On my mind: thoughts about salience, context and figurative language from a                 second language perspective

Kecskés, István

doi:10.1191/0267658306sr266ra

Cited by 84 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…His most interesting finding here is that learners find the literal meanings extremely hard to overcome when faced with low-visibility metaphors. This finding is in keeping with other recent work in the area (e.g., Keckses, 2006) that shows that literal meanings tend to be more salient for language learners than for native speakers, and that language learners are thus more likely than native speakers to attempt to decompose figurative expressions. This work has important implications for language learning and teaching, as it suggests that the metaphor/idiom comprehension strategies used by language learners do not necessarily resemble those used by native speakers, and that theories that are based on first language processing cannot be automatically transferred to the second language classroom.…”

supporting

confidence: 89%

Literature, Metaphor and the Foreign Language Learner. Jonathan Picken

Littlemore

2008

Metaphor and Symbol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

supporting

confidence: 89%

Literature, Metaphor and the Foreign Language Learner. Jonathan Picken

Littlemore

2008

Metaphor and Symbol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…18 Giora (2003) discussed salience in terms of meaning and figurative language. The readers are directed to Kecskés (2006) for insightful ideas on how the notion of salience may be applied to SLA. 19 It might have been that the English group was also trying to attribute meaning but that they were less likely to succeed.…”

Section: Revised Version Accepted 31 August 2009mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…18 18 Giora (2003) discussed salience in terms of meaning and figurative language. The readers are directed to Kecskés (2006) for insightful ideas on how the notion of salience may be applied to SLA. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Learner‐Generated Noticing of Written L2 Input: What Do Learners Notice and Why?

Park

2011

Language Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explored learners' self-generated noticing of L2 input. It is motivated by previous research on input enhancement which suggested that learners are able to notice certain aspects of input on their own without any external means to direct their attention. Drawing on insights that learner-generated noticing is largely mediated by learnerinternal factors, this study specifically traced the effects of learners' first language (L1), and their current second language (L2) knowledge in generating noticing. Two L1 groups (Japanese and English) with no knowledge of the L2 (Korean) were exposed to written L2 input and probed for their noticing behavior under a "zero knowledge" condition, and a "some knowledge" condition (i.e., after they had been taught some L2 words). Results revealed that under the "zero knowledge" condition, both groups exhibited similar noticing patterns prompted by perceptual input properties. Under the "some knowledge" condition, however, the Japanese group seemed to have noticed more input items and processed them at a deeper level of understanding. Insights gleaned from the study are discussed with avenues for future research.A plethora of input enhancement research conducted thus far has focused on externally manipulating the presentation of input in order to increase the salience of certain target forms as a means to draw learners' attention to those forms. Accumulating results have shown that this type of externally generated enhancement does not necessarily facilitate learner noticing. Coincidentally, findings have revealed insights that learners are able to notice certain aspects of input on their own (i.e., learner-generated noticing), driven by their internal (as opposed to external) factors. Such insights suggestive of learnergenerated noticing, however, have mostly surfaced as an incidental byproduct, rather than a result of a direct inquiry (Gass et al., 2003) have since highlighted the need to focus on investigating learners' builtin, naturally driven preference for noticing and processing second language (L2) input.The present study attempts to directly explore learners' self-generated noticing of L2 input when left to their own devices by exposing learners to "unenhanced" input and examining what they noticed and what factors prompted their noticing. Based on previous insights that learner-internal factors such as their prior knowledge affect their noticing (e.g.study specifically traced the effects of two learner-internal factors-(a) their first language (L1) and (b) their current knowledge of L2-in generating learner noticing.

show abstract

“…The measurement of intention and attention by means of relevance and salience is distinct from earlier explanations (e.g., Sperber and Wilson 1986;Wilson and Sperber 2004;Giora 2003;Kecskes 2006). Unlike Wilson and Sperber's (2004) account of relevance as a unified constraint with both cognitive and pragmatic concerns, relevance in our model is exclusively a pragmatic effect caused by relations to intention; only information that relates to intention is considered relevant in communication according to our approach.…”

Section: A Socio-cognitive View: the Construal Of Communicationmentioning

confidence: 91%

Activating, seeking, and creating common ground

Kecskés

Zhang

2009

P&C

Self Cite

204

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper argues that current pragmatic theories fail to describe common ground in its complexity because they usually retain a communication-as-transfer-between-minds view of language, and disregard the fact that disagreement and egocentrism of speaker-hearers are as fundamental parts of communication as agreement and cooperation. On the other hand, current cognitive research has overestimated the egocentric behavior of the dyads and argued for the dynamic emergent property of common ground while devaluing the overall significance of cooperation in the process of verbal communication. The paper attempts to eliminate this conflict and proposes to combine the two views into an integrated concept of common ground, in which both core common ground (assumed shared knowledge, a priori mental representation) and emergent common ground (emergent participant resource, a post facto emergence through use) converge to construct a dialectical socio-cultural background for communication.Both cognitive and pragmatic considerations are central to this issue. While attention (through salience, which is the cause for interlocutors' egocentrism) explains why emergent property unfolds, intention (through relevance, which is expressed in cooperation) explains why presumed shared knowledge is needed. Based on this, common ground is perceived as an effort to converge the mental representation of shared knowledge present as memory that we can activate, shared knowledge that we can seek, and rapport, as well as knowledge that we can create in the communicative process. The socio-cognitive approach emphasizes that common ground is a dynamic construct that is mutually constructed by interlocutors throughout the communicative process. The core and emergent components join in the construction of common ground in all stages, although they may contribute to the construction process in different ways, to different extents, and in different phases of the communicative process.

show abstract

On my mind: thoughts about salience, context and figurative language from a second language perspective

Abstract: To cite this version:Istvan Kecskes. On my mind: thoughts about salience, context and figurative language from a second language perspective.

Cited by 84 publications

References 32 publications

Literature, Metaphor and the Foreign Language Learner. Jonathan Picken

Literature, Metaphor and the Foreign Language Learner. Jonathan Picken

Learner‐Generated Noticing of Written L2 Input: What Do Learners Notice and Why?

Activating, seeking, and creating common ground

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About