Processing Advantages of Lexical Bundles: Evidence From Self‐Paced Reading and Sentence Recall Tasks
Abstract
This article examines the extent to which lexical bundles (LBs; i.e., frequently recurring strings of words that often span traditional syntactic boundaries) are stored and processed holistically. Three self‐paced reading experiments compared sentences containing LBs (e.g., in the middle of the ) and matched control sentence fragments (e.g., in the front of the ). LBs and sentences containing LBs were read faster than the control sentence fragments in all three experiments. Two follow‐up word and sentence recall experiments demonstrated that more sentences containing LBs were correctly remembered. Consistent with construction‐type models of language, these results suggest that regular multiword sequences leave memory traces in the brain.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
More formulaic language is processed faster and acquired earlier than less formulaic language in both L1 and L2.
“Studies have demonstrated that more formulaic language is processed faster and acquired earlier than less formulaic language both in L1 (e.g., Bannard & Matthews, 2008;Tremblay, Derwing, Libben, & Westbury, 2011) and in L2 (for review, see Siyanova-Chanturia & Pellicer-Sánchez, 2018).”
From Effects of Availability, Contingency, and Formulaicity on the Accuracy of English Grammatical Morphemes in Second Language Writing (2022) · cites this paper as Tremblay, Derwing, Libben, & Westbury, 2011
Cites
The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.
Miller, G. A. (1956) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0043158 · Cited by 17,812 · see citing works
Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005 · Cited by 8,540 · see citing works
The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity
Cowan, N. (2001) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x01003922 · Cited by 6,779 · see citing works
Formulaic Language and the Lexicon
Wray, A. (2002) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511519772 · Cited by 2,873 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Murakami, A., & Ellis, N. C. (2022) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/lang.12500 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
- Authors
- Tremblay, A., Derwing, B., Libben, G., & Westbury, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Alberta (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Tremblay, Antoine
- Venue
- Language Learning
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-01-31
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 569-613
- ISSN
- 0023-8333 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9922
- OpenAlex
- W1549337014
- Cited by
- 380
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 55 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 37 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 42.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Language Learning (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Keywords
- lexical bundles, multiword expressions, holistic processing, construction grammar, sentence processing, reading speed, sentence recall, word recall, memory traces, self-paced reading
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review