To cut a long story short:an analysis of formulaic sequences in short written narratives and their potential as markers of authorship

Previous research into formulaic language has focussed on specialised groups of people (e.g. L1 acquisition by infants and adult L2 acquisition) with ordinary adult native speakers of English receiving less attention. Additionally, whilst some features of formulaic language have been used as evidence of authorship (e.g. the Unabomber’s use of you can’t eat your cake and have it too) there has been no systematic investigation into this as a potential marker of authorship. This thesis reports the first full-scale study into the use of formulaic sequences by individual authors. The theory of formulaic language hypothesises that formulaic sequences contained in the mental lexicon are shaped by experience combined with what each individual has found to be communicatively effective. Each author’s repertoire of formulaic sequences should therefore differ. To test this assertion, three automated approaches to the identification of formulaic sequences are tested on a specially constructed corpus containing 100 short narratives. The first approach explores a limited subset of formulaic sequences using recurrence across a series of texts as the criterion for identification. The second approach focuses on a word which frequently occurs as part of formulaic sequences and also investigates alternative non-formulaic realisations of the same semantic content. Finally, a reference list approach is used. Whilst claiming authority for any reference list can be difficult, the proposed method utilises internet examples derived from lists prepared by others, a procedure which, it is argued, is akin to asking large groups of judges to reach consensus about what is formulaic. The empirical evidence supports the notion that formulaic sequences have potential as a marker of authorship since in some cases a Questioned Document was correctly attributed. Although this marker of authorship is not universally applicable, it does promise to become a viable new tool in the forensic linguist’s tool-kit.