (2003). Interaction effects in multiple regression (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuiper, K., Columbus, G., & Schmitt, N. (2009). Acquiring phrasal vocabulary. In S. Foster-Cohen (Ed.), Advances in language acquisition (pp. 216–240). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laufer, B., & Waldman, T. (2011). Verb-noun collocations in second language writing: A corpus analysis of learners’ English. Language Learning, 611, 647–672. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Lewis, M. (1993). The Lexical Approach: The state of ELT and a way forward. Hove: LTP.Google Scholar
Li, J., & Schmitt, N. (2009). The acquisition of lexical phrases in academic writing: A longitudinal case study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 181, 85–102. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Lindstromberg, S., & Boers, F. (2008a). The mnemonic effect of noticing alliteration in lexical chunks. Applied Linguistics, 291: 200−222. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008b). Phonemic repetition and the learning of lexical chunks: The mnemonic power of assonance. System, 361, 423−436. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lowry, R. (1998-2013). Vassarstats: Website for statistical computation. [URL] (accessed August 2012 through July 2013).Google Scholar
Madan, C., Glaholt, M., & Caplan, J. (2010). The influence of item properties on association-memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 631, 46–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marschak, M., & Paivio, A. (1977). Integrative processing of concrete and abstract sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 161, 217–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Merritt, P., DeLosh, E., & McDaniel, M. (2006). Effects of word frequency on individual-item and serial order retention: Tests of the order-encoding view. Memory and Cognition, 341, 1615–1627. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Murray, K. & Conner, M. (2009). Methods to quantify variable importance: Implications for the analysis of noisy ecological data. Ecology, 901, 349–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nadel, L., & Hardt, O. (2011). Update on memory systems and processes. Neuropsychopharmacology, 361, 251–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nattinger, J. & DeCarrico, J. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Nekrasova, T. (2009). English L1 and L2 speakers’ knowledge of lexical bundles. Language Learning, 591, 647–686. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oxford idioms dictionary for learners of English. (2006). Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Pawley, A., & Syder, F. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Native like selection and native like fluency. In J. Richards & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and Communication (pp. 191–226). London: Longman.Google Scholar
Qi, Y., & Ding, Y. (2011). Use of formulaic sequences in monologues of Chinese EFL learners. System, 391, 164–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Really Learn 100 Phrasal Verbs (2nd ed.). (2007). Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Schmitt, N. (Ed.). (2004). Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Statcrunch. 2007-2014. Data Analysis on the Web. London: Pearson Education. [URL] (23 January, 2014).Google Scholar
Tellings, A., Coppens, K., Gelissen, J., & Schreuder, R. (2013). Clusters of word properties as predictors of elementary school children’s performance on two word tasks. Applied Psycholinguistics, 341, 461–481. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tulving, E. (1972). Episodic and semantic memory. In E. Tulving & W. Donaldson (Eds.), Organization of memory (pp. 381–403). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1985a). How many memory systems are there? American Psychologist, 401, 385–398. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1985b). Memory and consciousness. Canadian Psychology, 261, 1–12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walker, I., & Hulme, C. (1999). Concrete words are easier to recall than abstract words: Evidence for a semantic contribution to short-term serial recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 251, 1256–1271. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wessa P. (2013). Skewness and Kurtosis Test (v1.0.3) in Free Statistics Software (v1.1.23-r7). Office for Research Development and Education. [URL] (accessed August 2012 through July 2013).Google Scholar
Zumbo, B., & Jennings, M. (2002). The robustness of validity and efficiency of the related samples t-test in the presence of outliers. Psicológica, 231, 415–450.Google Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Lindstromberg, Seth & June Eyckmans
2020. The effect of frequency on learners’ ability to recall the forms of deliberately learned L2 multiword expressions. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics 171:1 ► pp. 2 ff. DOI logo
Lindstromberg, Seth & June Eyckmans
2021. THE RETRIEVABILITY OF L2 ENGLISH MULTIWORD ITEMS IN A CONTEXT OF STRONGLY FORM-FOCUSED EXPOSURE. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 43:5 ► pp. 1040 ff. DOI logo
Eyckmans, June & Seth Lindstromberg
2017. The power of sound in L2 idiom learning. Language Teaching Research 21:3 ► pp. 341 ff. DOI logo
Lindstromberg, Seth
2016. Inferential statistics in Language Teaching Research: A review and ways forward. Language Teaching Research 20:6 ► pp. 741 ff. DOI logo
Lindstromberg, Seth
2020. Surplus interword phonological similarity in English multiword units. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 16:1 ► pp. 95 ff. DOI logo
Peters, Elke & Paul Pauwels
2015. Learning academic formulaic sequences. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 20 ► pp. 28 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 august 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.