|
 |
When can one adopt a native dictionary? | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Learning Techniques, Methods & Strategies | ( Topic Closed) |  |
| 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 9 of 124 15 November 2011 at 5:57pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
Good point. The reason for this is historical -- you'll find some old dictionaries entitled "a reading dictionary of (language)" or similar, which points to the original purpose of such dictionaries: reading, not production. So you do generally need to read both halves of a dictionary when going L1->L2. This is slowly improving, though. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| montmorency Diglot Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 4763 days ago 2371 posts - 3676 votes Speaks: English*, German Studies: Danish, Welsh | Message 10 of 124 15 November 2011 at 6:59pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
I don't know about monodics ( :-) lovely word ) in general, but as I see you are studying German, I would like to recommend to you one specific one: "Wörterbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache", published by De Gruter. My edition is dated 2000. It's all in German, and as the title suggests, it's specifically for people learning German as a foreign language. Therefore its explanations are very clear and extensive. It also has the great virtue (in my presbyopic eyes) of being very clearly printed and laid out, which cannot be said for a lot of large dictionaries. It also has some nice line-drawings by explanation of some words or word-groups, but it does not go over the top in this direction. Yes, it's a large, heavy "bookshelf" dictionary, so not something you would want to carry about. I would also say that it definitely will not replace a good bilingual dictionary, but I think it is a useful addition when your vocabulary is sufficiently large to make good use of it. Because its explanations are a bit lengthier than with a standard dictionary, or normal monodic, it has to sacrifice something in terms of the number of headwords, for a dictionary of its physical size, so you will probably find some gaps. That's life. 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 11 of 124 15 November 2011 at 7:01pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
|
While it is obvious that one has to start with bilingual dictionaries, I think it is worth considering using a monolingual dictionary in addition as soon as possible. In this I disagree strongly with most people here. Note that I said "in addition" not "instead." Many people of course see no point in ever using a monolingual dictionary because they can find everything in their bilingual dictionary. This I think is a major mistake.
Bilingual dictionaries have as their primary goal to show you how something in your target language is translated into your native language and vice-versa. And many dictionaries have all kinds of supplemental material on grammar or writing styles, etc. That's great, and the first dictionary should be bilingual. The key principle to keep in mind, however, is that you are not getting definitions of the word you are searching for. You are getting the equivalent in your language. In other words, you are not getting an explanation, you are getting the comparable word, the definition of which you are supposed to know. So for example you are reading something having to do with the tramway in Barcelona and you come across the word "pantógrafo" that you don't know. A bilingual dictionary will tell you that it is "pantograph" but it doesn't tell you what this is. If you already know what this is, no problem. The problem is that you are associating target language words and expressions with meanings in your native language. You are inevitably perpetuating the process of always translating into your native language instead of gradually developing a native-like view of the system. So when you see something, you are continuously thinking "how do I say this in my language?" This obviously is not conducive to thinking in the language. What you get in a monolingual dictionary is true definitions and explanations in the native language. So you are associating the words with meaning expressed in words of the target language. You learn, in Spanish, that the "pantógrafo" is that device that the trams use to connect to the overhead wires. The important point here is that if you want to start thinking in the language and move away from translating back and forth, it is best at some point to start seeing the language through the perspective of a native speaker. That is of course if you really want to speak like a native. I have also found that monolingual dictionaries often contain a wealth of useful information on etymology, notes on register and usage, synonyms and antonyms. Then there are all kinds of dictionaries: junior dictionaries, illustrated dictionaries, slang dictionaries or even dictionaries of difficulties. It is for similar reasons that I think that people should at some point start using a grammar book in the target language. If you want to get "into" a language and be able to talk about a language, you need the terminology and the kinds of explanations that you will find in a native language book. I'm not saying chuck the bilingual dictionary out the window. I'm saying supplement it. 7 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 12 of 124 15 November 2011 at 9:58pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
I agree -- this is a weakness in bilingual dictionaries.
But I disagree with this. Native language is not a conscious process -- it's second-nature to any speaker. If I read something in English, I understand it naturally, and without thinking about the words (presuming it's written in clear English, that is). When I read a definition in a quality bookshelf dictionary, I don't hold in my head the list of definitions, I read them and understand the concept they encode. It is that concept that I associate with the target word. But crucially, as the native language term is recognisable, I can use it as an additional cue to remind me of the dictionary when I've not got it in front of me.
The language you get your explanation in is irrelevant, because there is only one part of the brain that deals with semantics. You could tell me in Spanish, Swabisch or Swahili what a "pantógrafo" is and it would still mean the same to me. (Except that I don't speak Swabisch or Swahili.)
This is a spurious argument -- most native speakers of any language you'd care to mention don't have dictionaries of their own language, so while it sounds appealing, the native dictionary doesn't recreate the native speaker experience in any way.
Etymology I'll grant you, but the others are all available in good bilingual dictionaries too. My Collins Spanish<->English dictionary has a lot more usage information than my copy of the Diccionario Salamanca de la Lengua Española.
A native language grammar book has an entirely different goal from a learner's grammar. A native grammar aims at teaching grammar awareness, i.e. showing the native speaker what they already know instinctively, as well as pointing out dialectal deviations to help them consciously write in a more standard way. A bilingual learner's grammar has different assumptions of pre-existing knowledge. A speaker of Italian isn't going to have much problem with the French verb system, for example, but a Chinese person is going to find it completely alien. 4 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| tommus Senior Member CanadaRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5801 days ago 979 posts - 1688 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Dutch, French, Esperanto, German, Spanish | Message 13 of 124 15 November 2011 at 10:04pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
There is a very similar monolingual Dutch dictionary: "Nederlands als Tweede Taal", published by Van Dale. My copy is dated 2003. It is for people learning Dutch as a second language. It contains 14,000 words in 791 pages. It is soft-covered, about the size of a large paperback book. It is very clear and is pleasant to use. It gives the definite article for nouns (het or de), the plural form of nouns, and the infinitive, simple past and perfect for verbs. it separates the syllables and shows the accented one, but gives no other pronunciation information. It gives the meaning or meanings of the word, followed by one or more example sentences. It also has some tags to consolidated explanations. For example, 'father' is tagged to 'family' where all family relationships are shown together. It has everything I need in such a dictionary. I recommend it as a supplement to bilingual dictionaries. In this dictionary, I have broken my rule of not writing in books. I mark words or pages that I have studied, and add some notes of my own. Although I hate writing in books, especially nice ones like this one, it gives the book a good "used' and 'in use' and 'useful' feel. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| H.Computatralis Triglot Senior Member Poland Joined 6239 days ago 130 posts - 210 votes Speaks: Polish*, French, English Studies: German, Spanish, Latin | Message 14 of 124 15 November 2011 at 10:49pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
Except that it doesn't really mean what you think it does. monodic adj. pertaining to monody monody n. 1. An ode for one voice or actor, as in Greek drama. 2. A poem in which the poet or speaker mourns another's death. 3. Music a. A style of composition dominated by a single melodic line. b. A style of composition having a single melodic line; monophony. c. A composition in either of these styles. Quite ironic in a thread about dictionaries. ;) 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 15 of 124 15 November 2011 at 11:01pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
Rather than debate all of Cainntear's points, I would like to focus on this remark that made me laugh a bit. If I read correctly, it is stated that "most native speakers of any language you'd care to mention don't have dictionaries of their own language". For lovers of language like most of us at HTLAL, I would think that this has to be one of the most outlandish statements that we have read in quite a while. While I would admit that many uneducated people do not own a dictionary, I would think that anyone who has any kind of education has consulted a dictionary and probably owns one. I wonder how many people here at HTLAL do not own a dictionary in their native language. But let's get to the main argument by Cainntear: "the native dictionary doesn't recreate the native speaker experience in any way." As happens so often with Cainntear's cryptic comments, I have no idea what this means. What I did try to say in my own statement is that a monolingual dictionary gives you a definition or a description of the meaning using words in the target language and aimed at native speakers. Now Cainntear may never consult a monolingual English dictionary because he sees no necessity--I wonder about that--but I consult French and English dictionaries all the time. Why do people consult dictionaries in their language? Obviously, the number one reason is because they have met a word that they do not know. So you look it up. The other day, I heard "kiester" or "keester" in English and "obombrer" in French for the first time. So, I looked them up. The other reason may be doubt about meaning, spelling or usage. The definitions or explanations are in words that I can understand. And then I see examples from good sources. I don't know what Cainntear calls the native speaker's experience, but what I do know is that when I read a definition in my own language I am recreating the meaning in my head so that when I see the word again I now know what it means. Edited by s_allard on 16 November 2011 at 12:17am 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| tpark Tetraglot Pro Member Canada Joined 6981 days ago 118 posts - 127 votes Speaks: English*, German, Dutch, French Personal Language Map | Message 16 of 124 16 November 2011 at 4:43am | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
|
Most of the time I use the dictionaries on my iPhone, however I have monolingual dictionaries for all the languages
I use. I note that the monolingual dictionaries often have a greater number of words than the multiple language ones. 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. |
