Article published in:
Language Teaching for Young Learners
Vol. 4:1 (2022) ► pp. 6691
References
Aijmer, K.
(2011) Well I’m not sure I think. The use of well by non-native speakers. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 16 (2), 232–233. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Azkarai, A., & Oliver, R.
(2018) Teaching EFL to young learners. In R. Oliver & A. Azkarai (Eds.), Teaching young second language learners (pp. 89–108). Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K.
(2002) A new starting point? Investigating formulaic use and input in future expression. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24 (2), 189–198. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beckner, C., Blythe, R., Bybee, J., Christiansen, M. H., Croft, W., Ellis, N. C., Holland, J., Ke, J., Larsen-Freeman, D., & Schoenemann, T.
(2009) Language is a complex adaptive system: Position paper. Language Learning, 59 1(Suppl.1), 1–27. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V.
(2004) If You Look At …: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25 (3), 371–405. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E.
(1999) Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Longman.Google Scholar
Bybee, J.
(2002) Phonological evidence for exemplar storage of multiword sequences. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24 1, 215–21. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., Eyckmans, J., Kappel, J., Stengers, H. & Demecheleer, M.
(2006) Formulaic sequences and perceived oral proficiency: Putting a lexical approach to the test. Language Teaching Research, 10 (3), 245–261. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, L.
(2001) Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2003) Challenges for ELT from the expansion in teaching children. ELT Journal, 57 (2), 105–112. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carrol, G. & Conklin, K.
(2020) Is all formulaic language created equal? Unpacking the processing advantage for different types of formulaic sequences. Language and Speech, 63 (1), 95–122. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N.
(2004) The generative enterprise revisited: Discussions with Riny Huybregts, Henk van Riemsdijk, Naoki Fukui and Mihoko Zushi. Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Conklin, K. & Schmitt, N.
(2008) Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics, 29 (1), 72–89. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cook, V. J.
(1985) Language functions, social factors, and second language learning and teaching. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 23 (1–4), 177–198. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R.
(2008) The study of second language acquisition (2nd edition). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Erman, B. & Warren, B.
(2000) The idiom principle and the open choice principle. Text, 20 1, 29–62.Google Scholar
Girard, M. & Sionis, C.
(2003) Formulaic speech in the L2 class: An attempt at identification and classification. Pragmatics, 13 (2), 231–251. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Green, A.
(2012) Language functions revisited: Theoretical and empirical bases for language construct definition across the ability range (Vol. 2). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hasselgreen, A.
(2000) The assessment of the English ability of young learners in Norwegian schools: An innovative approach. Language Testing, 17 (2), 261–277. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hickey, T.
(1993) Identifying formulas in first language acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 20 1, 27–41. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lázaro Ibarrola, A. & Ángeles Hidalgo, M.
(2017) Benefits and limitations of conversational interactions among young learners of English in a CLIL context. In: M. P. García Mayo (Ed.), Learning foreign languages in primary school. Research Insights (pp. 86–102). Multilingual Matters. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McKay, P.
(2006) Assessing young language learners. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, R., & Myles, F.
(2019) Learning French in the UK setting: Policy, classroom engagement and attainable learning outcomes. Apples: Journal of Applied Language Studies, 13 (1), pp. 69–93. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Myles, F.
(2004) From data to theory: The over-representation of linguistic knowledge in SLA. Transactions of the Philological Society, 102 1, 139–168. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Myles, F., & Cordier, C.
(2017) Formulaic sequence (FS) cannot be an umbrella term in SLA: Focusing on psycholinguistic FSs and their identification. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39 (1), 3–28. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
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), 323–363. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Myles, F., Mitchell, R., & Hooper, J.
(1999) Interrogative chunks in French L2: A basis for creative construction? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21 (1), 49–80. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pawley, A., & Syder, F. H.
(1983) Two puzzles for linguistic theory native like selection and native-like fluency. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 191–230). Longman.Google Scholar
Peters, A.
(1983) The units of language acquisition. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pinter, A.
(2006) Teaching young language learners. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2017) Teaching young language learners. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schmitt, N.
(2010) Researching vocabulary: A vocabulary research manual. Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, J. M.
(1991) Corpus, concordance, collocations. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Sylvén, L. K. & Sundqvist, P.
(2017) Computer-assisted language learning (CALL) in extracurricular/extramural contexts, Calico Journal, 34 (1), i–iv. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, H.
(2009) English language learners and Math: Discourse, participation, and community in reform-oriented, middle school Mathematics classes. Information Age Publishing Inc.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N.
(2007) Chunk learning and the development of spoken discourse in a Japanese as a foreign language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 11 1, 433–457. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S.
(1978) Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Weinert, R.
(1995) The role of formulaic language in second language acquisition: A review. Applied Linguistics, 16 1, 180–205. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wible, D., Liu, A. L. E., & Tsao, N. L.
(2011) A browser-based approach to incidental individualization of vocabulary learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27 1, 530–543. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wong-Fillmore, L.
(1976) The second time around: Cognitive and social strategies in second language acquisition. PhD thesis , Stanford University.
Wood, D.
(2006) Uses and functions of formulaic sequences in second language speech: An exploration of the foundations of fluency. Canadian Modern Language Review, 63 (1), 13–33.Google Scholar
(2010) Formulaic language and second language speech fluency: Background, evidence, and classroom applications. Continuum.Google Scholar
(2015) Fundamentals of formulaic language: An introduction. Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Wray, A.
(1999) Formulaic language in learners and native speakers. Language Teaching, 32 (4), 213–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2002) Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2004) ‘Here’s one I prepared earlier’: Formulaic language learning on television. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic Sequences (pp. 248–268). John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008) Formulaic language: Pushing the boundaries. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2013) Formulaic language. Language Teaching, 46 (3), 316–334. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wray, A., & Namba, K.
(2003) Use of formulaic language by a Japanese-English bilingual child: A practical approach to data analysis. Japanese Journal for Multilingualism and Multiculturalism, 9 (1), 24–51.Google Scholar
Wray, A., & Perkins, R. M.
(2000) The functions of formulaic language: An integrated model. Language and Communication, 20 1, 1–2. CrossrefGoogle Scholar