Article published In:
Journal of Second Language StudiesVol. 3:1 (2020) ► pp.141–154
Complications in the L2 acquisition of the simple spatial prepositions in and on
Crosslinguistic differences in image schema and family resemblance
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Methods
- 2.1Participants
- 2.2Materials
- 2.3Procedure
- 3.Results
- 4.Discussion
- 5.Conclusions
-
References
References
Boers, F.
(2013) Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary: Assessment and integration. Language Teaching, 46(2), 208–224. 
Boers, F., & Demecheleer, M.
(1998) A cognitive semantic approach to teaching prepositions. ELT Journal, 52(3), 197–204.
Chilton, P.
(2014) Language, space, and mind: The conceptual geometry of linguistic meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Correa-Beningfield, M., Kristiansen, G., Navarro-Ferrando, I., & Vandeloise, C.
(2005) Image schemas vs. “complex primitives” in cross-cultural spatial cognition. In B. Hampe & J. E. Grady (Eds.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 343–376). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Cronbach, L. J.
(1977) Educational psychology (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Deane, P. D.
(2005) Multimodal spatial representation: On the semantic unity of over
. In B. Hampe & J. E. Grady (Eds.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 235–282). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Dodge, E., & Lakoff, G.
(2005) Image schemas: From linguistic analysis to neural grounding. In B. Hampe & J. E. Grady (Eds.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 57–91). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Evans, V., & Tyler, A.
(2005) Applying cognitive linguistics to pedagogical grammar: The English prepositions of verticality. Rev. Brasileira de Linguistica Applicada, 5(2), 11–42.
Feist, M. I., & Gentner, D.
(2012) Multiple influences on the use of English spatial prepositions: The case of “in” and “on”. In C. Boonthum-Denecke, P. M. McCarthy, & T. A. Lamkin (Eds.), Cross-disciplinary advances in applied natural language processing: Issues and approaches (pp. 305–323). Hersey, PA: IGI Global.
Garrod, S., Ferrier, G., & Campbell, S.
(1999)
In and on: Investigating the functional geometry of spatial prepositions. Cognition, 72(2), 167–189.
Gentner, D., & Bowerman, M.
(2009) Why some spatial semantic categories are harder to learn than others: The typological prevalence hypothesis. In J. Guo, E. Lieven, S. Ervin-Tripp, N. Budwig, S. Özçaliskan, & K. Nakamura (Eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (pp. 465–480). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Association.
Grady, J. E.
(2005) Image schemas and perception: Refining a definition. In B. Hampe & J. E. Grady (Eds.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 35–55). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Hart, C.
(2014) Discourse, grammar and ideology: Functional and cognitive perspectives. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Johnson, M.
(1987) The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
(2005) The philosophical significance of image schemas. In B. Hampe & J. E. Grady (Eds.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 15–33). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kosslyn, S. M.
(1980) Image and mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lakoff, G.
(1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Landau, B., & Jackendoff, R.
(1993) “What” and “where” in spatial language and spatial cognition. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16(2), 217–265.
Langacker, R. W.
(1991) Concept, image, and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lindstromberg, S.
(1996) Prepositions: Meaning and method. ELT Journal, 50(3), 225–236.
Machin, D.
(2009) Multimodality and theories of the visual. In C. Jewitt (Ed.), Handbook of multimodality (pp. 181–190). London: Sage.
Mandler, J. M., & Pagan-Canovas, C.
(2014) On defining image schemas. Language and Cognition, 6(4), 510–523.
McDonough, L., Choi, S., & Mandler, J. M.
(2003) Understanding spatial relations: Flexible infants, lexical adults. Cognitive Psychology, 46(3), 229–259.
Odlin, T.
(2005) Crosslinguistic influence and conceptual transfer: What are the concepts? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 251, 3–25.
Pinker, S.
(1999) Words and rules: The ingredients of language. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
Quirk, R., & Greenbaum, S.
(1973) A university grammar of English. London: Longman.
Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B.
(1975) Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7(4), 573–605.
Shintani, M., Mori, K., & Ohmori, T.
(2016) Image schema-based instruction in English grammar. In P. Clements, A. Krause, & H. Brown (Eds.), Focus on the learner (pp. 285–296). Tokyo: JALT.
Taferner, R. & Yamada, J.
Talmy, L.
(2000) Toward a cognitive semantics, Vol. 1: Concept structuring systems. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
(2005) The fundamental system of spatial schemas in language. In B. Hampe & J. E. Grady (Eds.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 199–234). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Tyler, A., & Evans, V.
(2003) Lexical meaning and experience: The semantics of English prepositions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zlatev, J.
(2005) What’s in a schema? Bodily mimesis and the grounding of language. In B. Hampe & J. E. Grady (Eds.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 314–341). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
Taferner, Robert Horst & Jun Yamada
2020. Complications in the L2 acquisition of the simple spatial prepositions in and on
. Journal of Second Language Studies 3:1 ► pp. 141 ff. 
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.