Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  L1/L2
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Jak uporządkować terminologiczny chaos w glottodydaktyce i po co?

100%
Cockiewicz W.
LingVaria : Półrocznik Wydziału Polonistyki UJ poświęcony zagadnieniom języka i językoznawstwa
|
2013
|
issue 15
201-213
EN
The terminology used in language pedagogy does not constitute a coherent system because it is not based on definitions of terms but rather on descriptions of prototypes and illustrating them with examples. As a result, different terms overlap. This is disadvantageous for discourse in language pedagogy, because it enforces terms to be redefined anew in every statement. The current article proposes a way to order and systematize terminology referring to, on the one hand, languages as viewed from the perspective of language pedagogy, and on the other, to the phenomenon of bi- and multilingualism. Based on five systematically employed criteria, a discrete set of terms has been obtained which reflect the language pedagogical (i.e. prepared from the point of view of language pedagogy) classification of languages. The first criterion allows also a bi- or multilingual person to be unambiguously distinguished from a polyglot. The first term describes someone who has acquired two or more native languages, while the second a person who has learned several or many foreign languages. The criteria of competence or of circumstances of use, which have so far been in common use, do not allow for such a clear distinction.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Quantitative and qualitative aspects of L1 (Swedish) and L2 (English) idiom perception

100%
Karlsson M.
Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching
|
2013
|
vol. 3
|
issue 2
293-319
EN
In the present investigation, 15 first term university students were faced with 80 context-based idioms in English (L2) and Swedish (L1) respectively, 30 of which were in the source domain of animals, commonly used in both languages, and asked to explain their meaning. The idioms were of varying frequency and transparency. Three main research questions were thus addressed:1. How well do students master idioms in their L2 as compared to their L1?2. How do (a) degrees of transparency, (b) idiom frequency and (c) the choice of source domain affect students’ L1 and L2 comprehension?3. To what extent is context used when interpreting L1 and L2 idioms?Results show that while the frequency of an idiom does not appear to play a part in whether it is comprehended or not in either language, the degree of transparency is of great importance in students’ L2. Also, students make extensive use of context in their L2.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Quantitative and qualitative aspects of L1 (Swedish) and L2 (English) idiom comprehension

100%
Karlsson M.
Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching
|
2013
|
vol. 3
|
issue 2
293-319
EN
In the present investigation, 15 first term university students were faced with 80 context-based idioms in English (L2) and Swedish (L1) respectively, 30 of which were in the source domain of animals, commonly used in both languages, and asked to explain their meaning. The idioms were of varying frequency and transparency. Three main research questions were thus addressed:1. How well do students master idioms in their L2 as compared to their L1?2. How do (a) degrees of transparency, (b) idiom frequency and (c) the choice of source domain affect students’ L1 and L2 comprehension?3. To what extent is context used when interpreting L1 and L2 idioms?Results show that while the frequency of an idiom does not appear to play a part in whether it is comprehended or not in either language, the degree of transparency is of great importance in students’ L2. Also, students make extensive use of context in their L2.
4
Content available remote

Jak uporządkować terminologiczny chaos w glottodydaktyce i po co?

67%
Cockiewicz W.
LingVaria : Półrocznik Wydziału Polonistyki UJ poświęcony zagadnieniom języka i językoznawstwa
|
2013
|
issue 1(15)
201-213
EN
The terminology used in language pedagogy does not constitute a coherent system because it is not based on definitions of terms but rather on descriptions of prototypes and illustrating them with examples. As a result, different terms overlap. This is disadvantageous for discourse in language pedagogy, because it enforces terms to be redefined anew in every statement. The current article proposes a way to order and systematize terminology referring to, on the one hand, languages as viewed from the perspective of language pedagogy, and on the other, to the phenomenon of bi- and multilingualism. Based on five systematically employed criteria, a discrete set of terms has been obtained which reflect the language pedagogical (i.e. prepared from the point of view of language pedagogy) classification of languages. The first criterion allows also a bi- or multilingual person to be unambiguously distinguished from a polyglot. The first term describes someone who has acquired two or more native languages, while the second a person who has learned several or many foreign languages. The criteria of competence or of circumstances of use, which have so far been in common use, do not allow for such a clear distinction.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.