Sophia University Junior College Division Faculty Journal
第 43 号, 2022, 117-125

Book Review

Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Pellicer-Sanchez,
A. (Eds.). (2019). Understanding Formulaic
Language: A Second Language Acquisition
Perspective. Routledge. xii + 277 pp. (softcover).
ISBN: 978-1-138-63497-8.
Reviewed byAlex Garin
Introduction
The research of formulaic language has been well established in the field of second
language acquisition. Most researchers agree that it plays a crucial role in language
learning, processing and application. Its significance is underlined by its ubiquity, as“…up to 70% of everything we say, hear, read, or write is to be found in some form of
fixed expressions” (Hill, 2000, p. 53). Furthermore, the importance of noticing formulaic
language for language learning, fluency development, expression of complex ideas andaccurate pronunciation is significant (Lewis, 1993). Incorporating formulaic language
into language teaching is commonly known as the lexical approach.
The purpose of this review is to introduce the reader to Understanding Formulaic
Language, a book that combines the latest research on formulaic language processing,acquisition and use from three specific and interconnected perspectives: cognitive,
sociocultural and pedagogical. Each of these constitutes a separate section of the book.
The review will summarize and evaluate 1-2 chapters from each section both in terms oftheoretical knowledge and its potential practical application in the classroom. It should
also be stated that this is an edited volume, bringing together contributions from someof the more well-established researchers in the field of formulaic language.

Cognitive Perspective
Usage-based perspective
At the beginning of chapter 1 in this section a distinction is made between a rulebased approach to language acquisition that describes language learning as acquiring
words and rules that determine how to merge these words together and a usage-based

─ 117 ─Alex Garinapproach that argues for a mental lexicon in which grammar and lexis are joined
together (Wulff, 2019). From my perspective, being both a former English learner anda current English teacher, the former approach is much more familiar and traditional
than the latter, essentially representing a grammar-based, linear syllabus. The latterapproach is something I became aware of only recently and is associated with a breakfrom grammar-focused language teaching and learning.
One of the primary factors for learning a language is the amount of linguistic
input that the learners are exposed to. “Early emphasis on receptive skills, especiallylistening, is essential” (Lewis, 1993, p. 194). Regarding the usage-based approach, thechapter lists several aspects of input that contribute to formulaic language acquisition.
The most relevant aspects for classroom contexts may be frequency, distribution,and saliency. Wulff differentiates that “token frequency is the frequency with whicha particular construction occurs in the input; type frequency refers to the number ofdistinct realizations of a given construction” (Wulff, 2019, p. 22). She also points out that
more densely dispersed and salient formulaic language usually has a higher probabilityof being acquired by language learners (Wulff, 2019).
The research summarized in this section could be usefully utilized in a language
classroom by a principled practitioner of the lexical approach. According to Nationand Macalister (2010), teaching principles must be grounded in theoretical researchand should not be too specific to provide variation and flexibility to accommodate fora wide range of conditions in which languages are learned. A language teacher could
take a principled approach to teaching formulaic language by consistently selecting
an appropriate amount of both reading and listening input containing most frequent,focused, and salient target expressions. This would most likely involve supplementing
the course book with both online input and texts composed by the teacher, as the
majority of published textbooks still adhere to the rule-based approach and focus on
single word vocabulary. While they still may contain useful input, the target language
may not be relevant for every teaching context. It would also likely mean designingtasks and activities that incorporate these multiword expressions in a way beneficial for
their acquisition by the learners.

Online Processing
In chapter 2 the processing of formulaic language is described from the standpointof both comprehension and production. In comprehension, one major factor in online
processing that is mentioned is again frequency. Native speakers and language learners

─ 118 ─

Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Pellicer-Sanchez, A. (Eds.). (2019). Understanding Formulaic Language: A Second
Language Acquisition Perspective. Routledge. xii + 277 pp. (softcover). ISBN: 978-1-138-63497-8.

are sensitive to multiword frequency. However, frequency seems to affect productionof formulaic language in L1 speakers (for example, faster articulation and increased
pausing), but the evidence is less clear with L2 learners (Siyanova-Chanturia & Van
Lancker Sidtis, 2019).
Again, the research in this chapter should be useful for a teaching practitioner andcould be applied in a principled way. The findings on comprehension are potentially
useful for all levels of students, but especially lower levels, as the teaching focus should
be much more on comprehensible input for the latter. Various techniques could be
used to focus on frequent formulaic language. Input flood, where target language isconcentrated in a short text. Highlighting and noticing tasks, as well as spaced retrieval
and review could all potentially be designed or adapted with a focus on more frequent
formulaic expressions and a goal of learners encountering these more often. This in turn
could benefit acquisition.
Even though the findings on frequency in production are less conclusive for L2
learners, some practical application could also be suggested. As already mentioned,
less pressure should be put on learners to produce the frequent formulaic language
accurately and appropriately, compared to simply comprehending it. In addition,
fluency activities could be designed, focusing on the repeated use of the most frequent
expressions, and allowing for planning time beforehand.

Socio-cultural perspective
Pragmatic perspective
In chapter 5 the acquisition of formulaic language is discussed from the pragmatic
perspective and the main factors that could affect the acquisition are outlined. According
to Bardovi-Harlig (2019), this area of research is mainly focused on the social functionof formulaic language, namely the use of particular phrases that may characterize
whether or not the speaker belongs to a specific speech community. This is relevant forL2 learners, as their knowledge of colloquial multi-word expressions could influence
their cultural identity and the degree of assimilation in the country where their L2 isthe predominant language of communication. This point is in turn related to anothermajor aspect of pragmatics discussed in the chapter, that of context. The author makes
a distinction between pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic competences. The former is
how well the learner knows an expression and the latter is how well they can use it inan appropriate context (Bardovi-Harlig, 2019).
Several factors related to formulaic language acquisition are outlined in the chapter.

─ 119 ─Alex Garin

One has already been mentioned in this review and that is the difference between input
and output. Bardovi-Harlig (2019) reports that when it comes to pragmatics, learners
notice more conventional expressions than they can output. This lack of production is
explained by either learners not knowing the expression, not knowing how to use an
expression or by them misinterpreting the context of use.
Another major factor in formulaic language acquisition is learning environment.
This is because in the country of their L2 learners could find themselves in situations
where pragmatics would be particularly noticeable. They are also more likely to havemore opportunities to notice input (Bardovi-Harlig, 2019). This is consistent with thebelief of many of my university students that learning L2 in a country where it isprimarily spoken is more beneficial than in their home country as a foreign language.
One other significant factor for acquisition is language instruction. According to
Bardovi-Harlig (2019), instruction has a positive effect on output of formulaic language,
but most textbooks lack authentic input to provide context and co-text for this target
language. This is consistent with earlier comments in this review for the need byteachers to develop and adapt published materials to best accommodate the needs oftheir learners.
Reviewing the main points of this chapter, several pedagogical implications forformulaic language instruction may be derived. Regarding context, formulaic language
should not only be taught in isolation, but rather it should also be presented to thelearners in the context of a sentence, paragraph or a larger text. That way they could
have a more comprehensive contextualized and co-textualized model of how the target
language is used accurately and appropriately.
Another implication has already been mentioned above, namely learners should not
be pressured to produce formulaic language right after encountering it for the first time.
Rather the focus should be on providing them with large amount comprehensible input,
with contextualized target language.
Finally, in relation to learning environment, the purpose of study should be clear
to the learners and the teacher. Some learners would be satisfied with limited exposure
to the formulaic language in their EFL context. They may have no ambitions of study
abroad or altering their identity through language practice. On the other hand, learners
who aspire to assimilate into the community of their L2 would usually have higher
proficiency goals, may be more motivated and put more pressure on themselves in order
to attain their learning goals. As much as possible, the teacher should be aware of theirlearners’ goals.

─ 120 ─

Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Pellicer-Sanchez, A. (Eds.). (2019). Understanding Formulaic Language: A Second
Language Acquisition Perspective. Routledge. xii + 277 pp. (softcover). ISBN: 978-1-138-63497-8.

Pedagogical perspective
Pedagogical approaches
Chapter 8 is focused on approaches to teaching formulaic language. There are three
approaches outlined: incidental, semi-incidental and deliberate. According to PellicerSanchez and Boers (2019), incidental language learning is a secondary result fromprimarily meaning-focused tasks, while deliberate learning encourages intentional
memorization and strengthening the knowledge of lexis and semi-incidental learning is
primarily focused on input meaning, while concurrently focusing attention on language
items.
An example of incidental learning may involve learners reading a graded reader or
listening to a story with the primary focus on meaning. As they read or listen, they may
also notice formulaic language in the input and eventually add it to their repertoire.
There are numerous factors that may contribute to incidental acquisition, but there are
two main ones mentioned in the chapter: frequency and modality. While results of thevarious studies listed in the chapter vary, Pellicer-Sanchez and Boers (2019) concluded
that overall, more frequent formulaic language was more likely to be retained by thelearners. Also, both reading and multi-modal input (reading plus listening together)were more effective for incidental acquisition than listening alone.
In semi-incidental learning, input is presented with the focus on meaning, butalso with target formulaic language highlighted in some way. There is no specificinstruction to study the highlighted phrases, but as a result of highlighting, learners’
attention tends to gravitate towards the target language. This is called typographic
enhancement, which tends to be more effective for acquisition of formulaic sequences
than unhighlighted input alone (Pellicer-Sanchez & Boers, 2019).
Regarding deliberate learning, several approaches are enumerated in the chapter.
Pellicer-Sanches and Boers (2019) note that in contextualized practice, learners cantry and find, or notice, examples of formulaic language in the input. Additionally,in decontextualized practice, they can do gap fill or matching tasks or study lists ofexpressions. They can also try to produce the target language either in written or spoken
form, but mastering accurate and appropriate production usually takes considerable
effort and repeated practice.
Overall, the authors aptly conclude that “the effectiveness of any pedagogicalprocedure – be it incidental, intentional, or both – will inevitably depend on the qualityof its design and how it is implemented” (Pellicer-Sanchez & Boers, 2019, p. 167). In
other words, no perfect methodology exists, and the effectiveness of acquisition will

─ 121 ─Alex Garindepend on a variety of factors, such as teaching methods and context, learner ability andmotivation, learning styles, learners’ L1, and the purpose of study to name just a few.
One other interesting comment at the end of the chapter is about existing
pedagogical practice of formulaic language. The authors state that it would be “useful
to find out more systematically how teachers and course designers around the world
are already addressing the challenge of FL learning” (Pellicer-Sanchez & Boers, 2019,p. 168). As a practicing university teacher, who incorporates the lexical approach in myclasses, it is interesting to compare my own practice with the approaches in this chapter.
Some of my own approaches match those in the chapter, namely incidental learning withthe focus on meaning in the input and deliberate learning with students being asked tofind and highlight examples of expressions in texts and using formulaic expressions intheir essays. But my teaching practice also includes several other aspects not mentioned
in the chapter. For example, learner training in the use of collocation dictionary, in how
to organize a lexical notebook for the new and semi-familiar expressions they encounter
during the course, and they also engage in reflection activities on the significance of
formulaic language in their L2 development. It would be difficult to report with highconfidence about the effectiveness of these teaching practices, but at the very least theattempt is there to raise the learners’ awareness of formulaic expressions and increase
their autonomy and independent skills they can hopefully use outside the classroom andafter the course is finished.

English for academic purposes perspective
In chapter 11 several reasons for using formulaic language in this context are
outlined. One reason is “that formulas are basic linguistic units” (Durant, 2019, p. 211).
Just as individual words are learned by students, formulaic expressions and phrases
should be focused on in a similar way. Learners should be made aware that manyphrases express a single meaning and should not be broken down into individual parts.
Another reason is related to the processing function of formulaic language alreadydiscussed above. Formulaic sequences can make processing easier, so the learner canfocus more on the meaning rather than form (Durant, 2019). This is related to fluency ofboth input comprehension and output production. The knowledge of formulaic language
can allow learners to become faster readers by focusing their eye movements on larger
chunks of text instead of individual words. It could also allow them to speak and write
more fluently by using prefabricated set phrases instead of trying to construct sentences
and utterances from individual words.

─ 122 ─

Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Pellicer-Sanchez, A. (Eds.). (2019). Understanding Formulaic Language: A Second
Language Acquisition Perspective. Routledge. xii + 277 pp. (softcover). ISBN: 978-1-138-63497-8.

The third reason is that certain kinds of formulaic language are very specificto particular EAP communities and by using this language the learner can signal
the membership in the community (Durant, 2019). This is related to the academic
conventions that learners need to master in order to be successful in their university
careers. Most prominently this may be relevant for academic essay writing – formulaic
sequences used to frame and organize the essay content, objectively express stance,
evaluate and analyze the sources, to name just a few examples. In my teachingexperience with academic writing, initially learners often struggle with adopting theseconventions and need extensive practice to become skillful at implementing them. The
importance of this practice should be stressed to learners, as universities and colleges
often require strict adherence to these conventions and failure to do so could result inpoor, unprofessional quality of work.

Limitations and conclusion
Overall, Understanding Formulaic Language is a comprehensive resource foranyone interested in the field of formulaic language acquisition and study. By combining
the cognitive, sociocultural and pedagogical perspectives, the book provides a wide rangeof the most recent research in the field that has direct relevance to classroom practice.
However, the book also has some potential limitations.
One has to do with the difficulty of application of the research on formulaic
language. While any teacher should be able to apply the research findings and principles
from the book with their learners, this may be more difficult for novice or pre-service
teachers. In particular, those not already familiar with or practicing the lexical approachor those not having necessary background knowledge in applied linguistics. The bookdoes have a pedagogical application section, but it lacks ready-made, hands-on tasks
and activities that beginner teachers would find especially useful because they would be
able to start using those right away with their students. This limitation is not uniqueto this book though, as to my knowledge, much of the research in language acquisition
is mainly focused on the theoretical, as opposed to practical side, and the struggle tointegrate the two is a well-known issue in language teaching.
Another potential limitation is the terminology in the book, again mainly
for beginner teachers. New teachers often struggle with reading second language
acquisition literature due to their lack of knowledge of technical language. They find it aslow and often demotivating process. Even for MA students, it usually takes a semesteror two to get acclimatized to technical language in journal papers and textbooks, so─ 123 ─Alex Garinmore experienced teachers should sympathize with those who struggle to read technicallanguage for the first time. And while the book is on the whole lucid and well-organized,
some of the more technical language in it may present a difficulty for some readers. But
again, this limitation is not specific to Understanding Formulaic Language, but is rather
more general to the literature in second language acquisition.
Having mentioned this, it must also be stated that these limitations should notpresent a difficulty for a more experienced teacher. For teachers with MA in applied
linguistics and multiple years of teaching with the lexical approach, Understanding
Formulaic Language provides a comprehensive overview of the field and a usefulreference source, clear principles for teaching methodology, and validation for existingclassroom practices. In addition, every chapter of the book suggests future research
directions for anybody interested in expanding the field of formulaic language.
Additionally, experienced teachers should be able to create their own tasks andactivities or adapt existing published materials based on the research findings inthe book. Although this is likely to be a more time-consuming process, it may also be
more beneficial for the learners’ needs and more rewarding for the teachers from a
professional development perspective. Learners could benefit more from tasks andactivities specifically tailored to their needs and the learning context and teachers could
benefit from a more involved lesson planning process that requires more creativity andthought.
To conclude, Understanding Formulaic Language is a useful resource for those who
simply want to learn more about the field of formulaic language, for teachers who areinterested in integrating formulaic language into their classrooms and for teachers whoalready practice the lexical approach. This book thoroughly explores its subject frommultiple perspectives relevant for both researchers and practicing teachers.

References:
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2019). Formulaic language in second language pragmatic research.
In A. Siyanova-Chanturia & Pellicer-Sanchez (Eds.), Understanding formulaic
language: A second language acquisition perspective (pp. 97-114). Routledge.
Durant, P. (2019). Formulaic language in English for academic purposes. In A. SiyanovaChanturia & Pellicer-Sanchez (Eds.), Understanding formulaic language: A second
language acquisition perspective (p. 211-227). Routledge.
Hill, J. (2000). Revising priorities: from grammatical failure to collocational success. In M.
Lewis (Ed.), Teaching collocation: Further developments in the lexical approach (pp.

─ 124 ─

Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Pellicer-Sanchez, A. (Eds.). (2019). Understanding Formulaic Language: A Second
Language Acquisition Perspective. Routledge. xii + 277 pp. (softcover). ISBN: 978-1-138-63497-8.

47-69). Language Teaching Publications.
Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach: The state of ELT and a way forward. Language
Teaching Publications.
Nation, P., & Macalister, M. (2010). Language Curriculum Design. Routledge.
Pellicer-Sanchez, A., & Boers, F. (2019). Pedagogical approaches to the teaching andlearning of formulaic language. In A. Siyanova-Chanturia & Pellicer-Sanchez (Eds.),
Understanding formulaic language: A second language acquisition perspective (pp.
153-173). Routledge.
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Pellicer-Sanchez, A. (Eds.). (2019). Understanding Formulaic
Language: A Second Language Acquisition Perspective. Routledge.
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Van Lancker Sidtis, D. (2019). What online processing tells
us about formulaic language. In A. Siyanova-Chanturia & Pellicer-Sanchez (Eds.),
Understanding formulaic language: A second language acquisition perspective (pp.
38-61). Routledge.
Wulff, S. (2019). Acquisition of formulaic language from a usage-based perspective. In
A. Siyanova-Chanturia & A. Pellicer-Sanchez (Eds.), Understanding formulaic
language: A second language acquisition perspective (pp. 19-37). Routledge.

─ 125 ─