Frequency and Variability of Figurative Uses of Motion Verbs in Readers for Pre-Intermediate EFL Learners

初階英語讀本之移動動詞譬喻用法分析

10.6481/JTR.201804_11(1).03

謝君青(Chun-Ching Hsieh)

conceptual metaphor ； conceptual metonymy ； graded readers ； 概念暗喻 ； 概念轉喻 ； 分級讀本

教科書研究

11卷1期（2018 / 04 / 15）

69 - 99

英文

Graded readers have been introduced in English classes to increase exposure to authentic reading texts based on learners’ current competencies, with the aim of enhancing foreign or second language (FL/SL) acquisition. Figurative uses of vocabulary, such as metaphor and metonymy, are common in both everyday language and the graded readers that expose learners to authentic target language. However, studies on figurative language in readers have been rare, and more research is necessary. This study examined figurative uses of motion verbs in five graded readers for pre-intermediate EFL learners at a university in Southern Taiwan in terms of frequency, variability, and other characteristics. Conceptual metaphor and conceptual metonymy were the two types of data collected from the readers. The results showed quantitatively that metaphoric uses of motion verbs occur in readers with greater frequency and variability than metonymic uses. In addition, the more advanced the reader, the more frequent and variable are the metaphors. Manner-of-motion verbs appear to be more frequent in metaphoric uses, whereas path-of-motion verbs predominate in metonymic uses. A qualitative analysis centering on the seven themes of metaphor and physiological metonymy detailed in this study could provide instructors with improved pedagogical resources for use in an FL/SL context.

在英語為第二種或外國語言的英語課程，普遍搭配分級讀本增進語言學習成效。單字的譬喻用法使用頻繁，讀本的內容亦是如此。但是讀本內容之譬喻用法的相關研究甚少，因此為落實語言學習及教學之成效，非常需要這方面的研究。本研究檢視台灣南部一所大學給初階英語程度學生的五本指定讀本之譬喻用法的頻繁性、多元化及特性，依據概念隱喻及概念轉喻蒐集，移動動詞在暗喻及轉喻的運用是本研究的分析重點。量化研究結果顯示在頻繁性及多元性層面，隱喻較轉喻更能代表讀本的程度不同，而且行為動詞在隱喻用法的頻率較方向動詞高，在轉喻的用法卻是運用較多的方向動詞。質性研究則分析讀本包含與移動動詞相關的七類隱喻及生理現象的轉喻用法，作為英語教師提升學習者譬喻能力的教學資源。

1. Shie, J.-S.(2003).Metaphorized motion in English.Taiwan Journal of Linguistics,1(2),95-120.
   連結：
2. Boers, F.(2004).Expanding learners' vocabulary through metaphor awareness: What expansion, what learners, what vocabulary?.Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching,Berlin, Germany:
3. Csábi, S.(2004).A cognitive linguistic view of polysemy in English and its implications for teaching.Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching,Berlin, Germany:
4. Dirven, R.(Ed.),Pörings, R.(Ed.)(2002).Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast.Berlin, Germany:Mouton de Gruyter.
5. Evans, V.(2007).The cognitive linguistics reader.London, UK:Equinoz.
6. Evans, V.(Ed.),Bergen, B. K.(Ed.),Zinken, J.(Ed.)(2007).The cognitive linguistics reader.London, UK:Equinoz.
7. Hatch, E.,Brown, C.(1995).Vocabulary, semantics and language education.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
8. Hsieh, C.-C.(2013).New Taipei, Taiwan,Tamkang University.
9. Hsieh, C.-C.,Hsu, H.-F.(2011).Discrete and complete inputs on phrasal verbs learning.Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the British Association for Applied Linguistics,UK:
10. Hsieh, L. C.-C.(2006).Learning prepositions as part of fixed phrases and collocations: The case of "On" in the EFL classroom.5th Pacific Second Language Research Forum,Brisbane, Australia:
11. Hu, Y.,Kang, Y. C.(2008).Bring and take: That's the question in teaching deictic shift in FL classrooms.2008 Second Language Forum
12. Lakoff, G.(1987).Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind.Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.
13. Lakoff, G.,Johnson, M.(2003).Metaphors we live by.Chicago, IL:University of Chicago.
14. MacKay, D. G.(1986).Prototypicality among metaphors: On the relative frequency of personification and spatial metaphors in literature written for children versus adults.Metaphor and Symbolic Activity,1(2),87-107.
15. Matlock, T.(2006).Depicting fictive motion in drawings.Cognitive linguistics investigation: Across languages, fields, and philosophical boundaries,Amsterdam, the Netherland:
16. Miller, G. A.,Johnson-Laird, P. N.(1976).Language and perception.Cambridge, MA:Belknap Press.
17. Niemeier, S.(2004).Linguistic and cultural relativity: Reconsidered for the foreign language classroom.Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching,Berlin, Germany:
18. Radden, G.(Ed.),Panther, K.-U.(Ed.)(2004).Studies in linguistic motivations.Berlin, Germany:Mouton de Gruyter.
19. Richards, J. C.(Ed.),Renandya, W. A.(Ed.)(2002).Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
20. Robinson, P.(Ed.)(2001).Cognition and second language instruction.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
21. Rojo, A.,Valenzuela, J.(2003).Fictive motion in English and Spanish.International Journal of English Studies,3(2),125-151.
22. Schmidt, N.(2000).Vocabulary in language teaching.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
23. Shibatani, M.(Ed.),Thompson, S. A.(Ed.)(1996).Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning.Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.
24. Slobin D. I.(1997).The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
25. Slobin, D. I.(2000).Verbalized events: A dynamic approach to linguistic relativity and determinism.Evidence for linguistic relativity,Amsterdam, the Netherlands:
26. Slobin, D. I.(2006).What makes manner of motion salient? Explorations in linguistic typology, discourse, and cognition.Space in languages: Linguistics system and cognitive categories,Amsterdam, the Netherlands:
27. Sweetser, E.(1990).From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantics structure.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
28. Talmy, L.(2000).Toward a cognitive semantics.Cambridge, MA:Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
29. Talmy, L.(2000).Toward a cognitive semantics.Cambridge, MA:Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
30. Ungerer, F.,Schmidt, H.-J.(2006).An introduction to cognitive linguistics.Harlow, UK:Pearson.