The role of L1 conceptual and linguistic knowledge and frequency in the acquisition of L2 metaphorical expressions
Abstract
This study investigates how figurative language is processed by learners of a second language (L2). With an experiment testing L2 comprehension of figurative expressions in three categories, each combining shared and unshared first language (L1) and L2 lexical representations and conceptual representations in a different way, the study investigates the effects of L1 conceptual knowledge, L1 linguistic knowledge and L1 frequency. I predict that in cases where the L1 and L2 share similarities in terms of conceptual knowledge (e.g. ANGER IS FIRE) and metaphorical expressions (e.g. His eyes are burning with anger), learners will better comprehend the L2 figurative expressions than in cases where the L1 and L2 share no such similarities. I further predict that when L1 and L2 share similarities in both conceptual knowledge and metaphorical expression, L1 frequency will have a positive effect on L2 metaphorical comprehension. These hypotheses are tested by examining the comprehension of advanced-level L2 Korean learners whose native language is English. The testing items are 54 Korean metaphorical expressions related to three emotion concepts (ANGER, HAPPINESS and SADNESS) presented to participants in one decontextualized and two contextualized tasks (limited and elaborated). The results demonstrate that the effects of L1 conceptual/linguistic knowledge and L1 frequency vary depending on the given context. The L2 learners performed significantly better with figurative language for w…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
L1 conceptual knowledge influences L2 acquisition.
“Thus, L1 conceptual knowledge indeed influences L2 acquisition (Türker, 2015).”
From Syntactic Networks of Interlanguage Across L2 Modalities and Proficiency Levels (2021) · cites this paper as Türker, 2015
Cites
Formulaic Language and the Lexicon
Wray, A. (2002) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511519772 · Cited by 2,873 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Most SLA research does not, because some theoretical views suggest that, unlike native speakers, L2 learners may not benefit much from frequently occurring structures due to other competing factors in L2 learning (Wolter and Gyllstad, 2013; Wray, 2002).”
BackgroundKroll, J. F., & Stewart, E. (1994) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1006/jmla.1994.1008 · Cited by 2,656 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Agreeing with earlier studies (Jiang, 2004; Kroll and Stewart, 1994; Yamashita and Jiang, 2010), the results suggest that the L1 influences L2 learners’ comprehension even at higher proficiency levels.”
ResultEllis, N. C. (2002) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263102002024 · Cited by 2,230 · see citing works
CONSTRUCTING A LANGUAGE: A USAGE-BASED THEORY OF LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
Foster-Cohen, S. (2004) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263104363059 · Cited by 969 · see citing works
More than words: Frequency effects for multi-word phrases
Arnon, I., & Snider, N. (2010) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2009.09.005 · Cited by 791 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Syntactic Networks of Interlanguage Across L2 Modalities and Proficiency Levels
Hao, Y., Wang, X., Wu, M., & Liu, H. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.643120 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
“Thus, L1 conceptual knowledge indeed influences L2 acquisition (Türker, 2015).”
Background
- Authors
- Türker, E.
- Affiliations
- Arizona State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Türker, Ebru
- ORCID
- Türker, Ebru
- Venue
- Second Language Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2015-07-20
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 25-48
- ISSN
- 0165-9960 (ISSN-L)
- 0267-6583
- 1477-0326
- OpenAlex
- W2272798350
- Cited by
- 58
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4
- FWCI
- 6.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Second language Research (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Language, Metaphor, and Cognition
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Keywords
- metaphorical language, figurative language comprehension, emotion concepts, cross-linguistic similarity, second language acquisition
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
