Phraseology in learners' dictionaries: What, where and how?

Siepmann, Dirk

doi:10.1075/z.138.15sie

Cited by 16 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…AlHassan and Wood (2015) also note the "vital role" (p. 52) FSs play in L2 learners' language competence, while Peters and Pauwels (2015) suggest that misuse can make them sound "odd and non-native-like" (p. 29), going on to note that within academic writing, L2 learners have been shown to overuse FSs more appropriate to spoken discourse. Siepmann (2008) also claims that analyses of L2 learners' discourse reveal greater use of a more limited number of FSs than is found in native speaker discourse, and of single words to express functions more commonly expressed by FSs, characteristics also reported by Cortes (2004) and Ellis (2012).…”

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 93%

Murray¹

2018

TESL Canada

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intervention exercises have tended to be limited to restricted controlled output in studies related to second language (L2) learners' acquisition of written academic formulaic sequences (FSs), while measurement of use has been drawn from freer output (AlHassan & Wood, 2015;Jones & Haywood, 2004;Peters & Pauwels, 2015). The current study reports on an intervention designed to be less controlled than previous studies and therefore closer to what learners would subsequently be required to produce. The intervention required a treatment group to edit target FSs into given paragraphs. These paragraphs were similar to those they were later required to produce and from which the data were drawn. Data drawn from pretests established that there was no significant difference in the occurrence of target FSs use between the treatment and control groups. Data drawn from posttests were used to determine whether there was any significant difference in the occurrence of the target FSs between pre-and posttests for each group. Results from the treatment group indicate that the intervention appears to have been effective in increasing learners' utility with the target FSs.

show abstract

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 93%

Murray¹

2018

TESL Canada

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The study of the representation and indexation of phraseology in both general and specialized lexicographic resources (e.g., dictionaries and databases) has been of interest for several scholars coming from diverse traditions and languages (Alonso Ramos, 2006;Bevilacqua, 2004;Buendía Castro & Faber, 2015;Heid, 2008;Leroyer, 2006;Mel'čuk, 2012;Mellado Blanco, 2008;Moon, 2008;Nuccorini, 2020;Paquot, 2015;Rojas Díaz & Pérez Sánchez, 2019;Siepmann, 2008;Sosiński, 2006;Tschichold, 2008;Veisbergs, 2020). However, the first step in any work on phraseology, according to García-Page, is to define phraseology's object of study (2008, p. 7).…”

Section: Definition Of Phraseological Unitmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Beyond the Grave’: Equivalence of Specialized Phraseological Units Containing Dead Metaphors in an English-Spanish Dictionary of Commerce and Economics

Sánchez

Díaz

2021

Mutatis Mutandis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines a question of the interest of scholars dealing with phraseology, terminology and translation, namely the task of translating and finding equivalents of idiomatic expressions, such as specialized phraseological units (henceforth SPUs), especially those in which a dead metaphor underlies. Among the unsolved questions that phraseology still struggles with to establish itself as a discipline on its own right there are two hindering factors that are related to terminology and translation: on the one hand, specialized phraseology is an under-explored and a not institutionalized line of research, to the point of being deemed a non-coherent research field (Kjær, 2007, p. 507). On the other hand, phraseology is considered to be a missing training subject in translation academic syllabi (Corpas Pastor, 2003, p. 222). Therefore, this study intends to offer descriptive data that could be used as a starting point for finding answers regarding the identification and even the creation of equivalents for SPUs that include dead metaphors among their lexical components. The aim of this article is two-fold, (i) it will offer a series of linguistic analyses (morphosyntactic and semantic) of the word forms in the SPUs being analyzed, and their equivalents and (ii) it will shed light on the translation techniques (Molina & Hurtado Albir, 2002, pp. 509-511) used to coin the equivalents of these SPUs.

show abstract

“…English language teaching materials in general have been criticized for not placing phrasal vocabulary in a central role, and failing to introduce it systematically (Koprowski 2005;Gouverneur 2008). Similarly, learner dictionaries have been criticized for their approach to phraseology, focusing on semantically non-transparent items, while more useful transparent items are often neglected (Siepmann 2008). These transparent bundles often have important pragmatic functions, and tend to be under-used by learners; they have the potential to help learners manage interactions in English.…”

Section: Lexical Bundles In Elt Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Do You Know to I Don’t Know: An Analysis of the Frequency and Usefulness of Lexical Bundles in Five English Language Self-Study Books

Allan

2017

Corpus Pragmatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowing which phrases to use in everyday situations is a key part of communicating effectively in English, and increasingly language learning materials are expected to reflect this. This paper presents a corpus analysis of five contemporary self-study books for English language learners, to identify common phrases taught, assess their form and function, and evaluate them against a baseline of lexical bundles (i.e. recurring sequences of words) used in social situations by users of English as a Lingua Franca (ELF). Self-study textbooks aim to equip the learner with enough English to function appropriately in a range of different contexts; they usually present language in the form of dialogues in common everyday situations, often supplemented with exercises, grammar explanations and glossaries. While they may differ in pedagogical approach, it could be anticipated that the lexical bundles found would be broadly similar. However, analysis of this corpus showed a lack of consistency both in the form and number of bundles found in the different publications. Furthermore, comparison with a corpus of ELF conversations extracted from the Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English (VOICE, version 2.0 XML) (2013) highlighted the underrepresentation of lexical bundles with certain pragmatic functions, such as hedges/stance expressions (I don't know, I think) and vague language (a little bit).

show abstract

Phraseology in learners' dictionaries: What, where and how?

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

‘Beyond the Grave’: Equivalence of Specialized Phraseological Units Containing Dead Metaphors in an English-Spanish Dictionary of Commerce and Economics

From Do You Know to I Don’t Know: An Analysis of the Frequency and Usefulness of Lexical Bundles in Five English Language Self-Study Books

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About