Idiom meaning selection following a prior context: eye movement evidence of L1 direct retrieval and L2 compositional assembly

References

• Abel, B. (2003). English idioms in the first language and second language lexicon: A dual representation approach. Second Language Research, 19(4), 329–358. https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658303sr226oa
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnon, I., & Snider, N. (2010). More than words: Frequency effects for multi-word phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 62(1), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.09.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bannard, C., & Matthews, D. (2008). Stored word sequences in language learning: The effect of familiarity on children’s repetition of four-word combinations. Psychological Science, 19(3), 241–248. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02075.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, S. D., & Weber, A. (2016). Bilingual and monolingual idiom processing is cut from the same cloth: The role of the L1 in literal and figurative meaning activation. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1350. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01350
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, S. D., & Weber, A. (2020). Context and literality in idiom processing: Evidence from self-paced reading. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 49(5), 837–863. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-020-09719-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beekhuizen, B., Armstrong, B. C., & Stevenson, S. (2021). Probing lexical ambiguity: Word vectors encode number and relatedness of senses. Cognitive Science, 45(5), e12943. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12943
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bortfeld, H. (1997). A cross-linguistic analysis of idiom comprehension by native and nonnative speakers. State University of New York at Stony Brook.
   Google Scholar
• Bortfeld, H. (2003). Comprehending idioms cross-linguistically. Experimental Psychology, 50(3), 217. https://doi.org/10.1026//1617-3169.50.3.217
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 977–990. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.977
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bybee, J. L. (2006). From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language, 82(4), 711–733. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0186
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bybee, J. L. (2013). Usage-based theory and exemplar representations of constructions. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. 49–69). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cacciari, C. (2014). Processing multiword idiomatic strings: Many words in one? The Mental Lexicon, 9(2), 267–293. https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.9.2.05cac
   Google Scholar
• Cacciari, C., & Corradini, P. (2015). Literal analysis and idiom retrieval in ambiguous idioms processing: A reading-time study. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27(7), 797–811. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2015.1049178
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cacciari, C., & S. Glucksberg. (1991). Understanding idiomatic expressions: The contribution of word meanings. In G. Simpson (Ed.), Understanding Word and Sentence (pp. 217–240). North-Holland.
   Google Scholar
• Cacciari, C., Padovani, R., & Corradini, P. (2007). Exploring the relationship between individuals’ speed of processing and their comprehension of spoken idioms. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19(3), 417–445.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cacciari, C., & Tabossi, P. (1988). The comprehension of idioms. Journal of Memory and Language, 27(6), 668–683. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(88)90014-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caillies, S., & Butcher, K. (2007). Processing of idiomatic expressions: Evidence for a new hybrid view. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 79–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480709336754
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrol, G. (2021). Psycholinguistic approaches to figuration. In A. S. da Silva (Ed.), Figurative language—Intersubjectivity and usage (pp. 307–338). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.11.10car
   Google Scholar
• Carrol, G., & Conklin, K. (2017). Cross language lexical priming extends to formulaic units: Evidence from eye-tracking suggests that this idea ‘has legs.’ Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20(2), 299–317. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728915000103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrol, G., & Conklin, K. (2020). Is all formulaic language created equal? Unpacking the processing advantage for different types of formulaic sequences. Language and Speech, 95–122. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830918823230
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrol, G., Conklin, K., & Gyllstad, H. (2016). Found in translation: The influence of the L1 on the reading of idioms in a L2. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(3), 403–443.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrol, G., & Littlemore, J. (2020). Resolving figurative expressions during reading: The role of familiarity, transparency, and context. Discourse Processes, 57(7), 609–626. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2020.1729041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charteris‐Black, J. (2002). Second language figurative proficiency: A comparative study of Malay and English. Applied Linguistics, 23(1), 104–133. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/23.1.104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (1980). Rules and representations. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00001515
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christiansen, M. H., & Arnon, I. (2017). More than words: The role of multiword sequences in language learning and use. Topics in Cognitive Science, 9(3), 542–551. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12274
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cieślicka, A. (2006). Literal salience in on-line processing of idiomatic expressions by second language learners. Second Language Research, 22(2), 115–144. https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658306sr263oa
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cieślicka, A. (2010). Formulaic language in L2: Storage, retrieval and production of idioms by second language learners. In M. Pütz & L. Sicola (Eds.), Cognitive processing in second language acquisition: Inside the learner’s mind (pp. 149–168). John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Cieślicka, A.B., Heredia, R.R., & Olivares, M. (2014). It’s All in the Eyes: How Language Dominance, Salience, and Context Affect Eye Movements During Idiomatic Language Processing. In M. Pawlak & L. Aronin (Eds.), Essential Topics in Applied Linguistics and Multilingualism. Second Language Learning and Teaching. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01414-2_2
   Google Scholar
• Columbus, G. (2010). Processing MWUs: Are MWU subtypes psycholinguistically real? In Wood, D. (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: Acquisition and communication (pp. 194–210). Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Columbus, G. (2013). In support of multiword unit classifications: Corpus and human rating data validate phraseological classifications of three different multiword unit types. Yearbook of Phraseology, 4(1), 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1515/phras-2013-0003
   Google Scholar
• Columbus, G., Sheikh, N. A., Côté-Lecaldare, M., Häuser, K., Baum, S. R., & Titone, D. (2015). Individual differences in executive control relate to metaphor processing: An eye movement study of sentence reading. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 1057. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.01057
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 72–89. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cronk, B. C., & Schweigert, W. A. (1992). The comprehension of idioms: The effects of familiarity, literalness, and usage. Applied Psycholinguistics, 13(2), 131–146. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716400005531
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cutting, J. C., & Bock, K. (1997). That’s the way the cookie bounces: Syntactic and semantic components of experimentally elicited idiom blends. Memory & Cognition, 25(1), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197285
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devlin, J., Chang, M. W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2019). BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In Proceedings of NAACL-HLT (pp. 4171–4186).
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, N. C., Simpson‐Vlach, R. I. T. A., & Maynard, C. (2008). Formulaic language in native and second language speakers: Psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 42(3), 375–396. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00137.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erman, B., & Warren, B. (2000). The idiom principle and the open choice principle. Text-Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 20(1), 29–62. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.2000.20.1.29
   Google Scholar
• Eskildsen, S. W. (2009). Constructing another language—Usage-based linguistics in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30(3), 335–357. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amn037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foraker, S., & Murphy, G. L. (2012). Polysemy in sentence comprehension: Effects of meaning dominance. Journal of Memory and Language, 67(4), 407–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.07.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraser, B. (1970). Idioms within a transformational grammar. Foundations of Language, 6, 22–42. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25000426
   Google Scholar
• Geeraert, K., Baayen, H., & Newman, J. (2018). “Spilling the bag” on idiomatic variation. In S. Markantonatou, C. Ramisch, A. Savary, & V. Vincze (Eds.), Multiword expressions at length and in depth: Extended papers from the MWE 2017 workshop (pp. 1–33). Language Science Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbs, R. W. (1980). Spilling the beans on understanding and memory for idioms in conversation. Memory & Cognition, 8(2), 149–156. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213418
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbs, R. W. (1986). Skating on thin ice: Literal meaning and understanding idioms in conversation. Discourse Processes, 9(1), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638538609544629
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbs, R. W., & Nayak, N. P. (1989). Psycholinguistic studies on the syntactic behavior of idioms. Cognitive Psychology, 21(1), 100–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(89)90004-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbs, R. W., Nayak, N. P., & Cutting, C. (1989). How to kick the bucket and not decompose: Analyzability and idiom processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 28(5), 576–593. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(89)90014-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giora, R. (1997). Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics, 8(3), 183–206. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1997.8.3.183
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giora, R. (1999). On the priority of salient meanings: Studies of literal and figurative language. Journal of Pragmatics, 31(7), 919–929. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00100-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giora, R. (2003). On our mind: Salience, context, and figurative language. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goldberg, A. E. (2019). Explain me this: Creativity, competition, and the partial productivity of constructions. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gullifer, J. W., Kroll, J. F., & Dussias, P. E. (2013). When language switching has no apparent cost: Lexical access in sentence context. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 278. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00278
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamblin, J. L., & Gibbs, R. W. (1999). Why you can’t kick the bucket as you slowly die: Verbs in idiom comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28(1), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023235403250
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holsinger, E., & Kaiser, E. (2013). Processing (non) compositional expressions: Mistakes and recovery. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(3), 866. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030410
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hubers, F., Cucchiarini, C., & Strik, H. (2020). Second language learner intuitions of idiom properties: What do they tell us about L2 idiom knowledge and acquisition? Lingua, 246, 102940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102940
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Irujo, S. (1986). Don’t put your leg in your mouth: Transfer in the acquisition of idioms in a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 20(2), 287–304. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586545
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Irujo, S. (1993). Steering clear: Avoidance in the production of idioms. IRAL. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 31(3), 205–219. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.1993.31.3.205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackendoff, R. (1995). The boundaries of the lexicon. In M. Everaert, E.-J. van der Linden, A. Schenk, & R. Schreuder (Eds.), Idioms: Structural and psychological perspectives (pp. 133–165). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Jackendoff, R. (1997). The architecture of the language faculty. (No. 28). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jackendoff, R. (2003). Précis of foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 26(6), 651–665. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X03000153
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang, N. A., & Nekrasova, T. M. (2007). The processing of formulaic sequences by second language speakers. The Modern Language Journal, 91(3), 433–445. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00589.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johns, B. T. (2021). Disentangling contextual diversity: Communicative need as a lexical organizer. Psychological Review, 128(3), 525. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000265
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keysar, B., & Bly, B. (1995). Intuitions of the transparency of idioms: Can one keep a secret by spilling the beans? Journal of Memory and Language, 34(1), 89–109. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1995.1005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuperman, V., Stadthagen-Gonzalez, H., & Brysbaert, M. (2012). Age-of-acquisition ratings for 30,000 English words. Behavior research methods, 44, 978–990. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0210-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kyriacou, M., Conklin, K., & Thompson, D. (2022). Ambiguity resolution in passivized idioms: Is there a shift in the most likely interpretation? Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 77(3), 212–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/cep0000300
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laufer, B. (2000). Avoidance of idioms in a second language: The effect of L1‐L2 degree of similarity. Studia linguistica, 54(2), 186–196. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9582.00059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, J., & Schmitt, N. (2009). The acquisition of lexical phrases in academic writing: A longitudinal case study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(2), 85–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2009.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Libben, M. R., & Titone, D. A. (2008). The multidetermined nature of idiom processing. Memory & Cognition, 36(6), 1103–1121.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Libben, M. R., & Titone, D. A. (2009). Bilingual lexical access in context: Evidence from eye movements during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(2), 381. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014875
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liontas, J. (2002). Context and idiom understanding in second languages. EUROSLA Yearbook, 2(1), 155–185. https://doi.org/10.1075/eurosla.2.11lio
   Google Scholar
• Marian, V., Blumenfeld, H. K., & Kaushanskaya, M. (2007). The Language Experience and Proficiency Questionnaire (LEAP-Q): Assessing language profiles in bilinguals and multilinguals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50(4), 940–967. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2007/067)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matlock, T., & Heredia, R. (2002). Understanding phrasal verbs in monolinguals and bilinguals. In R. Heredia & J. Altarriba (Eds.), Bilingual sentence processing (pp. 251–274). Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• McGinnis, M. (2004). Lethal ambiguity. Linguistic Inquiry, 35(1), 47–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGlone, M. S., Glucksberg, S., & Cacciari, C. (1994). Semantic productivity and idiom comprehension. Discourse Processes, 17(2), 167–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539409544865
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milburn, E., & Warren, T. (2019). Idioms show effects of meaning relatedness and dominance similar to those seen for ambiguous words. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 591–598. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01589-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mueller, R. A., & Gibbs, R. W. (1987). Processing idioms with multiple meanings. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 16(1), 63–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01067751
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nattinger, J. R., & DeCarrico, J. S. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nunberg, G. D. (1978). The pragmatics of reference (Vol. 79). Indiana University Linguistics Club.
   Google Scholar
• Nunberg, G., Sag, I. A., & Wasow, T. (1994). Idioms. Language, 70(3), 491–538. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1994.0007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palma, P., Whitford, V., & Titone, D. (2020). Cross-language activation and executive control modulate within-language ambiguity resolution: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46(3), 507. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000742
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pawley, A., & Syder, F. H. (1983). Natural selection in syntax: Notes on adaptive variation and change in vernacular and literary grammar. Journal of Pragmatics, 7(5), 551–579. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(83)90081-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pivneva, I., Mercier, J., & Titone, D. (2014). Executive control modulates cross-language lexical activation during L2 reading: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40(3), 787. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035583
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pritchett, L. K., Vaid, J., & Tosun, S. (2016). Of black sheep and white crows: Extending the bilingual dual coding theory to memory for idioms. Cogent Psychology, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2015.1135512
   Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
   Google Scholar
• Radford, A., Wu, J., Child, R., Luan, D., Amodei, D., & Sutskever, I. (2019). Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI Blog, 1(8), 9.
   Google Scholar
• Rossiter, M. J., Derwing, T. M., Manimtim, L. G., & Thomson, R. I. (2010). Oral fluency: The neglected component in the communicative language classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 66(4), 583–606. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.66.4.583
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schumacher, E., Eskenazi, M., Frishkoff, G., & Collins-Thompson, K. (2016, November). Predicting the relative difficulty of single sentences with and without surrounding context. In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (pp. 1871–1881).
   Google Scholar
• Senaldi, M. S. G., & Titone, D. A. (2022). Less direct, more analytical: Eye-movement measures of L2 idiom reading. Languages, 7(2), 91. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages7020091
   Google Scholar
• Senaldi, M. S. G., & Titone, D. A. (2024). Idiom meaning selection following a prior context: eye movement evidence of L1 direct retrieval and L2 compositional assembly [Materials]. Open Science Framework. https://osf.io/6tyn5/
   Google Scholar
• Senaldi, M. S. G., Titone, D. A., & Johns, B. T. (2022a). Determining the importance of frequency and contextual diversity in the lexical organization of multiword expressions. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 76(2), 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1037/cep0000271
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Senaldi, M. S. G., Wei, J., Gullifer, J. W., & Titone, D. (2022b). Scratching your tête over language-switched idioms: Evidence from eye-movement measures of reading. Memory & Cognition, 50(6), 1230–1256. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-022-01334-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2011). Adding more fuel to the fire: An eye-tracking study of idiom processing by native and non-native speakers. Second Language Research, 27(2), 251–272. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658310382068
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Van Lancker-Sidtis, D. (2019). What online processing tells us about formulaic language. In Siyanova-Chanturia, A. & Pellicer-Sánchez, A. (Eds.), Understanding formulaic language: A second language acquisition perspective (pp. 31–61). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Siyanova, A., & Schmitt, N. (2007). Native and nonnative use of multi-word vs. one-word verbs. IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(2). https://doi.org/10.1515/IRAL.2007.005
   Google Scholar
• Smolka, E., Rabanus, S., & Rösler, F. (2007). Processing verbs in german idioms: Evidence against the configuration hypothesis. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(3), 213–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480701357638
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sprenger, S. A., Levelt, W. J., & Kempen, G. (2006). Lexical access during the production of idiomatic phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 54(2), 161–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinel, M. P., Hulstijn, J. H., & Steinel, W. (2007). Second language idiom learning in a paired-associate paradigm: Effects of direction of learning, direction of testing, idiom imageability, and idiom transparency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(3), 449–484. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263107070271
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tabossi, P., Fanari, R., & Wolf, K. (2008). Processing idiomatic expressions: Effects of semantic compositionality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(2), 313. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.34.2.313
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tabossi, P., Fanari, R., & Wolf, K. (2009). Why are idioms recognized fast? Memory & Cognition, 37(4), 529–540. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.37.4.529
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Titone, D., Columbus, G., Whitford, V., Mercier, J., & Libben, M. (2015). Contrasting bilingual and monolingual idiom processing. In R. H. Roberto & B. C. Anna (Eds.), Bilingual figurative language processing (pp. 171–207). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139342100.011
   Google Scholar
• Titone, D. A., & Connine, C. M. (1994). Descriptive norms for 171 idiomatic expressions: Familiarity, compositionality, predictability, and literality. Metaphor and Symbol, 9(4), 247–270. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms0904_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Titone, D. A., & Connine, C. M. (1999). On the compositional and noncompositional nature of idiomatic expressions. Journal of Pragmatics, 31(12), 1655–1674. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00008-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Titone, D., & Libben, M. (2014). Time-dependent effects of decomposability, familiarity and literal plausibility on idiom priming: A cross-modal priming investigation. The Mental Lexicon, 9(3), 473–496. https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.9.3.05tit
   Google Scholar
• Titone, D., Libben, M., Mercier, J., Whitford, V., & Pivneva, I. (2011). Bilingual lexical access during L1 sentence reading: The effects of L2 knowledge, semantic constraint, and L1–L2 intermixing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(6), 1412. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024492
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Titone, D., Lovseth, K., Kasparian, K., & Tiv, M. (2019). Are figurative interpretations of idioms directly retrieved, compositionally built, or both? Evidence from eye movement measures of reading. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 73(4), 216–230. https://doi.org/10.1037/cep0000175
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Harvard university press.
   Google Scholar
• Tremblay, A., & Baayen, R. H. (2010). Holistic processing of regular four-word sequences: A behavioral and ERP study of the effects of structure, frequency, and probability on immediate free recall. In D. Wood (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: Acquisition and communication (pp. 151–173). Continuum International.
   Google Scholar
• Tremblay, A., Derwing, B., Libben, G., & Westbury, C. (2011). Processing advantages of lexical bundles: Evidence from self‐paced reading and sentence recall tasks. Language Learning, 61(2), 569–613. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00622.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tremblay, A., & Tucker, B. V. (2011). The effects of N-gram probabilistic measures on the recognition and production of four-word sequences. The Mental Lexicon, 6(2), 302–324. https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.6.2.04tre
   Google Scholar
• Underwood, G., Schmitt, N., & Galpin, A. (2004). The eyes have it: An eyemovement study into the processing of formulaic sequences. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing, and use (pp. 153–172). John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• van Ginkel, W., & Dijkstra, T. (2020). The tug of war between an idiom’s figurative and literal meanings: Evidence from native and bilingual speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(1), 131–147. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728918001219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Hell, J. G., & Dijkstra, T. (2002). Foreign language knowledge can influence native language performance in exclusively native contexts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 780–789. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196335
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Lancker, D., Canter, G. J., & Terbeek, D. (1981). Disambiguation of ditropic sentences: Acoustic and phonetic cues. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 24(3), 330–335. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.2403.330
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Lancker Sidtis, D. (2003). Auditory recognition of idioms by native and nonnative speakers of English: It takes one to know one. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24(1), 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716403000031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Lancker Sidtis, D., & Rallon, G. (2004). Tracking the incidence of formulaic expressions in everyday speech: Methods for classification and verification. Language & Communication, 24(3), 207–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2004.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinert, R. (1995). The role of formulaic language in second language acquisition: A review. Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 180–205. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/16.2.180
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood, D. (2006). Uses and functions of formulaic sequences in second language speech: An exploration of the foundations of fluency. Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(1), 13–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wray, A. (1999). Formulaic language in learners and native speakers. Language Teaching, 32(4), 213–231. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800014154
   Google Scholar
• Wray, A. (2000). Formulaic sequences in second language teaching: Principle and practice. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), 463–489. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.4.463
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wray, A. (2013). Formulaic language. Language Teaching, 46(3), 316–334. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444813000013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wulff, S. (2008). Rethinking idiomaticity: A usage-based approach. A&C Black.
   Google Scholar
• Wulff, S. (2013). Words and Idioms. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. 274–289). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar