NARROW READING AS A TOOL FOR MANAGING TRANSLATOR’S LINGUISTIC KNOWLEDGE

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Professional translators should be able to effectively manage their linguistic knowledge to meet their professional needs. This involves not only acquiring relevant terminology in a particular area, but also the means of expression specific to this subject field, thus ensuring nativelike speech in a foreign language. The article posits that one of the tools which can be successfully used to achieve this goal is narrow reading. The benefits of using narrow reading by translators to expand their linguistic knowledge can be justified by its ability to: 1) highlight the preferred ways of expressing certain ideas, conveying meanings and describing situations used by native speakers; 2) ensure comprehensive knowledge and long-term retention of new vocabulary; 3) encourage the process of constructing knowledge of a foreign language. It has been concluded that the effectiveness of using narrow reading for achieving the above-mentioned aims depends on the following factors: 1) awareness of the types of linguistic means which ensure nativelike speech; 2) the ability to notice means of expression specific to a particular subject field used by native speakers to convey specific ideas and meanings; 3) the ability to adequately use these linguistic means when speaking a foreign language. The article describes an algorithm for developing the knowledge and skills required to effectively use narrow reading for expanding students’ linguistic knowledge and ensure nativelike speech in a particular subject area. It can be used as part of an English language course in an undergraduate degree in translation and interpreting. The algorithm proved to be an an effective tool for achieving the above-mentioned goals.

About the authors

Jana Borisovna Emelyanova

Linguistics University of Nizhny Novgorod

Email: yemelyanova2007@yandex.ru
ul. Minina 31a, Nizhny Novgorod, Russian Federation, 603155

References

  1. Емельянова Я. Б. Теоретические основы и предпосылки переключения лингвокультурных кодов в переводе. Нижний Новгород: Изд-во ННГУ им. Н. И. Лобачевского, 2017. 194 с.
  2. Foster P., Bolibaugh C., Kotula A. Knowledge of nativelike selections in a L2 // Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 2014. Vol. 36 (1). P. 101–132. doi: 10.1017/S0272263113000624
  3. Wray A. Formulaic language in learners and native speakers // Language Teaching. 1999. Vol. 32 (4). P. 213–231. doi: 10.1017/S0261444800014154
  4. Wray A. Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. 348 p.
  5. Pawley A., Syder F. H. Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency // Language and Communication / eds. by J. Richards, R. W. Schmidt. London: Longman, 1983. P. 191–225.
  6. Cho K-S., Ahn K-O., Krashen S. The effects of narrow reading of authentic texts on interest and reading ability in English as a Foreign Language // Reading Improvement. 2005. Vol. 42 (1). P. 58–63.
  7. Rodrigo V., Greenberg D., Burke V., Hall R., Berry A., Brinck T., Joseph H., Oby M. Implementing an extensive reading program and library for adult literacy learners // Reading in a Foreign Language. 2007. Vol. 19 (2). P. 106–119.
  8. Laufer B. Vocabulary acquisition in a second language: Do learners really acquire most vocabulary by reading? Some empirical evidence // The Canadian modern language review. 2003. Vol. 59 (4). P. 567–587.
  9. Min Hui-Tzu. EFL vocabulary acquisition and retention: reading plus vocabulary enhancement activities and Narrow Reading // Language Learning. 2008. Vol. 58 (1). P. 73–115.
  10. Kang E. Y. Promoting L2 vocabulary learning through narrow reading // RELC Journal. 2015. Vol. 46. P. 165–179.
  11. Abdollahi M., Taghi M. Farvardin Demystifying the Effect of Narrow Reading on EFL Learners’ Vocabulary Recall and Retention // Education Research International. 2016. Article ID 5454031. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/5454031 (дата обращения: 03.06.2021).
  12. Waring R., Takaki M. At what rate do learners learn and retain new vocabulary from reading a graded reader? // Reading in a Foreign Language. 2003. Vol. 15 (2). P. 130–163.
  13. Schmitt N., Carter R. The lexical advantages of narrow reading for second language learners // TESOL Journal. 2000. Vol. 9 (1). P. 4–9.
  14. Chang A., Millet S. Narrow reading: Effects on EFL Learners’ reading speed, comprehension and perceptions // Reading in a Foreign Language. 2017. Vol. 29 (1). P. 1–19.
  15. Kweldju S. Narrow reading in an extensive reading course: lexically-based // Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan. 2008. Vol. 15 (3). P. 157–168.
  16. Krashen S. The Case for Narrow Reading // Language Magazine. 2004. Vol. 3 (5). P. 17–19.
  17. Gass S., Selinker L. Second language acquisition: an introductory course. 3rd ed. New York: Routledge, 2008. 616 p.
  18. Pigada M., Schmitt N. Vocabulary acquisition from extensive reading: A case study // Reading in a Foreign Language. 2006. Vol. 18. P. 1–28.
  19. Webb S. Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effect of reading and writing on word knowledge // Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 2005. Vol. 27 (1). P. 33–52. doi: 10.1017/S0272263105050023
  20. PACTE Group Building a Translation Competence Model // Triangulating translation: Perspectives in Process Oriented Research / ed. by F. Alves. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2003. P. 43–66.
  21. Boers F., Lindstromberg S. Optimizing a lexical approach to instructed second language acquisition. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. 204 p.
  22. Kecskes I. Situation-Bound Utterances in L1 and L2. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2003. 240 p.
  23. Kecskes I. Formulaic language in English Lingua Franca // Explorations in pragmatics / eds. by I. Kecskes, L. Horn). Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2008. P. 191–218.
  24. Lewis M. The lexical approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications, 1993. 200 p.
  25. Nation I. S. P. Learning vocabulary in another language. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, 2013. 640 p.
  26. Nattinger J. R., DeCarrico J. S. Lexical phrases and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992. 240 p.
  27. Wray A. Formulaic language: Pushing the boundaries. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 2008. 322 p.
  28. Wray A., Perkins M. R. The functions of formulaic language: An integrated model // Language and Communication. 2000. Vol. 20 (1). P. 1–28. doi: 10.1016/S0271-5309(99)00015-4.
  29. Conklin K., Schmitt N. The Processing of Formulaic Language // Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. 2012. Vol. 32. P. 45–61. doi: 10.1017/S0267190512000074.
  30. Thornbury S. Learning language in chunks. Part of the Cambridge Papers in ELT series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019. URL: http://www.cambridge.org/cambridge-papers-elt (дата обращения: 10.07.2020).
  31. Shin D., Nation P. Beyond single words: the most frequent collocations in spoken English // ELT Journal. 2008. Vol. 62 (4). P. 339–348.
  32. Lewis M. Implementing the Lexical Approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications, 1997. 176 p.
  33. Thornbury S. How to teach vocabulary. Harlow: Pearson, 2002. 192 p.
  34. Wiktorsson M. Register Differences between Prefabs in Native and EFL English. The Department of English in Lund: Working Papers in Linguistics. 2002. Vol 1. URL: https://lucris.lub.lu.se/ws/portalfiles/portal/6363039/623562.pdf (дата обращения: 12.01.2021).
  35. Гаспаров Б. М. Язык. Память. Образ. Лингвистика языкового существования. М.: Новое литературное обозрение, 1996. 352 c.
  36. Field J. Looking outwards, not inwards // ELT Journal. 2007. Vol. 61 (1). P. 30–38.
  37. Schmidt R. Attention // Robinson P. (ed.) Cognition and Second Language Instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. P. 3–32.
  38. Read J. Research in teaching vocabulary // Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. 2004. Vol. 4. P. 146–161.
  39. Ying Y., O’Neill M. Collocation learning through and ‘AWARE’ approach: Learner perspectives and learning process // Researching collocations in another language: Multiple interpretations / eds. by A. Barfield, H. Gyllstad. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. P. 181–193.
  40. Henriksen B. Research on L2 learners’ collocational competence and development: A progress report // L2 vocabulary acquisition, knowledge and use: New perspectives on assessment and corpus analysis / eds. by C. Bardel, C. Lindqvist, B. Laufer. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Eurosla, 2013. P. 29–56.
  41. Granger S. Prefabricated patterns in advanced EFL writing: Collocations and formulae // Phraseology: Theory, analysis, and applications / ed. by A. P. Cowie. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. P. 79–100.
  42. Siyanova A., Schmitt N. L2 Learner Production and Processing of Collocation: A Multi-study Perspective // The Canadian Modern Language Review. 2008. Vol. 64 (3). P. 429–458.
  43. Nesselhauf N. Collocations in a learner corpus. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 2005. 344 p.
  44. Cowie A. P. Multiword lexical units and communicative language teaching // Vocabulary and Applied Linguistics / eds. by P. Arnaud, H. Bejoint. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1992. P. 1–12.
  45. Durrant P., Schmitt N. To What Extent Do Na¬tive and Non-Native Writers Make Use of Collocations? // International Review of Applied Linguistics. 2009. Vol. 47 (1). P. 157–177. doi: 10.1515/iral.2009.007
  46. Laufer B., Waldman, T. Verb-Noun Collocations in Second Language Writing: A Corpus Analysis of Learners’ English // Language Learning. 2011. Vol. 61 (2). P. 647–672. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00621.x.
  47. Foster P. Rules and routines: A consideration of their role in the task-based language production of native and nonnative speakers // Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing / eds. by M. Bygate, P. Skehan, M. Swain. Harlow, UK: Longman, 2001. P. 75–93.
  48. Skehan P. A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. 336 p.
  49. Koya T. The acquisition of basic collocations by Japanese learners of English. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Waseda University, Japan, 2005. URL: https://www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/~shaoqun/tmp/Honbun-4160.pdf (дата обращения: 15.05.2021).
  50. Ellis N. C. At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge // Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 2005. Vol. 27 (2). P. 305–352.
  51. Bahns J., Eldaw M. Should we teach EFL students collocations? // System. 1993. Vol. 21. P. 101–114.
  52. Fan M. An exploratory study of collocational use by ESL students: A task-based approach // System. 2009. Vol. 37 (1). P. 110–123.
  53. Littlewood W. Defining and developing autonomy in East Asian contexts // Applied Linguistics. 1999. Vol. 20 (1). P. 71–94.
  54. Dilts R. Modeling With NLP. Meta Publications, 1998. 293 p

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download


Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).