Teaching compound nouns in ESP: insights from cognitive semantics

Abstract

T he objective of this chapter is to explore the relevance of cognitive linguistics for teaching [noun] + [noun] constructions to French learners of English for Specific Purposes (ESP), and more specifically, for process engineering. After a review of research on Compound Nouns (CNs) and explicit versus implicit learning, three basic tenets of cognitive linguistics are highlighted: the encyclopedic meaning of words (i.e. drawing on specialised knowledge in order to understand [noun] + [noun] compounds), the continuum between grammar and lexicon (learning CNs as terms, rather than as a grammar rule), and the symbolic nature of language (explaining CNs graphically). This chapter then reports on a case study of the use of [noun] + [noun] constructions by French learners of English for process engineering. Learners received explicit instruction on compound noun formation in two conditions: the experimental group (eight students) were taught via a cognitive-semantic approach, while the control group (eight students) received training in grammar (morphosyntactic approach). Data include CNs produced by the learners in summaries based on note-taking from specialised videos and in slideshows for internship presentations. Analysis and discussion claim an advantage for the experimental group in terms of implicit learning of specialised CNs, stylistic accuracy, and relevance of the graphical representation of CNs.

Variation in the Translation Patterns of English ‘Noun + Noun’ Compounds in ESP: The Case of Engineering Students

“…The results presented in this paper show that students had the greatest success in translating binominal compounds, less preparation for translating three-noun compounds, and the least skill when it came to four-noun compounds (15%, 40% and 59% of incorrect answers, respectively). In most instances, their translations used one or a combination of the common translation patterns (Adj+N, N 1 +Prep+N 2 and N 1 +N 2 (gen)) outlined by Krimer-Gaborović (2004;2017).…”

“…(for a more detailed description of pedagogical strategies, see Alemán Torres 1997, 21-22). In addition, Fries (2017), who also investigated this issue in the context of ESP for engineering students, suggests that the explicit learning through a morphosyntactic approach (i.e., explicit training in grammar) should be combined with implicit learning which refers to using one's extralinguistic knowledge (i.e., the expertise in students' specialized fields) in order to resolve ambiguities; providing repeated exposure to key lexicalized compounds in a given specialized domain; understanding the compounds by representing them graphically, and so on (for more detailed description, see Fries 2017, 97-99). Finally, attention should also be devoted to the use of unjustified Anglicisms, in this case using nouns in the nominative as premodifiers, which is not common in Serbian (e.g., prašak suplement hrani, puder suplement ishrani), as otherwise their occurrence could be expected to increase in future under the strong influence of English (e.g., internet veza or even raw Anglicisms such as Internet provider, business plan; Prćić 2019, 177).…”