Cover not available
Article published In:
Applying Embodied Cognition and Cognitive Linguistics to language teaching
Edited by Paolo Della Putta and Ferran Suñer
[Review of Cognitive Linguistics 21:1] 2023
► pp. 64–85
Special issue articles

Fostering the learning of the Russian motion verbs system in Italian-speaking students

An experimental study inspired by embodied approaches to language teaching

| University of Cordoba
| University of Turin

This study reports on the differential effectiveness of two pedagogical approaches to teaching L1-Italian students the Russian verbs of motion (глаголы движения, VoMs). The first is a Cognitive Linguistics, embodied approach, where the teacher used techniques such as image schemas, drawings and bodily activation to help the learners explore and understand the logic of VoMs. The second is a classic PPP approach, that works with mnemonic exercises, drills, and reproduction techniques, and that used classic metalinguistic terms to explain VoMs.

54 L1-Italian Russian students enrolled at the second year of University have been recruited in the study. Two groups were created: group A received a 160 minutes embodied treatment about VoMs, whereas group B received a 160 minutes classical PPP treatment on VoMs.

The informants have been tested in a classical pre, post and delayed-post test fashion with three different temporized tasks. Results show an accrued competence on VoMs of group A, that outperformed group B in all the tests. The relevance of these findings for L2 teaching will be discussed.

Keywords: Russian verbs of motion, embodiment, cognition, language teaching, embodied pedagogy
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Embodied and CL-inspired language teaching
  • 3.The Russian verbs of motion system
  • 4.Methodology
    • 4.1Participants
    • 4.2The control treatment
    • 4.3The experimental treatment
    • 4.4The timescale of the study
    • 4.5The tests for data elicitation
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1Timed acceptability judgement test
    • 5.2Sentence-picture matching test
    • 5.3Multiple choice completion
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 31 January 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00127.com
References
Asher, J.
(1977) Learning another language through actions: The complete teacher’s guidebook. California: Sky Oaks Productions.Google Scholar
Atkinson, D.
(2012) Cognitivism, adaptive intelligence and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics Review, 3 1, 211–232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baicchi, A.
(2010) Some observations on the typological constraints on translation: the case of directed motion constructions. In G. Palumbo (Ed), I vincoli del tradurre (pp. 109–122). Roma: Officina edizioni.Google Scholar
Boers, F., & Demecheleer, M.
(1998) A cognitive semantic approach to teaching prepositions, ELT Journal, 52 1, 197–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cadierno, T.
(2008) Learning to talk about motion in a foreign language. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 239–275). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cardini, F.-E.
(2009) Testing linguistic relativity: A comparison between English and Italian in the domain of manner of motion. Saarbruecken: VDM Verlag Dr. Mueller.Google Scholar
Ceciliani, A.
(2021) Maria Montessori and Embodied Education: current proposal in preschool education. Ricerche di Pedagogia e Didattica – Journal of Theories and Research in Education, 161, 149–163.Google Scholar
Colasacco, M. A.
(2019) A cognitive approach to teaching deictic motion verbs to German and Italian students of Spanish. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 57 1, 71–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, V.
(2008) Second language learning and teaching. London: Hodder Education.Google Scholar
Della Putta, P.
(2016) Do we also need to unlearn constructions? The case of constructional negative transfer from Spanish to Italian and its pedagogical implications. In S. De Knop & G. Gilquin (Eds.), Applied Construction Grammar (pp. 237–269). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018) Embodied semantics and the mirror neurons: past research and some proposals for the future. In A. Baicchi, R. Digonnet & J. Sandford (Eds.), Sensory perceptions in language, embodiment and epistemology (pp. 21–44). Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Knop, S.
(2020) From construction grammar to embodied construction practice. Constructions and Frames, 12 1, 121–148. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R.
(2006) Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: a psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(2), 141–172.Google Scholar
Evans, V., & Tyler, A.
(2005) Applying Cognitive Linguistics to Pedagogical Grammar: The English Prepositions of Verticality. Revista Brasileira de Lingüística Aplicada, 5 1, 11–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Farina, M.
(2021) Embodied cognition: dimensions, domains and applications. Adaptive Behaviour, 29 1, 73–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferro, M. C.
(2017) Sull’utilità della grammatica esplicita e della traduzione didattica nell’insegnamento del russo ad apprendenti italofoni. In C. Moracci (Ed.), Incontri fra russia e italia. lingua, letteratura e cultura (pp. 57–78). Milano: Led. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fici, F., & Zukova, N.
(2014) Riflessioni per la messa a punto di un prontuario delle forme verbali russe. In A. Bonola. (Eds.). Studi italiani di linguistica slava. Strutture, uso e acquisizione (pp. 57–73). Florence: Firenze University Press.Google Scholar
Fuganti Pedoni, M.
(2018) Il lessico nella didattica del russo come lingua straniera: dalla teoria alla pratica. Unpublished dissertation, University of Padoa.
Gallagher, S., & Lindgren, R.
(2015) Enactive metaphors: Learning through full-body engagement. Educational Psychology Review, 27(3), 391–404. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G.
(2005) The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22 1, 455–479. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A.
(2003) Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7 1, 219–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gor, K., Cook, S., Malyushenkova, V. & Vdovina, T.
(2010) Russian verbs of motion. second language acquisition and cognitive linguistics perspectives. In V. Hasko & R. Perelmutter (Eds), New approaches to slavic verbs of motion (pp. 360–385). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hasko, V.
(2009) The locus difficulties in the acquisition of Russian verbs of motion by highly proficient learners. The Slavic and East European Journal, 53 1, 360–385.Google Scholar
(2010) Semantic composition of motion verbs in Russian and English. The case of intra-typological variability. In V. Hasko & R. Perlmutter (Eds.). New approaches to Slavic verbs of motion (pp. 197–233). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holme, R.
(2012) Cognitive Linguistics and the second language class. TESOL Quarterly, 46 1, 6–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Housen, A., & Simoens, H.
(2016) Introduction: Cognitive perspectives on difficulty and complexity in L2 acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(3), 163–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I.
(2009) Path Salience in Motion Events. In J. Guo, E. Lieven, N. Budwig, S. Ervin-Tripp, K. Nakamura & S. Özcaliskan (Eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (pp. 403–414). London: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Janda, L.
(2006) Totally normal chaos: the aspectual behaviour of Russian motion verbs. Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 28 1, 183–193.Google Scholar
Jiang, N.
(2012) Conducting reaction time research in second language studies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Johannson Falk, M.
(2018) Embodied experience and the teaching and learning of L2 prepositions: a case study of abstract in and on. In A. Tyler, L. Huang & H. Jan. What is applied cognitive linguistics?: Answers from current SLA research (pp. 287–304). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kagan, O.
(2007) On the semantics of verbs of motion in Russian. Proceedings of the Israel Association for Theoretical Linguistics, 231, 1–16.Google Scholar
Langacker, R.
(1988) An overview of cognitive grammar. In B. Rudzka-ostyn b. (Ed.). Topics in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 3–47). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M.
(1999) Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Letzbor, K.
(2009) Glagoly dviženija v russkom jazyke i ich prepodovanie v ramkach rki na primere glagolov idti-xodit i proizvodnix. In Atti del convegno internazionale Cieurus – l’europa delle lingue e il russo: certificazione, istituzioni e strumenti per una nuova mediazione (pp. 185–203). Bologna: Clueb.Google Scholar
Macedonia, M.
(2019) Embodied learning: Why at school the mind needs the body. Frontiers in Psychology, 101, 2098. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Magnati, D., & Legittimo, F.
(2017) Дaвайте! Comunicare in russo 1. Milan: Hoepli.Google Scholar
Mazzuccato, A., & Argiuolo, A.
(2021) Enhancing students’ cultural competences through embodied knowing. In Proceedings of the First Workshop on Technology Enhanced Learning Environments for Blended Education (teleXbe2021), January 21–22, 2021, Foggia, Italy. CEUR Workshop Proceedings.Google Scholar
Pallotti, G.
(2015) A simple view of linguistic complexity. Second Language Research, 31(1), 117–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pavlenko, A., & Volynsky, M.
(2015) Motion encoding in Russian and English moving beyond Talmy’s typology. The Modern Language Journal, 99 1, 32–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rathunde, K.
(2009) Nature and embodied education. The Journal of Developmental Processes, 41, 70–80.Google Scholar
Skulmowski, A., & Rey, G.
(2018) Embodied learning: Introducing a taxonomy based on bodily engagement and task integration. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 3 1, 6. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D.
(2003) Language and thought online: cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.). Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought (pp. 157–192). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2004) The many ways to search for a frog: linguistic typology and the expression of motor event. In S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven. (Eds.). Relating events in narrative: Vol. 2. Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 219–257). Philadelphia: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Spada, N.
(2019) Discussion: balancing methodological rigor and pedagogical relevance. In R. Dekeyser & G. Prieto Botana (Eds.). Doing sla research with implications for the classroom (pp. 201–215), Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suñer, F., & Roche, J.
(2021) Embodiment in concept-based L2 grammar teaching: The case of German light verb constructions. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 59 1, 421–447. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suñer, F., Roche, J., & Van Vossel, L.
in this issue. Bodily engagement in the learning and teaching of grammar – On the effects of different embodied practices on the acquisition of German modal verbs.
Talmy, L.
(2000) Toward a cognitive semantics. Typology and process in concept structuring. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tran, C., Smith, B., & Buschkuehl, M.
(2017) Support of mathematical thinking through embodied cognition: Nondigital and digital approaches. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2 1, 16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomlinson, B.
(2011) Materials development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zalizniak, A.
(2017) Russian prefixed verbs of motion revisited. Zeitschrift für Slawistik, 62 1, 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar