Effect of Using Image-Schemas on Learning L2 Prepositions and Enhancing Learner Autonomy: A Dynamic System Theory and Cognitive Linguistics-Inspired Approach

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 Isfahan University of Technology

2 Sheikhbahaee University

Abstract

This study investigated the effect of applying the dynamic system theory (DST) and cognitive linguistics (CL) insights into grammar instruction on EFL learners’ learning of English prepositions and learner autonomy. Sixty Iranian EFL learners at the lower-intermediate level of language proficiency were randomly assigned to 1 experimental and 1 control group. The 2 groups filled out an autonomy questionnaire and took a test of preposition measuring their knowledge of on, over, around, for, and under. Then, the experimental group received a DST/CL-based instruction using image-schemas, whereas the control group followed a traditional approach of repetitions, drills, and substitutions for teaching of the same prepositions. Finally, to examine the effectiveness of the DST/CL-based program, the 2 groups were given the posttests of preposition and learner autonomy. Based on the results, the experimental group outperformed the control group on the test of prepositions, but did not show significant differences regarding the perception of learner autonomy. This indicates that the DST/CL-based approach which relies on meaningful motivation of explicit and underlying levels of interactions leads to better retention and learning of prepositions, but may not contribute to learner autonomy if practiced for a limited period of time.

Keywords

References

Alibabaee, A., & Mehranfar, Z., & Zarei, G. R. (2014). The role of teacher constructed vs. cooperative concept map learning strategies in EFL learners’ reading comprehension and autonomy. Journal of Reaserach in Applied Linguistics, 5(1),2-23.
Andreou, G., & Galantomos, L. (2009). Designing a conceptual syllabus for teaching metaphors and idioms in an L2 context. Porta Linguarum, 2, 69-77.
Artelt, C., Baumert, J., Julius-McElvany, N., & Peschar, J. (2003). Learners for life: Student approaches to learning. Paris: OECD.
Baltes, P. B. (1987). Theoretical propositions of life-span developmental psychology: On the dynamics between growth and decline. Developmental Psychology, 23, 611-626.
Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning.
London: Longman.
Beréndi, M., & Kövecses, Z. (2008). Using conceptual metaphors and metonymiesin vocabulary teaching [with: Márta Beréndi and Szilvia Csábi] In F. Boers & S.
Lindstromberg (Eds.) Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary
and phraseology (pp. 65-99). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Boers, F., & M. Demecheleer. (1998). A cognitive semantic approach to teach
prepositions. ELT Journal, 5(2), 197-204.
Boers, F. (2000). Metaphor awareness and vocabulary retention. Applied Linguistics, 21, 553-571.
Brugman, C. (1981).  The story of over: Polysemy, semantic, and the structure of lexicon. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of California, Berkeley.
Brugman, C. (1981).  The story of over. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of California, Berkeley.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book. Boston, MA: Heinele & Heinele.
Crabbe, D. (1993). Fostering autonomy from within the classroom: The teacher’s responsibility. System, 21(4), 443-452.
Cuyckens, H., & G. Radden (Eds.). (2002). Perspectives on prepositions. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Dam, L. (1995). Learner autonomy 3: From theory to classroom practice. Dublin: Authentik.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). Self-determination research: Reflections and future directions. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 431-441). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
Delshad, S. (1980). Persian and English prepositions compared and contrasted from a pedagogical point of view. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, USA.
Dewell, R. (1994). Over again: Image-schema transformations in semantic  analysis. Cognitive Linguistics, 5(4), 451-480.
Ellis, N. (2008). The dynamic of second language emergence: Cycles of language  use, language change, and language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 92(2),232-249.
Elman, J. L. (1990). Finding structure in time. Cognitive Science, 14(2), 179-211.
Elman, J. L. (1995). Language as a dynamical system. In R. Port & T. van Gelder (Eds.), Mind as motion: Dynamical perspectives on behavior and cognition. Cambridge: MIT Press. 
Elman, J. L., Bates, E., Johnson, M., Karmiloff Smith, A., Parisi, D., & Plunkett, K. (1996). Rethinking innateness. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh:  Edinburgh University Press.
Evans, V., & Tyler, A. (2005). Applying cognitive linguistics to pedagogical grammar: The English prepositions of verticality. Rev. Brasileria de Linguistica Aplicada, 5(2),11-42.
Gao, Y. (2011). Cognitive linguistics: Inspired empirical study of Chinese ELT teaching. Creative Education, 2(4), 354-362.
Gebhard, M., & Gunawan, W., & Chen, I. (2014). Redefining conceptions of grammar in English education in Asia: SFL in practice. Applied Research on English Language, 3(2),1-17.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1993). Towards a language-based theory of learning. Linguistics and Education, 5, 93-116.
Hohenberger, A., & Peltzer-Karpf, A. (2009). Language learning from the perspective of nonlinear dynamical systems. Linguistics, 47(2), 481-511.
Hohenberger, A. (2002). Functional categories in language acquisition. Self-organization of a dynamical system. Tübingen: Narr.
Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
Holme, R. (2009). Cognitive linguistics and language teaching. NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hyland, K. (2009). Teaching and researching writing. London: Pearson.
Jessner, U. (2008). A DST model of multilingualism and the role of metalinguistic awareness. The Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 270-283.
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of reason, thought, and imagination. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Koffi, E. (2010).  Applied English syntax: Foundations for word, phrase, and sentence analysis. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall Hunt Publishing Company.
Koosha, M., & Jafarpour, A. A. (2006). Data-driven learning and teaching collocation of prepositions: The case of Iranian EFL adult learners. Asian EFL  Journal, 8(4), 192-209.
Kovecses, Z., & Szabo, P. (1996). Idioms: A view from cognitive semantics. Applied Linguistics, 17, 326-335.
Kreitzer, A. (1997). Multiple levels of schematization: A study in the conceptualization of space. Cognitive Linguistics, 8(4), 291-325.
Kristiansen, G., & Achard, M., & Dirven, R. et al. (2008). Cognitive linguistics approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). Understanding language teaching: From method to postmethod. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh. The embodied mind and  its challenge to Western thought. NY: Basic Books.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Lam, Y. Y. (2009). Applying cognitive linguistics to teaching the Spanish prepositions por and para. Language Awareness, 18(1), 2-18.
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar, Volume 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Research methodology on language development from a complex systems perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 200-213.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 590-619.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2007). On the complementarity of chaos/complexity theory and dynamic systems theory in understanding the second language acquisition process. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(1), 35-37.
Lerner, R. M. (2006). Developmental science, developmental systems, and contemporary theories of human development. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 1: Theoretical models of human development (pp. 1-17). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
Lindstromberg, S. (1996). Prepositions: Meaning and method. ELT Journal, 50(3), 225-236.
Little, D. (2002). Learner autonomy and second/foreign language learning. In The guide to good practice for learning and teaching in languages, linguistics and area studies. LTSN Subject Center for Languages, Linguistics and Area Studies, University of Southampton.
Littlemore, J., & MacArthur, F. (2007). What do you learners need to know about the figurative extension of target language words? A contrastive corpus-based analysis of thread, hilar, wing, and aletear. Metaphor and discourse. A Special Edition of Culture, Language and Representation: Cultural Studies Journal of Universitat Jaume, 5, 131-150.
Lüftenegger, M., Schubert, B., Van de Schoot, R., Wagner, P., Finsterwald, M., & Spiel, C. (2012). Lifelong learning as a goal: Do autonomy and self-regulation in school result in well prepared pupils? Learning and Instruction, 22, 27-36.
Makni, F. (2013). Teaching polysemous words to Arab learners: A cognitive linguistics approach. Arab world English Journal, 5(1), 4-20.
Makni, F. (2014). Applying cognitive linguistics to teaching polysemous vocabulary. AWEJ, 5(1),4-20.
Matsumoto, N. (2008). Bridges between cognitive linguistics and second language pedagogy: The case of corpora and their potential. SKY Journal of Linguistics, 21, 125-153.
Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. United States: Cambridge University Press.
Pavlovic, V. (2010). Cognitive linguistics and English language teaching at English departments. Linguistics and Literature, 8(1), 79-90.
Pienemann, M. (2007). Variation and dynamic systems in SLA. Bilingualism:  Language and Cognition, 10(1), 43-45.
Plaza-Pust, C. (2008). Dynamic systems theory and universal grammar: Holding up a turbulent mirror to development in grammars. The Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 250-269.
Plumert, J. M., & Spencer, J. P. (2007). The emerging spatial mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Poehner, M. E. (2008). Dynamic assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting L2 development. USA: Springer.
Pütz, M., & Dirven, R. (Eds.). (1996). The construal of space in language and thought. London: Cambridge University Press.
Raczaszek-Leonardi, J., & Kelso, J. A. (2008). Reconciling symbolic dynamic  aspects of language: Toward a dynamic psycholinguistics. New Ideas in Psychology, 26, 193-207.
Radden, G. (1989). Figurative use of prepositions. In R. Dirven (Ed.), A user’s grammar of English: Word, sentence, text, interaction (pp. 551-576). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Rudzka-Ostyn, B. (2003).Word power: Phrasal verbs and compounds. A cognitive approach. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 
Sadri, E. (2012). Applying cognitive linguistics to teaching English phrasal verb. Lambert: Academic publishing.
Samuelson, L. K., Schutte, A. R., & Horst, J. S. (2009). The dynamic nature of knowledge: Insights from a dynamic field model of children’s novel noun generation. Cognition, 110, 322-345.
Schmitz, B., & Wiese, B. S. (2006). New perspectives for the evaluation of training sessions in self-regulated learning: Time-series analyses of diary data. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31(1), 64-96.  
Smith L. B., & Thelen, E. (2003). Development as a dynamic system. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 343-348.
Spencer, J. P., & Perone, S., & Buss, A. T. (2011). Twenty years and going strong: A dynamic system revolution in motor and cognitive development. Child Dev Perspect, 5(4),260-266.
Talebinejad, M. R., & Vahid Dastjerdi, H. (2002). Conceptual mapping, perception and production of L2 metaphorical expressions. International Journal of Humanities, 9(3), 47-61.
Talmy, L. (1988). The relation of grammar to cognition. In B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.), Topics in cognitive linguistics (pp. 165-205). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (1998). Dynamic systems theories. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1: Theoretical models of human development (pp. 563-634). New York: John Wiley.
Tuller, B., & Jantzen, M. G., & Jirsa, V. K. (2008). A dynamical approach to speech
categorization: Two routes to learning. New Ideas in Psychology, 26, 208-226.
Tyler, A., & Evans, V.  (2001). Reconsidering prepositional polysemy networks: The case of over. Language, 77(4), 724-765. 
Tyler, A., & Evans, V. (2003). The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning, and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tyler, A., & Evans, V. (2004). Applying cognitive linguistics to pedagogical grammar:  The case of over.  In M. Achard & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching (pp. 257-280). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Tyler, A., & Mueller, C. & Ho, V. (2011).  Applying cognitive linguistics to learning the semantics of English to, for and at: An experimental investigation. Retrieved May 13, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http//www.webs.uvigo.es/vialjournal/pdf/Vial 2011-Article7.pdf
van Geert, P. (1991). A dynamic systems model of cognitive and language growth. Psychological Review, 98(1), 3-53.
 
van Geert, P. (2007). Dynamic systems in second language learning: Some general methodological reflections. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(1), 47-49.
van Geert, P. (2008). The dynamic systems approach in the study of L1 and L2 acquisition: An introduction. The Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 179-199.
van Geert, P., & Steenbeek, H. (2005). Explaining after by before: Basic aspects of a dynamic systems approach to the study of development. Developmental Review, 25(3 & 4), 408-442.
van  Gelder, T. (1998). The dynamical hypothesis in cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21(5), 615-628.
Vandeloise, C. (1994). Methodology and analyses of the preposition. Cognitive Linguistics, 5(2), 157-184.
Verspoor, M., Lowie, W., & van Dijk, M. (2008). Variability in second language development from a dynamic systems perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 214-231.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Watcyn, P. (2000). Test your prepositions. Pearson: Education Limited.
Zarei, G. R., & Alibabaee, A. (2013). Autonomy as determinant of prospective learning: A study of English language learners. The International Journal of Humanities, 20(4),61-82.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2008). Motivation: An essential dimension of self-regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 1-30). New York, NY: Routledge.
 
Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics
Volume 7, Issue 1 - Serial Number 1
February 2016
Pages 118-137

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics