IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/eltjnl/v8y2015i3p24.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Cognitive Framework in Teaching English Simple Present

Author

Listed:
  • Cong Tian

Abstract

A Cognitive Grammar (CG) analysis of linguistic constructions has been claimed to be beneficial to second language teaching. However, little empirical research has been done to support this claim. In this study, two intact classes of Chinese senior high school students were given a 45-minute review lesson on the usages of the English simple present tense. Instruction for the experimental class was based on Langacker’s cognitive grammar analysis that highlighted the common motivation linking various usages, while that for the control class followed traditional teaching method. Results showed that the learners in the CG approach did not perform significantly better than the control group both on a grammaticality judgment and error correction task, and on a fill-in-the-blank task, though the CG approach did improve students’ performance considerably. The author argued that four reasons might have diminished the benefits of the CG approach- 1) the selection of the samples was inappropriate; 2) the CG approach ran counter to learners’ expectations about grammar; 3) the presentation of the CG treatment was too abstract, and linguistic terminologies new to the students were introduced, which made the lesson hard to follow; 4) instructional time was too limited. Therefore more classroom research is needed to substantiate the claimed pedagogical benefits of the CG approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Cong Tian, 2015. "A Cognitive Framework in Teaching English Simple Present," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(3), pages 1-24, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:8:y:2015:i:3:p:24
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/download/45412/24615
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/45412
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:8:y:2015:i:3:p:24. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.