Teaching Culture through Language: Exploring Metaphor and Metonymy in Chinese Characters

Ying-hsueh Hu

Abstract


Learners of Mandarin Chinese often find reading and writing Chinese characters extremely challenging. This study proposes a holistic approach that is anchored in the theoretic framework of Cognitive Linguistics to teaching Chinese characters for reading/writing by explicitly heightening learners’ awareness of the cultural knowledge encoded in the radicals and characters. Radicals are keys to learning characters as they are a vital clue to the meaning of a word and help compose compound characters. Traditional ways of organizing and teaching radicals are in accordance with the number of strokes they have. However, the proposed approach organizes radicals by way of concepts that reflect the folk categories speakers of Chinese share. Learners were also taught how conceptual metaphor and metonymy motivate the formation of radicals and compound words. Twenty-nine international students at a university in Taiwan participated in the study. A survey was administered after 6 weeks of treatment yielding results that are favorable to the approach. It was also found that such an approach may not suit all learners depending on their prior knowledge.


Keywords


language learning, Chinese radicals, semantic cues, cognitive linguistics, metaphor and metonymy, culture

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abreu, A. S., & Vieira, S. B. (2009). Learning phrasal verbs through image schemas: A new approach. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1491689

Barcelona, A. (2000). On the plausibility of claiming a metonymic motivation for conceptual metaphor. In A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads (pp. 31-58). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Boers, F. (2004). Expanding learners’ vocabulary through metaphor awareness: What expansion, what learners, what vocabulary?. In M. Achard & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching (pp. 211-232). Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Boers, F., Eyckmans, J., & Stengers, H. (2007). Presenting figurative idioms with a touch of etymology: More than mere mnemonics? Language Teaching Research, 11, 43-62.

Boers, F., & Lindstromberg, S. (2009). Optimizing a lexical approach to instructed second language acquisition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillian.

Casasanto, D., & Boroditsky, L. (2007). Time in the mind: Using space to think about time, Cognition, 106(2), 579-593. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.03.004

Dictionary of Chinese Character Information [汉字信æ¯å­—å…¸] (1988). Shanghai, China: Science Press [科学出版社].

Dirk, G. (Ed.). (2006). Cognitive linguistics: Basic readings. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Dirven, R. (1985). Metaphor as a basic means for extending the lexicon. In W. Paprotte & R. Dirven (Eds.), The ubiquity of metaphor: Metaphor in language and thought (pp. 85-119). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Dunlap, S., Perfetti, C. A., & Liu, Y. (2011). Learning vocabulary in Chinese as a foreign language: Effects of explicit instruction and semantic cue of reliability. Retrieved from:

http://www.pitt.edu/~perfetti/PDF/DunlapLearningVocabulary.pdf

Goossens, L. (1990). Metaphtonymy: The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in expressions for linguistic action, Cognitive Linguistics, 1(3), 323-340.

Györi, G. (1996). Historical aspects of categorisation. In E. H. Casad (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics in the redwoods (pp. 175-206). Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Györi, G. (1998). Semantic change, semantic theory and linguistic relativity. Duisburg: L.A.U.D.

Hansen, J., & Stanfield, J. B. (1981). The relationship of field dependent -independent cognitive style to foreign language learning achievement. Language Learning, 31, 349-369.

Hara, N., & King, R. (2000). Students' distress with a Web-based distance education course: an ethnographic study of participants' experiences. Information, Communication and Society, 3(4), 557–579.

Hu, Y. H., & Fong, Y. Y. (2010). Obstacles to CM- guide L2 idiom interpretation. In S. Knop, F. Boers & A. Rycker (Eds.), Fostering language teaching efficiency through cognitive linguistics (pp. 293-316). New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Hu, Y. H., & Ho, Y. C. (2009). Prepositions we live by: Implications of the polysemy network in teaching English prepositions in and on. In B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk & K. Dziwirek (Eds.), Studies in cognitive Corpus linguistics (pp. 336-370). Frankfurt: Peter Lang Verlagsgruppe.

Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Joy, S., & Kolb, D. (2007). Are there cultural differences in learning style? International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 33(1), 69-85.

Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire and dangerous things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.

Littlemore, J., & Low, G. (2006). Metaphorical competence, second language learning, and communicative language ability. Applied Linguistics, 27(2), 268-294. doi: 10.1093/applin/aml004

Ma, K. Y. (1997). The relation between the writing system and the use of metaphor in English and Chinese (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND.

Oxford, R. L. (1990). Missing link: Evidence from research on language learning styles and strategies. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Linguistics, language teaching acquisition: The interdependence of theory, practice and research (pp. 438-460). Georgetown University Round Table on Language and Linguistics, 1990.

Radden, G. (2000). How metonymic is metaphor. In A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads (pp. 59-78). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. (2000). The role of mapping and domains in understanding metonymy. In A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads (pp. 109-132). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyster.

Shen, H. H. (2000). Radical knowledge and character learning among learners of Chinese as a foreign language. Linguistic Studies, June, 85-93.

Shen, H. H. (2004). Level of cognitive processing: Effects on character learning among non-native learners of Chinese as a foreign language, Language and Education, 18, 167-182.

Shen, H. H., & Ke, C. (2007). Radical Awareness and Word Acquisition Among Nonnative Speaker of Chinese. The Modern Language Journal, 91(1), 97-111.

Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: C.U.P.

Talmy, L. 1988. Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12, 49-100.

Tyler, A., & Evans, V. (2004). Applying cognitive linguistics to pedagogical

grammar: The case of over. In M. Achard & S. Niemeier (Eds.). Cognitive

linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching, (pp. 257-280). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Ungerer, F., & Schmid, H-J. (1996). An introduction to cognitive linguistics. London: Longman.

Wang, J., & Koda, K. (2013). Does partial radical information help in the learning of Chinese characters? In E. Voss, S-J D. Tai & Z. Li (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 2011 second language research forum: Converging theory and practice (pp. 162-172). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.

Xu, D., & Jaggars, S. S. (2013). The impact of online learning on students’ course : Evidence from a large community and technical college system. Economics of Education Review, 37, 46-57.

Xu, S. (121 AD). Shou wen jie zi [Text in Chinese].

Yasuda, S. (2010). Learning Phrasal Verbs through Conceptual Metaphors: A Case of Japanese EFL Learners. TESOL Quarterly, 44(2), 250-273.

Zhang, D., Zhao, J., Zhou, L., & Nunamaker, J. (2004), Can e-learning replace classroom learning? Communications of the ACM, 45(5), 75-79

Zhou, L. J. (2012, May). The teaching of Chinese characters—A fun way of learning characters to decode Shou wen jie zhi. Retrieved from: http://mandarin.nccu.edu.tw/data/teacher/pdf [Text in Chinese].

Zhou, Y. L. (2013, May). Understanding the ontology of the radical/character土(Soil/Earth) in Shou wen jie zhi through conceptual metaphor theory and semantic field theory. Paper presented at the 15th Symposium on Chinese Philology in Central Taiwan 第å五屆中å€æ–‡å­—å­¸å­¸è¡“ç ”è¨Žæœƒ, Chinese Cultural University, Taipei. [Text in Chinese].


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


e-ISSN: 1694-2116

p-ISSN: 1694-2493