Volume 9, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2213-8722
  • E-ISSN: 2213-8730
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



While increasing efforts have been made to teach English prepositions to EFL learners from a Cognitive Linguistics (CL) perspective, the bulk of the extant research has focused on adult learners at the advanced English proficiency level and reported only quantitative results. Limited attention has been paid to elementary learners, and there has been little qualitative evidence of the pedagogical effectiveness of CL-informed approaches. This study aims to address these issues with a quasi-experiment embedded in an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design. Twenty-two young Chinese learners received two types of instruction, respectively, to learn locative prepositions and . A conceptual metaphor that originates in CL was exploited as the intervention for the experimental group, whereas a data-driven approach was adopted for the control group. Quantitative data collected from the participants through a set of tests and qualitative data collected from the instructor with a semi-structured interview generally supported the effectiveness and, to a lesser extent, the efficiency of the CL-informed approach. The paper concludes with a discussion of the pedagogical implications derived from the empirical results.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Akbari, R., & Allvar, N. K.
    (2010) L2 teacher characteristics as predictors of students’ academic achievement. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 13(4), n4.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ang, L., & Tan, K. H.
    (2016) Preposition-related collocation use among British and Malaysian learners: A corpus analysis. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 24, 145–156.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Barnett, S. M., & Ceci, S. J.
    (2002) When and where do we apply what we learn?: A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 612–637. 10.1037/0033‑2909.128.4.612
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.612 [Google Scholar]
  4. Boulton, A.
    (2010) Data-driven learning: Taking the computer out of the equation. Language Learning, 60(3), 534–572. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2010.00566.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00566.x [Google Scholar]
  5. Boulton, A., & Cobb, T.
    (2017) Corpus use in language teaching: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 67(2), 348–393. 10.1111/lang.12224
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12224 [Google Scholar]
  6. Brown, H. D.
    (2000) Principles of language learning and teaching. San Francisco State University: Person Education Limited.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Chen, X., & Xu, Y.
    (2009) 意象图式理论对多义介词 On, Over, Above 习得作用的实证研究 [An empirical study on the effectiveness of Theory of Image Schema on learning English prepositions on, over, and above]. 外语与外语教学 [Foreign Languages and Second Language Teaching], 9, 18–23.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Darus, S., & Ching, K. H.
    (2009) Common errors in written English essays of form one Chinese students: A case study. European Journal of Social Sciences, 10(2), 242–253.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Falck, M. J.
    (2018) Embodied experience and the teaching and learning of L2 prepositions: A case study of abstract in and on. InA. Tyler, L. Huang, & H. Jan (Eds.), What is applied cognitive linguistics?: Answers from current SLA research (pp.287–304). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110572186‑011
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110572186-011 [Google Scholar]
  10. Gu, P. Y., Hu, G., & Zhang, L. J.
    (2005) Investigating language learner strategies among lower primary school pupils in Singapore. Language and Education, 19(4), 281–303. 10.1080/09500780508668682
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09500780508668682 [Google Scholar]
  11. Hemchua, S., & Schmitt, N.
    (2006) An analysis of lexical errors in the English compositions of Thai learners. Prospect, 21(3), 3–25.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Hung, B. P.
    (2017) Vietnamese students learning the semantics of English prepositions. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies, 17(4), 14–27. 10.17576/gema‑2017‑1704‑10
    https://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2017-1704-10 [Google Scholar]
  13. Hung, B. P., Truong, V., & Nguyen, N. V.
    (2018) Students’ responses to CL-based teaching of English prepositions. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 73, 41–58. 10.14689/ejer.2018.73.3
    https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2018.73.3 [Google Scholar]
  14. Hung, B. P., Truong, V., & Vu, N. N.
    (2018) Applying cognitive linguistics to teaching English prepositions: A quasi-experimental study. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 327–346. 10.12973/iji.2018.11323a
    https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11323a [Google Scholar]
  15. Jafari, S. S.
    (2014) A cross-linguistic study of English and Persian prepositions. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 5(3), 689–697. 10.4304/jltr.5.3.689‑697
    https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.5.3.689-697 [Google Scholar]
  16. Koosha, M., & Jafarpour, A. A.
    (2006) Data-driven learning and teaching collocation of prepositions: The case of Iranian EFL adult learners. Asian EFL journal, 8(4), 192–209.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Lakoff, G.
    (1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  18. Lindstromberg, S.
    (1998) English prepositions explained. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. 10.1075/z.88
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.88 [Google Scholar]
  19. Mahmoodzadeh, M.
    (2012) A cross-linguistic study of prepositions in Persian and English: The effect of transfer. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 2(4), 734–740. 10.4304/tpls.2.4.734‑740
    https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.4.734-740 [Google Scholar]
  20. Odlin, T.
    (2012) Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition. InC. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp.436–486). Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Pan, X.
    (2019) The effectiveness of the Conceptual Metaphor Approach to English idiom acquisition by young Chinese learners. Metaphor and the Social World, 9(1), 59–82. 10.1075/msw.17024.pan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.17024.pan [Google Scholar]
  22. Schnotz, W.
    (2005) An integrated model of text and picture comprehension. InR. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (Vol.49–69, pp.69). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511816819.005
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816819.005 [Google Scholar]
  23. Stipek, D. J.
    (1998) Motivation to learn: From theory to practice (3rd ed.). Allyn & Bacon: Boston.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Sun, X., & Hu, G.
    (2020) Direct and indirect data-driven learning: An experimental study of hedging in an EFL writing class. Language Teaching Research, 00(0), 1–29. 10.1177/1362168820954459
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820954459 [Google Scholar]
  25. Tyler, A.
    (2012) Cognitive linguistics and second language learning. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203876039
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203876039 [Google Scholar]
  26. Tyler, A., & Evans, V.
    (2003) The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning, and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486517
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486517 [Google Scholar]
  27. 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, 181–206.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Wardhaugh, R.
    (1970) The contrastive analysis hypothesis. TESOL quarterly, 4, 123–130. 10.2307/3586182
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3586182 [Google Scholar]
  29. Wijaya, D., & Ong, G.
    (2018) Applying cognitive linguistics to teaching English prepositions in the EFL classroom. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(1), 1–10. 10.17509/ijal.v8i1.11456
    https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v8i1.11456 [Google Scholar]
  30. Yu, X.
    (2014) An analysis of prepositional error correction in TEM8 and its implications for FL learning. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 4(3), 624–630. 10.4304/tpls.4.3.624‑630
    https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.4.3.624-630 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error