The relationship between topic and metaphor in second-language learners’ essays
In this article I investigate to what extent the use of metaphorical expressions in language learners’ texts vary
according to the topic they have chosen to write about. The data come from the Norwegian learner corpus ASK, where the texts are
from written assignments produced by adult second-language learners as part of an official Norwegian test and texts. Texts from
two different prompts are selected, which are related to friendship and nature. Metaphors are defined according to conceptual
metaphor theory and a triangulation of methods is used, alternating between a manual and an automatic extraction method.
The results confirm the hypothesis that the two different prompts given to the learners in a language test not
only triggers different metaphorical expressions but also influences the amount of metaphor used in the learners’ writing. This
knowledge is important to researchers for comparing the use of metaphors between different groups, such as between different
learners or between students in different stages of education. It is also important for test designers who decide on topics to be
used in tests and teachers who help learners prepare for their tests. In addition, it is of interest for researchers, educators in general and the learners
themselves who are interested in the effect the use of metaphors in texts have on raters’ evaluations in high-stake tests.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Metaphor theory
- 3.Earlier research
- 4.Data and method
- 5.Methodology adopted
- 6.Analysis
- 7.Findings
- 8.Discussions and conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
References (56)
References
Ahlgren, K. & Magnusson, U. (this
issue). “Second part of the apple”: Friendship metaphors in second language
writing.
Andersen, M. S. (2000). Metaphor
matters. Hermes – Journal of
Linguistics, 241, 57–80. [URL]
Askeland, N. (2008). Lærebøker
og forståing av kommunikasjon. Om forståing av begrepet kommunikasjon gjennom metaforar og
metaforsignal i seks læreverk i norsk for ungdomstrinnet
1997–99. Oslo: Acta Humaniora.
Bednarek, M. (2008). Emotion
talk across corpora. New York: Palgrave.
Cameron, L. (2003). Metaphors
in educational
discourse. London: Continuum.
Cameron, L. & Besser, S. (2004). Writing
in English as an additional language at key stage
2. Leeds: University of Leeds.
Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus
approaches to critical metaphor analysis. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Deignan, A. (2008). Corpus
linguistics and metaphor. In Gibbs, R. W. Jr. (Eds.), The
Cambridge handbook of metaphor and
thought (pp. 280–294). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Deignan, A. (2009). Searching
for metaphorical patterns in corpora. In Baker, P. (Ed.), Contemporary
corpus
linguistics (pp. 9–31). London: Continuum.
Gentner, D. (1982). Why
nouns are learned before verbs: Linguistic relativity vs. natural
partitioning. In Kuczaj, S. (Ed.), Language
development: Language, culture and
cognition (pp. 301–334). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass.
Gibbs, R. W. Jr. (1994). The
poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language and
understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gimbel, J. (1998). Tyrkiske
børns fagrelevante danske ordforråd i femte klasse. In J. Møller, P. Quist, A. Holmen & J. N. Jørgensen (Eds.), Tosproget
udvikling. Københavnerstudier i tosprogethed.
Køgeserien, K41. Denmark: Lærerhøjskole.
Golden, A. (1984). Fagord
og andre ord i o-fagsbøker for grunnskolen. In A. Hvenekilde & E. Ryen (Eds.), ”Kan
jeg få ordene dine,
lærer”. Oslo: LNU/Cappelen.
Golden, A. (2017). Emotions
negotiated in L2 texts: A corpus study of written production by adult learners on a Norwegian
test. In A. Golden, S. Jarvis & K. Tenfjord (Eds.), Crosslinguistic
influence and distinctive patterns of language learning: Findings and insights from a learner
corpus (pp. 188–230). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Golden, A. (2018). Utvikling
av ordforrådet på et andrespråk. In A.-K. H. Gujord & G. T. Randen (Eds.), Norsk
som andrespråk – perspektiver på læring og
utvikling (s. 190–213). Cappelen Damm Akademisk.
Golden, A. & Kulbrandstad, L. A. (2021). When errors are corrected. In A. Golden, L. A. Kulbrandstad, & L. J. Zhang (Eds), Crossing Borders, Writing Texts, Being Evaluated: Cultural and Disciplinary Norms in Academic Writing. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Golden, A., Kulbrandstad, L. A. & Tenfjord, K. (2017). Evaluation
of texts in tests, or: Where is the dog buried? In A. Golden, S. Jarvis & K. Tenfjord (Eds.), Crosslinguistic
influence and distinctive patterns of language learning: Findings and insights from a learner
corpus (pp. 231–271). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Grady, J. (1997). Foundations
of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes. Ph.D.
dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Granger, S. & Paquot, M. (2009). Lexical
Verbs in Academic Discourse. A corpus-driven study of learner
use. In M. Charles, D. Pecorari & S. Hunston (Eds.), Academic
writing: At the Interface of Corpus and
Discourse (pp. 193–214). London: Continuum.
Hamp-Lyons, L. & Prochnow, S. (1991). The
difficulties of difficulty: Prompts in writing assessment. In S. Anivan (Ed.), Current
Developments in Language Testing. Anthology Series
25 (pp. 58–76). Singapore: Regional Language Centre. Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization.
Harsch, C. and Rupp, A. A. (2011). Designing
and scaling level-specific writing tasks in alignment with the CEFR: A test-centered
approach. Language Assessment
Quarterly, 8 (1), 1–13.
Huhta, A., Alanen, R., Tarnanen, M., Martin, M. & Hirvelä, T. (2014). Assessing
learners’ writing skills in an SLA study: Validating the rating process across tasks, scales and
languages. Language
Testing, 22(1), 307–328.
Hyland, K. (2003). Second
language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kahn, K. (2019). Becoming
a citizen. Linguistic trials and negotiations in the
UK. London: Bloomsbury.
Klintenberg, B. (2014). Akademiska
ord i kemi – en studie om högstadieelevers förståelse av akademiska ord i
kemiläroböcker. Magisteruppsats. Göteborg: Göteborgs universitet.
Kövecses, Z. (2000). Metaphor
and emotion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor.
A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kövecses, Z. (2005). Metaphor
in culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women,
fire and dangerous things. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors
we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy
in the flesh. New York: Basic Books.
Littlemore, J., & Low, G. (2006). Figurative
thinking and foreign language learning. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Nemati, M. (2003). The
Relationship between Topic difficulty and Mode of Discourse: An In-depth study of EFL Writers’ Production, Recognition, and
Attitude”. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics
(IJAL), 6(2), 87–116.
Olvegård, L. (2014). Herravälde.
Är det bara killar eller? Andraspråksläsare möter lärobokstexter i historia för
gymnasieskolan. Göteborg: Göteborgsstudier i nordisk språkvetenskap.
Partington, A. (2003). The
linguistics of political argument: the Spin-Doctor and the Wolf-Pack at the White House. London and New York: Routledge.
Philips, G. (2009). Non
una donna in politica, ma una donna politica: Women’s political language in an Italian
context. In K. Ahrens (Ed.), Politics,
gender and conceptual
metaphors (pp. 83–111). Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Pitzl, A. M. (2018). Creativity
in English as a lingua franca: Idiom and
metaphor. Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.
Reddy, M. J. (1993/1979). The conduit metaphor. A case of frame conflict in our language about
language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor
and
thought (pp. 164–201). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Reid, J. (1990). Responding
to different topic types: A quantitative analysis from a contrastive rhetoric
perspective In B. Kroll (Ed.) Second
language writing: Research insights for the
classroom (pp. 191–210). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ruth, L., & Murphy, S. (1988). Designing
writing tasks for the assessment of writing. Ablex Pub Corp.
Semino, E. & Koller, V. (2009). Metaphor,
politics and gender: A case study from Italy. In K. Ahrens (Ed.), Politics,
gender and conceptual
metaphors (pp. 36–61). Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Stålhammar, M. (1997). Metaforernas
mönster i fackspråk och
allmänspråk. Stockholm: Carlssons Bokforlag.
Stefanowitsch, A. (2006). Words
and their metaphors: A corpus-based approach. In S. T. Stefanowitsch, & A. Gries (Eds.), Corpus-based
approaches to metaphor and
metonymy (pp. 63–105). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Tenfjord, K., Meurer, P. & Hofland, K. (2006). The
ASK corpus – a language learner corpus of Norwegian as a second language [URL]
Viberg, Å. (1993). Crosslinguistic
perspectives on lexical organization and lexical
progression. In K. Hyltenstam & Å. Viberg (Eds.), Progression
and regression in
language (pp. 245–266). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Viberg, Å. (1998). Crosslinguistic
perspectives on lexical acquisition: the case of language-specific semantic
differentiation. In K. Haastrup & Å. Viberg (Eds.), Perspectives
on lexical acquisition in a second
language (pp.175–208). Lund: Lund University Press.
Viberg, Å. (2012). Basic
verbs in typological perspective. In M. Van Peteghem, P. Lauwers, E. Tobback, A. Demol & L. De Wilde (Eds.), Le
verbe an verve: Réflections sur la syntaxe et la sémantique
verbales (pp.255–273). Gent: Academia Press.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Shakoury, Kayvan & Frank Boers
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 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.