 |
[email protected] |
 |
3275638434 |
 |
 |
| Paper Publishing WeChat |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
A Study of L2 Learner’s Knowledge of Metonymic Sense of “Hand”
MA Yiting, GAO Wencheng
Full-Text PDF
XML 675 Views
DOI:10.17265/1539-8072/2020.09.001
University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai, China
Based on a learner corpus Chinese Learner English Corpus (CLEC) and a native speaker corpus Freiburg Brown Corpus of American English (FROWN), this research investigates the differences between Chinese learners of English and English native speakers in their knowledge of the metonymic senses of human body word “hand”. Two research questions are raised: (1) What are the features that distinguish Chinese English learners from English native speakers? (2) What are the rules in learners’ learning of English metonymic senses? In order to answer these two questions, this paper has investigated the frequencies of the identified senses in two corpora of FROWN and CLEC, and the sequence of learning metonymic senses. The results show that Chinese learner’s knowledge of metonymic senses of “hand” is restricted to fixed phrases, especially verb phrases. It is also found that in the process of English learning, learners do have some preferences for basic sense, and then they learn peripheral senses by reciting some fixed phrases.
metonymic sense of “hand”, FROWN, CLEC, type of sense, sequence
Boers, F. (2000). Metaphor awareness and vocabulary retention. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), 553-571.
Chen, L. (2017). The frontiers of metaphorical competence in second language vocabulary teaching. Foreign Language Research, (2), 105-109.
Cheng, H. F., & Li, Y. Y. (2016). CL-based empirical studies of semantic acquisition of polysemous words: The case of over. Journal of Beijing International Studies University, (2), 42-58, 134.
Csábi, S. (2004). A cognitive linguistic view of polysemy in English and its implication for teaching. In Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching (pp. 233-256). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Elston, G. K., & Williams, J. (2008). First language polysemy affects second language meaning interpretation: Evidence for activation of first language concepts during second language reading. Second Language Research, 24(2), 167-187.
Huang, B. R. (2013). On metaphorical properties of acceptation of body terms and its projection braking. Foreign Language Research, (6), 39-42.
Kondaiah, K. (2004). Metaphorical systems and their implications to teaching English as a foreign language. Asian EFL Journal, 6(1), Art. 3.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). The metaphorical structure of the human conceptual system. Cognitive Science, 4(2), 195-208.
Langacker, R. W. (2000). Grammar and conceptualization. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Marika, K., & Slava, K. (2008). Metaphor awareness in teaching vocabulary. Language Learning Journal, 36(2), 249-257.
Miao, L. X. (2015). The semantic production and development of Chinese learners’ polysemous words: A corpus-based study. Modern Foreign Languages, (2), 217-226.
Mu, Z. (1986). A comparison of English and Chinese polysemy. Journal of Foreign Languages, (6), 21-26.
Panther, K., & Radden, G. (1999). Metonymy in language and thought. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Scott, C., Tom, S., & Danielle, M. (2010). The development of polysemy and frequency use in English second language speakers. Language Learning, 60(3), 573-605.
Shi, J. F., & Tang, B. (2018). On L2 learners’ knowledge of metaphorical sense: A corpus-based study of human-body terms. Journal of Xi’an International Studies University, 26(3), 18-23, 128.
Taylor, J. R. (1989). Linguistic categorization: Prototypes in linguistic theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wang, D. C. (1980). On the semantic system of English polysemy. Journal of Foreign Languages, (6), 47-52.
Wang, W. B. (2015). An investigation into the cognitive cause of polysemousness from the perspective of the reversibility of figure and ground: Taking the Chinese verb “chi” and the English verb “make” for instance. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, (5), 36-41.
Wang, Y. (2007). Cognitive linguistics. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Wu, Q. G. (1979). Word meaning processing in English vocabulary teaching. Modern Foreign Languages, (3), 1-10.
Wu, X., & Wang, Q. (1998). Vocabulary learning strategies for non-English major undergraduate students. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, (5), 55-59.
Xue, Y. H., & Yang, Z. (2014). A contrastive study of English and Chinese non-basic color terms from the perspective of cognitive semantics. Journal of Foreign Languages, 37(1), 36-42.
Zhang, S. Q. (2012). A cognitive linguistic approach towards Chinese college students’ acquisition of English synaesthetic polysemous words. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, (2), 9-12, 65.