Chinese L2 acquisition of sense relatedness for shàng “to go up”
-
Haiyan Liang
Haiyan Liang lectures in the School of Languages and Cultures at the University of Queensland, Australia. Her research interests include applied cognitive linguistics, Chinese cultural studies, intercultural communication and translation and interpreting studies.
und
Karen Sullivan
Karen Sullivan is a Senior Lecturer in Linguistics at the University of Queensland, Australia. Her latest book,
Mixed Metaphors: Their Use and Abuse , is a fun and accessible introduction to the ways that metaphors are combined and the reasons why metaphors sometimes mix. Sullivan is also the author ofFrames and Constructions in Metaphoric Language and numerous papers on metaphor and polysemy.
Abstract
This paper examines the relations between the senses of the Chinese polysemous verb shàng “to go up”, in an effort to understand how the various senses of polysemous words are organized in the L1 and L2 lexicons and to shed light on the role they might play in L2 polysemy acquisition. To this end, we analyzed the senses of shàng at the conceptual level, then used these findings to inform an empirical study of the sense relatedness as perceived by L1 and L2 participants. A developmental pattern is identifiable across the L2 proficiency groups. Specifically, the sense relations identified by the L2 groups increasingly approximate those identified by L1 as their proficiency level grows. Both native speakers and learners base their perceptions of sense relatedness on purported conceptual metaphors as well as other factors such as transitivity, function and concreteness – though the two groups apply these concepts in different ways. These findings suggest that learners can access the same conceptual tools as native speakers, but are using these tools in a way that differs from native speakers. Conclusions support the cognitive motivations behind polysemous senses and teaching-oriented findings that overlap in L1 and L2. Conceptual universals should be helpful in L2 vocabulary acquisition.
摘要：
本文考察了汉语多义动词 “上” 的各词义之间的关系，以及汉语母语 (L1) 的人和汉语二语 (L2) 的人分别如何理解和组织这些词义，最后揭示了其在汉语 L2习得中所可能起到的作用。为此，我们首先在概念层面分析了动词 “上” 的多个词义，然后用这些分析的结果，对 L1 和 L2 参与者所感知的多个词义的关联性进行了实证研究。研究结果发现， L2 各组在意义关联性方面呈明显的发展趋势，即 L2 的汉语水平越高，其感知的 “上” 的词义关联性就越接近 L1。L1 和 L2 各组对 “上” 的词义的分组不仅基于动词的及物性、功能性和具像性，而且还很大程度上基于这些词义潜在的概念隐喻，L1 和 L2 在运用这些标准时也不尽相同。研究结论支持一词多义现象的认知动机，L1 和 L2 对多义词理解的相似之处对于二语教学有启发作用，概念普遍性应该有助于二语词汇习得。
About the authors
Haiyan Liang lectures in the School of Languages and Cultures at the University of Queensland, Australia. Her research interests include applied cognitive linguistics, Chinese cultural studies, intercultural communication and translation and interpreting studies.
Karen Sullivan is a Senior Lecturer in Linguistics at the University of Queensland, Australia. Her latest book, Mixed Metaphors: Their Use and Abuse, is a fun and accessible introduction to the ways that metaphors are combined and the reasons why metaphors sometimes mix. Sullivan is also the author of Frames and Constructions in Metaphoric Language and numerous papers on metaphor and polysemy.
A Appendix
Frequency of shàng constructions produced by L1 participants (n=92) based on Liang (2014:213)
| Rank | Item (with literal meaning of the noun) | Idiomatic translation | CL1 production frequency | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 | 1 | Shàng lóu ‘building’ | To go upstairs | 60 |
| 2 | Shàng xué ‘school’ | To go to school | 43 | |
| 3 | Shàng wǎng ‘net’ | To surf the web/get online | 42 | |
| 4 | Shàng kè ‘class’ | To start class | 32 | |
| 5 | Shàng bān ‘work’ | To go to/start to work | 30 | |
| 6 | Shàng chē ‘car’ | To get into a car | 26 | |
| 7 | Shàng cài ‘dishes’ | To serve food | 20 | |
| 8 | Shàng chuáng ‘bed’ | To get into bed | 16 | |
| 9 | Shàng chǎng ‘sports field’ | To get onto the sports field | 12 | |
 | 10 | Shàng diànshì ‘TV’ | To be on TV | 6 |
| 11 | Shàng yào ‘ointment’ | To apply ointment | 5 | |
| 12 | Shàng chénglǐ ‘town’ | To go to town | 5 | |
| 13 | Shàng jiē ‘street’ | To get onto the street/go out | 4 | |
| 14 | Shàng gǎng ‘mound’ | To get employed | 4 | |
| 15 | Shàng tái ‘stage’ | To come into power | 4 | |
| 16 | Shàng huò ‘goods’ | To restock goods | 4 | |
| 17 | Shàng niánjì ‘age’ | To grow old | 4 | |
| 18 | Shàng shì ‘market’ | To come into season/(firms) to go public | 3 | |
| 19 | Shàng mǎ ‘horse’ | To get on horseback/start (a project) | 2 | |
| 20 | Shàng guīmó ‘scale’ | To increase scale/expand | 2 | |
| Total | 324 |
References
Aitchison, Jean. 2012. Words in the mind: An introduction to the mental lexicon. Malden, Mass: John Wiley & Sons.Suche in Google Scholar
Boers, Frank. 1996. Spatial prepositions and metaphor: A cognitive semantic journey along the up-down and front-back dimensions. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Suche in Google Scholar
Boers, Frank. 2000. Metaphor awareness and vocabulary retention. Applied Linguistics 21(4). 553–571.10.1093/applin/21.4.553Suche in Google Scholar
Borg, Ingwer, Patrick J. F. Groenen & Patrick Mair. 2013. Applied multidimensional scaling. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-31848-1Suche in Google Scholar
Brugman, Claudia Marlea. 1988. The story of over: Polysemy, semantics, and the structure of the lexicon. New York: Garland.Suche in Google Scholar
Cattell, Raymond B. 1966. The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research 1(2). 245–276.10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10Suche in Google Scholar
Cienki, Alan. 1989. Spatial cognition and the semantics of prepositions in English, Polish, and Russian. Munich: Verlag Otto Sagner.10.3726/b12805Suche in Google Scholar
Clancy, Steven J. 2006. The topology of Slavic case: Semantic maps and multidimensional scaling. Glossos 7. 1–28.Suche in Google Scholar
Croft, William & Keith T. Poole. 2008. Inferring universals from grammatical variation: Multidimensional scaling for typological analysis. Theoretical Linguistics 34(1). 1–37.10.1515/THLI.2008.001Suche in Google Scholar
Crossley, Scott A., Tom Salsbury & Danielle S. McNamara. 2010. The development of polysemy and frequency use in English second language speakers. Language Learning 60(3). 573–605.10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00568.xSuche in Google Scholar
Ellis, Nick C. 2008. Phraseology: The periphery and the heart of language. In F. Meunier & S. Granger (eds.), Phraseology in Foreign language learning and teaching, 1–18. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/z.138.02ellSuche in Google Scholar
Field, Andy. 2009. Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: Sage Publications.Suche in Google Scholar
Gass, Susan M. & Larry Selinker. 2008. Second language acquisition: An introductory course. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203932841Suche in Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W., Dinara A. Beitel, Michael Harrington & Paul E. Sanders. 1994. Taking a stand on the meanings of stand: Bodily experience as motivation for polysemy. Journal of Semantics 11(4). 231–251.10.1093/jos/11.4.231Suche in Google Scholar
Haastrup, Kirsten & Birgit Henriksen. 2000. Vocabulary acquisition: Acquiring depth of knowledge through network building. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 10(2). 221–240.10.1111/j.1473-4192.2000.tb00149.xSuche in Google Scholar
Kline, Paul. 2013. Handbook of psychological testing. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315812274Suche in Google Scholar
Jarvis, Scott. 2000a. Methodological rigor in the study of transfer: Identifying L1 influence in them interlanguage lexicon. Language Learning 50(2). 245–309.10.1111/0023-8333.00118Suche in Google Scholar
Jarvis, Scott. 2000b. Semantic and conceptual transfer. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 3(1). 19–21.10.1017/S1366728900260112Suche in Google Scholar
Jarvis, Scott & Michael Daller. 2013. Vocabulary Knowledge: Human Ratings and Automated Measures. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/sibil.47Suche in Google Scholar
Jarvis, Scott & Aneta Pavlenko. 2007. Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203935927Suche in Google Scholar
Kellerman, Eric. 1978. Giving learners a break: Native language intuitions as a source of predicions about transferability. Working Papers on Bilingualism 15. 59–92.Suche in Google Scholar
Kellerman, Eric. 1979. Transfer and non-transfer: Where we are now. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2(1). 37–57.10.1017/S0272263100000942Suche in Google Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltan. 1986. Metaphors of anger, pride, and love: A lexical approach to the structure of concepts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pb.vii.8Suche in Google Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltan. 2005. Metaphor in culture: Universality and variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511614408Suche in Google Scholar
Lakoff, Goeff & Mark Johnson. 1980a. Conceptual metaphor in everyday language. The Journal of Philosophy 77(8). 453–486.10.2307/2025464Suche in Google Scholar
Lakoff, Goeff & Mark Johnson. 1980b. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226470993.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Lan, Chun. 1999. A cognitive approach to spatial metaphors in English and Chinese. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong.Suche in Google Scholar
Lan, Chun. 2002. A cognitive approach to UP/DOWN metaphors in English and Shang/Xia metaphors in Chinese. In B. Altenberg (ed.), Lexis in contrast: Corpus-based approaches, 151–174. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.7.11chuSuche in Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 2006. Parts of the body in Yélî Dnye, the Papuan language of Rossel Island. Language Sciences 28(2). 221–240.10.1016/j.langsci.2005.11.007Suche in Google Scholar
Li, Thomas Fuyin. 2003. The acquisition of metaphorical expressions, idioms, and proverbs by Chinese learners of English: A conceptual metaphor and image schema based approach. Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA) database.Suche in Google Scholar
Liang, Haiyan. 2014. Factors accounting for acquisition of polysemous shàng “to go up”-phrases in Chinese as a second language (CSL). Chinese as a Second Language Research 3(2). 201–225.10.1515/caslar-2014-0011Suche in Google Scholar
Liang, Haiyan. 2015. Conceptualization of up and down in Chinese and English. In L. Ko & P. Chen (eds.), Translation and Cross-cultural communication studies in the Asia Pacific, 469–484. Amsterdam: Ropodi.10.1163/9789004299245_029Suche in Google Scholar
Lindstromberg, Seth. 2010. English prepositions explained. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/z.157Suche in Google Scholar
Link, Perry. 2013. An anatomy of Chinese: Rhythm, Metaphor, Politics. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.10.4159/harvard.9780674067684Suche in Google Scholar
Liu, Dilin. 2002. Metaphor, culture, and worldview: The case of American English and the Chinese Language. New York: University Press of America.Suche in Google Scholar
Majid, Asifa, Melissa Bowerman, Miriam Van Staden & James S. Boster. 2007. The semantic categories of cutting and breaking events: A crosslinguistic perspective. Cognitive Linguistics 18(2). 133–152.10.1515/COG.2007.005Suche in Google Scholar
Miller, George A. 1969. A psychological method to investigate verbal concepts. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 6(2). 169–191.10.1016/0022-2496(69)90001-7Suche in Google Scholar
Norvig, Peter & Geoff Lakoff. 2011. Taking: A study in lexical network theory. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society.10.3765/bls.v13i0.1820Suche in Google Scholar
Odlin, Terence. 2003. Cross-linguistic influence. In C. J. Doughty and M. H. Long (eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition, 436–485. Malden, MA: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470756492.ch15Suche in Google Scholar
Odlin, Terence. 2005. Crosslinguistic influence and conceptual transfer: What are the concepts? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 25. 3–25.10.1017/S0267190505000012Suche in Google Scholar
Odlin, Terence. 2008. Conceptual transfer and meaning extensions. In P. Robinson & N. C. Ellis (eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition, 306–340. London: Routledge.Suche in Google Scholar
Pavlenko, Aneta & Scott Jarvis. 2001. Conceptual transfer: New perspectives on the study of crosslinguistic influence. Paper presented at the Cognition in language use: Selected papers from the 7th International Pragmatics Conference.Suche in Google Scholar
Raukko, Jarno. 2003. Polysemy as flexible meaning: Experiments with English get and Finnish pitdd. In B. Nerlich, Z. Todd, V. Herman & D. D. Clark (eds.), Polysemy: Flexible patterns of meaning in mind and language, 161–193. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Suche in Google Scholar
Sandra, Dominiek & Sally Rice. 1995. Network analyses of prepositional meaning: Mirroring whose mind – The linguist’s or the language user’s? Cognitive Linguistics 6(1). 89–130.10.1515/cogl.1995.6.1.89Suche in Google Scholar
Schmitt, Norbert. 1998. Tracking the incremental acquisition of second language vocabulary: A longitudinal study. Language Learning 48(2). 281–317.10.1111/1467-9922.00042Suche in Google Scholar
Scott, Amanda. 1989. The vertical dimension and time in Mandarin. Australian Journal of Linguistics 9(2). 295–314.10.1080/07268608908599424Suche in Google Scholar
Shirai, Yasuhiro. 1990. Putting PUT to use: Prototype and metaphorical extension. Issues in Applied Linguistics 1(1). 78–97.10.5070/L411004987Suche in Google Scholar
StatSoft, I. 2013. Electronic statistics textbook. Retrieved from http://www.statsoft.com/textbook/Suche in Google Scholar
Sullivan, Karen. 2014. Visibility and economy as dimensions of metaphoric language. Language and Literature 23(4). 1–21.10.1177/0963947014543608Suche in Google Scholar
Taylor, John R. 2003. Polysemy’s paradoxes. Language Sciences 25(6). 637–655.10.1016/S0388-0001(03)00031-7Suche in Google Scholar
Tyler, Andrea & Vyvyan Evans. 2003. The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning and cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486517Suche in Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Richard B. Dasher. 2002. Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486500Suche in Google Scholar
Wolter, Brent. 2006. Lexical network structures and L2 vocabulary acquisition: The role of L1 lexical/conceptual knowledge. Applied Linguistics 27(4). 741–747.10.1093/applin/aml036Suche in Google Scholar
Yu, Ning. 1995. Metaphorical expressions of anger and happiness in English and Chinese. Metaphor and Symbol 10(2). 59–92.10.1207/s15327868ms1002_1Suche in Google Scholar
Yu, Ning. 1998. The contemporary theory of metaphor: A perspective from Chinese, vol. 1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/hcp.1Suche in Google Scholar
Zhang, Yuan. 2013. Spatial representation of topological concepts IN and ON: A comparative study of English and Mandarin Chinese. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Concordia University, Montréal.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Papers in English
- Chinese L2 acquisition of sense relatedness for shàng “to go up”
- Dialectics versus polemics in Chinese rhetoric: A study of indirection in Chinese and Chinese ESL argumentative writing as compared with English argumentative writing
- Perceptual cue weighting in L1 and L2 Chinese: An investigation of aspiration and frication in Chinese obstruents by Danish learners
- Papers in Chinese
- 国际汉语教材中的中国人物性别角色
- 汉语作为外语写作焦虑的质性研究
- 人文社會科學語料庫與學術搭配詞檢索系統之建置與專業華語教學
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Papers in English
- Chinese L2 acquisition of sense relatedness for shàng “to go up”
- Dialectics versus polemics in Chinese rhetoric: A study of indirection in Chinese and Chinese ESL argumentative writing as compared with English argumentative writing
- Perceptual cue weighting in L1 and L2 Chinese: An investigation of aspiration and frication in Chinese obstruents by Danish learners
- Papers in Chinese
- 国际汉语教材中的中国人物性别角色
- 汉语作为外语写作焦虑的质性研究
- 人文社會科學語料庫與學術搭配詞檢索系統之建置與專業華語教學
