Exploring Cognitive Linguistics for Improving Phrasal Verb Learning in Vietnamese EFL Contexts

Ton Nu My Nhat; Nghi Tran; Nhon Dang

doi:10.31637/epsir-2026-2346

Authors

Ton Nu My Nhat Ho Chi Minh City University of Industry and Trade https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5794-8391
Nghi Tran Ho Chi Minh City University of Industry and Trade https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6549-3895
Nhon Dang Tân Tạo University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0861-8417

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31637/epsir-2026-2346

Keywords:

estudiantes de EFL, instrucción basada en la lingüística cognitiva, phrasal verbs en inglés, intervención, prototípico, derivado, extensiones metafóricas

Abstract

Introduction: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of cognitive linguistics-based instruction in enhancing the comprehension and retention of English Phrasal verbs (PVs) among Vietnamese EFL learners. Methodology: Eighty business-majored students from two classes were selected and divided into two groups, including a control group (n=40) and an experimental group (n=40). These participants were exposed to an intervention that contrasts cognitive linguistics-based PV instruction for the experimental group against traditional teaching methods for the control group. The study utilized the quantitative measures, with pre-, post- and delayed posttests, under analysis of descriptive and inferential statistics. Results: The findings revealed that the cognitive-based approach, rooted in understanding prototypical and derivative meanings of PVs and particles, image schemas, and metaphorical extensions and main verb grouping, emerged as a potential alternative to the traditional method of PV instruction. Discussion: The research offered a holistic understanding of the merits of cognitive-based methods for teaching English PVs. The results indicated meaningful pedagogical potential for improving phrasal verb instruction. Conclusions: The findings hold implications for the pedagogy of some other linguistic areas from this approach. The study also highlights the value of cognitive linguistics-based instruction as a promising approach in the Vietnamese EFL context.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Ton Nu My Nhat, Ho Chi Minh City University of Industry and Trade

Is an Associate Professor of Linguistics at the Faculty Foreign Languages, Ho Chi Minh City University of Industry and Trade, Vietnam. Her areas of research include teaching English to speakers of other languages (TESOL), critical discourse studies, systemic functional-multimodal discourse analysis, and ESP.

Nghi Tran, Ho Chi Minh City University of Industry and Trade

Is currently Dean of the Faculty of Foreign Languages, Ho Chi Minh City University of Industry and Trade, Vietnam. His work focuses on developing and implementing effective teaching methodologies, using corpus-based techniques in language teaching, AI in education, and the role of literacy in second language learning.

Nhon Dang, Tân Tạo University

Is currently Dean of the School of Languages, Tan Tao University, Vietnam. His areas of research include teaching English to speakers of other languages (TESOL), SLA, linguistics, and AI in language education. He is also interested in implementing English projects in the community.

References

Alhamdan, B., Alenazi, O., & Maalej, Z. A. (2018). Motion verbs in modern standard Arabic and their implications for Talmy's lexicalization patterns. Language Sciences, 69, 43-56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2018.06.001

Armstrong, K. (2004). Sexing up the dossier: A semantic analysis of phrasal verbs for language teachers. Language Awareness, 13(4), 213-224. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410408668808

Boers, F. (2000). Metaphor awareness and vocabulary retention. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.4.553

553-571.

Boers, F. (2004). Expanding learners’ vocabulary through metaphor awareness: What expansion, what learners, what vocabulary. In S. Niemeier, & M. Achard (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching, (pp. 211-232). Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199857.211

Brown, H. D., & Heekyeong, L. Teaching principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (4th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.

Celce-Murcia, M., Larsen-Freeman, D., & Williams, H. A. (1983). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher's course. Newbury House Rowley, MA.

Cornell, A. (1985). Realistic goals in teaching and learning phrasal verbs. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 23(14), 269-280. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.1985.23.1-4.269 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.1985.23.1-4.269

Dagut, M., & Laufer, B. (1985). Avoidance of phrasal verbs—A case for contrastive analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7(1), 73-79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100005167

Darwin, C. M., & Gray, L. S. (1999). Going after the phrasal verb: An alternative approach to classification. TESOL Quarterly, 33(1), 65-83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3588191

Dehé, N. (2002). Particle verbs in English. Particle Verbs in English, 1-317. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/la.59

Donati, M., & Strapparava, C. (2023). A cognitive linguistics analysis of phrasal verbs representation in distributional semantics. Proceedings of the Ninth Italian Conference on Computational Linguistics (CLiC-it 2023).

Dwight, B. (1971). The phrasal verb in English. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008413100008409 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008413100008409

Ellis, N. C., & Sagarra, N. (2010). The bounds of adult language acquisition: Blocking and learned attention. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(4), 553-580. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263110000264

Fraser, B. (1975). Hedged performatives. Speech Acts, 187-210. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_008

Gardner, D., & Davies, M. (2007). Pointing out frequent phrasal verbs: A corpus‐based analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 339-359. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00062.x

Garnier, M., & Schmitt, N. (2015). The PHaVE List: A pedagogical list of phrasal verbs and their most frequent meaning senses. Language Teaching Research, 19(6), 645-666. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168814559798

Gibbs, R. W. (1990). Psycholinguistic studies on the conceptual basis of idiomaticity. Cognitive Linguistics, 1(4), 417-452. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.4.417 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.4.417

Gibbs, R. W. (1991). Semantic analyzability in children’s understanding of idioms. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 34(3), 613-620. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3403.613 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3403.613

Hulstijn, J. H., & Marchena, E. (1989). Avoidance: Grammatical or semantic causes? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11(3), 241-255. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100008123

Jackendoff, R. (1997). The architecture of the language faculty. MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004373167_003

Karahan, P. (2015). The effect of conceptual metaphors on Turkish EFL learners’ comprehension and production of phrasal verbs. International Journal of Linguistics and Communication, 3(1), 76-86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15640/ijlc.v3n1a10

Kovecses, Z., & Szabco, P. (1996). Idioms: A view from cognitive semantics. Applied Linguistics, 17(3), 326-355. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/17.3.326

Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Longman.

Kurtyka, A., Putz, M., Niemeier, S., & Dirven, R. (2001). Teaching English phrasal verbs: A cognitive approach. Applied Cognitive Linguistics, 2, 29-54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110866254.29

Lakoff, G., Johnson, M., & Lawler, J. M. (1983). Metaphors we live by. Language, 59(1), 201-201. https://doi.org/10.2307/414069 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/414069

Langacker, R. W. (2012). Essentials of cognitive grammar. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.013.0005

Laufer, B., & Eliasson, S. (1993). What causes avoidance in L2 learning: L1-L2 difference, L1-L2 similarity, or L2 complexity? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(1), 35-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100011657

Lee, H. (2012). Concept-based approach to second language teaching and learning: Cognitive lingusitics-inspired instruction of English phrasal verbs. The Pennsylvania State University.

Liao, Y., & Fukuya, Y. J. (2004). Avoidance of phrasal verbs: The case of Chinese learners of English. Language Learning, 54(2), 193-226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00254.x

Lin, H.-C. (2018). Particles in phrasal verbs—a cognitive linguistic approach to meaning construction in the EFL context. University of Northumbria at Newcastle (United Kingdom).

Lindner, S. J. (1983). A lexico-semantic analysis of English verb particle constructions “with” and “up”. Indiana University Linguistic Club.

Lindstromberg, S. (2022). The compositionality of English phrasal verbs in terms of imageability. Lingua, 275, 103373. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2022.103373

Liu, D. (2012). The most frequently-used multi-word constructions in academic written English: A multi-corpus study. English for Specific Purposes, 31(1), 25-35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2011.07.002

Liu, D., & Myers, D. (2020). The most-common phrasal verbs with their key meanings for spoken and academic written English: A corpus analysis. Language Teaching Research, 24(3), 403-424. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818798384

Lu, Z., & Sun, J. (2017). Presenting English polysemous phrasal verbs with two metaphor-based cognitive methods to Chinese EFL learners. System, 69, 153-161. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.07.016

Mahpeykar, N., & Tyler, A. (2015). A principled cognitive linguistics account of English phrasal verbs with up and out. Language and Cognition, 7(1), 1-35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2014.15

Mohammed, A. O. G. (2019). A cognitive approach to the instruction of phrasal verbs: Rudzka-Ostyn’s model. Journal of Language and Education, 5(2 (18)), 10-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2019.8170

Moon, R. (1997). Vocabulary connections: Multi-word items in English. Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy, 40-63.

Morgan, P. S. (1997). Figuring out figure out. Metaphor and the semantics of the English verb-particle construction. Cognitive Linguistics, 8(4), 327-358. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1997.8.4.327 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1997.8.4.327

Neagu, M. (2007). English verb particles and their acquisition: A cognitive approach. Revista española de lingüística aplicada(20), 121-138.

Nippold, M. A. (1998). Later language development: The school-age and adolescent years. ERIC.

Rudzka-Ostyn, B. (2008). Word power: Phrasal verbs and compounds: A cognitive approach. Walter de Gruyter.

Side, R. (1990). Phrasal verbs: Sorting them out. ELT Journal, 41(2), 144-152. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/44.2.144 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/44.2.144

Siyanova, A., & Schmitt, N. (2007). Native and nonnative use of multi-word vs. one-word verbs. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/IRAL.2007.005

Spring, R. (2018). Teaching phrasal verbs more efficiently: Using corpus studies and cognitive linguistics to create a particle list. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 9(5),

121-135. https://doi.org/10.7575/AIAC.ALLS.V.9N.5P.121 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.9n.5p.121

Strong, B., & Boers, F. (2019). The error in trial and error: Exercises on phrasal verbs. TESOL Quarterly, 53(2), 289-319. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.478

Talebinejad, M. R., & Sadri, E. (2013). Applying cognitive linguistics to teaching conceptual basis of up and down in phrasal verbs. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 3(1), 333-340.

Tran, P. N. T., & Tran, Q. T. (2019). The use of phrasal verbs in English language research proposals by Vietnamese MA students. VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 35(4). DOI: https://doi.org/10.25073/2525-2445/vnufs.4399

Tran, Q. T., & Pham, V. B. (2023). English Majors’ Difficulties in Using Phrasal Verbs in Academic Writing. VNU Journal of Science: Education Research.

Tyler, A. (2004). Applying Cognitive Linguistics to Pedagogical Grammar: The Case of over Andrea Tyler and Vyvyan Evans. Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching, 18, 257. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199857.257

Tyler, A., & Evans, V. (2003). The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning and cognition. The Semantics of English Prepositions: Spatial Scenes, Embodied Meaning and Cognition, 1-266. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486517 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486517

Van der Veer, R. (2000). Some reflections concerning Gal’perin’s theory. Human Development, 43(2), 99-102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000022663

White, B. J. (2012). A conceptual approach to the instruction of phrasal verbs. The Modern Language Journal, 96(3), 419-438. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01365.x

Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. ERIC. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519772

Yasuda, S. (2010). Learning phrasal verbs through conceptual metaphors: A case of Japanese EFL learners. TESOL Quarterly, 44(2), 250-273. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2010.219945