Résumés
Abstract
This study examines how adult second language learners acquire the different meanings of the Spanish preposition a. Cognitive linguistic models predict that spatial meanings are acquired first, as they are conceptually basic and are the source from which other meanings derive via natural cognitive mechanisms such as metaphor and image-schema transformation (Tyler & Evans, 2003). However, there has been little empirical evidence to support this hypothesis. Results from an oral story-telling task conducted with beginner (N = 10), intermediate (N = 10), and advanced (N = 4) learners suggest that the acquisition of prepositional meanings is not driven solely by cognitive mechanisms, but rather that other non-conceptual factors, such as collocational patterns, cross-linguistic transfer, frequency, and saliency, also play a prominent role. These findings imply that learners approach the multiple varied meanings of a preposition by relying on several different mechanisms simultaneously.
Résumé
Cette étude examine la manière dont les apprenants adultes de langue seconde acquièrent les différentes acceptions de la préposition a en espagnol. Les modèles de la linguistique cognitive prédisent que les acceptions spatiales sont acquises avant les autres puisqu’elles sont conceptuellement basiques et sont la source dont les autres acceptions dérivent au moyen des mécanismes cognitifs naturels tels que la métaphore et la transformation de l’image-schéma (Tyler et Evans, 2003). Cependant, il y a eu peu de preuves empiriques pour soutenir cette hypothèse. Les résultats provenant d’une tâche orale où des apprenants de niveau débutant (N = 10), intermédiaire (N = 10) et avancé (N = 4) racontent une histoire à partir d’images suggèrent que l’acquisition des acceptions prépositionnelles ne dépend pas seulement des mécanismes cognitifs, mais aussi d’autres facteurs non conceptuels, comme les patrons collocationnels, le transfert translinguistique, la fréquence et la saillance, qui jouent également un rôle important. Ces résultats impliquent que les apprenants abordent le problème des multiples acceptions variées d’une préposition en utilisant plusieurs mécanismes différents en même temps.
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- Alexopoulou, A. (2006). Análisis de la evolución interlingüística y jerarquía de las dificultades en la interlengua escrita de aprendientes de español de origen griego. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 19, 9-28.
- Azevedo, M. (1980). The interlanguage of advanced learners: An error analysis of graduate students’ Spanish. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 18(3), 217-227.
- Boers, F., & Demecheleer, M. (1998). A cognitive semantic approach to teaching prepositions. ELT Journal, 52, 197-204.
- Bybee, J. (2008). Usage-based grammar and second language acquisition. In P. Robinson & N. C. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 216-236). New York, NY: Routledge.
- Cho, K. (2010). Fostering the acquisition of English prepositions by Japanese learners with networks and prototypes. In S. De Knop, F. Boers, & A. De Rycker (Eds.), Fostering language teaching efficiency through cognitive linguistics (pp. 259-275). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
- Davies, M. (2002). Corpus del Español: 100 million words, 1200s-1900s. Retrieved from http://www.corpusdelespanol.org
- Durrant, P., & Schmitt, N. (2010). Adult learners’ retention of collocations from exposure. Second Language Research, 7, 163-188.
- Ellis, N. C., & Cadierno, T. (2009). Constructing a second language: Introduction to the special section. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7, 111-139.
- Falk, Y., & Bardel, C. (2010). The study of the role of the background languages in third language acquisition: The state of the art. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 48(2-3), 185-219.
- González-Alvarez, E., & Doval-Suárez, S. M. (2008). Testing the cognitive categorizations of at in native and non-native English speakers: Evidence from a corpus study. The Linguistics Journal, 3(1), 100-135.
- Guntermann, G. (1992). An analysis of interlanguage development over time: Part 1, por and para. Hispania, 75(1), 177-187.
- Hallan, N. (2001). Paths to prepositions? A corpus-based study of the acquisition of a lexico-grammatical category. In J. Bybee & P. Hopper (Eds.), Frequency and emergence of linguistic structure (pp. 91-120). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
- Haspelmath, M. (1997). From space to time: Temporal adverbials in the world’s languages. Munich, Germany: Lincom Europa.
- Henning, G. (1978). A developmental analysis of errors of adult Iranian students of English as a foreign language. Language Learning, 28(2), 387-397.
- Huerta, B. L. (2009). The semantics of the Spanish prepositions en, a, and de: A cognitive approach (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY.
- Ijaz, I. H. (1986). Linguistic and cognitive determinants of lexical acquisition in a second language. Language Learning, 36(4), 401-451.
- Jarvis, S. (2000). Methodological rigor in the study of transfer: Identifying L1 influence in the interlanguage lexicon. Language Learning, 50(2), 245-309.
- Jarvis, S., & Odlin, T. (2000). Morphological type, spatial reference, and language transfer. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 535-556.
- Jiménez Catalán, R. M. (1996). Frequency and variability in errors in the use of English prepositions. Miscelánea: A Journal of English and American Studies, 17, 171-187.
- Lafford, B., & Ryan, J. (1995). The acquisition of lexical meaning in a study abroad context: The Spanish prepositions por and para. Hispania, 78(3), 528-547.
- Lam, Y. (2009). Applying cognitive linguistics to teaching the Spanish prepositions por and para. Language Awareness, 18(1), 2-18.
- Lam, Y. (2010). Yes/no tests for foreign language placement at the post-secondary level. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(2), 54-72.
- Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2004). Input versus transfer?—The role of frequency and similarity in the acquisition of L2 prepositions. In M. Achard & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching (pp. 77-94). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
- Matula, S. (2007). Incorporating a cognitive linguistic presentation of the prepositions on, in, and at in ESL instruction: A quasi-experimental study (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Georgetown University, Washington, D.C.
- Morimoto, S., & Loewen, S. (2007). A comparison of the effects of image-schema-based instruction and translation-based instruction on the acquisition of L2 polysemous words. Language Teaching Research, 11(3), 347-372.
- Navarro i Ferrando, I., & Tricker, D. (2000/2001). A comparison of the use of at, in, and on by EFL students and native speakers. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 14, 295-324.
- Pinto, D., & Rex, S. (2006). The acquisition of the Spanish prepositions por and para in a classroom setting. Hispania, 89(3), 611-622.
- Rice, S. (1996). Prepositional prototypes. In M. Pütz & R. Dirven (Eds.), The construal of space in language and thought (pp. 135-165). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
- Rice, S. (1999). Patterns of acquisition in the emerging mental lexicon: The case of to and for in English. Brain and Language, 68, 268-276.
- Rice, S. (2003). Growth of a lexical network: Nine English prepositions in acquisition. In H. Cuyckens, R. Dirven, & J. Taylor (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics (pp. 243-280). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
- Sandra, D., & Rice, S. (1995). Network analyses of prepositional meaning: Mirroring whose mind—the linguist’s or the language user’s? Cognitive Linguistics, 6(1), 89-130.
- Taylor, J. (1988). Contrasting prepositional categories: English and Italian. In B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.), Topics in cognitive linguistics (pp. 299-326). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
- Tyler, A. (2012). Cognitive linguistics and second language learning: Theoretical basics and experimental evidence. New York, NY: Routledge.
- Tyler, A., & Evans, V. (2003). The semantics of English prepositions. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
- Tyler, A., Mueller, C., & Ho, V. (2011). Applying cognitive linguistics to learning the semantics of English to, for and at: An experimental investigation. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(1), 181-205.