Treść książki

Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
12
Introduction
EventConceptualizationParadigm(vonStutterheim2003).Tetheoreticalover-
viewendswithachapterdevotedtotheConceptualTransferHypothesisproperand
anevaluationofitstheoreticalandempiricalbases.Tisconstitutesaspringboard
forresearchwhichwasconductedinaccordancewiththerecommendationsofthe
hypothesisandispresentedinStudies1and2.
Study1takesasitspointofdepartureWierzbicka’s(1997)explicationsforfriend-
shiptermsinPolishandEnglish.Becausetheexplicationsarehypothesizedtoillus-
trateprototypicalcognitivescenariosandthusshowthethinkingbehindparticular
words,Wierzbickaarguestheyreflectunderlyingconceptualcategories.Study1a
examinesnamingpatternsthroughasetofexplication-basedscenariosineachof
theparticipants’languages.Teobtaineddataareusedforinter-andintra-group
comparisonstoassesstheinfluenceofbilingualismandthecontextofL2learning
anduseonverbalcategorizationintheL1andL2.Study1bexaminescorrelations
betweenverbalcategorizationandsimilarityjudgments.
Study2explorespre-linguisticconceptualization,drawingonadatasetcollected
duringafilm-retellingtask.Testudyisbasedonafour-stagemodeldevelopedby
HabelandTappe(1999)andmodifiedbyvonStutterheimandNüse(2003).Study
2afocusesontheselectionstageofconceptualizationandexaminestheprocessin
termsofSlobin’sTinkingforSpeakingHypothesis(Slobin1996)andTalmy’s(2000,
2003)typologyofverbsofmotion.Structuringandsegmentationareinvestigatedin
Study2b,whichisbasedonvonStutterheim’sEventConceptualizationParadigm.
Testudyhasacomparativecharacterandusesbothbilingualandmonolingual
data.
Teconcludingchapterappraisesthestrengthsandweaknessesoftheproject
andexpandsonitspracticalmerits,aswellaslookingatareasinneedofclarifica-
tionandimprovement.ItalsosuggestssomeavenuesforfutureresearchandL2
learning,thushighlightingthosecognitiveandlinguisticprocessesthatprevious
researchdidnotseemtobeawareof.
Teinterpretationsproposedinthisworkareconsistentwiththetheoryof
multi-competence(Cook2003)andtheDynamicModelofMultilingualism(Herdina
andJessner2002),which,forreasonsofspace,havenotbeenpresentedhere.Fol-
lowingPavlenko(1999,2005),thetermsbilingualmemoryandthebilingualmental
lexiconareusedinterchangeably,whiletheabbreviationSLAreferstobothsecond
andforeignlanguagelearning.Wheneverrelevant,thetypeofL2learninganduse
isspecifiedbymeansoftermssuchasimmersion,naturalistic,formalandforeign
languagelearning.Smallcapitalsdenotecognitivelconceptualcategories,members
ofcategories,imageschemasandmetaphors.Despitethecriticismthatthenotionof
thenativespeakerhasreceivedfrombilingualism-orientedresearchers(Cook2003;
Davies2006;Romaine1995),ithasbeenappliedafewtimesinthisworkforlack
ofconvincingalternativesandforstylisticreasons.Arelatedtermandmorepre-
ciseyardstickforevaluatingbilingualsisthesociallyandeducationallycomparable
monolingual,whichhasbeenusedincontextswhereitensuredclarityandprecision