Formulaic sequences and perceived oral proficiency: putting a Lexical Approach to the test

By F. Boers, June Eyckmans, J. Kappel, H. Stengers, Murielle Demecheleer. 2006

487 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Developmental and Educational Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/41dc19de486f8a2849494551514e0bceaf49a4fe

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Teaching Formulaic Sequences: The Same as or Different From Teaching Single Words? (2012, background): “For example, Boers et al. (2006) found that learners who were exposed to considerable listening and reading and made aware of the formulaic language in that input were later judged to be more orally proficient than learners who received the same input but were taught with a traditional grammar +…”
The effects of repetition and time of post-test administration on EFL learners’ form recall of single words and collocations (2014, background): “Although the major focus in collocation research has been on FL learners’ use of collocations, the following instructional interventions for learning collocations (and formulaic sequences) have been studied so far: the lexical approach (Boers et al., 2006), typographic salience (Bishop, 2004; Peters”
Spoken fluency revisited (2010, background): “In the L2 context, the acquisition and appropriate use of formulaic sequences in spoken language has been shown to enhance the perception of oral proficiency (Boers et al., 2006).”
The idiom principle revisited (2014, background): “…perceive language produced by non-natives that contains MWEs as superior to discourse that is lacking MWEs, or is, in Millar’s terms, ‘malformed’ (Boers et al. 2006; Geluso 2013), the extent to which there is a processing disadvantage that can also lead to, for example, comprehension issues…”
Assessing Lexical Proficiency Using Analytic Ratings: A Case for Collocation Accuracy (2014, background): “These stored chunks may also lead to fewer lexical errors on the part of L2 learners (Boers et al. 2006), allowing language use to appear more natural and proficient (Hoey 2005).”
A Phrasal Expressions List (2012, background): “Boers et al. (2006), for example, showed that L2 speakers were judged as more proficient when they used formulaic sequences. The same applies for written discourse. Ohlrogge (2009) examined 170 written compositions from an EFL proficiency test and concluded that those with higher scores also tended ”