Article In:
Review of Cognitive Linguistics: Online-First Articles

Applying Cognitive Linguistics to elucidate the meanings of the particles IN/OUT and UP/DOWN in L2 classrooms

Pedagogical experience vs. research findings

ORCID logo | Universidad de Extremadura
ORCID logo | Universidad de Extremadura
Cognitive Linguistics offers valuable insights for second language instruction, particularly in enhancing motivated polysemy to facilitate vocabulary acquisition. This paper reports on a longitudinal, classroom-based study and analyses the design, implementation, and assessment of activities inspired by Cognitive Linguistics, elucidating the polysemous meanings of the particles IN/OUT and UP/DOWN. The study involved an experimental group comprising 81 Spanish secondary school students and a control group of 26 students. Following a pre-test/post-test design, participants completed two tests (a gap-fill particle test and a lexical depth test) designed to measure students’ command of polysemous meanings. Despite positive teacher feedback and a perceived increase in awareness of polysemy, the experimental learners showed no statistically significant improvement in the test results. We conclude that a comprehensive approach is required to evaluate learning outcomes, encompassing pedagogical experience, classroom-based research factors, and effective assessment measures.
Keywords: Applied Cognitive Linguistics (ACL), polysemy, classroom-based research, L2 vocabulary
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.ACL research: Findings and challenges in L2 vocabulary instruction
    • 2.1Figurative meanings in everyday language and their reflection in L2 teaching materials
    • 2.2Linguistic motivation and its potential for vocabulary acquisition
    • 2.3Critical gaps in ACL research
  • 3.Study
    • 3.1Objective and research questions
    • 3.2Participants
    • 3.3Research methods
      • 3.3.1Methodology
        • Phase 1: Pre-test
        • Phase 2: Teaching intervention
        • Phase 3: Delayed post-test
      • 3.3.2Data collection
        • Instruments used for quantitative data collection
          • Instrument 1 — VLT 2K
          • Instrument 2 — Particle test
          • Instrument 3 — Lexical Depth test
        • Instruments used for qualitative data collection
      • 3.3.3Data analysis
    • 3.4Pedagogical methods
      • 3.4.1Teacher training in the applications of cognitive linguistics to L2 instruction
      • 3.4.2Materials design and implementation of CL-oriented activities
  • 4.Results and discussion
    • 4.1Quantitative results
      • 4.1.1Pre-test and post-test results (experimental vs. control groups)
      • 4.1.2Variations in the pre-test vs. post-test scores
      • 4.1.3Comparison of lexical knowledge variations (control vs. experimental groups)
    • 4.2Qualitative insights into teacher feedback on CL-inspired pedagogy
      • Timing and schedule
      • Class size and lesson duration
      • Teaching techniques
      • Contextual relevance
  • 5.Conclusions, implications, and further directions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Author queries
  • References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
References (61)
References
Achard, M., & Niemeier, S. (2004). Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aizawa, K. (2018). Exploring L2 learners’ vocabulary knowledge of primary and peripheral meanings. Research Bulletin, 77 1, 31–40.Google Scholar
Alejo-González, R. (2010). Making sense of phrasal verbs: A cognitive linguistics account. AILA Review, 23 1, 50–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alejo-González, R., & García-Bermejo, V. (2020). The manage of two kingdoms must: An analysis of metaphor in two CLIL textbooks. In A. M. Piquer-Píriz & R. Alejo-González (Eds.), Metaphor in foreign language instruction (pp. 241–262). Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alejo-González, R., Piquer-Píriz, A. M., & Reveriego-Sierra, G. (2010). Phrasal verbs in EFL course books. In S. De Knop, F. Boers & A. D. Rycker (Eds.), Fostering language teaching efficiency through cognitive linguistics (pp. 59–78). Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Amaya-Chávez, E. (2010). The gaps to be filled: The (mis)treatment of the polysemous sense of hand, cool and run in EFL textbooks. In G. Low, Z. Todd, A. Deignan & L. Cameron (Eds.), Researching and applying metaphor in the real world (pp. 81–104). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 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
(2022, October 27–28). Instructional approaches to multiword expressions in a second language: A critical review. [Plenary session]. VI Congreso Internacional de Lingüística y Literatura, Santander, Cantabria, Spain. [URL]
Boers, F., & Lindstromberg, S. (2008). Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009). Optimising a lexical approach to instructed second language acquisition. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 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, acquisition and testing (pp. 53–78). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., Piquer-Píriz, A. M., Stengers, H., & Eyckmans, J. (2009). Does pictorial elucidation foster recollection of idioms? Language Teaching Research, 13 (4), 367–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, L. (2003). Metaphor in educational discourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Condon, N. (2008). How cognitive linguistics motivations influence the learning of phrasal verbs. In F. Boers & S. Lindstromberg (Eds.), Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology (pp. 133–158). Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Council of Europe. (2020). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment — Companion volume. Council of Europe Publishing. Available at [URL]
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34 (2), 213–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Knop, S., Boers, F., & De Rycker, A. (2010). Fostering language teaching efficiency through cognitive linguistics. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. 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
Deignan, A., Semino, E., & Paul, S.-A. (2019). Metaphors of climate science in three genres: Research articles, educational texts, and secondary school student talk. Applied Linguistics, 40 (2), 379–403. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z., & Szabó, P. (1996). Idioms: A view from Cognitive Semantics. Applied Linguistics, 17 (3), 326–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lahlou, H., & Abdul Rahim, H. (2023). The inclusion of polysemes in non-native English textbooks: A corpus-based study. Arab World English Journal, 14 (2), 19–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1990). Concept, image and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lazar, G. (2003). Meaning and metaphors: Activities to practise figurative language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lindstromberg, S. (1996). Prepositions: Meaning and method. ELT Journal, 50 (3), 225–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010). English prepositions explained (2nd ed.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindstromberg, S., & Boers, F. (2005). From movement to metaphor with manner-of-movement verbs. Applied Linguistics, 26 (2), 241–261. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008). Teaching chunks of language: From noticing to remembering. Helbling Languages.Google Scholar
Littlemore, J. (2023). Applying cognitive linguistics to second language learning and teaching (2nd ed.). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Littlemore, J., & Low, G. (2006). Figurative thinking and foreign language learning. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Llopis-García, R. (2024). Applied cognitive linguistics and L2 instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Low, G. (2017). Eliciting metaphor in education research: Is it really worth the effort? In F. Ervas, E. Gola & M. G. Rossi (Eds.), Metaphor in communication, science and education (pp. 249–266). Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017). Using metaphor in the teaching of second/foreign languages. In E. Semino & Z. Demjén (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of metaphor and language (pp. 413–425). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2021). Afterword. Metaphor and the Social World, 11 (2), 352–359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacArthur, F., & Piquer-Píriz, A. M. (2007). Staging the introduction of figurative extensions of familiar vocabulary items in EFL: Some preliminary considerations. Ilha do Desterro: A Journal of English Language, Literatures in English and Cultural Studies, 53 1, 123–134.Google Scholar
Martín-Gascón, B., Llopis-García, R., & Alonso-Aparicio, I. (2023). Does L2 assessment make a difference? Testing the empirical validity of applied cognitive linguistics in the acquisition of the Spanish/L2 psych-verb construction. Language Teaching Research. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martín-Gilete, M. (2022a). CL-oriented approaches to teaching phrasal verbs: A report on EFL classroom-based research. Human Review. International Humanities Review, 11 1(Monograph), 1–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2022b). The role of input in the use of metaphor in L2 writing. ES Review: Spanish Journal of English Studies, 43 1, 207–241. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2024). Topic-based teaching of metaphor in an EFL syllabus: A longitudinal study of achievement at B2 level. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Extremadura. [URL]
Meara, P., & Fitzpatrick, T. (2000). Lex30: An improved method of assessing productive vocabulary in an L2. System, 28 (1), 19–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Millar, E. (2023). Exploring linguistic research influence in mainstream English language teaching: The case of multi-word verbs. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Cantabria. [URL]
Nacey, S. (2013). Metaphors in learner English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Niemeier, S. (2017). Teaching (in) metaphors. In F. Ervas, E. Gola & M. G. Rossi (Eds.), Metaphor in communication, science and education (pp. 267–282). Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piquer-Píriz, A. M. (2011). Motivated word meanings and vocabulary learning. The polysemy of hand in the English for young learners classroom. Metaphor and the Social World, 1 (2), 154–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2020). Figurative language and young L2 learners. In A. M. Piquer-Píriz & R. Alejo-González (Eds.), Metaphor in foreign language instruction (pp. 57–78). Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piquer-Píriz, A. M., & Alejo-González, R. (2016). Applying cognitive linguistics: Identifying some current research foci (figurative language in use, constructions and typology). Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 14 (1), 1–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2020). Metaphor in foreign language instruction. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piquer-Píriz, A. M., & Boers, F. (2019). La lingüística cognitiva y sus aplicaciones a la enseñanza de lenguas extranjeras. In I. Ibarretxe-Antuñano, T. Cadierno & A. Castañeda Castro (Eds.), Lingüística cognitiva y español LE/L2 (pp. 52–70). New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ponterotto, D. (1994). Metaphors we can learn by: How insights from cognitive linguistic research can improve the teaching/learning of figurative language. English Teaching Forum, 32 (3), 2–7.Google Scholar
Radden, G., & Panther, K. (2004). Studies in linguistic motivation. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Rudzka-Ostyn, B. (2003). Word power: Phrasal verbs and compounds. A cognitive approach. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saaty, R. (2020). An enactment-based approach to the teaching of metaphoric expressions: A case of Saudi EFL learners. In A. M. Piquer-Píriz & R. Alejo-González (Eds.), Metaphor in foreign language instruction (pp. 263–286). Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D., & Clapham, C. (2001). Developing and exploring the behaviour of two new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test. Language Testing, 18 (1), 55–88. 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
Tyler, A. (2012). Cognitive linguistics and second language learning: Theoretical basics and experimental evidence. New York: Routledge. 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