Composite predicates (CPs), that is, complex predicate structures comprising a light verb and an eventive noun (e.g., make a move or give a speech) are common in Present-day English and are particularly characteristic of spoken language. The aim of the paper is to trace language changes involving CPs from 1560 to 1760, a period in which the use of CPs has not yet received adequate scholarly attention. Specifically, the study examines the frequencies, lexical productivity and syntactic patterns of CPs in two types of Early Modern English (EModE) dialogues, drawn from Trial Proceedings and Drama Comedy sampled in A Corpus of English Dialogues 1560–1760 – a 1.2-million word computerized corpus of EModE speech-related texts. The results reveal significant differences between the two types of dialogue and shed light on the development of CPs in association with grammaticalization and lexicalization.

Text-oriented formulaic expressions (e.g., in addition to, on the other hand, nevertheless) are important in crafting reader-friendly prose and particularly frequent in academic discourse. By accommodating both multi-word expressions (MWEs) and single-word expressions (SWE5), the present study is among the first attempts to explore how the two types of expressions relate and contribute to the level of formulaicity in academic discourse. Through a manual examination of formulaic expressions in context, the present study provides important insights into the nature of formulaicity in the organisation of written academic discourse produced by mature and developing writers, with pedagogical implications for the training of novice writers in scientific fields.

Predatory publishing has become a much-discussed and highly visible phenomenon over the past few years. One widespread, but hardly tested, assumption is the idea that articles published in predatory journals deviate substantially from those published in traditional journals. In this paper, we address this assumption by utilizing corpus linguistic tools. We compare the 'academic-like' nature of articles from two different journals in political science, one top-ranking and one alleged predatory. Our findings indicate that there is significant linguistic variation between the two corpora along the dimensions that we test. The articles display notable differences in the types and usage of keywords in the two journals. We conclude that articles published in so-called predatory journals do not conform to linguistic norms used in higher-quality journals. These findings may demonstrate a lack of quality control in predatory journals but may also indicate a lack of awareness and use of such linguistic norms by their authors. We also suggest that there is a need for the education of authors in science writing as this may enable them to publish in higher-ranked and quality-assured outlets.

Formulaic sequences (e.g. on the other hand, for example, at the same time) are pervasive in natural language use and play an important role in differentiating socially situated practices. This paper examines formulaic sequences signalling discourse organisation in academic ELF lectures from a disciplinary perspective. Most previous studies of this kind employ a frequency-based approach; however, the inherent limitations of the methodology (e.g. arbitrary operational criteria, difficulty in handling discontinuous units) mean that a great deal may have been overlooked. This may be particularly relevant to ELF communication, which involves a high degree of flexibility and adaptability. The present study aims to address this gap by taking a manual approach in the identification of formulaic sequences, continuous or discontinuous, in context. The results provide further evidence for disciplinary differences and variability in the use of formulaic language to signal discourse organisation by lecturers in academic ELF settings.