Dạy giới từ tiếng anh theo quan điểm ngôn ngữ học tri nhận

ABSTRACT The present study aimed to investigate the effects of applying cognitive linguistics CL to teaching the spatial and metaphorical senses of English prepositions above, among, at,

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HUE UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES

BÙI PHÚ HƯNG

TEACHING ENGLISH PREPOSITIONS:

A COGNITIVE LINGUISTIC APPROACH

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY THESIS IN THEORY

AND METHODOLOGY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING

HUE, 2019

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HUE UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES

BÙI PHÚ HƯNG

TEACHING ENGLISH PREPOSITIONS:

A COGNITIVE LINGUISTIC APPROACH

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY THESIS IN THEORY

AND METHODOLOGY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING

CODE: 9 14 01 11

SUPERVISORS:

Assoc Prof Trương Viên, PhD

Assoc Prof Nguyễn Ngọc Vũ, PhD

HUE, 2019

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I certify my authorship of the PhD thesis submitted today entitled:

“TEACHING ENGLISH PREPOSITIONS: A COGNITIVE LINGUISTIC APPROACH”

for the degree of Doctor of Education, is the result of my own research, except where otherwise acknowledged, and that this thesis has not been submitted for a higher degree at any other institution To the best of my knowledge, the thesis contains no material previously published or written by other people except where the reference is made in the thesis itself

Hue, ………, 2018

Author’s signature

Bùi Phú Hưng

ABSTRACT

The present study aimed to investigate the effects of applying cognitive linguistics (CL) to teaching the spatial and metaphorical senses of English

prepositions above, among, at, behind, beside, between, in, in front of, on and

under It made attempts to apply the basic concepts in cognitive linguistics,

including embodiment theory, image schemas theory, conceptual metaphor theory and domain mapping theory Also, the integrated text and picture comprehension (ITPC) model was applied to frame the class activities A pretest-posttest between-group research design was adopted The results of the pretest and pre-questionnaire were used to select student participants who were then divided into two different groups: cognitive group and traditional group The findings revealed that the cognitive group (M=27.00) outperformed the traditional group (M=22.36) in the posttest in terms of both the spatial and metaphorical meanings

The cognitive group participants also responded that they appreciated the CL-based teaching of the prepositions more than the pedagogical applications which their former teachers had previously applied in terms of both the spatial and metaphorical meanings Six out of 25 cognitive members responded that the teacher should have added something fun to make the class more interested in the lesson Most of the participants believed that CL-based teaching was appropriate and admitted that CL-based teaching had more positive effects on their knowledge of the spatial meanings than that of the metaphorical meanings

The findings suggest that future studies and practices in ELT which would like to apply cognitive linguistics in EFL (English as a foreign language) classroom could include songs or games in the post-teaching stage to make the class more interesting Future research could also apply cognitive linguistics to teaching other prepositions in other contexts and employ a delayed posttest to measure EFL students’ retention of knowledge

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

To conduct this doctoral thesis, I received much guidance and assistance from my supervisors, the academic panel at Hue University of Foreign Languages – Hue University, friends and students

First of all, my great sincere thanks would go to my supervisors, Assoc Prof

Dr Truong Vien at Hue University and Assoc Prof Dr Nguyen Ngoc Vu at Ho Chi Minh City University of Education They constantly motivated me to complete this thesis punctually and gave me great advice on how to conduct this doctoral thesis I really appreciated their supervision with theoretical background in cognitive linguistics

I also owe thanks to Assoc Prof Dr Tran Van Phuoc, Assoc Prof Dr Le Pham Hoai Huong, Assoc Prof Dr Pham Thi Hong Nhung, Dr Ton Nu Nhu Huong, Dr Truong Bach Le and other academic panelists at University of Foreign Languages – Hue University for their advice on every single stage of conducting this doctoral dissertation

I am very grateful to all the teachers and student participants for their assistance with participating in this study Without them, there would have been no chance for this PhD thesis to be completed

My appreciation is extended to my family and friends for their support They recommended large resources of materials and shared my cheers and stress from this thesis

ABBREVIATIONS

CL: cognitive linguistics

CG: cognitive group

EFL: English as a foreign language

ELT: English language teaching

GPA: grade point average

ITPC model: integrated text picture comprehension model L1: first language or native language

TABLE OF CONTENTS

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP i

ABSTRACT ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii

ABBREVIATIONS iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS v

LIST OF TABLES viii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Rationale 1

1.2 Research Objectives 4

1.3 Research Questions 4

1.4 Research Scope 5

1.5 Significance of the Study 5

1.6 Organization of the Thesis 5

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 7

2.1 Approaches in English Language Teaching 7

2.1.1 Contemporary Perspectives in English Language Teaching and Learning 7

2.1.1.1 Interventionist Approach……… …7

2.1.1.2 Non-Interventionist Approach………9

2.1.1.3 Integration of Interventionism and Non-Interventionism in EFL Context 10

2.1.2 The Place of CL in ELT 10

2.2 Theoretical Framework 13

2.2.1 CL’s Views of English Prepositions 13

2.2.1.1 Spatial Configurations of English Prepositions 13

2.2.1.2 The Domain-Mapping Theory 15

2.2.1.3 Conceptual Metaphors of English Prepositions 16

2.2.2 Image Schema Theory 19

2.2.2.1 Foundations of Image Schemas 19

2.2.2.2 Demonstrating the Senses of Prepositions with Image Schemas 21

2.2.2.3 The Image Schemas Applied in this Study 22

2.2.2.4 Incorporating CL into Teaching Prepositions 27

2.3 Previous Studies 32

2.4 Summary 39

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 41

3.1 Rationale for the Research Approach and Design 41

3.2 Participants 42

3.2.1 Description of Teachers 42

3.2.2 Student Participants 43

3.3 Data Collection Instrumentation 46

3.3.1 Pretest and Posttest 47

3.3.2 Questionnaires and Interviews 49

3.4 Pilot Study 51

3.5 Researcher’s Roles 53

3.6 Research Procedure and Treatments 53

3.6.1 Traditional Treatment 55

3.6.2 Cognitive Treatment 56

3.7 Data analysis 58

3.8 Research Reliability and Validity 59

3.9 Research Ethics 61

3.10 Summary 61

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 62

4.1 Effects of CL-Based Teaching on Vietnamese EFL College Students’ Knowledge of Spatial and Metaphorical Meanings 62

4.1.1 Performances in the Pretest and Posttest 63

4.1.2 Measures of the Test Scores across the Two Treatments 65

4.1.3 Scores of Test Sections and Inter-Subject Variability 66

4.1.4 Investigating other Variables Considered to Have Affected the Experimental Results 76

4.1.5 Discussion of the Effects of the CL-based Treatment on the Participants’ Knowledge of Spatial and Metaphorical Meanings 81

4.1.5.1 Discussion of the Experimental Results 81

4.1.5.2 Comparison of the Findings of this Study and those from the Previous Studies 90

4.2 Students’ Evaluation of the Effects of the CL-Based Treatment 93

4.2.1 Students’ Evaluation of the Effects of the CL-Based Treatment of the Spatial Meanings of the Prepositions 95

4.2.2 Students’ Evaluation of the Effects of the CL-Based Treatment of the Metaphorical Meanings of the Prepositions 106

4.2.3 Discussion of the Students’ Evaluation of the Effects of the CL-Based Treatment 115

4.3 Summary 124

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 125

5.1 General Conclusion 125

5.2 Implications 128

5.3 Limitations of the Study 130

5.4 Suggestions for Future Studies 131

REFERENCES

APPENDICES APPENDIX A1: PRETEST

APPENDIX A2: POSTTEST

APPENDIX A3: ANSWERS TO THE PRETEST AND POSTTEST

APPENDIX B1: LESSON ONE (TG)

APPENDIX B2: LESSON TWO (TG)

APPENDIX B3: LESSON THREE (TG)

APPENDIX B4: LESSON FOUR (TG)

APPENDIX C1: LESSON ONE (CG)

APPENDIX C2: LESSON TWO (CG)

APPENDIX C3: LESSON THREE (CG)

APPENDIX C4: LESSON FOUR (CG)

APPENDIX D: ANSWERS TO THE HANDOUT TASKS

APPENDIX E1: PRE-QUESTIONNAIRE

APPENDIX E2: POST-QUESTIONNAIRE (FOR THE COGNITIVE GROUP)

APPENDIX E3: POST-QUESTIONNAIRE (FOR THE TRADITIONAL GROUP) APPENDIX F: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

APPENDIX G1: PAIR MATCHING PARTICIPANTS

APPENDIX G2: COMPARISON OF PAIRS’ SCORE IMPROVEMENTS FROM PRETEST TO POSTTEST

APPENDIX H1: CODED INTERVIEW RESPONSES BY CG MEMBERS:

SPATIAL MEANINGS

APPENDIX H2: CODED INTERVIEW RESPONSES BY CG MEMBERS:

METAPHORICAL MEANINGS

APPENDIX I1: COMPARISON OF CG’S AND TG’S SCORE GAINS FROM PRETEST TO POSTTEST BY SECTION

APPENDIX I2: CG’S AND TG’S EAGERNESS FOR JOINING THE STUDY APPENDIX I3: COMPARING CG’S AND TG’S RESPONSES TO PART 2

OF THE PRE-QUESTIONNAIRE

APPENDIX I4: COMPARISON OF TG’S AND CG’S MEAN SCORES:

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 Description of teachers 41

Table 3.2 Student participants 43

Table 3.3 Summary of data collection instruments 45

Table 3.4 Item distribution in the pre -questionnaire 49

Table 3.5 Examples of data coding 57

Table 4.1 Total mean scores and standard deviations by CG and TG 62

Table 4.2 Score gains in spatial meanings 63

Table 4.3 Score gains in metaphorical meanings 63

Table 4.4 Paired samples correlation 64

Table 4.5 Repeated measures of paired samples test 64

Table 4.6 Comparison of mean scores of the test sections across the two treatments 66

Table 4.7 Independent samples t-test of two group’s scores across three sections 68 Table 4.8 Independent samples t-test of across the three sections in the pretest and

posttest between the two groups 69

Table 4.9 Participants’ score improvements by track 71

Table 4.10 CG’s responses to the pre-questionnaire and post-questionnaire 93

Table 4.11 Interest and appropriateness of the teaching of the spatial meanings in participants’ prior experiences 94

Table 4.12 Interest and appropriateness of CL-based teaching of spatial meanings 95 Table 4.13 Effects of the teaching of spatial meanings in participants’ prior experiences 99

Table 4.14 Effects of CL-based teaching of the spatial meanings 100

Table 4.15 Interest and appropriateness of the teaching of the metaphorical meanings in participants’ prior experiences 1071

Table 4.16 Interest and appropriateness of CL-based teaching of metaphorical meanings 1086

Table 4.17 Effects of the teaching of the metaphorical meanings in participants’ prior experiences 11207

Table 4.18 Effects of CL-based teaching of metaphorical meanings 1131

Table 4.19 Bartlette’s test 112

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1 Levels of representation 12

Figure 2.2 Prepositions across domains 16

Figure 2.3 Integrated text and picture comprehension model (ITPC) 20

Figure 2.4 Demonstration of the preposition over 21

Figure 2.5 Image schema of preposition in (meaning: CONTAINMENT) 22

Figure 2.6 Image schema of the preposition above by Gardenfors 22

Figure 2.7 Image schema of above applied in this study 22

Figure 2.8 AROUND image schema (Adapted from Bacs, 2002) 23

Figure 2.9 Image schema of the preposition among applied in this study 23

Figure 2.10 ADJENCY image schema 23

Figure 2.11 Image schema of at appliedin this study 23

Figure 2.12 Image schema for BACK 24

Figure 2.13 Image schema of behind applied in this study 24

Figure 2.14 Image schema of beside (Dana and Mantey, 2006, p 113) 24

Figure 2.15 Image schema of beside applied in this study 24

Figure 2.16 STATIC-RELATION image schema of between in this study 25

Figure 2.17 DYNAMIC RELATION image schema of between in this study 25

Figure 2.18 Image schema of in front of (Dana and Mantey, 2006, p 113) 26

Figure 2.19 Image schema ofin front of applied in this study 26

Figure 2.20 2-D image schema of on (Adapted from Gardenfors, 2000) 26

Figure 2.21 Image schema of the preposition on used in this study 26

Figure 2.22 Image schema of preposition under (Dana and Mantey, 2006) 27

Figure 2.23 Image schema of preposition under applied in this study 27

Figure 4.1 CG individuals’ score growth 70

Figure 4.2 TG individuals’ score growths 70

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Rationale

In the past decades, large numbers of empirical studies have been contributed

to the teaching and learning of English as a second or foreign language These contributive efforts have been made in foreign language teaching, (e.g Chen & Lin, 2018; Phạm Vũ Phi Hổ & Usaha, 2015) second language acquisition, and associated areas, including cognitive science and linguistics (e.g.Vũ Thị Huyền & Nguyễn Văn

Trào, 2017; Kobayashi, 2018)

However, English prepositions expose some inherent difficulties to students learning English as a foreign language (Fang, 2000) First, prepositions are examples of polysemy; one preposition used in different contexts may have several different meanings Secondly, the meanings of one preposition may vary in different

contexts (Collins & Hollo, 2010; Hornby, 2015) Thirdly, there is sometimes

overlapping between prepositions in use; that is, one preposition can replace another

with a slight difference in meaning For example, the expressions in Frankfurt and

at Frankfurt are both considered correct in different contexts The former may be

used to refer to somebody’s home, but the latter may describe a point on a journey

(Swan, 2014) Another common characteristic of prepositions is that they are

multi-functional For instance, a prepositional phrase serves different functions, such as an adjunct, a complement or a modifier in different contexts (Collins & Hollo, 2010)

Traditional pedagogical options for teaching English prepositions to adult learners of English as a foreign language also expose problems Nguyễn Thị Mai Hoa (2009) discovered that Vietnamese teachers mainly exploited the pedagogical suggestions in prescribed textbooks Most textbooks applied in Vietnam (e.g Hopkins & Cullen, 2007; Murphy, 2013) provide instructions on prepositions with classifications, such as prepositions of place, prepositions of time and prepositions

of direction Accordingly, these sub-types of prepositions are taught independently,

and the combinations of verb-preposition are considered an arbitrary matter Also,

Lê Văn Canh (2011) has discovered that English language teaching (ELT) in Vietnam is somehow based on translation The application of translating prepositions in ELT does not always work effectively Recent studies on how prepositions Fare presented to adult learners of English as a foreign language (EFL) have also shown that these types of instruction do not help students of English as a foreign language sucessfully learn and enhance their achievements in English prepositions (Cho, 2010; Song, 2013; Tyler, Mueller & Ho, 2011) Contemporary literature demonstrates the pivotal role of knowledge of language in second language acquisition (Ellis, 2008; Pawlak, 2006); however, a lack of emphasis on language meaning does not help facilitate accumulating and retaining instructed language items (Ausubel, 2000) Also, it has been argued by some researchers (Ausubel, 2000; Cho, 2010) that learning by heart or simple memorization cannot help integrate new input with learners’ existing knowledge in order to form a related cognitive structure Recent studies with interests in exploring human abilities to process and store language components have provided empirical findings that teaching vocabulary should be based on meaning and that teachers should help adult learners form a cognitive structure of language items (Gebhard, Gunawan & Chen, 2014)

The emergence of cognitive linguistics gives implications for English language teaching and learning as its foundation is based on how humans acquire and learn language In particular, its grounding in cognitive science suggests some implications to help learners systemically organize language input in cognitive processing Taylor (2008, p 37) asserts that “any innovation in linguistic theory is bound, sooner or later, to have an impact on the language teaching profession.” Cognitive linguistics has been motivating a number of pedagogical applications which have been especially provided empirical evidence about several concerns in English language teaching, including vocabulary (Boers, 2000a, 2000b, 2013), collocations (Walker, 2008), phrasal verbs (Csábi, 2004) Regarding prepositions, cognitive linguistics presents the image schema theory anddomain mapping theory,

which believe that prepositions can be represented by image schemas (Evans & Green, 2006) and the sub-types of prepositions are associated in meaning and can

be represented by image schemas (Bùi Phú Hưng, 2016a, 2016b) The application

of cognitive linguistics to teaching English prepositions may help students of English as a foreign language improve in their learning of prepositions as they can form a related cognitive structure (Ausubel, 2000) Tyler, et al (2011) and Song (2013) made efforts to explore the effectiveness of applying cognitive linguistics to English language teaching

However, the endeavors above were confined to a limited number of prepositions and were conducted in European contexts MacMillan and Schumacher (2001, p 178) believe that “treatment in an experiment is supposed to be repeated” Concerning cognitive linguistics, Langacker (2008, p 66) suggests that there should

be more empirical findings to test the effectiveness of pedagogical applications of cognitive linguistics and that “extensive pedagogical application of cognitive linguistics remains a long-term goal” Although considered successful, the experimental studies by Tyler, et al (2011) and Song (2013) recommend that the further studies applying cognitive linguistics to teaching English prepositions should be extended by including other prepositions and should be conducted in other contexts because people of different native languages may construe spatial configurations differently In particular, linguistic and spatial construal of students’ first language is considered to have effects on how they perceive spatial coding in English prepositions to a certain extent The application of cognitive linguistics in teaching prepositions may help students learning English as a foreign language understand and use English prepositions effectively since cognitive linguistics can illustrate the spatial configurations in English prepositions (Alonso, Cadierno & Jarvis, 2016) Also, Krzeszowski (1990), Taylor (2002) and Tyler and Evans (2001) assert that the spatial meanings of prepositions are related to their peripheral senses (other senses of prepositions), which makes students find learning prepositions in the target language problematic The concerns arouse an interest in conducting a

study applying cognitive linguistics to teaching English prepositions to Vietnamese students

1.2 Research Aims

In general, this study aims to make an insight into an understanding of the role of cognitive linguistics in instruction on English as a foreign language through

an investigation of how basic concepts in cognitive linguistics should be applied in

a classroom of English as a foreign language Arguably, there remains a gap in literature to explore students’ evaluation of pedagogical application based on cognitive linguistics in order to have a comprehensive view of both how application

of cognitive linguistics helps improve students’ knowledge of the semantics of the prepositions and how students think of pedagogy based on cognitive linguistics in English language teaching (ELT) Therefore, the aims of this study are dual

The primary purpose of this quasi-experimental study is to explore the

effects of applying cognitive linguistics to teaching English prepositions above,

among, at, behind, beside, between, in, in front of, on, and under That is, it aims to

investigate the effects of CL-based teaching on Vietnamese EFL foreign-language) students’ knowledge of the spatial and metaphorical meanings of the aforementioned prepositions Also, it aims to explore Vietnamese students’ opinions of preposition teaching based on cognitive linguistics (CL) or how they appreciate the treatment based on cognitive linguistic concepts

(English-as-a-1.3 Research Questions

This study seeks to answer the following research questions:

1 What are the effects of CL-based teaching on Vietnamese EFL college students’ knowledge of spatial and metaphorical meanings of English prepositions?

2 How do Vietnamese EFL college students evaluate the effects of CL-based teaching of English prepositions?

1.4 Research Scope

This study did not attempt to teach all English prepositions, but it took a

cognitive linguistic approach to the teaching of the ten prepositions above, among,

at, behind, beside, between, in, in front of, on, and under to Vietnamese students at

a university in Ho Chi Minh City Fifty first-year students, equally divided into a cognitive group (CG) and a traditional group (TG), were involved in the present study These ten prepositions were chosen as a result of their high level of

frequency and difficulty (Lindstromberg, 2010)

1.5 Significance of the Study

The present study hopes to contribute to the literature on pedagogical applications of cognitive linguistics in terms of both the spatial and metaphorical meanings of English prepositions More specifically, it introduces an approach to the teaching of English prepositions based on basic concepts in cognitive linguistics Also, curriculum designing and textbook writing will be facilitated in terms of providing appropriate lessons and tasks to assist students in mastering English prepositions in general and the prepositions involved in this study in particular For a practical purpose, this study sheds light on effective teaching of English prepositions and provides implications for research and practice in English language teaching

1.6 Organization of the Thesis

This doctoral dissertation consists of five main chapters Following this introduction, which presents the rationale for the present study as well as the research objectives, questions, scope and significance, Chapter Two reviews extant literature on cognitive linguistics and its applications in English language teaching, which motivates and forms the foundation for the research questions addressed in this thesis It also takes into account the concerns as well as perspectives in English language teaching in which cognitive linguistics is grounded Gaps in previous studies are then figured out Chapter Three sketches research methods and design employed in the study To collect the participants’ opinions of the treatment based

on cognitive linguistics, both questionnaires and interviews were conducted in hope

to triangulate the data Specifically, instruments, sample participants and treatments

in the pretest-posttest between-group model and research reliability and validity are particularized Results of the study and discussion are presented in Chapter Four These involve the results of the pretest and posttest from the experimental study as

an answer to Research Question 1, and students’ responses to the questionnaires and interviews are also presented and discussed as an answer to research Question 2 Additionally, it gives a detailed interpretation of results of the study, with reference

to findings of previous studies Finally, Chapter Five summarizes the key findings and gives implications for future research and practice in teaching English prepositions, and indicates its limitations

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter first outlines the main perspectives in ELT and the place of CL in ELT Then, it presents the basic concepts in CL, including the foundation of CL, image schema theory, domain mapping theory, conceptual metaphor theory and ITPC model CL-based approach has proposed three main models for ELT, including gestalt learning theory, information processing and computer models, and constructivism This present study has a great interest in constructivism, in which integrated text and picture comprehension model is grounded, since it is supposed to improve students’ achievement by engaging them in the learning process

2.1 Approaches in English Language Teaching

2.1.1 Contemporary Perspectives in English Language Teaching and Learning

A review of contemporary literature shows that there are two main approaches in English language teaching and acquisition Interventionism supports

a belief that input of linguistic features provided by teacher instruction, or pedagogical intervention, is indispensable and facilitative Nevertheless, the other end of the spectrum is non-interventionism, which views pedagogical intervention

as unnecessary Learners should be exposed to communicative use of language instead because it helps learners acquire language in particular contexts These perspectives both have implications for pedagogical research and practices (Bielak

& Pawlak, 2013)

2.1.1.1 Interventionist Approach

Interventionists propose a number of hyphotheses about second language acquisition and learning Firstly, it takes into consideration the importance of cognitive processes (Pienemann, 2007) A pedagogical application inspired from this theory is that language teaching should take into account learners’ developmental stages in that the target input should be one stage in advance of the

learners’ present stage For example, simple words should be taught before compound and complex words Instruction is for nothing if learners are not able to cognitively process the input However, Nunan (1994) presents a concern that humans may acquire language in a natural setting People can also acquire authentic language use in everyday life although it may be beyond their developmental stage Ellis (1997) argues that linguistic input through instruction develops explicit, not implicit, knowledge Explicit knowledge occurs as a result of consciousness raising

or explicit language teaching and learning of linguistic features, but implicit knowledge, as a result of implicit language learning, is unconscious and facilitates language use Contemporary literature in second language acquisition and learning shows that both implicit and explicit knowledge may be a result of instruction Pawlak (2006) claims that teacher instruction may enhance learners’ language use if

it is accompanied by productive tasks Language learning is considered a process of changing explicit knowledge of language elements into implicit knowledge To facilitate this process, practice must be applied Also, people’s age has little or no impact on their ability to accumulate explicit knowledge; nonetheless, there is a decline in people’s ability to acquire implicit knowledge Implicit unconscious teaching may be best applied to young learners, but explicit conscious teaching may

be applicable to adult learners (Bialystok, 1994 & Ellis, 2005) Ellis (2008), Pawlak (2006) and Williams (2005) further explain that explicit and implicit learning normally aims at the corresponding types of knowledge, but implicit knowledge may also be generated from explicit instruction in a long term It can be inferred from this argument that explicit instruction which requires learners’ attention plays

a crucial role in EFL classrooms of adults, and it also triggers language acquisition

in a long run (Ellis, 2009; Pawlak, 2006) Another concern is about how teacher’s instruction is processed (VanPatten, 2002) Accordingly, teacher’s instruction is the source of linguistic data which provides input through a process of conscious learning (Lee, 2003) The input is first accumulated in working memory and then processed further in appropriate conditions, such as practice Therefore, pedagogically, teacher instruction should focus on the problems diagnosed by the

teacher and help learners improve their processing strategies As the input is processed by learners, teacher’s instruction needs to draw learners’ attention as a cognitive engagement

2.1.1.2 Non-interventionist Approach

Arguments against the pedagogical intervention are also based on a number

of theories First, Krashen (1985) hypothesizes that the first language (L1) acquisition and second language (L2) acqusition are exactly the same An emerging problem here is that there are a vast number differences in acquisition of L1 and L2: L1 intereference in L2 acquisition, level of proficiency as the outcome of L2 acquisition, and the number of factors that influence L2 acquisition While acquisition takes place unconsciously and implicitly in a naturalistic setting, learning is a conscious and explicit process Language learning tends to improve learners’ explicit knowledge and does not help them use language in spontaneous circusmtances However, contemporary literature provides evidence that explicit learning may also result in implicit knowledge (Ellis, 2008) Some pedagogical practices have been developed in these theories Audiolingualism, which places an emphasis on repetition, does not regard conscious learning as important However, this practice is not widely applied due to its ignorance of meaning in language learning (Pawlak, 2006) The second application is the introduction and implementation of content-based instruction or immersion programs in which a foreign language is a medium of instruction in the courses in academic disciplines

It is obvious that such pedagogical applications in ELT are relatively successful Nonetheless, a problem is these applications have proved successful in contexts where learners have opportunities to get exposed to English in daily life or in contexts where English is used as a second language (Pawlak, 2006) Another shortcoming of this approach is that learners’ language fluency rather than accuracy

is enhanced (Swain, 1992)

2.1.1.3 Integration of Interventionism and Non-interventionism in EFL Contexts

The argument on whether pedagogical intervention or teacher instruction is the best option in ELT may be inconclusive In fact, it can be seen from the aforementioned reviews of theories in SLA and language teaching in terms of teacher instruction that interventionism has a vital role in EFL contexts Some pedagogical applications in ELT have been outlined by most language researchers and practitioners In the first place, in the context where out-of-class exposure to English is not plentiful or in the context where English is used as a foreign language, the teacher should provide learners with as much time for productive skills as possible In the second place, when teachers identify learners’ needs for instruction, the instruction can be given explicitly in foreign language teaching contexts Finally, teachers’ instruction, in EFL classroom, should be short enough and easy to understand to leave time for other class activities, such as drills and production tasks (Harmer, 2015b; Thornbury, 2002; Ur, 2012)

2.1.2 The Place of CL in the Contemporary Literature in ELT

The past two decades have experienced a rapidly increasing number of applications of CL as additions to both fields of linguistics and ELT (Taylor, 2008,

p 37), which has improved and motivated the potential suitability of CL for explaining linguistic phenomena and foreign language teaching from the view that language categories are considered meaningful The existence of such contributions has bridged the gaps between CL and ELT in forms of publications of journal articles (e.g Sobrino, 2014; Tyler et al., 2011; Wijaya & Ong, 2018), research articles published as chapters in books (e.g Boers & Lindstromberg, 2008; Boers, Rycker & Knop, 2010; Vallori, 2014) and books presenting results from single studies applying CL to ELT or basic concepts in CL (e.g Bielak & Pawlak, 2013; Nguyễn Ngọc Vũ, 2016)

CL is grounded on a conglomerate of theories and empirical studies It explores the relationship between language and the human mind or cognition It is

also based on the interconnections between language and human experiences of society and interactions with the external world (Evans & Green, 2006; Geeraerts & Cuyckens, 2010; Kardela, 2011; Langacker, 2008)

In one place, CL declares itself to be “cognitive” as it views language as a non-autonomous inventory in that humans convey their thoughts in language That

is, people’s memory and perceptions are formed by their experiences with the external physical world and then their experiences help them shape their knowledge These interconnected aspects give rise to cognitive models In a word, language and cognition are inherently connected with human cognition

It is also significant to address, at this point, that CL views language as an integral part of social and communicative experiences Another major claim of CL

is that social happenstances and human interactions with the physical world are included in language (Croft & Cruise, 2004; Tyler, 2012) In fact, language reflects what humans think of the social events which they have experienced on a daily basis (Langacker, 1999a) Embodiment theory in CL shows the inherent linkages of language with cognition as aspects of human life (Figure 2 1)

Regarding prepositions, one of the first and foremost cognitive structure which children achieve is an object in relation with other physical objects in the physical surroundings These conceptions, which are then represented by prepositions, form mental images of the corresponding objects in the external physical world and “spatial physical relationships are the fundamental that we use space as a domain for structuring other less concrete aspects of our experience” (Lee, 2001) This can be seen that cognitive abilities play an important role in language learning Langacker (1999b), Croft (2000) and Littlemore (2009) assert that humans experiences in a vast number of language elements in life and all such language elements, commonly called usage events in CL, are accumulated as an inventory of linguistic units in the mind in cognitive processing With repetition of human interactions with events in society, language learning take place and humans form linguistic knowledge and image schemas, which gives implications for L2

The physical world

It may be pivotal here to conceal the difference in the view of “cognition”

between generativism and CL In particular, generativism claims to be “cognitive”

from its inferences on the working of the human mind In other words, it ignores the

crucial role of humans’ embodied experience, which in turn shapes human

perceptions of the social events in their interactions In other words, generativism

views language as autonomous, but CL hypothesizes that language reflects human

general cognitive processes (Taylor, 2002; Tyler, 2012)

A review of literature in second language acquisition and basic concepts in

cognitive linguistics shows that the learning of a second language requires

“cognitive processes that are used by second language learners to turn L2 input into

acquisition (Ellis, 2006a), which requires learners’ attention to input from the

teacher (Ellis, 2006b) Doughty (2003) also posits that mere exposure to the use of

second language may be ineffective to those who do not notice the language input,

but teacher instruction usually focuses on particular aspects of language, which

should be explicit (Williams, 2005)

Some language educators and educational psychologists (e.g Beréndi, Csábi

& Kovecses, 2008; Boers, 2000; Condon & Kelly, 2002; Nguyễn Thu Hương, 2005;

Skoufaki, 2008; Song, 2013), inspired by the theories about the interrelationship between language and the mind in CL, have facilitated learners’ accumulation of linguistic meaning of target items by delivering teacher-fronted explicit instruction

as a source of language knowledge because learners’ attention and memory as descriptions in CL are essential for language learning These researchers also provided the learners with exercise drills in their studies Bielak and Pawlak (2013), Condon (2008), and Tyler, et al (2011) have applied explicit instruction, exercise drills and language reproductive tasks in their studies The applications of CL in these studies show it is compatible with contemporary literature in teaching English

to adults in EFL contexts (Section 2.2.1)

2.2 Theoretical Framework

2.2.1 CL’s Views of English Prepositions

2.2.1.1 Spatial Configurations of English Prepositions

Different from other schools of linguistics which view prepositions as sense or meaningless connecters and the formations of prepositional verbs, phrasal verbs, and collocations are of arbitrary matter (Chomsky, 1995), CL views prepositions as a word class whose meanings can be explained by the relationship between participants involved in the context and classified as prototypical and non-prototypical (Langacker, 1999b) The examples below can illustrate the semantic features of English prepositions:

non-(1) the bottom of the jar

(2) the chirping of the birds

(3) the color of the lawn

(4) the state of California

From the examples above (Langacker, 1999b, pp 74-76), the preposition of mostly describes the relationship between an entity the jar and its component the

bottom In example (1), the preposition of is used with what cognitive linguistics

calls prototypical meaning as it is used to describe the relationship between an

instrinsic component and a whole In example (2), the preposition of shows the

relationship between the participants the birds and an event the chirping which the participants are intrinsic to In example (3), color is designated as a quality of the

lawn Finally, in example (4), the state and California refer the same entity, but California indicates the entity in a more particular manner that the state designates

the schematic notion of the entity Langacker (1999b, p 77) asserts that “an entity could hardly not be intrinsic to itself’”

Cognitive linguists also propose that the meanings of prepositions can be explained by the reference entity called landmark and the mentioned object called trajector (Lee, 2001) Herskovits (1986) also provides examples 5-8 below as

illustrations of the spatial meanings of the preposition in:

(5) the cat in the house

(6) the flowers in the vase

(7) the bird in the tree

(8) the finger in the ring

In example (5), the cat is totally contained in the house The cat is the trajector (TR) and the house is the landmark (LM) In this situation, the meaning of the preposition in is prototypical as TR is totally contained in LM However, in example (6), TR the flowers is not wholly inside the LM the vase; the meaning of the preposition in here, therefore, is non-prototypical In example (7), it is essential

to include all the branches of the tree as LM In this case, a three-dimensional space

should be construed and the meaning of the preposition in is also non-prototypical Finally, in example (8), the finger is conceptualized as TR in a particular position and the ring is construed as LM covering some part of TR In summary, meanings

of prepositions can be prototypical or non-prototypical

Contemporary literature provides two main different options for ELT: focused and meaning-focused Whether a pedagogical application should be form-focused or meaning-focused has been a common issue of concern in the second language acquisition literature Form-focused approach is defined as “any systematic attempt to enable or facilitate language learning by manipulating the

form-mechanisms of learning and/or the conditions under which these occur” (Housen & Pierrard, 2005, p 3) In contrast, the meaning-focused approach focuses on meanings of the target language Those in favor of the meaning-focused approach criticize the form-focused approach for its lack of emphasis on fluency Long (1988) further explains that learners should pay attention to the meaning and use of the target language items before they are aware of form VanPatten (2004) also sets meaning-before-form principle for second language acquisition and foreign language teaching and learning In a study by VanPatten (1990) to figure out the effects of form-focused instruction and meaning-focused instruction on learners’ retention of target language items, the findings suggest that learners remember instructed items with meanings better than those which are considered to have little

or no meaning since input processing in the mind decreases retention of meaningless items Bielak and Pawlak (2013) and Lê Văn Canh (2011) also believe that form-based instruction may be best applied in teaching structure-associated language items

In CL, prepositions prove to be meaningful Meaning-focused instruction on prepositions was applied by a couple of studies Song (2013) and Tyler, et al (2011) performed experiments teaching prepositions to compare the effectiveness of meaning-focused instruction and instruction that ignored the inherent senses of prepositions As a result of the study, the groups that received meaning-focused instruction outperformed the other groups in the posttest In summary, the application of meaning-focused approach to teaching English prepositions in EFL contexts have proved appropriate in illumination of CL

2.2.1.2 The Domain-Mapping Theory

A domain, or a frame, is an inventory of conventional linguistic units equated with conceptualization (Langacker, 1987; Fillmore, 2006) In CL, a domain

is the cognitive structure providing background context and helping us to understand the meaning of any word and refers to completely different experience parts of the human such as space, color, emotion, and temperature Space domain

can be considered as the most basic domain among them (Taylor, 1989) According

to Nguyễn Ngọc Vũ (2016) and Lakoff (1987), the cognitive domain is a metaphoric mapping from physical space, where prepositions are used with the spatial meanings to conceptual abstract space, where prepositions are used with metaphorical meanings The result of this process is the “mental space” or a place for conceptualizing and thinking Radden and Dirven (2007) propose networks of meanings of prepositions from physical space to mental space based on the concept

of domain as follows:

Spatial domain Abstract domain

Figure 2.2 Prepositions across domains (Adapted from Geeraerts & Cuyckens, 2010 & Evans, 2007, p 53) Space-metaphor parallelisms mean that prepositions are first accumulated in the spatial domain (source domain) through embodied interactions with the physical world, and then they can transfer onto the target domain (referring to abstract domain in this study), in which they are used with the metaphorical meanings (Figure 2.2) The domain mapping theory gives implications for the teaching of English prepositions (Section 2.2.2.4)

2.2.1.3 Conceptual Metaphors of English Prepositions

Metaphor is a frequent activity of the human mind, and it is prevalent in everyday activities This idea is quite different from traditional view that treats metaphor as a literary device (Nguyễn Ngọc Vũ, 2016) In cognitive linguistics, conceptual meataphor theory is grounded in everyday experience For example, “be

at a crossroads” in example (9) is projected into human cognition and may refer to a

context in which the two lovers are at a point of making a decision Similarly, in example (10), LOVE is conceptualized as a JOURNEY as people in love may decide to cease or continue when they identify trouble (Lakoff, 1993)

(9) We are at a crossroads

(10) Love is a journey

Conceptual metaphors in general root in culture as they reflect conceptualization mutually agreed in a particular culture (Ngô Đình Phương & Nguyễn Thị Kim Anh, 2016) In fact, conceptual metaphors of prepositions particularly show the network of prepositional senses Boroditsky (2000) and Kemmerer (2005) propose that TIME IS SPACE metaphor However, this study was interested in teaching the target prepositions in the spatial domain and abstract domain, so the term “metaphorical meanings” in this study refers to the metaphorical use of the prepositions in the abstract domain Boers (2000a), Condon (2008), Condon and Kelly (2002), Ferrando (1999) and Skoufaki (2008) discover that prepositions in collocations, prepositional verbs and idioms expose to have metaphorical meanings In addition, Thom (2017) discovers that particles in phrasal verbs usually carry the metaphorical meanings Ferrando (1999) analyzes some examples as follows:

(11) left no party with enough strength to form a government on its own (12) … he felt able to end on a note of hope

The preposition on is primarily used to indicate a spatial relation that the

mentioned object is supported by the reference point The reference point can be

mapped in various ways In example (11), its own is conceived of as the support of

the government The expression a government on its own refers to a situation when

a government supports itself In example (12), the positive feeling a note of hope is

conceived of as the support

Ferrando (1999) also believe that the prepositions in the prepositional verbs

in examples (13) and (14) are examples of conceptual metaphor Accordingly, cure

and the aid are conceptualized as supports (reference point), and the diabetic patient and they are those receiving these supports respectively

(13) … the diabetic patient who relies on cure by the quack device…

(14) They count on the aid of the neutral countries attending the Geneva

other side” of the reference point (Figure 2.4) When it arrives at the destination, the

action is finished, which “explains the sense completed” as in example (15) In example (16), the verb figure literally refers to manipulate numbers and includes the conceptual sense thinking The verb figure is conceptually mapped into the abstract domain with the sense reaching a solution by thinking The preposition out

primarily refers to a spatial sense that the mentioned object gets out of its

boundaries or becomes visible or accessible The phrasal verb figure out, thus, means “make a solution cognitively accessible by thinking The adverb particle out

in this phrasal verb is used with a metaphorical sense accessible or knowing, which

stems from its spatial sense

(15) The lecture is over

(16) … to figure out a solution

Prepositions in English collocations, idioms and prepositional verbs, and adverb particles expose their metaphorical meanings In order to figure out applicability of CL in preposition teaching, it may be crucial to examine image schema theory Not only can the spatial meanings of prepositions be illustrated by image schemas, but their conceptual metaphors can (Evans, 2007; Gallese & Lakoff, 2005; Johnson, 2005; Wilson & Gibbs, 2007)

However, the transfer of prepositions across domains does not always take place In one sense, different types of prepositional meanings can be impaired by brain damage In another sense, people may accumulate the spatial meanings better than the metaphorical meanings as the former is more concrete (Kemmerer, 2005)

In this study, all the participants were normal Also, there was a review of the spatial meanings accompanied by image schemas in advance of the teaching of the metaphorical meanings

2.2.2 Image Schema Theory

2.2.2.1 Foundations of Image Schemas

Image schema theory has its root in embodied or grounded cognition Accordingly, human bodily experiences are the source for cognitive capacities This viewpoint has become increasingly supported by findings from both psychology and neuroscience (Gallese & Lakoff, 2005; Feldman & Narayanan, 2004; Wilson & Gibbs, 2007) Based on embodiment theory, image schemas are considered mental representations that are extracted from our experience with the external world An image schema is a cognitive structure which is used to interpret humans’ physical experiences and connections of concepts in the human mind (Clausner & Croft, 1999) In other words, language in use reflects what humans mean and think (Johnson, 2017) In terms of human sense of the directions and locations of things

in the physical world, they make sense of the surrounding, such as LEFT, RIGHT,

UP and DOWN Hampe (2005, p 18) describes the image schema as motor nature of various structures of our conceptualization and reasoning”

“sensory-CL places a high emphasis on visual experience in daily life, from which images find some way to enter the mental process because a visual, in a common sense, tells us more information about the referent than a word does Then, images

of a relevant area match to establish an organized schema Evans (2007, p 107) claims that “image schemas provide the basis for more richly detailed lexical concepts” That means, image schemas tend to convey meaning prior to form and reflect human experiences After image schemas of prepositions representing their

spatial senses are constructed in the human mind, they may enable people to use them with the metaphorical meanings (Mandler & Cánovas, 2014)

Schnotz (2014) particularizes the cognitive process of auditory and visual information by providing the ITPC model (Figure 2.3), in which humans receive information mainly from two channels: visual and auditory Representational symbols in instruction may influence the mental process more directly than does text, while text may impact propositional representation more than do graphics (Schnotz, 2014) Regarding second language acquisition (SLA), teachers need to employ both graphics and text in instruction Auditory and visual information enter auditive and visual channels through the ear and the eye respectively Then, the processed information is forwarded to the working memory via the verbal and pictorial channel In order to form long-term memory, learners need to have opportunities to integrate the two sources of information where prior experience and new input form language acquisition

Long-term memory Conceptual Organizing

Propositional Mental models representations

Working memory

Verbal channel Pictorial channel

Auditive memory Visual memory

Auditory channel Visual channel

Sensory register Ear register Eye register

spoken text sound images written text visual images Figure 2.3 Integrated text and picture comprehension model (ITPC)

(Adapted from Schnotz, 2014) Amin, Jeppsson and Haglund (2015) also assert that auditory and visual information enters human minds via people’s interaction with the material and the physical world, which in turns form propositional representations to help people form long-term memory However, blurred images can cause confusion to learners (Loschky, Ringer, Johnson, Larson, Neider & Kramer, 2014) In this study, all

image schemas applied were presented on PowerPoint files to be identifiable to

learners

2.2.2.2 Demonstrating the Senses of Prepositions with Image Schemas

Cognitive linguists provide at least four basic principles for illustrating

concepts with image schemas First, an image schema should be mainly relevant to

the semantic characteristics of the entity illustrated Also, the LM, one or more

entities of secondary prominence, is a reference point in a stationary position within

the reference setting Third, the target object or TR can be moving (Figure 2.4),

usually represented by an arrow, or unmoving (Figure 2.5) The LM and TR are

identified by a certain relation, represented by a line (for the practical purpose of the

present study, referring to a preposition) For example, the sentence “The athlete

jumped over a horizontal bar.” (Figure 2.4) Finally, relations between things are

usually represented by prepositions in English since an English preposition usually

describes where TR is in comparison with the LM (Ming, 2011 & Lee, 2001)

TR

LM

Figure 2.4 Demonstration of the preposition over

(Adapted from Geeraerts & Cuyckens, 2010, p 127)

Herskovits (1986) proposes that LM can be two-dimensional (2-D) or

three-dimensional (3-D), but a 3-D LM usually describes a clearer relation between TR

and LM (Figure 2.5) Although a preposition may be illustrated by several image

schemas according to what meaning it has in context, the construction of an image

schema has to primarily satisfy 5 requirements: (1) relationship between TR and

LM, (2) their distance, (3) the existence of contact between TR and LM, (4) shape

and size of TR and LM and (5) direction of TR in comparison with LM (Taylor,

1989)

TR TR TR

LM LM

2-D image schema 3-D image schema

Figure 2.5 Image schema of preposition in (meaning: CONTAINMENT)

(Adapted from Herskovits, 1986)

2.2.2.3 The Image Schemas Applied in this Study

The following analyses of the prepositions above, among, at, behind, beside,

between, in, in front of, on and under are based mainly on their semantic properties

defined in Oxford Advanced Learners’ Dictionary (Hornby, 2015)

The spatial meaning of the preposition above is TR is at a higher place and

separate from LM (Hornby, 2015; Lindstromberg, 2010, pp 109-110)

Metaphorically, above refers to the sense “having a higher quality or higher position

than” (Lindstromberg, 2010, p 117) Gardenfors (2000) proposes a 2-D image

schema of the stative TR for the preposition above (Figure 2.6) In this study, the

image schema for the preposition above prototypically describes a stative TR at a

higher position/place in comparison with the 3-D LM (Figure 2.7)

TR TR

LM LM

Figure 2.6 Image schema of Figure 2.7 The image schema of above

the preposition above applied in this study

(Adapted from Gardenfors, 2000)

The spatial sense of among is “surrounded by a group/ groups of things or

people (Hornby, 2015) Accordingly, TR is included or in the middle of a group/

groups of LMs That is, in this case, there can be more than one LM (Bacs, 2002)

The metaphorical usage of among refers to “in a group or crowd” (Lindstromberg,

2010, p 93) In this study, regarding the embodied concepts of AROUND and

AMONG, the TR and LMs of the AROUND image schema (Figure 2.8) constructed

by Bacs (2002) were interchanged to represent the concept of AMONG (Figure

2.9), and the LMs were reduced in number for simplification (Lakoff, 1987)

Figure 2.8 AROUND image schema

(Adapted from Bacs, 2002)

Figure 2.9 The image schema of the

preposition among used in this study

Yang (2008) analyzed and figured out four spatial meaningss of the

prepostion at and proposed four corresponding image schemas of this preposition:

ADJACENCY (prototypical), LINEAR-RELATION, DYNAMIC-RELATION, and

CONTAINMENT Song (2013) suggests LINEAR-RELATION is considered a

sub-sense of ADJACENCY as it exposes to have related details of ADJACENCY,

aforementioned image schemas so the image schema for ADJACENCY should be

used to represent LINEAR-RELATION in teaching Wijaya and Ong (2018)

applied the image schema for ADJACENCY (Figure 2.10) in their study for its

generalization This study excluded the senses DYNAMIC-RELATION and

CONTAINMENT of the preposition at The image schema for the preposition at

applied in this study (Figure 2.11) was based on these references

LM TR LM TR

Figure 2.10 ADJENCY Image schema Figure 2.11 Image schema of at applied

(Adapted from Wijaya and Ong, 2018) in this study

According to Oxford Advanced Learners’ Dictionary (Hornby, 2015), the

preposition behind is spatially defined as “at or towards the back of somebody or something, and party or totally hidden by it” Metaphorically, behind commonly

refers to “agents that are unknown or agents’ motives” (Lindstromberg, 2010, p

105) The present study was interested in using the preposition behind to express the

stative location of TR in comparison with LM without a focus on the dynamic nature of TR The image schema for the sense “towards the back of somebody or

something” (Figure 2.12) proposed by Johanson and Papafragou (2014) was

adapted to construct the image schema of the preposition behind with a removal of

the feature MOVEMENT applied in this study (Figure 2.13)

LM TR LM TR

Figure 2.12 Image schema for BACK

(Johanson and Papafragou, 2014)

Figure 2.13 Image schema of behind

applied in this study

The spatial sense of the preposition beside is described as “next to somebody

or something or at the side of somebody or something” In this study, the

preposition beside was used to express the spatial sense “at the side of somebody or something” (Hornby, 2015)

LM LM TR

TR

Figure 2.14 Image schema of beside Figure 2.15 Image schema of beside

(Dana and Mantey, 2006, p 113) applied in this study

Dana and Mantey (2006) propose an image schema for this sense of

the preposition beside (Figure 2.14) This illustration may be confusing on account

of its similarity to the image schema for the preposition at applied in this study The

image schema applied in this study (Figure 2.15) shows the interchangeability of the

LM and TR in the image schema of the preposition beside (Langacker, 1990, pp 10; Lee, 2001, pp 3-4) as in the sentences “The horse is beside the man.” or “The

9-man is beside the horse.”

The preposition between is defined as “in or into the space separating two

objects or people” and “from one place to another” (Hornby, 2015) That is, the

preposition between can be used with three senses: (1) in the space separating two

LMs, (2) into the space separating two LMs and (3) moving from one LM to

another and back as in the sentence “A spider spins a web between grass stems” (Cambridge Dictionary, 2016) Metaphorically, between commonly refers to

“choosing, distinguishing or disconcerning” (Lindstromberg, 2010, p 92) Bacs

(2002) also admits that some concepts inherently suggest more than one LM The

image schemas of the preposition between applied in this study referred to (1)

STATIVE RELATION (Figure 2.16) and (2) DYNAMIC RELATION (Figure 2.17), which were based on proposals by Lindner (1982), Lakoff (1987), Yang (2008) and Ming (2011)

LM TR LM LM TR LM

Figure 2.16 STATIC-RELATION Figure 2.17 DYNAMIC RELATION

image schema of between in this study image schema of between in this study

The spatial sense of the preposition in is described as TR a part or the whole

contained inside LM or TR moving into LM and finally finds a place inside LM

(Hornby, 2015) Regarding this definition, the preposition in has two main image

schemas: CONTAINMENT (Herskovits, 1986) and INCLUSIVE DYNAMIC

STATUS as in the expression come in (Lindner, 1982) respectively In the present

study, the 3-D LM by (Herskovits, 1986) was adapted to refer to the concept

CONTAINMENT (Figure 2.5) and the other sense of the preposition in was

considered a sub-category of the concept CONTAINMENT Metaphorically, in is

used when the LM is construed as “states, conditions, circumstances, actions, and

moods” (Lindstromberg, 2010, p 77)

The spatial sense of the preposition in front of is defined as “in the position

or in the direction that somebody or something is facing” Metaphorically, in front

of is used with quite a similar sense as ahead, but ahead is used with a more general

sense (Lindstromberg, 2010, p 107) Dana and Mantey (2006) propose a 3-D image

schema of the preposition in front of (Figure 2.18) For a mutual understanding and

realization of TR among the participants, this study used a circle to represent TR

(Figure 2.19)

LM LM

TR TR

Figure 2.18 Image schema of Figure 2.19 Image schema of

in front of (Dana and Mantey, 2006, p 113) in front of applied in this study

The spatial senses of on describes TR “is in contact with LM that is a

supprting surface” (Linstromberg, 2010, p 51) From this definition, TR should be

in a higher position than LM, and covers part or the whole of LM (Hornby, 2015)

TR

TR

LM LM

Figure 2.20 2-D image schema of on Figure 2.21 Image schema of the

(Adapted from Gardenfors, 2000) preposition on used in this study

The image schema proposed by Gardenfors (2000) demonstrated all the

semantic properties of the preposition on (Figure 2.20) and was a relevant reference

for constructing the image schema of the preposition on applied in this study

(Figure 2 21) Metaphorically, on is used to describe a situation when LM is a

sufferer to TR, or it describes progress (Lindstromberg, 2010)

Oxford Advanced Learners’ Dictionary (Hornby, 2015) defines the

preposition under with three main spatial senses: (1) below the surface of

something, (2) covered by something, and (3) in a position that is below something

Embodied senses (1), (2) and (3) express a common sense that shows a static

relation between TR and LM that LM is in a higher position than TR The

prepositions below can be used in place of under in some circumstances However,

when there is contact between TR and LM, the preposition under must be used

Metaphorically, under is commonly used to mean “bad, less in quality, relatively

powerless” (Lindstromberg, 2010) The image schema (Figure 2.22) proposed Dana

and Mantey (2006) was a reference for constructing the image schema of the

preposition under applied in this study (Figure 2.23)

LM LM

TR

Figure 2.22 Image schema of

preposition under TR

(Dana and Mantey, 2006, p 113) Figure 2.23 Image schema of

preposition under applied in this study

2.2.2.4 Incorporating CL into Teaching English Prepositions

Evans (2007) states that image schemas, domains and conceptual metaphor

together are responsible for learners’ understanding and use of language The

application of visuals in language teaching may not be a new idea Direct Method,

developed in the 1900s, suggests applying real-life objects and visuals in foreign

and second language teaching However, this method does not regard learners’

cognitive engagement as a pivotal factor in language learning Adult learners’ cognitive engagement is a key factor in foreign language learning as it leads to the

“development of lexical and conceptual representations” (Hemavathi, 2013, p 68) Therefore, explicit instruction on the semantic properties accompanied by image schemas is essential in EFL classroom as image schemas are considered to engage learners cognitively in language learning (Deuchar & Quay, 2000; Gass & Selinder, 2008; Kroll & Sunderman, 2008; Taylor, 2008; Wei, 2000) Hurtienne (2016) also believes that language learners use image schemas intuitively, and image schemas can also represent conceptual metaphors

Considering the teaching and learning of prepositions, image schemas may illustrate the spatial relationships However, a problem may be that people from different native language backgrounds may construe spatial configurations differently, which may make EFL learners find English prepositions difficult to learn In a study, Jarvis and Odlin (2000) discovered that Finnish-native EFL

students preferred to use the preposition on in English, but Swedish-native EFL students preferrably used the preposition in When the participants were asked to describe a man and woman sitting, Finnish-native EFL students believed that sit in

the grass was appropriate, but Swedish-native EFL students preferred to choose sit

on the grass An explanation is Finnish-native speakers construe the grass as a

space containing sitting people, but Swedish-native speakers construe the grass as a

surface instead Munnich and Landau (2010) also conducted a study to discover how Korean and Spanish EFL students coded geometric relationships mainly in

their use of English prepositions in, on, under, and over The findings showed that

these two groups made different error patterns in their productive tasks on account

of the influence of their L1 spatial construal on their spatial configurations of English expressed in their use of English prepositions Alonso et al (2016) also confirmed this perspective in their study on how Danish and Spanish people construed spatial relationships In a word, cross-linguistic influence may be responsible for incorrect choices of prepositions in a second or foreign language (Karim & Nassaji, 2013)