The effects of cognitive-based instruction and assessment on figurative constructions comprehension and productiona case study

Referencias bibliográficas

• Achard, M., & Niemeier. S. (Eds.). (2008). Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching. Walter de Gruyter.
• Acquaroni, R. & Suárez-Campos, L. (2019). El desarrollo de la competencia metafórica en la enseñanza del español LE/L2. In I. Ibarretxe Antuñano, T. Cadierno & A. Castañeda Castro (Eds.), Lingüística cognitiva y español LE/L2 (pp. 371-391). London: Routledge.
• Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Billow, R.M. (1975). A cognitive developmental study of metaphor comprehension. Developmental psychology, 11, 415-422.
• Boers, F. (2000). Enhancing metaphoric awareness in specialised reading. English for specific purposes, 19(2), 137-147.
• Boers, F., & Lindstromberg, S. (Eds.). (2008). Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Buck, D. (1949). A dictionary of selected synonyms in the principal Indo-European languages. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
• Cadierno, T., & Eskildsen. S. (Eds.). (2015). Usage-based perspectives on second language learning. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter Mouton.
• Charteris‐Black, J. (2002). Second language figurative proficiency: A comparative study of Malay and English. Applied linguistics, 23(1), 104-133.
• Cook, V. (1985). Language functions, social factors, and second language learning and teaching. IRAL, 23(1-4),177-198.
• Cook, V. (2016). Second language learning and language teaching. Routledge.
• Deignan, A. (1999). Metaphorical polysemy and paradigmatic relations: A corpus study. Word, 50(3), 319–338.
• Deignan, A. (2020). Figurative language learning and lexicography. In P. Hanks & G.M de Schryver (Eds.), International Handbook of Modern Lexis and Lexicography, (pp. 1–15). Berlin: Springer.
• De Knop, S., & De Rycker. T. (Eds.). (2008). Cognitive approaches to pedagogical grammar: A volume in honour of René Dirven. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
• De Knop, S., Boers, F., & De Rycker. A. (Eds.). (2010). Fostering language teaching efficiency through cognitive linguistics. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
• Geeraerts, D., & Cuyckens, H. (Eds.). (2007). The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics. Oxford University Press.
• Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh University Press.
• Evans, N., & Wilkins, D. (2000). In the mind's ear: The semantic extensions of perception verbs in Australian languages. Language: 546-592.
• Grady, J. (1997). Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary scenes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of California, Berkeley.
• Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I., Cadierno, T., & Castañeda, A. (Eds.). (2019). Lingüística cognitiva y español LE/L2. New York, NY: Routledge.
• Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (1999). Polysemy and metaphor in perception verbs: A cross- linguistic study (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Edinburgh.
• Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2000). ¿Es la metáfora el único proceso que interviene en el cambio semántico? Revista española de lingüística aplicada, 1, 409-418.
• Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2002). Mind-as-body as a cross-linguistic conceptual metaphor. Miscelánea. A Journal of English and American Studies, 25(1), 93-119.
• Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2005). Limitations for cross-linguistic metonymies and metaphors. Cognitive and discourse approaches to metaphor and metonymy, 19, 187.
• Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2006). Cross-linguistic polysemy in tactile verbs. In J. Luchjenbroers (Ed.), Cognitive Linguistics Investigations: Across languages, fields and philosophical boundaries (pp. 235-253). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2008). Vision metaphors for the intellect: Are they really cross-linguistic? Atlantis, 30(1), 15-33.
• Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I. (2013). The relationship between conceptual metaphor and culture. Intercultural pragmatics, 10(2), 315-339.
• Kogan, N. (1983). Stylistic variation in childhood and adolescence: creativity, metaphor, and cognitive styles. In J. Flavell & E. Markman (Eds.), Cognitive development (pp. 630-706). New York: Wiley
• Kövecses, Z. (2000). The scope of metaphor. In A. Barcelona (Ed.). Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive perspective (pp. 79-92). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Kövecses, Z. (2010). Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford University Press.
• Kövecses, Z. (2020). Extended Conceptual Metaphor Theory. Cambridge: CUP
• Kurath, H. (1921). The semantic sources of the words for the emotions in Sanskrit, Greek, Latin and the Germanic languages. Menasha: George Banta Publishing.
• Lakoff, G., & Johnson. M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Lakoff, G., & Johnson. M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh. New York: Basic books.
• Lantolf, J. P., & Bobrova, L. (2014). Metaphor instruction in the L2 Spanish classroom: Theoretical argument and pedagogical program. Journal of Spanish Language Teaching, 1(1), 46-61.
• Littlemore, J. (2001). Metaphoric competence: a language learning strength of students with a holistic cognitive style? TESOL Quarterly, 35(3), 459-491.
• Littlemore, J. (2010). Metaphoric competence in the first and second language. In M. Pütz & L. Sicola (Eds.), CELCR (pp. 293-331).
• Littlemore, J., & Low, G. (2006a). Figurative thinking and foreign language learning. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Littlemore, J., & Juchem-Grundmann, C. (Eds.). (2010). Applied cognitive linguistics in second language learning and teaching. AILA Review, 23(1).
• Llopis-García, R. (2010). Why cognitive grammar works in the L2 classroom: A case study of mood selection in Spanish. AILA Review, 23(1), 72-94.
• Llopis-García, R. 2021. Applied Cognitive Linguistics for Meaningful–and Successful!–L2 Language Teaching. YRCL. Online Conference.
• MacArthur, F. (2010). Metaphorical competence in EFL: Where are we and where should we be going? A view from the language classroom, Applied Cognitive Linguistics in Second Language Learning and Teaching. AILA Review, 23:155-173.
• MacArthur, F., & Littlemore, J. (2011). On the repetition of words with the potential for metaphoric extension in conversations between native and non-native speakers of English. Metaphor and the Social World, 1(2), 201-239.
• MacArthur, F., Krennmayr, T., & Littlemore, J. (2015). How basic is UNDERSTANDING IS SEEING when reasoning about knowledge? Asymmetric uses of sight metaphors in office hours consultations in English as academic lingua franca. Metaphor and Symbol, 30(3), 184-217.
• Mitchell, R., Myles, F., &. Marsden, E. (2019). Second language learning theories. Routledge.
• Niemeier, S. (2017). Teaching (in) metaphors. In F. Ervas, E. Gola & M.G. Rossi (Eds.), Metaphor in communication, science and education (pp. 267-282). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
• O’Reilly, D., & Marsden, E. (2021). Eliciting and measuring L2 metaphoric competence: Three decades on from Low (1988). Applied Linguistics, 42(1), 24-59.
• Raffaelli, I., & B. Kerovec. (2018). The concept of ‘touch’in the formation of the Croatian and Turkish lexicon: The example of tactile verbs. LingBaW, 4, 129-140.
• Rojo, A., & Valenzuela, J. (2005). Verbs of sensory perception: An English-Spanish comparison. Languages in Contrast 5(2), 219-243.
• Soriano, C. (2016). El lenguaje de las emociones. In M.C. Horno Chéliz, I. Ibarretxe Antuñano y J.L Mendívil Giró (Eds.), Panorama actual de la ciencia del lenguaje (pp. 243-259). Zaragoza: Prensas de la Universidad de Zaragoza.
• Suárez-Campos, L., & Hijazo-Gascón, A. (2019). La metáfora conceptual y su aplicación a la enseñanza del español LE/L2. In Iraide Ibarretxe, Teresa Cadierno & Alejandro Castañeda (Eds.), Lingüística cognitiva y español LE/L2 (pp. 235-252). Routledge.
• Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Teymouri A.M., & Dowlatabadi, H. (2014). Metaphoric competence and language proficiency in the same boat. Procedia–Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1895-1904.
• Tyler, A. (2012). Cognitive linguistics and second language learning: Theoretical basics and experimental evidence. New York: Routledge.
• 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), 180-205.
• VanPatten, B., Keating, G.D., & Wulff, S. (Eds.). (2020). Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction. New York: Routledge.
• Viberg, Å. (2015). Sensation, perception and cognition: Swedish in a typological-contrastive perspective. Functions of language, 22(1), 96-131.
• FUNDING INFORMATION
• Financial support for this paper has been provided by the Spanish Ministry of Education (FPU Program, FPU17/04542), as well as by the Fulbright Commission through the predoctoral program for a seven-month stay at Columbia University (New York).