Unconventional Expressions: Productive syntax in the L2 acquisition of formulaic language

Abstract

This article presents a generative analysis of the acquisition of formulaic language as an alternative to current usage-based proposals. One influential view of the role of formulaic expressions in second language (L2) development is that they are a bootstrapping mechanism into the L2 grammar; an initial repertoire of constructions allows for statistical induction of abstract grammatical categories, such that formulaic language is the data source from which syntactic rules are derived. This study brings evidence to bear on this debate from three studies of the acquisition of conventional expressions by L2 learners of English. A total of 271 learners and 58 native speakers completed either an oral conversation-simulation task or an aural-written elicited imitation task. The data show that while learners exhibit knowledge of both contextualized use and the lexical core of conventional expressions, production data reflect the morphosyntactic knowledge of learners at particular stages of development. Formulaic language does not drive the acquisition of syntax; rather, the acquisition of syntax as an independent process drives changes in the production of conventional expressions. Their gradual transformations allow for insights not only into the acquisition of syntax, but also into the nature of multi-word expressions in the mental lexicon.

Task, formulaic language, and role play for developing ESL students’ academic language

“…The repeated use of formulas in writing and role play fortified them in the students' schema for automatic use later, at a time of need. Formulas usage supports Bardovi-Harlig's and Stringer's (2017) findings that formulas get stored with conventional phrases in long term memory.…”

“…The view that once the formulaic expressions are memorised they help in the induction of abstract grammatical constructions has been advocated by Ellis ( , 2012 and Wray (2000Wray ( , 2008. Contrary to this view is the one that as learners develop their language proficiency, their knowledge of syntax and lexis drives changes in the production of conventional expressions and multi-word expressions-formulaic expressions (Bardovi-Harlig & Stringer, 2017). Nevertheless, the importance of formulaic expressions cannot be underestimated.…”

The Acquisition of Conventional Expressions as a Pragmalinguistic Resource in Chinese as a Foreign Language

“…Attempts at the conventional expressions, or the lexical core, exhibit at least two content words of a multi‐morpheme expression but are not identical to the conventional expression. The lexical core is a concept from second language acquisition derived from interlanguage analysis (Bardovi–Harlig, ; Bardovi–Harlig & Stringer, ; see also Taguchi et al., ). In English, Sorry for lating shows sorry and late , the lexical core for Sorry I'm late ; in Chinese, the lexical core for “X shì duōshǎo qián ” (‘How much is X?’) is duōshǎo ‘how much’ and qián ‘money.’ Interrater reliability for the identification of the lexical core of target expressions was 90.1%.…”

“…Analysis of lower‐scoring scenarios showed that learners may have performed different speech acts in those contexts, or if they performed the expected speech act, may have used a competing expression. The subsequent interlanguage analysis showed that learners start with a lexical core—key words that carry the meaning of the expression—such as sorry … late for the conventional expression Sorry I'm late which fills in as the grammar develops (Bardovi–Harlig & Stringer, ). In a second study, Bardovi–Harlig and Bastos () investigated the influence of proficiency, length of stay, and intensity of interaction on the production of conventional expressions by the learners in Bardovi–Harlig ().…”

“…Another issue related to proficiency is the timing of the acquisition of formulas, of which conventional expressions are one type. Vocabulary researchers place the acquisition of formulaic language as late, characteristic of advanced learners with knowledge of target morphosyntax (Boers & Lindstromberg, ); usage‐based researchers place acquisition of formulas much earlier, and posit a role for formulas in driving the development of grammar (Ellis, ; see Bardovi–Harlig & Stringer, , for a review). Thus, proficiency is important to this study from the perspective of both pragmatics and formulaicity.…”