This study investigated the effects of teaching English prepositions using schematic diagrams inspired by cognitive linguistics in a computer‐based tutorial system called the English Preposition Tutor. Training was designed based on the theoretical framework of the Competition Model and a cognitive linguistic analysis of prepositions. Sixty‐four Cantonese‐speaking intermediate learners of English were trained using a sentence–picture matching task. They received one of the three types of feedback: schematic diagram feedback, metalinguistic rule feedback, or correctness feedback. Only the schematic diagram feedback group was exposed to chaining between spatial senses and nonspatial senses. Results showed that instruction was effective in all three feedback groups, as measured by a cloze test and a translation test. In the translation test, the group receiving schematic diagram feedback outperformed the correctness feedback group. The effects of the three feedback conditions were not significantly different in the cloze test.

Informed by two usage‐based approaches, this study investigated to what extent different types of computer‐based training facilitated English preposition learning among intermediate Chinese learners of English. The design of the pedagogical materials was informed by the cognitive linguistics (CL) framework while the training format was motivated by the competition model (MacWhinney, 1997). A total of 91 participants were randomly assigned to one of four types of computer‐based training: animated schematic diagrams with CL explanations, rules, and exemplars (i.e., rule‐of‐thumb definitions with three example sentences), correctness feedback (i.e., correct vs. incorrect), and the control, who received training on English Articles. For the three prepositional treatment groups, two layers of mediation were provided: (i) implicit prompts to guide decision making in selecting the correct preposition and (ii) explicit feedback on the selection. Results showed that the computer‐based training was effective across the three treatment groups, as measured by an untimed grammaticality judgment test and a picture elicitation test. Additionally, on the picture elicitation test, the schematic mediation group outperformed the rule and exemplar mediation group at the posttest and the correctness mediation group at the delayed posttest respectively. The data suggest there is a need to introduce various assessment task types to capture a more holistic understanding of participants' L2 development.

No abstract