METAPHORICAL INSIGHTS: PHRASAL VERB KNOWLEDGE GAINS IN THE LIGHT OF CONCEPTUAL METAPHOR THEORY

Dilsah Kalay, İlknur Keçik

Abstract


The primary objective of this research is twofold: first, to elucidate the explicit teaching of phrasal verb constructions within the framework of conceptual metaphor theory, with a specific focus on the metaphorical aspects of particle usage, and second, to examine the correlation between such explicit instruction in phrasal verbs and the gains in implicit knowledge of these verb forms. This study employed a within-group pretest/posttest design as part of an experimental investigation involving 60 Turkish English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners who were students at the School of Foreign Languages (SFL) at a state university in Turkey. The research was analyzed across three dimensions: the achievement and retention of both receptive and productive knowledge of phrasal verbs, subconscious recognition and processing of lexical items, and the processing of phrasal verb meanings in a semantic context. To assess the first dimension, a multiple-choice test to gauge the students' receptive understanding of phrasal verbs and a c-test to measure their controlled productive knowledge of these verb forms were administered at three points: the initial pretest, an immediate posttest, and a delayed posttest. A masked repetition priming lexical decision task was utilized to investigate the subconscious recognition and processing of lexical items. Additionally, a self-paced task was employed to scrutinize the participants' semantic processing of phrasal verb meanings. The study's findings revealed that the explicit presentation of phrasal verb knowledge within the conceptual metaphor framework significantly impacts not only the acquisition and retention of receptive and productive knowledge but also the subconscious recognition and processing of lexical items, as well as the semantic priming of phrasal verb meanings, which substantiates the influential role of conceptual metaphors in the lexical aspects of language learning.

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter


Keywords


phrasal verbs; conceptual metaphor theory; interface hypothesis; explicit instruction; implicit word knowledge

Full Text:

PDF

References


Akakura, M. (2012). Evaluating the effectiveness of explicit instruction on implicit and explicit knowledge. Language Teaching Research, 16 (1), 9–37.

Al-Darayseh, A. (2014). The impact of using explicit/implicit vocabulary teaching strategies on improving students’ vocabulary and reading comprehension. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4 (6), 1109-1118. doi:10.4304/tpls.4.6.1109–1118.

Alexandra, E. M. (2001). Use and comprehension of English phrasal verbs. Ph.D. Dissertation Abstract. UMI Company.

Archer, A. L., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. New York: The Guilford Press.

Barekat, B., & Baniasady, B. (2014). The impact of phrasal verb avoidance on the writing ability of the university EFL learners. The International Conference on Current Trends in ELT, Iran: Urmia University, 20-22 May, 2013. In Elsevier – Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 343-352.

Biber, D., Johansson S., Leech G., Conrad S., & Finegan E. (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, p. xxviii + 1204. ISBN 0-582-237254.

Brown, J. D. (1996). Testing in language programs. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Cameron, L., & Maslen, R. (2010). Metaphor analysis: Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and the humanities. Equinox.

Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (2006). Cambridge Grammar of English, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher’s course. (2nd ed.). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Coady, J. (1997). L2 vocabulary acquisition: A synthesis of the research. In J. Coady and T. Huckin (Eds.), Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 272–290.

Cobb, T. (2007). Computing the vocabulary demands of L2 reading. Language Learning & Technology, 11, 38–63.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Collins COBUILD Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs. 2002. (2nd Ed.) Glasgow: HarperCollins Publishers.

Cornell, A. (1985). Realistic goals in teaching and learning phrasal verbs. IRAL, 23, 269–280.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Crossley, S., Allen, D. B., & McNamara, D. S. (2011). Text readability and intuitive simplification: A comparison of readability formulas. Reading in a foreign language, 23 (1), 84–10.

Dagut, M., & Laufer, B. (1985). Avoidance of phrasal verbs: A case for contrastive analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 73–80.

Darwin, C. M., & Gray, L. S. (1999). Going after the phrasal verb: An alternative approach to classification. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 65–83.

Davies, M. (2008). The corpus of contemporary American English (COCA). Retrieved from http://corpus.byu.edu/coca, in November 2017.

DeKeyser, R. (1995). Learning Second Language Grammar Rules: An Experiment with a Miniature Linguistic System. Studies in second language acquisition, 17 (3), 379–410.

DeKeyser, R. (1997). Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 195–221.

Eisenbeiss, S. (2009). Generative approaches to language learning. Linguistics, 47 (2), 273-310.

El-Dakhs, D. A. S. (2016). The lexical knowledge and avoidance of phrasal verbs: The case of Egyptian learners of English. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 5 (1), 132-144.

Elgort, I. (2007). The role of intentional decontextualised learning in second language vocabulary acquisition: Evidence from primed lexical decision tasks with advanced bilinguals. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. Wellington, NZ: Victoria University of Wellington, Linguistics.

Elgort, I. (2011). Deliberate learning and vocabulary acquisition in a second language. Language Learning, 61 (2), 367–413. doi:10.1111/lang.2011.61.issue-2.

Ellis, N. (1995). The psychology of foreign language acquisition: Implications for CALL. International Journal of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL), 8, 103–12.

Ellis, N. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27 (2), 305–352. doi:10.1017/S027226310505014X.

Ellis, N. (2007). The associate-cognitive CREED. In B. VanPatten and J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in Second Language Acquisition: An Introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 77–95.

Ellis, N. (2014). Usage-based models of first and second language acquisition. Lecture given at the Distinguished Visiting Lecturer Series, Temple University Japan, Osaka Campus, Tokyo and Osaka campuses.

Ellis, R. (2004). The definition and measurement of L2 explicit knowledge. Language Learning, 54 (2), 227–275.

Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric Study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 141–172.

Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLA perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 83–107.

Ellis, R. (2009). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language. In R. Ellis, S. Loewen, C. Elder, R. Erlam, J. Philp, and H. Reinders (Eds.), Implicit and Explicit Knowledge in Second Language Learning, Testing and Teaching. Bristol/Buffalo, NY/Toronto: Multilingual Matters, 31–64.

Ellis, R., Loewen, S., Elder, C., Erlam, R., Philp, J., & Reinders, H. (2009). Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching. Bristol/Buffalo, NY/Toronto: Multilingual Matters.

Evans, V., & Tyler, A. (2005). Applying cognitive linguistics to pedagogical grammar: The English prepositions of verticality. Revista Brasileira de Linguistica Aplicada, 5 (2), 11–42.

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160.

Flesch, R. (1948). A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32, 221–233.

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (1996). How to Design and Evaluate Research. USA: Mc. Graw-Hill Inc

Ganji, M. (2011). The best way to teach phrasal verbs: Translation, sentential contextualization or metaphorical conceptualization? Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1 (11), 1497–1506.

Gardner, D., & Davies, M. (2007). Pointing out frequent phrasal verbs: A corpus-based analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 41, 339–359.

Garnier, M., & Schmitt, N. (2015). The pave list: A pedagogical list of phrasal verbs and their most frequent meaning senses. Language Teaching Research, 19 (6), 645–666.

Gass, S. (1999). Incidental vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21 (2), 319–333.

Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition: An introductory course. London: Taylor & Francis Group.

Güleryüz Adamhasan, B. (2014). Teaching and learning phrasal verbs through conceptual metaphors. Unpublished MA Thesis. Adana: Çukurova University, Institute of Social Sciences.

Güzel, E. (2014). An experimental study on teaching phrasal verbs to elementary students through an authentic pop song. Unpublished MA Thesis. Erzurum: Atatürk University, Institute of Educational Sciences.

Heaton, J. B. (1995). Practice your phrasal verbs. Harlow: Longman.

Hoey, M. (2005). Lexical priming: A new theory of words and language. New York, NY: Routledge.

Hu, Y., & Lou, P. (2013). Making sense of phrasal verbs: A case study of EFL learners in Taiwan. ICLC 2013, Taiwan, Tamkang University.

Hulstijn, J. H. (2002). Towards a unified account of the representation, processing and acquisition of second language knowledge. Second Language Research, 18, 193–223.

Johansen, T. A. (2007). What’s in a metaphor? - The use of political metaphors in the conservative and labour parties. Unpublished MA Thesis. University of Tromso.

Kalay, D. (2019). Implicit phrasal verb knowledge gains through conceptual metaphor theory: A case of university prep school students. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. Eskişehir: Anadolu University, Institute of Educational Sciences.

Kayael, R. (2007). Do Turkish teacher trainees avoid English phrasal verbs? A study with the students of ELT department, Anadolu University. Unpublished MA Thesis. Eskişehir: Anadolu University, Institution of Educational Sciences.

Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A practical introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.

Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis. New York: Longman Group Ltd.

Kubiszyn, T., & Borich, G. (2000). Educational testing and measurement: Classroom application and practice. (6th Ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Kurtyka, A. (2001). Teaching English phrasal verbs: A cognitive approach. In M. Putz, S. Niemeier, and R. Dirven (Eds.), Applied Cognitive Linguistics II: Language Pedagogy. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter, 29–54.

Lakoff, G., and Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors we live by. London: The University of Chicago.

Laufer, B., & Eliasson, S. (1993). What causes avoidance in L2 learning: L1-L2 difference, L1-L2 similarity, or L2 complexity? Studies in Second Language, 15, 35–48.

Laufer, B., & Girsai, N. (2008). Form-focused instruction in second language vocabulary learning: A case for contrastive analysis and translation. Applied Linguistics, 29, 694–716.

Lee, H. (2012). Concept-based approach to second language teaching and learning: Cognitive linguistics-inspired instruction of English phrasal verbs. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. Pennsylvania (US): the Pennsylvania State University, College of the Liberal Arts.

Lewis, M. (1997). Implementing the lexical approach. Hove, UK: Language Teaching Publications.

Liao, Y., & Fukuya, Y. J. (2004). Avoidance of phrasal verbs: the case of Chinese learners of English. Language Learning, 54, 193–226.

Liu, D. (2011). The most frequently used English phrasal verbs in American and British English: A multicorpus examination. TESOL Quarterly, 45 (4), 661–688.

Malvern, D., Richards, B., Meara, P., & Milton, J. (2008). Introduction: special issue on knowledge and use of the lexicon in French as a second language. French Language Studies, 18, 269–276.

McNamara, T. (2005). Semantic priming: Perspectives from memory and word recognition. New York, NY: Psychology Press.

McRae, K., & Boisvert, S. (1998). Automatic semantic similarity priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 558–572.

Michigan Language Assessments - Camila, (2015). MET sample test a, ann arbor: Cambridge Michigan language assessments. Retrieved from https://michiganassessment.org/test-takers/prepare-study/met-sample-test, in September 2017.

Nation, P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nation, P. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review, 63, 59–82.

Nation, P. (2011). Research into practice: Vocabulary. Language Teaching, 44 (4), 529–539. doi:10.1017/S0261444811000267.

Nhu N., & Nguyen. P. (2009). Conceptual metaphor and its application in teaching phrasal verbs to English majors at Thuc Hanh high school. Unpublished MA Thesis. Ho Chi Minh City: University of Education.

Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.

Obermeier, A. S. (2015). Multiword units at the interface: Deliberate learning and implicit knowledge gains. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. Philadelphia, USA: Temple University.

Osterhout, L., McLaughlin, J., Pitkanen, I., Frenck-Mestre, C., & Molinaro, N. (2006). Novice learners, longitudinal designs, and event-related potentials: A means for exploring the neurocognition of second language processing. Language Learning, 56 (1), 199–230.

Renuka, P., & Pushpanjali, K. (2013). Leaflet preparation and validation procedures. Universal J. Public Health, 1, 110–114.

Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2010). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Britain: Pearson Education Limited.

Rudzka-Ostyn, B. (2003). Word power: Phrasal verbs and compounds. A cognitive approach. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Saltık, H. (2014). EFL teachers’ and students’ attitudes towards use of phrasal verbs. Unpublished MA Thesis. İstanbul, Turkey: Fatih University, Institute of Social Sciences.

Schmitt, N. (2004). Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing, and use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Schmitt, N. (2007) Current perspectives on vocabulary teaching and learning. In J. Cummins and C. Davison (Eds.), International Handbook of English language teaching: part II. NY: Springer, 827–841.

Schmitt, N., & Redwood, S. (2011). Learner knowledge of phrasal verbs: A corpus-informed study. In Meunier F., De Cock S., Gilquin G. and Paquot M. (Eds.), A Taste for Corpora. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 173–208.

Schmitt, N., & Underwood, G. (2004). Exploring the processing of formulaic sequences through a self-paced reading task. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic Sequences Acquisition, Processing and Use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 55–86.

Schmitt, N., Dornyei, Z., Adolphs, S., & Durow, V. (2004). Knowledge and acquisition of formulaic sequences: A longitudinal study. In N. Schmitt (Eds.), Formulaic Sequences Acquisition, Processing and Use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 55–86.

Sonbul, S., & Schmitt, N. (2013). Explicit and implicit lexical knowledge: Acquisition of collocations under different input conditions. Language Learning, 63, 121–159.

Sorace, A. (2011). Pinning down the concept of “Interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1 (1), 1–33. doi:10.1075/lab.1.1.01sor.

Spada, N., and Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 263–308.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics. (6th ed.). United States: Pearson Education.

Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics, vol. 2: Typology and process in concept structuring. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Talmy, L. (2008). Aspects of attention in language. In N. Ellis and P. Robinson (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. New York, NY: Routledge, 37–54.

The British National Corpus, version 3 (BNC XML Ed.). 2007. Distributed by Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford, on behalf of the BNC Consortium. URL: http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/.

Tokowicz, N., & MacWhinney, B. (2005). Implicit and explicit measures of sensitivity to violations in second language grammar: An event-related potential investigation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 173–204.

Tremblay, A., Derwing, B., Libben, G., & Westbury, C. (2011). Processing advantages of lexical bundles: Evidence from self-paced reading and sentence recall Tasks. Language Learning, 61 (2), 569-613. doi:10.1111/lang.2011.61.issue-2.

Trofimovich, P., & McDonough, K. (2011). Using priming methods to study L2 learning and teaching. In P. Trofimovich and K. McDonough (Eds.), Applying Priming Methods to L2 Learning, Teaching and Research: Insights from Psycholinguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1–17.

Tyler, A. (2008). Cognitive linguistics and second language instruction. In N. Ellis and P. Robinson (Eds.), The Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 456–488.

Tyler, A., & Evans, V. (2004). Applying cognitive linguistics to pedagogical grammar: The case of over. In M. Achard and S. Niemeier (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics, Second Language Acquisition, and Foreign Language Teaching. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 257–280.

Underwood, G., Schmitt, N., & Galpin, A. (2004). The eyes have it: An eye-movement study into the processing of formulaic sequences. In N. Schmitt (Eds.), Formulaic Sequences. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 153–172.

Valerio, A. (1998). Establishing associations between phrasal verbs and metaphors: An attempt to explain the meaning of a set of phrasal verbs through metaphorical concepts. A Dissertation. Universidade Federal Do Parana, Curitiba.

Vine, E., & Warren, P. (2012). Corpus, coursebook and psycholinguistic evidence on use and concept: The case of category ambiguity. In S. Hoffman, P. Rayson and G. Leech (Eds.), English Corpus Linguistics: Looking back, Moving Forward. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 239–247.

Wei, M. (2007). An examination of vocabulary learning of college-level learners of English in China. The Asian EFL Journal, 9, 93–114.

White, B. J. (2012). A conceptual approach to the instruction of phrasal verbs. The Modern Language Journal, 96 (3), 419–438.

Wray, A. (2000). Formulaic sequences in second language teaching: Principle and practice. Applied Linguistics, 21, 463–489.

Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Yang, A., & Hsieh, S. (2010). Conceptual Metaphor Awareness on English Phrasal Verbs Teaching and Learning for Adolescents in Taiwan. Retrieved from http://ir.lib.ncku.edu.tw/bitstream/987654321/108255/4/Conceptual%20metaphor%20awareness%20on%20English%20phrasal%20verbs%20teaching%20and%20learning%20for%20adolescents%20in%20Taiwan.pdf, in January 2018.

Yasuda, S. (2010). Learning phrasal verbs through conceptual metaphors: A case of Japanese EFL learners. TESOL Quarterly, 44 (2), 250–273.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejfl.v7i3.5070

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright © 2015 - 2023. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching (ISSN 2537-1754) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms.

All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).