Cover not available

In:Usage-based Perspectives on Language and Language Acquisition: In honour of Heike Behrens
Edited by Karin Madlener-Charpentier, Marjolijn H. Verspoor, Mirjam Weder and Annelies Häcki Buhofer
[Trends in Language Acquisition Research 35] 2026
► pp. 248–271

Get fulltext
PDF logo with download linkDownload Chapter PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Chapter EPUB

Chapter 9
Verb-argument constructions in advanced L2 English

The case of sojourners

Authors
 | University of Basel
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 21 May 2026
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.35.09koy
Abstract
Research on studying abroad (SA) suggests that input-rich contexts help L2 learners develop advanced word use embedded in target-like multiword constructions, or formulaicity. Native-like formulaic use is a key indicator of L2 proficiency, but little research has explored SA contexts to confirm its impact on formulaicity development. Using a dynamic usage-based (DUB) approach (Verspoor & Behrens, 2011), this study examines how verb-argument constructions (VACs) develop in written L2 English during SA. Data come from the SALA Diary Subcorpus (Pérez-Vidal, 2014), collected from 26 Catalan/Spanish advanced L2 learners over a semester (12–17 weeks) in an anglophone context. VACs were analyzed using TAALES (Kyle et al., 2018). A generalized additive mixed-effects model showed significant effects of random (participant behavior) and fixed factors (time), supporting the DUB claim of nonlinear, variable individual trajectories. Participants achieved significantly higher association strength scores for VACs. Further analysis confirmed the link between syntactic, lexical, and VAC indices with holistic formulaicity scores, implying that human raters consider all subdimensions of written L2 performance when making holistic judgements.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.L2 immersion through study abroad
  • 3.Formulaicity and formulaic sequences
  • 4.L2 complexity and VACs in DUB research
  • 5.Methodology
    • 5.1Design
    • 5.2Participants
    • 5.3Learner Corpus
    • 5.4Holistic formualicity scores
    • 5.5VAC indices
    • 5.6Data analysis procedures
  • 6.Results
    • 6.1RQ1: VAC development
    • 6.2RQ2: Relationship between HOLFOR, VAC,
      and syntactic and lexical indices
  • 7.Discussion
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
References (68)
References
Aziez, F., Bátyi, S., Pfenninger, S., & Verspoor, M. (2026). A longitudinal dynamic usage-based study on peer interaction at an Indonesian pesantren. In K. Madlener-Charpentier, M. Verspoor, M. Weder, & A. Häcki Buhofer (Eds.), Usage-based perspectives on language and language acquisition. In honour of Heike Behrens. John Benjamins (this volume).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Behrens, H. (2009). Usage-based and emergentist approaches to language acquisition. Linguistics, 47, 383–411. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bestgen, Y., & Granger, S. (2014). Quantifying the development of phraseological competence in L2 English writing: An automated approach. Journal of Second Language Writing, 26, 28–41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Borràs, J., & Llanes, À. (2021). Re-examining the impact of study abroad on L2 development: A critical overview. The Language Learning Journal, 49(5), 527–540. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2012). Defining and operationalising L2 complexity. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 21–46). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). Conceptualizing and measuring short-term changes in L2 writing complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 26, 42–65. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cobb, T. (2002). Web Vocabprofile. Retrieved on 1 February 2022 from [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Colson, J. P. (2017). The IdiomSearch experiment: Extracting phraseology from a probabilistic network of constructions. In R. Mitkov (Ed.), Computational and corpus-based phraseology: Proceedings of EUROPHRAS 2017 (pp. 13–24). Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (2007). Study abroad as foreign language practice. In R. M. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in a second language: Perspectives from Applied Linguistics and Cognitive Psychology (pp. 208–226). Camebridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). Research on language development during study abroad: Methodological considerations and future perspectives. In C. Pérez-Vidal (Ed.), Language acquisition in study abroad and formal instruction contexts (pp. 313–327). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Durrant, P., & Schmitt, N. (2009). To what extent do native and non-native writers make use of collocations? IRAL — International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 47(2), 157–177. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing: A review with implications for theories of implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(2), 143–188. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Language acquisition as rational contingency learning. Applied Linguistics, 27, 1–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. (2026). What’s in a word? Cognitive-linguistic, corpus-linguistic, neuroscientific, AI, psycholinguistic, and usage-based perspectives. In K. Madlener-Charpentier, M. Verspoor, M. Weder, & A. Häcki Buhofer (Eds.), Usage-based perspectives on language and language acquisition. In honour of Heike Behrens. John Benjamins (this volume).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., Simpson-Vlach, R., Römer, U., O’Donnell, M., & Wulff, S. (2015). Learner corpora and formulaic language in SLA. In S. Granger, G. Gilquin, & F. Meunier (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of learner corpus research (pp. 357–378). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2016). Online processing of verb — argument constructions: Lexical decision and meaningfulness. Language and Cognition, 8(3), 391–420. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Ferreira–Junior, F. (2009). Construction learning as a function of frequency, frequency distribution, and function. The Modern Language Journal, 93(3), 370–385. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eskildsen, S. W. (2009). Constructing another language — Usage-based linguistics in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30, 335–357. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2026). Second language learning as local and long-term process in and for social interaction. In K. Madlener-Charpentier, M. Verspoor, M. Weder, & A. Häcki Buhofer (Eds.), Usage-based perspectives on language and language acquisition. In honour of Heike Behrens. John Benjamins (this volume).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Foster, P. (2009). Lexical diversity and native-like selection: The bonus of studying abroad. In B. Richards, H. Daller, D. Malvern, P. M. Meara, J. Milton, & J. Treffers-Daller (Eds.), Vocabulary studies in first and second language acquisition: The interface between theory and application (pp. 91–106). Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. T., Hampe, B., & Schönefeld, D. (2005). Converging evidence: Bringing together experimental and corpus data on the association of verbs and constructions. Cognition, 95(1), 27–48. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gustafsson, H., & Verspoor, M. H. (2017). The development of chunks in Dutch L2 learners of English. In J. Evers-Vermeul & E. Tribushinina (Eds.), Usage-based approaches to language acquisition and language teaching (pp. 255–276). Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Han, Z. (2004). Fossilization in adult second language acquisition. Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hou, J., Loerts, H., & Verspoor, M. H. (2018). Chunk use and development in advanced Chinese L2 learners of English. Language Teaching Research, 22(2), 148-168. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kliesch, M., & Pfenninger, S. E. (2021). Cognitive and socioaffective predictors of L2 microdevelopment in late adulthood: A longitudinal intervention study. The Modern Language Journal, 105(1), 237–266. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Köylü, Z., Eryılmaz, N., & Pérez-Vidal, C. (2023). A dynamic usage-based analysis of L2 written complexity development of sojourners. Journal of Second Language Writing, 60, 101002. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Köylü, Z., Eryılmaz, N., & Pérez-Vidal, C., & Verspoor, M., & Gustafsson, H. (2024). Longitudinal development of holistic formulaicity, formulaic sequences and lexical complexity in sojourner diaries: A dynamic usage-based perspective. Language Learning, 74(S2), 116–147. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Köylü, Z., & Tracy-Ventura, N. (2022). Learning English in today’s global world: A comparative study of at home, anglophone, and lingua franca study abroad. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 44(5), 1330–1355. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kyle, K. (2016). Measuring syntactic development in L2 writing: Fine-grained indices of syntactic complexity and usage-based indices of syntactic sophistication (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kyle, K., & Crossley, S. A. (2017). Assessing syntactic sophistication in L2 writing: A usage-based approach. Language Testing, 34, 513–535. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kyle, K., Crossley, S., & Berger, C. (2018). The tool for the automatic analysis of lexical sophistication (TAALES): Version 2.0. Behavior Research Methods, 50(3), 1030–1046. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kyle, K., Crossley, S., & Verspoor, M. (2021). Measuring longitudinal writing development using indices of syntactic complexity and sophistication. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43(4), 781–812. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kyle, K., Crossley, S. A., & Jarvis, S. (2021b). Assessing the validity of lexical diversity indices using direct judgements. Language Assessment Quarterly, 18(2), 154–170. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive grammar as a basis for language instruction. In P. Robinson & N. C. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 66–88). Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lu, X., & Ai, H. (2015). Syntactic complexity in college-level English writing: Differences among writers with diverse L1 backgrounds. Journal of Second Language Writing, 29, 16–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McCarthy, P. M., Jarvis, S. (2010) MTLD, vocd-D, and HD-D: A validation study of sophisticated approaches to lexical diversity assessment. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 381–392. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mitchell, R. (2021). Language and student mobility in Europe. In R. Mitchell & H. Tyne (Eds.), Language, mobility and study abroad in the contemporary European context (pp. 1–9). Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mora, J. C., & Valls-Ferrer, M. (2012). Oral fluency, accuracy, and complexity in formal instruction and study abroad learning contexts. TESOL Quarterly, 46(4), 610–641. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nesselhauf, N. (2004). What are collocations? In D. J. Allerton, N. Nesselhauf, & P. Skandera (Eds.), Phraseological units: Basic concepts and their application (pp. 1–21). Schwabe.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Osborne, J. (2007). Why do they keep making the same mistakes? Evidence for error motivation in a learner corpus. In J. Waliński, K. Kredens, & S. Goźdź-Roszkowski (Eds.), Corpora and ICT in language studies: PALC 2005 Łódź studies in language (pp. 117–128). Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paquot, M. (2019). The phraseological dimension in interlanguage complexity research. Second Language Research, 35(1), 121–145. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pawley, A., & Syder, F. H. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 191–225). Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Penris W., & Verspoor M. (2017). Academic writing development: A complex, dynamic process. In S. E. Pfenninger & J. Navracsics (Eds.): Future research directions for applied linguistics (pp. 215–242). Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pérez-Vidal, C., & Llanes, À. (2021). Linguistic effects of international student mobility in European perspective. In R. Mitchell & H. Tyne (Eds.), Language, mobility and study abroad in the contemporary European context (pp. 22–33). Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
RStudio Team. (2022). RStudio: Integrated development environment for R (Version 2022.02.0). RStudio, PBC. [URL]
Römer, U., O’Donnell, M. B., & Ellis, N. C. (2015). Using COBUILD grammar patterns for a large-scale analysis of verb-argument constructions: Exploring corpus data and speaker knowledge. In N. Groom, M. Charles, & J. Suganthi (Eds.), Corpora, grammar and discourse: In honour of Susan Hunston (pp. 43–72). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Römer, U., Roberson, A., O’Donnell, M. B., & Ellis, N. C. (2014). Linking learner corpus and experimental data in studying second language learners’ knowledge of verb-argument constructions. ICAME Journal, 38, 115–135. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmid, H. J. (2020). The dynamics of the linguistic system: Usage, conventionalization, and entrenchment. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Serrano, R., Llanes, À., & Tragant, E. (2016). Examining L2 development in two short-term intensive programs for teenagers: Study abroad vs. “at home.” System, 57, 43–54. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Siyanova, A., & Schmitt, N. (2008). L2 learner production and processing of collocation: A multi-study perspective. Canadian Modern Language Review, 64(3), 429–458. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Pellicer-Sánchez, A. (2019). Formulaic language: Setting the scene. In A. Siyanova-Chanturia and A. Pellicer Sánchez (Eds.) Understanding formulaic language (pp. 1–15). Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Slobin, D. (2026). The wealth of the stimulus. In K. Madlener-Charpentier, M. Verspoor, M. Weder, & A. Häcki Buhofer (Eds.), Usage-based perspectives on language and language acquisition. In honour of Heike Behrens. John Benjamins (this volume).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smiskova-Gustafsson, H. (2013). Chunks in L2 development: A usage-based perspective (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Groningen.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smiskova-Gustafsson, H., Verspoor, M., & Lowie, W. (2012). Conventionalized ways of saying things (CWOSTs) and L2 development. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 125–142. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A. (2013). Collostructional analysis. In T. Hoffmann, & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar, 290–306. Oxford. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A., & Gries, S. T. (2003). Collostructions: Investigating the interaction of words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 8(2), 209–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Steinkrauss, R. (2026). The ditransitive verb-argument construction in German L1 acquisition — A longitudinal case study. In K. Madlener-Charpentier, M. Verspoor, M. Weder, & A. Häcki Buhofer (Eds.), Usage-based perspectives on language and language acquisition. In honour of Heike Behrens. John Benjamins (this volume).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Rij, J., Wieling, M., Baayen, R. H., van Rijn, H., & van Rij, M. J. (2020). itsadug: Interpreting time series and autocorrelated data using GAMMs (Version 2.4) [R package]. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verspoor, M. H., & Behrens, H. (2011). Dynamic systems theory and a usage-based approach to second language development. In M. H. Verspoor, K. de Bot, & W. Lowie (Eds.), A dynamic approach to second language development (pp. 25–38). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verspoor, M., Lowie, W., Chan, H., & Vahtrick, L. (2017). Linguistic complexity in second language development: Variability and variation at advanced stages. Recherches en Didactique des Langues et des Cultures, 14(1), 1–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verspoor, M., Lowie, W., & Van Dijk, M. (2008). Variability in second language development from a dynamic systems perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 214–231. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verspoor, M., Lowie, W., & Wieling, M. (2021). L2 developmental measures from a dynamic perspective. In B. Le Bruyn & M. Paquot (Eds.), Learner corpus research meets second language acquisition (pp. 172–190). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verspoor, M., & Rosmawati, R. (2024). Disambiguating complexity: From CAF to CAFIC: A commentary on “Complexity and difficulty in second language acquisition: A theoretical and methodological overview.” Language Learning, 75(2), 493–532. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verspoor, M. H., Schmid, M. S., & Xu, X. (2012). A dynamic usage-based perspective on L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(3), 239–263. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wind, A. (2020). A dynamic usage-based approach to the longitudinal development of verb argument constructions in second language writing: Two case studies. In C. Kalman (Ed.), DEAL 2020: A snapshot of diversity in English applied linguistics (pp. 39–72). Eötvös Loránd University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wood, S. N. (2006). mgcv: Mixed GAM computation vehicle with automatic smoothness estimation (Version 1.3) [R package]. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zaytseva, V., Miralpeix, I., & Pérez-Vidal, C. (2021). When in one’s new country: Examining native-like selections in English at home and abroad. In M. Howard (Ed.), Study abroad and the second language learner: Expectations, experiences and development (pp. 211–232). Bloomsbury. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Aziez, Feisal, Szilvia Bátyi, Simone E. Pfenninger & Marjolijn Verspoor
2026. A longitudinal dynamic usage-based study on peer interaction at an Indonesian pesantren . In Usage-based Perspectives on Language and Language Acquisition [Trends in Language Acquisition Research, 35], ► pp. 272 ff. DOI logo
Ellis, Nick
2026. What’s in a word?. In Usage-based Perspectives on Language and Language Acquisition [Trends in Language Acquisition Research, 35], ► pp. 69 ff. DOI logo
Eskildsen, Søren Wind
2026. Second language learning as local and long-term process in and for social interaction. In Usage-based Perspectives on Language and Language Acquisition [Trends in Language Acquisition Research, 35], ► pp. 224 ff. DOI logo
Steinkrauss, Rasmus
2026. The ditransitive verb-argument construction in German L1 acquisition. In Usage-based Perspectives on Language and Language Acquisition [Trends in Language Acquisition Research, 35], ► pp. 168 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2026. 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue