<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2>In a message dated 11/1/01 3:36:58 PM Central Standard Time, patrick@lingomotors.com writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">But the question is, whose interpretation? Whose intuitions?
<BR></FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">TEFL Teachers, please tell: do students learn better if presented </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">with A, or with B? - </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"> A) Pre-sorted sets of concordance lines (maybe with carefully </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"> crafted explanations already attached), or </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"> B) Unorganized concordances, which they have to wrestle through, </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"> forming their own hypotheses and imposing their own order.</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">Obviously A is quicker -- but, if time is not a problem, is B more effective?</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR> I find this an interesting question, especially since I am writing a dissertation now using Cobuild's US Books corpus to analyze sense extensions of the verb HOLD via basic level images, image schematic structures, metaphor, and metonymy. As a researcher and native English speaker, I have 'wrestled through' the corpus, attempting to form my own hypotheses and to impose my own order on the mish mash. It is quite a challenging undertaking. I teach university level ESL and would not impose this task upon my students. If it's hard for me, I can imagine that it would be well nigh impossible for them.
<BR> After fumbling towards a solution to the question of how best to carve up the corpus and to uncover some kind of category structure, I am now thinking in terms of domains for my own research, and wonder if this wouldn't be a workable approach for ESL students as well. What I think would be most interesting to do as an instructor would be to first identify domains that are participating in the word sense distribution of the target word. For example, with HOLD, I see a clear grouping of senses within what I would term a cognitive domain. These are senses that refer to 'holding a belief', 'holding a judgment', a tradition that one 'holds dear' and so forth. I see another clear grouping of senses associated with people coming together to accomplish some task. These are uses that refer to 'holding a meeting', 'holding a seminar', holding a demonstration', and so on. I am calling this a communication domain, for want of a better term right now.
<BR> At any rate, suppose students were given a simple but thorough explanation of the meaning of a domain - background knowledge that you can use to understand a word; areas of human experience, etc. with several clear examples. Following this, they could be presented with a small corpus, perhaps 20-25 examples, and asked to identify domain groupings. As an instructor, my thinking would be to arrange the corpus such that no more than three very obvious domains are represented across, say, 21 examples (7 per domain). Depending upon how structured the instructor wishes the lesson to be, he or she could propose a possible list of domains for the target word, or, with more time, ask students to identify their own domains. The second task has the potential for uncovering fascinating construals based on cultural differences. Some of the construals, I would be willing to bet, would also be based on misreading stemming from low language proficiency. That, too, would be useful to uncover and discuss. The instructor would already have his or her analyses on hand, and could use them as a reference point for comparison/evaluation of the students' analyses.
<BR> The key, I think, would be to keep the corpus small, and to give students a clear set of criteria for their groupings. Domains are one idea. I'm sure other teachers could think of more.
<BR>
<BR>Paula Bramante
<BR>University of New Mexico </FONT></HTML>