Contextualized Teaching of Different Senses of “al-” in Turkish as a Foreign Language

Year 2021, , 333 - 355, 22.10.2021

Deniz Ekin Yavaş , Funda Uzdu Yıldız

https://doi.org/10.31464/jlere.908777

Abstract

Different types of word knowledge require different approaches to teaching. It is argued that learning different senses of words takes place through constantly encountering words in different contexts. Experimental studies also show that comprehension of unknown word senses (Iravani and Ghasemi, 2013) and ambiguity resolution of polysemous words (Watanabe, 2014) are facilitated when the context is available. Verbal polysemy is especially closely related to context. Verbs can show distributional differences in their different senses and verbs have different valences in some of their senses. Based on these relations between polysemy and context, this study aims to create sentence contexts for “al-”, a high-frequency verb in Turkish, for contextualized teaching of its different senses in Turkish as a foreign language. The sentence contexts for different senses of the verb are created based on the information about its different senses’ valences.

Keywords

Contextualized Teaching, Verbal Polysemy, Valence, Turkish as a Foreign Language

References

• Adolphs, S. & Schmitt, N. (2003). Lexical Coverage of Spoken Discourse. Applied linguistics. 24(4): 425-438.
• Adolphs, S. & Schmitt, N. (2004). Vocabulary Coverage According to Spoken. Vocabulary in a Second Language: Selection, Acquisition, and Testing (pp. 39-51). Editors P. Bogaards & B. Laufer. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
• Aksan, Y., Aksan, M., Mersinli, Ü., & Demirhan, U. U. (2017). A Frequency Dictionary of Turkish. Taylor & Francis.
• Akşehirli, S. (2013). Türkçede Et- Katkısız Eyleminin Sözlüksel İşlevleri. Turkish Studies. 8(9): 481-494.
• Asher, N. (2011). Lexical Meaning in Context: A Web of Words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Baleghizadeh, S., & Nik, A. B. (2011). The Effect of Type of Context on EFL Learners' Recognition and Production of Colligations. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies. 7(1): 100-112.
• Bogaards, P. (2001). Lexical Units and the Learning of Foreign Language Vocabulary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 23(3): 321-343.
• Brugman, C. (2001). Light Verbs and Polysemy. Language Sciences. 23(4-5): 551-578.
• Carter, R. (2012). Vocabulary. New York: Routledge.
• Crossley, S., Salsbury, T. & McNamara, D. (2010). The Development of Polysemy and Frequency Use in English Second Language Speakers. Language Learning. 60(3): 573-605.
• Fellbaum, C. (1990). English Verbs as a Semantic Net. International Journal of Lexicography. 3(4), 278-301.
• Fellbaum, C. (1998). A Semantic Network of English: The Mother of All WordNets. EuroWordNet: A Multilingual Database with Lexical Semantic Networks (pp. 137-148). Editor P. Vossen.
• Göksel, A., & Kerslake, C. (2005). Turkish: A Comprehensive Grammar. Routledge.
• Herusatoto, H. (2012). Longer EFL Vocabulary Retention: Learning in Context or in Isolation?. LINGUA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa dan Sastra. 6(2): 181-183.
• Horst, M., Cobb, T. & Meara, P. (1998). Beyond a Clockwork Orange: Acquiring Second Language Vocabulary Through Reading. Reading in a Foreign Language. 11: 207–23. Dordrecht, Springer.
• Hoshino, Y., Sakata, N., Morimoto, S., Matsukubo, A. & Tsubaki, M. (2018). The Meaning Distributions of a Polysemous Word in Two Kinds of EFL Learning Materials. Journal of Bunkyo Gakuin University. 17: 35-56.
• Hu, H. M. & Nation, P. (2000). What Vocabulary Size is Needed to Read Unsimplified Texts. Reading in a Foreign Language. 8: 689-696.
• Iravani, H., & Ghasemi, M. D. (2013). A Comparison of Using Three Different Types of Cues, Elaborated Context, Semantic Frames and Meaning Chains, in Disambiguating Polysemous Verbs. International Journal of English Language Education. 1(1), 109-129.
• Karlsson, M. (2013). Quantitative and Qualitative Aspects of Advanced Learners' L1 and L2 Mastery of Polysemous Words. Hermes-Journal of Language and Communication Studies. 51: 79-112.
• Laufer, B. (1992). How Much Lexis is Necessary for Reading Comprehension?. Vocabulary and Applied Linguistics (pp. 126-132). Editors P. J. Arnaud & H. Bejoint. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Laufer, B. (1997). The Lexical Plight in Second Language Reading: Words You Don't Know, Words You Think You Know, and Words You Can't Guess. Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition: A Rationale for Pedagogy (pp. 20-34). Editors J. Coady & T. Huckin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Laufer, B. & Shmueli, K. (1997). Memorizing New Words: Does Teaching Have Anything to Do with it?. RELC JOURNAL. 28(1): 89-106.
• Leech, G. (1992). Corpora and theories of linguistic performance. Directions in corpus linguistics, 105-122.
• Lemmens, M. (1998). Lexical perspectives on transitivity and ergativity. Benjamins.
• Levin, B. & Rappaport Hovav, M. (2005). Argument Realization. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
• Mehrpour, S. (2008). A Comparison of the Effects of Two Vocabulary Teaching Techniques. The Asian EFL Journal. 10(2): 192-208.
• Miyamoto, T. (2000). The Light Verb Constructions in Japanese: The Role of the Verbal Noun. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
• Morimoto, S., & Loewen, S. (2007). A Comparison of the Effects of Image-Schema Based Instruction and Translation-Based Instruction on the Acquisition of L2 Polysemous Words. Language Teaching Research. 11(3): 347-372.
• Nagy, W. E. (1995). On the Role of Context in First-and Second-Language Vocabulary Learning. Champaign.: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
• Nation, I. S. P. (1993). Vocabulary Size, Growth, and Use. The Bilingual Lexicon (pp. 115-134). Editors R. Schreuder & B. Weltens. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
• Nation, I. S. P. (2006). How Large a Vocabulary is Needed for Reading and Listening?. Canadian Modern Language Review. 63(1): 59-82.
• Nation, I. S. P. (2011). Research into Practice: Vocabulary. Language Teaching. 44(4): 529-539.
• Nation, P., & Waring, R. (1997). Vocabulary Size, Text Coverage and Word Lists. Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition and Pedagogy. 14: 6-19.
• Nation, P. & Meara, P. (2010). Vocabulary. An Introduction to Applied Linguistics (pp. 34-53). Editor N. Schmitt. London: Hodder Education.
• Özbek, A. (2008). Support Verb Constructions in Turkish. Annals of Japan Association for Middle East Studies. 24(1), 1-16.
• Özbek, A. (2010). On Çek- as a Light Verb-A Contrastive View from Japanese. Dil ve Dilbilimi Çalışmaları Dergisi 6(1): 1-13.
• Öztürk, M. (2017) Words with Multiple Meanings in Authentic L2 Texts: An analysis of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal. 17(2): 133-141.
• Öztürk, M. (2018). Acquisition of Noun Polysemy in English as a Foreign Language. Journal of Foreign Language Education and Technology. 3(1): 83-109.
• Pigada, M. & Schmitt, N. (2006). Vocabulary Acquisition from Extensive Reading: A Case Study. Reading in a Foreign Language. 18(1): 1–28.
• Prince, P. (1996). Second Language Vocabulary Learning: The Role of Context versus Translation as a Function of Proficiency. The Modern Language Journal. 80: 478- 493
• Qian, D. D. (2002). Investigating the Relationship Between Vocabulary Knowledge and Academic Reading Performance: An Assessment Perspective. Language Learning. 52(3): 513-536.
• Rappaport Hovav, M. & Levin, B. (1998). Building Verb Meanings. The Projection of Arguments: Lexical and Compositional Factors (pp. 97-134.). Editors M. Butt & W. Geuder. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
• Sadeghi, K. & Nobakht, A. (2014). The Effect of Linguistic Context on EFL Vocabulary Learning. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies. 14(3).
• Saito, K., Webb, S., & Trofimovich, P. (2016) Lexical Profiles of Comprehensible Second Language Speech: The Role of Appropriateness, Fluency, Variation, Sophistication, Abstractness, and Sense Relations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 38: 677-701.
• Schmitt, N. (1998). Tracking the Incremental Acquisition of Second Language Vocabulary: A Longitudinal Study. Language Learning. 48(2): 281-317.
• Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Schmitt, N. (2008). Instructed Second Language Vocabulary Learning. Language Teaching Research. 12(3): 329-363.
• Schmitt, N. (2010) Researching Vocabulary: A Vocabulary Research Manual. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Schmitt, N., Jiang, X., & Grabe, W. (2011). The Percentage of Words Known in a Text and Reading Comprehension. The Modern Language Journal. 95(1): 26-43.
• Sezer, T. (2017). TS Corpus Project: An Online Turkish Dictionary and TS DIY Corpus. European Journal of Language and Literature. 9(1), 18-24.
• Sezer, T. (2016). Tweets Corpus: Building a Corpus by Social Media. Journal of National Education and Social Sciences. 210: 621-633
• Sezer, T. & Sezer, B. (2013). TS Corpus: Herkes İçin Türkçe Derlem. Proceedings 27th National Linguistics Conference, 217-225.
• Spalek, A. A. (2015). Spanish Change of State Verbs in Composition with Atypical Theme Arguments: Clarifying the Meaning Shifts. Lingua. 157: 36-53.
• Stevenson, S., Fazly, A., & North, R. (2004). Statistical Measures of the Semi-Productivity of Light Verb Constructions. Proceedings of the Workshop on Multiword Expressions: Integrating Processing. 1-8.
• Şen, E. & Turan, S. (2012). Türkçede Eylemlerin Altulam Özellikleri ve Bu Özelliklerin Eğitim-Öğretim Ortamlarına Aktarılması. Dil Dergisi. 158: 7-36.
• Uçar, A. (2007). Eylemde Çokanlamlılık ve Sözlük Girdisi Olarak Katkısız Eylemler XXI. Ulusal Dilbilim Kurultayı Bildirileri 10 (pp.137-145) Editors Y. Aksan & M. Aksan. Mersin: Mersin University.
• Uçar, A. (2009). Türkçede Eylemlerde Çokanlamlılık: Uygunluk Kuramı Çerçevesinde Bir Çözümleme [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Ankara University Graduate School of Social Sciences.
• Uçar, A. (2010). Light Verbs Constructions in Turkish Dictionaries: Are They Submeanings of Polysemous Verbs?. Journal of Linguistics and Literature.7(1): 1-17.
• Uzun, N. E. (1997). Türkçe Eylemlerde Çokanlamlılık ve Rol Kuramı. A. Ü. Tömer Dil Dergisi. 51 (1), 5-20.
• Ünaldı, I., Bardakçı, M., Akpınar, K. D. & Dolaş, F. (2013). A Comparison of Contextualized, Decontextualized and Corpus-Informed Vocabulary Instruction: A Quasi-Experimental Study. Dil ve Edebiyat Eğitimi Dergisi. 2(8): 78-95.
• Vater, Heinz (2003). Valency and Diathesis. Motivation in Languages: Studies in Honor of Günter Radden (pp. 99-122) Editors H. Cuyckens, T. Berg, R. Dirven and K. Panther. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Waring, R. & Takaki, M. (2003). At What Rate Do Learners Learn and Retain New Vocabulary from Reading a Graded Reader? Reading in a Foreign Language. 15: 130- 163
• Watanabe, Y. (2014). Effects of Contextual Constraint on the Processing of Polysemous Words in Japanese EFL Reading. KATE Journal. 28: 55-68.
• Webb, S. (2007). Learning Word Pairs and Glossed Sentences: The Effects of a Single Context on Vocabulary Knowledge. Language Teaching Research. 11(1): 63-81.
• Yavaş, D. E. (2020). Contextualized Teaching of Polysemous Verbs in Turkish as a Foreign Language [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Dokuz Eylul University Graduate School of Social Sciences.
• Zaefferer, D. (2002). Polysemy, polyvalence, and linking mismatches: the concept of RAIN and its codings in English, German, Italian, and Spanish. DELTA: Documentação de Estudos em Lingüística Teórica e Aplicada, 18(SPE), 27-56.