此研究的目標是要探討使用顯性教學搭配影視教學法和隱性教學搭配影視教學法來教導以英語為外國語之英語低成就大學學生形式搭配詞。研究者募集62位來自台灣北部某所大學的學生參與本研究的實驗。這62位受試者有31位被分為實驗組，31位被分為控制組；實驗組授與顯性教學搭配影視教學法，而控制組則是授與隱性教學搭配影視教學法。實驗中所使用的教材是受試者選出的一部美國電視影集中的第一集到第五集；收集資料的工具有模擬標準多益測驗，多重選擇題測驗，和開放式問卷。模擬標準多益測驗的成績用來分配受試者至實驗組或控制組,確認兩組的受試者英文能力相似；多重選擇題測驗是由形式搭配詞所編輯而成的前測與後測；開放式問卷會在實驗組和控制組每一堂課結束前分發給受試者，其作用為收集兩組受試者對於課程內容、教學方法的感想與意見。研究結果顯示: (1) 以顯性教學教導形式搭配詞比起隱性教學有效；(2) 在語言使用方面，形式搭配詞具有充分的功能姓；(3) 形式搭配詞與單字文法截然不同；(4) 使用影視教學法教導形式搭配詞具有許多優點；(5) 態度在學習語言中扮演重要的角色。

The purpose of this study aimed to investigate the effect of using formulaic sequences to teach low-achieving EFL university students. Sixty-two students were recruited as the subjects of this study. They were students in a university located in the northern part of Taiwan. Of them, 31 students were placed in the experimental group, and 31 students were placed in the control group. The experimental group received an explicit instruction whereas the control group was instructed by an implicit instruction.  Five episodes from an American TV series which were selected by the students were used as the teaching materials. The instruments included one mock standardized TOEIC test, which served as an instrument to determine whether the students’ English proficiency was similar in both groups, one multiple-choice test (a formulaic sequence test that was taken by the students in both groups as a pre-test and a post-test), and one open-ended questionnaire which was distributed to the students in the experimental and control group at the end of each class. The results of this study showed that: (1) explicit teaching is better than implicit teaching in the instruction of formulaic sequences, (2) formulaic sequences bear the function of language use, (3) formulaic sequences are different from grammar and vocabulary, (4) there are advantages of using video-based instruction to teach formulaic sequences, and (5) attitudes towards learning play an important role in learning a language.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements......I
Chinese Abstract ....II
English Abstract .....III
Table of Contents......V
List of Tables......VIII
List of Figures......XI
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION......1
Background of the Study......1
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions......3
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW......5
Phraseology and Formulaic Sequences......5
Formulaic Sequences	......8
Acquisition of Formulaic Sequences in L1 and Learning of Acquisition of Formulaic Sequences in L2......8
Definition of Formulaic Sequences......11
The Functions of Formulaic Sequences......15
Formulaic Language as a Tool for Social- interaction......17
Formulaic Language as a Short-cut in Processing......19
Facilitating Language Production......22
Krashen's Six Hypotheses......23
The Acquisition-learning Hypothesis......24
The Natural Order Hypothesis......24
The Monitor Hypothesis......25
The Input Hypothesis......27
The Affective Filter Hypothesis......28
The Reading Hypothesis......30
Noticing Hypothesis......31
Explicit Teaching and Implicit Teaching......34
Video-based Approach......36
Empirical Studies of the Necessity for Teaching Formulaic Sequences in Second Language Classroom......40
CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY......46
Participants......46
Instruments......48
Materials......48
Procedures......50
At the Beginning Stage of the Experiment......50
The Experimental Stage......52
Data Collection......58
Data Analysis......58
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS......60
Results of the Quantitative Data......60
Results of the Qualitative Data......63
CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION......94
Explicit Teaching is Better Than Implicit Teaching in the Instruction of Formulaic Sequences......94
Formulaic Sequences Bear the Functions of Language Use......100
Formulaic Sequences are Different From Grammar and Vocabulary......102
The Advantages of Using Video-based Instruction to Teach Formulaic Sequences	......105
Attitudes Towards Learning Plays an Important Role in Learning a Language........110
CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION......113
Summary of the Study......113
Pedagogical Implications......113
Limitation of the Study......115
Future Studies......115
REFERENCE......117
APPENDICES......134
Appendix A: Mock Standardized Test of English for International Communication (TOEIC).......134
Appendix B: The Backgrounds of the Participants in the Control Group and Experimental Group......139
Appendix C: The Open-ended Questionnaires (Chinese Version)......141
Appendix D: American TV series Grey’s Anatomy, Season 1......145
Appendix E: Questionnaire on American TV Series Used as the Teaching Material in Class (Chinese Version) ......146
Appendix F: Handouts for the Control Croup ......147
Appendix G: Work Sheets for the Control Croup (Chinese Version) ......152
Appendix H: Handouts for the Experimental Croup 	......153
Appendix I: Work Sheets for the Experimental Croup (Chinese Version) ......158
Appendix J: Pre-test......159
Appendix K: Post-test......171


LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Terms Used to Describe Aspects of Formulaicity in the Literature....12
Table 2. The Function of Formulaic Language (Wray, 2000; Wray & Perkins, 2000).....17
Table 3. Subcategorization of Processing by Functions of formulaic sequences Wray& Perkins (2000).....20
Table 4. Syllabus.....52
Table 5. A Descriptive Statistics of the Scores Earned by Both Groups on the Pre-test ....60
Table 6. A Descriptive Statistics of the Scores Earned by Both Groups on the Post-test ....61
Table 7. A Paired Sample t-Test for the Students’ Scores on the Pre-test and Post-test ......62
Table 8. An Independent Sample t-Test for the Students’ Scores on the Pre-test .....62
Table 9. An Independent Sample t-Test for the Students’ Scores on the Post-test .....63
Table 10. The Results of Question 1: Do you have the habit of watching English movies with both English and Chinese subtitles? Why? (First class) ........63
Table 11. The Results of Question 2: Before you take this class, have you ever noticed formulaic sequences? (First class) .......64
Table 12. The Results of Question 3: What do you think of the class today? (First class) .......65
Table 13. The Results of Question 4: Do you have any problems with the film played in the class today? (First class) ......66
Table 14. The Results of Question 5: Do you have any suggestions about the teaching in the class today? (First class) ......66
Table 15. The Results of Question 6: Do the FSs in the film and script’s handout today impress you? Why? (First class) ......67
Table 16. The Results of Question 1: What do you think of the class today? (Second class to fourth class).	.....69
Table 17. The Results of Question 2: Do you have any problems with the film played in the class today? (Second class to fourth class) ......71
Table 18. The Results of Question 3: Do you have any suggestions for the teaching in the class today? (Second class)........72
Table 19. The Results of Question 3: Do you have any suggestions for the teaching in the class today? (Third class) .......73
Table 20. The Results of Question 3: Do you have any suggestions for the teaching in the class today? (Fourth class) ........73
Table 21. The Results of Question 4: Do the FSs in the film and script’s handout today impress you? Why? (Second class to fourth class) ......75
Table 22. The Results of Question 5: After taking this class, does finding FSs while watching the series become easier for you? (Second class) .......76
Table 23. The Results of Question 5: After taking this class, does finding FSs while watching the series become easier for you? (Third Class) ......76
Table 24. The Results of Question 5: After taking this class, does finding FSs while watching the series become easier for you? (Fourth Class) ......77
Table 25. The Results of Question 6: Is it necessary to increase the number of times that each episode to be played in each class? Why? (Fifth Class) .....81
Table 26. The Results of Question 7: Do you prefer to be instructed by telling you where the FSs are in the series and their meanings right after you watched each episode in the class, or to be taught to find the FSs in the series and their meanings by yourself first and then give you the answers in the next class? Why? (Fifth Class) .....82
Table 27. The Results of Question 8: How do you determine whether a sentence is an FS or not? (Fifth Class) .......84
Table 28. The Results of Question 9: Are there any differences between FSs you learned in the class, and vocabulary and grammar you learned before? (Fifth Class) .....85
Table 29. The Results of Question 10: After taking this class, are you interested in learning FSs? Why? (Fifth Class) ......87
Table 30. The Results of Question 11: Are you willing to learn FSs through movies, films, or series by yourself in your leisure time? (Fifth Class) ........89
Table 31. The Results of Question 12: After you learn the FSs, are there any differences or changes when you watch the episode in the class? (Fifth Class) .......91
Table 32. The Results of Question 13: What kinds of characteristics in a movie, a film, or a series will attract you to make use of these features to learn FSs in the classroom? (Fifth Class) ......92

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Function-based Category of Formulaic Sequences in English as a Target Language For L2 Learners ....16
Figure 2. Operation of the "Affective Filter" ......29
Figure 3. The Process of Learning Implicit Knowledge .....33

References 

Aijmer, K. (1996). Conversational routines in English. London and New York:  Longman.
Alali, F.A., & Schmitt, N. (2012). Teaching formulaic sequences: The same as or different from teaching single words. TESOL Journal, 3(2), 153-180.
Al-Arishi, A. Y. (1994). Technology in communicative language teaching. Language
Quarterly, 32, 175-191.
Anderson, R. C., Armbruster B. B., & Roe, M. (1989). A modest proposal for improving the education of reading teachers. ERIC, ED 313674.
Anderson, J. R., & Lebiere, C. (1998). The Atomic Components of Thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Baggett, P. (1984). Role of temporal overlap of visual and auditory material in forming dual media associations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76 (3), 408-417.
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1987). "Competition, variation, and language learning". In Mechanisms of Language Acquisition, B. MacWhinney (Ed.), 157-193. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2002). "A new starting point? Investigating formulaic use and input in future expression". Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 189-198.
Becker, J. (1975). The phrasal lexicon. Bolt Beranek and Newman Report No.3081, AI Report No. 28. 
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V. (2004). ‘Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks,’ Applied Linguistics, 25, 377–405
Boers, F., Eyckmans, J., Kappel, J., Stengers, H., & Demecheleer, M. (2006). Formulaic sequences and perceived oral proficiency: Putting a Lexical approach to the test. Language Teaching Research, 10(3), 245-261.   
Bolinger, D. (1976). Meaning and memory. Forum Linguisticum, 1, 1-14. 
Brown, D. H. (2000). Teaching by Principles: An interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. Longman Press.
Brown, D. H. (2005). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Longman Press.
Brown, J. K. (2008). Student-centered instruction: involving students in their own education. Music Educators Journal, 94(5).
Brown, R. (1973). A First Language. Cambridge: Harvard Press.
Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
Bybee, J. (2000). ”The phonology of the lexicon; evidence from lexical diffusion”. In M. Barlow and S. Kemmer (Eds.) Usage-Based Models of Language. Stanford: CSLI, 65-85. (See also Hooper).
Byrnes, H. (2007). Locating the advanced learner in theory, research, and educational practice: An introduction. In H. Byrnes, H. Weger-Guntharp, & K. Sprang (Eds.), Educating for advanced foreign language capacities: Constructs, curriculum, instruction, assessment (pp. 1-14). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Cambridge Academic Content Dictionary. (2008). Cambridge University Pres. 
Cambridge Advanced Learners’ Dictionary. (2008). Cambridge University Pres. 
Cognition and Technology Group. (1992). An anchored instruction approach to cognitive skills acquisition and intelligent tutoring. In Cognitive approaches to automated instruction, J. W. Regian & V. J. Shute, (Eds). 135-170. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
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.
Coulmas, F. (1979). On the sociolinguistic relevance of routine formulae. Journal of Pragmatics, 3, 239-266. 
Davis, M. (2008). The corpus of contemporary American English: 450 million words. 1990-present. Available online athttp://corpus.byu.edu/coca.
DeCarrico J. S., & Nattinger J. R. (1992). Lexical Phrases and Language Teaching. New York: Oxford University Press
De Cock, S. (2000). “Repetitive phrasal chunkiness and advanced EFL speech and writing”. In C. Mais & M. Hundt (Eds.), Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory: Papers from ICAME 20 1999. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 51-68.
Ding, Y. R., & Y. Qi. (2005). Use of formulaic language as a predictor of L2 oral and written performance. Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages, 28(3), 49-53. 
Dorgeloh, H., & Wanner, A. (2009). ‘Formulaic argumentation in scientific discourse’ in R. Corrigan, E. A. Moravcsik, H. Ouali & K. M. Wheatley (Eds): Formulaic Language, 2: Acquisition, Loss, Psychological Reality, and Functional Explanations. John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 523–44
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition (pp. 197-261). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1974). Natural sequences in child second language acquisition. Language Learning 24: 37-53.
Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1975). A new approach to discovering universal strategies of child second language acquisition. In D. Dato (Ed.) Developmental Psycholinguistics: Theory and Applications. Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics. Washington: Georgetown University Press. pp. 209-233.
Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1977). Remarks on creativity in language acquisition. In M. Burt, H. Dulay and M. Finnochiaro (Eds.) Viewpoints on English as a Second Language. New York: Regents. pp. 95-126.
Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1978). Some guidelines for the assessment of oral language proficiency and dominance. TESOL Quarterly, 12, 177-192.
Dusenbury, L. A., Hansen, W. B., & Giles, S. M. (2003). Teacher training in norm setting approaches to drug education: A pilot study comparing standard and video-enhanced methods. Journal of Drug Education, 33(3), 325-336.
Ejzenberg, R. (2000). The juggling act of oral fluency: A psycho-sociolinguistic metaphor. In: H. Riggenbach (Ed.), Perspectives on Fluency, pp. 287-313. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Elley, W. (1998). Raising Literacy Levels in Third World Countries: A Method That Works. Culver City, CA: Language Education Associates.
Ellis, R. (1994). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
Ellis, R. (1997). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
Ellis, R., Johnson, K. E., Henry, A., & Roseberry, R. L. (1998). An Evaluation of a Genre-Based Approach to the Teaching of EAP/ESP Writing. TESOL Quarterly, 32(1), Version of Record online: 4 JAN 2012
Ellis, N. C. (1994). Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages. San Diego/CA: Academic Press.
Ellis, N. C. (1996). Sequencing in SLA: Phonological memory, chunking, and points of order. Second Language Acquisition 18, 91-126.
Ellis, N. C., & Sinclair, S. G. (1996). ‘Working memory in the acquisition of vocabulary and syntax: putting language in good order,’ The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A (1), 234–50
Fabris, M. (1978). The acquisition of English grammatical functors by child second language learners. TESOL Quarterly, 12, 482.
Fotos, S., & Ellis, R. (199). Communicating about grammar: a task-based approach. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 605–28.
Granger, S. (1998). Prefabricated patterns in advanced EFL writing: Collocations and formulae. In A.P. Cowie (Ed), Phraseology: Theory, Analysis and Applications, 145-160. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hatch, E., Peck, S., & Wagner-Gough, J. (1979). A look at process in child second- language acquisition. In Ochs, E., Schieffelin, B.B. (Ed.), Developmental Pragmatics Academic Press, New York, pp.269-278.
Hadley, A. O. (2001). Teaching Language in Context. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Howarth, P. (1998). Phraseology and second language proficiency. Applied Linguistic, 19(1), 22-24
Howarth, P. (1998). The phraseology of learners’ academic writing. In A. Cowie (Ed.), Phraseology: Theory, analysis and applications (pp. 161–86). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Hyland, K. (2008). ‘As can be seen: lexical bundles and disciplinary variation,’ English for Specific Purposes, 27, 4–21.
Irujo, S. (1986). A piece of cake: learning and teaching idioms, ELT Journal, 40(3), 236-42.
Irujo, S. (1993). Steering clear: Avoidance in the production of idioms. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 31, 205-219.
Jiang, N., & Nekrasova, T. M. (2007). The processing of formulaic sequences by second language speakers. The Modern Language Journal, 91(3), 433–445.
Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology:
A constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Johnson, A., & Heffernan, N. (2006). The short readings project: A CALL reading activity utilizing vocabulary recycling. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(1), 63-77.
Kellerman, E. (1978). Giving learners a break: Native language intuitions as a source of predictions about transferability. Working Papers in Bilingualism 15, 309-315.
Kern. R. (2008). Making connection through texts in language teaching. Language Teaching 41, 367-387.  
Kessler, C., & Idar, I. (1977). The acquisition of English syntactic structures by a Vietnamese child. Paper presented at the Los Angeles Second Language Acquisition Forum, UCLA.
Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research,
61(2), 179-211.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition.  Pergamon Press Inc.
Krashen, S. D. (1987). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition.  Prentice-Hall International.
Krashen, S. D. (1988). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Prentice-Hall International.
Krashen, S. D. (1993). The Power of Reading. Englewood, CA: Libraries Unlimited.
Krashen, S. D. (1994). The Input Hypothesis and Its Rivals. In N.C. Ellis (Ed.). Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages. London: Academic Press, 45-77.
Krashen, S. D. (2003a). Explorations in Language Acquisition and Use: The Taipei Lectures. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Krashen, S. D. (2003b). Dealing with English Fever. In English Teachers’ Association/ROC. Selected Papers from the Twelfth International Symposium on English Teaching. Taipei: Crane Publishing Company, 100-108.
Krashen, S. D., & Pon, P. (1975). An error analysis of an advance ESL learner. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 7, 125-129
Krashen, S. D., & Terrell. T.D. (1983). The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Kuiper, K., & Haggo, D. C. (1984). “Livestock Auctions, Oral Poetry and Ordinary Language.” Language in Society, 13, 205-34.
Kuiper, K., & Lin, D. T. G. (1989). Cultural congruence and conflict in the acquisition of formulae in a second language. In O. Garcia & R. Otheguy (Eds.), English Across Cultures: Cultures Across English, 281-304.
Kuiper, K. (1996). Smooth Talkers: The Linguistic Performance of Auctioneers and Sportscasters. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lai, C., & Zhao, Y. (2006). Noticing and Text-Based Chat. Language Learning & Technology, 10(3), 102-120
Laufer, B., & Eliasson, S. (1993). What causes avoidance in L2 learning: L1-L2 difference, L1-L2 similarity, or L2 complexity? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 35-48.
Lave, J. (1993). The practice of learning. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives On Activity and Context, 3-32. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lewis, M. (1993). The Lexical approach: The state of ELT and a way forward. London: Language Teaching Publication. 
Lewis, M. (2008). The idiom principle in L2 English: Assessing elusive formulaic sequences as indicators of idiomaticity, fluency and proficiency, unpublished doctoral thesis, Stockholm: Stockholm University. 
Lightbown, P.M., & Spada, N. (1993). Second language learning in the classroom. In How are languages learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Liou, H. C. (2013). An Automatic Reference Aid for Improving EFL Learners' Formulaic Expressions in Productive Language Use. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 7(1), 57- 68. 
Liu, W., & Huo, Y. (2011). On the Role of Formulaic Sequences in Second
Language Acquisition. US-China Foreign Language, 1(11), 708-713. 
Long, M. H. (1988). Instructed interlanguage development. In Beebe, L.M. (Ed.). Issues in Second Language Acquisition. New York: Newbury
Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: a design feature in language teaching methodology. In de Bot, K., Ginsberg, R.B. & Kramsch, C. (Eds), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective. Amsterdam: Benjamins
Lu, Z., Hou, L., & Huang, X. (2010). A Research on A Student-Centred Teaching Model in An ICT-Based English Audio-Video Speaking Class. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology (IJEDICT), 6(3), 101-123.
Macmillan Dictionary. (2005). Macmillan U.K.
Maeda, S. (2011). Implicit teaching and explicit teaching of the usage of “please” to high school students. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from http://www.paaljapan.org.
Magnan, S. S. (2004). Rediscovering text: Multiple stories for language departments.
Profession, 95-106.
Makino, T. (1980). Acquisition Order of English Morphemes by Japanese Adolescents. Tokyo: Shinozaki Shorin Press.
McCombs, B. L. & Whistler, J. S. (1997). The Learner-Centered Classroom and School. Strategies for Increasing Student Motivation and Achievement. Sam Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers.
McGuire, M. (2009). Formulaic sequences in English conversations: Improving spoken fluency in non-native speakers (Unpublished master’s thesis).University of North Texas. Retrieved from http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc11024/m2/1/high_res_d/thesis.pdf
Meara, P. (1987). Vocabulary in a Second Language: Vol. 2. London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research (CILT).
Meara, P. (1992). "Vocabulary in a second language. Volume III 1986-1990".  Reading in a Foreign Language, 9, 761-837.
Meara, P. (2003). The Vocabulary Acquisition Research Group Archive (VARGA).  Internet resource: http://www.swan.ac.uk/cals/calsres/varga/index.htm.  
Melin, C. (2010). Between the lines: When culture, language, and poetry meet in the
classroom. Language Teaching, 43, 349-365.
Merriam, S., & Caffarella, R. (1999). Learning in Adulthood (2nd ed.). San Francisco: JosseyBass, 
Meunier, F., & Granger, S. (Eds). (2008). Phraseology in foreign language learning and teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Millar, N. (2011). The processing of malformed formulaic language. Applied Linguistics, 32 (2), 129–148.
MLA Ad Hoc Committee on Foreign Languages. (2007). Foreign languages and higher education: New structures for a changed world. Profession, 234-245.
Moon, R. (1992). Textual aspects of fixed expressions in learners’ dictionaries. In    P. J. L. Arnaud & H. Bejoint (Eds.), Vocabulary and applied linguistics (pp. 13-27). London: Macmillan Academic and Professional Ltd.
Moon, R. (1998). Fixed expressions and idioms in English: A corpus-based approach. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press
Nation, P. (1989). Improving speaking fluency. System, 17(3), 377-384.
Nattinger, J. R., & DeCarrico, J. S. (1992). Lexical Phrases and Language Teaching. Oxford University Press.
Nelson, K. (1973). Structure and Strategy in Learning to Talk. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, Serial no. 149, nos 1-2. 
Nelson, K. (1981). "Individual differences in language development: Implications for development and language". Developmental Psychology, 17, 170-187.
Ohlrogge, A. (2009). Formulaic expressions in intermediate EFL writing assessment In R. Corrigan, E. A. Moravcsik, H. Ouali & K. M. Wheatley (Eds), Formulaic Language Volume 2: Acquisition, Loss, Psychological Reality, and Functional Explanations. John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 375–86.
Omaggio, H. A. C. (2001). Teaching language in context (3rd ed.). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Overbaugh, R. C. (1995). The efficacy of interactive video for teaching basic
techniques of classroom management of pre-service teachers. Computers
in Human Behaviors, 11(3-4), 511-527.
Oxford Collocation Dictionary (2nd ed.). (2009). Oxford University Press. 
Pawley, A., & Syder, F. H. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and Communication, New Longman. 191-226
Peters, A. (1983). The Units of Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Peter, R. (1996). Learning simple and complex second language rules under implicit, incidental, rule-search, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(1), 27-67.
Peter. R. (1997). Generalizability and automaticity of second language learning under implicit, incidental, enhanced, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(2), 223-247.
Pino-Silva, J. (2007). The video-based short comment writing task. Foreign Language Annals, 40(2), 320-329.
Richards, J. C., Platt, J., & Weber, H. (1985). Longman dictionary of applied linguistics. London: Longman.
Robinson, P. (1996). Learning simple and complex second language rules under implicit, incidental, rule-search, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(1), 27-67.
Robinson, P. (1997). Generalizability and automaticity of second language learning under implicit, incidental, enhanced, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(2), 223-247.
Rubin, J., & Thompson, I. (1994). How to be a more successful language learner. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Rutherford, W. (1987). Second language grammar: Learning and teaching. London: Longman.
Saho M., (2011). A Study of Implicit Teaching and Explicit Teaching of the Usage of “Please” to High School Students. Proceedings of the 16th Conference of Pan-Pcific Association of Applied Linguistics.
Schmidt, R.W. (1983). "Interaction, acculturation, and the acquisition of communicative competence: A case study of an adult". In Sociolinguistics and Language Acquisition, N. Wolfson & E. Judd (Eds), 137-174.  Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Oxford Journals Humanities, Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129-158.
Schmidt, R. (1993). Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 13, 206-226.
Schmidt, R. (1994b). Implicit learning and the cognitive unconscious: of artificial grammars and SLA. In N. C. Elis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages, 165-209. Academic Press.  
Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language teaching and learning (Technical Report No. 9) (pp. 1-64). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i at Manoa.
Schmidt, R., & Frota, S. (1986). Developing basic conversational ability in a second language. A case study of an adult learner of Portuguese. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition, (pp. 237-326) Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House.
Schmidt, E., (Ed.). (Impress). Attention and awareness in foreign language learning and teaching (Tech. Rep. No.9). Honolulu: University of Hawaii at Manoa, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. 
Schmitt, N. (2004). Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing, and use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company
Schmitt, N., & Carter, R. (2004). Formulaic sequences in action: An introduction. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences (pp. 1–22). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins. 
Schuh, K. L. (2003). Knowledge construction in the learner-centered classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 426–442.
Sharwood, S. M. (1991). "Speaking to many minds: On the relevance of different types of language information for the L2 learner". Second Language Research, 7(2), 118-132.
Sharwood, S. M. (1993). Input Enhancement in Instructed SLA: Theoretical 
Bases. Studies in Proceedings of the 16th Conference of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics 442 Second Language Acquisition, 
15, 165-179.
Shin, F. (2001). Motivating Students with Goosebumps and Other Popular Books. CSLA Journal, 25(1), 15-19.
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2011a). Adding more fuel to the fire: An eyetracking study of idiom processing by native and nonnative speakers. Second Language Research, 27, 251–272
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stevick, E. (1976). Memory, Meaning, and Method. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House.
Stokes, J., Krashen S. D., & Kartchner, J. (1998). Factors in the Acquisition of the Present Subjunctive in Spanish: The Role of Reading and Study. ITL: Review of Applied Linguistics, 121-122, 19-25.
Swaffar, J., & Vlatten, A. (1997). A sequential model for video viewing in the foreign language curriculum. The Modern Language Journal, 81, 175-188.
Taguchi, N. (2007). Chuck learning and the development of spoken discourse in a Japanese as a foreign language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 11(4), 433-485. 
Underwood, G., Schmitt, N., & Galpin, A. (2004). The eyes have it: an eye-movement study into the processing of formulaic sequences. In N. Schmitt(Ed), Formulaic sequences (pp. 153-72). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 
Underwood, G., Foulsham, T., van Loon, E., Humphreys, L., & Bloyce, J. (2006). Eye movements during scene investigation: a test of the saliency map hypothesis, Europ. J. Cognitive Psychol., 18, 321–342.
Van Lanker, D., & Kempler, D. (1987). Comprehension of familiar phrases by left- but not by right- hemisphere damaged patients. Brain and Language, 32, 265-277.   
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wajnryb, R. (1988). The dictogloss method of language teaching: A text-based, communicative approach to grammar. English Teaching Forum, 26(3), 35-38. 
Wajnryb, R. (1990). Grammar dictation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-Centered Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Weinert, R. (1995).The role of formulaic language in second language acquisition: A review. Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 180-205.
Welch, M., & Jeffrey, J. B. (1991). Write, P.L.E.A.S.E.: A Video-Assisted Strategic Intervention to Improve Written Expression of Inefficient Learners. Remedial and Special Education, 12, 37-47.
Wong, F. L. (1976). The Second Time Around: Cognitive and Social Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. Unpublished PhD thesis, Stanford University.
Wood, D. (1998). Making the grade: An interactive course in English for
Academic purposes. Toronto: Prentice Hall Allyn and Bacon.
Wood, D. (2002). Formulaic language in acquisition and production: Implications for teaching. TESL Canada Journal, 20, 1-15.
Wood, D. (2006). Uses and functions of formulaic sequences in second language speech: An exploration of the functions of fluency. The Canadian Modern Lana gauge Review, 63(1), 13-33.
Wood, D. (2009a). Effects on focused instruction of formulaic sequences on fluent expression in second language narratives: A case study. Canadian Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 39-57. 
Wood, D. (2009b). Preparing ESP learners for workplace placement. ELT Journal, 63(4), 323-331. 
Wood, D. (2010). Formulaic language and second language speech fluency: Background, evidence and classroom application. London: Continuum. 
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., and Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 17, 89–100.
Wray, A. (1990). ‘The dual system (“focusing”) hypothesis: a right hemisphere account for left hemisphere language.’ Speculations in Science and Technology, 13(1), 3-12. 
Wray, A. (1992). The Focusing Hypothesis: The Theory of left Hemisphere Lateralized Language Re-examined. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 
Wray, A. (1999). Formulaic language in learners and native speakers. Language Teaching, 32(4), 213-31
Wray, A. (2000). Formulaic sequences in second language teaching: Principle and practice. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), 463-489. 
Wray, A., & Perkins, M. R. (2000). The functions of formulaic language: An intergraded model. Language and Communication, 20(1), 1-28.    
Wray, A. (2000). Formulaic sequences in second language teaching: Principles and practice. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), 463-489.
Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the Lexicon. Cambridge University
Press.
Wulff, S., Swales, J. M., & Keller, K. (2009). ‘‘We have about seven minutes for questions’: the discussion sessions from a specialized conference,’ English for Academic Purposes 28, 79–92.
Yang, H. Z. (2012). Words to Teachers. In Qin, X. B. (Ed.), New Century College English Series of Learning to Speak Textbook. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press: x-xi.
Yorio, C. (1978). Confessions of a second language speaker/learner. Paper presented at 12th annual TESOL convention, Mexico City. 
Yorio, C. A. (1980). Conventionalized language forms and the development of 
communicative competence. TESOL Quarterly, 14(4), 433-442.