Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
6
Tableofcontents
2.2.
2.2.1.
2.2.2.
2.2.3.
2.2.4.
TeTinkingforSpeakingHypothesis
BackgroundtotheTinkingforSpeakingHypothesis:Talmy’stypologyof
motionverbs
CritiqueofTalmy
DirectedmotioninPolish
TeWhorfiandimensionofTinkingforSpeaking
TinkingforSpeakingefectsingesturalcommunication
Bilingualresearch
Conceptualizationviaeventconstrual:TevonStutterheimparadigm
Processesofconceptualization
EvidencefromSlaviclanguages
Conceptualizationinbilingualsandsecondlforeignlanguagelearners
2.2.5.
2.2.6.
2.3.
2.3.1.
2.3.2.
2.3.3.
2.4.
Linguisticrelativity:Generalperspective
2.5.
Conclusion
3.
3.1.
3.2.
3.3.
3.4.
3.5.
62
63
65
67
71
74
75
79
80
85
87
90
98
TeConceptualTransferHypothesis
Assessingthescopeofthephenomenon
Issuesininvestigatingthelinguisticlnon-linguisticinterface
Methodologicalconcerns
Telinguisticdimension
Conclusion
100
101
102
105
110
114
Study1:Investigatingsemanticandconceptualcategorizationinthedomain
ofinterpersonalrelationshipsinPolishandEnglish
115
4.1.
NaminginterpersonalrelationshipsinPolishandEnglish
117
4.2.
4.2.1.
4.2.2.
4.2.3.
4.2.4.
4.2.5.
4.2.6.
4.2.6.1.Intra-groupvariables
4.2.6.2.Categorycorefeatures
4.2.7.
Study1a
Researchquestions
Participants
Materials
Procedure
Analysis
Results
121
122
122
124
130
131
132
154
158
Discussionandsummaryoffindings
160
4.2.7.1.BilingualcategorizationpatternsintheL2
160
4.2.7.2.BilingualcategorizationpatternsintheL1
162
4.2.7.3.Teprocessesatworkinthebilinguallexicon
4.2.7.4.TeL2andL1innaturalandformallearningcontexts
4.2.7.5.Factorsinfluencingnamingpatternsinbilinguals
4.2.7.6.OntheapplicationofNaturalSemanticMetalanguageandlinguisticanalyses
4.3.
4.3.1.
4.3.2.
inresearchintosemanticandconceptuallevels
Study1b
Researchobjectives
Participants
163
165
167
169
172
172
173
4.
