Given the fundamental contribution of formulaic sequences to the fluent, natural second/foreign language (L2) use and processing, finding effective ways of improving learners’ formulaic language has increasingly engaged the attention of L2 practitioners. Focusing on lexical bundles (LBs), as the most frequent formulaic-language strings, the current quasi-experimental study examined statistical learning of recurring 3-to-6-word LBs among Iranian learners of English as a foreign language (EFL) receiving different types of distributional, narrative sensory stimuli. To this end, three intact classes received a recurring-theme narrative content in three different input modalities including only-auditory, audiovisual, and captioned audiovisual. To examine whether exposure to statistical, varied-modality input (or sensory stimuli) constituted profound knowledge of L2 lexical bundles, the three experimental groups’ performances on immediate and delayed posttests were compared with those of a control group which received no purposefully distributional, modality-based stimuli. ANOVA results revealed that all the frequency-based modality inputs led to more sizeable LB gains. Further, multiple (captioned) audiovisual sensory stimuli more effectively fostered retention and recalling of the target LBs over time than only-auditory input. The retention differences between the bimodal and multimodal inputs were insignificant. Overall, the findings supported combined statistical, formulaic advantages for processing, retention, and recalling of L2 LBs through distributional, multimodal stimuli.
AllenD. (2010). Lexical bundles in learner writing: An analysis of formulaic language in the ALESS Learner Corpus. Komaba Journal of English Education, 1, 105–127.
2.
BahrickL.E.LickliterR. (2000). Intersensory redundancy guides attentional selectivity and perceptual learning in infancy. Developmental Psychology, 36, 190–201.
3.
BaltovaI. (1999). Multisensory language teaching in a multidimensional curriculum: The use of authentic bimodal video in core French. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 56, 31–48.
4.
BarlowM.KemmerS. (2000). Usage-based models of language. CSLI.
5.
BatterinkL.J.ReberP.J.NevilleH.J.PallerK.A. (2015). Implicit and explicit contributions to statistical learning. Journal of Memory and Language, 83, 62–78.
6.
BiberD.BarbieriF. (2007). Lexical bundles in university spoken and written registers. English for Specific Purposes, 26, 263–286.
7.
BiberD.ConradS.ReppenR. (1999). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge University Press.
8.
BiberD.ConradS.CortesV. (2004). If you look at . . .: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25, 371–405.
9.
BirhanA.T. (2021). Effects of teaching lexical bundles on EFL students’ abstract genre academic writing skills improvement: Corpus-based research design. International Journal of Language Education, 5, 585–597.
BybeeJ. (2013). Usage-based theory and exemplar representations of Construction. In HoffmannT. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. 49–69). Oxford University Press.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd edition.Lawrence Erlbaum.
14.
ConklinK. (2020). Processing single- and multi-word items. In WebbS. (Ed.), Handbook of vocabulary studies (pp. 174–188). Routledge.
15.
CortesV. (2002). Lexical bundles in freshman composition. In ReppenR.FitzmauriceS.M.BiberD. (Eds.), Using corpora to explore linguistic variation (pp. 131–145). John Benjamins.
16.
CunilleraT.CàmaraE.LaineM.Rodríguez-FornellsA. (2010). Speech segmentation is facilitated by visual cues. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 260–274.
17.
DangT.N.Y.LuC.WebbS. (2022). Learning single words and collocations through viewing an academic lecture. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 44, 708–736.
18.
DörnyeiZ. (2009). The psychology of second language acquisition. Oxford University Press.
19.
DurrantP.SchmittN. (2010). Adult learners’ retention of collocations from exposure. Second Language Research, 26, 163–188.
20.
EllisN.C. (2001). Memory for language. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 33–68). Cambridge University Press.
21.
EllisN.C. (2006). Cognitive perspectives on SLA. The associative cognitive CREED. Association Internationale de Linguistique Appliquée Review, 19, 100–121.
22.
EllisN.C.WulffS. (2015). Usage-based approaches to SLA. In VanPattenB.WilliamsJ. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition. Second Language Acquisition Research Series (pp. 75–94). Routledge.
23.
EricksonL.C.ThiessenE.D. (2015). Statistical learning of language: Theory, validity, and predictions of a statistical learning account of language acquisition. Developmental Review, 37, 66–108.
24.
FiserJ.AslinR.N. (2002). Statistical learning of higher order temporal structure from visual shape-sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 458–467.
25.
FrostR.MonaghanP. (2020). Insights from studying statistical learning. In RowlandC.F.TheakstonA.L.AmbridgeB.TwomeyK.E. (Eds.), Current perspectives on child language acquisition: How children use their environment to learn (pp. 65–89). John Benjamins.
26.
GebhartA.L.NewportE.L.AslinR.N. (2009). Statistical learning of adjacent and non- adjacent dependencies among non-linguistic sounds. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16, 486–490.
27.
GholamiL. (2021). Incidental reactive focus on form in language classes: Learners’ formulaic versus nonformulaic errors, their treatment, and effectiveness in communicative interactions. Foreign Language Annuals, 54, 897–922.
28.
GlicksohnA.CohenA. (2013). The role of cross-modal associations in statistical learning. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 20, 1161–1169.
29.
GoldbergA.E. (2003). Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 219–224.
30.
GuichonN.McLornanS. (2008). The effects of multimodality on L2 learners: Implications for CALL resource design. System, 36, 85–93.
31.
HylandK. (2008). As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes, 27, 4–21.
32.
HylandK.JiangF. (2018). Academic lexical bundles: How are they changing?International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 23, 383–407.
33.
JeongH.JiangN. (2019). Representation and processing of lexical bundles: Evidence from word monitoring. System, 80, 188–198.
34.
KaligarriffA.BaisaV.BuštaJ., et al. (2014). The Sketch Engine: Ten years on. Lexicography ASIALEX, 1, 7–36.
Larsen-FreemanD. (2002). Making sense of frequency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 275–285.
37.
Le-ThiD.DörnyeiZ.Pellicer-SánchezA. (2022). Increasing the effectiveness of teaching L2 formulaic sequences through motivational strategies and mental imagery: A classroom experiment. Language Teaching Research, 26, 1202–1230.
38.
MajuddinESiyanova-ChanturiaA.BoersF. (2021). Incidental acquisition of multiword expression through audiovisual materials: The role of repetition and typographic enhancement. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43, 985–1008.
39.
MayerR.E. (2009). Multimedia learning. 2nd edition. Cambridge University Press.
40.
MayerR.E. (2014). Introduction to multimedia learning. In MayerR.E. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 1–24). 2nd edition.Cambridge University Press.
41.
MitchelA.D.ChristiansenM.H.WeissD.J. (2014). Multimodal integration in statistical learning: Evidence from the McGurk illusion. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1–6.
42.
MitchelA.D.WeissD.J. (2011). Learning across senses: Cross-modal effects in multisensory statistical learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 1081–1091.
43.
MitchellR.MylesF.MarsdenE. (2013). Second language learning theories. Routledge.
44.
Montero PerezM. (2020). Incidental vocabulary learning through viewing video: The role of vocabulary knowledge and working memory. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42, 749–773.
45.
MorenoR.MayerR.E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358–368.
46.
MoserJ.BatterinkL.J.HegnerY.L., et al. (2021). Dynamics of nonlinguistic statistical learning: From neural entrainment to the emergence of explicit knowledge. NeuroImage, 240, 118378.
47.
NapolitanoA.C.SloutskyV.M. (2004). Is a picture worth a thousand words? The flexible nature of modality dominance in young children. Child Development, 75, 1850–1870.
48.
NiegemanH.HeidigS. (2012). Multimedia learning. In SeelN.M. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp. 2372–2375). Springer.
49.
NorthbrookJ.AllenD.ConklinK. (2021). ‘Did you see that?’: The role of repetition and enhancement on lexical bundle processing in English learning materials. Applied Linguistics, 43, 453–472.
50.
NorthbrookJ.ConklinK. (2019). Is what you put in what you get out? Textbook-derived lexical bundle processing. Applied Linguistics, 40, 816–833.
51.
PaivioA. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford University Press.
52.
PangW. (2010). Lexical bundles and the construction of an academic voice: A pedagogical perspective. Asian EFL Journal, 47, 2–13.
53.
Pellicer-SánchezA. (2017). Learning L2 collocations incidentally from reading. Language Teaching Research, 21, 381–402.
54.
Pellicer-SánchezA.TragantE.ConklinK., et al. (2020). Young learners’ processing of multimodal input and its impact on reading comprehension: An eye-tracking study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42, 577–598.
55.
PerruchetP.PactonS. (2006). Implicit learning and statistical learning: One phenomenon, two approaches. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 233–238.
56.
PetersE. (2012). Learning German formulaic sequences: The effect of two attention-drawing techniques. The Language Learning Journal, 40, 65–79.
57.
PetersE. (2014). The effects of repetition and time of post-test administration on EFL learners form recall of single words and collocations. Language Teaching Research, 18, 75–94.
58.
PetersE. (2019). The effect of imagery and on-screen text on foreign language vocabulary learning from audiovisual input. TESOL Quarterly, 53, 1008–1032.
59.
PetrovskaI. (2012). Teaching Lexical bundles patterns in English and Macedonian tourism discourse. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 44, 228–235.
60.
PuimègeE.PetersE. (2019). Learning formulaic sequences through viewing L2 television and factors that affect learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42, 525–549.
61.
PujadasG.MuñozC. (2020). Examining adolescent EFL learners’ TV viewing comprehension through captions and subtitles. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42, 551–575.
62.
RazmjooA.MontasseriZ. (2018). The effect of extensive reading on Iranian EFL learners’ lexical bundle performance: A comparative study of adaptive and authentic texts. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 10, 185–204.
63.
RebuschatP. (2015). Implicit and explicit learning of language. John Benjamins.
64.
RoeteI.FrankS.L.FikkertP.CasillasM. (2020). Modeling the influence of language input statistics on children’s speech production. Cognitive Science, 44, 1–24.
65.
SaffranJ.R.AslinR.N.NewportE.L. (1996). Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science, 274, 1926–1928.
66.
SaffranJ.R.NewportE.L.AslinR.N.TunickR.A.BarruecoS. (1997). Incidental language learning: Listening (and learning) out of the comer of your ear. Psychological Science, 8, 101–105.
67.
SchnotzW. (2014). An integrated model of text and picture comprehension. In MayerR.E. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 72–103). Cambridge University Press.
68.
SeitzA.R.KimR.van WassenhoveV.ShamsL. (2007). Simultaneous and independent acquisition of multisensory and unisensory associations. Perception, 36, 1445–1453.
69.
SellA.J.KaschakM.P. (2009). Does visual speech information affect word segmentation?Memory and Cognition, 37, 889–894.
70.
ShamsL.SeitzA.R. (2008). Benefits of multisensory learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 411–417.
71.
SteinB.E.StanfordT.R. (2008). Multisensory integration: Current issues from the perspective of the single neuron. Nature Review Neuroscience, 9, 255–266.
72.
SungE.MayerR.E. (2013). Online multimedia learning with mobile devices and desktop computers: An experimental test of Clark’s methods-not-media hypothesis. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 639–647.
73.
SzudarskiP.CarterR. (2016). The role of input flood and input enhancement in EFL learners’ acquisition of collocations. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 26, 245–65.
74.
ThiessenE.D. (2010). Effects of visual information on adults’ and infants’ auditory statistical learning. Cognitive Science, 34, 1093–1106.
75.
ThiessenE.D.KronsteinA.T.HufnagleD.G. (2013). The extraction and integration framework: A two-process account of statistical learning. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 792–814.
76.
ThiessenE.D.SaffranJ.R. (2007). Learning to learn: Infants’ acquisition of stress-based strategies for word segmentation. Language Learning and Development, 3, 73–100.
77.
ThompsonS.P.NewportE.L. (2007). Statistical learning of syntax: The role of transitional probability. Language Learning and Development, 3, 1–42.
78.
TomaselloM. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Harvard University Press.
79.
WebbS.ChangA. (2015). Second language vocabulary learning through extensive reading with audio support: How do frequency and distribution of occurrence affect learning?Language Teaching Research, 19, 667–686.
80.
WebbS.KagimotoE. (2009). The effects of vocabulary learning on collocation and learning. TESOL Quarterly, 43, 55–77.
81.
WebbS.NewtonJ.ChangA. (2013). Incidental learning of collocation. Language Learning, 63, 91–120.
82.
WeiY.LeiL. (2011). Lexical bundles in the academic writing of advanced Chinese EFL learners. RELC Journal, 42, 155–166.
83.
WrayA. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge University Press.
84.
WrayA. (2008). Formulaic language: Pushing the boundaries. Oxford University Press.
85.
WulffS.EllisN.C. (2018). Usage-based approaches to second language acquisition. In MillerD.BayramF.RothmanJ.SerratriceL. (Eds.), Bilingual cognition and language: The state of the science across its subfields (pp. 37–56). John Benjamins.
86.
ZhangR.ZouD. (2021). A state-of-the-art review of the modes and effectiveness of multimedia input for second and foreign language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32, 2790–2816.
