Cover not available
Article published In:
Conceptual transfer, (re)conceptualisation and other cognitive aspects of crosslinguistic influence in L2 acquisition
Edited by Cecilia Gunnarsson-Largy
[Language, Interaction and Acquisition 14:1] 2023
► pp. 14–40

Conceptual transfer

Roots, assumptions, and current scope

ORCID logo | Northern Arizona University

This article provides updated perspectives on research related to conceptual transfer, which is defined as crosslinguistic influence arising from language-specific concepts and patterns of conceptualization. I discuss the historical roots of conceptual transfer, its relationship to linguistic relativity and thinking for speaking, its core assumptions, and its current scope of inquiry. While discussing its scope of inquiry, I review some of the key findings in this area of research as well as some of the recent studies that have expanded its scope. I conclude with a summary of five important points that can be drawn from the existing research on conceptual transfer, and I offer suggestions for future directions.

Keywords: conceptual transfer, crosslinguistic influence, linguistic relativity, thinking for speaking
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Historical roots and overlapping frameworks
  • 3.Conceptual transfer and its core assumptions
    • 3.1Assumption 1: Individuals and groups of individuals often conceptualize the same experiences differently
    • 3.2Assumption 2: Differing verbal expressions of experience can be used as evidence of differences in conceptualization
    • 3.3Assumption 3: The ways other people describe experiences affect how we conceptualize those experiences
    • 3.4Assumption 4: The more we hear/read experiences being described in a certain way, the stronger the schemas we develop
    • 3.5Assumption 5: Those schemas then affect how we conceptualize similar future experiences
    • 3.6Assumption 6: Each discourse community has conventional/habitual ways of referring to common experiences
    • 3.7Assumption 7: Each person belongs to one or more discourse communities
    • 3.8Assumption 8: The discourse practices we adopt from our communities affect how we conceptualize common experiences
  • 4.The conceptual transfer continuum
  • 5.The current scope of conceptual transfer
  • 6.Summary and future directions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 27 October 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lia.22011.jar
References
Alessandroni, N., & Rodríguez, C.
(2020) The development of categorisation and conceptual thinking in early childhood: Methods and limitations. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 33 1, 17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Athanasopoulos, P.
(2009) Cognitive representation of colour in bilinguals: The case of Greek blues. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12 1, 83–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Athanasopoulos, P., & Bylund, E.
(2013) Does grammatical aspect affect motion event cognition? A cross-linguistic comparison of English and Swedish speakers. Cognitive Science, 37 1, 286–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2020) Whorf in the wild: Naturalistic evidence from human interaction. Applied Linguistics, 41 (6), 947–970. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Austen, S., & Jarvis, S.
(2021) Conceptual meaning in Italian speaking learners’ expression of temporality in L2 English. Journal of Second Language Studies, 4 (1), 121–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berlin, B., & Kay, P.
(1969) Basic color terms: Their universality and evolution. University of California Press.Google Scholar
Boas, F.
(1911) Introduction to the handbook of North American Indians. Smithsonian Institution Bulletin 40, Part I.Google Scholar
Borg, E.
(2003) Discourse community. ELT Journal, 57 (4), 398–400. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brewer, W. F., & Treyens, J. C.
(1981) Role of schemata in memory for places. Cognitive Psychology, 13 1, 207–230. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bylund, E.
(2009) The effects of age of L2 acquisition on L1 event conceptualization principles. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12 1, 305–322. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bylund, E., & Athanasopoulos, P.
(2014) Linguistic relativity in SLA: Toward a new research program. Language Learning, 64 (4), 952–985. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bylund, E., & Jarvis, S.
(2011) L2 effects on L1 event conceptualization. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14 (1), 47–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cal, N. A.
(2016) Individual differences in eyewitness testimony. Honors Undergraduate Theses. 152. [URL]
Chang, M. X.-L., Jetten, J., Cruwys, T., Haslam, C., & Praharso, N.
(2016) The more (social group memberships), the merrier: Is this the case for Asians? Frontiers in Psychology, 7 1. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Choi, S.
(2009) Typological differences in syntactic expressions of path and causation. In V. Gathercole (Ed.), Routes to language: Studies in honor of Melissa Bowerman (pp. 169–194). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.
(1986) Knowledge of language. Praeger.Google Scholar
Davies, I. R. L., Sowden, P. T., Jerrett, D. T., Jerrett, T., & Corbett, G. G.
(1998) A cross-cultural study of English and Setswana speakers on a colour triads task: A test of the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis. British Journal of Psychology, 89 (1), 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Engemann, H., Hendriks, H., Hickmann, M., Soroli, E., & Vincent, C.
(2015) How language impacts memory of motion events in English and French. Cognitive Processing, 16 (S1), 209–213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Filipovic, L.
(2008) Language as a witness: Insights from cognitive linguistics. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 14 (2), 245–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flecken, M., Athanasopoulos, P., Kuipers, J. R., & Thierry, G.
(2015) On the road to somewhere: Brain potentials reflect language effects on motion event perception. Cognition, 141 (4), 41–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forsyth, D. R.
(2018) Group dynamics (seventh edition). Cengage.Google Scholar
Green, D. W., & Abutalebi, J.
(2013) Language control in bilinguals: The adaptive control hypothesis. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25 (5), 515–530. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gumperz, J. J., & Levinson, S. C.
(1991) Rethinking linguistic relativity. Current Anthropology, 32 (5), 613–623. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hampton, J. A., & Passanisi, A.
(2016) When intensions do not map onto extensions: Individual differences in conceptualization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42 (4), 505–523. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hartsuiker, R. J., & Pickering, M. J.
(2008) Language integration in bilingual sentence production. Acta Psychologica, 128 (3), 479–489. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heider, E. R.
(1972) Universals in color naming and memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 93 1, 10–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, H., Hickmann, M., & Demagny, A.-C.
(2008) How English native speakers learn to express caused motion in English and French. Acquisition et Interaction en Langue Étrangère, 27 1, 15–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hudson, W.
(1960) Pictorial depth perception in sub-cultural groups in Africa. Journal of Social Psychology, 52 1, 183–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1967) The study of the problem of pictorial perception among unacculturated groups. International Journal of Psychology, 2 (2), 89–10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Humboldt, W. V.
(1841–1852) Gesammelte Werke [Collected works]. Georg Reimer.Google Scholar
Jarvis, S.
(1997) The role of L1-based concepts in L2 lexical reference. PhD thesis, Indiana University.
(2011) Conceptual transfer: Crosslinguistic effects in categorization and construal. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14 1, 1–8. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016) Clarifying the scope of conceptual transfer. Language Learning, 66 (3), 608–635. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S., & Odlin, T.
(2000) Morphological type, spatial reference, and language transfer. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22 1, 535–556. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S., & Pavlenko, A.
(2008) Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klemfuss, N., Prinzmetal, W., & Ivry, R. B.
(2012) How does language change perception: A cautionary note. Frontiers in Psychology, 3 1. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lambert, M., Stutterheim, C. v., Gerwien, J., & Carroll, M.
(2022) Under the surface: A survey on principles of language use in advanced L2 speakers. Language, Interaction and Acquisition, 13 (1), 1–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R. W.
(2008) Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lenneberg, E. H.
(1953) Cognition in ethnolinguistics. Language, 29 (4), 463–471. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S. C.
(1992) Primer for the field investigation of spatial description and conception. Pragmatics, 2 (1), 5–47.Google Scholar
Loftus, E., & Palmer, J.
(1974) Reconstruction of automobile: An example of the interaction between language and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 131, 585–589. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lucy, J.
(1992) Grammatical categories and cognition. A case study of the linguistic relativity hypothesis. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1996) The scope of linguistic relativity: An analysis and review of empirical research. In J. J. Gumperz & S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 37–69). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1997) Linguistic relativity. Annual Review of Anthropology, 26 1, 291–312. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lupyan, G., & Bergen, B.
(2016) How language programs the mind. Topics in Cognitive Science, 8 1, 408–424. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malotki, E.
(1983) Hopi time: A linguistic analysis of the temporal concepts in the Hopi language. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meyer, P. G.
(2005) Synchronic English linguistics (third edition). Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Odlin, T.
(2005) Crosslinguistic influence and conceptual transfer: What are the concepts? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25 1, 3–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Park, H. I.
(2019) How do Korean-English bilinguals speak and think about motion events? Evidence from verbal and non-verbal tasks. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23 (3), 483–499. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2022) The role of language in expressing agentivity in caused motion events: A cross-linguistic investigation. Frontiers in Psychology, 16 1. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Park, H. I., Jarvis, S., & Kim, J. E.
(2022) Exploring motion event construal: How much attention do speakers of different languages and cultures pay to context? Lingua, 265 1, 103164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Partos, T. R., Cropper, S. J., & Rawlings, D.
(2016) You don’t see what I see: Individual differences in the perception of meaning from visual stimuli. PloS ONE, 11 (3), e0150615. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pavlenko, A.
(1997) Bilingualism and cognition. PhD thesis, Cornell University.
(1998, March). SLA and acculturation: Conceptual transfer in L2 learners’ narratives. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Applied Linguistics, Seattle, WA.
(2003) Eyewitness memory in late bilinguals: Evidence for discursive relativity. International Journal of Bilingualism, 7 (3), 257–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014) The bilingual mind and what it tells us about language and thought. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016) Whorf’s lost argument: Multilingual awareness. Language Learning, 66 (3), 581–607. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S.
(1994) The language instinct: How the mind creates language. William Morrow. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pullum, G. K.
(1991) The great Eskimo vocabulary hoax and other irreverent essays on the study of language. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Sapir, E.
(1929) The status of linguistics as a science. Language, 5 (4): 207–214. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1931) Conceptual categories in primitive languages. Science, 74 1, 578.Google Scholar
Seel, N. M.
(2012) Schema development. In N. M. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning. Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shepard, R. N.
(1994) Perceptual-cognitive universals as reflections of the world. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1 1, 2–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. I.
(1993) Adult language acquisition: A view from child language study. In C. Perdue (Ed.), Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives (pp. 239–252). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2003) Language and thought online: Cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the investigation of language and thought (pp. 157–191). MIT Press.Google Scholar
Starren, M.
in preparation). A view on a crime: A language and genre-specific viewpoint on the same event.
Stutterheim, C. v., Andermann, M., Carroll, M., Flecken, M., & Schmiedtová, B.
(2012) How grammaticized concepts shape event conceptualization in language production: Insights from linguistic analysis, eye tracking data, and memory performance. Linguistics, 50 (4), 833–867. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stutterheim, C. v., Gerwien, J., Bouhaous, A., Carroll, M., & Lambert, M.
(2020) What makes up a reportable event in a language? Motion events as an important test domain in linguistic typology. Linguistics, 58 (6), 1659–1700. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stutterheim, C. v., & Klein, W.
(1987) A concept-oriented approach to second language studies. In C. W. Pfaff (Ed.), First and second language acquisition processes (pp. 191–205). Newbury House.Google Scholar
Stutterheim, C. v., Lambert, M., & Gerwien, J.
(2021) Limitations on the role of frequency in L2 acquisition. Language and Cognition, 13 1, 291–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stutterheim, C. v., & Nüse, R.
(2003) Processes of conceptualization in language production: Language-specific perspectives and event construal. Linguistics, 41 (5), 831–881. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sunderman, G., & Kroll, J. F.
(2006) First language activation during second language lexical processing: An investigation of lexical form, meaning, and grammatical class. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28 1, 387–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swales, J. M.
(1990) Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Trajchevska, D., & Jarvis, S.
(2020, October). Crosslinguistic influence and evidentiality. Poster presented at the Second Language Research Forum (SLRF 2020), Virtual conference hosted by Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, October 23–25, 2020.
Whorf, B. L.
(1944) The relation of habitual thought and behavior to language. ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 1 (4), 197–215.Google Scholar
(1956) Carroll, J. B. (ed.), Language, thought, and reality. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Zaal, F. F. J. M., Bingham, G. P., & Schmidt, R. C.
(2000) Visual perception of mean relative phase and phase variability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26 (3), 1209–1220.Google Scholar