|
 |
When can one adopt a native dictionary? | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Learning Techniques, Methods & Strategies | ( Topic Closed) |  |
| s_allard Triglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5365 days ago 2704 posts - 5425 votes  Speaks: French*, English, Spanish Studies: Polish | Message 81 of 124 28 November 2011 at 1:34pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
|
For some unfathomable reason, there seems to be some dispute over whether a bilingual or a monolingual dictionary is better. I guess some people see it in those terms. For me it's not a question of one or the other. I don't prefer monolingual dictionaries; I just think they have their value. After all, we are studying a language to be able to speak, read or write it. To that end, at some point we read texts in the target language, listen to recordings, watch movies, etc. You may watch a cooking program on television in the target language to familiarize yourself with the vocabulary of food and cooking. Or you may read Harry Potter in the target language to see how the language works. Why not read a word book or a grammar book in the target language? As I've always said, I think it adds a different perspective and opens up a whole world of language tools that natives use. But then again, most learners are not at this level and are not interested. Edited by s_allard on 28 November 2011 at 1:35pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
 Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6638 days ago 9078 posts - 16473 votes Speaks: Danish*, French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, Romanian, Catalan Studies: Afrikaans, Greek, Norwegian, Russian, Serbian, Icelandic, Latin, Irish, Lowland Scots, Indonesian, Polish, Croatian Personal Language Map | Message 82 of 124 28 November 2011 at 2:34pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
Excellent suggestion, but it has little to do with our discussion about the use of different kinds of dictionary as quick tools when we have an urgent problem. I might sit down to read a grammar, and it could be in the language under discussion or not. And I could sit down to read one of those dictionaries which contain so much information that they almost look like encyclopedias. Or the columns, books and articles in which various aspects of language are discussed - including those threads in HTLAL which discuss aspects of English. However if I want to know what a specific word means then I still use a bilingual dictionary. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| s_allard Triglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5365 days ago 2704 posts - 5425 votes Speaks: French*, English, Spanish Studies: Polish | Message 83 of 124 28 November 2011 at 4:21pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
I'm not sure that the discussion is about quick tools for an urgent problem. If you're in a rush and you want to know what something is in your own language, then obviously the bilingual dictionary is the way to go. If you're not in a rush and you "want to know want a specific word means", why would you use a monolingual dictionary instead of a bilingual dictionary? It depends on your interest. If you're interested in seeing how the word is defined, that is to say explained conceptually in different words, then the monolingual dictionary is the way to go. Obviously, the monolingual dictionary does not give you the equivalent word in your native language. So you're not getting the meaning through your native language. You are getting it through the target language. Let's say a Spanish-speaker comes across the word "ambulatory" in an English text and looks it up in the Reverso online dictionary, this is what they would see: "ambulatory adj (US, Med) no encamado" If that person looks up the same word in the V2 Vocabulary Builder, this is what they would see: "ambulatory adjective Definition: 1. able to walk; 2. relating to walking; 3. moving from place to place Synonyms: mobile, recovering, healing, itinerant, walking, roving, nomadic Antonyms: immobile, bedridden Tips: Ambulatory is derived from the Latin ambulare, "to walk." This is also where we get the word ambulance. Ambulatory most often refers to patients who are recovering in or out of the hospital, but can also refer to activities done while walking. It can also refer to an outpatient clinic. In law, it refers to something that can be revoked, like a will. The word ambulatory can also be a noun to refer to a sheltered walkway. Usage Examples: Despite his serious medical condition, George was ambulatory, so the doctors allowed him to remain at home. (mobile, walking) The tribe was ambulatory and never remained in one place for long. (roving, nomadic) The plastic surgeon works out of an ambulatory care facility if he is doing outpatient procedures, but handles overnight patients in a regular hospital. (recovery, outpatient) The ambulatory patients are kept in a different wing of the hospital from those requiring total bed rest. (mobile, recovering)" Again, we are looking are two different things. If the person is in a rush, then the translation is fine. Notice that the translation is not a definition. There is no explanation of meaning. "no encamado" is an equivalent that supposes that the reader knows the definition. On the other hand, if the reader is not in a rush and wants to see how the word is defined and used in English, the monolingual is perhaps of interest. I am not saying the monolingual is better. As I have said a gazillion times, it adds a different perspective. For most people, the quick equivalent is enough. For a lot of people, all that information in a monolingual dictionary is overkill because their mastery of the target language is not enough for them to appreciate all the details. I should also point out that all monolingual dictionaries are not the same. I'm not familiar with the situation in other languages, but I do know that in French and in English there is a plethora of all kinds of excellent dictionaries. In my opinion, one of the best dictionaries in the world in terms of lexicographic design is the one-volume Le Petit Robert. This is only one member of a whole family of different kinds of dictionary. And if you want real overkill there is the six-volume Le Grand Robert. But I would be the first to admit that the vast majority of learners of French never get close to where they can really appreciate using something like Le Petit Robert. In my observation, most learners give up learning once they pass whatever necessary examination. They remain fossilized at some intermediate level. Their mistakes become ingrained, and they stop making real progress. This is where a monolingual dictionary and a monolingual grammar book can make a difference. As I have said so many times, it is all about acquiring knowledge through the target language that is interesting. You are using the words of the language to learn about the language. But this is definitely not if you are in a rush and you need a quick fix. 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| Cainntear Pentaglot Senior Member Scotland linguafrankly.blogsp Joined 5946 days ago 4399 posts - 7687 votes Speaks: Lowland Scots, English*, French, Spanish, Scottish Gaelic Studies: Catalan, Italian, German, Irish, Welsh | Message 84 of 124 28 November 2011 at 5:03pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
We're going round in circles.
I would not dispute this, but why is "getting it through the target language" of any relevance?
That's an entirely disengenuous comparison. The difference between the two dictionaries is more down to editorial policy than language.
If you understand the meaning, it has been defined, whether it has been "explained" or not. I wouldn't consider the Reverso entry you quoted to be a good definition, but that doesn't hold for some of the better dictionaries available.
You keep saying this, but you give a strong impression that you do indeed find it better.
Maybe it's an unfortunate translation mistake, but the word "appreciate" (my emphasis) does imply superiority.
The fact that beginners and intermediate learners can't use monolingual dictionaries is self-evident and shouldn't be worth mentioning, but despite stating repeatedly that monolingual dictionaries aren't "better" than bilingual ones, you here propose clearly and unambiguously that monolingual materials are the cure for the intermediate trap and fossilised errors. What is it about "acquiring knowledge through the target language" that is so interesting? It seems to me that you seem to follow the belief that monolingual materials are a cure-all and that translation is the source of all learner problems. (As can be seen from many of the posts here, I am not the only one who reads your posts that way.) Of course, it's understandable that you would believe this, as it is the prevalent teaching philosophy of our time. But as I've said before, it's merely a question of fashion, and soon enough another fashion will take its place. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| s_allard Triglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5365 days ago 2704 posts - 5425 votes Speaks: French*, English, Spanish Studies: Polish | Message 85 of 124 28 November 2011 at 6:22pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
Since I have neither the desire nor the time to respond to all of @cainntear's rambling post, I'd like to look at the key issue here. I like to work with real examples because we have something concrete to work with. In the case here, the Spanish-speaker gets the meaning of "ambulatory" in one of two ways. One way is "no encamado", the assumption being that the speaker knows what "no encamado" means and how to use "ambulatory" based on the usage of "no encamado". This is fine for most purposes and most people. The other way of obtaining the meaning of "ambulatory" is through the monolingual dictionary entry. It tells us in English that the the meaning or definition of "ambulatory" is: "1. able to walk; 2. relating to walking; 3. moving from place to place". We see three shades of meaning, using the English words "able to walk", "relating to walking" and "moving from place to place". So, the learner is picking up the English formulations or other ways of saying the same thing in a simpler fashion. This is what I mean by acquiring meaning through the target language. How relevant is this? For some people like @cainntear, it isn't relevant at all. "no encamado" is just fine. This I can't dispute. I believe, however, that it is useful for learners to see how a word can be reformulated in related words. Here the learner is acquiring a nexus of relationships between the words "ambulatory", "walking" and "moving around". I would also add that it's interesting to see synonyms, antonyms, a historical note and some great examples. @cainntear disagrees with my opinion and believes that all of this stuff is irrelevant. I respect this opinion, and this is why I say that I do not believe that the monolingual dictionary is superior, even though @cainntear thinks I'm saying the contrary. I keep saying that's it all a matter of perspective and need. If "no encamado" does the job, there is no need to look further. If you have the time and curiosity, maybe all that text may be of interest. Where is the problem? Edited by s_allard on 28 November 2011 at 6:25pm 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| hrhenry Octoglot Senior Member United States languagehopper.blogs Joined 5065 days ago 1871 posts - 3642 votes Speaks: English*, SpanishC2, ItalianC2, Norwegian, Catalan, Galician, Turkish, Portuguese Studies: Polish, Indonesian, Ojibwe | Message 86 of 124 28 November 2011 at 7:32pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
A recent example right here on HTLAL was from a few weeks ago regarding "me dieron ganas" (or "me daban ganas" - I don't remember). The single actual reference given was from a monolingual dictionary. Not that bilingual dictionaries are incapable of producing a proper explanation, it's just that in this particular case it was only found in a monolingual dictionary. R. == 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| s_allard Triglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5365 days ago 2704 posts - 5425 votes Speaks: French*, English, Spanish Studies: Polish | Message 87 of 124 28 November 2011 at 8:31pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
There's a wonderful saying in French, "Qui veut noyer son chien, l'accuse de rage." Roughly translated, it means, "If you want to get rid of your dog, say that it has rabies." When I see what @cainntear says what I really meant to say, I think this calls for the use of a good monolingual dictionary of the English language. Edited by s_allard on 28 November 2011 at 8:32pm 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| Cainntear Pentaglot Senior Member Scotland linguafrankly.blogsp Joined 5946 days ago 4399 posts - 7687 votes Speaks: Lowland Scots, English*, French, Spanish, Scottish Gaelic Studies: Catalan, Italian, German, Irish, Welsh | Message 88 of 124 28 November 2011 at 9:06pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
The key issue is that you aren't reading what I actually said.
But your example is completely bogus. V2 is completely atypical. The reason "ambulatory" gets so little space in Reverso is because Reverso is a digital version of Collins' paper-based dictionaries, and it's not even one of their big ones. The editors grant space to entries based on their perceived usefulness, and "ambulatory" wasn't considered useful enough to merit any more space than it got. V2, on the other hand, was designed ground-up for the internet, so the physical constraints of paper aren't an issue. A concrete example it may be; a useful comparison it is not.
That's not what I said. That's not what I said. That's not what I said. If you had paid attention to what I wrote (rather than sitting trying to think up smug put-downs) you might have realised that. 1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
