Applying Cognitive Linguistics to Pedagogical Grammar: The Case of Over

Language learning is one of the most complicated feats that human beings accomplish. Any number of very real reasons exist as to why L2 learning presents tremendous challenges. However, instructed L2 learning has been further complicated by the fact that important elements of systematicity that exist in language have not been appropriately captured by the pedagogical grammars which underlie modern foreign language teaching textbooks and materials. For instance, lexical classes, such as English prepositions, are represented in the grammars (and the textbooks based on them) in piecemeal fashion. When students (and their teachers) encounter varying uses of these forms, the systematic relations between the multiple uses remain unexplained. For example, traditional analyses have not offered any explanations for why the four different meanings found in the sentences in (1a-d) are all associated with the form over:

[1]  J. Grady Foundations of meaning : primary metaphors and primary scenes , 1997 .

[2]  J. Mandler How to build a baby: On the development of an accessible representational system☆ , 1988 .

[3]  J. Mandler How to build a baby: II. Conceptual primitives. , 1992, Psychological review.

[4]  T. Odlin Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind , 1988 .

[5]  Georgia M. Green Pragmatics and Natural Language Understanding , 1989 .

[6]  Susan Jean Lindner A lexico-semantic analysis of English verb particle constructions with out and up , 1981 .

[7]  Claudia Brugman The Story of over : polysemy, semantics, and the structure of the lexicon , 1988 .

[8]  D. Larsen-Freeman,et al.  The Grammar Book: An ESL/EFL Teacher's Course , 1983 .

[9]  Anatol C. Kreitzer,et al.  Multiple levels of schematization: A study in the conceptualization of space , 1997 .

[10]  Siobhan Chapman Logic and Conversation , 2005 .

[11]  Leonard Talmy,et al.  Force Dynamics in Language and Cognition , 1987, Cogn. Sci..

[12]  Robert B. Dewell,et al.  Over again: Image-schema transformations in semantic analysis , 1994 .

[13]  Leonard Talmy,et al.  Figure and Ground in Complex Sentences , 1975 .

[14]  李幼升,et al.  Ph , 1989 .

[15]  G. Lakoff,et al.  Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind , 1988 .

[16]  E. Traugott On the Rise of Epistemic Meanings in English: An Example of Subjectification in Semantic Change , 1989 .

[17]  D. Sandra,et al.  Network analyses of prepositional meaning: Mirroring whose mind—the linguist’s or the language user’s? , 1995 .

[18]  R. Langacker Foundations of cognitive grammar , 1983 .

[19]  Marcella Frank,et al.  Modern English;: A practical reference guide , 1972 .

[20]  J. Grady,et al.  A typology of motivation for conceptual metaphor: correlation vs. resemblance , 1999 .

[21]  S. Kosslyn Image and mind , 1982 .

[22]  E. Rosch Cognitive Representations of Semantic Categories. , 1975 .