Enhancing English spatial prepositions acquisition among Spanish learners of English as L2 through an embodied approach

References

Alonso, Rosa. 2002. The role of transfer in second language acquisition. Vigo, Spain: University of Vigo Press.Search in Google Scholar

Alonso, Rosa, Teresa Cadierno & Scott Jarvis. 2016. Crosslinguistic influence in the acquisition of spatial prepositions in English as a foreign language. In María Rosa Alonso (ed.), Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition, 93–120. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781783094837-008Search in Google Scholar

Arnett, Carlee & Ferran Suñer. 2019. Leveraging cognitive linguistic approaches to grammar teaching with multimedia animations. Journal of Cognitive Science 20(3). 365–399. https://doi.org/10.17791/jcs.2019.20.3.365.Search in Google Scholar

Barsalou, Lawrence W. 2008. Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology 59. 617–645. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639.Search in Google Scholar

Bennett, David C. 1975. Spatial and temporal uses of English prepositions: An essay in stratificational semantics. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Boroditsky, Lera & Michael Ramscar. 2002. The roles of body and mind in abstract thought. Psychological Science 13(2). 185–189. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00434.Search in Google Scholar

Bowerman, Melissa & Soonja Choi. 2001. Shaping meanings for language: Universal and language-specific in the acquisition of spatial semantic categories. Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development 3. 475–511. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511620669.018.Search in Google Scholar

Chown, Eric. 2013. Spatial prototypes. In Thora Tenbrink, Jan Wiener & Christophe Claramunt (eds.), Representing space in cognition: Interrelations of behaviour, language, and formal models, 87–114. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679911.003.0006Search in Google Scholar

Cienki, Alan J. 1989. Spatial cognition and the semantics of prepositions in English, Polish and Russian, 172. Bern: Peter Lang International Academic Publishers.10.3726/b12805Search in Google Scholar

Cohen, Jacob. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar

Coventry, Kenny R. & Simon C. Garrod. 2004. Saying, seeing and acting: The psychological semantics of spatial prepositions. London: Psychology Press.10.4324/9780203641521Search in Google Scholar

Coventry, Kenny R. & Simon C. Garrod. 2005. Towards a classification of extra-geometric influences on the comprehension of spatial prepositions. In Laura Carlson & Emile van der Zee (eds.), Functional features in language and space. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199264339.003.0010Search in Google Scholar

Coventry, Kenny R. & Pedro Guijarro-Fuentes. 2008. Spatial language learning and the functional geometric framework. In Nick Ellis & Peter Robinson (eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition, 114–137. New York, NY: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Coventry, Kenny R., Mercè Prat-Sala & Lynn Richards. 2001. The interplay between geometry and function in the comprehension of over, under, above, and below. Journal of Memory and Language 44(3). 376–398. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2000.2742.Search in Google Scholar

Coventry, Kenny R., Berenice Valdés, Alejandro Castillo & Pedro Guijarro-Fuentes. 2008. Language within your reach: Near–far perceptual space and spatial demonstratives. Cognition 108(3). 889–895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.06.010.Search in Google Scholar

de Knop, Sabine. 2020. The embodied teaching of complex verbal constructions with German placement verbs and spatial prepositions. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 18(1). 131–161. https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00054.kno.Search in Google Scholar

Driver, Paul. 2012. Pervasive games and mobile technologies for embodied language learning. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching (IJCALLT) 2(4). 50–63. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijcallt.2012100104.Search in Google Scholar

Dudschig, Carolin, Irmgard de la Vega & Barbara Kaup. 2014. Embodiment and second-language: Automatic activation of motor responses during processing spatially associated L2 words and emotion L2 words in a vertical Stroop paradigm. Brain and Language 132. 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2014.02.002.Search in Google Scholar

El-Bouz, Katsiaryna. 2016. Animation of grammar–Interplay of cognitive linguistics and multimedia learning: The example of German modal auxiliaries. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association 4(1). 135–152. https://doi.org/10.1515/gcla-2016-0010.Search in Google Scholar

Feist, Michele I. 2000. On in and on: An investigation into the linguistic encoding of spatial scenes. Evanston: Northwestern University Doctoral dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Feist, Michele I. 2008. The changing shape of prepositional meanings. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Boston University conference on language development.Search in Google Scholar

Gallagher, Shaun & Robb Lindgren. 2015. Enactive metaphors: Learning through full-body engagement. Educational Psychology Review 27. 391–404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9327-1.Search in Google Scholar

Gallese, Vittorio & Corrado Sinigaglia. 2011. What is so special about embodied simulation? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 15(11). 512–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2011.09.003.Search in Google Scholar

Grivokostopoulou, Foteini, Konstantinos Kovas & Isidoros Perikos. 2020. The effectiveness of embodied pedagogical agents and their impact on students learning in virtual worlds. Applied Sciences 10(5). 1739. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10051739.Search in Google Scholar

Group, Pragglejaz. 2007. MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 22(1). 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms2201_1.Search in Google Scholar

Hawkins, Bruce Wayne. 1984. The semantics of English spatial prepositions, vol. 142. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.Search in Google Scholar

Hayward, William G. & Michael J. Tarr. 1995. Spatial language and spatial representation. Cognition 55(1). 39–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)00643-y.Search in Google Scholar

Herskovits, Annette. 1982. Space and the prepositions in English: Regularities and irregularities in a complex domain. Stanford, California: Stanford University.Search in Google Scholar

Herskovits, Annette. 2009. Language and spatial cognition: An interdisciplinary Study of the Prepositions in English. London/New York: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hickmann, Maya. 2007. Static and dynamic location in French: Developmental and cross-linguistic perspectives. In Michel Aurnague, Maya Hickmann & Laure Vieu (eds.), The categorization of spatial entities in language and cognition, 20, 205–231. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/hcp.20.12hicSearch in Google Scholar

Huerta, Beth Lynn. 2009. The semantics of the Spanish prepositions en, a, and de: A cognitive approach. New York: State University of New York at Buffalo.Search in Google Scholar

Ijaz, Helene I. 1986. Linguistic and cognitive determinants of lexical acquisition in a second language. Language and Learning 36(4). 401–451. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1986.tb01034.x.Search in Google Scholar

Jackendoff, Ray. 1983. Semantics and cognition. Massachusetts: The MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Jarvis, Scott & Terence Odlin. 2000. Morphological type, spatial reference, and language transfer. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22(4). 535–556. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263100004034.Search in Google Scholar

Jarvis, Scott & Aneta Pavlenko. 2008. Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. Abingdon: Routledge.10.4324/9780203935927Search in Google Scholar

Johnson-Glenberg, Mina C., David A. Birchfield, Lisa Tolentino & Tatyana Koziupa. 2014. Collaborative embodied learning in mixed reality motion-capture environments: Two science studies. Journal of Educational Psychology 106(1). 86–104. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034008.Search in Google Scholar

Johnson-Laird, Philip N. 1984. Semantic primitives or meaning postulates: Mental models or propositional representation? In Computational models of natural language processing, 227–246. New York: Elsevier North-Holland, Inc.Search in Google Scholar

Johnson, Mark. 1987. The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Kellerman, Eric. 1977. Towards a characterisation of the strategy of transfer in second language learning. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin 2(1). 58–145.Search in Google Scholar

Kellerman, Eric. 1979. Transfer and non-transfer: Where we are now. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2(1). 37–57. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263100000942.Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar

Landau, Barbara. 2017. Update on “what” and “where” in spatial language: A new division of labor for spatial terms. Cognitive Science 41. 321–350. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12410.Search in Google Scholar

Levinson, Stephen C. 1996. Frames of reference and Molyneux’s question: Cross-linguistic evidence. In Paul Bloom, Mary A. Peterson, Lynn Nadel & Merrill F. Garrett (eds.), Language and space, 109–169. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lindgren, Robb, Michael Tscholl, Shuai Wang & Emily Johnson. 2016. Enhancing learning and engagement through embodied interaction within a mixed reality simulation. Computers & Education 95. 174–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.001.Search in Google Scholar

Littlemore, Jeannette. 2009. Applying cognitive linguistics to second language learning and teaching. Berlin: Springer.10.1057/9780230245259Search in Google Scholar

Loewenstein, Jeffrey & Dedre Gentner. 2005. Relational language and the development of relational mapping. Cognitive Psychology 50(4). 315–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2004.09.004.Search in Google Scholar

Mueller, Charles M. 2011. English learners’ knowledge of prepositions: Collocational knowledge or knowledge based on meaning? System 39(4). 480–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.10.012.Search in Google Scholar

Munnich, Edward, Barbara Landau & Barbara Anne Dosher. 2001. spatial language and spatial representation: A cross-linguistic comparison. Cognition 81(3). 171–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(01)00127-5.Search in Google Scholar

Niemeier, Susanne. 2017. Task-based grammar teaching of English: Where cognitive grammar and task-based language teaching meet. Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto Verlag.10.1515/east-2018-0048Search in Google Scholar

Odlin, Terence. 2005. Crosslinguistic influence and conceptual transfer: What are the concepts? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 25. 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190505000012.Search in Google Scholar

Odlin, Terence. 2008. Conceptual transfer and meaning extensions. In Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition, 316–350. Abingdon: Routledge.10.4324/9780203938560-22Search in Google Scholar

Onto. n.d. Online Cambridge advanced Learner’s dictionary. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/es/diccionario/ingles/onto.Search in Google Scholar

Pallier, Christophe, Stanislas Dehaene, Jean-Baptiste Poline, Denis LeBihan, Anne-Marie Argenti, Emmanuel Dupoux & Jacques Mehler. 2003. Brain imaging of language plasticity in adopted adults: Can a second language replace the first? Cerebral Cortex 13(2). 155–161. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/13.2.155.Search in Google Scholar

Pérez, Pedro Benítez & Simón José Granada. 1990. Adquisición de la preposición en la primera y segunda lengua. Revista Espanola de Linguistica Aplicada 6. 139–148.Search in Google Scholar

Peterson, Mary A., Lynn Nadel, Paul Bloom & Merrill F. Garrett. 1996. Space and language. In Paul Bloom, Merrill F. Garrett, Lynn Nadel & Mary A. Peterson (eds.), Language and space, 553–577. Cambridge & London: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/4107.003.0017Search in Google Scholar

Pouw, Wim T., Tamara Van Gog, Rolf A. Zwaan & Fred Paas. 2016. Augmenting instructional animations with a body analogy to help children learn about physical systems. Frontiers in Psychology 7. 860. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00860.Search in Google Scholar

Regier, Terry & Laura A. Carlson. 2001. Grounding spatial language in perception: An empirical and computational investigation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 130(2). 273. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.130.2.273.Search in Google Scholar

Robinson, Peter & Nick C. Ellis (eds.). 2008. Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition. Abingdon: Routledge.10.4324/9780203938560Search in Google Scholar

Roche, Jörg & Julia Scheller. 2008. Grammar animations and cognition. In Felicia Zhang & Beth Barber (eds.), Handbook of research on computer-enhanced language acquisition and learning, 205–218. New York & London: IGI Global.10.4018/978-1-59904-895-6.ch012Search in Google Scholar

Rosch, Eleanor & Carolyn B. Mervis. 1975. Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology 7(4). 573–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9.Search in Google Scholar

Scheller, Julija. 2008. Animationen in der Grammatikvermittlung: multimedialer Spracherwerb am Beispiel von Wechselpräpositionen, 7. Münster: LIT Verlag Münster.Search in Google Scholar

Segall, Marshall H., Donald T. Campbell & Melville J. Herskovits. 1963. Cultural differences in the perception of geometric illusions. Science 139(3556). 769–771. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.139.3556.769.Search in Google Scholar

Simms, Nina K. & Dedre Gentner. 2019. Finding the middle: Spatial language and spatial reasoning. Cognitive Development 50. 177–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2019.04.002.Search in Google Scholar

Skulmowski, Alexander & Günter Daniel Rey. 2018. Embodied learning: Introducing a taxonomy based on bodily engagement and task integration. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications 3(1). 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-018-0092-9.Search in Google Scholar

Stam, Gale & Marion Tellier. 2022. Gesture helps second and foreign language learning and teaching. In Aliyah Morgenstern & Susan Goldin-Meadow (eds.), Gesture in language: Development across the lifespan, 335–363. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association & Walter de Gruyter GmbH.10.1037/0000269-014Search in Google Scholar

Steen, Gerard J., Aletta G. Dorst, Berenike J. Herrmann, Anna Kaal, Tinna Krennmayr & Trijntje Pasma. 2010. A Method for linguistic metaphor identification. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/celcr.14Search in Google Scholar

Suñer, Ferran & Jörg Roche. 2019. Embodiment in concept-based L2 grammar teaching: The case of German light verb constructions. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 59(3). 421–447. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2018-0362.Search in Google Scholar

Takahashi, George. 1969. Perception of space and the function of certain English prepositions. Language and Learning 19(3–4). 217–234.10.1111/j.1467-1770.1969.tb00464.xSearch in Google Scholar

Takahashi, George. 2016. An adventure in English language space: A key to the mysteries of prepositions. Bloomington, Indiana: Xlibris.Search in Google Scholar

Talmy, Leonard. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics, Volume 1: Concept Structuring Systems. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/6847.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Tyler, Andrea. 2010. Usage-based approaches to language and their applications to second language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 30. 270–291. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190510000140.Search in Google Scholar

Tyler, Andrea. 2012. Cognitive linguistics and second language learning: Theoretical basics and experimental evidence. Abingdon: Routledge.10.4324/9780203876039Search in Google Scholar

Tyler, Andrea & Vyvyan Evans. 2003. The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning, and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486517Search in Google Scholar

Tyler, Andrea, Charles Mueller & Vu Ho. 2011. Applying cognitive linguistics to learning the semantics of English to, for and at: An experimental investigation. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics 8(1). 181–205.Search in Google Scholar

Vandeloise, Claude. 1985. Au-delà des descriptions géométriques et logiques de l’espace: Une description fonctionnelle. Lingvisticae Investigationes 9(1). 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1075/li.9.1.07van.Search in Google Scholar

Vandeloise, Claude. 1987. La préposition à et le principe d’anticipation. Langue Française (76). 77–111. https://doi.org/10.3406/lfr.1987.4732.Search in Google Scholar

Vandeloise, Claude. 1991. Spatial prepositions: A case study from French. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Vandeloise, Claude. 1994. Methodology and analyses of the preposition in. Cognitive Linguistics 5(2). 157–184. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1994.5.2.157.Search in Google Scholar

Wik, Preben & Anna, Hjalmarsson. 2009. Embodied conversational agents in computer assisted language learning. Speech Communication 51(10). 1024–1037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2009.05.006.Search in Google Scholar

Yoon, Susan, Emma Anderson, Joyce Lin & Karen Elinich. 2017. How augmented reality enables conceptual understanding of challenging science content. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 20(1). 156–168.Search in Google Scholar