Abstract
The paper examines the relationship of formulaic language use and linguistic creativity in the first and second language. It argues that creativity in language use means more than just combining words and meaning-units in a syntax-affecting way. In fact, the proper use of formulaic language is one of the conditions for linguistic creativity which is a discourse level rather than just a sentence level phenomenon (Kecskes 2013). In this sense linguistic creativity refers to the online ability of combining prefabricated units with novel items (ad hoc generated items) in a syntax-affecting way to express communicative intention and goals and create new meaning. Linguistic creativity is a subconscious and mostly automatic process that relies on existing knowledge and the actual situational need and intention of the speaker. It is a graded phenomenon ranging from the more conventional and predictable to the less conventional and unpredictable.
The focal point of this paper is deliberate creativity which is on the less conventional and more unpredictable side of the continuum. It is mostly a conscious process in which language users prefer to generate their own utterances rather than resorting to prefabricated units or the combination of ad hoc generated units and ready-made expressions. The term was briefly mentioned first in (Howarth 1998) referring to second language learners but not exactly in the sense as described above. This paper will argue that deliberate creativity exists not only in L2 use but also L1 use. However, its nature in L1 may be different from that of L2.
Based on a study (Kecskes 2015) it is claimed that the “idiom principle” (Sinclair 1987) is the most salient guiding mechanism in any language production. However, the principle generates less formulaic language in L2 than L1 because there are several factors that are not present in L1 but are there in L2 affecting the functioning of the idiom principle in different degree. Such factors include language proficiency, willingness to use certain formulas, language fluency of other participants, limited core common ground, and others. As a result, the actual production of formulaic expressions in the L2 will always be lower than in L1. This, however, does not mean that people in their L2 use are less creative linguistically than in their L1.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Altenberg, B. (1998). On the phraseology of spoken English: The evidence of recurrent word-combinations. In A. P. Cowie (Ed.), Phraseology: Theory, analysis, and applications (pp. 101–122). Oxford: Clarendon.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Pearson Education.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V. (2004). If you look at …: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25, 371–405.
Bolander, M. (1989). Prefabs, patterns and rules in interaction? Formulaic speech in adult learners’ L2 Swedish. In K. Hyltenstam & L. K. Obler (Eds.), Bilingualism across the Lifespan: Aspects of acquisition, maturity, and loss (pp. 73–86). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bolinger, D. (1976). Meaning and memory. Forum Linguisticum, 1, 1–14.
Chomsky, N. (1964). Current issues in linguistic theory. The Hague: Mouton.
Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Coulmas, F. (Ed.). (1981). Conversational routine: Explorations in standardized communication situations and prepatterned speech. The Hague: Mouton.
Eckert, P. (1992). Communities of practice: Where language, gender and power all live. In K. Hall, M. Bucholtz, & B. Moonwomon (Eds.), Locating power, proceedings of the 1992 Berkeley women and language conference (pp. 89–99). Berkeley: Berkeley Women and Language Group.
Ellis, N. C. (2003). Constructions, chunking, and connectionism: The emergence of second language structure. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 63–103). Malden: Blackwell.
Ellis, N. C., Simpson-Vlach, R., & Carson, M. (2008). Formulaic language in native and second language speakers: Psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 42, 375–396.
Fillmore, C. J. (1976). The need for a frame semantics within linguistics. Statistical Methods in Linguistics, 12, 5–29.
Fillmore, C. J. (1982). Frame semantics. In The Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm (pp. 111–137). Seoul: Hanshin.
Gairns, R., & Redman, S. (1986). Working with words: A guide to teaching and learning vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Giora, R. (1997). Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics, 7, 183–206.
Giora, R. (2003). On our mind: Salience, context and figurative language. New York: Oxford University Press.
Givoni, S., Giora, R., & Bergerbest, D. (2013). How speakers alert addressees to multiple meanings. Journal of Pragmatics, 48(1), 29–40.
Gumperz, J. (1968). The Speech Community. In Duranti, A. (ed.) Linguistic Anthropology: A reader 1:66–73.
Habermas, J. (1979). Communication and the evolution of society. Toronto: Beacon.
House, J. (2003). Misunderstanding in intercultural university encounters. In J. House, G. Kasper, & S. Ross (Eds.), Misunderstanding in social life: Discourse approaches to problematic talk (pp. 22–56). London: Longman.
Howarth, P. (1998). Phraseology and second language proficiency. Applied Linguistics, 19, 24–44.
Hymes, D. H. (1962). The ethnography of speaking. In T. Gladwin & W. C. Sturtevant (Eds.), Anthropology and human behavior (pp. 13–53). Washington, DC: The Anthropology Society of Washington.
Kecskes, I. (2000). A cognitive-pragmatic approach to situation-bound utterances. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 605–625.
Kecskes, I. (2003). Situation-bound utterances in L1 and L2. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kecskes, I. (2007). Formulaic language in English lingua franca. In I. Kecskes & L. R. Horn (Eds.), Explorations in pragmatics: Linguistic, cognitive and intercultural aspects (pp. 191–219). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kecskes, I. (2012). Is there anyone out there who really is interested in the speaker? Language and Dialogue, 2, 283–297.
Kecskes, I. (2013). Intercultural pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kecskes, I. (2015). Is the idiom principle blocked in Bilingual L2 production? Chapter 2. In R. Heredia & A. Cieslicka (Eds.), Bilingual figurative language processing (pp. 28–53). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McEnery, T., & Wilson, A. (1996). Corpus linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
McEniry, S. (2011). Free in all senses of the word. The bottom line. In http://thebottomline.as.ucsb.edu/2011/04/free-in-all-senses-of-theword
Miller, J., & Weinert, R. (1998). Spontaneous spoken language: Syntax and discourse. Oxford: Clarendon.
Morgan, J. L. (1978). Two types of convention in indirect speech acts. In C. Peter (Ed.), Pragmatics (syntax and semantics 9) (pp. 261–280). New York: Academic.
Nattinger, J. R., & De Carrico, J. S. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.
Octopus (1995, October). p. 144.
Ortaçtepe, D. (2012). The development of conceptual socialization in international students: A language socialization perspective on conceptual fluency and social identity (advances in pragmatics and discourse analysis). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Pawley, A., & Syder, H. F. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. Language and Communication, 5, 191–226.
Prodromou, L. (2008). English as a lingua franca: A corpus based analysis. London: Continuum.
Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Segalowitz, N., & Freed, B. F. (2004). Context, contact, and cognition in oral fluency acquisition: Learning Spanish in at home and study abroad contexts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 173–199.
Simpson-Vlach, R., & Ellis, N. C. (2010). An academic formulas list: New methods in phraseology research. Applied Linguistics, 31, 487–512.
Sinclair, J. (1987). Collocation: A progress report. In R. Steele & T. Treadgold (Eds.), Language topics: Essays in honour of Michael Halliday (pp. 319–331). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
Warga, M. (2005). ‘Je seraistrèsmerciable’: Formulaic vs. creatively produced speech in learners’ request closings. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8, 67–94.
Weinert, R. (1995). The role of formulaic language in second language acquisition: A review. Applied Linguistics, 16, 180–205.
Wray, A. (1999). Formulaic language in learners and native speakers. Language Teaching, 32, 213–231.
Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wray, A. (2005). Idiomaticity in an L2: Linguistic processing as a predictor of success. In B. Briony (Ed.), IATEFL 2005: Cardiff conference selections (pp. 53–60). Canterbury: IATEFL.
Wray, A., & Perkins, M. R. (2000). The functions of formulaic language: An integrated model. Language and Communication, 20, 1–28.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kecskes, I. (2016). Deliberate Creativity and Formulaic Language Use. In: Allan, K., Capone, A., Kecskes, I. (eds) Pragmemes and Theories of Language Use. Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology, vol 9. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43491-9_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43491-9_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-43490-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-43491-9
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)