Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
1.4
0.9
Journals
Languages
Special Issues
Idiomatic and Formulaic Language: Learning, Processing and Representation
share announcement

Idiomatic and Formulaic Language: Learning, Processing and Representation

A special issue of Languages (ISSN 2226-471X).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (30 August 2023) | Viewed by 6599

Special Issue Editor

Dr. Gareth Carrol

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of English Language and Linguistics, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
Interests: psycholinguistics; second language acquisition; formulaic language; idioms; figurative language; metaphor; vocabulary; phraseology; construction grammar; usage-based linguistics

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Formulaic language, encompassing a vast range of phrases, idioms, collocations, multiword expressions, constructions and patterns, is now well-established as a topic of interest in studies of vocabulary, lexicography and psycholinguistics. In other words, many approaches now recognize that it is not only “words” (however defined) that occupy space within the lexicon, but also a range of units of varying size and fixedness.  These units contribute to the efficient use of language, playing an important role in “native-like” communication (Pawley & Syder, 1983), and fulfil a range of communicative, social and interpersonal functions (Schmitt, 2017; Wray, 2012). The “processing advantage” offered by formulaic language is robustly supported in the literature, and has been demonstrated for a wide range of phrase types (e.g. Carrol & Conklin, 2020).

Despite the rise in interest over the past two decades (or more), the exact nature of how such units are represented in the mental lexicon remains unclear. Wray (2002) described how a “heteromorphic” lexicon might accommodate this, but it is unclear how well evidenced this assertion is. Experimental results suggest that, at least for idioms, processing by native speakers may combine both “direct retrieval” and “componential analysis” (e.g. Titone, Lovseth, Kasparian & Tiv, 2019), but how this might extend to other types of phrase, including both figurative and literal combinations, remains to be seen. Despite widespread claims of “whole form storage” of formulaic phrases across the literature, direct evidence to support this is scarce (Siyanova-Chanturia and Martinez, 2014) and it is often inferred by studies that take behavioural measures (reaction times, reading patterns) as their dependent variable.

The purpose of this Special Issue is to further the primarily psycholinguistic investigations underway into idiomatic and formulaic language. The focus is deliberately broad, encompassing any topic that could reasonably be included under this heading. Authors are free to define their own criteria for formulaicity, but commonly accepted definitions relate to factors such as frequency, fixedness, predictability and (variable) compositionality. The focus of studies and the methodologies used can vary, but the relevance for psycholinguistic questions of learning, processing and representation should be clear. We welcome submissions on any language, as long as formulaic expressions constitute the main subject under investigation. Authors should carefully consider important contemporary issues such as sample size, appropriateness of design and analysis, and availability of data, analysis scripts, etc., as a part of their submissions.

We request that, prior to submitting a manuscript, interested authors initially submit a proposed title and an abstract of 400–600 words summarizing their intended contribution. Please forward this document to the guest editor ([email protected]) or to the Languages editorial office ([email protected]). Abstracts will be reviewed by the guest editors for the purposes of ensuring proper fit within the scope of the Special Issue. Full manuscripts will undergo double-blind peer-review.

References

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. DOI: 10.1177/0023830918823230.

Pawley, A., and Syder, F. H. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In J. C. Richards and R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and Communication (pp. 191-226). New York, NY: Longman Inc.

Schmitt, N. (March 2017). Vocabulary: Principles and practice. English Teaching Professional, 109, 4-6.

Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Martinez, R. (2014). The idiom principle revisited. Applied Linguistics, 35(5), 549–569. DOI: 10.1093/applin/amt054.

Titone, D., Lovseth, K., Kasparian, K., & Tiv, M. (2019). Are figurative interpretations of idioms directly retrieved, compositionally built, or both? Evidence from eye movement measures of reading. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 73(4), 216–230. DOI: 10.1037/cep0000175.

Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wray , A. ( 2012 ). What do we (think we) know about formulaic language? An evaluation of the current state of play. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 231 – 254.

Dr. Gareth Carrol
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Languages is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • psycholinguistics
  • second language acquisition
  • formulaic language
  • idioms
  • figurative language
  • metaphor
  • vocabulary
  • phraseology
  • construction grammar
  • usage-based linguistics

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (4 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

30 pages, 1991 KiB  
Article
Adding a Piece to the Puzzle: Children’s Exposure to Idioms
by Jacolien van Rij, Floris H. Uithof, Sanne Poelstra, Stephen M. Jones and Simone A. Sprenger
Languages 2024, 9(11), 344; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9110344 - 1 Nov 2024
Viewed by 632
Abstract
Idioms are figurative multiword expressions that need to be learned as part of the native phrasal vocabulary. While it has been shown that non-figurative multiword expressions are acquired with language exposure, the learning process for idioms may be different because the figurative meaning [...] Read more.
Idioms are figurative multiword expressions that need to be learned as part of the native phrasal vocabulary. While it has been shown that non-figurative multiword expressions are acquired with language exposure, the learning process for idioms may be different because the figurative meaning adds complexity to the learning task. Idiom vocabulary overall develops relatively late, but it is unknown to what extent children are exposed to idioms, and what kinds of idioms they encounter. Here, we investigated children’s idiom exposure and its effect on the development of idiom vocabulary in three studies: we explore the frequency of a well-tested set of Dutch idioms in a corpus of child literature, test idiom familiarity in a controlled setting in primary school children, and compare those findings to a set of online familiarity ratings. We find that children’s idiom exposure differs from adult idiom exposure, when comparing idiom frequencies based on children’s books and a corpus with resources for adults. Idiom decomposability and idiom frequencies from the children’s books, but not frequencies from the adult corpus, influenced the familiarity ratings of older children, suggesting that language exposure and idiom characteristics, such as decomposability, both play a role in idiom acquisition. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Idiomatic and Formulaic Language: Learning, Processing and Representation)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 638 KiB  
Article
What Fires Together, Wires Together: The Effect of Idiomatic Co-Occurrence on Lexical Networks
by Simone A. Sprenger, Sara D. Beck and Andrea Weber
Languages 2024, 9(3), 105; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9030105 - 18 Mar 2024
Viewed by 1427
Abstract
This study investigated the processing of lexical elements of idioms in isolation. Using visual word priming, spreading activation for idiomatically related word pairs (e.g., pop–question) was compared to that for semantically related (e.g., answer–question) and unrelated word pairs (e.g., trim [...] Read more.
This study investigated the processing of lexical elements of idioms in isolation. Using visual word priming, spreading activation for idiomatically related word pairs (e.g., pop–question) was compared to that for semantically related (e.g., answer–question) and unrelated word pairs (e.g., trim–question) in two experiments varying in SOA (500 ms and 350 ms). In line with hybrid theories of idiom representation and processing, facilitatory priming was found in both experiments for idiomatic primes, suggesting a tight link between the words of an idiom that is mediated by a common idiom representation. While idiomatic priming was stable across SOAs, semantic priming was stronger for the short SOA, implying fast and early activation. In conclusion, one lexical element of an idiom can facilitate the processing of another, even if the elements are not presented within a phrasal context (i.e., within an idiom), and without the words being semantically related. We discuss our findings in light of theories about idiom processing, as well as current findings in the field of semantic priming. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Idiomatic and Formulaic Language: Learning, Processing and Representation)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 425 KiB  
Article
Not Batting an Eye: Figurative Meanings of L2 Idioms Do Not Interfere with Literal Uses
by Marianna Kyriacou and Franziska Köder
Languages 2024, 9(1), 32; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9010032 - 19 Jan 2024
Viewed by 1632
Abstract
Encountering idioms (hit the sack = “go to bed”) in a second language (L2) often results in a literal-first understanding (“literally hit a sack”). The figurative meaning is retrieved later, subject to idiom familiarity and L2 proficiency, and typically at a processing [...] Read more.
Encountering idioms (hit the sack = “go to bed”) in a second language (L2) often results in a literal-first understanding (“literally hit a sack”). The figurative meaning is retrieved later, subject to idiom familiarity and L2 proficiency, and typically at a processing cost. Intriguingly recent findings report the overextension of idiom use in inappropriate contexts by advanced L2 users, with greater L2 proficiency somewhat mitigating this effect. In this study, we tested the tenability of this finding by comparing eye-movement patterns for idioms used literally, vs. literal control phrases (hit the dirt) in an eye-tracking-while-reading paradigm. We hypothesised that if idiom overextension holds, processing delays should be observed for idioms, as the (over)activated but contextually irrelevant figurative meanings would cause interference. In contrast, unambiguous control phrases should be faster to process. The results demonstrated undifferentiated processing for idioms used literally and control phrases across measures, with L2 proficiency affecting both similarly. Therefore, the findings do not support the hypothesis that advanced L2 users overextend idiom use in inappropriate contexts, nor that L2 proficiency modulates this tendency. The results are also discussed in light of potential pitfalls pertaining to idiom priming under typical experimental settings. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Idiomatic and Formulaic Language: Learning, Processing and Representation)
20 pages, 412 KiB  
Article
The Effect of Congruency and Frequency of Exposures on the Learning of L2 Binomials
by Abdulaziz Altamimi and Kathy Conklin
Languages 2024, 9(1), 9; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9010009 - 21 Dec 2023
Viewed by 1764
Abstract
Although extensive research has been carried out on opaque formulaic language where the meaning is not the sum of the individual words (i.e., idioms and many collocations), it is still not clear how cross-language congruency and frequency of exposure influence the learning of [...] Read more.
Although extensive research has been carried out on opaque formulaic language where the meaning is not the sum of the individual words (i.e., idioms and many collocations), it is still not clear how cross-language congruency and frequency of exposure influence the learning of transparent formulaic language in an L2. In the current study, self-paced reading along with offline word order recognition tasks were used to investigate the role of cross-language congruency and the frequency of exposure on the learning and processing of fully transparent binomials. In the self-paced reading, Arabic second language learners of English and native English speakers encountered three types of binomial phrases either two or five times in English texts: English-only binomials, Arabic-only binomials that were translated into English, and congruent binomials (acceptable in English and Arabic). A subsequent offline task revealed that both native and non-native speakers developed knowledge of the ‘correct’ order of binomials (i.e., fish and chips, not chips and fish) after only two exposures in the self-paced reading. Native speakers were more accurate on congruent and English-only items than Arabic-only items, while non-natives speakers exhibited no differences in accuracy across the binomial types. The offline task showed that native speakers responded faster to congruent and English-only items than Arabic-only, and non-native speakers responded faster to congruent items than English-only and Arabic-only. The frequency of exposure had no effect, with no difference in response times and accuracy between two and five exposures. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Idiomatic and Formulaic Language: Learning, Processing and Representation)
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-4
Back to TopTop