present simple / present continuous present ... - springer978-3-642-27455-8/1.pdf · 222 present...

221

Appendix ACognitive Treatment Handout

Present Simple / Present Continuous

MÓWIENIE O TERAZNIEJSZOSCI

PRESENT SIMPLE PRESENT CONTINUOUS

Jerry trusts his girlfriend.Jerry and Jane understand me now.Jerry needs his girlfriend’s car right now.The box contains two pairs of shoes.I don’t recognize this man.Does Jerry like his girlfriend’s car?

Jerry is building a castle.Jerry and Jane are cooking dinner right now.Jerry is repairing his girlfriend’s car right now.The gate is opening.I am not cleaning my room.Is Jerry driving to his girlfriend’s house?


We have a very big house.This tea smells very nice.Jerry weighs 75 kilos now.

We are having lunch now.Jerry is smelling his wife’s tea now.Jerry is weighing his son now.

J. Bielak and M. Pawlak, Applying Cognitive Grammar in the Foreign Language Classroom, Second Language Learning and Teaching, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-27455-8, © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

222


I promise I will not eat your ice-cream.We apologize for what happened yesterday.We thank you for the invitation.

l l l l

Appendix A: Cognitive Treatment Handout

223

I. Wybierz i zakresl kółkiem jedna z dwóch podkreslonych i oddzielonych znakiem „/” czesci zdania, która lepiej, poprawniej uzupełnia tekst. Druga, odrzucona czesc zdania przekrescl.

1. My girlfriend resembles / is resembling my mother. 2. Can you see this? My dog eats / is eating my uncle’s dinner. 3. I’m eating it, but this cake doesn’t taste / isn’t tasting very well. 4. Look, my dog tastes / is tasting my mother’s soup. 5. She intends / is intending to start a business next year. 6. I thank / am thanking you for your hospitality. It was a wonderful weekend. 7. She has won the lottery? Oh, come on, I doubt / am doubting it. 8. I can feel water under my shoes. The snow melts / is melting. 9. Why do they put / are they putting money on the table at this moment?10. She doesn’t know / isn’t knowing Jim personally.11. I can see she has a brush in her hand. I think she cleans / is cleaning her bike.

II. Uzupełnij zdania wstawiajac podane w nawiasie słowa w odpowiednim czasie: Present Simple lub Present Continuous.

1. Open the door, it’s Jerry! He (come from) …………………………. the wood with some mushrooms.

2. My grandmother (come from) ……………………….. Russia. She was born and raised in Moscow.

3. We (promise) ……………….………… that we will always do our English homework.

4. Have a look at Tom and Jerry! They have hammers in their hands and they (destroy) …………………………. that old radio.

5. My job (not include) ……………………….. making coffee for the boss! 6. I am sure they are in a bar right now. And I think they (get drunk)

……………………….. . 7. I can’t go out and buy bread now because I (paint) …………..…………… a

picture. 8. She (comb) ………………………….. her hair because in a minute she will

pose for a photo. 9. My mother (need) ………………………….. a new watch because she lost

the old one. 10. (you, agree) …………………..….… that we should organize the party in the

basement?11. I (remember) …………..……………… him, as a child, playing the piano

beautifully.


224

III. Przetłumacz wiernie nie przetłumaczone jeszcze fragmenty zdan z j. polskiego na j. angielski. Tłumaczac, uzyj słów podanych w nawiasach (w odpowiedniej formie).

1. Przysiegam, ze nie widziałem kto to zrobił. (swear) …………………..…....................... that I haven’t seen who did it. 2. Spójrz na niebo! Pogoda zmienia sie na lepsza. (change) Have a look at the sky! ………………………………..….… for the better. 3. Dlaczego jej tu nie ma? Czy Jane prasuje spódnice na jutro? (iron) Why is she not here? …………………….……..….… her skirt for tomorrow? 4. Ten mezczyzna wydaje sie byc bardzo miły. Cały czas sie usmiecha. (seem) This …….……………………….. to be very nice. He’s smiling all the time. 5. Jerry jest w kuchni i własnie wacha zupe, która jest na kuchence. (smell) Jerry is in the kitchen and he …….……………………….. which is on the

cooker. 6. Ten pokój pachnie papierosami i piwem. (smell) This …….……………………….. of cigarettes and beer. 7. Dlaczego w tym pokoju jest tak cicho? A, Jarek i Romek rozgrywaja partyjke

szachów. (play) Why is it so quiet in the room? Oh, …….……………………….. a game of

chess. 8. Jest taka ładna pogoda. Podejrzewam, ze nasi koledzy poszli na plaze.

(suppose) The weather is so good. …………………………. our friends have gone to

the beach. 9. Nie widział swojej siostry od roku, ale wcale za nia nie teskni. (miss) He hasn’t seen his sister for one year, but …….……………………….. at all.10. Nie moge sie teraz oderwac od telewizora, bo policjanci własnie aresztuja

Jimmy’ego Pif-Pafa. (arrest) I can’t get my eyes off the TV, because ….…….………………………..

Jimmy Pif-Paf.11. Kazdy, kto słyszał kłopotach Roberta, współczuje mu. (pity) Everyone who has heard about Robert’s troubles …….……………………….


225225J. Bielak and M. Pawlak, Applying Cognitive Grammar in the Foreign Language Classroom, Second Language Learning and Teaching, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-27455-8, © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Appendix BTraditional Treatment Handout











226

I. Wybierz i zakresl kółkiem jedna z dwóch podkreslonych i oddzielonych znakiem „/” czesci zdania, która lepiej, poprawniej uzupełnia tekst. Druga, odrzucona czesc zdania przekrescl.

1. My girlfriend resembles / is resembling my mother. 2. Can you see this? My dog eats / is eating my uncle’s dinner. 3. I’m eating it, but this cake doesn’t taste / isn’t tasting very well. 4. Look, my dog tastes / is tasting my mother’s soup. 5. She intends / is intending to start a business next year. 6. I thank / am thanking you for your hospitality. It was a wonderful weekend. 7. She has won the lottery? Oh, come on, I doubt / am doubting it. 8. I can feel water under my shoes. The snow melts / is melting. 9. Why do they put / are they putting money on the table at this moment?10. She doesn’t know / isn’t knowing Jim personally.11. I can see she has a brush in her hand. I think she cleans / is cleaning her bike.


1. Open the door, it’s Jerry! He (come from) …………………………. the wood with some mushrooms.

2. My grandmother (come from) ……………………….. Russia. She was born and raised in Moscow.

3. We (promise) ……………….………… that we will always do our English homework.

4. Have a look at Tom and Jerry! They have hammers in their hands and they (destroy) …………………………. that old radio.

5. My job (not include) ……………………….. making coffee for the boss! 6. I am sure they are in a bar right now. And I think they (get drunk)

……………………….. . 7. I can’t go out and buy bread now because I (paint) …………..…………… a

picture. 8. She (comb) ………………………….. her hair because in a minute she will

pose for a photo. 9. My mother (need) ………………………….. a new watch because she lost

the old one. 10. (you, agree) …………………..….… that we should organize the party in the

basement?11. I (remember) …………..……………… him, as a child, playing the piano

beautifully.

Appendix B: Traditional Treatment Handout

227

III. Przetłumacz wiernie nie przetłumaczone jeszcze fragmenty zdan z j. polskiego na j. angielski. Tłumaczac, uzyj słów podanych w nawiasach (w odpowiedniej formie).

1. Przysiegam, ze nie widziałem kto to zrobił. (swear) …………………..…....................... that I haven’t seen who did it. 2. Spójrz na niebo! Pogoda zmienia sie na lepsza. (change) Have a look at the sky! ………………………………..….… for the better. 3. Dlaczego jej tu nie ma? Czy Jane prasuje spódnice na jutro? (iron) Why is she not here? …………………….……..….… her skirt for tomorrow? 4. Ten mezczyzna wydaje sie byc bardzo miły. Cały czas sie usmiecha. (seem) This …….……………………….. to be very nice. He’s smiling all the time. 5. Jerry jest w kuchni i własnie wacha zupe, która jest na kuchence. (smell) Jerry is in the kitchen and he …….……………………….. which is on the

cooker. 6. Ten pokój pachnie papierosami i piwem. (smell) This …….……………………….. of cigarettes and beer. 7. Dlaczego w tym pokoju jest tak cicho? A, Jarek i Romek rozgrywaja partyjke

szachów. (play) Why is it so quiet in the room? Oh, …….……………………….. a game of

chess. 8. Jest taka ładna pogoda. Podejrzewam, ze nasi koledzy poszli na plaze.

(suppose) The weather is so good. …………………………. our friends have gone to

the beach. 9. Nie widział swojej siostry od roku, ale wcale za nia nie teskni. (miss) He hasn’t seen his sister for one year, but …….……………………….. at all.10. Nie moge sie teraz oderwac od telewizora, bo policjanci własnie aresztuja

Jimmy’ego Pif-Pafa. (arrest) I can’t get my eyes off the TV, because ….…….………………………..

Jimmy Pif-Paf.11. Kazdy, kto słyszał kłopotach Roberta, współczuje mu. (pity) Everyone who has heard about Robert’s troubles …….……………………….

Appendix B: Traditional Treatment Handout


Appendix C Cognitive Treatment Power Point Presentation



Jakub Bielak, Mirosław PawlakUniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza, Kalisz

230









Appendix C: Cognitive Treatment Power Point Presentation

231





232 Appendix C: Cognitive Treatment Power Point Presentation

233Appendix C: Cognitive Treatment Power Point Presentation

236




Czasowniki satyczne

TRUSTUNDERSTANDNEEDCONTAINRECOGNIZELIKE

BUILDCOOKREPAIROPENCLEANDRIVE (TO ...)


240




Czasowniki statyczne Czasowniki dynamiczne




242




Czasowniki statyczne Czasowniki dynamiczne




243




Czasowniki statyczno-dynamiczneHAVESMELLWEIGH

HAVESMELLWEIGH





244




245



Czasowniki oznaczajace czynnosci polegajace na MÓWIENIU

PROMISEAPOLOGIZETHANK


247


MÓWIENIEO TERAZNIEJSZOSCI

Jakub Bielak, Mirosław PawlakUniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza, Kalisz

J. Bielak and M. Pawlak, Applying Cognitive Grammar in the Foreign Language Classroom, Second Language Learning and Teaching, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-27455-8, © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Appendix D Traditional Treatment Power Point Presentation

248









Appendix D: Traditional Treatment Power Point Presentation

249










250




Czasowniki statyczne - stany Czasowniki dynamiczne - czynnosci







251




Czasowniki statyczno-dynamiczneStany

HAVESMELLWEIGH

Czynnosci

HAVESMELLWEIGH




252



Czasowniki oznaczajace czynnosci polegajace na MÓWIENIU

PROMISEAPOLOGIZETHANK



Test AProjekt badawczy Jakuba Bielaka i Mirosława Pawlaka, Uniwersytet im. A. Mickiewicza, Kalisz

Imie i nazwisko : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Klasa: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I. Wybierz i zakresl kółkiem jedna z dwóch podkreslonych i oddzielonych znakiem „/” czesci zdania, która lepiej, poprawniej uzupełnia tekst. Druga, odrzucona czesc zdania przekresl.

PRZYKŁAD:

Jack has gone / have going to school.

1. Jerry is in the bathroom and he fi lls / is fi lling the bathtub with water to give his dog a bath.

2. A: Why did you do such a bad thing? B: I swear / am swearing that I will never do it gain.

3. The wind is so strong today and I can see that it destroys / is destroying the birds’ nest on the tree.

4. The mountain rises / is rising above the city like a large angel. 5. I cook / am cooking something very good for tonight. 6. A: He stole all your money. B: This fact doesn’t matter / isn’t mattering any

more. 7. Do you appreciate / are you appreciating his help? Without it you would not

have been success-ful. 8. Fiona puts on / is putting on a warm coat because it’s cold and she has to go

outside in a minute. 9. I think that Ralph is outdoors and that he digs / is digging a hole in the

ground. Later he may hide some money in it.10. Jerry believes / is believing in God and this is why he would like to go to

church every Sunday.

Appendix E The Written Test

254

11. She doesn’t trust / isn’t trusting you any more.12. Can you see Jack on the path? He probably comes from / is probably coming

from the boat.


PRZYKŁAD:

Jerry (write) . . . . . . . . writes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a letter every day.

1. Can you see something like smoke over the jar? Probably the substance in the jar (evaporate) ………………………… just now.

2. We will not be able to go into her garden. I can see that a very high wall (surround) ………………………… the garden.

3. Tomorrow is a very important day and that’s why Jack (polish) …………….……………. his shoes; he would like to look smart.

4. Judge: I am sure you stole the money and hurt the old lady. Defendant: I (deny) …………………………… all these accusations. 5. He has just got up and he (get dressed) …………………………. in a great

hurry. He’ll be late if he doesn’t do it really fast. 6. John (not, agree) ……………..….………… with me that the new Harry

Potter fi lm is great. 7. At this moment she (repair) ……………………….. her old bike. 8. I’m afraid that at this point they (consider) ………………………….. him to

be a drunk. 9. (you, need) ………..………………… anything else at this point?10. Look! A strange man (open) …………………..………. the trunk in your car.11. At this moment the team (consist of) ……………..………….. 5 Europeans

and 3 Americans. This will probably not change any time soon.12. A: I bought a lot of apples but I don’t know how much exactly. B: (Your wife,

weigh) ………………….……… them in the kitchen now?

III. Przetłumacz wiernie nie przetłumaczone jeszcze fragmenty zdan z j. polskiego na j. angielski. Tłumaczac, uzyj słów podanych w nawiasach (w odpowiedniej formie), o ile sa podane.

PRZYKŁAD:

Jerry pisze codziennie jeden wiersz. (write)

. . . . . . . . . Jerry writes one . . . . . . . . . . . poem every day.

1. A: Dlaczego on jest w tym pedzacym pociagu? B: Bo własnie wraca z Krakowa. (come from)

B: Why is he on this rushing train? B: Because . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cracow.

Appendix E: The Written Test

255

2. Ona włozyła cos do pudełka wczoraj, kiedy mnie nie było, wiec jest tajemnica, co to pudełko teraz zawiera. (contain)She put something into the box yesterday, when I was away, so it’s a secret what …………………………….. .

3. Oni cierpliwie czekaja, bo nie watpia, ze John przyjdzie na czas. (doubt)They are waiting patiently, ………............................................ that John will come on time.

4. Naprawde przepraszam za zachowanie mojego syna. (apologize)……......................................... for my son’s behavior.

5. O mój Boze! Te psy sa coraz blizej. Widze, ze one nas okrazaja! (surround)Oh my God! These dogs are closer and closer. I can see …...…………………….. us!

6. A: O, masz mokre rece, wiec pewnie wziełas sie za pranie. B: Tak, ale nie piore twojej sukni, tylko moje rekawiczki. (wash)A: Oh, your hands are wet, so I gather that you’ve got down to doing the washing. B: Right, …….………………………. your dress, just my gloves.

7. Zołnierze, co wy zrobiliscie? Rozkazuje wam to w tej chwili posprzatac! (order)What have you done, soldiers? ……………………….……… to clean it right now!

8. Co on kombinuje z tymi nozyczkami? Nie widze dobrze, czy on wycina zdjecia z mojego albumu? (cut)What is he up to with this pair of scissors? I can’t see very well, ………………..……………… out of my album?

9. Ta zupa, która ugotowałes smakuje naprawde dobrze. Czy moge zjesc jeszcze? (taste)This soup you …………....……………..……….. good. Can I have some more?

10. Uwielbiam swojego meza za jego wrazliwosc. (adore)................................................. husband for his sensitivity.

11. Popatrz, Stas maluje twój portret. Za godzine bedzie gotowy. (paint)……............................................ your portrait. It will be finished in an hour.

12. Pomóz mi! Zmieniam koło w samochodzie, a we dwóch zrobimy to szybciej. (change)Help me! ………………….………………. a wheel in my car and the two of us will do it faster.

Słowniczek

adore - uwielbiacapologize – przepraszac, przeprosicappreciate – doceniac, docenicbe afraid – obawiac siebathtub – wanna

come from – pochodzic z / dochodzic, dojsc zconsider – uwazacconsist of – składac sie zcontain – zawierac


256

cut – wycinac, wyciacdefendant - oskarzonydeny – zaprzeczac, zaprzeczycdestroy – niszczyc, zniszczycdig – kopac, wykopacdoubt – watpic, zwatpicevaporate – parowac, wyparowacfi ll – wypełniac, wypełnicget dressed – ubierac, ubrac siejar – słój, słoikjudge - sedziamatter – miec znaczenienest – gniazdoorder – rozkazywac, rozkazac

polish – polerowac, wypolerowacpromise – obiecywac, obiecacrise – wzrastac, wzrosnac / wznosic, wzniesc sie / wschodzic, wzejscsmoke - dymsurround – otaczac, otoczyc / okrazac, okrazycswear – przysiegac, przysiactaste – smakowac / kosztowac, skosztowactrunk – bagaznikwash – prac, wypracweigh – wazyc (np. 2 kg) / wazyc, zwazyc

Test BProjekt badawczy Jakuba Bielaka i Mirosława Pawlaka, Uniwersytet im. A. Mickiewicza, Kalisz

Imie i nazwisko: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Klasa: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


PRZYKŁAD:


1. It’s 11 p.m., so I’m sure that he is in his bedroom and that he undresses / is undressing.

2. Does Josh resemble / Is Josh resembling his father more in appearance or in character?

3. I have these needles and wool, because, as you can see, I knit / am knitting a sweater for you.

4. This wine comes from / is coming from Italy. This is where it is produced, but I bought it in Austria.

5. In this photo, my dad doesn’t put / isn’t putting a book on a table; it’s a diary, not a book.


257

6. Unemployment rises / is rising right now. 7. A: Why did you break this fl ower? B: It was an accident, sir. I apologize / am

apologizing. 8. Stop this! Can’t you see that I eat / am eating a hamburger and I cannot leave

it for later? 9. Judge: I sentence / am sentencing you to 5 years in prison.10. A: Can you see Jerry with a hammer and some nails? B: Yes, he hangs / is

hanging a picture on the wall.11. Henry imagines / is imagining that he isn’t liked by people. It started after he

was in a car accident ten years ago. Before the accident he had never had such thoughts.

12. She resents / is resenting what you said then and that’s why she hasn’t seen you for so many months.


PRZYKŁAD:


1. After his awful behavior, she (regard) ……………………….….. Jerry as a coward.

2. Oh, it was a wonderful holiday. We (thank) ……………..……….…… you very much!

3. Captain, look! The enemy soldiers (surround) ……………..……………. the castle! Another ten minutes and we will not be able to escape!

4. I can’t talk to you over the phone now, because I’m busy. … No, I (not, make ) ……………….………. dinner now, I’m busy with something else. … All right, I’ll call you later.

5. You (deserve) …….………..…………. a dessert after all this hard work! 6. It was much better before, but now, after you added tomatoes, this soup (taste)

………………….……… awful. 7. I want to give this present to Bill, who will be here in a minute. This is why I

(wrap) ……………….………… the present in this paper. 8. (these students, respect) ………….……………... their teacher? 9. Can you see these two guys in dirty clothes? They (build)

…………………………. a doghouse for their dog; they would like to fi nish before evening.

10. At this moment Sally (iron) …………………….…….. her mother’s blouse.11. Susan can’t answer the phone because she (comb)

………………..…………… her hair.12. I just (not, understand) ……………………………. this man and his views.


258


PRZYKŁAD:



1. Mam za godzine pociag i teraz pakuje walizke. (pack) My train leaves in an hour and .................................................... my suitcase. 2. Cóz, miałem sporo czasu, wiec przemyslałem to dobrze i radze ci wyjechae

na pare miesiecy do ciotki w Rosji. (advise) Well, I’ve had enough time, so I’ve thought it over

………..………………………… to go and visit your aunt in Russia for a couple of months.

3. Nie ma cie od wielu miesiecy, wiec za toba tesknie. (miss) You’ve been away for many months, ........................................................ you. 4. Na tej dziwnej ilustracji kot zmienia sie w mysz i jest gdzies w połowie tego

przeobrazenia. (turn into) In this strange picture .................................................... into a mouse and is

roughly halfway through this metamorphosis. 5. W tej sytuacji moje szczescie zalezy od tego, co zrobisz. In this situation, ……….......................................... what you do. (depend on) 6. Dlaczego mnie znowu aresztujecie? Nic nie zrobiłem. Pusccie mnie! (arrest) …….…………………….…….. me again? I haven’t done anything. Let me

go! 7. Nie moge ci teraz pomóc, ale obiecuje, ze pomoge ci pózniej. I can’ t help you now, ………..…….…………………… I will help you later.

(promise) 8. Ta wieza wznosi sie wysoko nad miastem i widac ja z daleka. (rise) This tower …………………………............... above the city and you can see

it from a great distance away. 9. Obawiam sie, ze nie mozesz sie teraz spotkac z moja córka; kapie sie w tej

chwili w łazience. (have) I’m afraid you can’t see my daughter …………………………….…….. a

bath in the bathroom at the moment.10. Widzisz? Moja ciocia miesza ryz z warzywami, ze by zrobic risotto. (mix) Can you see? My ................................................... rice with vegetables to

make risotto. 11. Ładne zdjecie. O, a ten chłopiec, to kto? A, juz wiem, poznaje mojego wuja

Marka, był wtedy małym chłopcem. (recognize) A nice picture. Oh, and this boy, who is it? All right now,

……………………………………… Mark, he was a young boy then.


259

12. Dlaczego on sie goli? Mówił, ze pójdzie do pracy nieogolony. (shave) ……...................................................? He said that he would go to work

unshaved.

Słowniczek

advise – radzic, poradzicapologize – przepraszac, przeprosicappearance - wygladcome from – pochodzic z / dochodzic, dojsc zdepend on – zalezec oddeserve – załugiwac, zasłuzyc nadiary - pamietnikescape – uciekac, uciechang – zawieszac, zawiesichave – miec / brac, wziac (np. prysznic)imagine – zdawac, zdac sie komus, zejudge – sedziaknit – robic, zrobic cos na drutachmean – znaczycmiss – tesknicmix – mieszac, wymieszacneedle - drutpack – pakowac, spakowacpromise – obiecywac, obiecacrecognize – poznac, rozpoznac

regard – uwazacresemble – przypominac, byc podobnymresent – czuc, poczuc sie urazonymrespect - szanowacrise – wzrastac, wzrosnac / wznosic, wzniesc sie / wschodzic, wzejscsentence – skazywac, skazacshave – golic, ogolic siesurround – otaczac, otoczyc / okrazac, okrazyctaste – smakowac / kosztowac, skosztowacthank – dziekowac, podziekowacturn into – zmieniac, zmienic sie wundress – rozbierac, rozebrac sieunemployment – bezrobocieview – pogladwool - wełnawrap – owijac, owinac

Test CProjekt badawczy Jakuba Bielaka i Mirosława Pawlaka, Uniwersytet im. A. Mickiewicza, Kalisz



PRZYKŁAD:


1. Worker: This job is awful and I can’t do it any longer. In fact, I resign / am resigning. Boss: Oh, no. You can’t do this to me!


260

2. There are some workers in the closed shop because they renovate / are renovating it.

3. Do you realize / Are you realizing how hard it is to have a regular job and study English at uni-versity at the same time?

4. This long word doesn’t mean / isn’t meaning ‘a cat’ in Japanese. 5. I don’t remember / am not remembering the time when we were happy. It’s

just not in my memory. 6. Can you see the funny look on Jenny’s face? That’s because she tastes / is

tasting my mother’s sour soup. 7. I gave him a piece of wood and now he sculpts / is sculpting a fi gure out of it. 8. This large tree, which was cut down three days ago, weighs / is weighing

almost 2 tons. 9. I can see that the shopkeeper closes / is closing the shop, so you won’t

manage to buy bread.10. You can hear that awful screaming because the dentist pulls out / is pulling

out Jerry’s tooth. He is so quick to scream when in pain.11. He is still OK but he’s had a few drinks and he gets drunk / is getting drunk.

You must stop him!12. The lord pities / is pitying people who make so little money and have to feed

their large families.


PRZYKŁAD:


1. He (seem) …………………………. to be a wonderful football player. 2. The price of this holiday (include) ……………………………accommodation

and transport, but not food. 3. A: Why do you need a pen? B: Because I (write) ……………………………

an essay for tomor-row’s class. 4. Can you see those young men with baseball bats? I think they (damage)

………………………….. our neighbor’s car now. 5. After you did and said all those things last year the detective started to be sus-

picious. In fact, he (suspect) ………………………… you of this crime now. 6. Look up! The crane (lift) …………………………... a very large stone onto

the roof. 7. Hello guys! I was born in Scotland, where I lived up until last year, but I

(come) ………………………. to Poland from Russia, where I have lived for 7 months.

8. I can’t stop the car because we (drive) ……………………..…. to Venice and we mustn’t be late.


261

9. She used to weigh 100 kg, but after dieting for 6 months she (not, weigh) ……………...…………….. that much.

10. You can now see how brave Linda is. (you, admire) …………………….……... her for her bravery?

11. She can’t stop and talk to you, because she (carry) …………………..……… this packet to the bank. It’s really urgent!

12. VIP: We all came here to christen the new ship, so let me do it: ‘I (name) ……………..………….. the ship Queen Mary’.


PRZYKŁAD:



1. W tej chwili instalujesz kuchenke w kuchni? (instal) .................................................... a cooker in the kitchen right now? 2. Ten dom nalezy teraz do mnie i moge go sprzedac, chocby jutro. (belong) ................................................... me now, and I can sell it, even tomorrow. 3. Popatrz tylko! Złoty płot otacza ten piekny pałac. (surround) Just look! A gold ………………………………….… palace. 4. Nie przeszkadzajcie nam, bo rozgrywamy partyjke brydza. (play) Don’t bother us, ………........................................ a game of bridge. 5. Wstawaj! Musisz to zobaczyc! Słonce własnie wschodzi. (rise) Get up! You have to see this! .….………………………….………. at the

moment. 6. Roztapiam w tym garnku masło poniewaz chciałbym dzisiaj upiec specjalne

ciasto. (melt) …………………....................…… butter in this pot because I would like to

bake a special cake today. 7. Nie widzisz, ja nie sprzatam całego samochodu, a tylko tylne siedzenie. Musi

byc czyste na popołudnie. (clean) Can’t you see? ....................................................... car, just the back seat. It

must be clean in the afternoon. 8. Przepraszam was za moje wczorajsze zachowanie, to było spowodowane

stresem. (apologize) ……..……………………..……… my bad behavior yesterday; it was caused

by too much stress. 9. Czy Jarek i Sylwia zamierzaja mieszkac w Polsce? (intend) ........................................................... in Poland?


262

10. Ona teraz załuje tego, co sie stało. (regret) Now, ..................................................... what happened.11. Przypuszczam, ze on jest teraz na wakacjach i lezy na plazy. (suppose) ......................................................... gone for a holiday and is lying on the

beach.12. Prosze, pomóz mi. Własnie przykrywam dziure tym ogromnym głazem.

(cover) Please, …………....………………………. the hole with this huge stone.

Słowniczek

admire – podziwiacapologize – przepraszac, przeprosicbaseball bat – kij baseballowybelong to – nalezec docarry – niesc, zaniescchristen – chrzcic, ochrzciccome from – pochodzic z / dochodzic, dojsc zcover – przykrywac, przykryccrane – dzwigdamage – uszkadzac, uszkodzicessay – wypracowaniefeed – karmic, wykarmicfence – płotget drunk – upijac, upic sieinclude – obejmowac, objacinstall – instalowac, zainstalowacintend - zamierzaclift – podnosic, podniescmean – znaczycmelt – roztapiac, roztopicmemory - pamiec

name – nadawac, nadac imiepity – współczucpull out – wyrywac, wyrwacrealize – zdawac, zdac sobie spraweregret - załowacrenovate – remontowac, wyremontowacresign - rezygnowac, zrezygnowacrise – wzrastac, wzrosnac / wznosic, wzniesc sie / wschodzic, wzejscsculpt – rzezbic, wyrzezbicseem – wydawac, wydac siestone – kamien, głazsuppose – przypuszczac, przypuscicsurround – otaczac, otoczyc / okrazac, okrazycsuspect – podejrzewacsuspicious - podejrzliwytaste – smakowac / kosztowac, skosztowacurgent – pilnyweigh – wazyc (np. 2 kg) / wazyc, zwazyc



Test A stimulus sentences

1. My parents are playing a game of cards now. 2. My father’s shoes do not cost over 200 zloty. 3. My parents are intending to go abroad this year. 4. My mother understands young people very well. 5. At this moment, my father is repairing something. 6. I am sure my father is having a very good job. 7. It’s diffi cult, but I’m thanking you for this task. 8. My mother melts ice in the kitchen now. 9. Probably my father is smelling fl owers right now.10. My mother does not feed a dog at this moment.

Test B stimulus sentences

1. Believe it or not, I promise I will eat less fat. 2. My father is not selling an old car now. 3. Right now my father paints a wall at home. 4. It’s possible that my parents are eating breakfast. 5. I am sure different people trust my father . 6. My mother is not judging her life to be a success. 7. My father’s job is including a lot of walking. 8. My mother comes home from a shop now. 9. The soup my mom cooked yesterday smells very nice.10. My mother cleans her desk at this moment.

Appendix F The Oral Elicited Imitation Test

264

Test C stimulus sentences

1. My mother is ironing my clothes right now. 2. Probably my father knows some famous people. 3. Listen, I am swearing that my mom likes hip-hop. 4. My mother’s safe is containing a lot of gold rings. 5. At home, my father changes his clothes now. 6. My parents defi nitely come from Kalisz. 7. It’s possible that my mother tastes some food now. 8. At this moment my mother is not baking a cake. 9. My father does not prefer bikes to cars now.10. I’m at school but my father drives to work now.

Oral test sheet

Test nr . . . . . . .


1. Prawda Nieprawda Nie jestem pewien/pewna










Appendix F: The Oral Elicited Imitation Test


ANKIETA

Czesc pierwsza – wiadomosci o uczniu

Imie i nazwisko: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Jak długo uczysz sie j. angielskiego? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ile godzin j. angielskiego tygodniowo miałes/as w poprzednich szkołach?Przedszkole: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Szkoła podstawowa: . . . . . . . . . . . .Gimnazjum: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Czy uczysz lub uczyłes/as sie j. angielskiego na kursach lub lekcjach indywidualnych poza szkoła? TAK/NIE (zaznacz jedna odpowiedz)Jesli tak, to napisz jakiego rodzaju to kursy i jak intensywne (np. przez dwa lata w gimnazjum chodziłem/am na kurs dla sredniozaawansowanych, zajecia 2 razy w tygodniu po 1,5 godziny, itp.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Appendix G Questionnaire for COG

266

Czy masz kontakt z j. angielskim poza lekcjami w szkole i na kursach? TAK/NIE Jesli tak, to napisz w jakiej formie i jak czesto (np. czasami docieram do słów moich ulubionych piosenek i próbuje je zrozumiec lub przetłumaczyc na j. polski albo mniej wiecej dwa razy w tygodniu ogladam krótki program telewizyjny po angielsku, itp.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dlaczego uczysz sie jezyka angielskiego? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Czesc druga – komentarze i opinie uczniów

W Twojej klasie przedstawiono niedawno uzycie czasów Present Simple i Present Continuous, kiedy mówimy o wydarzeniach dziejacych sie w chwili mówienia (w czasie terazniejszym).

Czy uczyłes/as sie tego materiału gramatycznego wczesniej? TAK/NIEJesli tak, to napisz w jaki sposób. Czy w inny niz podczas niedawnej lekcji? Jesli inny, to na czym polega róznica? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

UWAGA: W ponizszych pytaniach zaznacz jedna z pieciu odpowiedzi (wyjasnienie symboli: 1 – zdecydowanie nie zgadzam sie, 2 – nie zgadzam sie, 3 – nie mam zdania, 4 – zgadzam sie, 5 – zdecydowanie zgadzam sie).

Co sadzisz o sposobie, w jaki przedstawiono niedawno uzycie czasów Present Simple i Present Continuous, kiedy mówimy o wydarzeniach dziejacych sie w chwili mówienia (w czasie terazniejszym)?

1. Ta lekcja podobała mi sie. 1 2 3 4 5 Co Ci sie podobało, a co nie? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Appendix G: Questionnaire for COG

267

2. Ta lekcja była interesujaca. 1 2 3 4 5 Co było interesujace, a co nie? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3. Wszystko było zrozumiałe, jasne. 1 2 3 4 5 Co było zrozumiałe, a co nie? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4. Ta lekcja była łatwa. 1 2 3 4 5 Co było łatwe, a co trudne? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5. Rysunki i wykresy uzyte podczas tej lekcji były jasne i pomocne. 1 2 3 4 5

6. Teraz rozumiem w jaki sposób uzywamy tych czasów. 1 2 3 4 5

Jesli czegos nie rozumiesz, napisz czego. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

7. Teraz potrafi e je poprawnie stosowac. 1 2 3 4 5

8. Czy uczyłes/as sie tego materiału gramatycznego samodzielnie w domu, po lekcji? TAK/NIE

Jesli tak, to napisz jak długo i w jaki sposób. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Inne komentarze dotyczace tej lekcji: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Appendix G: Questionnaire for COG


Appendix H Questionnaire for TRAD

ANKIETA

Czesc pierwsza – wiadomosci o uczniu

Imie i nazwisko: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Jak długo uczysz sie j. angielskiego? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ile godzin j. angielskiego tygodniowo miałes/as w poprzednich szkołach?Przedszkole: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Szkoła podstawowa: . . . . . . . . . . . . Gimnazjum: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Czy uczysz lub uczyłes/as sie j. angielskiego na kursach lub lekcjach indywidual-nych poza szkoła? TAK/NIE (zaznacz jedna odpowiedz)Jesli tak, to napisz jakiego rodzaju to kursy i jak intensywne (np. przez dwa lata w gimnazjum chodziłem/am na kurs dla sredniozaawansowanych, zajecia 2 razy w tygodniu po 1,5 godziny, itp.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

270

Czy masz kontakt z j. angielskim poza lekcjami w szkole i na kursach? TAK/NIE Jesli tak, to napisz w jakiej formie i jak czesto (np. czasami docieram do słów moich ulubionych piosenek i próbuje je zrozumiec lub przetłumaczyc na j. polski albo mniej wiecej dwa razy w tygodniu ogladam krótki program telewizyjny po angielsku, itp.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dlaczego uczysz sie jezyka angielskiego? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Czesc druga – komentarze i opinie uczniów

W Twojej klasie przedstawiono niedawno uzycie czasów Present Simple i Present Continuous, kiedy mówimy o wydarzeniach dziejacych sie w chwili mówienia (w czasie terazniejszym).

Czy uczyłes/as sie tego materiału gramatycznego wczesniej? TAK/NIEJesli tak, to napisz w jaki sposób. Czy w inny niz podczas niedawnej lekcji? Jesli inny, to na czym polega róznica? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

UWAGA: W ponizszych pytaniach zaznacz jedna z pieciu odpowiedzi (wyjasnienie symboli: 1 – zdecydowanie nie zgadzam sie, 2 – nie zgadzam sie, 3 – nie mam zdania, 4 – zgadzam sie, 5 – zdecydowanie zgadzam sie).

Co sadzisz o sposobie, w jaki przedstawiono niedawno uzycie czasów Present Simple i Present Continuous, kiedy mówimy o wydarzeniach dziejacych sie w chwili mówienia (w czasie terazniejszym)?

1. Ta lekcja podobała mi sie. 1 2 3 4 5 Co Ci sie podobało, a co nie? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Appendix H: Questionnaire for TRAD

271

2. Ta lekcja była interesujaca. 1 2 3 4 5 Co było interesujace, a co nie? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3. Wszystko było zrozumiałe, jasne. 1 2 3 4 5 Co było zrozumiałe, a co nie? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4. Ta lekcja była łatwa. 1 2 3 4 5 Co było łatwe, a co trudne? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5. Teraz rozumiem w jaki sposób uzywamy tych czasów. 1 2 3 4 5

Jesli czegos nie rozumiesz, napisz czego. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6. Teraz potrafi e je poprawnie stosowac. 1 2 3 4 5

7. Czy uczyłes/as sie tego materiału gramatycznego samodzielnie w domu, po lekcji? TAK/NIE

Jesli tak, to napisz jak długo i w jaki sposób. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Inne komentarze dotyczace tej lekcji: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Appendix H: Questionnaire for TRAD


Aarts, Bas. 2004. Grammatici certant [Review article of The Cambridge grammar of the English language by Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey K. Pullum]. Journal of Linguistics 40: 365-382.

Aarts, Flor G. A. M. 1988. A comprehensive grammar of the English language: The great tra-dition continued [Review article of A comprehensive grammar of the English language by Randolph Quirk, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech and Jan Svartvik]. English Studies 69: 163-173.

Abrahamsson, Niclas. 2003. Development and recoverability of L2 codas: A longitudinal study of Chinese-Swedish interphonology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 25: 313-349.

Achard, Michel. 2004. Grammatical instruction in the natural approach: A cognitive grammar view. In Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching, eds. Michel Achard and Susanne Niemeier, 165-194. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Achard, Michel. 2008. Teaching construal: Cognitive pedagogical grammar. In Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition, eds. Peter Robinson and Nick C. Ellis, 432-455. New York: Routledge.

Achard, Michel, and Susanne Niemeier (eds.). 2004. Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Andersen, Roger W., and Yasuhiro Shirai. 1994. Discourse motivations for some cognitive acqui-sition principles. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16: 133-156.

Andersen, Roger W., and Yasuhiro Shirai. 1996. The primacy of aspect in first and second language acquisition: The pidgin-creole connection. In Handbook of second language acqui-sition, eds. William Ritchie and Tej K. Bhatia, 527-570. San Diego: Academic Press.

Anderson, John R. 1976. Language, memory, and thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Anderson, John R. 1983. The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press.Anderson, John R. 1995. Learning and memory: An integrated approach. New York: Wiley.Anthanasiadou, Angeliki. 2004. Teaching temporal connectors and their prototypical non-tem-

poral extensions. In Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching, eds. Michel Achard and Susanne Niemeier, 195-210. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Arabski, Janusz. 1979. Errors as indications of the development of interlanguage. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Slaskiego.

Augustyn, Danuta. 2006. Efektywnoác zastosowania wybranych elementów gramatyki kogni-tywnej w glottodydaktyce, na przykładzie rodzajnika włoskiego [The effectiveness of using selected aspects of cognitive grammar in foreign language pedagogy: Teaching Italian arti-cles]. [Unpublished PhD dissertation. Uniwersytet Slaski, Katowice.]

Austin, John Langshaw. 1962. How to do things with words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

References

References274

Ausubel, David. 1961. The use of advance organizers in the learning and retention of meaning-ful verbal material. Journal of Educational Psychology 51: 266-274.Bailey, Nathalie, Carolyn Madden, and Stephen Krashen. 1974. Is there a ‘natural sequence’ in adult second language learning? Language Learning 24: 235-244.

Banko, Mirosław. 2002. Wykłady z polskiej fleksji [Lectures on Polish inflection]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

Barcelona, Antonio (ed.). 2003. Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen. 1995. The interaction of pedagogy and natural sequences in the acqui-sition of tense and aspect. In Second language acquisition theory and pedagogy, eds. Fred R. Eckman, Diane Highland, Peter W. Lee, Jean Mileham and Rita W. Weber, 151-168. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen. 2000. Tense and aspect in second language acquisition: Form, mean-ing, and use. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen, and Llorenç Comajoan. 2008. Order of acquisition and developmental readiness. In The handbook of educational linguistics, eds. Bernard Spolsky and Francis M. Hult, 383-397. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Barsalou, Lawrence W., Cynthia Breazeal, and Linda B. Smith. 2007. Cognition as coordinated non-cognition. Cognitive Processing 8: 79-91.

Batstone, Richard. 1994a. Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Batstone, Richard. 1994b. Product and process: Attitude and deniability. In Grammar and the

language teacher, eds. Martin Bygate, Alan Tonkyn and Eddie Williams, 224-236. New York: Prentice Hall.

Belaj, Branimir. 2008. Pre-locativity as the schematic meaning of the Croatian verbal prefix pred-. Jezikoslovlje 9.1-2: 123-140.

Beretta, Alan, and Alan Davies. 1985. Evaluation of the Bangalore Project. ELT Journal 39: 121-127.

Bialystok, Ellen. 1994. Representation and ways of knowing: Three issues in second language acquisition. In Implicit and explicit learning of languages, ed. Nick C. Ellis, 549-569. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Bielak, Jakub. 2007. Applying Cognitive Grammar in the classroom: Teaching English posses-sives. In Exploring focus on form in language teaching (Special issue of Studies in Pedagogy and Fine Arts), ed. Mirosław Pawlak, 113-133. Poznan: Faculty of Pedagogy and Fine Arts, Adam Mickiewicz University.

Bielak, Jakub. 2011. Cognitive linguistics and foreign language pedagogy: an overview of recent trends and developments. In Extending the boundaries of research on second language learn-ing and teaching, ed. Mirosław Pawlak, 241-262. Heidelberg: Springer.

Bielak, Jakub. 2012. Cognitive grammar in the service of teaching linguistic flexibility and crea-tivity. In Informed teaching: Premises of modern foreign language pedagogy, eds. Hadrian Lankiewicz and Emilia Wasikiewicz-Firlej, 155-173. Piła: Panstwowa Wyzsza Szkoła Zawodowa im. Stanisława Staszica.

Bielak, Jakub, and Mirosław Pawlak. 2011. Teaching English tense and aspect with the help of cognitive grammar: An empirical study. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 1: 365-400.

Binnick, Robert I. 1991. Time and the verb: A guide to tense and aspect. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Boers, Frank. 2000. Metaphor awareness and vocabulary retention. Applied Linguistics 21: 553-571.

Boers, Frank. 2001. Remembering figurative idioms by hypothesizing about their origins. Prospect 16: 35-43.

Boers, Frank, and Murielle Demecheleer. 1998. A cognitive semantic approach to teaching prep-ositions. ELT Journal 52: 197-204.

References 275

Boers, Frank, and Seth Lindstromberg. 2006. Cognitive linguistic applications in second or for-eign language instruction: Rationale, proposals and evaluation. In Cognitive linguistics: Current applications and future perspectives, eds. Gitte Kristiansen, Michel Achard, René Dirven and Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, 305-355. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Boers, Frank, and Seth Lindstromberg (eds.). 2008. Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Breen, Michael P. 1984. Process syllabuses for the language classroom. In General English syl-labus design: ELT Documents 118, ed. Christopher J. Brumfit, 47-60. London: Pergamon/The British Council.

Brisard, Frank. 2005. Epistemic interactions of tense and aspect in the English verb: The para-digm of the present. In Cognitive linguistics: A user-friendly approach, ed. Kamila Turewicz, 65-82. Szczecin: Wydawnicto Uniwersytetu Szczecinskiego.

Broccias, Cristiano. 2006. Cognitive approaches to grammar. In Cognitive linguistics: Current applications and future perspectives, eds. Gitte Kristiansen, Michel Achard, René Dirven and Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, 81-115. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Broccias, Cristiano. 2008. Cognitive linguistic theories of grammar and grammar teaching. In Cognitive approaches to pedagogical grammar, eds. Sabine De Knop and Teun De Rycker, 67-90. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Bybee, Joan. 2008. Usage-based grammar and second language acquisition. In Handbook of cog-nitive linguistics and second language acquisition, eds. Peter Robinson and Nick C. Ellis, 216-236. New York: Routledge.

Casad, Eugene H. 1981. The conversational scheme and Cora viewpoint articles. Linguistic Notes from La Jolla 8: 41-72.

Casad, Eugene H. 1982. Cora locationals and structured imagery. [Unpublished PhD dissertation. University of California, San Diego.].

Casad, Eugene H., and Ronald W. Langacker. 1985.’Inside’ and ‘outside’ in Cora grammar. International Journal of American Linguistics 51: 247-81.

Celce-Murcia, Marianne. 2001. Language teaching approaches: An overview. In Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd edition), ed. Marianne Celce-Murcia, 3-11. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Celce-Murcia, Marianne, and Diane Larsen-Freeman. [1983] 1999. The grammar book: An EFL/ESL teacher’s course (2nd edition), Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Chafe, Wallace L. 1976. Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. In Subject and topic, ed. Chares N. Li, 25-55. New York: Academic Press.

Chalker, Sylvia. 1994. Pedagogical grammar: Principles and problems. In Grammar and the language teacher, eds. Martin Bygate, Alan Tonkyn and Eddie Williams, 31-44. New York: Prentice Hall.

Chen, Liang, and John W. Oller, Jr. 2008. The use of passives and alternatives in English by Chinese speakers. In Cognitive approaches to pedagogical grammar, eds. Sabine De Knop and Teun De Rycker, 385-415. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin and use. New York: Praeger.Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Clashen, Harald. 1980. Psycholinguistic aspects of L2 acquisition. In Second language develop-

ment: Trends and issues, ed. Sascha Felix, 57-79. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Clashen, Harald, and Pieter Muysken. 1986. The availability of universal grammar to adult

and child learners - the study of the acquisition of German word order. Second Language Research 2: 93-119.

Cohen, Jacob. [1969] 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Collentine, Joseph. 1998. Processing instruction and the subjunctive. Hispania 81: 576-587.Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect: An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related prob-

lems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

References276

Comrie, Bernard. 1985. Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Condon, Nora. 2008. How cognitive linguistic motivations influence the learning of phrasal

verbs. In Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology, eds. Frank Boers and Seth Lindstromberg, 133-158. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Cook, Vivian. 1994. Universal Grammar and the teaching and learning of second languages. In Perspectives on pedagogical grammar, ed. Terence Odlin, 25-48. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cook, Walter A., S. J. 1989. Case grammar theory. Washington, D. C.: Georgetown University Press.Corder, Stephen P. 1967. The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied

Linguistics 5: 161-169.Corder, Stephen P. 1981. Error analysis and interlanguage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Croft, William. 2000. Parts of speech as language universals and as language-particular catego-

ries. In Approaches to the typology of word classes, eds. Petra M. Vogel and Bernard Comrie, 65-102. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Croft, William. 2001. Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Csábi, Szilvia. 2004. A cognitive linguistic view of polysemy in English and its implications for teaching. In Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teach-ing, eds. Michel Achard and Susanne Niemeier, 233-256. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Cummins, Jim. 1980. The cross-lingual dimensions of language proficiency: Implications for bilingual education and the optimal age issue. TESOL Quarterly 14: 175-187.

De Bot, Kees. 1996. The psycholinguistics of the output hypothesis. Language Learning 46: 529-555.Declerck, Renaat. 2006. The grammar of the English verb phrase. Vol. 1: The grammar of the

English tense system: A comprehensive analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.DeKeyser, Robert M. 1995. Learning second language grammar rules: an experiment with a min-

iature linguistic system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 17: 379-410.DeKeyser, Robert M. 1997. Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language mor-

phosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19: 195-221.DeKeyser, Robert M. 1998. Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and prac-

ticing second language grammar. In Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, eds. Catherine Doughty and Jessica Williams, 42- 63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

DeKeyser, Robert M. 2003. Implicit and explicit learning. In The handbook of second lan-guage acquisition, eds. Catherine J. Doughty and Michael H. Long, 310-348. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

DeKeyser, Robert M. 2007a. Study abroad as foreign language practice. In Practice in a sec-ond language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology, ed. Robert M. DeKeyser, 208-226. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

DeKeyser, Robert M. 2007b. Skill acquisition theory. In Theories in second language acquisi-tion: An introduction, eds. Bill VanPatten and Jessica Williams, 97-113. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

DeKeyser, Robert M. 2009. Cognitive-psychological processes in second language learning. In The handbook of language teaching, eds. Michael H. Long and Catherine J. Doughty, 119-138. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

DeKeyser, Robert, Rafael Salaberry, Peter Robinson, and Michael Harrington. 2002. What gets processed in processing instruction: A response to Bill VanPatten’s Update. Language Learning 52: 805-823.

DeKeyser, Robert, and Karl Sokalski. 1996. The differential role of comprehension and produc-tion practice. Language Learning 46: 613-642.

De Knop Sabine, Frank Boers, and Antoon De Rycker (eds.). 2010. Fostering language teaching efficiency through cognitive linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

De Knop, Sabine, and Antoon De Rycker (eds.). 2008. Cognitive approaches to pedagogical grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

De Rycker, Antoon, and Sabine De Knop. 2009. Integrating cognitive linguistics and foreign language teaching - historical background and new developments. Journal of Modern Languages 19: 29-46.

References 277

Dirven, René. 1985. Definition of a pedagogical grammar. ITL Review of Applied Linguistics 67/68: 43-67.

Dirven, René. 1989. Cognitive linguistics and pedagogic grammar. In Reference grammars in modern linguistic theory, eds. Gottfried Graustein and Gerhard Leitner, 56-75. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.

Dirven, René. 1990. Pedagogical grammar (State of the art article). Language Teaching: The International Abstracting Journal for Language Teachers and Applied Linguists 23: 1-18.

Dirven, René. 2005. Major strands in cognitive linguistics. In Cognitive linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction, eds. Francesco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez and M. Sandra Peña Cervel, 17-68. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Doughty, Catherine J. 1998. Acquiring competence in a second language. In Learning foreign and second languages: Perspectives in research and scholarship, ed. Heidi Byrnes, 128-156. New York: The Modern Language Association of America.

Doughty, Catherine J. 1991. Second language instruction does make a difference: Evidence from an empirical study on SL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 13: 431-469.

Doughty, Catherine J. 2003. Instructed SLA: Constraints, compensation and enhancement. In The handbook of second language acquisition, eds. Catherine J. Doughty and Michael H. Long, 256-310. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Doughty, Catherine, and Jessica Williams. 1998. Issues and terminology. In Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, eds. Catherine Doughty and Jessica Williams, 1-11. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dulay, Heidi, and Marina Burt. 1973. Should we teach children syntax? Language Learning 23: 245-258.

Dulay, Heidi, and Marina Burt. 1974a. Errors and strategies in child second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly 8: 129-136.

Dulay, Heidi, and Marina Burt. 1974b. Natural sequences in child second language acquisition. Language Learning 24: 37-53.

Eastwood, John. [1992] 1999. Oxford practice grammar (2nd edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Eisenstein, Miriam. 1980. Grammatical explanations in ESL: Teach the student not the method. TESL Talk 11: 3-13.

Ellis, Nick C. 1998. Emergentism, connectionism and language learning. Language Learning 48: 631-664.

Ellis, Nick C. 1999. Cognitive approaches to SLA. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 19: 22-42.Ellis, Nick C. 2002. Frequency effects in language processing. Studies in Second Language

Acquisition 24: 143-188.Ellis, Nick C. 2003. “Constructions, chunking, and connectionism: The emergence of second lan-

guage structure. In The handbook of second language acquisition, eds. Catherine J. Doughty and Michael H. Long, 33-68. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Ellis, Nick C. 2005. At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27: 305-352.

Ellis, Nick C. 2006. Cognitive perspectives on SLA: The Associative-Cognitive CREED. AILA Review 19: 100-121.

Ellis, Nick C. 2008. Usage-based and form-focused language acquisition: The associative learn-ing of constructions, learned attention, and the limited L2 endstate. In Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition, eds. Peter Robinson and Nick C. Ellis, 372-405. New York: Routledge.

Ellis, Nick C., and Diane Larsen-Freeman. 2006. Language emergence: Implications for applied linguistics - Introduction to this special issue. Applied Linguistics 27: 558-589.

Ellis, Nick C., and Peter Robinson. 2008. An introduction to cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and language instruction. In Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition, eds. Peter Robinson and Nick C. Ellis, 3-24. New York: Routledge.

References278

Ellis, Rod. 1984. The role of instruction in second language acquisition. In Language learning in formal and informal contexts, eds. David Singleton and D. G. Little, 19-37. Dublin: Irish Association for Applied Linguistics.

Ellis, Rod. 1990. Instructed second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell.Ellis, Rod. 1992. The classroom context: An acquisition-rich or an acquisition-poor environ-

ment? In Text and context: Crossdisciplinary perspectives on language study, eds. Claire Kramsch and Sally McConnel-Ginet, 171-186. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.

Ellis, Rod. 1993. Second language acquisition and the structural syllabus. TESOL Quarterly 27: 91-113.

Ellis, Rod. 1994. A theory if instructed second language acquisition. In Implicit and explicit learning of languages, ed. Nick C. Ellis, 79-114. San Diego, Academic Press.

Ellis, Rod. 1997. SLA research and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Ellis, Rod. 1998. Teaching and research: Options in grammar teaching. TESOL Quarterly 32:

39-60.Ellis, Rod. 2002. Grammar teaching - practice or consciousness-raising? In Methodology in

language teaching: An anthology of current practice, eds. Jack C. Richards and Willy A. Renandya, 167-174. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ellis, Rod. 2005. Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychomet-ric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27: 141-172.

Ellis, Rod. 2006a. Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLA perspective. TESOL Quarterly 40: 83-107.

Ellis, Rod. 2006b. Modeling learning difficulty and second language proficiency: The differential contributions of implicit and explicit knowledge. Applied Linguistics 27: 431-463.

Ellis, Rod. 2008a. Explicit form-focused instruction and second language acquisition. In The handbook of educational linguistics, eds. Bernard Spolsky and Francis M. Hult, 437-455. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Ellis, Rod. 2008b. Investigating grammatical difficulty in second language learning: Implications for second language acquisition research and language testing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 18: 4-22.

Ellis, Rod. 2008c. The study of second language acquisition (2nd edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, Rod. 2009a. Implicit and explicit learning, knowledge and instruction. In Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching, eds. Rod Ellis, Shawn Loewen, Catherine Elder, Rosemary Erlam, Jenefer Philp and Hayo Reinders, 3-26. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Ellis, Rod. 2009b. Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language. In Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching, eds. Rod Ellis, Shawn Loewen, Catherine Elder, Rosemary Erlam, Jenefer Philp and Hayo Reinders, 31-64. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Ellis, Rod, Shawn Loewen, and Rosemary Erlam. 2006. Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 28: 339-368.

Erlam, Rosemary. 2003. The effects of deductive and inductive instruction on the acquisition of direct object pronouns in French as a second language. Modern Language Journal 87: 242-260.

Erlam, Rosemary. 2006. Elicited imitation as a measure of L2 implicit knowledge: An empirical validation study. Applied Linguistics 27: 464-491.

Erlam, Rosemary. 2009. The elicited oral imitation test as a measure of implicit knowledge. In Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching, eds. Rod Ellis, Shawn Loewen, Catherine Elder, Rosemary Erlam, Jenefer Philp and Hayo Reinders, 65-93. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Ervin-Tripp, Susan. 1974. Is second language learning really like the first? TESOL Quarterly 8: 111-127.

Evans, Vyvyan. 2011. Language and cognition: The view from cognitive linguistics. In Language and bilingual cognition, eds. Vivian Cook and Benedetta Bassetti, 69-108. New York: Psychology Press. http://www.vyvevans.net/TheViewFromCogLx.pdf. Accessed 6 July 2010.

http://www.vyvevans.net/TheViewFromCogLx.pdf

References 279

Evans, Vyvyan, and Melanie Green. 2006. Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Fauconnier, Gilles. 1994. Mental spaces: Aspects of meaning construction in natural language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fauconnier, Gilles. 1997. Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fauconnier, Gilles, and Mark Turner. 2003. The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.

Fillmore, Charles J. 1977. Topics in lexical semantics. In Current issues in linguistic theory, ed. Roger W. Cole, 76-138. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Fillmore, Charles J. 1988. The mechanisms of construction grammar. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 14: 35-55.

Fisiak, Jacek, Maria Lipinska-Grzegorek, and Tadeusz Zabrocki. 1978. Introductory Polish-English contrastive grammar. Warszawa: PWN.

Fitts, Paul M., and Michael I. Posner. 1967. Human performance. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

Folley, Mark, and Diane Hall. 2003. Longman advanced reference grammar: A self-study refer-ence & practice book with answers. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Fotos, Sandra. 1993. Consciousness-raising and noticing through focus on form: Grammar task performance vs. formal instruction. Applied Linguistics 14: 385-407.

Fotos, Sandra. 2002. Structure-based interactive tasks for the EFL grammar learner. In New per-spectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms, eds. Eli Hinkel and Sandra Fotos, 135-154. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gallimore, Ronald, and Ronald Tharp. 1981. The interpretation of elicited imitation in a stand-ardized context. Language Learning 31: 369-92.

Gass, Susan M. 1988. Integrating research areas: A framework for second language studies. Applied Linguistics 9: 198-217.

Gass, Susan M., and Larry Selinker. [1994] 2008. Second language acquisition: An introductory course (3rd edition). New York: Routledge.

Geeraerts, Dirk, and Hubert Cuyckens. 2007. Introducing cognitive linguistics. In The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics, eds. Dirk Geeraerts and Hubert Cuyckens, 3-21. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gibbs, Raymond W. 1995. What’s cognitive about cognitive linguistics? In Cognitive linguis-tics in the redwoods: The expansion of a new paradigm in linguistics, ed. Eugene H. Casad, 27-54. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Goldberg, Adele. E. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument struc-ture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Goldberg, Adele. E. 2006. Constructions at work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Góralczyk, Iwona. 2009. The complement clause scene: A cognitive grammar account of

indicative’that’-clauses in Polish and English. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej.

Greenbaum, Sidney, and Randolph Quirk. 1990. A student’s grammar of the English language. Harlow: Longman.

Halliday, Michael A. K. 1979. Modes of meaning and modes of expression: types of grammatical structure and their determination by different semantic functions. In Function and context in linguistic analysis: Essays offered to William Haas, eds. D. J. Allerton, Edward Carney and David Holdcroft, 57-79. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Halliday, Michael A. K. 1993. Systemic theory. In Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, ed. Ron E. Asher, 4905-4908. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Hampe, Beate (ed.). 2005. From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Hasan, Ruqaiya, and Gillian Perret. 1994. Learning to function in the other tongue: A systemic functional perspective on second language teaching. In Perspectives on pedagogical gram-mar, ed. Terence Odlin, 179-226. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

References280

Herron, Carol, and Michael Tomasello. 1992. Acquiring grammatical structures by guided induc-tion. French Review 65: 708-718.

Hewings, Martin. 2005. Advanced grammar in use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Hinkel, Eli. 2011. Construction grammar and its contribution to language teaching. (Paper pre-

sented at the TESOL meeting, New Orleans, LA, March 2011).Hinkel, Eli, and Sandra Fotos. 2002. From theory to practice: A teacher’s view. In New perspec-

tives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms, eds. Eli Hinkel and Sandra Fotos, 1-12. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Holme, Randal. 2009. Cognitive linguistics and language teaching. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Holme, Randal. 2011. A construction grammar for the classroom. International Review of

Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 48: 355-377.Holme, Randal, and Julie King. 2000. Teaching through metaphor: Towards a learner-friendly

language. In Patterns and perspectives: Insights into EAP writing practice, ed. Paul Thompson, 117-130. Reading: Reading University CALS.

Holt, Jens. 1943. Études d’aspect. Acta Jutlandica 15, 2. Copenhague: Aarhus Universitet.Hopper, Paul, and Sandra A. Thompson. 1984. The discourse basis for lexical categories in uni-

versal grammar. Language 60: 703-52.Housen, Alex, Michel Pierrard, and Siska Van Daele. 2006. structure complexity and the efficacy

of explicit grammar instruction. In Investigations in instructed second language acquisition, eds. Alex Housen and Michel Pierrard, 199-234. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Howell, David C. 2007. Statistical methods for psychology (7th edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth CENGAGE.

Hubbard, Philip L. 1994. Non-transformational theories of grammar: Implications for language teaching. In Perspectives on pedagogical grammar, ed. Terence Odlin, 49-71. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Huddleston, Rodney. 1988. Review article of A comprehensive grammar of the English language by Randolph Quirk, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech and Jan Svartvik. Language 64: 345-354.

Huddleston, Rodney, and Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hudson, Richard. 2008. Word Grammar, Cognitive Linguistics, and second language learning and teaching. In Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition, eds. Peter Robinson and Nick C. Ellis, 89-113. New York: Routledge.

Hulstijn, Jan H. 1995. Not all grammar rules are equal: Giving grammar instruction its proper place in foreign language teaching. In Attention and awareness in foreign language learning, ed. Richard Schmidt, 359-386. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Hulstijn, Jan H. 2002. Towards a unified account of the representation, processing and acquisi-tion of second language knowledge. Second Language Research 18: 193-223.

Hulstijn Jan H. 2005. Theoretical and empirical issues in the study of implicit and explicit second-language learning: Introduction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27: 129-140.

Huong, Nguyen Thu. 2005. Vietnamese learners mastering English articles. [Unpublished PhD dis-sertation, University of Groningen.] http://dissertations.ub.rug.nl/FILES/faculties/ppsw/2005/h.n.thu/thesis.pdf. Accessed 20 February 2011.

Hymes, Dell. 1972. On communicative competence. In Sociolinguistics, eds. John Pride and Janet Holmes, 269-293. Baltimore: Penguin.

Janda, Laura A. 1993. A geography of case semantics: The Czech dative and the Russian instru-mental. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Jarvis, Scott, and Aneta Pavlenko. 2008. Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. New York: Routledge.

Johnson, Keith. 1996. Language teaching and skill-learning. Oxford: Blackwell.Johnson, Keith. 2001. An introduction to foreign language learning and teaching. Harlow:

Pearson Education.Johnston, Malcolm. 1985. Syntactic and morphological progressions in learner English.

Canberra: Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs.

http://dissertations.ub.rug.nl/FILES/faculties/ppsw/2005/h.n.thu/thesis.pdf

http://dissertations.ub.rug.nl/FILES/faculties/ppsw/2005/h.n.thu/thesis.pdf

References 281

Kardela, Henryk. 2000. Dimensions and parameters in grammar. Studies in A/D asymmetries and subjectivity relations in Polish. Lublin: Maria Curie-Skłodowska University Press.

Kardela, Henryk. 2011. The psychological reality of grammar. A cognitive linguistics perspec-tive. In New perspectives in language, discourse and translation studies, eds. Mirosław Pawlak and Jakub Bielak, 43-60. Heidelberg: Springer.

Kay, Paul, and Charles J. Fillmore. 1999. Grammatical constructions and linguistic generaliza-tions: The What’s X doing Y construction. Language 75: 1-34.

Klein, Wolfgang, and Clive Perdue. 1992. Utterance structure: Developing grammars again. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Kochanska, Agata. 1996. Temporal meanings of spatial prepositions in Polish: The case of przez and w. In The construal of space in language and thought, eds. Martin Pütz and René Dirven, 491-508. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Kochanska, Agata. 2002. A cognitive grammar analysis of Polish non-past perfectives and imper-fectives: How virtual events differ from actual ones. In Grounding: The epistemic footing of deixis and reference, ed. Frank Brisard, 349-390. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Kochanska, Agata. 2004. How perfect can an imperfective be? A cognitive grammar contrastive analysis of the Polish past imperfective and the English present perfect. In Imagery in lan-guage. Festschrift in honour of Professor Ronald W. Langacker, eds. Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk and Alina Kwiatkowska, 269-278. Frankfurt am Mein: Peter Lang.

Kövecses, Zoltán. 2002. Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Kövecses, Zoltán, and Peter Szabó. 1996. Idioms: A view from cognitive semantics. Applied

Linguistics 17: 326-355.Krashen, Steven. 1981. Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford:

Pergamon.Krashen, Stephen. 1982. Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford:

Pergamon.Krashen, Stephen. 1985. The input hypothesis. London: Longman.Krashen, Stephen. 2003. Explorations in language acquisition and use. Portsmouth, NH:

Heinemann.Krashen, Stephen, and Tracy D. Terrell. 1983. The natural approach: Language acquisition in

the classroom. Oxford: Pergamon.Król-Markefka, Agnieszka. 2006. The effects of applying cognitive grammar to the teaching of

English articles to Polish learners. In Language and identity: English and American stud-ies in the age of globalization. Vol. 2: Language and culture, eds. Ewa Witalisz and Justyna Lesniewska, 100-115. Kraków: Jagiellonian University Press.

Król-Markefka, Agnieszka. 2007. How do Polish learners use English articles? A diagnostic study. In Exploring focus on form in language teaching (Special issue of Studies in Pedagogy and Fine Arts), ed. Mirosław Pawlak, 135-153. Poznan: Faculty of Pedagogy and Fine Arts, Adam Mickiewicz University.

Król-Markefka, Agnieszka. 2010a. A i the dla uczniów z wyobraznia - efekty zastosowania gramatyki kognitywnej w szkole [A and the for imaginative students - effects of applying cognitive grammar in the classroom]. Neofilolog 35: 207-220.

Król-Markefka, Agnieszka. 2010b. Metalinguistic knowledge and the accurate use of English articles: The effects of applying Cognitive Grammar in second language teaching. [Unpublished PhD dissertation. Uniwersytet Jagiellonski, Kraków.]

Kumaravadivelu, B. 1994. The postmethod condition: (E)merging strategies for second/foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly 28: 27-48.

Kumaravadivelu, B. 2005. Understanding language teaching: From method to postmethod. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Kurtyka, Andrzej. 2001. Teaching English phrasal verbs: a cognitive approach. In Applied cogni-tive linguistics II: Language pedagogy, eds. Martin Pütz, Susanne Niemeier and René Dirven, 29-54. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire and dangerous things. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

References282

Langacker, Ronald W. 1982. Space grammar, analysability, and the English passive. Language 58: 22-80.

Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. 1: Theoretical prerequi-sites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. 2: Descriptive applications. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Langacker, Ronald W. 1994. Culture, cognition, and grammar. In Language contact and lan-guage conflict, ed. Martin Pütz, 25-53. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Langacker, Ronald W. 1999a. Assessing the cognitive linguistic enterprise. In Cognitive linguis-tics: Foundations, scope, and methodology, eds. Theo Janssen and Gisela Redeker, 13-60. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Langacker, Ronald W. 1999b. Grammar and conceptualization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Langacker, Ronald W. 2001a. Cognitive linguistics, language pedagogy, and the English present

tense. In Applied cognitive linguistics I: Theory and language acquisition, eds. Martin Pütz, Susanne Niemeier and René Dirven, 3-40. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Langacker, Ronald W. 2001b. Discourse in Cognitive Grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 12: 143-188.

Langacker, Ronald W. [1991] 2002. Concept, image, and symbol: The cognitive basis of gram-mar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Langacker, Ronald W. 2005a. Construction grammars: Cognitive, radical, and less so. In Cognitive linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction, eds. Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez and M. Sandra Peña Cervel, 101-159. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Langacker, Ronald W. 2005b. Wykłady z gramatyki kognitywnej. Lublin 2001. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej.

Langacker, Ronald W. 2008a. Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Langacker, Ronald W. 2008b. Cognitive Grammar as a basis for language instruction. In Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition, eds. Peter Robinson and Nick C. Ellis, 66-88. New York: Routledge.

Langacker, Ronald W. 2009. Investigations in cognitive grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Lantolf, James P. 2006. Sociocultural Theory and L2: State of the art. Studies in Second

Language Acquisition 28: 67-109.Lantolf, James P., and Steven L. Thorne. 2007. Sociocultural theory and second language learn-

ing. In Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction, eds. Bill VanPatten and Jessica Williams, 201-224. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 1976. An explanation for the morpheme acquisition order of second lan-guage learners. Language Learning 26: 125-134.

Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 1997. Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics 18: 141-165.

Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 2003. Teaching language: From grammar to grammaring. Boston: Thomson and Heinle.

Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 2009. Teaching and testing grammar. In The handbook of language teaching, eds. Michael H. Long and Catherine J. Doughty and, 518-542. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Larsen-Freeman, Diane, and Michael H. Long. 1991. An introduction to second language acqui-sition research. London: Longman.

Larson-Hall, Jenifer. 2010. A guide to doing statistics in second language research using SPSS. New York: Routledge.

Leech, Geoffrey. 1994. Students’ grammar - teachers’ grammar - learners’ grammar. In Grammar and the language teacher, eds. Martin Bygate, Alan Tonkyn and Eddie Williams, 17-30. New York: Prentice Hall.

Leech, Geoffrey. 2004. A new Gray’s Anatomy of English grammar [Review article of The Cambridge grammar of the English language by Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey K. Pullum]. English Language and Linguistics 8: 121-147.

References 283

Leino, Jaakko. 2005. Frames, profiles and constructions: Two collaborating CGs meet the Finnish Permissive Construction. In Construction grammars: Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions, eds. Jan-Ola Östman and Mirjam Fried, 89-120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Lenko-Szymanska, Agnieszka. 2007. Past progressive or simple past? The acquisition of progressive aspect by advanced Polish learners of English. In Corpora in the foreign language classroom, eds. Encarnación Hidalgo, Luis Quereda and Juan Santana, 253-266. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Levelt, Willem J. M. 1989. Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press/Bradford.

Lewis, Michael. 1993. The lexical approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.Lewis, Michael. (ed.). 2000. Teaching collocation: Further developments in the lexical approach.

Hove: Language Teaching Publications.Lightbown, Patsy M. 1985. Can language acquisition be altered by instruction? In Modelling and

assessing second language acquisition, eds. Kenneth Hyltenstam and Manfred Pienemann, 101-112. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Lightbown, Patsy M. 1998. The importance of timing in focus-on-form. In Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, eds. Catherine Doughty and Jessica Williams, 177-196. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lindner, Susan. 1981. A lexico-semantic analysis of English verb-particle constructions with UP and OUT. [Unpublished PhD dissertation. University of California, San Diego.].

Lindstromberg Seth, and Frank Boers. 2005. From movement to metaphor with manner-of-move-ment verbs. Applied Linguistics 26: 241-261.

Littlemore, Jeannette. 2009. Applying cognitive linguistics to second language learning and teaching. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Littlemore, Jeannette, and Costanze Juchem-Grundmann (eds.). 2010. Applied cognitive lin-guistics in second language learning and teaching. (AILA Review 23.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Llopis-García, Reyes. 2010. Why cognitive grammar works in the L2 classroom: A case study of mood selection in Spanish. In Applied cognitive linguistics in second language learning and teaching (AILA Review 23), eds. Jeannette Littlemore and Costanze Juchem-Grundmann, 72-94. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Lock, Graham. 1996. Functional English grammar: An introduction for second language teach-ers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Loewen, Shawn, Rosemary Erlam, and Rod Ellis. 2009. The incidental acquisition of third person -s as implicit and explicit knowledge. In Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching, eds. Rod Ellis, Shawn Loewen, Catherine Elder, Rosemary Erlam, Jenefer Philp and Hayo Reinders, 262-280. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Long, Michael H. 1983. Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics 4: 126-141.

Long, Michael H. 1991. Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective, eds. Kees de Bot, Ralph Ginsberg and Claire Kramsch, 39-52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Long, Michael H. 1996. The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Handbook of second language acquisition, eds. William Ritchie and Tej K. Bhatia, 413-468. San Diego: Academic Press.

Long, Michael H. 2003. Stabilization and fossilization in interlanguage development. In The handbook of second language acquisition, eds. Catherine J. Doughty and Michael H. Long, 487-536. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Long, Michael H. 2007. Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Loschky, Lester, and Robert Bley-Vroman. 1990. Grammar and task-based methodology. In

Tasks and language learning, eds. Graham Crookes and Susan M. Gass, 123-167. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Lyster, Roy. 1994. The effect of functional-analytic teaching on aspects of French immersion stu-dents’ sociolinguistic competence. Applied Linguistics 15: 263-287.

References284

Lyster, Roy. 2004. Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 26: 399-432.

Lyster, Roy, and Leila Ranta. 1997. Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19: 37-66.

McClelland, James L., and David E. Rumelhart (eds.). 1986. Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. Vol. 2: Psychological and biological models. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press/Bradford.

McDade, Hiram, Marta Simpson, and Donna Lamb. 1982. The use of elicited imitation as a measure of expressive grammar: A question of validity. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 47: 19-24.

Mackey, Alison. 1999. Input, interaction and second langue development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 21: 557-587.

Mackey, Alison, and Jenifer Philip. 1997. Conversational interaction and second language devel-opment: Recasts, responses and red herrings? Modern Language Journal 82: 338-356.

McLaughlin, Barry. 1987. Theories of second language acquisition. London: Arnold.McLaughlin, Barry, and Roberto R. Heredia. 1996. Information processing approaches to

research on second language acquisition and use. In A handbook of second language acquisi-tion, eds. William C. Ritchie and Tej K. Bhatia, 213-228. San Diego: Academic Press.

MacWhinney, Brian. 1987. The Competition Model. In Mechanisms of language acquisition, ed. Brian MacWhinney, 249-308. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

MacWhinney, Brian. 2001. The Competition Model: The input, the context, and the brain. In Cognition and second language instruction, ed. Peter Robinson, 69-90. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Maldonado, Ricardo. 2008. Spanish middle syntax: A usage-based proposal for grammar teach-ing. In Cognitive approaches to pedagogical grammar, eds. Sabine De Knop and Teun De Rycker, 155-196. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Manczak-Wohlfeld, Elzbieta, Anna Nizegorodcew, and Ewa Willim. [1987] 2007. A practical grammar of English. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

Marras, Valentina, and Teresa Cadierno. 2008. Spanish gustar vs. English like: A cognitive analysis of the constructions and its implication for SLA. In Language in the context of use: Discourse and cognitive approaches to language, eds. Andrea Tyler, Yiyoung Kim and Mari Takada, 233-252. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Meisel, Jurgen, Harald Clashen, and Manfred Pienemann. 1981. On determining developmen-tal stages in natural second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 3: 109-135.

Morris, C. Donald, John D. Bransford, and Jeffrey J. Franks. 1977. Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 16: 519-533.

Mortelmans, Tanja. 1994. Understanding German dative verbs and their English and Dutch equiv-alents: A contrastive study in cognitive grammar. Antwerp Papers in Linguistics 78: 1-124.

Mukherjee, Joybrato. 2002. Review of The Cambridge grammar of the English language by Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey K. Pullum. The LINGUIST List. http://linguistlist.org/issues/13/13-1853.html. Accessed 15 January 2010.

Mukherjee, Joybrato. 2006. Corpus linguistics and English reference grammars. In The chang-ing face of corpus linguistics: Papers from the 24th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 24), ed. Antoinette Renouf, 337-354. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Murphy, Raymond. 2004. English grammar in use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Myles, Florence, Janet Hopper, and Rosamond Mitchell. 1998. Rote or rule? Exploring the

role of formulaic language in classroom foreign language learning. Language Learning 48: 323-364.

Mystkowska-Wiertelak, Anna, and Mirosław Pawlak. 2012. Production-oriented and comprehen-sion-based grammar teaching in the foreign language classroom. Heidelberg: Springer.

Nassaji, Hossein, and Sandra Fotos. 2011. Teaching grammar in second language classrooms: Integrating form-focused instruction in communicative context. New York: Routledge.

http://linguistlist.org/issues/13/13-1853.html

http://linguistlist.org/issues/13/13-1853.html

References 285

Nemser, William. 1971. Approximative systems of foreign language learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics 9: 115-123.

Nerlich, Brigitte, and David D. Clarke. 2007. Cognitive linguistics and the history of linguistics. In The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics, eds. Dirk Geeraerts and Hubert Cuyckens, 589-607. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Newby, David. 2004. Pedagogical grammar. In Michael Byram (ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of language teaching and learning. 459-461. London: Routledge.

Newmark, Leonard. 1966. How not to interfere in language learning? International Journal of American Linguistics 32: 77-83.

Newmark, Leonard, and David A. Reibel. 1968. Necessity and sufficiency in language learning. In International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 6: 145-164.

Niemeier, Susanne. 2005a. Applied cognitive linguistics and newer trends in foreign language teaching methodology. In Language in use: Cognitive and discourse perspectives on lan-guage and language learning, eds. Andrea E. Tyler, Mari Takada, Yiyoung Kim and Diana Marinova, 100-111. Washington, D.C.: Georgtown University Press.

Niemeier, Susanne. 2005b. Boundedness/unboundedness: Blick durch das Schlüsselloch. Angewandte kognitive Linguistik für den Englischunterricht [Boundedness/unboundedness: The keyhole method. Applied cognitive linguistics for TEFL]. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Linguistik 43: 3-31.

Niemeier, Susanne 2008. The notion of boundedness/unboundedness in the foreign language classroom. In Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology, eds. Frank Boers and Seth Lindstromberg, 309-328. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Niemeier, Susanne, and Monika Reif. 2008. Making progress simpler? Applying cognitive grammar to tense-aspect teaching in the German EFL classroom. In Cognitive approaches to pedagogical grammar, eds. Sabine De Knop and Teun De Rycker, 325-356. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Norris, John Michael, and Lourdes Ortega. 2000. Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research syn-thesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning 50: 417-528.

Nunan, David. 1994. Linguistic theory and pedagogic practice. In Perspectives on pedagogical grammar, ed. Terence Odlin, 253-270. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nuyts, Jan. 2005. Brothers in arms? On the relations between Cognitive and Functional Linguistics. In Cognitive linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction, eds. Francesco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez and M. Sandra Peña Cervel, 69-100. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Odlin, Terence. 1989. Language transfer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Odlin, Terence. 1994a. Introduction. In Perspectives on pedagogical grammar, ed. Terence

Odlin, 1-22. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Odlin, Terence (ed.). 1994b. Perspectives on pedagogical grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.Odlin, Terence. 2003. Cross-linguistic influence. In The handbook of second language acqui-

sition, eds. Catherine J. Doughty and Michael H. Long, 436-486. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Ortega, Lourdes. 2007. Second language learning explained? SLA across nine contemporary the-ories. In Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction, eds. Bill VanPatten and Jessica Williams, 225-250. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Paivio, Alan. 1971. Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Paradis, Michel. 2004. A neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Pavesi, Maria. 1986. Markedness, discoursal modes and relative clause formation in a formal and

informal context. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 8: 38-55.Pawlak, Mirosław. 2004a. On the effectiveness of options in grammar teaching: Translating the-

ory and research into classroom practice. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 40: 269-287.Pawlak, Mirosław. 2004b. Describing and researching interactive processes in the foreign lan-

guage classroom. Konin: Wydawnictwo Panstwowej Wyzszej Szkoły Zawodowej w Koninie.Pawlak, Mirosław. 2006. The place of form-focused instruction in the foreign language class-

room. Kalisz: Wydział Pedagogiczno-Artystyczny UAM.

References286

Pawlak, Mirosław. 2008. The effect of corrective feedback on the acquisition of the English third person singular -s ending. In Morphosyntactic issues in second language acquisition, ed. Danuta Gabrys-Barker, 187-202. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Pawlak, Mirosław. 2012. Error correction in the foreign language classroom: Reconsidering the issues. Poznan: Wydział Pedagogiczno-Artystyczny UAM and Wydawnictwo PWSZ w Koninie.

Piatkowska, Katarzyna. 2007. Applying cognitive linguistics in glottodidactic practice: On the basis of teaching English prepositions to adult English language learners. [Unpublished PhD dissertation. Nicolaus Copernicus University, Torun.]

Pica, Teresa. 1983. Adult acquisition of English as a second language under different conditions of exposure. Language Learning 34: 465-497.

Pica, Teresa, Lloyd Holliday, Nora Lewis, and Lynelle Montgenhaler. 1989. Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 11: 63-90.

Pienemann, Manfred. 1985. Learnability and syllabus construction. In Modelling and assess-ing second language acquisition, eds. Kenneth. Hyltenstam and Manfred Pienemann, 23-76. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Pienemann, Manfred. 1987. Determining the influence of instruction on L2 speech processing. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 10: 83-113.

Pienemann, Manfred. 1998. Language processing and second language development: Processability theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamin.

Pienemann, Manfred. 2005. An introduction to Processability Theory. In Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory, ed. Manfred Pienemann, 1-59. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Pienemann, Manfred. 2007. Processability theory. In Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction, eds. Bill VanPatten and Jessica Williams, 137-154. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Pollard, Carl, and Ivan A. Sag. 1994. Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Chicago: The Chicago University Press.

Prabhu, N. S. 1984. Procedural syllabuses. In Trends in language syllabus design, ed. John A. S. Read, 272-280. Singapore: Singapore University Press.

Prabhu, N. S. 1987. Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Purpura, James E. 2004. Assessing grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Pütz, Martin, Susanne Niemeier, and René Dirven (eds.). 2001a. Applied cognitive linguistics I:

Theory and language acquisition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Pütz, Martin, Susanne Niemeier, and René Dirven (eds.). 2001b. Applied cognitive linguistics II:

Language pedagogy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive

grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. 1972. A grammar of

contemporary English. London: Longman.Radden, Günter. 1992. The cognitive approach to natural language. In Thirty years of linguis-

tic evolution. Studies in honour of René Dirven on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday, ed. Martin Pütz, 513-541. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Radden, Günter, and René Dirven. 2007. Cognitive English grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Radford, Andrew. 1988. Transformational grammar: A first course. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Radford, Andrew. 2009. Analysing English sentences: A minimalist approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rajagopalan, Kanavillil. 2004. The philosophy of applied linguistics. In The handbook of applied linguistics, eds. Alan Davies and Catherine Elder, 397-420. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Ravem, Roar. 1974. The development of Wh-questions in first and second language learners. In Error analysis: perspectives on second language acquisition, ed. Jack C. Richards, 134-155. London: Longman.

References 287

Ringbom, Håkan. 2007. Cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Robinson, Peter. 1995. Attention, memory, and the ‘noticing’ hypothesis. Language Learning 45: 283-331.

Robinson, Peter. 1996. Learning simple and complex rules under implicit, incidental, rule-search conditions, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18: 27-67.

Robinson, Peter. 2003. Attention and memory during SLA. In The handbook of second lan-guage acquisition, eds. Catherine J. Doughty and Michael H. Long, 631-678. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Robinson, Peter, and Nick C. Ellis. 2008. Conclusion: Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition and L2 instruction - issues for research. In Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition, eds. Peter Robinson and Nick C. Ellis, 489-545. New York: Routledge.

Robinson, Peter, and Nick C. Ellis (eds.). 2008. Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition. New York: Routledge.

Rosa, Elena, and Ron Leow. 2004. Computerized task-based exposure, explicitness, type of feed-back, and Spanish L2 development. Modern Language Journal 88: 192-216.

Rosa, Elena, and Michael D. O’Neil. 1999. Explicitness, intake and the issue of awareness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 21: 511-556.

Rosch, Eleanor. 1978. Principles of categorization. In Cognition and categorization, eds. Eleanor Rosch and Barbara L. Lloyd, 27-47. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Rudzka-Ostyn, Brygida. 1993. Introduction. In Conceptualizations and mental processing in lan-guage, eds. Richard A. Geiger and Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn, 1-20. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Rudzka-Ostyn, Brygida. 2003. Word power: Phrasal verbs and compounds. A cognitive approach. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Rumelhart, David E., and James L. McClelland (eds.). 1986. Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. Vol. 1: Foundations. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press/Bradford.

Rutherford, William. 1987. Second language grammar: Learning and teaching. London: Longman.

Salaberry, Richard. 1997. The role of input and output practice in second language acquisition. Canadian Modern Language Review 53: 422-451.

Schmidt, Richard. 1990. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11: 17-46.

Schmidt, Richard. 1994. Deconstructing consciousness: In search of useful definitions for applied linguistics. AILA Review 11: 11-26.

Schmidt, Richard. 1995. Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In Attention and awareness in foreign language learning, ed. Richard Schmidt, 1-63. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.

Schmidt, Richard. 2001. Attention. In Cognition and second language instruction, ed. Peter Robinson, 3-32. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schmidt, Richard W., and Sylvia Nagem Frota. 1986. Developing basic conversational ability in a second language: A case study of an adult learner of Portuguese. In Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition, ed. Richard Day, 237-326. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Searle, John R. 1969. Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Seliger, Howard H. 1975. Inductive method and deductive method in language teaching: A reex-amination. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 13: 1-18.

Seliger, Howard. 1979. On the nature and function of language rules in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly 13: 359-369.

Selinker, Larry. 1972. Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics 10: 201-231.Shaffer, Constance. 1989. A comparison of inductive and deductive approaches to teaching for-

eign languages. Modern Language Journal 73: 395-403.

References288

Sharwood-Smith, Michael. 1974. Imperfective vs. progressive - an exercise in contrastive peda-gogical linguistics. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 3: 85-90.

Sharwood-Smith, Michael. 1981. Consciousness-rising and the second language learner. Applied Linguistics 2: 159-169.

Sharwood-Smith, Michael. 1993. Input enhancement in instructed SLA: Theoretical bases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 15: 165-179.

Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1985. Passives and related constructions: A prototype analysis. Language 61: 821-48.

Shirai, Yasuhiro, and Roger W. Andersen. 1995. The acquisition of tense-aspect morphology. Language 71: 743-762.

Smith, Philip D. 1970. A comparison of the audiolingual and cognitive approaches to foreign language instruction: The Pennsylvania foreign language project. Philadelphia: Center for Curriculum Development.

Spada, Nina, and Patsy M. Lightbown. 1993. Instruction and the development of questions in the L2 classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 15: 205-221.

Spada, Nina, Patsy M. Lightbown, and Joanna L. White. 2006. The importance of form/mean-ing mappings in explicit form-focused instruction. In Investigations in instructed second language acquisition, eds. Alex Housen and Michel Pierrard, 235-269. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Standop, Ewald. 2000. Englische Verbkomplementation. Anglia 118: 217-257.Stern, Hans Heinrich. 1992. Issues and options in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.Stevick, Earl W. 1986. Images and options in the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.Swain, Merrill. 1985. Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and

comprehensible output in its development. In Input in second language acquisition, eds. Susan Gass and Carolyn Madden, 235-253. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Swain, Merrill. 1992. Manipulating and complementing content teaching to maximize learning. In Foreign/second language pedagogy research, eds. Eric Kellerman, Robert Philipson, Larry Selinker, Michael Sharwood-Smith and Merril Swain, 234-250. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Swain, Merrill. 1995. Three functions of output in second language learning. In Principles and practice in the study of language: Studies in honor of H. G. Widdowson, eds. Guy Cook and Barbara Seidlhofer, 125-144. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Swain, Merrill. 1998. Focus on form through conscious reflection. In Focus on form in class-room second language acquisition, eds. Catherine Doughty and Jessica Williams, 64-81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Swain, Merill. 2000. The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collabo-rative dialogue. In Sociocultural theory and second language learning, ed. James P. Lantolf, 97-114. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Swain, Merrill. 2005. The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, ed. Eli Hinkel, 471-483. New York: Routledge.

Swain, Merill, and Robert Keith Johnson. 1997. Immersion education: A category within bilin-gual education. In Immersion education: International perspectives, eds. Robert Keith Johnson and Merill Swain, 1-16. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Swain, Merill, and Sharon Lapkin. 1995. Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics 16: 371-391.

Swan, Michael. 1994. Design criteria for pedagogic language rules. In Grammar and the lan-guage teacher, eds. Martin Bygate, Alan Tonkyn and Eddie Williams, 45-55. New York: Prentice Hall.

Swan, Michael. 2002. Seven bad reasons for teaching grammar - and two good ones. In Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice, eds. Jack C. Richards and Willy A. Renandya, 148-152. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Swan, Michael. 2006. Teaching grammar - does grammar teaching work? Modern English Teacher 15: 5-13.

References 289

Sweetser, Eve. 1990. From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Talmy, Leonard. 1988. Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science 12: 49-100.Talmy, Leonard. 2003a. Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. 1: Concept structuring systems.

Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, and London: Bradford.Talmy, Leonard. 2003b. Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. 2: Typology and process in concept

structuring. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, and London: Bradford.Taylor, John R. 1995. Linguistic categorization: Prototypes in linguistic theory. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.Taylor, John R. 1996. Possessives in English: An exploration in cognitive grammar. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.Taylor, John R. 2002. Cognitive grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Taylor, John R. [1993] 2008. Some pedagogical implications of cognitive linguistics. In

Cognitive approaches to pedagogical grammar, eds. Sabine De Knop and Teun De Rycker, 37-66. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Terrell, Tracy D. 1977. A natural approach to second language acquisition and learning. Modern Language Journal 61: 325-336.

Thornbury, Scott. 1999. How to teach grammar. Harlow: Pearson Education.Tomasello, Michael, and Carol Herron. 1988. Down the garden path: Inducing and correcting

overgeneralization errors in the foreign language classroom. Applied Psycholinguistics 9: 237-246.

Tomlin, Russel S. 1994. Functional grammars, pedagogical grammars, and communicative language teaching. In Perspectives on pedagogical grammar, ed. Terence Odlin, 140-178. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tomlin, Russell S., and Victor Villa. 1994. Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16: 185-204.

Turewicz, Kamila. 1994. English IN and ON; Polish W and NA. A cognitive grammar perspec-tive. In Focus on language, eds. Edmund Gussman and Henryk Kardela, 205-215. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej.

Turewicz, Kamila. 1997. Cognitive grammar for contrastive linguistics. A case study of indirect speech in English and Polish. In Language history and language modelling: A festschrift for Jacek Fisiak on his 60th birthday, eds. Raymond Hickey and Stanisław Puppel, 1859-1886. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Turewicz, Kamila. 2000. Applicability of cognitive grammar as a foundation of pedagogical/reference grammar. Łódz: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.

Turewicz, Kamila. 2004. Autonomia przez dialog [Autonomy through dialogue]. In Autonomia w nauce jezyka obcego [Autonomy in foreign language learning], ed. Mirosław Pawlak, 340-350. Poznan: Wydział Pedagogiczno-Artystyczny UAM.

Turula, Anna. 2011. Form-focused instruction and the advanced language learner: On the importance of the semantics of grammar. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Tuz, E. 1993. From controlled practice to communicative activity: Does training transfer? Temple University Japan Research Studies in TESOL 1: 97-108.

Twardzisz, Piotr. 1998. Seeing things: mass and count nouns in focus. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 34: 245-260.

Tyler, Andrea. 2008. Cognitive linguistics and second language instruction. In Handbook of cog-nitive linguistics and second language acquisition, eds. Peter Robinson and Nick C. Ellis, 456-488. New York: Routledge.

Tyler, Andrea, and Vyvyan Evans. 2001. The relation between experience, conceptual structure and meaning: non-temporal uses of tense and language teaching. In Applied cognitive lin-guistics I: Theory and language acquisition, eds. Martin Pütz, Susanne Niemeier and René Dirven, 63-105. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Tyler, Andrea, and Vyvyan Evans. 2004. Applying cognitive linguistics to pedagogical grammar: The case of over. In Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching, eds. Michel Achard and Susanne Niemeier, 257-280. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

References290

Tyler, Andrea, Charles M. Mueller, and Vu Ho. 2010. Applying cognitive linguistics to instructed L2 learning: The English modals. In Applied cognitive linguistics in second language learning and teaching (AILA Review 23), eds. Jeannette Littlemore and Costanze Juchem-Grundmann, 31-49. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

VanPatten, Bill. 1996. Input processing and grammar instruction. Norwood, NJ: Albex Publishing Corporation.

VanPatten, Bill. 2002. Processing instruction: An update. Language Learning 52: 755-803.VanPatten, Bill. 2004. Input processing in second language acquisition. In Processing instruction:

Theory, research, and commentary, ed. Bill VanPatten, 5-31. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.VanPatten, Bill. 2007. Input processing in adult second language acquisition. In Theories in sec-

ond language acquisition: An introduction, eds. Bill VanPatten and Jessica Williams, 115-135. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

VanPatten, Bill, and Teresa Cadierno. 1993. Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 15: 225-243.

VanPatten, Bill, and Soile Oikennon. 1996. Explanation vs. structured input in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18: 495-510.

VanPatten, Bill, and Cristina Sanz. 1995. From input to output: Processing instruction and com-municative tasks. In Second language acquisition theory and pedagogy, eds. Fred R. Eckman, Diane Highland, Peter W. Lee, Jean Mileham and Rita R. Weber, 169-185. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Vendler, Zeno. 1957. Verbs and times. The Philosophical Review 66: 143-160.Vendler, Zeno. 1967. Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Verkuyl, Henk J. 1993. A theory of aspectuality: The interaction between temporal and atempo-

ral structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Verspoor, Marjolijn H., and Wander Lowie. 2003. Making sense of polysemous words. Language

Learning 53: 547-586.Vygotsky, Lev S. 1978. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Wächtler, Kurt. 1987. Review of The English reference grammar. Language and Linguistics,

writers and readers by Gerhard Leitner, Journal of English Linguistics 20: 258-262.Walker, Constance L., and Diane J. Tedick. 2000. The complexity of immersion education:

Teachers address the issues. Modern Language Journal 84: 5-27.Walker, Crayton. 2008. Factors which influence the process of collocation. In Cognitive lin-

guistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology, eds. Frank Boers and Seth Lindstromberg, 291-308. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Wee, Lionel. 2007. Construction grammar and English language teaching. Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching 3: 20-32.

Westney, Paul. 1994. Rules and pedagogical grammar. In Perspectives on pedagogical grammar, ed. Terence Odlin, 72-96. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

White, Lydia. 1989. Universal grammar and second language acquisition. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

White, Lydia. 2003. Second language acquisition and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

White, Ronald V. 1988. The ELT curriculum: Design, innovation and management. Oxford: Blackwell.

Whong, Melinda. 2011. Language teaching: Linguistic theory in practice. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Widdowson, Henry 1998. Context, community and authentic language. TESOL Quarterly 32: 705-716.

Wilkins, David. 1976. Notional syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Williams, Jessica. 2005. Learning with awareness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27:

269-304.Williams, Jessica, and Jacqueline Evans. 1998. What type of focus on which forms? In Focus

on form in classroom second language acquisition, eds. Catherine Doughty and Jessica Williams, 139-155. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


Associative learning, 109, 110Attention, 45, 53, 60, 103–105, 114, 119, 123,

140, 154, 157, 168, 220Auto-input, 106

BBacksliding, 95Base, 23–25, 43, 48–50, 52, 76, 82, 132, 167,

170, 186, 187, 215Binary-choice test, 167, 173, 180Bonferroni post hoc test, 171Boundedness, 133, 143, 148, 163, 186Bounding, 34, 76, 77, 81, 82, 86, 128

CCanonical event model, 16, 52Case grammar, 59, 121Categorization

by prototype, 27, 28by schema, 27, 28

CL. See Cognitive linguisticsClarification request, 109, 119Coding, 44, 51–53, 123, 125, 129, 184, 201Cognition, 9, 10, 45, 46, 51, 52, 54, 73, 76,

129Cognitive ability, 45–47, 50–52Cognitive anti-method, 98Cognitive approach to grammar, 4, 7, 8, 53,

55, 56, 122, 215Cognitive domain, 20–22, 26Cognitive linguistics, 1, 2, 4, 7–10, 13, 17, 43,

52–55, 62, 76, 109, 122, 126, 132, 135, 152, 216, 219

AAbstraction, 46, 51, 52Access node, 23–25Acquisition-learning hypothesis, 96Acquisition order, 94, 96, 101Adjective, 29, 36–39, 118, 177Advance organizer, 106Adverb, 29, 36–39, 41, 101, 150, 167Affect, 28, 112, 125, 129, 166, 218Affective activity, 107Affective filter, 97Affective filter hypothesis, 97Aktionsart, 64, 65Analysis of variance, 171, 173, 175, 176,

179–182, 197–199Analytic teaching strategy, 114ANOVA. See Analysis of varianceApplied cognitive linguistics, 2, 122, 216Approximative system, 94Article, 2, 129, 134, 136Aspect

grammatical, 64, 65, 149imperfective. See Verb, imperfectivelexical, 64, 65, 76, 77, 140, 149–151,

164, 168–170non-progressive aspect, 62, 73, 74, 84, 85,

128, 148, 160, 164perfect, 64, 148perfective. See Verb, perfectiveperfective/imperfective aspectual distinc-

tion, 76, 149progressive, 4, 11, 42, 53, 56, 57, 63, 71,

75, 76, 78, 81, 83, 87, 141, 147, 148, 151, 164, 184, 207, 220

Aspect Hypothesis, 150

Index

Index292292

EEffect size, 171, 172, 175, 176, 180, 181, 197,

199, 207Elicited imitation test, 142, 144, 165–168,

197, 198, 200–204, 212, 217Embodied character of language, 8Encyclopedic semantics, 20English, 29, 33, 42, 52, 58, 63, 64, 67, 72,

73, 78, 83, 87, 100, 123, 134–136, 147–149, 154, 166, 184, 195, 197, 203

Entrenchment, 18Error correction, 95, 97, 119, 125, 134Expansibility, 34, 35, 41, 42, 76, 77, 86Experiential teaching strategy, 97, 99Explicit instruction, 92, 97, 103, 110, 115–

118, 126, 136, 153, 166, 200, 213Explicit knowledge, 90–92, 96, 104, 111,

116–118, 126, 134, 135, 151, 166, 173, 177, 180, 187, 197, 208, 210, 216, 218

Explicit learning, 91, 92, 103, 115

FFeature-focused option, 114, 115, 117, 137Feedback, 106, 114, 117–120, 125, 134, 137,

143, 151, 153, 156, 165Figure/ground alignment, 52Focused communication, 114, 115, 118Focus on error, 114, 119, 153, 156Focus on forms, 99, 105, 114Force dynamics, 135Formulator, 44Fossilization, 95Fragile feature, 110French, 108, 132, 133, 137Functional grammar, 121

GGames-Howell test, 171Gap-filling test, 134, 144, 156, 167, 173, 178,

179, 181, 182, 190Garden path technique, 118General linear model, 171, 175, 181, 198Generative grammar. See Generative linguis-

ticsGenerative linguistics, 9, 11, 12, 53, 54, 59, 60Generativism. See Generative linguisticsGerman, 11Government and binding theory, 44Grammaring, 124Grammatical construction, 15, 42, 124, 186Greenhouse-Geisser correction, 176,

182, 199

Cognitive psychology, 91, 104Cognitive routine, 11, 26Cognitive science, 1, 45Collaborative dialogue, 109, 116, 135Commercial transaction frame, 20Communicational teaching project, 98, 99, 137Communicative competence, 93, 99Communicative language teaching, 94, 100Component structure, 43, 45, 46, 55Composite structure, 43, 46Composition, 15, 19, 42–46, 52, 80Comprehensible input hypothesis, 96Comprehension communication task, 114, 115Conceptual blending theory, 8Conceptualization, 20, 39, 40, 44, 46, 50, 123,

125, 132, 162, 188Conceptual metaphor, 8Conceptual metaphor theory, 2, 8Conceptual semantics, 8Connectionism, 109, 110, 117, 137, 219Consciousness raising, 105, 115Construal, 47, 133Constructional schema, 15, 16, 42, 43, 51,

52, 75Construction grammar, 8, 54, 55, 220Content-based teaching, 98Contractibility, 34, 35, 41, 42, 76, 82, 86Cora, 11Corpus linguistics, 59Correspondence, 12, 13, 19, 26, 43–46, 52,

59, 76, 80Croatian, 11Crosslinguistic influence. See Language transferCzech, 11

DDeclarative clause, 124, 128Declarative knowledge, 102–104Deductive teaching/instruction, 116, 117, 134,

135, 153Deep processing, 125, 129, 184, 187Deep understanding, 125, 129Delayed-effect hypothesis, 106, 111, 117, 137,

152, 187, 200Descriptive grammar, 58, 59, 66, 75, 120, 121Descriptive/reference grammar, 57, 62, 66, 72,

87, 121Design criteria for pedagogical language rules,

88Developmental feature, 101, 102, 111Developmental sequence, 94, 96, 101Dutch, 11

C (Cont.)

Index 293293

MMemory, 9, 45, 55, 103, 104, 106, 107, 111,

117, 125, 129Mental space, 8, 132, 133Mental spaces theory, 8, 132Mental transformation, 46Method, 98Methodological option, 4, 89, 90, 100, 113,

114, 120, 137, 151, 152, 205, 215Minimalist program, 44, 60Monitor, 4, 95–98, 111, 137, 156, 189Monitor hypothesis, 96Monitor model, 4, 95–113, 137Monitor theory. See Monitor modelMood, 132, 133, 135Morpheme acquisition study, 94Morphological stage, 150Morphology, 13, 15, 16, 64, 89, 100, 149Motivation, 8, 17, 34, 94, 97, 124, 126, 129,

132, 133, 137, 142, 186Multidimensional model, 101

NNatural approach, 98, 134, 137Natural order hypothesis, 96Neural activation, 11, 32Non-interface hypothesis, 111Non-interventionist position, 93, 95, 98–100,

111, 136, 137Non-linguistic unit, 17Noticing, 91, 92, 104, 105, 108, 110, 111, 117,

119, 137Noticing hypothesis, 104, 105, 108, 110, 111,

137Noun

count, 30, 34, 35, 40, 41, 186mass. See Noun, non-countnon-count, 29, 34, 35, 39–41, 123, 132, 133

OOutput, 44, 45, 99, 108, 109, 112, 118, 135,

137, 153Output hypothesis, 4, 108, 109, 112, 137Overgeneralization, 95, 118

PParallel distributed processing, 11Part of speech. See Word classPedagogical grammar, 3, 4, 58, 73, 74, 83, 87,

90, 120–127, 130, 135–137, 141, 149, 154, 156, 184, 210, 217

HHeterogeneity, 8, 76, 84, 128, 213Homogeneity, 35, 41, 76, 79, 82, 128, 163,

175

IIdentity hypothesis, 4, 93–95, 97, 136Image schemas theory, 8Immediate scope, 49, 52, 75, 79–82, 86Immersion program, 98, 108, 137Implicit instruction, 106, 115, 117, 118Implicit knowledge, 91, 98, 102, 111, 115,

117, 118, 126, 135–137, 143, 166–168, 197, 200, 201, 204, 212, 217, 218

Implicit learning, 91, 92, 110, 111, 115Incidental learning, 115Incubation period, 106, 200Inductive teaching, 153Inert knowledge problem, 93Innate language faculty, 96Input, 3, 45, 92, 96, 97, 105–107, 110, 111,

118, 119, 135–137, 168, 220Input enhancement, 105, 114, 119Input flooding, 119Input processing theory, 106, 107, 111, 137,

168Intentional learning, 115Interaction hypothesis, 108, 112, 137Interface hypothesis, 111, 112, 152Interlanguage, 93–95, 97, 101, 105, 106, 109,

112, 166, 187, 188, 200, 211Interlanguage theory, 93–95, 97, 137Inter-subject variability, 188, 189, 191, 213Interventionist position, 100, 108

LL1 = L2 hypothesis, 93Landmark, 36–38, 40, 46, 50–52, 75, 78, 80,

132Language acquisition device, 93, 96, 97Language awareness, 125, 184Language transfer, 94, 149Learner performance option, 113, 114, 151Lexical approach, 55Lexical category. See Word classLexical stage, 150Likert-scale, 171, 172, 206, 208, 209Linguistic grammar, 120, 121Linguistic unit, 11–13, 18, 19, 22, 26, 28, 43,

44, 46, 51, 53, 90, 124Logical problem of language acquisition, 96

Index294294

Scanningsequential, 36, 39, 46, 47, 75, 78, 79, 86,

126summary, 46, 47

Scope of predication, 49, 76–78Second language acquisition, 1, 89–93, 95,

96, 100, 101, 104, 110, 112, 113, 118, 120, 122, 132, 136, 137, 166, 215, 216, 219

Selection, 49, 52, 73, 98, 109, 170, 187Semantic motivation, 8, 17, 34, 124, 186Semantic pole, 12, 13, 16, 18, 22, 27, 30, 33,

37, 39, 43, 46, 80Semantic space, 19, 20, 22, 25–28Semantic unit, 20, 21Simplification, 37, 94, 95Skill-learning theory, 4, 102–104, 109, 111,

117, 137, 152SLA. See Second language acquisitionSociocultural theory, 109, 152Space grammar, 10Spanish, 132, 133, 135Speech act theory, 59Split-block procedure, 169SPSS, 171Stimulus sentence, 169, 170, 201Strategies of learning and communication, 95Structured input activity, 107, 112, 119, 135,

136Syllabus

analytic, 4, 10, 56, 61, 76, 98, 114, 132built-in, 95communicative, 93, 94, 97–100, 103, 107,

111, 112, 115, 116, 118, 124, 134, 213, 219

procedural, 98process, 99structural, 114, 151Type B, 98

Symbolic thesis, 7, 12–14, 17Symbolic unit, 13, 16, 22, 23, 29, 31, 37Symbolization, 12, 19, 22, 26, 42, 44, 46, 52Syntax, 13, 15, 16, 43, 54, 64, 89, 125Systemic-functional grammar, 121Systemic theory, 59

TTeachability hypothesis, 95, 101, 102, 111Temporal connector, 133Tense

future perfect progressive, 100past, 17, 42, 101, 116, 119, 124, 186present, 57, 157

Perspective, 4, 9, 26, 49, 52, 64, 78, 81, 83, 92, 109, 112, 126, 129, 216

Phonological pole, 12, 13, 15–18, 30, 31, 33, 39Phonological space, 19, 26, 28, 29Phonological unit, 27Phonology, 33, 39, 105Phrase structure grammar, 59Plural noun formation, 15, 52Polish, 11, 58, 73, 99, 134, 149, 151–153, 157,

171, 200, 218Possessive, 123Postmethod era, 113Poverty of the stimulus, 96Practical grammar, 58, 62, 73, 75, 85, 87, 131,

151Practical/pedagogical grammar, 58, 71, 73, 75,

83, 87, 121, 215Pragmatics, 20, 25, 52, 55, 90, 129Pragmatic stage, 150Predication, 12, 32, 34, 49, 76–78Preposition, 13, 14, 123Priming effect, 106Procedural knowledge, 102–104Processability hierarchy, 101, 150Processability theory, 95, 101, 104, 137Processing instruction, 105, 107, 119,

134–136Profile, 22–25, 32–34, 39–41, 43, 48–50, 75,

77, 80, 82, 84, 132Profile determinant, 43Prototype theory, 2, 17Psychology, 1, 45, 91, 104

QQuestionnaire, 141, 142, 171–173, 204–210

RRadical construction grammar, 54, 55Recasting, 119Reference grammar, 66, 81, 87Referential activity, 107Relation

atemporal, 36–38, 79temporal, 36–40, 63, 67, 72, 76, 77, 124,

133, 150, 160Relational grammar, 121Replicability, 34, 41Rule/list fallacy, 43

SScaffolded interaction, 152

P (Cont.)

Index 295295

Verbdynamic, 11, 26, 53, 62–64, 70–75, 87,

129, 140, 148, 155, 156, 213, 220imperfective, 30, 39–42, 69, 72, 76, 78, 81,

82, 87, 149, 169, 184, 186modal, 129, 133, 148perfective, 39–41, 42, 53, 70, 72, 76–79,

81–83, 149, 162, 184, 186performative, 82, 165, 169phrasal, 2, 132–134stance, 63, 148state. See Verb, stativestative, 65–76, 78, 83, 84, 128, 154, 156,

161, 213, 220Voice

active, 133middle, 133passive, 115, 133

WWord class, 27, 29–31, 33, 36, 39, 47, 50, 51

ZZero option, 93, 98–100

present continuous. See Present progressive

present progressive, 3, 72, 73, 116, 130, 140, 148, 149, 151, 154–156, 161, 163, 164, 167, 169, 172, 178, 210, 213, 221

present simple, 3, 116, 130, 140, 149, 151, 154–157, 163, 164, 169, 178, 210, 221–223, 225, 226, 245

Theoretical grammar, 1–4, 7, 8, 57–59, 90, 93, 98, 104, 106, 108–110, 121, 122, 127, 147, 149, 215, 216

Trajector, 36–38, 40, 51, 75, 78, 80, 86, 132Transfer-appropriate processing, 103Transfer of training, 94Translation test, 167, 173, 182t-test, 172, 206

UUnboundedness, 133, 148, 186Universal grammar, 93, 95, 96, 121Usage-based nature of language, 8Usage event, 25, 44, 46, 124

VVariational feature, 111