Exploring Proficiency and Task Effects on Taiwanese EFL Learners’ Understanding of English Vertical Axis Prepositions: Above, Below, Over, and Under

Authors

  • Bing-Huan Rory Wu

    Department of English, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei 106, Taiwan
  • Chun-Yin Doris Chen

    Department of English, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei 106, Taiwan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i2.7266
Received: 12 September 2024 | Revised: 10 October 2024 | Accepted: 12 October 2024 | Published Online: 5 February 2025

Abstract

This research aims to examine how Taiwanese students, who are learning English as a foreign language, comprehend the core meanings of English vertical axis prepositions such as above, over, below, and under. It also investigates how different proficiency levels and task types influence their understanding of these prepositions. Fifty-four college freshmen participated in the study. They were categorized into basic, intermediate, and advanced proficiency groups. A control group of eighteen native English speakers was also included. Two types of tasks—sentence-in-isolation and sentence-in-context—were employed in a sentence-completion format. The findings suggest that the core meanings of the four prepositions were similarly difficult. However, understanding the extended meaning of under appeared to be the easiest overall, followed by the other three prepositions. Proficiency levels significantly impacted the results. Beginner learners struggled more with extended meanings overall, while advanced learners outperformed intermediate learners in both basic and extended meanings. Additionally, intermediate and advanced learners exhibited similar patterns in acquiring individual extended meanings.

Keywords:

Vertical Prepositions; Core Meanings; Extended Meanings; Task; Proficiency

References

[1] Swan, M., 2005. Practical English Usage, 3rd ed. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK. p. 425.

[2] Tyler, A., Evans, V., 2003. The Semantics of English Prepositions: Spatial Scenes, Embodied Meaning, and Cognition. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. pp. 18-20.

[3] Saravanan, J., 2015. The use of English prepositions: An empirical study. Journal of Nelta. 19(1-2), 158-168.

[4] Langacker, R.W., 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Volume 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford University Press: Palo Alto, USA. p. 231.

[5] Taylor, J., 1988. Contrasting prepositional categories: English and Italian. In: Rudzka-Osty, B. (ed.). Topics in Cognitive Linguistics. John Benjamins: Amsterdam, Netherlands. pp. 299-326.

[6] Aajami, R.F., 2022. Cognitive linguistic study of the English prepositions above, on, and over. Journal of Language & Linguistics Studies. 18(1), 738-751.

[7] Li, J., Cai, J., 2016. L1 transfer in Chinese learners' use of spatial prepositions in EFL. In: Yu, L., Odlin, T. (eds.). New Perspectives on Transfer in Second Language Learning. Multilingual Matters: Bristol, UK. pp. 63-75.

[8] Chan, S.H., Eng, W.B., Pauline T.H.L., 2004. The acquisition of the English inflectional -s morphemes by young L1 Chinese speakers. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies. 4(2).

[9] Xu, J., 2008. Error theories and second language acquisition. US-China Foreign Language. 6(1), 35-42.

[10] Brown, H.D., 1994. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching, 3rd ed. Prentice Hall: Hoboken, US. pp. 242-266.

[11] White, L., 2003. Second Language Acquisition and Universal Grammar. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. pp. 151-202.

[12] Wu, C., Gao, W., 2021. A study on acquisition of English preposition in by Chinese non-English major students under the principled-polysemy model. Sino-US English Teaching. 18(5), 99-106.

[13] Kaneko, T., 2006. Semantic network makes things more problematic: Use of vertical axis prepositions by Japanese learners of English. Gakuen. 786, 1-16.

[14] Leech, G., Rayson, P., Wilson, A., 2001. Word Frequencies in Written and Spoken English: Based on the British National Corpus. Longman: Harlow, UK. p. 294.

[15] Boers, F., 1994. Motivating meaning extensions beyond physical space: A cognitive linguistic journey along the up-down and the front-back dimension [Ph.D. dissertation]. Antwerp, Belgium: University of Antwerp. p. 327.

[16] Brugman, C.M., 1988. The Story of Over: Polysemy Semantics and the Structure of the Lexicon. Garland Press: New York, US. pp. 79-104.

[17] Lakoff, G., 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, US. pp. 416-461.

[18] Rudzka-Ostyn, B., 2003. Word Power: Phrasal Verbs and Compounds: A Cognitive Approach. De Gruyter Mouton: Berlin, Germany. pp. 160-172.

[19] Lowie, W., Verspoor, M.H., 2001. Making sense of prepositions: The role of frequency and similarity in the acquisition of L2 prepositions. In: Van der Meer, G., ter Meulen, A. (eds). Making Sense from Lexeme to Discourse. Groningen Arbeiten in Germanistischen Linguistik: Groningen, Netherlands. pp.75-86.

[20] Mueller, C.M., 2011. English learners' knowledge of prepositions: Collocational knowledge or knowledge based on meaning? System. 39(4), 480-490.

[21] Zwarts, J., Winter, Y., 2000. Vector space semantics: A model-theoretic analysis of locative prepositions. Journal of Logic, Language and Information. 9(2), 169-211.

[22] Evans, V., Tyler, A., 2005. Applying cognitive linguistics to pedagogical grammar: The English prepositions of verticality. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada. 5, 11-42.

[23] Eckman, F. R. 1977. Markedness and the contrastive analysis hypothesis. Language Learning. 27(2), 315-330.

[24] Clark, E.V., 1973. What's in a word? On the child's acquisition of semantics in his first language. In: Moore, T.E. (ed.). Cognitive Development and Acquisition of Language. Academic Press: New York, USA. pp. 65-110.

[25] Chen, A.C.H., 2014. A quantitative corpus-based approach to English spatial particles: conceptual symmetry and its pedagogical implications. Taiwan Journal of TESOL. 11(1), 75-104.

[26] Rhee, S., 2004. Semantic structure of English prepositions: An analysis from a grammaticalization perspective. Language Research. 40(2), 397-427.

[27] Castelfranchi, C., Parisi, D., 1980. Linguaggio, Conoscenze e Scopi [Language, Knowledge and Goals]. Cristiano Castelfranchi and Domenico Parisi: Bologna, Italy. pp. 1-561.

[28] Heine, B., Claudi, U., Hünnemeyer, F., 1991. From cognition to grammar: Evidence from african languages. In: Traugott, E.C., Heine, B. (eds.). Approaches to Grammaticalization. vol. 1: Focus on Theoretical and Methodological Issues. John Benjamins: Amsterdam, Netherlands. pp. 149-187.

[29] Lakoff, G., Johnson, M., 1980. Metaphors We Live by. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, US. pp. 14-21.

[30] Winter, B., 2023. Abstract concepts and emotion: Cross-linguistic evidence and arguments against affective embodiment. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences. 378(1870).

[31] Binder, J.R., Westbury, C.F., McKiernan, et al., 2005. Distinct brain systems for processing concrete and abstract concepts. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 17(6), 905-917.

[32] James, C.T., 1975. The role of semantic information in lexical decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1(2), 130-136.

[33] Schwanenflugel, P.J., 2013. Why are abstract concepts hard to understand? In: Schwanenflugel, P.J. (ed.). The Psychology of Word Meanings. Psychology Press: London, UK. pp. 235–262.

[34] Han, Z., 2006. Fossilization: Can grammaticality judgment be a reliable source of evidence? In: Han, Z.H., Odlin, T. (eds.). Studies of Fossilization in Second Language Acquisition. Multilingual Matters: Bristol, UK. pp. 56-82.

[35] Liu, Y.T., 2009. Attainability of a native-like lexical processing system in adult second language acquisition: A study of advanced L2 Chinese learners. Language and Linguistics. 10(3), 489-520.

[36] Rips, L.J., Bloomfield, A., Asmuth, J., 2008. From numerical concepts to concepts of number. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 31(6), 623–642.

[37] Zhao, H., Huang, S., Zhou, Y., et al., 2020. Schematic diagrams in second language learning of English prepositions: A behavioral and event-related potential study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 42(4), 721-748.

[38] Sorace, A., 2005. Selective optionality in language development. In: Cornips, L., Corrigan, K.P. (eds.). Syntax and Variation. Reconciling the Biological and the Social. John Benjamins: Amsterdam, Netherlands. pp. 55–80.

Downloads

How to Cite

Wu, B.-H. R., & Chen, C.-Y. D. (2025). Exploring Proficiency and Task Effects on Taiwanese EFL Learners’ Understanding of English Vertical Axis Prepositions: Above, Below, Over, and Under. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 7(2), 339–354. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i2.7266

Issue

Vol. 7 , Iss. 2 (February 2025)

Article Type

Article

License

Copyright © 2025 Bing-Huan Rory Wu, Chun-Yin Doris Chen

Creative Commons License

This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.