| Writing in English for non-native English speakers is difficult not only because of the unfamiliar linguistic system, but also because of the different ways of perceiving and conceptualizing, which are represented by their native language and English respectively. The way to understand what and how they write, therefore, is to understand how they perceive and conceptualize the world in which they live. The prototype theory based on the natural categorization indicates that everyday English language is largely metaphorical. The question is whether it is also true for other languages. For example, how do non-native English speakers compare with the English native speakers regarding the characteristics of their conceptual categorization as reflected in their respective language? What does it imply for ESL/EFL writing? The present research attempts to address such kinds of questions by examining Chinese native speakers on how they express themselves about certain abstract concepts in both Chinese and English, and whether they differ from English native speakers in their use of metaphors. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses were conducted. The findings show that generally both English and Chinese languages are rich in and somewhat dependent on metaphorical expressions for particular everyday abstract concepts; however, the Chinese native speakers have a higher inclination to use metaphors whenever possible in their everyday language than their native English counterparts. Whereas many of the metaphorical expressions used by both Chinese and English native speaker participants are universal in terms of the conceptual metaphors upon which the expressions are based, the evidence from this research shows that certain ways of perceiving and conceptualizing are purely culture-specific. This research implies that the study of the similarities and differences of the conceptual categorization across cultures is fundamental to many existing research topics in second/foreign language acquisition, and it is also highly pragmatic in second/foreign curriculum development and pedagogy. |
