|
 |
When can one adopt a native dictionary? | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Learning Techniques, Methods & Strategies | ( Topic Closed) |  |
| Ari Heptaglot Senior Member Norway Joined 6517 days ago 2314 posts - 5695 votes  Speaks: Swedish*, English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Mandarin, Cantonese Studies: Czech, Latin, German | Message 57 of 124 22 November 2011 at 7:03am | IP Logged | ||||||||
Maybe for learning English, though there are often pretty good English dictionaries in most languages. After learning English, you use an X-English bilingual dictionary. At least that's what I do. 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Ari Heptaglot Senior Member Norway Joined 6517 days ago 2314 posts - 5695 votes Speaks: Swedish*, English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Mandarin, Cantonese Studies: Czech, Latin, German | Message 58 of 124 22 November 2011 at 7:11am | IP Logged | ||||||||
No, but it was sort of implicit in the OP. What this thread started with was "It's seeming to be the earlier that one can get rid of direct translations, the better, letting the words simply mean what they mean." This is what me, Cainntear and Iversen started arguing about, and it's what the discussion was about from the beginning. Your position, that one can use a monodic to find some extra vocab, I find hard to argue against, though I've tried to argue against some specific claims in your posts. Edited by Ari on 22 November 2011 at 7:11am 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| nonneb Pentaglot Groupie SpainRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 4686 days ago 80 posts - 173 votes Speaks: English*, Ancient Greek, Latin, German, Spanish Studies: Mandarin, Hungarian, French | Message 59 of 124 22 November 2011 at 8:37am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
I always attempt to use a monolingual dictionary as soon as it stops being a burden, so usually in the B2 area.
Sometimes, as has been noted in the thread, a translation to one's native language can clarify the meaning of a word in the target language more simply. The problem is that this can also create unnecessary confusion, because words in different languages don't always line up with each other. But in practice, a speaker of a common European language learning another common European language can stick with a good bilingual dictionary as long as you want. I personally prefer to keep the number of words I look up to a minimum after learning enough of a language to understand TV shows/novels, and when I do look up words, I use a monolingual dictionary if possible and as soon as possible because I feel more confident in my ability to understand the subtleties of the word in context than I do in the ability of most dictionaries to clarify the meaning through translation. This is highly dependent on the language, and I use(d) leo for longer in German than I did, say, any bilingual Spanish dictionary. To answer the OP's question most directly, use whatever you think helps you understand words best, which you learn within a short time of beginning to use a dictionary, bi- or monolingual. 1 person has 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 60 of 124 22 November 2011 at 11:01am | IP Logged | ||||||||
Danish is also a small language (measured in speakers), but I'm actually reasonably content with the supply of dictionaries for the main languages (and some less studied ones). But I supplement with dictionaries based on other languages like English and German, and all in all I find that I'm reasonably well served with bilingual dictionaries whose base languages I can understand. Besides I use Google to find examples and translations as a supplement to my dictionaries and other tools. I do own a number of monolingual speciality books like slang and etymology dictionaries, boooks explaining a small number of works in great detail and even a number of 'ordinary' monolingual dictionaries like Hornby's English dictionary and P'tit Robert - but even in my best languages I prefer bilingual dictionaries when it only is the meaning of a word I'm looking for. Digression: I still don't own a Slovene - something dictionary, but even for Slavic languages I have a reasonable collection, partly because I stocked up on those while we still had a specialized Slavic bookstore in my hometown. I also own a number of small dictionaries in languages which I probably won't ever learn - including Asiatic languages whose writing systems are totally beyond me (Chinese!). But I know that my old Greek and Russian dictionaries were bought mostly for fun in the late 70s and early 80s, and then I didn't touch them until recent years when I restarted my language studies. So keeping a stock of unused dictionaries in weird languages standing on my shelves doesn't bother me. They might come in handy some day.. Edited by Iversen on 22 November 2011 at 11:11am 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
 Fasulye Heptaglot Winner TAC 2012 Moderator Germany fasulyespolyglotblog Joined 5782 days ago 5460 posts - 6006 votes 1 sounds Speaks: German*, DutchC1, EnglishB2, French, Italian, Spanish, Esperanto Studies: Latin, Danish, Norwegian, Turkish Personal Language Map | Message 61 of 124 22 November 2011 at 12:00pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
In my normal daily language usage I for 95 % use bilingual dictionaries, both L1 - L3 and L2 - L3 ones, so I am not strictly dependent on involving my native language German.
On HTLAL I from time to time pick up unknown English words like my latest ones "disheartend" and "endorsement" and these I always look up in my monolingual "Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary" because such words are often American English and my European bilingual dictionaries often neglect American English expressions. Sometimes I use my monolingual Romance dictionaries (French, Italian, Spanish) especially to look up rare cooking ingredients from Mediterianan recipes. I almost never use my Dutch monolingual dictionary (Van Dale) and only in cases of doubt my monolingual "Plena Illustrita Vortraro" (= PIV) for Esperanto. For Danish I haven't got a monolingual one (and it would now be to early to use one!) and for German I use my "DUDEN Rechtschreibung" dictionary. Fasulye Edited by Fasulye on 22 November 2011 at 1:11pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| trance0 Pentaglot Groupie Slovenia Joined 5685 days ago 52 posts - 78 votes Speaks: Slovenian*, English, German, Croatian, Serbian | Message 62 of 124 22 November 2011 at 12:29pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
I know that there are plenty of quality bilingual dictionaries for English, I make use of them very often when I'm 'upgrading' my vocabulary in German or Serbocroatian. But that doesn't change the fact that I haven't come across a good bilingual Slovene dictionary yet and as my English will never be as good as my Slovene I think that puts me somewhat at a disadvantage in comparison with native speakers of languages that have good bilingual dictionaries.
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 63 of 124 22 November 2011 at 2:22pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
The thing is, anything bigger than a pocket dictionary is going to account for this - translations are bundled into "senses". In some older dictionaries, you'll find this done with commas and semicolons, but in modern dictionaries, it's done with numbers, just like in quality monolingual dictionaries. Sometimes you even get a mixture of both. Take this example from Larousse English<->Catalan
The comma'd translations have to be considered together as one definition, whereas the semicolon adds a distinct translation which has the same sense. The different numbered senses must be considered independently. The mistake comes when people look at a bilingual dictionary entry as a series of independent words, rather than a set of words that give you the meaning taken together. Yes, each word in the set is a potential translation, but it is more than that. It's just a shame that so many classes bad-mouth dictionaries rather than teaching students how to use them properly.... 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 64 of 124 23 November 2011 at 5:01am | IP Logged | ||||||||
There example given here from an English-Catalan dictionary actually illustrates the nature and limitations of a bilingual dictionary. First of all, the entry consists of a list of equivalents of the headword Go off. These are not definitions, as claimed here. For example, apagar-se is not a definition of Go off (lighting, heating); it is the equivalent word in Catalan. The difference may seem just a question of semantics, but it's important because there is no attempt to explain what Go off in the context actually means. The dictionary is only saying that in Catalan it is apagar-se. This is not a big problem in general because the Catalan-speaker who looks up the word Go off in an English-Catalan dictionary will be content most of the time with the equivalents given above. But those are not definitions. If you were to look up Go off in an English monolingual dictionary, you will find true definitions of what the word means. And, depending on the size and quality of the dictionary, you will find many examples of the use of the word. The other issue that is raised when using bilingual dictionaries is the limitations of the equivalents. The dictionary tells us that apagar-se is the equivalent of Go off in a specific context. Can we reverse this equivalence? Can we say that Go off is the equivalent of apagar -se? In certain contexts yes but not in all. That is always the danger when one works entirely with equivalents and not with meaning. Neither have apagar -se nor Go of been actually defined. I don't want to make a big deal out of this because I believe most people will be totally satisfied with a good bilingual dictionary. And please don't believe that I'm saying that bilingual dictionaries are not as good as monolingual dictionaries. I'm just saying that they are different tools. Edited by s_allard on 23 November 2011 at 5:03am 2 persons have 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. |
