Digital graphic schematizations for acquiring English phrasal verbs

Shinsuke Yoshida

syoshida@kansai-u.ac.jp
Kansai University Osaka, Japan

ABSTRACT ESL/EFL learners tend to have difficulty in having clear images of phrasal verbs since both basic verbs and adverbs have various functions and meanings. Consequently, they have to memorize each expression by rote. To solve this problem it would be effective to develop and practice digital teaching materials based on Prototype Theory with graphic schematization s (i.e. visualized moving images through a presentation tool). The author developed a Digital graphic schematizations of phrasal verbs and investigated its effect on Japanese EFL learners in acquiring phrasal verbs. The result shows Digital graphic schematizations tend to work effectively for Group-A phrasal verbs (e.g. take down, give off, take in, etc.) but not for GroupB (e.g. go down, go off, take over, etc.), which suggests graphic schematizations work effectively in acquiring phrasal verbs to a certain extent. In addition to that, the author improved some graphic schematizations of Group-B phrasal verbs and reexamined their effect on Japanese EFL learners. The result shows there are some words which improved a lot (e.g. come off, give in, go off, go down, go over, and take over), however, there are still some which are hard to show by graphic forms (e.g. get by, go about, come about, go by, come over, and take up). Keyword: phrasal verbs, prototype theory, graphic schematization, ESL/EFL

INTRODUCTION
Although native speakers do not usually need to study phrasal verbs explicitly, for many ESL/EFL learners, it seems to be difficult to have clear images of phrasal verbs due to the fact that both basic lexical verbs and particles can have various functions and meanings (i.e. idiomaticity). In many cases ESL/EFL learners use single-word equivalents (e.g. confuse), on the other hand native speakers use a phrasal verb in its place (e.g. mix up) (Dagut & Laufer, 1985). Accordingly, ESL/EFL learners have to memorize each expression by rote. One solution for this problem would be to develop and practice digital teaching materials based on Prototype Theory (Geeraerts, 1989) with graphic schematizations i.e. frame-by-frame advance pictograms using animations due to the following reasons: 1) this theory can be used to develop a model for dealing with such semantic phenomena as the fuzzy boundaries of lexical categories, the flexible and dynamic nature of word meaning; 2) obtaining knowledge through this theory, students would acquire prototypical sense of phrasal verbs so that they can infer new phrasal verbs meanings by analogy; 3) since pictograms work as graphic schematizations without linguistic explanations, this material would be universal to any ESL/EFL learners; 4) learners have the option to select learning materials that meets their level of knowledge and interest.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The research questions of the present study are as follows:

RQ1) How effectively does this material work as graphic schematizations for acquiring phrasal verbs? ; RQ2) What types of phrasal verbs are successfully/unsuccessfully acquired and why? ; RQ3) How could we improve unsuccessful graphic schematizations?

RESEARCH DESIGN
To survey RQ1 and RQ2, Experiment 1 was conducted, in which students were 1) to put phrasal verbs written in letters (alphabets) into Japanese, and then 2) to interpret graphic schematizations of the same phrasal verbs into Japanese. From the results some types of phrasal verbs were to be discovered suitable for graphic schematizations. To investigate RQ3, Experiment 2 was performed, in which 1) some phrasal verbs unsuitable for graphic schematizations in Experiment 1 were chosen, 2) students were to put the original graphics into Japanese. Next, 3) the original ones were improved to be the ones suitable for graphic schematizations, Then, 4) students were to put these into Japanese, and finally 5) some investigation was conducted on proper graphic schematizations for phrasal verb acquisition.

Experiment 1 Participants
37 college sophomores majoring in English in Japan participated in the first experiment.

Materials
First, both basic verbs such as come, go, get, give, take and adverbs (prepositions) such as about, after, away, by, down, for, in, off, on, out, over, through, up are selected. Second, animations of verbs (e.g. get) (see Figures 1a, b, c; 2a, b, c; 3a, b, c) and adverbs (prepositions) (e.g. through) (see Figures 4a, b, c) to show their prototypes with movements are made. Third, both verbs and adverbs (prepositions) hyperlinked to animations are listed in a table. Fourth, animations of phrasal verbs to show their prototypes with movements are made (e.g. get through) (see Figures 5a, b, c).

Fig. 1.a-c: get (1) [animation]

Fig. 2.a-c: get (2) [animation]

Fig. 3.a-c: get (3) [animation]

Fig. 4.a-c: through [animation]

Fig. 5.a-c: get through [animation]

Tests
Test 1: 28 phrasal verbs (written in letters only) Test 2: 28 phrasal verbs (same as the Test 1) with graphic schematizations

Procedure
In the Test 1, 28 phrasal verbs (written in letters only) to be translated into Japanese, and in the Test2, the same phrasal verbs with graphic schematizations on the computer screen using PowerPoint were to be translated into Japanese.

Results
The average scores (percentages) of correct answers in the Test-1, and 2 are 4.1 (1.5%) and 9.3 (3.4%), respectively (see Fig.6).

test-2 test-1
0 2 4 6 8 10

Fig.6. Average scores of two tests

Comparing the results of the Test 1 and 2, participants marked higher scores in the Test 2 on the following phrasal verbs (i.e. score= [Test2][Test1]): take down, give off, take in, give away, come through, come up, come by Group-A, which is probably suitable for graphic schematizations. (see Figure 7). On the other hand, they marked lower scores in the Test 2 on the following phrasal verbs (i.e. score= [Test2][Test1]): go over, go down, come off, get by, come about, come away, go off Group-B, which is not probably suitable for graphic schematizations. (see Figure 8).

come by come up come through give away take in give off take down -12 -2 8 18 28

Fig.7. Average scores of Group-A phrasal verbs

go off come away come about get by come off go down go over -12 -2 8 18 28

Fig.8. Average scores of Group-B phrasal verbs As a result, graphic schematizations tend to work effectively for Group-A phrasal verbs but not for Group-B, which probably suggests either some phrasal verbs are not suitable for graphic schematizations, or we need to provide more proper animations to activate graphic schematizations.

Experiment 2 Participants
44 college sophomores majoring in Law in Japan participated in the second experiment.

Procedure
In the Test 1, 12 phrasal verbs (written in letters only) which are selected from Group-B in the Experiment 1 were to be translated into Japanese, and in the Test 2, the same phrasal verbs with original graphic schematizations on the computer screen were to be translated into Japanese. Then in the Test 3, improved graphic schematizations were to be translated into Japanese.

Results
The average scores (percentages) of correct answers in the Test 1, 2, and 3 are 3.75 (8.5%), 5 (11.4%), and 20.3 (46.0%), respectively (see Fig.9).

test-3 test-2 test-1 0 10 20

Fig.9. Average scores of three tests

Comparing the results of the Test 2 and 3, participants marked higher scores in the Test 3 on the following phrasal verbs (i.e. score= [Test-3][Test-2]): come off, give in, go off, go down, go over, and take over Group-A, which is probably suitable for graphic schematizations. (see Figure 10).

take over go over go down go off give in come off

-0.40 0.10 0.60

test-3 test-2

Fig.10. Average scores of Group-A

On the other hand, they marked low increase in scores in the Test 3 on the following phrasal verbs (i.e. score= [Test 3][Test 2]): get by, go about, come about, go by, come over, and take up GroupB, which is not probably suitable for graphic schematizations. (see Figure 11).

get by go about come about go by come over take up

-0.40 0.10 0.60

test-3 test-2

Fig.11. Average scores of Group-B

To investigate the reason why the scores of Group-A phrasal verbs had increased from the Test 2 (original graphic schematizations) to the Test 3 (improved graphic schematizations), students misinterpretations of phrasal verbs in the Test 2 were analyzed, and a comparison between the original graphic schematizations and improved graphic schematizations were conducted.

Students misinterpretations are as follows: 1. come off (to succeed): to go outside, to come out, to be born from something 2. give in (to yield): to be robbed, to make someone work, to be satisfied, to get 3. go off (to make a sudden noise): to get up, time passes, to start something 4. go down (to travel along a road ): to change something, to make something, 5. go over (to examine): to leave, to conquer, to control, to gather, to look at 6. take over (to accept duty from someone else): to run a business, to hand over The improvements from original graphic schematizations to improved ones are as follows: 1. come off : to change an abstract graphics into concrete ones 2. give in : to make sure where the agents point of view is 3. go off : to provide more than one example to show an abstract concept (see fig.12a, b) 4. go down : to guide the agents point of view not to misunderstand the direction 5. go over : to add a persons action in an abstract situation 6. take over : to put peoples interaction to show a complicated situation such as business matters

go off

Fig.12a. Original go off

Finally the answers to the research questions are as follows:

Fig.12b. Improved go off

RQ1&2: Digital graphic schematizations tend to work effectively for Group-A phrasal verbs (e.g. take down, give off, take in, etc.) but not for Group-B (e.g. go down, go off, take over, etc.), which suggests graphic schematizations work effectively in acquiring phrasal verbs to a certain extent. RQ3: to improve unsuccessful graphic schematizations, we need to use concrete graphics, to make sure where the agents point of view is, to provide more than one example, to guide the agent s point of view, to add a persons action, and to put peoples interaction For a future study concerning Group-B phrasal verbs, which are not probably suitable for graphic schematizations, it would be effective to develop graphics using the concepts of semantic network and cognitive maps so that EFL learners could construct their mental models of the world in English more systematically.

REFERENCES
Dagut, M., & Laufer, B. (1985). Avoidance of phrasal verbs a case for contrastive analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 7, 73-80. Geeraets, D. (1989). Introduction: Prospects and problems of prototype theory. Linguistics, 27, 587-612. Lee, D. (2001). Cognitive Linguistics an Introduction, London: Oxford. McCaleb, J. et al. (2006). All-purpose dictionary of English phrasal verbs, Tokyo: Asahi Publishing Company. Tanaka, S. (1987). Semantics of basic verbs: Core and prototype, Tokyo: Sanyu-sha Publishing Company. Tanaka, S. et al. (2003). E-gate English-Japanese dictionary, Tokyo: Benesse Corporation.