Errors in the use fomulaic sequences by english major student

INTRODUCTION

Background to the study

Formulaic sequences are pre-existing patterns in the minds of native speakers, crucial for both spoken and written communication Research by Erman and Warren (2000) indicated that these sequences accounted for 58.6% of spoken and 52.3% of written discourse Foster (2001) found that they represented 32.3% of spontaneous speech in native speakers More recently, Wei and Li (2013) utilized Mutual Information scores to analyze academic language and discovered that sequences of two to six words comprised 58.75% of their corpus, aligning closely with Erman and Warren’s findings Overall, it can be concluded that formulaic sequences constitute approximately one-third to one-half of the English language.

Formulaic sequences are a crucial aspect of communication, enabling native speakers to process language efficiently Research suggests that individuals can only handle eight to ten words of new discourse at a time (Kuiper & Haggo, 1984; Pawley & Syder, 1983) However, the average person can produce and comprehend language far beyond this limit due to the storage of these sequences in long-term memory.

Formulaic sequences, when stored as units, enhance processing efficiency compared to creatively generated phrases As Gibbs Jr (2007) notes, possessing formulaic competence is crucial for effective communication.

“mental shortcuts in both language production and comprehension” (p 702) A sufficient repertoire of formulaic language allows for ease of mental processing, contributing to natural and effective communication

Formulaic competence not only meets communicative needs but also addresses social requirements, as highlighted by Wray and Perkins (2000) From a sociocultural viewpoint, employing formulaic sequences strengthens an individual's identity and affiliation with a specific community Each speech community possesses its own distinct linguistic patterns and formulaic expressions Lack of familiarity with these expectations can hinder an individual's success within that community Jones and Haywood (2004) demonstrated this through the writing of undergraduates and postgraduates, where those who did not utilize discipline-specific formulaic sequences were often perceived as inadequate, irrespective of their actual expertise Therefore, to gain acceptance in a social group, it is crucial for individuals to be knowledgeable about the shared formulaic sequences of that group.

Formulaic sequences play a crucial role in language learning due to their significant communicative and social functions Mastering a diverse array of these sequences enhances learners' fluency, accuracy, and expression Research by Boers et al (2006) indicates that second language speakers are viewed as more proficient when they effectively use formulaic sequences, a finding supported by Ohlrogge (2009) in the context of written language While the connection between language proficiency and formulaic competence remains partially unexplored, it is widely accepted that a strong knowledge of formulaic sequences serves as a reliable indicator of advanced language proficiency (Bonk, 2000; Hawkey & Barker, 2004).

Wood, 2006; Yorio, 1989) It follows that acquiring formulaic sequences is essential to achieve native-like proficiency

Acquiring formulaic sequences in English poses a significant challenge for learners, particularly in countries like Vietnam where English is taught as a foreign language Research indicates that formulaic competence develops slowly and often lags behind other linguistic skills due to limited exposure to English (Irujo, 1993, as cited in Schmitt & Carter, 2004) Many Vietnamese learners primarily rely on their English classes for exposure, but the restricted time allocated to different skills makes it impractical for these classes to provide the rich input necessary for natural acquisition Consequently, enhancing formulaic competence remains a persistent issue in English education in Vietnam, especially in areas lacking active English-speaking communities (Dürnyei, Durow, & Zahran, 2004).

Vietnamese learners often struggle with acquiring English formulaic sequences due to their tendency to avoid what they perceive as risky language, opting instead for familiar expressions to maintain confidence Schmitt and Carter (2004) suggest that the significant differences between Vietnamese and English contribute to this challenge, making it particularly difficult for learners to grasp English's figurative meanings Unlike native speakers, who can quickly interpret figurative language, learners frequently find it hard to discern whether a phrase should be taken literally or figuratively (Wood, 2015) As a result, Vietnamese learners may misuse English formulaic sequences or avoid them entirely.

Advanced learners often struggle with formulaic sequences, leading to frequent errors in their usage (Paquot & Granger, 2012) Despite extensive research aimed at enhancing the teaching and learning of these sequences, they remain challenging for many English learners To assist learners in minimizing errors and achieving near-native proficiency, it is essential to invest more effort in analyzing these mistakes Such detailed analysis can offer valuable insights for improving the teaching and learning processes related to formulaic sequences.

Rationale for the study

Recent literature on error analysis in formulaic language has predominantly examined key types of formulaic sequences, including collocations, idioms, phrasal verbs, lexical bundles, and proverbs While findings vary based on sample selection and methodologies, there is a general agreement that collocations, idioms, and phrasal verbs are the most common types of formulaic sequences and are also the most susceptible to errors (Vilkaitė, 2016; Paquot & Granger).

Errors in the use of formulaic sequences, such as collocations, idioms, and phrasal verbs, are prevalent among English learners, regardless of their proficiency levels Research by Nesselhauf (2005) revealed that one-third of the verb-noun collocations produced by EFL learners were erroneous, a finding echoed by Laufer and Waldman (2011), who noted similar error rates across all proficiency levels Notably, advanced and intermediate learners exhibited a higher frequency of collocational errors compared to beginners, highlighting that even proficient learners struggle with these error-prone areas.

In Vietnam, the phenomenon of formulaic language has been receiving more attention in recent years Generally, formulaic sequences are studied from two major directions: experiments and error analysis

The experimental approach aims to identify effective methods for teaching various types of formulaic sequences Successful strategies include cognitive-linguistic techniques like conceptual metaphors (Bui, 2019; Pham, 2017), explicit instruction methods (Le-Thi, Rodgers, & Pellicer-Sánchez, 2017), and translation-based instruction techniques (Do, 2017).

Error analysis studies indicate a concerning deficiency in formulaic competence among Vietnamese learners, highlighting their restricted receptive knowledge of formulaic sequences (Nguyen, Khau, & Truong, 2021; Nguyen & Webb, 2017; Tran, 2017; Vo & Nguyen, 2020).

A study conducted in 2019 analyzed the writing skills of Vietnamese Master of Arts students in English Applied Linguistics, revealing that even advanced learners struggled with the proper use of phrasal verbs This difficulty reflects a common trend of avoidance seen among English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners These results align with previous research conducted in other countries, highlighting that formulaic sequences present significant challenges for Vietnamese students.

Most studies on language learners have concentrated on specific types of formulaic sequences, such as collocations, idioms, or phrasal verbs, often neglecting a comprehensive approach that includes all three This lack of research in error analysis highlights the need for more inclusive studies that examine the interplay of these formulaic sequences An error analysis that encompasses collocations, idioms, and phrasal verbs would reveal the distribution of errors across these categories, offering valuable insights for educators Such insights could help teachers prioritize their focus in teaching formulaic language, ultimately enhancing language learning outcomes.

Most error analysis studies on formulaic sequences focus primarily on the errors made by learners, often neglecting to examine their correctly formed sequences.

To effectively assess learners' formulaic competence, it is essential to analyze both errors and correct outputs, while considering factors such as their English learning backgrounds and perceptions of formulaic sequences These elements significantly influence learners' ability to use formulaic language Given that formulaic competence is multifaceted and cannot be evaluated through a single test, focusing on formulaic performance—essentially the language output during assessments—becomes more practical in smaller studies This performance reflects learners' overall competence in language production Although a single test may not fully capture their formulaic competence, insights gained from their performance, when contextualized with key learning factors, can provide valuable pedagogical implications.

This study aims to fill the gap in the literature on formulaic language by examining English-major students' use of formulaic sequences, such as collocations, idioms, and phrasal verbs It investigates both errors and correct usage to provide a comprehensive overview of students' formulaic performance Furthermore, the research analyzes potential correlations between formulaic performance and key learning factors The findings enhance the understanding of common errors and the relationship between learning factors and formulaic performance, offering valuable insights for teaching formulaic sequences in EFL classrooms.

Aims of the study

This study focuses on examining the errors in formulaic sequence usage among English-major students at a prominent university in Ho Chi Minh City The participants' performance was evaluated through a Vietnamese-to-English translation test, designed to assess their ability to produce correct formulaic sequences The investigation specifically analyzes the errors made by participants in relation to the accurate outputs they generated during the test.

The study aims to explore the potential connections between participants' formulaic performance and various influential learning factors Key factors under examination include the participants' English learning backgrounds, their views on formulaic sequences, and their self-assessments regarding the acquisition and usage of these sequences.

Research questions

In alignment with the research aims, two research questions were raised:

(1) What are the common errors in the use of formulaic sequences made by English-major students in their Vietnamese-to-English translations?

This study explores the connection between English-major students' performance in Vietnamese-to-English translations and various factors, including their English learning backgrounds, their perceptions of formulaic sequences, and their self-assessment of acquiring and using these sequences.

Significance of the study

This study highlights the necessity for increased research on formulaic sequences within the realm of English language teaching and learning in Vietnam, emphasizing its importance for enhancing educational outcomes.

This study offers an in-depth review of existing literature on formulaic sequences, highlighting the frequent errors associated with their use It specifically focuses on the three most common and error-prone types: collocations, idioms, and phrasal verbs Additionally, an error taxonomy is presented to categorize these mistakes effectively.

The study identifies and categorizes the most common errors related to formulaic sequences, based on existing literature and subsequent error analysis It highlights the relative distribution of these errors across three distinct types of formulaic sequences These insights can guide researchers interested in formulaic language by pinpointing problematic areas that warrant further investigation.

This study highlights the practical benefits of identifying errors for both learners and teachers By understanding common formulaic sequences, learners can reflect on and potentially avoid their mistakes Additionally, the correlation analysis between formulaic performance and key learning factors can help optimize the learning process by promoting beneficial factors and minimizing obstacles.

This study enhances and broadens the understanding of formulaic sequences, offering valuable recommendations in the final chapter that support both teaching and learning These insights contribute significantly to improving learners' overall proficiency.

Scope of the study

This study examines three common types of formulaic sequences—collocations, idioms, and phrasal verbs—that are often prone to errors The research involved 50 English-major students, primarily second-semester third-year students from a university in Ho Chi Minh City, indicating that participants were upper-intermediate to advanced English learners with several years of experience Additionally, the study focused exclusively on the participants' written productive performance, utilizing a 575-word error elicitation method.

Vietnamese-to-English translation test The reasons for those methodological choices are explained in the Methodology chapter.

Organization of thesis chapters

There are five main chapters in this study: Introduction, Literature Review,

Methodology, Findings and Discussion, and Conclusion and Recommendations, which are structured as follows:

The Introduction chapter begins with the background information and sets the tone for the study by providing the rationale, aims, research questions, significance, and scope of the study

The Literature Review chapter provides a thorough examination of the theoretical foundations pertinent to the study, focusing on formulaic sequences and the common errors associated with their usage It subsequently outlines the conceptual framework that guides the methodological approaches discussed in the following chapter.

The Methodology chapter explains how the study was conducted It describes in detail the research design, instrumentation, sample selection, as well as procedures for data collection and analysis

The Findings and Discussion chapter outlines the key findings of the study, addressing the research questions and laying the foundation for the recommendations that will be presented in the subsequent chapter.

The Conclusion and Recommendations chapter briefly summarizes the study and offers pedagogical implications for the teaching and learning of formulaic sequences, as well as suggestions for further research

LITERATURE REVIEW

Formulaic sequences

This study focuses on formulaic sequences, highlighting the terminological inconsistencies in defining this linguistic phenomenon Linguists generally agree that languages exhibit preferred patterns for word arrangement and restrictions on word combinations, which contribute to the smooth flow of language (Murphy, 2003) Despite the widespread acknowledgment of formulaic language, there is no consensus among linguists on its terminology, leading to a diverse array of terms and definitions used to describe it.

Reviewing existing literature on formulaic language, Wray and Perkins

Research has identified over 40 terms related to formulaic language, including idioms, multiword units, fixed expressions, and routine formulae Each term conceptualizes the phenomenon with varying criteria; for example, "multiword units" focuses on the form, while "fixed expressions" highlight their fixedness and "routine formulae" emphasize recurrency Despite some authors using these terms interchangeably, distinctions remain significant in understanding formulaic language.

Using terms like "idioms" to describe the entire phenomenon of formulaic language can lead to inaccurate assumptions, as not all expressions share idiomatic properties Conversely, the term "multiword unit" is more inclusive but lacks specificity regarding the characteristics of these language constructs Each term has its advantages and disadvantages, offering different insights into the nature of formulaic language.

Table 2.1 Different terms used to describe the phenomenon of formulaic language (Wray & Perkins, 2000, p 3)

Wray and Perkins (2000) introduced the term "formulaic sequence" to describe formulaic language, viewing it as a neutral descriptor This study adopts "formulaic sequence" as an overarching term for lexical items related to formulaic language for two key reasons: first, the term implies that these items function as formulas, indicating they possess specific characteristics.

Formulaic sequences (FSs) refer to fixed functions and forms that may undergo occasional changes, encompassing a wide range of formulaic language This term is both inclusive and analytically useful, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of various types of language patterns The definition and operationalization of formulaic sequences will be explored in the following section.

Formulaic sequences (FSs) have been defined in various ways by different scholars, with some, like Bannard and Lieven (2009) and Hudson and Wiktorsson (2009), emphasizing their surface forms, while others, such as Kerz and Haas (2009) or Wray and Perkins (2000), focus on the cognitive processes involved This section examines FSs from both form-oriented and cognitive-oriented perspectives, ultimately presenting the holistic, multidimensional approach utilized in this study.

Hudson and Wiktorsson (2009) define a formulaic sequence (FS) as a combination of two or more words that exhibit a higher level of constraint in their co-occurrence (p 81) Similarly, Bannard and Lieven (2009) describe an FS as a frequently occurring multiword expression (p 299) This perspective emphasizes that FSs are characterized by their frequent and constrained nature, comprising at least two words.

A word sequence typically requires a minimum of two words, but this alone is insufficient; it must also meet a frequency criterion Currently, there is no official definition of the frequency threshold that qualifies a sequence as formulaic An examination of the literature on frequency-based approaches reveals this gap in understanding, as noted by Wood.

(2015) found out that the “frequency cutoffs can range from 10 to 40 occurrences per million words”, all at the discretion of each individual researcher (pp 20–21)

In corpus linguistics, normalized frequency refers to the measure of word occurrences per million, which is crucial for making comparisons across different corpora (McEnery, Xiao, & Tono, 2006) Without such comparisons, raw frequency counts lack significance.

In this study, the author determined that a frequency count of 13 (often abbreviated as FREQ) is adequate for analysis Consequently, the cut-off threshold was established solely based on the raw frequency data.

In corpus research, the raw frequency threshold for determining formulaicity is typically set between three to five, with many studies utilizing a threshold of five based on the 100-million-word British National Corpus (BNC) In contrast, research involving the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA), which is over ten times larger than the BNC, often employs a lower threshold of three Bestgen (2018) notes that a smaller corpus necessitates a higher threshold for statistical significance, indicating that fewer data require larger effects for meaningful results Consequently, this study, utilizing COCA for data analysis, adopted a raw frequency threshold of three to assess the formulaic status of sequences.

While frequency of occurrence is often viewed as a key characteristic of formulaic sequences (FSs), it alone cannot adequately identify them Research by O’Donnell, Rửmer, and Ellis (2013) highlights that some sequences, like "longitude and latitude" or "raining cats and dogs," are formulaic despite their low frequency Conversely, high-frequency sequences such as "and of the" or "but it is" do not qualify as formulaic The distinguishing factor for true FSs lies in the strength of association between the words, suggesting that frequency should be assessed alongside measures of association to filter out sequences that merely co-occur by chance.

The strength of association between words can be effectively measured using the Mutual Information (MI) score, which assesses the link between a node word and its surrounding words within a 4-word span A high MI score indicates a strong association, suggesting that the words co-occur more frequently than would be expected by chance Typically, an MI score of 3 or higher is regarded as a robust indicator of formulaicity Consequently, this study has adopted an MI threshold of 3 as one of the criteria for frequency support.

This study defines a formulaic sequence (FS) as a string of two or more words that achieves a Mutual Information (MI) score of 3 or higher and has a raw frequency (FREQ) of at least 3 in the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) While this operational definition utilizes objectively measurable variables, it offers limited insight into the properties of FSs To address this limitation, the following section will explore the characteristics of FSs from an alternative perspective.

Wray and Perkins (2000) provide a widely-cited definition of formulaic sequences (FSs) from a cognitive perspective, describing them as prefabricated sequences of words or meaning elements These sequences are stored in memory and retrieved as whole units during use, rather than being generated or analyzed through language grammar.

FSs and error analysis

There is a long history to the practice of error analysis (EA) for pedagogical purposes The next section discusses major theories and concepts central to EA

Before delving into Error Analysis (EA), it's essential to distinguish between errors and mistakes Corder (1967) categorized "errors of performance," referred to as mistakes, as unsystematic and insignificant in language learning, while "errors of competence" denote systematic errors that reveal learners' underlying linguistic knowledge Ellis (1997) supports this notion, asserting that errors indicate gaps in a learner's knowledge, occurring when the learner is unaware of the correct form In language teaching and learning, there is a consensus on the importance of analyzing errors, as they provide insights into the learning process and mechanisms of interference (Corder, 1967; Dulay et al., 1982; James, 1998).

Error Analysis (EA) was first systematically introduced by Corder in 1974, who outlined a model with three key stages: the collection, description, and explanation of errors, referred to as idiosyncrasy This foundational model evolved over the years, with Ellis expanding it in 1997 into a four-step process that includes identifying, describing, explaining, and evaluating errors Further refinement came from Gass and Selinker in 2008, who developed a comprehensive six-step model encompassing data collection, error identification, classification, quantification, analysis, and remediation.

Figure 2.1 Six-step error analysis procedure (Gass & Selinker, 2008, p 103)

Gass and Selinker’s (2008) error analysis model involves several key steps: initially, data on learners' errors, whether written or oral, is gathered for analysis Next, the researcher identifies the specific errors present in the collected data Following this, the errors are categorized into distinct groups The next step involves quantifying these errors by category After quantification, the nature of the errors is analyzed, leading to the final step where pedagogical interventions are proposed based on the types and frequencies of the identified errors.

The models discussed focus on identifying and explaining errors, which are key objectives of Error Analysis (EA) A significant distinction of Gass and Selinker’s (2008) model compared to earlier versions lies in its fourth and sixth steps, which involve quantifying and remediating errors These steps are essential for identifying the most prevalent error types and devising strategies for remediation Given that this study aims to investigate common errors in the use of Formulaic Sequences (FSs) and their remediation, the six-step procedure from Gass and Selinker (2008) has been adapted as the research framework The rationale for these adjustments and the methodology employed are detailed in the study.

2.2.2 Types of errors in the use of FSs

The surface strategy taxonomy and the linguistic category taxonomy are two prominent EA descriptive taxonomies that concentrate on observable error features, providing a foundation for further analysis (Ellis, 1997b, p 54) Each taxonomy presents unique advantages and limitations, which will be explored in the following sections.

The surface strategy taxonomy, as defined by Dulay, Burt, and Krashen (1982), emphasizes the alterations in surface structures made by language learners, illustrating how their errors differ from the target language This taxonomy categorizes errors into four types: omission, addition, misformation, and misordering Additionally, James (1998) introduced a fifth category, enhancing the understanding of language learning errors.

26 blends to account for errors made by blending two grammatical forms together

(See Table 2.5 for descriptions and examples)

Table 2.5 Summary of surface strategy taxonomy (Dulay et al., 1982; James,

Researchers frequently utilize established categories to create tailored error taxonomies for their studies Mohammadi and Es-hagi (2018) exemplified this by applying the surface strategy taxonomy to analyze formulaic speech (FS) errors in argumentative essays from 63 upper-intermediate Iranian EFL learners, identifying 13 distinct categories such as omission, addition, incorrect selection, and overgeneralization While their error taxonomy provided insights into learners' strategies when making FS errors, the extensive number of categories complicated the analysis Additionally, some categories, like misuse and incorrect selection, overlapped, leading to potential confusion The approximation category, which inherently includes various strategies, was overly simplified in their study to only encompass synonyms, neglecting other significant error types.

27 approximation As a result, this error taxonomy was not adopted in the present study

The surface strategy taxonomy has faced significant criticism for its implications on language learning Dulay et al (1982) suggest that this taxonomy reflects the cognitive processes through which learners reconstruct a second language However, Ellis (1997) challenges this perspective, arguing that it presumes learners focus solely on the surface structures of the target language instead of developing their own unique linguistic frameworks.

The surface strategy taxonomy lacks clarity in its value, as it fails to accurately depict mental processes, which may contribute to its limited adoption in educational assessment (EA).

Another type of descriptive error taxonomy that has been used to analyze

FS errors refer to a taxonomy of linguistic categories, including nouns, verbs, and adjectives, closely linked to traditional EA practices for educational purposes This taxonomy aligns with the linguistic categories typically found in syllabuses and textbooks In the realm of formulaic language research, Qi and Ding (2011) proposed an FS error taxonomy grounded in this linguistic category framework.

Table 2.6 An error taxonomy for FSs (Qi & Ding, 2011, p 170)

FS errors are classified into internal and external categories, with external errors arising from inappropriate context usage and internal errors stemming from issues within sequence components Internal errors are further categorized linguistically into verbs, nouns, adjectives, adverbs, prepositions, articles, pronouns, and conjunctions, along with a category for errors involving multiple components Qi and Ding's (2011) FS error taxonomy effectively encapsulates the principles of a linguistic category taxonomy, offering a clear method for classifying FS errors This taxonomy also facilitates the quantification of errors, aligning with one of the primary objectives of the current study.

Qi and Ding’s (2011) taxonomy for classifying errors in the use of FSs

Table 2.7 presents the final error taxonomy used in this study Several adjustments were made to Qi and Ding’s (2011) taxonomy to make it more suitable

Table 2.7 The error taxonomy used for the present study (Adapted from Qi and

First, the category preposition + article was removed This category includes errors involving both a preposition and an article – two components in a

The analysis revealed a formulaic sequence that overlaps with the category of errors affecting multiple components Additionally, based on insights from a preliminary pilot study, the categories of pronouns and conjunctions were removed from consideration Further details regarding this decision and the pilot study are elaborated in the Methodology chapter.

2.2.3 Sources of errors in the use of FSs

Learner errors typically stem from three primary sources: interlingual, intralingual, and communication-strategy-based factors These sources can be further dissected into various sub-categories, reflecting the processes and strategies learners use when making errors.

Interlingual errors arise when a learner's native language influences their use of the target language, as noted by Schachter and Celce-Murcia (1977) These errors occur when learners apply their first language knowledge while attempting to communicate in the new language According to Lott (1983, as cited in Ellis), interlingual errors can be categorized into three types: overextension of analogy, transfer of structure, and interlingual errors.

Overextension of analogy occurs when learners incorrectly apply a linguistic item due to similarities with their native language This often leads to the transfer of structure, where phonological, lexical, or grammatical forms from the mother tongue replace those in the target language Additionally, interlingual errors arise from the absence of specific features in the second language that do not exist in the learner's native language According to Smith and Swan (2001), learners are particularly prone to making errors in second language areas that lack close equivalents in their mother tongue.

Conceptual framework

This study is guided by a conceptual framework developed from the theories discussed in this chapter (See Figure 2.2) Utilizing Gass and Selinker’s (2008) six-step model, comprehensive instructions for data collection and analysis were established The researcher identified FS errors and correct outputs, which were then verified using COCA Error classification followed the FS error taxonomy adapted from Qi and Ding’s (2011), enabling effective quantification of the errors.

The adapted six-step model by Gass and Selinker (2008) offers detailed guidance for data collection and analysis, enabling the identification of FS errors and correct outputs through researcher judgment and verification with COCA Error classification followed the FS error taxonomy from Qi and Ding (2011), facilitating the quantification of errors While the study did not primarily focus on error sources, existing literature (Dulay & Burt, 1974; James, 1998; Richards, 1974b) provided valuable insights into certain errors.

The study analyzed students' learning backgrounds, perceptions of formulaic sequences, and their acquisition and use of these sequences to explore correlations with overall formulaic performance The correlation analysis results served as a foundation for addressing errors This conceptual framework was crucial in shaping the research instruments and optimizing the evaluation process, ensuring it was efficiently aligned with theoretical principles.

Figure 2.2 Conceptual framework of the present study

This chapter establishes the theoretical framework for the study by reviewing existing literature on formulaic sequences (FSs) and English acquisition (EA) It highlights the criteria and characteristics of FSs, focusing on collocations, idioms, and phrasal verbs Additionally, it categorizes FS errors and identifies their primary sources The subsequent chapter will elaborate on the EA procedure and other methodological decisions made during the research.

METHODOLOGY

Research design

This study employed a mixed-methods approach to examine the foreign language (FS) errors committed by English-major students during a Vietnamese-English translation test As outlined in Chapter 2: Literature Review, the research adapted the EA model to facilitate this analysis.

Gass and Selinker’s (2008) error analysis model has been modified to include participants' correct output and a correlation analysis This adaptation utilizes a translation test as the error elicitation instrument for specific reasons.

The EA practice has its own merits and flaws On the one hand, EA focuses on the learner’s systematic errors which reflect their interlanguage (Corder, 1975)

It allows researchers and educators to have a look at learners’ underlying processes while making errors, thus, providing pedagogical implications On the other hand,

EA faces criticism for prioritizing learners' mistakes while neglecting their correct outputs (Hummel, 2014) Additionally, the process of error identification in EA is flawed, as it fails to consider learners' avoidance behavior (Kleinmann, 1977; Schachter & Celce-Murcia, 1977) When given the freedom to express themselves creatively, learners often tend to avoid certain language structures.

37 difficult target language patterns and resort to patterns they know well (Hummel,

This study addresses the shortcomings of the EA model by analyzing both participants' formulaic sequence (FS) errors and correct outputs, providing a comprehensive view of their translation performance A small-scale correlation analysis was conducted to explore potential relationships between participants' formulaic performance and various learning factors, including their English learning backgrounds, perceptions of FSs, and self-assessment of FS acquisition and usage Data for these variables were gathered through a questionnaire detailed in Section 3.5.1.

To address the issue of learners' avoidance in language acquisition, effective error elicitation techniques are essential While free production activities like essays can be beneficial, they may not adequately reveal learners' interlanguage errors Corder (1975) emphasizes the need for controlled elicitation methods, such as tests that compel learners to disclose specific aspects of their language use Among these, translation tests are particularly effective, as they can be structured to expose learners to certain features of the target language, minimizing the opportunity for avoidance Consequently, this study employed a translation test to obtain optimal data on learners' language use.

The research design for this study utilized an adapted version of Gass and Selinker’s (2008) EA model, incorporating a translation test to analyze learners’ avoidance behaviors By integrating correct output into the original model, the study aimed to assess participants’ overall formulaic performance Furthermore, a correlation analysis was conducted to explore potential relationships between participants' formulaic performance and key learning factors discussed in Chapter 1, Section 1.2.

This study centers on the concept of formulaic sequences (FSs), necessitating a brief recap of their operational definition introduced in Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.1 In this research, an FS is defined as a string of words—whether continuous or discontinuous—that satisfies three criteria: it must consist of at least two words, achieve a Mutual Information score of 3 or higher (MI ≥ 3), and have a raw frequency of at least three occurrences (FREQ ≥ 3) in the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA).

The FREQ and MI measures are central to operationalizing FSs Section 2.1.1.1 has briefly touched on the basics of FREQ and MI measurements While

FREQ is a fairly straightforward concept that requires little explanation, the methodological reasoning behind the choice of MI over other association measures should be discussed further

In language learning research, various measures exist to assess the strength of association between words, including MI, t-score, Log Dice, and Log Likelihood (Bhalla & Klimcikova, 2019; Gablasova et al., 2017; Zakharov, 2017) Determining the best measure is challenging and should align with the research's purpose and design Gablasova et al (2017) recommend considering three key principles when selecting an association measure: understanding the mathematical reasoning behind it, the scale it operates on, and its practical effects on highlighting or downgrading word combinations.

This study focused on a single corpus, making the scale principle irrelevant, as it is typically necessary for research involving multiple corpora requiring standardization Consequently, the third principle concerning practical effects became the key consideration in selecting an appropriate association measurement for this research.

The practical effect of association measurements highlights specific features of frequent word sequences, with t-score and Log Likelihood emphasizing high-frequency patterns, while MI and Log Dice focus on the exclusivity of word sequences (Barrs, 2019; Bhalla & Klimcikova, 2019; Gablasova et al., 2017; Messaoudi, 2019) As noted by Durrant and Schmitt (2009), t-score and Log Likelihood are akin to rankings based on raw frequency, making them unsuitable for this study, which has already established FS error identification using a raw frequency criterion Thus, utilizing t-score or Log Likelihood would be redundant, leaving MI and Log Dice as the more appropriate measures for analysis.

MI and Log Dice each have their own advantages and disadvantages; while Log Dice has a fixed maximum value and fails to reward low-frequency word sequences, MI lacks a maximum value and tends to favor rare word sequences (Durrant & Schmitt, 2009; Gablasova et al., 2017; Messaoudi, 2019) Despite these differences, MI is deemed the more suitable measure for this study for various reasons.

In this study, the focus is on the minimum value (MI ≥ 3), rendering the maximum value irrelevant To address the bias of MI scores towards low-frequency sequences, a minimum frequency threshold is established, which, in this case, is FREQ ≥ 3, ensuring the integrity of the findings Additionally, MI demonstrates a significant advantage over Log Dice in terms of resource availability, as MI scores are easily accessible through COCA without requiring specialized software or complex calculations Therefore, FREQ and MI scores emerge as the most suitable metrics for this research.

Context of the study

This study was conducted at the English Faculty of a major university in

Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam The Bachelor’s (BA) program offered by this English Faculty has passed the evaluation ofthe ASEAN University Network and met the

40 quality standards according to the ASEAN University Network-Quality Assurance This study took place in one Advanced Translation 1 class in the BA program in 2021

Advanced Translation 1 is a specialized course aimed at equipping students with the essential skills for translating professional texts To enroll, students must have completed all language skill courses along with two foundational translation courses: Basic Translation and Translation Practice This course focuses on translating topics in fine arts, literature, literary criticism, economics, and politics between Vietnamese and English The study was conducted within the Advanced Translation 1 course for various reasons.

Many first and second-year university students majoring in English often struggle with grammatical and spelling errors due to limited English study in high school To address this issue, a study focused on third-year students who had completed prerequisite language skill courses Students lacking prior translation practice, regardless of their language proficiency, tend to find translation tasks challenging, impacting their performance Therefore, the research specifically targeted third-year students enrolled in the Advanced Translation 1 course, as they had already developed a certain level of translation competence through earlier courses Consequently, their translation outputs were expected to exhibit fewer basic errors and more accurately reflect their formulaic performance.

Secondly, the mode of error elicitation for this study was a translation test

Administering the translation test in the Advanced Translation 1 course minimized disruptions to the class schedule and reduced confusion that could arise from having the test in other courses This approach provided students with an additional opportunity to demonstrate their translation skills effectively.

41 students to practice translating a new topic that was not included in their official syllabus

Choosing the Advanced Translation 1 course for this study was a deliberate decision based on methodological factors, providing significant advantages for both the research and its participants.

Prior to the main study, a pilot study was conducted to assess the instruments and the FS error taxonomy through an online practice test, raising concerns about students' error consistency in a more constrained testing environment Initially, the researcher planned to administer the translation test under different conditions to two Advanced Translation 1 classes, but this approach risked the study's validity and reliability due to uncontrollable variables Ultimately, the pilot study's optimization of research instruments allowed for data saturation, leading to the decision to include only one class in the final study.

Pilot study

A pilot study was conducted to assess the research instruments and the suitability of the FS taxonomy proposed by Qi and Ding (2011) Due to the unavailability of the Advanced Translation 1 course during the pilot study, the Advanced Translation 3 course was chosen instead The curriculum includes three primary translation courses for focused practice: Advanced Translation 1, Advanced Translation 2, and Advanced Translation 3, with Advanced Translation 1 addressing both Vietnamese-to-English and English-to-Vietnamese translations.

The Advanced Translation 2 course focuses on English-to-Vietnamese translation, while Advanced Translation 3 specializes in Vietnamese-to-English translation Given that both Advanced Translation 1 and Advanced Translation 3 address Vietnamese-to-English translation and have identical prerequisites, Advanced Translation 3 was selected for the pilot study.

The participants of the pilot study included 42 English-major students in the first semester of their fourth year They were delivered the translation test (see

In the pilot study, participants completed the questionnaire and related tasks via an online Google Form, allowing them to work at their own pace While some may argue that an online format provided advantages such as reduced time pressure and access to resources, the decision to conduct the study online was primarily driven by safety concerns during the COVID-19 outbreak in Ho Chi Minh City Importantly, the availability of online resources did not mitigate the occurrence of fossilized errors (FS errors) among participants, as they can only self-correct mistakes they recognize Data analysis confirmed the presence of FS errors Consequently, the translation products and questionnaire responses were collected and analyzed using the main study's analysis scheme Based on the pilot study findings, adjustments were made to the research instruments and the FS error taxonomy, as detailed in Section 3.5: Research instruments.

Participants

The participants of the main study included 50 English-major students who were attending the Advanced Translation 1 class (Table 3.1)

4 th year 02 participants Total: 50 participants

Translation test 50 participants Questionnaire 41 participants

A total of 50 university students participated in the translation test, with 48 in their third year and two in their fourth year The minimal difference of one semester was not expected to significantly impact their test performance, as all participants had completed the necessary language skill and translation courses, achieving a proficiency level similar to those in a prior pilot study Participation was voluntary, with nine students opting out of the questionnaire, which did not influence the error analysis However, for the correlation analysis, the researcher excluded these nine participants to maintain the study's reliability and validity.

Research instruments

The research utilized two primary instruments: a questionnaire and a translation test Additionally, it incorporated the COCA database to validate the researcher’s assessment of the formulaic nature of word sequences during both the identification of errors and the evaluation of correct outputs.

The questionnaire aimed to collect data on specific learning factors that could have impacted participants' formulaic performance in the test, which was crucial for the subsequent correlation analysis.

Table 3.2 Description of the initial questionnaire

The questionnaire focused on three key learning factors: participants' English learning background, their perceptions of formulaic sequences (FSs), and their self-assessment of FS acquisition and usage Each factor was detailed through specific variables aligned with the questionnaire items, as shown in Table 3.2 For instance, the English learning background was analyzed based on the age participants began learning English (variable V1, linked to questionnaire item Q1), their learning context (variable V2, related to item Q2), and their exposure sources.

In this study, we examined the impact of English proficiency (variable V3) and questionnaire item Q3 on participants' formulaic performance in the test These variables were selected for their potential influence, and correlation analysis was conducted to explore any possible relationships between them and the participants' performance outcomes.

To ensure clarity for participants unfamiliar with the term "FSs," the questionnaire utilized the more recognizable term "fixed expressions" and included examples to avoid confusion Designed to be brief and straightforward, the questionnaire was administered immediately after the translation test to minimize the impact of participant fatigue on their responses.

The questionnaire, designed to take approximately five minutes, featured close-ended, multiple-choice questions, allowing participants to add additional information when needed Participants were required to provide their names to correlate their responses with their translation products for analysis, with assurances that their identities and scores would remain confidential and solely utilized for research purposes.

The final questionnaire used in the main study remained relatively the same as the initial questionnaire used for the pilot study, with the exception of item Q9 (See Table 3.3)

Table 3.3 Description of the questionnaire items used for the main study

After the pilot study, it became evident that item Q9 which asks about the participants’ speech production was not necessary Although it did show that the

In the pilot study, 46 participants made deliberate efforts to utilize FSs; however, this aspect was not pertinent to the current research, which focused solely on errors in learners' written outputs Consequently, item Q9 was excluded from the final questionnaire For the complete version of the questionnaire, please see Appendix C.

The present study aimed to analyze FS errors through a Vietnamese-English translation test focused on mental well-being, a topic not covered in the Advanced Translation 1 course, ensuring no disruption to participants' learning This subject was chosen for its accessibility, as it does not require specialized vocabulary, with additional terms provided to aid participants in identifying FSs Conducted in 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic, which significantly impacted mental health globally and in Vietnam, the study also served as a reminder for participants to prioritize their mental wellness, addressing a topic often shrouded in social stigma.

The creation of Vietnamese text for translation involves two main steps, beginning with the selection of an English text that meets four specific criteria: it must focus on mental well-being, come from a reputable source, be written authentically by native speakers, and contain a diverse range of commonly used phrasal structures Notably, the chosen English text is casual rather than formal or academic, as phrasal verbs are often avoided in formal writing, despite their prevalence in academic sources This approach was taken to ensure that participants in the translation test engage with a more relatable and accessible style of English.

47 would not consciously limit themselves from producing any type of FSs out of conventional expectations

Following the compilation of the text, the next phase involved translating it from English to Vietnamese The researcher aimed to create a natural-sounding Vietnamese version while preserving the distinctive patterns of the English functional structures (FSs) This translated Vietnamese text was utilized in the translation test, with the original English text serving as the baseline for analysis.

This process ensures that Vietnamese text allows for the production of fixed expressions (FSs) at a frequency comparable to that of native speakers Essentially, if an average native speaker can produce FSs at a specific frequency in a given context, a near-native learner should also be able to achieve similar results Using random Vietnamese text could hinder participants from producing English FSs due to the text's linguistic characteristics Additionally, the reliability and authenticity of the English baseline text are maintained Importantly, the translation test aims not to require participants to replicate the exact FSs or their quantity from the English text, but rather to facilitate FS production and identify errors in their usage.

The initial translation test consisted of a 400-word Vietnamese text; however, following a pilot study, it was determined that this text did not yield enough data for the main study Consequently, an additional paragraph on the same topic was created using the previously outlined process, resulting in a final translation test of 575 words This revised text is designed to take approximately 60 minutes to translate into English For reference, see Appendix D for the final version of the translation test and Appendix E for the English baseline text.

3.5.3 Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA)

The Corpus of Contemporary American English (https://www.english- corpora.org/coca/) was used as a reference tool to support the identification of FS

The study identified 48 errors in participants' translation products, utilizing the COCA corpus for its extensive database of over one billion words, which is continuously updated with more than 25 million words annually since 1990, with the latest update in March 2020 In contrast, the British National Corpus (BNC) contains only 100 million words and was last updated in 2014, making COCA the most current and representative corpus of English Additionally, COCA's online accessibility, allowing free users up to 50 search queries and 5,000 concordance lines daily, makes it suitable for small-scale research, solidifying its selection for this study.

Data collection procedure

In the final meeting of the Advanced Translation 1 class, participants completed a translation test followed by a questionnaire, chosen for its convenience within the class schedule Prior to the test, they were informed that the provided text was informal, allowing them to focus on doing their best without the need for formal language.

Participants had 60 minutes to complete a translation test using only paper dictionaries, with no electronic devices permitted After finishing the test, they were allotted five minutes for a questionnaire, although nine participants opted out Ultimately, the study gathered 50 translation test products totaling 20,813 words and received 41 completed questionnaire responses The following section details the data analysis process.

Data analysis procedure

The data analysis followed Gass and Selinker’s (2008) error analysis model, incorporating participants’ correct outputs and a correlation analysis, as detailed in Section 3.1.

The initial phase involved gathering potential FS errors and the accurate outputs generated by participants during the translation test To achieve this, the 20,813-word translated document was manually entered into QDA Miner, a software designed for qualitative data analysis.

3.7.2 Step 2 – Identification of FS errors and correct output

After collecting data into the analysis software, the researcher meticulously reviewed the text to identify both unformulaic word sequences and those deemed correct It's important to note that the term "error" is used solely for analytical purposes, as the identified unformulaic sequences may be commonly used by native speakers and could be considered formulaic in different contexts In this study, "FS errors" refer to word sequences that do not align with the operational definitions established, without implying that these errors should be avoided in practical use.

To identify errors in language learning, it is essential to compare learners' sentences with standard forms of the target language, as noted by Ellis (1997a) This comparison, particularly in corpus-based research, involves analyzing learners' deviant forms against a corpus of native texts In this study, the word sequences identified by the researcher will be analyzed using the COCA database to determine their frequency (FREQ) and mutual information (MI) scores, as illustrated in Figure 3.1.

In a pilot study, a participant translated "giảm nhẹ một hệ quả không mong đợi" as "minimize an unexpected consequence." While the term "consequence" is appropriate, the pairing of "minimize" with "consequence" appears somewhat unnatural To evaluate its formulaic status, the phrase was analyzed using the COCA search interface, applying a minimum MI score of 3.

Figure 3.2 Example of the minimize+consequence combination searched in

An error notification was generated (see Figure 3.3) when the combination of the words "minimize" and "consequence" produced a mutual information (MI) score below the established threshold of MI = 3 According to the operational definition, a valid word sequence must consist of at least two words and have a frequency (FREQ) of three or more.

In the context of COCA, a mutual information (MI) score of 3 or higher is required for classification as a free structure (FS) However, this sequence fails to meet the third criterion of the MI score, resulting in an FS error that aligns with the researcher’s initial assessment.

To ensure accurate error identification, the researcher will verify the FREQ and MI score of the erroneous sequence in COCA using the collocate searching feature Figure 3.4 illustrates the verbs commonly associated with the noun "consequence," with the first column displaying the FREQ and the second column presenting the MI score.

The MI score of the sequence "minimize and consequence" is only 2.74, indicating it cannot be considered formulaic despite a frequency of 45 It's important to note that the values and specific order may change with updates to the COCA database and measurement algorithms, but these changes are not expected to impact the formulaic status of the sequences.

Figure 3.4 Actual FREQ and MI score of the combination minimize+consequence

The choice of the verb "minimize" is incorrect; instead, the noun "consequence" should be paired with verbs like "mitigate" or "ameliorate." These alternatives not only preserve the intended meaning but also yield a higher mutual information score, creating a more effective phrase.

In this phase of the research, the investigator not only pinpointed FS errors but also identified the correct responses generated by participants during the test This process mirrored the earlier error identification method, where potential FSs, previously marked, were examined in the COCA database to assess their frequency (FREQ) and mutual information (MI) scores against established criteria Upon completion, a comprehensive compilation of the participants' FS errors alongside their correct outputs was prepared for subsequent analysis.

3.7.3 Step 3 – Classification of FS errors

The FS error taxonomy utilized in this study was adapted from Qi and Ding (2011), excluding the categories of preposition + articles, pronouns, and conjunctions The preposition + article category overlaps with the 'others' category, as detailed in Section 2.2.2.2 Following the pilot study, it was determined that the categories of pronouns and conjunctions were also redundant.

The pilot study findings indicate that errors related to pronouns and conjunctions are primarily grammatical in nature, as demonstrated by examples from the participants' translation products (Figure 3.5).

Figure 3.5 Examples of errors involving pronouns

It is clear that the sequence write *them down is erroneous The pronoun

The incorrect use of the pronoun *them instead of it highlights a common issue in pronoun reference, particularly with singular nouns like step or movement While *them appeared within the phrasal verb write down, it is important to note that this instance should not be classified as a formal syntactic (FS) error The primary issue stemmed from participants' inability to establish a clear anaphoric reference to the intended noun Similar errors involving pronouns identified in the pilot study were predominantly due to violations of grammatical rules rather than FS errors Consequently, creating a separate FS error category for pronouns may not be warranted.

The same could be stated for errors involving conjunctions A pilot study participant wrote:

“When facing obstacles, we either can or cannot adapt.”

The phrase "either can or cannot adapt" sounds unnatural due to its awkward construction, as it uses a single action verb, "adapt," with correlative conjunctions A more natural phrasing would be "we can either adapt or not." However, this issue does not qualify as a formal sentence (FS) error according to the study's criteria Similar instances identified in the pilot study indicate that the misuse of conjunctions is primarily a grammatical error, which should not be categorized within the FS error taxonomy.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

The participants’ common errors in the use of FSs

In Section 3.6, it was noted that the participants contributed 50 translation products, resulting in a compiled total of 20,813 words Additionally, Figure 4.1 illustrates the number of attempts made by participants to utilize functional strategies (FSs) during the translation test.

Figure 4.1 Number of attempts made by the participants to use FSs

Overall, 1,389 word sequences were determined to be correct output while

535 word sequences were identified as FS errors All of the word sequences that

A total of 1,924 attempts to use functional strategies (FSs) were identified in the translation test, with 27.81% of these attempts classified as either correct outputs or errors.

FS errors, and 72.19% resulted in correct output

Figure 4.2 presents a double-line chart comparing the total attempts to use FSs and the corresponding FS errors made by each participant

Figure 4.2 Comparison of the participants’ FS errors and total attempts to use

The chart illustrates the relationship between the number of attempts made by participants and the frequency of fixed structure (FS) errors, with vertical numbers indicating attempts and horizontal numbers representing participants The line depicting FS errors highlights a trend where an increase in FS usage correlates with a higher incidence of errors, aligning with Thewissen's (2013) "accuracy-complexity trade-off effect." This suggests that as participants made more attempts to utilize FSs during the translation test, they consequently committed more errors.

In all of the participants’ attempts to use FSs, 63.67% are collocations, 21.93% are idioms, and 14.4% are phrasal verbs (Figure 4.3) This distribution of

The distribution of FS types aligns with the findings of Vilkaitė (2016), revealing that collocations are the most prevalent, followed by idioms and phrasal verbs.

Figure 4.3 Distribution of the participants’ attempts to use FSs

A closer look at individual performances (Figure 4.4) shows the distribution of attempts to use FSs by individual participants

Figure 4.4 FS attempts by the individual participants

The vertical numbers on the left side of the chart represent the number of attempts that the participants made to use FSs in the test The numbers on the

Total IdiomAttemptsTotal Phrasal VerbAttempts

The analysis reveals that while individual participants show significant variation in their attempts to use collocations, their efforts to incorporate idioms and phrasal verbs remain consistent This indicates that even those who frequently attempt collocations struggle equally with idioms and phrasal verbs, suggesting a potential pattern of avoidance and a lack of competence in using these linguistic elements.

In this study, participants made a total of 1,924 attempts to incorporate fixed structures (FSs) in their translations, achieving 1,389 successful outputs and encountering 535 errors This indicates that 27.81% of their attempts resulted in FS errors, while 72.19% were successful The attempts aligned with Thewissen’s framework.

The 2013 study highlights the "accuracy-complexity trade-off effect," indicating that increased use of formulaic sequences (FSs) correlates with a higher likelihood of errors A significant portion of participants' FS attempts, approximately 63.67%, involved collocations, while their use of idioms and phrasal verbs was notably lower at 21.93% and 14.40%, respectively This suggests that participants acknowledged the importance of FSs in English language use and actively sought to incorporate them into their communication However, their attempts were accompanied by a diverse range of FS errors, which will be further analyzed in the subsequent section.

4.1.2 Common FS errors by linguistic categories

This section analyzes the frequency and distribution of FS errors among participants, considering both the overall counts and the types of errors made The discussion includes learning factors and potential sources of these errors, although pinpointing a specific source is challenging due to the complexity of mental processes involved EA researchers have sought to model the mental processes learners experience when making errors, as noted by Dulay et al (1982) However, there remains no effective method to directly assess these cognitive processes as they occur in learners' minds In EA studies, distinctions regarding errors are often made at the discretion of the researchers.

According to Etzel (2019), mental processes are inherently difficult to observe or measure directly, leading researchers to infer their existence This study presents findings and interpretations based on the researcher’s understanding, acknowledging that other researchers may interpret the identified errors differently and attribute them to various sources depending on their perspectives.

In this study, the term "error(s)" specifically refers to unformulaic word sequences, distinct from grammar, spelling, or other linguistic violations FS errors are defined as word sequences that, despite being grammatically accurate, fail to meet the established criteria for formulaic sequences as outlined in the operational definition While these sequences may be deemed correct and formulaic in different contexts, such considerations are outside the scope of this discussion.

In Section 4.2.1, it was noted that out of the 20,813 words translated by participants, 535 functional structure (FS) errors were identified These errors are categorized as shown in Table 4.1, with the inaccurate choices that led to FS criterion violations underlined and marked with an asterisk.

Table 4.1 The participants’ FS errors by linguistic categories

FS errors Standard sequences External Errors

(Inappropriate use of sequences in context)

46 8.58% *full circle common *senses vicious circle common experiences

Int er n al E rror s (Err or s in the c om p onen ts of t h e s equen ce s) C ont en t w or d s

*set a plan experiencing difficulties make a plan

*obstacles emotional needs experience hardship

*all-compassing health poor sleep general health

*continually occupy drawing up continuously occupy

*in a piece of paper obligations *with on a piece of paper obligations to Article 21 3.92% on *the paper take *an initiative on paper take initiative

(Errors in more than one component)

*each step *each time mental health one step at a time

This article examines the frequency of FS errors made by study participants, providing examples and analyses for each error type The author offers potential explanations for the sources of these errors, acknowledging the complexity of identifying the exact mental processes behind them It is important to note that these explanations are not definitive; they represent the author's perspective, and alternative interpretations are equally valid.

In this study, inaccurate verb choices emerged as the most prevalent type of FS errors, accounting for 37.31% of all identified errors Notably, every participant exhibited this type of error.

Some participants translated the phrase "giảm nhẹ một hệ quả không mong đợi" as "alleviate an unexpected consequence." While the combination of "alleviate" and "consequence" may seem semantically compatible, it does not meet the criteria for formulaic language in this study (FREQ = 10; MI = 2.1) This incorrect verb choice indicates a formulaic sequence (FS) error, likely stemming from the participant's misconception that "alleviate" and "consequence" can be used together meaningfully This misunderstanding is linked to the mental process known as false concepts hypothesized, which can arise from intralingual sources (Richards, 1974a).

Inaccurate verb choices have also been found to be the most common type of errors by previous research (Nesselhauf, 2005; Nguyen et al., 2021; Zinkgrọf,

In a study examining FS errors related to verb choices, findings revealed a divergence from previous research, notably that of Nesselhauf (2005), which identified nouns like action, attitude, problem, and step as significant sources of difficulty for participants Conversely, the current study's participants largely did not struggle with selecting appropriate verbs for these nouns, suggesting that variations in participants' native languages may partly account for these differences.

The relationships between the participants’ formulaic performance and

This study addresses the limitations of traditional error analysis (EA) by examining participants' formulaic performance, focusing on both errors and correct outputs The subsequent sections analyze the learning factors that may have impacted participants' test performance and explore the potential connections between these factors and their formulaic performance.

Co llo cati o n s Id io ms Phr as al V e rb s

To fully understand learners' formulaic performance, it is crucial to analyze their errors alongside various learning factors The insights presented here are based on 41 questionnaire responses and do not represent the views of the nine participants who chose not to participate.

4.2.1.1 The participants’ English learning background

According to Figure 4.8, a significant 61% of participants began learning English between the ages of 5 and 10, while 34.1% started after turning 10 Notably, only 4.9% of participants reported starting their English education before the age of 5.

Figure 4.8 The participants’ starting age

The slight variation in the starting age of participants is consistent with the Vietnam Ministry of Education and Training’s Decision No 3321/QD-BGDDT, which mandates English instruction beginning in Grade 3 since 2010 Given that the participants are aged 20-21, it is logical that nearly all began learning English at this age, reflecting the experience of most Vietnamese students in the same age group.

According to Figure 4.9, participants reported various learning contexts for English, with the majority engaging in learning beyond formal school classes Notably, only 17.1% of participants indicated that they studied English exclusively at school.

Figure 4.9 The participants’ learning contexts

Most participants acquired their English skills through formal education in schools, as well as at English centers and through self-study at home Some engaged in English learning groups, while others utilized online resources, highlighting a blend of formal and semi-formal learning environments This indicates that a significant number of participants took the initiative to enhance their English proficiency independently.

Figure 4.10 illustrates the different sources participants utilized to enhance their English exposure beyond the classroom The left side of the chart indicates the actual number of participants, while the top of each column displays the corresponding percentage for each option For instance, 38 participants engaged with a specific source, highlighting its significance in their language learning journey.

A total of 41 participants, representing 92.7% of responses, reported watching YouTube in English It is important to note that the total percentages in the chart do not equal 100%, as participants had the option to select multiple responses.

At school, Self- study, at English centers 24.4%

At school, At English centers 7.3%

At school, English learning groups2.4%

77 options at the same time, such as both watching YouTube and talking to foreigners in English

Figure 4.10 The participants’ sources of exposure to English

It is clear that the participants had plenty of exposure to English through online media, including YouTube videos (92.7%), books and newspapers (61%),

A significant 78% of participants were exposed to English through TV shows and movies; however, this exposure was mostly passive and did not facilitate productive communication skills While 29.3% practiced speaking English with Vietnamese friends, only 14.6% had the chance to engage in actual conversations with foreigners.

4.2.1.2 The participants’ perceptions of FSs

Participants exhibited a positive perception of English formulaic sequences (FSs), recognizing their significance in learning and using the language According to the data, 87.8% of participants indicated that understanding FSs enhances their comprehension of English and improves listening and reading skills Additionally, 63.4% noted that knowledge of FSs contributes to greater fluency in speaking and writing, while 75.6% believed that developing formulaic competence could help them achieve near-native proficiency.

I read English newspapers and/or English books.

I watch TV shows and/or movies in English.

I talk to foreign friends in English.

I practice English with myVietnamese friends.

Figure 4.11 The participants’ awareness of the benefits of FSs

Participants demonstrated a strong awareness of the crucial role that feedback strategies (FSs) play in enhancing both receptive and productive language skills, ultimately contributing to achieving native-like proficiency.

4.2.1.3 The participants’ perceptions of their acquisition and use of FSs

A study on participants' acquisition and use of fixed expressions (FSs) revealed that 90.2% often notice FSs while reading English texts, and 87.5% actively seek to learn these new expressions Figure 4.12 illustrates their study techniques, with actual participant numbers on the left and corresponding percentages at the top of each column Notably, 51.4% of participants, totaling 18 individuals, reported looking up fixed expressions in dictionaries It's important to note that since participants could select multiple options, the total percentage exceeds 100%.

They help me understand English better, thus, improving my reading and listening skills.

They help me write and speak English more fluently.

They help me sound more like native speakers.

They help me translate correctly.

Figure 4.12 The participants’ techniques to learn FSs

A significant 82.5% of participants expressed their intention to consciously integrate formulaic sequences (FSs) into their English writing The methods they planned to employ for this integration varied among individuals, as illustrated in Figure 4.13.

Figure 4.13 The participants’ habits of incorporating FSs in writing

A significant majority of writers, 72%, rely on dictionaries and Google for reference during the writing process Meanwhile, 12% focus on reviewing and editing their work afterward to incorporate more functional structures or correct errors Additionally, 16% of writers utilize a combination of both strategies to enhance their writing.

I look up the fixed expressions in dictionaries.

I search the fixed expressions on Google.

I write the fixed expressions and their meanings in my notebook to review later.

A significant 70.7% of participants reported finding English fixed expressions (FSs) challenging to understand without the aid of dictionaries or Google Many expressed difficulty in memorizing FSs, highlighting that they are often drastically different from their Vietnamese counterparts Some participants noted the abundance of FSs to memorize and the lack of suitable equivalents in Vietnamese These challenges stem from the fixed and non-compositional nature of many FSs, compounded by the linguistic differences between English and Vietnamese, which can lead to interference Addressing these difficulties is essential for enhancing the teaching and learning of FSs.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Conclusion

This study investigates the formulaic speech (FS) errors made by English-major students to identify common error types and explore the relationships between formulaic performance, including FS errors and correct outputs, and key learning factors such as English learning backgrounds and perceptions of FSs The research is guided by two primary questions aimed at understanding these dynamics.

(1) What are the common errors in the use of FSs made by English- major students in their Vietnamese-to-English translations?

This study explores the correlation between English-major students' formulaic performance in Vietnamese-to-English translations and their English learning backgrounds It also examines their perceptions of formulaic sequences (FSs) and their self-assessment of acquiring and utilizing these sequences.

Utilizing Gass and Selinker’s (2008) error analysis model, alongside correct output and correlation analysis, enabled the identification of prevalent types of formulaic sequence (FS) errors and their potential links to key learning factors To address the research questions, data was collected from a Vietnamese-to-English translation test and a brief questionnaire This data was analyzed to assess participants' FS errors and correct outputs, in addition to their English learning backgrounds and perceptions regarding formulaic sequences and their acquisition.

99 use of FSs – all of which likely influenced the participants’ formulaic performance in the test

Based on the findings from the error analysis and the results from the correlation analysis, the two research questions are answered as follows:

The study identified the most prevalent foreign language (FS) errors made by English-major students in their Vietnamese-to-English translations, highlighting inaccurate verb choices at 37.1%, inaccurate preposition choices at 18.7%, and inaccurate noun choices at 11.9% Notably, collocations emerged as the most error-prone category, accounting for a significant 81.2% of all identified errors.

The study reveals that participants' formulaic performance, measured by FS errors and correct outputs, shows weak to medium correlations with their English learning backgrounds, including learning contexts and exposure sources Additionally, their study techniques and active use of formulaic sequences in writing relate to their perceptions of acquisition and use However, participants' awareness of the significance and benefits of formulaic sequences does not strongly correlate with their performance, indicating a disconnect between perception and actual output in formulaic language use.

Pedagogical implications and suggestions

The findings of the present study offer several pedagogical implications and suggestions for the teaching and learning of FSs

In the current study, inaccurate verb choices are the primary source of FS errors As discussed in Section 4.1.2.1, learners face challenges with verbs due to the complex cognitive processes involved in their acquisition Research indicates that the human brain struggles with verb learning because verb meanings are highly context-dependent (Earles & Kersten, 2000; Engelkamp et al., 1990).

According to Reynolds & Flagg (1976), learners often struggle to recall the correct verbs when faced with contexts that differ from those in which they originally learned the verbs This challenge likely contributes to the frequent errors in verb choice seen in fixed expressions (FSs) To mitigate this issue, it is essential to expose learners to diverse contexts when teaching new FSs, encouraging them to explore various situations where these expressions can be applied effectively.

Participants who engaged in English studies across various settings, such as schools, English centers, and study groups, demonstrated superior formulaic performance, evidenced by more accurate outputs and fewer errors, compared to those who studied in only one environment Furthermore, individuals who self-studied at home also exhibited strong formulaic skills While other influencing factors may exist, it appears that a blend of formal, semi-formal, and informal learning environments can enhance English learning Since attending English centers may not be feasible for all due to socioeconomic constraints, promoting self-study and peer study groups serves as effective and accessible alternatives.

Effective self-studying techniques can enhance the acquisition of formulaic sequences (FSs) Participants who minimized FS errors often utilized dictionaries and Google to look up unfamiliar FSs, subsequently noting down their meanings for later review Research indicates that taking notes is a crucial process for retaining information, with both handwritten and digital notes proving effective for memorization To optimize formulaic acquisition, learners should choose a note-taking method that suits them, ensuring that their notes are concise and well-organized for maximum memory retention.

Forming study groups with peers is an effective strategy for enhancing formulaic speech (FS) acquisition Participants who engaged in communicative English interactions, both with native speakers and fellow Vietnamese learners, demonstrated the highest levels of correct output, highlighting the advantages of English-speaking communities in FS learning (Dürnyei et al., 2004) Additionally, extensive social interaction in English can help reduce learners' avoidance of phrasal verbs (Wang, 2019) Overall, peer study groups provide a simple yet productive means for learners to practice English communicatively and improve their formulaic competence.

Active learner engagement in utilizing formulaic sequences (FSs) is crucial for effective acquisition Participants who incorporated FSs into their writing demonstrated fewer errors, highlighting the importance of autonomy and motivation in learning Teachers must not only provide structured lessons addressing common errors but also foster an environment that encourages active participation in FS learning By emphasizing the impact of effective study techniques and consistent English practice, educators can significantly enhance students' formulaic development Additionally, offering guidance on self-study methods and facilitating peer study groups tailored to learners' demographics will further support their learning journey.

Limitations of the study

The findings of this study are subject to certain limitations Firstly, the research focuses exclusively on the written production of participants during a translation test, which does not reflect their spoken abilities Secondly, the identification of formulaic sequence (FS) errors and correct outputs was performed by the author, a native Vietnamese speaker, due to resource constraints Despite implementing objective criteria and rigorous procedures, including the use of COCA for verification, these factors may influence the overall validity of the results.

The study identified 102 errors, but elements of subjectivity likely influenced the findings Additionally, the correlation analysis between participants' formulaic performance and learning factors could not establish a definitive cause-effect relationship, limiting the study to identifying potential correlations and beneficial factors The small sample size restricted the number of errors and correct outputs collected, and the absence of longitudinal data prevented the determination of whether the reported errors were systematic.

In summary, the study's limitations, which include its lack of aim for broader representation and predictions, are unlikely to adversely affect the findings To enhance the understanding of FSs, the following section presents several recommendations for future research.

Recommendations for further research

To enhance the current study on formulaic language, educators and researchers should consider maintaining the existing error analysis model while incorporating correct output and correlation analysis, specifically focusing on spoken production Involving native English speakers in identifying formulaic speech errors can enhance objectivity Alternatively, conducting pedagogical experiments may provide insights into the causes of these errors and the impact of various learning factors, such as exposure sources and study techniques, on formulaic performance Additionally, collecting error data over time can help identify systematic errors and inform targeted remediation strategies.

Alangari, M., Jaworska, S., & Laws, J (2020) Who’s afraid of phrasal verbs? The use of phrasal verbs in expert academic writing in the discipline of linguistics

Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 43, 1–13 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100814

Armstrong, K (2004) Sexing up the dossier: A semantic analysis of phrasal verbs for language teachers Language Awareness, 13(4), 213–224

Bannard, C., & Lieven, E (2009) Repetition and reuse in child language learning

In H Ouali, E A Moravcsik, R Corrigan, & K Wheatley (Eds.), Formulaic language: Acquisition, loss, psychological reality, and functional explanations (Vol 2, pp 299–321) Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing

Barrs, K (2019) Deriving lists of collocates from web corpora: Issues and implications of different association measures Studies in the Humanities and

Becker, J D (1975) The phrasal lexicon Theoretical Issues in Natural Language

Processing, 60–63 Cambridge, Massachusetts: Association for

Computational Linguistics https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3115/980190.980212

Bestgen, Y (2018) Evaluating the frequency threshold for selecting lexical bundles by means of an extension of the Fisher’s exact test Corpora, 13(2), 205–228

Bhalla, V., & Klimcikova, K (2019) Evaluation of automatic collocation extraction methods for language learning Proceedings of the Fourteenth Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications,

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 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168806lr195oa

Boers, F., & Lindstromberg, S (2006) Cognitive linguistic applications in second or foreign language instruction: Rationale, proposals, and evaluation In G Kristiansen, M Achard, R Dirven, & F J R de M Ibỏủez (Eds.),

Applications of cognitive linguistics (pp 305–355) New York: Mouton de

Boers, F., & Lindstromberg, S (2009) Optimizing a lexical approach to instructed second language acquisition New York: Palgrave Macmillan

Bolinger, D (1971) The phrasal verb in English Cambridge, Massachusetts:

Bonk, C J (2000) Testing ESL learners’ knowledge of collocation A Focus on

Language Test Development: Expanding the Language Proficiency Construct across a Variety of Tests (Technical Report #21) , 113–142

Boone, G (2021) How social interaction affects students’ formulaic development in L2 German in a multilingual SA context: Four case studies In Language,

Mobility and Study Abroad in the Contemporary European Context (pp 154–

Boonyasaquan, S (2009) An analysis of collocational violations in translation

Boukhenfir, L., & Bourbia, A (2017) Students’ strategies in translating culture- specific idioms from English into Arabic Mohammed Seddik Ben Yahia

Buerki, A (2016) Formulaic sequences: A drop in the ocean of constructions or something more significant? European Journal of English Studies, 20(1), 15–

Bui, D C., Myerson, J., & Hale, S (2013) Note-taking with computers: Exploring alternative strategies for improved recall Journal of Educational Psychology,

105(2), 299 https://doi.org/https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0030367

Bui, P H (2019) A cognitive linguistic approach to teaching English idioms to

EFL students: Experimental results The Southeast Asian Journal of English

Language Studies, 25(2) https://doi.org/http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2019-

Bui, T K P (2018) Common structural errors in Vietnamese - English translation made by English majored students at Duy Tan University Journal of Science and Technology, 8(129), 61–65

Castro, M (2013) An analysis of prepositional errors of college students

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Foreign Language Learning and Teaching, 97–108 Bangkok, Thailand

Chen, H H.-J., Yang, C T.-Y., Wei, I F.-F., & Jiang, A (2015) A corpus study on phrasal verb use in the academic writing of published authors, native English-speaking students, and Taiwanese EFL learners English Teaching &

Corder, S P (1967) The significance of learners’ errors International Review of

Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 5, 161–170

Corder, S P (1974) Idiosyncratic dialects and error analysis Error Analysis: Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition, 158–171

Corder, S P (1975) Error analysis, interlanguage and second language acquisition Language Teaching, 8(4), 201–218

Cowie, A P (1994) Phraseology In A R E (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (pp 3168–3171) Pergamon: Oxford

Dagut, M., & Laufer, B (1985) Avoidance of phrasal verbs—A case for contrastive analysis Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7(1), 73–79

Dam, P (2001) Old habits die hard: Persistent errors in English written by Vietnamese speakers The Annual Meeting of the National Association of Bilingual Education, 1–7 Arizona: ERIC

Darwin, C M., & Gray, L S (1999) Going after the phrasal verb: An alternative

The article discusses the approach to classification in language teaching, specifically focusing on collocations and their significance in education It references a study by de Souza Hodne (2009) that investigates word combinations in two English textbooks designed for Norwegian upper secondary school students The findings contribute to understanding effective teaching methods that enhance language acquisition and usage This research was published in the TESOL Quarterly, which highlights its relevance in the field of English language teaching.

Dirven, R (2012) English phrasal verbs: Theory and didactic application In D Geeraerts, R Dirven, J Taylor, & R Langacker (Eds.), Language Pedagogy (pp 3–28) Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton

Do, T H (2017) The impact of different instructions on Vietnamese EFL students’ acquisition of formulaic sequences English Language Teaching, 10(8), 18–31

Dửrnyei, Z., Durow, V., & Zahran, K (2004) Individual differences and their effects on formulaic sequence acquisition In N Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp 87–106) Amsterdam: John

Dulay, H C., & Burt, M K (1972) You can’t learn without goofing: An analysis of children’s second language In J Richards (Ed.), Error Analysis Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition (pp 1–46) London: Longman

Dulay, H C., & Burt, M K (1974) Errors and strategies in child second language acquisition TESOL Quarterly, 129–136

Dulay, H C., Burt, M K., & Krashen, S (1982) Language two New York:

Durna, F K., & Güneş, O (2020) A corpus linguistics investigation into phrasal verbs in British academic spoken English Journal of Foreign Language Education and Technology, 5(1), 204–223

Durrant, P (2008) High frequency collocations and second language learning

Durrant, P., & Schmitt, N (2009) To what extent do native and non-native writers make use of collocations? International Review of Applied Linguistics in

Language Teaching, 47(2), 157–177 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2009.007

Earles, J L., & Kersten, A W (2000) Adult age differences in memory for verbs and nouns Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 7(2), 130–139 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1076/1382-5585(200006)7:2;1-U;FT130

Ellis, R (1997a) Second language acquisition (Ninth; H Widdowson, Ed.)

I don't know!

Ellis, R (1997b) The study of second language acquisition Oxford: Oxford

Engelkamp, J., Zimmer, H D., & Mohr, G (1990) Differential memory effects of concrete nouns and action verbs Zeitschrift Für Psychologie Mit Zeitschrift

Erman, B., & Warren, B (2000) The idiom principle and the open choice principle Text-Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 20(1),

Etzel, B C (2019) Environmental approaches to the development of conceptual behaviors In D M Baer & E M Pinkston (Eds.), Environment And Behavior (pp 52–79) New York, NY: Routledge

Fletcher, B (2005) Register and phrasal verbs MED Magazine, 33(4), 212–224 Retrieved from http://macmillandictionaries.com/MED- Magazine/September2005/33-Phrasal-Verbs-Register.htm

Foster, P (2001) Rules and routines: A consideration of their role in the task- based language production of native and non-native speakers In M Bygate,

P Skehan, & M Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching, and testing (pp 75–93) Harlow: Longman

Friedman, M C (2014) Notes on note-taking: Review of research and insights for students and instructors Harvard Initiative for Learning and Teaching, pp 1–

Gablasova, D., Brezina, V., & McEnery, T (2017) Collocations in corpus‐based language learning research: Identifying, comparing, and interpreting the evidence Language Learning, 67(S1), 155–179 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12225

Gardner, D., & Davies, M (2007) Pointing out frequent phrasal verbs: A corpus‐ based analysis TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 339–359

Gass, S M., & Selinker, G (2008) Second language acquisition: An introductory course New York: Taylor & Francis

Gerard, J E (2007) The reading of formulaic sequences in a native and non- native language: An eye movement analysis The University of Arizona

Ghabanchi, Z., & Goudarzi, E (2012) Avoidance of phrasal verbs in learner English: A study of Iranian students World Journal of English Language, 2(2), 43

Gibbs Jr, R W (2007) Idioms and formulaic language In D Geeraerts & H Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics New York: Oxford University Press

Granger, S., & Bestgen, Y (2014) The use of collocations by intermediate vs advanced nonnative writers: A bigram-based study International Review of

Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 52, 229–252 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2014-0011

Hager, P., Gonczi, A., & Athanasou, J (1994) General issues about assessment of competence Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 19(1), 3–16

Hakuta, K (1974) Prefabricated patterns and the emergence of structure in second language acquisition Language Learning, 24(2), 287–297 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1974.tb00509.x

Han, S (2015) Processing formulaic sequences by native and nonnative speakers of English: Evidence from reading aloud Northern Arizona University

Hart, C W (2017) Ultimate phrasal verb book (Third) New York: Simon and

Hautte, J Vanden (2017) Avoidance of phrasal verbs in learner English

Hawkey, R., & Barker, F (2004) Developing a common scale for the assessment of writing Assessing Writing, 9(2), 122–159

Hickey, T (1993) Identifying formulas in first language acquisition Journal of

Child Language, 20(1), 27–41 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000900009107

Hong, A L., Rahim, H A., Hua, T K., & Salehuddin, K (2011) Collocations in Malaysian English learners’ writing: A corpus-based error analysis The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 17, 31–44

Howarth, P (1998) Phraseology and second language proficiency Applied

Linguistics, 19(1), 24–44 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/19.1.24

Hudson, J., & Wiktorsson, M (2009) Formulaic language and the relater category–the case of about In R Corrigan, E A Moravcsik, H Ouali, & K

M Wheatley (Eds.), Formulaic language (Vol 1, pp 77–95) Amsterdam:

Hummel, K M (2014) Introducing second language acquisition: Perspectives and practices West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons

Hundt, M., & Mair, C (1999) “Agile” and “uptight” genres: The corpus-based

110 approach to language change in progress International Journal of Corpus

Linguistics, 4(2), 221–242 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.4.2.02hun

Hunston, S (2002) Corpora in applied linguistics Cambridge: Cambridge

James, C (1998) Errors in language learning and use: Exploring error analysis Harlow: Pearson Education

Jones, M., & Haywood, S (2004) Facilitating the acquisition of formulaic sequences In N Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp 269–300) Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company

Kalnikaité, V., & Whittaker, S (2008) Cueing digital memory: How and why do digital notes help us remember? People and Computers XXII Culture, Creativity, Interaction 22, 153–161 The British Computer Society

Kalnikaitŏ, V., & Whittaker, S (2007) Does taking notes help you remember better? Exploring how note taking relates to memory Supporting Human Memory with Interactive Systems, 33–36 Lancaster, UK

Kersten, A W., & Earles, J L (2004) Semantic context influences memory for verbs more than memory for nouns Memory & Cognition, 32(2), 198–211 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196852

Kerz, E., & Haas, F (2009) The aim is to analyze NP: The function of prefabricated chunks In H Ouali, E A Moravcsik, R Corrigan, & K Wheatley (Eds.), Formulaic Language: Distribution and historical change

(Vol 1, pp 97–115) Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing

Khusnita, D., & Rukmini, D (2016) The EFL learners’ perceptions and realizations of formulaic sequences in casual conversation English Education

Kleinmann, H H (1977) Avoidance behavior in adult second language acquisition 1 Language Learning, 27(1), 93–107

Knight and McKelvie (1986) explored how attendance, note-taking, and review impact memory retention from lectures, emphasizing the distinction between encoding information and the external storage function of notes Their study, published in the Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, reveals that active participation and effective note-taking strategies significantly enhance memory recall The findings underscore the importance of engaging with lecture material for improved learning outcomes.

Kuiper, K., & Haggo, D (1984) Livestock auctions, oral poetry, and ordinary language Language in Society, 205–234

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, 35–48 https://doi.org/doi:10.1017/S0272263100011657

Laufer, B., & Waldman, T (2011) Verb‐noun collocations in second language writing: A corpus analysis of learners’ English Language Learning, 61(2),

647–672 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00621.x

Le-Thi, D., Rodgers, M P H., & Pellicer-Sánchez, A (2017) Teaching formulaic sequences in an English-language class: The effects of explicit instruction versus coursebook instruction TESL Canada Journal, 34(3), 111–139

Lestari, E P., Susilohadi, G., & Wahyuni, D S (2015) The impact of habit of watching movies and discourse competence on students’ speaking skill

Li, H., & Yao, Y (2022) Formulaic competence in college-level Asian English learner’s argumentative writing: Examining the effects of language background and topic The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 1–11

Liao, Y., & Fukuya, Y J (2004) Avoidance of phrasal verbs: The case of Chinese learners of English Language Learning, 54(2), 193–226 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00254.x

Lin, M.-H., & Kuo, C.-H (2014) The rhetorical functions of lexical bundles in computer science research article introductions Asian ESP Journal, 10(2),

Ma, R (2020) Frequency effect of formulaic sequences on CAF in academic

112 writing: Examples from L2 master’s theses Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 43(4), 489–505

Marks, J (2005) The truth revealed: Phrasal verbs in writing and speech MED Magazine, 34 Retrieved from http://macmillandictionaries.com/MED-

Magazine/October2005/34-Feature-PV-Spoken-Written.htm

McEnery, T., Xiao, R., & Tono, Y (2006) Corpus-based language studies: An advanced resource book London & New York: Taylor & Francis

Messaoudi, S (2019) The efficiency of association measures in automatic extraction of collocations: Exclusivity and frequency International Journal of Cognitive and Language Sciences, 13(4), 222–225

Ministry of Education and Training (2010) Decision No 3321/QD-BGDDT

Mohammadi, M., & Es-hagi, S J (2018) Examining EFL learners’ formulaic competence and factors affecting formulaic sequences’ learnability Studies, 6(2), 195–208

Mueller, P A., & Oppenheimer, D M (2014) The pen is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note taking Psychological

Science, 25(6), 1159–1168 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614524581

Murphy, A C (2003) Naturalness is to text what grammatical correctness is to sentences: A corpus-driven perspective Rassegna Italiana Di Linguistica Applicata, 35(1–2), 207–223

Muskat‐Tabakowska, E (1969) The notions of competence and performance in language teaching Language Learning, 19(1‐2), 41–54

Nesselhauf, N (2005) Collocations in a learner corpus Amsterdam: John

Nguyen, H T., Khau, H A., & Truong, N K (2021) The use of English collocations in written translation–A case of university English-majored

113 students International Journal of Higher Education, 10(1), 252–272

Nguyen, T M (2020) English language errors in academic writing: An analysis of English research papers of Thu Dau Mot University Journal of Science

Thu Dau Mot University Journal of Science, 2(2), 238–254

Nguyen, T M H., & Webb, S (2017) Examining second language receptive knowledge of collocation and factors that affect learning Language Teaching

Research, 21(3), 298–320 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816639619

Nurmukhamedov, U (2015) An evaluation of collocation tools for second language writers ProQuest LLC

O’Donnell, M B., Rửmer, U., & Ellis, N C (2013) The development of formulaic sequences in first and second language writing: Investigating effects of frequency, association, and native norm International Journal of Corpus

Linguistics, 18(1), 83–108 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.18.1.07odo

Ohlrogge, A (2009) Formulaic expressions in intermediate EFL writing assessment In R Corrigan, E A Moravcsik, H Ouali, & K M Wheatley (Eds.), Formulaic language (Vol 2, pp 375–386) Amsterdam: John

Paquot, M., & Granger, S (2012) Formulaic language in learner corpora Annual

Review of Applied Linguistics, 32(32), 130–149 https://doi.org/doi:10.1017/S0267190512000098

Park, D (2007) Identifying & using formal & informal vocabulary IDP Education, the University of Cambridge and the British Council The Post

Pawley, A., & Syder, F H (1983) Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency In J C Richards & R W Schmitt (Eds.),

Language and communication (pp 191–225) London: Longman

Peters, A M (1983) The units of language acquisition (Vol 1) CUP Archive

Pham, T B N (2017) Teaching english idioms of happiness and sadness through conceptual metaphors in vietnamese context Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh

Phan, T M U., Nguyen, T T H., Ly, T T M., & Nguyen, L B N (2021) Common challenges in Vietnamese-English translation Of English-majored juniors at Tay Do University, Vietnam European Journal of English Language Teaching, 6(3)

Qi, Y., & Ding, Y (2011) Use of formulaic sequences in monologues of Chinese

EFL learners System, 39(2), 164–174 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.02.003

Rea, L M., & Parker, R A (2014) Designing and conducting survey research: A comprehensive guide San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons

Read, J., & Nation, P (2004) Measurement of formulaic sequences In N Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (p 23-)

Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing Company

Reynolds, A G., & Flagg, P W (1976) Recognition memory for elements of sentences Memory & Cognition, 4(4), 422–432 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213199

Richards, J (1974a) A non-contrastive approach to error analysis In J C Richards (Ed.), Error analysis: Perspectives on second language acquisition (pp 172–188) London: Longman

Richards, J (1974b) Error analysis: Perspectives on second language acquisition London: Longman

Schachter, J., & Celce-Murcia, M (1977) Some reservations concerning error analysis Tesol Quarterly, 441–451

Schmid, H.-J (2003) Collocation: Hard to pin down, but bloody useful Zeitschrift

Schmidt, R (1983) Interaction, acculturation, and the acquisition of communicative competence: A case study of an adult Sociolinguistics and Language Acquisition, 137, 174

Schmitt, N (2006) Formulaic language: Fixed and varied Estudios de Lingüística

Schmitt, N (2010) Researching vocabulary: A vocabulary research manual

Schmitt, N., & Carter, R (2004) Formulaic sequences in action In N Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp 1–22)

Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company

Schmitt, N., & Redwood, S (2011) Learner knowledge of phrasal verbs: A corpus-informed study In F Meunier, S De Cock, G Gilquin, & M Paquot (Eds.), A taste for corpora: In honour of Sylviane Granger (pp 173–209)

Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company

Scott-Jones, J (2019) Learn to use partial correlation in R with data from the NIOSH quality of worklife Survey (2014) In SAGE Research Methods

Datasets London: SAGE Publications, Ltd https://doi.org/https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781526498250

Sevenants, A., Daniởls, D., Janssens, L., & Schaeken, W (2012) Conscious and unconscious thought preceding complex decisions: The influence of taking notes and intelligence Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 34(34), 2310–2314

Smith, B., & Swan, M (2001) Learner English: A teacher’s guide to interference and other problems Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Snijders, T A B., & Bosker, R J (2011) Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling London: SAGE Publications

Sonomura, M O (1993) Idiomaticity in basic writing: formulas and idioms in the writing of some multilingual and creole speaking community college students

Sroka, K A (1972) The syntax of English phrasal verbs (Reprint 20) Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton

Taguchi, N., Li, S., & Xiao, F (2013) Production of formulaic expressions in L2 Chinese: A developmental investigation in a study abroad context Chinese as a Second Language Research, 2(1), 23–58

Taylor, J R (2006) Polysemy and the lexicon In G Kristiansen, M Achard, R Dirven, & F J R de M Ibỏủez (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Current Applications and Future Perspectives (pp 51–80) New York: Mouton de

Thewissen, J (2013) Capturing L2 accuracy developmental patterns: Insights from an error‐tagged EFL learner corpus The Modern Language Journal, 97(S1), 77–101 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540- 4781.2012.01422.x

Thim, S (2012) Phrasal verbs: The English verb-particle construction and its history Berlin: Walter de Gruyter

Thu, H N., & Huong, N T (2005) Vietnamese learners mastering English articles

Tran, H Q (2017) Figurative idiomatic competence: An analysis of EFL learners in Vietnam Asian-Focused ELT Research and Practice: Voices from the Far

Edge, 66–86 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5746/LEiA/13/V4/I1/A3/Tran

Tran, P N T., & Tran, Q T (2019) The use of phrasal verbs in English language research proposals by Vietnamese MA students VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 35(4)

Vilkaitė, L (2016) Formulaic language is not all the same: Comparing the frequency of idiomatic phrases, collocations, lexical bundles, and phrasal

117 verbs Taikomoji Kalbotyra, (8), 28–54 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15388/TK.2016.17505

Vo, T D M., & Nguyen, V L (2020) An investigation of Vietnamese EFL teenage learners’ knowledge of common English idioms: Implications for idiom instruction European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 5(1)

Vu, V D (2017) An empirical study on negative transfer in Vietnamese tertiary EFL learners’ English writing Journal of Teaching English for Specific And

In the study by Wang (2019), the avoidance of phrasal verbs among adult Chinese immigrants is examined, highlighting the influence of effective exposure to the second language (L2) environment and overall language proficiency on this avoidance behavior The research, published in The Asian Journal of Applied Linguistics, reveals that limited familiarity with phrasal verbs contributes to their underuse, emphasizing the need for targeted language instruction and increased interaction within L2 contexts to enhance proficiency and reduce avoidance.

Wei, N., & Li, J (2013) A new computing method for extracting contiguous phraseological sequences from academic text corpora International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 18(4), 506–535 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.18.4.03wei

Wiechmann, D (2008) On the computation of collostruction strength: Testing measures of association as expressions of lexical bias Corpus Linguistics &

Linguistic Theory, 4(2), 253–290 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1515/CLLT.2008.011

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 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.63.1.13

Wood, D (2015) Fundamentals of Formulaic Language: An Introduction

Wood, D (2019) Classifying and identifying formulaic language In Stuart Webb (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Vocabulary Studies (pp 30–45)

Oxfordshire: Routledge https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429291586-3

Wray, A (2002) Formulaic language and the lexicon New York: Cambridge

Wray, A., & Perkins, M R (2000) The functions of formulaic language: An integrated model Language & Communication, 20(1), 1–28

Wu, Q., Xing, C., Li, Y., Ke, G., He, D., & Liu, T.-Y (2021) Taking notes on the fly helps language pre-training International Conference on Learning Representations, 1–14

Yang, W (2010) A tentative analysis of errors in language learning and use

Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1(3), 266–268 https://doi.org/doi:10.4304/jltr.1.3.266-268

Yorio, C A (1989) Idiomaticity as an indicator of second language proficiency

Zakharov, V (2017) Evaluation and combining association measures for collocation extraction Proceedings of the International Conference IMS-

Zinkgrọf, M (2008) V+ N miscollocations in the written production of university level students Estudios de Lingüística Aplicada, 8, 91–116

Hành vi thích ứng là những lựa chọn giúp giải quyết vấn đề hoặc giảm thiểu hậu quả không mong muốn, trong khi hành vi rối loạn thích ứng lại cản trở khả năng thích nghi với tình huống mới hoặc khó khăn Những thói quen này có thể hình thành từ khi còn nhỏ Khi đối mặt với trở ngại, chúng ta có thể chọn cách thích ứng hoặc không Nếu tình huống vượt quá tầm kiểm soát, vẫn có những biện pháp điều trị hiệu quả.

Những tình trạng bệnh như đau đầu và mất ngủ thường đi kèm với nhau, tạo thành một vòng luẩn quẩn ảnh hưởng đến sức khỏe tinh thần Khi đối mặt với những thách thức khó khăn, bạn có thể cảm thấy gánh nặng, nhất là khi sức khỏe tổng quát cần cải thiện Thay vì lặp lại những suy nghĩ tiêu cực, hãy biến chúng thành động lực để lập kế hoạch hành động giải quyết vấn đề Hãy phác thảo từng bước cần thực hiện hoặc ghi lại trên giấy Nếu những suy nghĩ nghiền ngẫm chiếm ưu thế trong cuộc sống, cân nhắc tìm kiếm biện pháp trị liệu Quan trọng là xác định vấn đề và bắt đầu hành động từng bước một để cải thiện tình hình.

Việc giữ một gương mặt vui vẻ và biểu hiện tích cực trước mọi người, ngay cả khi gặp khó khăn, thường được khen ngợi Ngược lại, những người thể hiện cảm xúc tiêu cực như thất vọng, buồn bã, hay giận dữ lại thường nhận phải những bình luận như “có thể còn tệ hơn” hoặc “mọi thứ sẽ tốt hơn nếu bạn thay đổi thái độ” Chúng ta thường được khuyên rằng một thái độ tích cực sẽ giúp chúng ta phục hồi nhanh chóng hơn.

This brief questionnaire focuses on your study habits and will take just 5 minutes to complete Rest assured, your responses are solely for research purposes, and your identity will remain completely confidential and anonymous.

1 When did you first start learning English?

 From 5 years old to 10 years old

2 How have you been studying English? (You may choose more than one answer.)

3 Besides going to class, which activity you often do to gain more exposure to English? (You may choose more than one answer.)

 I read English newspapers and/or English books

 I watch TV shows and/or movies in English

 I talk to foreign friends in English

 I practice English with my Vietnamese friends

4 Do you think that English fixed expressions (e.g collocations, idioms, phrasal verbs, etc.) are important in learning and using English?

5 How could knowledge of fixed expressions (e.g collocations, idioms, phrasal verbs, etc.) benefit you? (You may choose more than one answer.)

 They help me understand English better, thus, improving my reading and listening skills

 They help me write and speak English more fluently

 They help me sound more like native speakers

6 When you read an English text, do you often notice the use of fixed expressions (e.g collocations, idioms, phrasal verbs, etc.)?

7 If you see fixed expressions in an English text, do you try to study them?

 No (If so, please skip Question 8)

8 How do you study English fixed expressions?

 I look up the fixed expressions in dictionaries

 I search the fixed expressions on Google

 I write the fixed expressions and their meanings in my notebook to review later

9 When you speak in English, do you try to incorporate fixed expressions (e.g collocations, idioms, phrasal verbs, etc.)?

10 When you write in English, do you try to incorporate fixed expressions?

 No (If so, please skip Question 11)

11 How do you incorporate fixed expressions into your writing?

 I use dictionaries and/or Google when I write to add fixed expressions

 After I write, I review my writing to correct and/or add more fixed expressions

12 What difficulties do you have with English fixed expressions? (You may choose more than one answer.)

 English fixed expressions are difficult to understand without using dictionaries or Google

 English fixed expressions are difficult to remember

 English fixed expressions are drastically different from Vietnamese

Thank you again for your participation!

This brief questionnaire, designed to assess your study habits, will take just 5 minutes to complete Rest assured, your responses will be utilized solely for research purposes, and your identity will remain completely confidential and anonymous.

13 When did you first start learning English?

 From 5 years old to 10 years old

14 How have you been studying English? (You may choose more than one answer.)

15 Besides going to class, which activity you often do to gain more exposure to English? (You may choose more than one answer.)

 I read English newspapers and/or English books

 I watch TV shows and/or movies in English

 I talk to foreign friends in English

 I practice English with my Vietnamese friends

16 Do you think that English fixed expressions (e.g collocations, idioms, phrasal verbs, etc.) are important in learning and using English?

17 How could knowledge of fixed expressions (e.g collocations, idioms, phrasal verbs, etc.) benefit you? (You may choose more than one answer.)

 They help me understand English better, thus, improving my reading and listening skills

 They help me write and speak English more fluently

 They help me sound more like native speakers

18 When you read an English text, do you often notice the use of fixed expressions (e.g collocations, idioms, phrasal verbs, etc.)?

19 If you see fixed expressions in an English text, do you try to study them?

 No (If so, please skip Question 8)

20 How do you study English fixed expressions?

 I look up the fixed expressions in dictionaries

 I search the fixed expressions on Google

 I write the fixed expressions and their meanings in my notebook to review later

21 When you write in English, do you try to incorporate fixed expressions?

 No (If so, please skip Question 10)

22 How do you incorporate fixed expressions into your writing?

 I use dictionaries and/or Google when I write to add fixed expressions

 After I write, I review my writing to correct and/or add more fixed expressions

23 What difficulties do you have with English fixed expressions? (You may choose more than one answer.)

 English fixed expressions are difficult to understand without using dictionaries or Google

 English fixed expressions are difficult to remember

 English fixed expressions are drastically different from Vietnamese

Thank you again for your participation!

Hành vi thích ứng (Adaptive behaviors) giúp giải quyết vấn đề hoặc giảm nhẹ hậu quả không mong muốn, trong khi hành vi rối loạn thích ứng (Maladaptive behaviors) cản trở khả năng thích nghi với tình huống mới hoặc khó khăn Những thói quen này có thể hình thành từ khi còn nhỏ Khi đối mặt với trở ngại, chúng ta có thể chọn cách thích ứng hoặc không Nếu tình huống vượt quá tầm kiểm soát, vẫn có những biện pháp điều trị hiệu quả.

Những tình trạng bệnh như đau đầu và mất ngủ thường liên kết với nhau, tạo thành một vòng luẩn quẩn ảnh hưởng đến sức khỏe tinh thần Khi đối mặt với những thách thức khó khăn, sức khỏe tổng quát có thể bị suy giảm Thay vì để những suy nghĩ tiêu cực chiếm lĩnh, hãy lập kế hoạch hành động để giải quyết vấn đề Hãy phác thảo từng bước cần thực hiện trong đầu hoặc ghi lại trên giấy Nếu những suy nghĩ nghiền ngẫm không ngừng làm phiền bạn, hãy xem xét tìm kiếm biện pháp trị liệu Quan trọng là xác định vấn đề và bắt đầu hành động từng bước một để cải thiện tình hình.

Việc thể hiện gương mặt vui vẻ và thái độ tích cực, ngay cả khi đối mặt với khó khăn, thường nhận được sự khen ngợi từ người khác Trong khi đó, những ai bộc lộ cảm xúc như thất vọng, buồn bã, hay giận dữ lại thường bị chỉ trích với những câu như “có thể còn tệ hơn” hay “mọi thứ sẽ tốt hơn nếu bạn thay đổi thái độ” Chúng ta thường được khuyên rằng một thái độ tích cực sẽ giúp chúng ta hồi phục nhanh chóng hơn.

Việc ưu tiên bản thân không có gì sai, dù bạn có trách nhiệm với người khác Hãy nhận thức và thấu hiểu nhu cầu cảm xúc của chính mình mà không cần phải giấu diếm Cảm xúc của bạn, dù tích cực hay tiêu cực, đều là hợp lý Đôi khi bạn cảm thấy hạnh phúc, nhưng cũng có lúc cảm thấy chán nản Giải quyết cảm xúc không phải là điều dễ dàng; bạn cần chia sẻ với những người thân yêu Họ rất muốn giúp đỡ nhưng có thể không biết cách Hãy phá vỡ rào cản và chia sẻ cảm xúc của bạn, cho họ biết bạn cần gì, dù chỉ là một bờ vai để nương tựa hay một chuyến đi chữa lành.

Adaptive behavior involves choosing to address problems or reduce negative outcomes, while maladaptive behaviors hinder our ability to adjust to new challenges, often stemming from early habits When confronted with obstacles, we have the option to adapt or remain stagnant However, if situations become overwhelming, treatment options are available to help regain control.