EQOL Journal (2019) 11(1):
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
The pedagogical potential of a bilingual specialized dictionary in tertiary education
Mira Milić 1 ✉ • Filip Sadri 1 • Tatjana Glušac 2
Received: 22th April, 2019 |
DOI: 10.31382/eqol.190606 |
Accepted: 10th May, 2019 |
|
© The Author(s) 2019. This article is published with open access. |
|
Abstract
Even though specialized dictionaries provide abundant information, research findings indicate that their role in the teaching process has been neglected. Within the context of the current global domination of English and an increased need for linguistic standardization, special emphasis is placed on the use of specialized dictionaries in teaching vocabulary. With this in mind, the purpose of this research is to analyze pedagogical potential of a specialized bilingual dictionary in function of ESP vocabulary learning and knowledge transfer. A
✉mmilic@uns.ac.rs
1University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, Novi Sad, Serbia
2Union University, Faculty of Law and Business
Studies Dr. Lazar Vrkatić, Novi Sad, Serbia
ESP teaching but also knowledge transfer from English to
Keywords specialized dictionary • pedagogical potential • standardization • ESP • teaching.
Introduction
Building on the latest theoretical advances in the field of specialized lexicography, the main aim of this paper is to provide an enlightening insight into the pedagogical dimension of dictionaries, which is attached special importance in the Anglo- globalized world of today. Under such circumstances an
51
EQOL Journal (2019) 11(1):
Section 4 elaborates research results, whilst the last, Section 5, summarizes the conclusions.
Theoretical framework
Given that the current source language of many specialized registers in the contemporary anglo- globalized world is English (cf. Furiassi, Pulcini and Rodríguez González, 2012), bilingual dictionaries are in the limelight today, since they are expected to offer well thought out standardized
However, even though lexicography is about a century old field of research,
52
skills is not a matter to be dealt with during a single class lecture or a single course. Rather it should be acquired through the educational system (Béjoint 1994: 168;
Narrowing the topic to dictionary use in the tertiary education in the field of sport and physical education in Serbia, the findings (Milić 2015) indicate that specialized vocabulary in Serbian is predominantly created by the adaptation of English terms through transshaping and translation. Under such circumstances standardization work in terminology is mostly focused on contrastive aspects of English and Serbian. In order to give contribution to standardization of extremely
EQOL Journal (2019) 11(1):
Aiming at giving some impulse to the use of dictionaries in the teaching process in tertiary education, research has been undertaken under the title “Using dictionaries in teaching ESP in tertiary education”, which was financially supported by the Provincial Secretariat for Higher Education and Scientific Research. The aims and method of this research are dealt with in the following sections.
Method
The aim of this research was to get an insight into dictionary use in terms of frequency, reasons and manner of using different types of dictionaries as a teaching resource in ESP in tertiary education. The research included 705 students and 21 ESP teachers from eleven faculties of the University of Novi Sad. Research instruments were two questionnaires (compiled from the existing literature (cf. Alhaisoni 2008; Al Homoud 2017; Bejoint 1981; Harvey and Yuill 1997; Li 1998; Nation 2001; Tomaszczyk, 1979): one for teachers and one for students and a
Given that the sample included students and teachers, the following analysis is considered from two perspectives (students’ and teachers’). However, the analysis only deals with the answers that are directly related to the topic: These are: the type of dictionary, the information most frequently looked
up, and the difficulties in dictionary consultation from the perspective of both groups of respondents, as well as the attitudes towards dictionary use in the classroom from the teacher’s point of view.
Results
Concerning the type of dictionary (see Table 1), both groups of respondents (students and teachers) consult electronic lexicographic resources most frequently, i.e.
Concerning the type of information looked up in a dictionary (see Table 2) it seems that students are predominantly interested in the following: meaning, translation equivalents, the use in context and pronunciation. The information on meaning and translation equivalents reflects the receptive dictionary skills, whereas the use in context and pronunciation point to the productive ones. However, the mere fact that the mean values generally account for the scale level rarely suggests that dictionaries are not used sufficiently in ESP learning. Taking into account the teachers’ answers, it can be noticed that the mean values are closer to the category sometimes, which means that they rely on dictionaries more than their students do. Shifting the focus to the least frequently looked up dictionary information one can see that it is grammatical information for both groups of respondents. Considering students, this can be explained either by the lack of knowledge of lexicographic conventions or selectivity of their search. When teachers are concerned, this may be due to their reluctance to waste time on dictionary consultation in terms of grammar, since it is traditionally done through lecturing on grammar during the class.
53
EQOL Journal (2019) 11(1):
Table 1. The frequency of use in terms of dictionary type
|
|
|
|
Students |
Teachers |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dictionary type |
Min. |
Max. |
Mean |
SD |
Mean |
SD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Printed |
1 |
4 |
1.85 |
0.90 |
1.71 |
0.85 |
|
Electronic |
1 |
4 |
2.51 |
1.12 |
2.71 |
0.90 |
|
1 |
4 |
3.12 |
0.88 |
2.43 |
0.93 |
|
|
Mobile application |
1 |
4 |
2.13 |
1.11 |
2.40 |
0.99 |
|
General monoling. |
1 |
4 |
1.70 |
0.83 |
2.29 |
1.06 |
|
General bilingual |
1 |
4 |
2.27 |
0.95 |
2.38 |
1.12 |
|
Specialized monoling. |
1 |
4 |
1.51 |
0.75 |
2.71 |
1.15 |
|
Specialized bilingual |
1 |
4 |
1.65 |
0.80 |
1.71 |
0.85 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Table 2. The frequency of use of dictionary information |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
Students |
Teachers |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Information |
Min. |
Max. |
Mean |
SD |
Mean |
SD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grammatical informat. |
1 |
4 |
1.77 |
0.88 |
2.33 |
0.80 |
|
Meaning |
1 |
4 |
2.43 |
0.86 |
3.24 |
0.70 |
|
Pronunciation |
1 |
4 |
2.01 |
0.91 |
2.57 |
0.81 |
|
Translation equivalent |
1 |
4 |
2.13 |
0.89 |
2.76 |
1.04 |
|
Use in context |
1 |
4 |
2.10 |
0.90 |
2.90 |
0.83 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With reference to difficulties in dictionary consultation, the findings (see Table 3) indicate that the matter viewed from the students’ perspective is rather positive. Accordingly, the results show that students have had some training on the use of dictionaries during their university education. It also turns out that they do not find it difficult to understand dictionary information, so that one can get an impression that they successfully consult a dictionary for receptive and productive purposes alike. However, the mere fact that the average value related to difficulties in dictionary consultation falls within the range from 55.53% (Yes) to 44.48% (No) indicates that the use of dictionaries in ESP is not satisfactory. This is further confirmed by the fact that students are not confident in their own dictionary use skills, since the negative answer to the statement I cannot assess whether a dictionary is good or bad passes beyond 50% (53.61%).
The teachers’ views of the problems in dictionary use (see Table 4) are also rather encouraging, since most of them do not agree with the statement that
54
dictionary use consumes a lot of time during the class, which may be an indicator of their positive attitudes towards dictionary use even though they do not realize it in practice. According to the findings it seems that the greatest problem in dictionary use in class is the accessibility of dictionaries in educational institutions. It is interesting to note here that teachers believe that there are bilingual specialized dictionaries in their particular field, even though four respondents rightly observe that there are not enough quality specialized dictionaries.
Finally, the issue of the pedagogical potential of a dictionary is closely related with the teachers’ attitudes towards the use of dictionaries in ESP teaching (see Table 5). The findings indicate that most surveyed teachers believe that students should not necessarily be taught how to use a dictionary before enrolling university, as well as that teaching dictionary use is not necessary in a digital world. However, all of them agree that higher frequency of dictionary use does not necessarily require its digital form, as well as that dictionary use skills could enable
EQOL Journal (2019) 11(1):
autonomous learning. The former is neither in accordance with the students’ view nor with the contemporary principles of dictionary compilation
(cf. Prćić 2018), but the latter proves the assumption that dictionaries can be pedagogical resources both in the classroom and outside it.
Table 3. Difficulties in dictionary consultation from the students’ perspective
Statement |
|
Yes |
|
No |
|
|
|
|
|
||
n |
% |
n |
% |
||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was taught how to use a dictionary at university. |
459 |
65.95 |
237 |
34.05 |
|
I do not understand definition of meaning in English, because my English is not |
198 |
28.49 |
497 |
71.51 |
|
I do not understand the abbreviations in a dictionary (e.g. [N], [infml], etc.). |
396 |
56.98 |
299 |
43.02 |
|
I cannot use the word in the context by means of dictionary information. |
100 |
14.41 |
594 |
85.59 |
|
I do not understand phonetic symbols. |
303 |
43.60 |
392 |
56.40 |
|
The fact that I can use a dictionary enables me to use it frequently. |
428 |
61.67 |
266 |
38.33 |
|
I can use different types of dictionaries without any difficulty. |
425 |
61.33 |
268 |
38.67 |
|
I can understand all information in a dictionary without any difficulty. |
359 |
51.73 |
335 |
48.27 |
|
The use of dictionaries is very complicated. |
99 |
14.22 |
597 |
85.78 |
|
I can assess whether a dictionary is good or not. |
321 |
46.39 |
371 |
53.61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 4. Problems related to the use of dictionaries from the teachers’ perspective |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statement |
|
Yes |
|
No |
|
|
|
|
|
||
n |
% |
n |
% |
||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
Students do not want to bring dictionaries to the class |
11 |
52.4 |
10 |
47.6 |
|
The number of dictionaries in an institution is insufficient. |
9 |
42.9 |
12 |
57.1 |
|
Students do not know how to use a dictionary. |
18 |
85.7 |
3 |
14.3 |
|
The use of dictionaries is time consuming |
14 |
66.7 |
7 |
33.3 |
|
Inferential meaning in the context is preferred to the use of a dictionary. |
12 |
57.1 |
9 |
42.9 |
|
There is no adequate online dictionary. |
15 |
71.4 |
6 |
28.6 |
|
There is no specialized dictionary in a particular field. |
20 |
95.2 |
1 |
4.8 |
|
There is no quality specialized dictionary in a particular field. |
17 |
81.0 |
4 |
19.0 |
|
The use of dictionaries would encourage students to use mobile phones for |
20 |
95.2 |
1 |
4.8 |
|
other purposes. |
|||||
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
55
EQOL Journal (2019) 11(1):
Table 5. Teachers’ attitudes towards the use of dictionaries
Statement
YesNo
n |
% |
n |
% |
|
|
|
|
Students should have been taught how to use a dictionary before enrolling in
Due to information accessibility today, it is not necessary to know how to use a dictionary.
Dictionaries should be compiled in electronic form, so that students could use Dictionary use skill enables autonomous learning.
7 |
33.3 |
14 |
66.7 |
19 |
90.5 |
2 |
9.5 |
21 |
100.00 |
0 |
0.00 |
0 |
0.00 |
21 |
100.00 |
Discussion
Generally speaking, the findings of the above research concerning the use of dictionaries for pedagogical purposes are encouraging from the aspect of both groups of respondents, even though dictionaries are not used to a satisfactory extent in ESP teaching and learning, since the mean values of dictionary consultation account for the category rarely (for students) and sometimes (for teachers) (see Tables 1 and 2). Another indicator of an unsatisfactory extent of dictionary use is the fact that the average value related to difficulties in dictionary consultation (see Table 3) falls within the range of 55.53% (Yes) to 44.48% (No). This may be due to two reasons: firstly, the ESP teaching method is predominantly
Having in mind the fact that most
56
general bilingual dictionaries whereas teachers are more interested in bilingual specialized dictionaries than students (See Table 1). The students’ answers might be due to the lack of information on specialized dictionaries, whereas ESP teachers could have found such information during their practical work in the teaching process. Be that as it may, a quality English- Serbian specialized dictionary can provide valuable pedagogical benefits provided it is in accordance with
Developing the idea further, it could be said that a quality bilingual dictionary could be an extremely useful tool in knowledge transfer from English to Serbian under the circumstances of
EQOL Journal (2019) 11(1):
reference source for teaching
To sum up, in order to utilize the pedagogical potential of a bilingual specialized dictionary, it is necessary to: intensify effort in compiling quality terminological products; foster dictionary culture; provide timely information on new quality dictionaries; organize systematic training in dictionary use through the process of education; and integrate dictionaries in
References
Agerbo, H. (2016). The Incorporation of specialised data in lexicographic meaning explanations: A discussion based on sports and fitness terms. Lexicos, 26,
Alhaisoni, E. (2008). The use of dictionaries by Saudi EFL students across educational level and university major. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Essex.
University Preparatory Program Students. International Journal of Linguistics, 9(4),
Augustyn, P. (2013) No dictionaries in the classroom: translation equivalents and vocabulary acquisition. International Journal of Lexicography 26(3),
Béjoint, H. (1989). The teaching of dictionary use: Present state and future tasks. In Hausmann, F. J.,
Béjoint, H. (2010). The Lexicography of English: From Origins to Present. Oxford: OUP
Catelly,
Furiassi, C., V. Pulcini & F. Rodríguez González (Eds.). (2012). The anglicization of European lexis. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Hartmann, R., R., K. (2001). Teaching and researching lexicography. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Hartmann, R., R., K., & Gregory, J. (1998). Dictionary of lexicography. London & New York: Routledge.
Harvey, K. & Yuill, D. (1997). A study of the use of a monolingual pedagogical dictionary by learners of English engaged in writing. Applied Linguistics, 18(3):
Lew, R. (2013). Online dictionary skills. Kosem, I., J. Kallas, P. Gantar, S. Krek, M. Langemets and M. Tuulik (Eds.) 2013. Electronic lexicography in the 21st century: thinking outside the Paper. Proceedings of the eLex 2013 Conference,
Milić, M. (2004). Termini igara loptom u engleskom jeziku i njihovi prevodni ekvivalenti u srpskom, neobjavljena magistarska teza [Ball game terms in English and their translation equivalents in Serbian, unpublished Master’s thesis]. Novi Sad: Filozofski fakultet.
Milić M. (2006).
Milić, M. (2015). Creating
Milić, M. (2016). Principi sastavljanja dvojezičnih terminoloških rečnika:
srpski jezik SANU. Available at: http://dais.sanu.ac.rs/bitstream/handle/123456789/172 5/15%20Milić%20LLuSSP.pdf?sequence=1&isAllow ed=y.
Milić, M., Jonić, Ž., & Đurić Mojsilović, I. (2015). Creation of
Milić, M., Panić Kavgić, O., & Kardoš, A. (2017). Novi
256). Novi Sad: Filozofski fakultet. Available at:
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nesi, H. (2013). Dictionary use by English language learners. Language Teaching, 47(1):
Prćić, T. (2011). Engleski u srpskom, 2. izd. [English within Serbian, the second Edition]. Novi Sad: Filozofski fakultet.
Prćić, T. (2014). Building contact linguistic competence related to English as the nativized foreign language.
57
EQOL Journal (2019) 11(1):
System, 42,
Prćić, T. (2018). Ka savremenim srpskim rečnicima. Prvo, elektronsko, izdanje [Towards modern Serbian dictionaries, the first digital edition]. Novi Sad:
Filozofski fakultet. Available at
Scolfield, P. (1982). Using the English dictionary for comprehension. TESOL Quaterly, 16(2):
Tarp, S. (2005). The Pedagogical dimension of the well- conceived specialized dictionary. Ibéica 10,
Tomaszczyk, J. (1979). Dictionaries: users and uses. Glottodidactica, 12:
Vasić, V., Prćić, T., & Nejgebauer, G. (2018). Do yu speak anglosrpski? Rečnik novijih anglicizama. 3. elektronsko izdanje. [Do You Speak
Wu, J. & Wang, B. (2004). The role of vocabulary in ESP teaching and learning. presentation at the Fourth international conference on ELT in China New Directions in ELT in China, May
Yong, H. & Peng, J. (2007), Bilingual lexicography from a communicative perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co./Philadelphia: John Benjamins North America.
How to cite this article:
APA:
MLA:
Chicago:
Milić, M., Sadri, F., & Glušac, T. (2019). The pedagogical potential of a bilingual specialized dictionary in tertiary education.
Exercise and Quality of Life, 11(1),
Milić, Mira, Filip Sadri and Tatjana Glušac. "The pedagogical potential of a bilingual specialized dictionary in tertiary education."
Exercise and Quality of Life 11.1 (2019):
Milić, Mira, Filip Sadri, and Tatjana Glušac. "The pedagogical potential of a bilingual specialized dictionary in tertiary education."
Exercise and Quality of Life 11, no. 1 (2019):
58