Cover not available
Article In:
Cognitive Linguistic Studies
Vol. 11:2 (2024) ► pp.402–439

Exploring crosslinguistic influence on learning particles in phrasal verbs through a cognitive linguistic approach

ORCID logo | Northumbria University,
It is now well established that English phrasal verbs cause English as foreign language learners no small degree of confusion due to the semantic complexity. However, the influence of crosslinguistic transfer on learning phrasal verbs has remained unclear. There even has been little qualitative analysis of the crosslinguistic difference between literal and metaphorical meanings of particles. This paper proposes an instructional approach underpinned by metaphor and categorization in cognitive linguistics and highlights particles as a means of disentangling polysemous verb-particle constructions. Fifteen students from four universities in Taiwan, China and the UK participated in the study. Results of the qualitative data, i.e., discussion tasks, in-session tasks, and interviews, suggested that despite the difficulty of understanding some target items, the crosslinguistic similarities and differences generally aid the learning of the phrasal verbs via the proposed approach. Raising an awareness of crosslinguistic difference between metaphorical meanings of particles can be pedagogically useful.
Keywords: phrasal verbs, particles, metaphor, categorization, crosslinguistic influence
Article outline
  • 1.Background
    • 1.1Challenges of phrasal verbs in EFL learning
    • 1.2Cognitive linguistic approach to teaching particles and phrasal verbs
    • 1.3Crosslinguistic influence
    • 1.4Objectives of the study
  • 2.Methods
    • 2.1Participants
    • 2.2Materials
    • 2.3Instruments
    • 2.4Procedure
    • 2.5Analysis
  • 3.Results and discussion
    • 3.1Research question one: Crosslinguistic similarities and differences
      • 3.1.1Similar L1/L2 use in spatial meanings of particles in phrasal verbs
      • 3.1.2Similar L1/L2 use in temporal/metaphorical meanings of particles in phrasal verbs
      • 3.1.3Different L1/L2 use in spatial meanings of particles in phrasal verbs
      • 3.1.4Different L1/L2 use in temporal/metaphorical meanings of particles in phrasal verbs
    • 3.2Research question two: L2 production
      • 3.2.1Phrasal verbs with spatial meanings
      • 3.2.2Phrasal verbs with temporal meanings
      • 3.2.3Phrasal verbs with metaphorical meanings
    • 3.3Research question three: Learners’ attitudes toward the cognitive linguistic approach intervention
  • 4.Conclusion and pedagogical implications
  • References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
References (79)
References
Atkinson, D. (1987). The mother tongue in the classroom: A neglected resource?. ELT Journal, 41 (4), 241–247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1993). Teaching in the target language: A problem in the current orthodoxy. The Language Learning Journal, 8 (1), 2–5. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boers, F. (2000). Metaphor awareness and vocabulary retention. Applied Linguistics, 21 (4), 553–571. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). Cognitive semantic ways of teaching figurative phrases: An assessment. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9 (1), 227–261. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary: Assessment and integration. Language Teaching, 46 (2), 208–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., Demecheleer, M., & Eyckmans, J. (2004). Etymological elaboration as a strategy for learning figurative idioms. In P. Bogaards & B. Laufer (Eds.), Vocabulary in a second language: Selection (pp. 53–78). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., & Lindstromberg, S. (Eds.). (2008). Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., & Stengers, H. (2008). A quantitative comparison of the English and Spanish repertoires of figurative idioms. In F. Boers & S. Lindstromberg (Eds.), Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology (pp. 355–374). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, D. (1971). The phrasal verb in English. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Brugman, C. (1981). The story of over. Master’s thesis. Berkeley: University of California.
Butzkamm, W. (1998). Code-switching in a bilingual history lesson: The mother tongue as a conversational lubricant. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1 (2), 81–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003). We only learn language once. The role of the mother tongue in FL classrooms: Death of a dogma. The Language Learning Journal, 28 (1), 29–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher’s course. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
Cervantes, I. M., & Gablasova, D. (2018). Phrasal verbs in L2 spoken English: The effect of L2 proficiency and L1 background. In V. Brezina & L. Flowerdew (Eds.), Learner corpus research: New perspectives and applications (pp. 28–46). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, J. (2002). Second language figurative proficiency: A comparative study of Malay and English. Applied Linguistics, 23 (1), 104–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, V. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 57 (3), 402–423. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cooper, T. C. (1999). Processing of idioms by L2 learners of English. TESOL Quarterly, 33 (2), 233–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cornell, A. (1999). Idioms: An approach to identifying major pitfalls for learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 37 (1), 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oak: Sage.Google Scholar
Dagut, M., & Laufer, B. (1985). Avoidance of phrasal verbs – A case for contrastive analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7 (1), 73–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deignan, A., Gabryś, D., & Solska, A. (1997). Teaching English metaphors using cross-linguistic awareness-raising activities. ELT Journal, 51 (4), 352–360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dirven, R. (2001). English phrasal verbs: Theory and didactic application. In M. Pütz, S. Niemeier & R. Dirven (Eds.), Applied cognitive linguistics II: Language pedagogy (pp. 3–28). Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dirven, R., & Verspoor, M. (Eds.). (2004). Cognitive exploration of language and linguistics. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Duff, P. (2018). Case study research in applied linguistics. New York & London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
El-Dakhs, D. A. S., Sonbul, S., & Alwazzan, R. (2021). Learning phrasal verbs in the EFL classroom: The effect of prior vocabulary knowledge and opacity. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 60 (4), 1253–1291. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elgort, I. (2017). Incorrect inferences and contextual word learning in English as a second language. Journal of the European Second Language Association, 1 (1), 1–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (1999). Learning a second language through interaction. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gairns, R., & Redman, S. (2011). Idioms and phrasal verbs. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gardner, D., & Davies, M. (2007). Pointing out frequent phrasal verbs: A corpus-based analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 41 (2), 339–359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garnier, M., & Schmitt, N. (2015). The PHaVE List: A pedagogical list of phrasal verbs and their most frequent meaning senses. Language Teaching Research, 19 (6), 645–666. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gu, P. Y. (2003). Vocabulary learning in a second language: Person, task, context and strategies. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language, 7 (2), 1–25.Google Scholar
Holme, R. (2004). Mind, metaphor and language teaching. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009). Cognitive linguistics and language teaching. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Cognitive linguistics and the second language classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 46 (1), 6–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H., & Marchena, E. (1989). Avoidance: Grammatical or semantic causes. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11 (3), 241–255. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Irujo, S. (1986). A piece of cake: Learning and teaching idioms. ELT Journal, 40 (3), 236–242. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z., & Szabó, P. (1996). Idioms: A view from cognitive semantics. Applied Linguistics, 17 (3), 326–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krashen, S. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input hypothesis. The Modern Language Journal, 73 (4), 440–464. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004). The power of reading: Insights from the research. Portsmouth: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Kurtyka, A. (2001). Teaching English phrasal verbs: A cognitive approach. In M. Pütz, S. Niemeier & R. Dirven (Eds.), Applied cognitive linguistics II: Language pedagogy (pp. 29–54). Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. London: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2003). Metaphors we live by. London: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar (vol. I): Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
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, 15 (1), 35–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laufer, B., & Girsai, N. (2008). Form-focused instruction in second language vocabulary learning: A case for contrastive analysis and translation. Applied Linguistics, 29 (4), 694–716. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leow, R. P. (2001). Do learners notice enhanced forms while interacting with the L2?: An online and offline study of the role of written input enhancement in L2 reading. Hispania, 84 (3), 496–509. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, L., & Xu, H. (2015). Using an online dictionary for identifying the meanings of verb phrases by Chinese EFL learners. Lexikos, 25 1, 191–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liao, Y., & Fukuya, Y. J. (2004). Avoidance of phrasal verbs: The case of Chinese learners of English. Language Learning, 54 (2), 193–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindstromberg, S. (1996). Prepositions: Meaning and method. ELT Journal, 50 (3), 225–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Littlemore, J. (2003). The communicative effectiveness of different types of communication strategy. System, 31 (3), 331–347. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009). Applying cognitive linguistics to second language learning and teaching. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lu, Z., & Sun, J. (2017). Presenting English polysemous phrasal verbs with two metaphor-based cognitive methods to Chinese EFL learners. System, 69 1, 153–161. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mahpeykar, N., & Tyler, A. (2015). A principled cognitive linguistics account of English phrasal verbs with up and out. Language and Cognition, 7 (1), 1–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moon, R. (1997). Vocabulary connections: Multi-word items in English. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 40–63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Neagu, M. (2007). English verb particles and their acquisition: A cognitive approach. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 20 1, 121–138.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Ravin, Y., & Leacock, C. (2000). Polysemy: An overview. In Y. Ravin & C. Leacock (Eds.), Polysemy: Theoretical and computational approaches (pp. 1–29). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104 (3), 192–233. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1977). Human categorization. Studies in Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1 1, 1–49.Google Scholar
Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8 (3), 382–439. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rudzka-Ostyn, B. (2003). Word power: Phrasal verbs and compounds: A cognitive approach. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11 (2), 129–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, N. (1997). Vocabulary learning strategies. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 199–227). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schmitt, N., & McCarthy, M. (Eds.). (1997). Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, S. A. (2021). Exploring knowledge of transparent and non-transparent multi-word phrases among L2 English learners living in an anglophone setting. System, 101 1, 102590. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Strong, B., & Boers, F. (2019). The error in trial and error: Exercises on phrasal verbs. TESOL Quarterly, 53 (2), 289–319. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swan, M. (1997). The influence of the mother tongue on second language vocabulary acquisition and use. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 156–280). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics (vol. II): Typology and process in concept. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. R. (2017). Syntactic constructions as prototype categories. In M. Tomasello (Ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure (vol. 1) (pp. 177–202). New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Torres-Martínez, S. (2015). A constructionist approach to the teaching of phrasal verbs: Dispelling the verb+particle myth in multiword verb instruction. English Today, 31 (3), 46–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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 (Vol. 181) (pp. 257–280). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van der Veer, R. (2000). Some reflections concerning Gal’perin’s theory. Human Development, 43 1, 99–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verspoor, M., & Lowie, W. (2003). Making sense of polysemous words. Language Learning, 53 (3), 547–586. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
White, B. J. (2012). A conceptual approach to the instruction of phrasal verbs. The Modern Language Journal, 96 (3), 419–438. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yasuda, S. (2010). Learning phrasal verbs through conceptual metaphors: A case of Japanese EFL Learners. TESOL Quarterly, 44 (2), 250–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zibin, A. (2016). The comprehension of metaphorical expressions by Jordanian EFL learners. Sage Open, 6 (2), 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar