Developing productive metaphoric competence through a frame-inspired task-based teaching model
Thomai Dalpanagioti
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, GreeceThomai Dalpanagioti holds an MA and a PhD in Linguistics-Lexicography from the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. She is currently affiliated with Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (as a full-time faculty member), Hellenic Open University and the University of Nicosia, where she teaches linguistics and research methodology courses to undergraduate and postgraduate students. Her research interests are in the areas of cognitive linguistics, corpus linguistics, lexicography, and vocabulary acquisition.
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5493-3496
Résumé
The paper reports preliminary findings from applying a frame-inspired task-based approach to metaphor teaching in an EFL classroom. The teaching model used combines Frame Semantics, a cognitive linguistic theory that takes a usage-based view of meaning, with Task-Based Language Teaching, which emphasizes second/foreign language learning through interactionally authentic language use. In this paper we examine students’ productions in terms of the amount, type and function of metaphor use with a view to identifying the stages the students went through in developing their metaphoric competence in L2 writing. We illustrate how their metaphor awareness skills seem to develop along a continuum from non-deliberate isolated figurative instances to deliberate extended metaphor used as a conceptual and discursive framework for their writing. We thus provide preliminary evidence for the effectiveness of the proposed frame-inspired task-based approach to metaphor teaching.
Mots-clés :
metaphor production, learner discourse, MIPVU, deliberate metaphor, Frame Semantics, Task-Based Language TeachingRéférences
Ahlgren, K., Golden, A., & Magnusson, U. 2021. Metaphor in education: A multilingual and Scandinavian perspective. Metaphor and the Social World 11(2): 196-211. https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.00015.ahl
Ahrens, K., & Jiang, M. 2020. Source domain verification using corpus-based tools. Metaphor and Symbol, 35(1): 43-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2020.1712783
Dalpanagioti, Th. 2021. A frame-inspired task-based approach to metaphor teaching. Lexis [Online] 18. Special Issue: Lexical Learning and Teaching. https://doi.org/10.4000/lexis.5839
Dalpanagioti, Th. 2022a. What frame semantics can offer to task-based language teaching. TESOL Journal, 14(2): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.692
Dalpanagioti, Th. 2022b. Marrying frame semantics with task-based language teaching. In: A.-M. Sougari & V. Bardzokas (eds.), Selected Papers from the 24th International Symposium on Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, 253-269. Thessaloniki: Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. https://doi.org/10.26262/istal.v24i0.9160
Danesi, M. 1994. Recent research on metaphor and the teaching of Italian. Italica: Bulletin of the American Association of Teachers of Italian, 71: 453-464.
Di Biase-Dyson, C. & Egg, M. 2020. Drawing attention to metaphor. An introduction to the debate. In: C. Di Biase-Dyson & M. Egg (eds.) Drawing Attention to Metaphor, 1-14. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
East, M. 2021. Foundational Principles of Task-Based Language Teaching. New York, NY: Routledge.
Fillmore, C. J. 1982. Frames semantics. In The Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.), Linguistics in the Morning Calm, 11-37. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing.
Fillmore, C. & Petruck, M. 2003. FrameNet glossary. International Journal of Lexicography, 16(3): 359-361.
Littlemore, J. 2001. Metaphoric competence: A language learning strength of students with a holistic cognitive style? TESOL Quarterly, 35(3): 459-491.
Littlemore, J. & Low, G. 2006. Metaphoric competence, second language learning, and communicative language ability. Applied Linguistics, 27(2): 268-294.
Low, G. 1988. On teaching metaphor. Applied Linguistics, 9(2): 125-147.
Low, G. 2020. Taking Stock after Three Decades: “On Teaching Metaphor” Revisited. In: A. M. Piquer-Píriz & R. Alejo-González (eds.), Metaphor in Foreign Language Instruction, 37-56. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lu, Q. 2021. “Desire is like a dreadful monster”: Analysis of extended metaphors in L2 argumentative essays by Chinese learners of English. Frontiers in Psychology, 21(12): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.803359
MacArthur, F. 2017. Using metaphor in the teaching of second/foreign languages. In: E. Semino & Z. Demjén (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Metaphor and Language, 413-425. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Nacey, S. 2013. Metaphors in Learner English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Nacey, S. 2017. Metaphor comprehension and production in a second language. In: E. Semino & Z. Demjén (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Metaphor and Language, 503-516. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Nacey, S. 2019. Development of L2 metaphorical production. In: A. M. Piquer-Píriz & R. Alejo-González (eds.), Metaphor in Foreign Language Instruction, 173-198. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Nacey, S. 2022. Development of metaphorical production in learner language: A longitudinal perspective. Nordic Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, 272-297. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.46364/njltl.v10i2.975
Nacey, S., Krennmayr, T., Dorst, A. G., & Reijnierse, W. G. 2019. What the MIPVU protocol doesn’t tell you (even though it mostly does). In: S. Nacey, A. G. Dorst, T. Krennmayr, & W. G. Reijnierse (eds.), Metaphor Identification in Multiple Languages: MIPVU Around the World, 41-68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
O'Reilly, D., & Marsen, E. 2021. Eliciting and Measuring L2 Metaphoric Competence: Three Decades on from Low (1988). Applied Linguistics, 42(1): 24-59. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amz066
Philip, G. 2006. “Drugs, traffic, and many other dirty interests”: Metaphor and the language learner. RaAm6 Researching and Applying Metaphor. Retrieved April 8, 2023, from http://amsacta.cib.unibo.it/archive/00002125/
Reijnierse, W. G. 2017. The value of deliberate metaphor. Dissertation. University of Amsterdam.
Reijnierse, W. G., Burgers, C., Krennmayr, T., & Steen, G. 2018. DMIP: A Method for Identifying Potentially Deliberate Metaphor in language use. Corpus Pragmatics 2: 129-147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-017-0026-7
Reijnierse, W. G., Burgers, C., Krennmayr, T., & Steen, G. 2020. The role of co-text in the analysis of potentially deliberate metaphor. In: C. Di Biase-Dyson & M. Egg (eds.) Drawing Attention to Metaphor, 15-38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Semino, E. 2021. “Not Soldiers but Fire-fighters” – Metaphors and Covid-19. Health Communication, 36(1): 50-58. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1844989
Steen, G. J. 2008. The paradox of metaphor: Why we need a three-dimensional model of metaphor. Metaphor & Symbol, 23(4): 213-241. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480802426753
Steen, G. J. 2011. From three dimensions to five steps: The value of deliberate metaphor. Metaphorik.de, 21: 83-110.
Steen, G. J. 2017. Deliberate Metaphor Theory: Basic assumptions, main tenets, urgent issues. Intercultural Pragmatics 14(1): 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2017-0001
Steen, G. J., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A. A., Krennmayr, T., & Pasma, T. 2010. A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Willis, J. 1996. A Framework for Task-Based Learning. Harlow: Longman Addison-Wesley.
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece
Thomai Dalpanagioti holds an MA and a PhD in Linguistics-Lexicography from the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. She is currently affiliated with Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (as a full-time faculty member), Hellenic Open University and the University of Nicosia, where she teaches linguistics and research methodology courses to undergraduate and postgraduate students. Her research interests are in the areas of cognitive linguistics, corpus linguistics, lexicography, and vocabulary acquisition.
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5493-3496
