The present study investigated the effects of two types of core-image-based basic verb learning approaches: the learner-centered and the teacher-centered approaches. The learner-centered approach was an activity in which participants found semantic relationships among several definitions of each basic target verb through a picture-elucidated card game. By contrast, the teacher-centered approach involved explicit instruction from the teacher explaining how several definitions of the basic target verbs are interrelated. A total of 241 Japanese EFL (English as a foreign language) junior high school students acted as participants in this comparative study to determine the superior approach. At the end of the treatment period, a short questionnaire was distributed. A two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed that the learner-centered approach was more effective than the teacher-centered approach with regard to both retention rates for learned definitions and accuracy rates for novel definitions of the basic target verbs. The results of paired t-tests for the questionnaire also support these findings. Considering the results, it can be argued that basic verbs may be best taught through a learner-centered collaborative approach, with conventional teacher-centered explicit instruction as a supplement.
AltarribaJ.KnickerbockerH. (2011). Acquiring second language vocabulary through the use of images and words. In: TrofimovichP.McDonoughK. (Eds.), Applying priming methods to L2 learning, teaching and research (pp. 21–48). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
3.
AltenbergB.GrangerS. (2001). The grammatical and lexical patterning of MAKE in native and non-native student writing. Applied Linguistics, 22, 173–195.
4.
AndersonJ.R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5.
BeheydtL. (1987). The semantization of vocabulary in foreign language learning. System, 15, 55–67.
BoersF.DemecheleerM. (2001). Measuring the impact of cross-cultural differences on learners’ comprehension of imageable idioms. ELT Journal, 55, 255–262.
8.
BoersF.LindstrombergS. (2009). Optimizing a lexical approach to instructed second language acquisition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
9.
BoersF.DemecheleerM.CoxheadA.WebbS. (2014). Gauging the effectiveness of exercises on verb–noun collocations. Language Teaching Research, 18, 50–70.
10.
BoersF.EyckmansJ.KappelJ.StengersH.DemecheleerM. (2006). Formulaic sequences and perceived oral proficiency: Putting a lexical approach to the test. Language Teaching Research, 10, 245–261.
11.
BoersF.LindstrombergS.EyckmansJ. (2014). Some explanations for the slow acquisition of L2 collocations. VIAL - Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11, 41–62.
12.
BoersF.Piquer PirizA. M.StengersH.EyckmansJ. (2009). Does pictorial elucidation foster recollection of idioms?Language Teaching Research, 13, 367–382.
13.
BogaardsP. (2001). Lexical units and the learning of foreign language vocabulary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 321–343.
14.
BolingerD. (1965). The atomization of meaning. Language, 41, 555–573.
15.
CraikF.I.M.LockhartR.S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684.
16.
CsábiS. (2004). A cognitive linguistic view of polysemy in English and its implications for teaching. In: AchardM.NiemeierS. (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching (pp. 241–260). New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
17.
DallerH.MiltonJ.L.Treffers-DallerJ. (Eds.). (2007). Modelling and assessing vocabulary knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18.
DewellR.B. (1994). Over again: Image-schema transformations in semantic analysis. Cognitive Linguistics, 5, 351–380.
19.
DurrantP.SchmittN. (2009). ‘To what extent do native and non-native writers make use of collocations?’International Review of Applied Linguistics, 47, 157–177.
20.
EllisN.C.CadiernoT. (2009). Constructing a second language: Introduction to the special section. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7, 111–139.
21.
FinkbeinerM.ForsterK.NicolJ.NakamuraK. (2004). The role of polysemy in masked semantic and translation priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 1–22.
22.
FukutomiK. (2012). Chugakusei ni okeru kihondoushi meiku no bunpouteki goiteki koroke-shon ni tsuite [The grammatical and lexical patterning of make in Japanese junior high school students’ writing and English textbooks]. KGU Journal of Language and Literature, 19, 95–116.
23.
GibbsR.W.ColstonH.L. (1995). The cognitive psychological reality of image schemas and their transformations. Cognitive Linguistics, 6, 347–378.
24.
HatchE. (1978). Second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
25.
HenriksenB. (1999). Three dimensions of vocabulary development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 303–317.
26.
HulstijnJ.H.LauferB. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the involvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51, 539–558.
27.
HummelK.M. (2010). Translation and short-term L2 vocabulary retention: Hindrance or help?Language Teaching Research, 14, 61–74.
28.
ImaiM. (1993). What is missing in L2 word meaning representation?: Problems in second language vocabulary learning. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 41, 243–253.
29.
JiangN. (2000). Lexical representation and development in a second language. Applied Linguistics, 21, 47–77.
30.
JiangN. (2002). Form–meaning mapping in vocabulary acquisition in a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 617–637.
31.
JiangN. (2004). Semantic transfer and its implications for vocabulary teaching in a second language. Modern Language Journal, 88, 416–432.
32.
KreitzerA. (1997). Multiple levels of schematization: A study in the conceptualization of space. Cognitive Linguistics, 8, 291–325.
33.
LakoffG. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
34.
LauferB.HulstijnJ. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22, 1–26.
35.
LauferB.WaldmanT. (2011). Verb–noun collocations in second language writing: A corpus analysis of learners’ English. Language Learning, 61, 647–672.
36.
LennonP. (1996). Getting ‘easy’ verbs wrong at the advanced level. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 34, 23–36.
37.
LittlemoreJ. (2009). Applying cognitive linguistics to second language learning and teaching. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
38.
LiuD. (2010). Going beyond patterns: Involving cognitive analysis in the learning of collocations. TESOL Quarterly, 44, 4–30.
39.
McKeownM.G. (1993). Creating effective definitions for young word learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 17–31.
40.
MillerG.A. (1969). A psychological method to investigate verbal concepts. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 6, 169–191.
41.
MillerG.A. (1978). Semantic relations among words. In: HalleM.BresnanJ.MillerG.A. (Eds.), Linguistic theory and psychological reality (pp. 60–118). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
42.
MondriaJ.A. (1996). Vocabulaireverwerving in het vreemde-talenonderwijs: De effecten van context en raden op de retentie [Vocabulary acquisition in foreign language instruction: The effects of context and guessing on retention]. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
43.
MorimotoS.LoewenS. (2007). A comparison of the effects of image-schema-based instruction and translation-based instruction on the acquisition of L2 polysemous words. Language Teaching Research, 11, 347–372.
44.
NagyW. (1997). On the role of context in first- and second-language vocabulary learning. In: SchmittN.McCarthyM. (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 64–83). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45.
NakataT. (2009). The effects of positive evidence and metalinguistic information on L2 lexico-semantic development. JACET Journal, 49, 1–13.
46.
NassajiH.TianJ. (2010). Collaborative and individual output tasks and their effects on learning English phrasal verbs. Language Teaching Research, 14, 397–419.
47.
NationI.S.P. (1993). Vocabulary size, growth, and use. In: SchreuderR.WeltensB. (Eds.), The bilingual lexicon (pp. 115–134). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
48.
NationI.S.P. (2013). Learning vocabulary in another language. 2nd edition.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
49.
NationI.S.P.WebbS. (2011). Researching and analysing vocabulary. Boston, MA: Heinle.
50.
NesiH.MearaP. (1994). Patterns of misinterpretation in the productive use of EFL dictionary definitions. System, 22, 1–15.
51.
NiedaM. (2006). Eigo kudoushi no nin-chi gengogakuteki bunseki [A cognitive analysis of English phrasal verbs]. Bulletin of Kyoto, 109, 31–43.
52.
OtsukiK.TakaseA. (2012). Comparison of pedagogical grammar in picture books and English textbooks. Extensive Reading World Congress Proceedings, 1, 116–119.
53.
PaivioA. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. New York: Oxford University Press.
54.
PawleyA. (2006). Where have all the verbs gone? Remarks on the organisation of languages with small, closed verb classes. Unpublished paper presented at the 11th Binnenial Rice University Linguistics Symposium, Houston, TX. Available at: http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~lingsymp/Pawley.pdf (accessed June 2016).
55.
PawleyA.SyderF.H. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In: RichardsJ.C.SchmidtR.W. (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 191–225). London: Longman.
56.
PetersE. (2007). Manipulating L2 learners’ online dictionary use and its effect on L2 word retention. Language Learning & Technology, 11, 45–67. Available at: http://llt.msu.edu/vol11num2/peters/default.html (accessed June 2016).
57.
PetersE.HulstijnJ.H.SercuL.LutjeharmsM. (2009). Learning L2 German vocabulary through reading: The effect of three enhancement techniques compared. Language Learning, 59, 113–151.
58.
PrinceP. (1996). Second language vocabulary learning: The role of context versus translations as a function of proficiency. Modern Language Journal, 80, 478–493.
59.
RottS. (1999). The effect of exposure frequency on intermediate language learners’ incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 589–619.
60.
RuhlC. (1989). On monosemy: A study in linguistic semantics. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
61.
SchmidtR.W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129–158.
62.
SinclairJ. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
63.
SwainM.LapkinS. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal, 82, 320–337.
64.
TanakaS. (Ed.). (1987). Kihondoushi no imiron [Lexico-semantics of English basic verbs: Exploration into lexical core and prototype]. Tokyo: Sanyusha.
65.
TanakaS. (2006). Lexical competence in English: Theoretical background and practical application of core schema. RIeD Educational Development, 2, 7–26.
66.
TanakaS. (2012). New directions in L2 lexical development. Vocabulary Learning and Instruction, 1, 1–9.
TomlinsonB. (2007). Using form-focused discovery approaches. In: FotosS.NassajiH. (Eds.), Form focused instruction and teacher education: Studies in honor of Rod Ellis (pp. 179–194). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
69.
TylerA.EvansV. (2004). Applying cognitive linguistics to pedagogical grammar: The case of over. In: AchardM.NiemeierS. (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching (pp. 257–280). New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
70.
VerspoorM.LowieW. (2003). Making sense of polysemous words. Language Learning, 53, 547–586.
71.
VerspoorM.TylerA. (2009). The role of cognitive linguistics in second language research. In: RitchieW.BhatiaT.K. (Eds.), The new handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 160–177). Oxford: Emerald.
72.
WalkerC.P. (2011). A corpus-based study of the linguistic features and processes which influence the way collocations are formed: Some implications for the learning of collocations. TESOL Quarterly, 45, 291–312.
73.
WaringR.TakakiM. (2003). At what rate do learners learn and retain new vocabulary from reading a graded reader?Reading in a Foreign Language, 15, 130–163.
74.
WebbS.MacalisterJ. (2013). Is text written for children useful for L2 extensive reading?TESOL Quarterly, 47, 300–322.
75.
Wildner-BassettM.E. (1994). Intercultural pragmatics and proficiency: ‘Polite’ noises for cultural appropriateness. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 3–17.
76.
YamagataS.YoshidaH. (2015). Image-based basic verb learning through learner-centered and teacher-centered approaches: A case study on Japanese EFL junior high school students. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5, 679–687.
77.
YamashitaJ.JiangN. (2010). L1 influence on the acquisition of L2 collocations: Japanese ESL users and EFL learners acquiring English collocations. TESOL Quarterly, 44, 647–668.
