Application of Frame Semantics to Teaching Seeing and Hearing Vocabulary to Iranian EFL Learners

Document Type: Research Article

Authors

University of Isfahan

Abstract

A term in one language rarely has an absolute synonymous meaning in the same language; besides, it rarely has an equivalent meaning in an L2. English synonyms of seeing and hearing are particularly grammatically and semantically different. Frame semantics is a good tool for discovering differences between synonymous words in L2 and differences between supposed L1 and L2 equivalents. Vocabulary teaching based on synonymous or bilingual equivalents has confused EFL Iranian students. Frame semantics has shown to improve L2 comprehension of EFL learners. Hence, teachers are recommended to either explain the meaning of each word or provide them with synonyms and bilingual equivalents together with complementary explanations concerning the differences between the words.

Keywords


Atzler, J. K. (2011). Twist in the list: Frame semantics as vocabulary teaching and learning tool. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.

Baker, C. F. (1999). Seeing clearly: Frame semantics, psycholinguistic, and cross-linguistic approaches to the semantics of the English verb see. Unpulished doctoral dissertation, Berkeley University.

Cienki, A. (2007). Frames, idealized cognitive models, and domains. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 170-187). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Fillmore, C. J (1982). Frame semantics. In H. Ŏ. Hakhoe (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm (pp. 111-138). Seoul: Hanshin.

Fillmore, C. J. (2007). Valency issues in FrameNet. In T. Herbst & K. Götz-Votteler (Eds.), Valency: Theoretical, descriptive, and cognitive issues 187 (pp. 129-160). Berlin: Walter de Guyter.

Fillmore, C. J., & Atkins, B. T. (1992). Toward a frame-based organization of the lexicon: The semantics of RISK and its neighbors. In A. Lehrer & K. Eva (Eds.), Frames, fields, and contrast: New essays in semantics and lexical organization (pp. 75-102). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Haghshenas, A. M., Samei, H., & Entekhabi, N. (2005). Millennium English-Persian dictionary. Tehran: Farhang Moaser Publishers.

Mackey, D. (2010). Read this! Fascinating stories from the content areas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Perception Frame. (2001). In FrameNet. Retrieved August 7, 2014, from the World Wide Web: https://framenet.icsi.berkeley.edu/fndrupal/index.php?q=frameIn dex.

Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Trusler, J. (1766). The difference between words, esteemed synonyms in the English language, and the proper choice of them determined together with, so much of Abbe Girard’s treatise, on this subject, as would agree, with our mode of expression (Vols 1 & 2). Michigan: University of Michigan Library.

Ungerer, F., & Schmid, H. J. (2006). An introduction to cognitive linguistics. London: Longman.

Xu, F., & Li, T. (2011). Semantic frame and EVT for Chinese EFL learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(3), 649-654.