Moreover, nearly 40% of all the studied monolinguals confirmed that they had been passively exposed to foreign languages or dialects in their environment approximately a fourth of these monolinguals who declared exposure to at least one foreign language (or dialect) confirmed that they also used these languages. More than half of this 80% of monolinguals also used languages they had learned at some point in their lives. Through an online survey, we found that more than 80% of these monolinguals had learned at least one foreign language, dialect, or type of jargon. In this study, we analyse the linguistic experiences of 962 English-speaking individuals from the United Kingdom (UK) who identified as monolinguals. The linguistic experiences of monolinguals are usually overlooked when analysing the impact of foreign language experiences on language processing and cognitive functioning. Monolingualism has typically been understood as a homogeneous phenomenon. I then review ways in which monolingualism has been represented thus far in the literature, outline some possible research questions and end by introducing the contributions to this volume. In this introduction I will outline why a simple definition of monolingualism is neither easy to establish nor useful, and also why it is important to come to an understanding of it as a particular kind of 'lingualism' (Cruz Ferreira p.c.). This special issue of Sociolinguistic Studies carries just such a title, and the papers it includes represent an attempt to explore the phenomenon of monolingualism from a number of different perspectives. There is little systematic investigation of monolingualism: Romaine pointed out in 1995 that she would find it strange to see a book with the title 'Monolingualism'. The implication of this is that monolingualism is the norm, and that bilingualism and multilingualism constitute abnormal states which merit investigation even though this idea sits oddly with the belief of most linguists that the majority of the world's population is bi- or multilingual, and that therefore monolingualism may be the exception rather than the norm. After all, is it not bilinguals and multilinguals who present the more interesting questions? It certainly seems so, for research has concentrated on their linguistic, psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic make-up. I hope that the exercise will broaden our perspective on a hitherto grey area of pedagogical lexicography, and perhaps turn up a few useful principles.Some may find it strange to see a special journal issue on monolingualism. This will provide an opportunity to meet a new learner4>riented dictionary type and examine it in the light of contemporary metalexicography. (Incidentally, all my references are from the period since the first EURALEX Congress, held at my place of work in 1983.) My aim is to discuss a particular compromise dictionary genre, halfway between the unilingual and the interlingual, which has been almost completely ignored in dictionary research so far. I startby basing my title on that of a recent Paper written by the first EURALEX President (Stein 1990), not because I disagree with her, but because I want to stress the other direction. I cannot hope to reverse this trend in my paper, but I can point out a few topics which may have been overlooked in the literature. Indeed, one could easily get the impression that a budding pedagogical lexicography is concerned almost exclusively with monolingual EFLdictionaries. Hausmann 1989, p.l5 and Ilson 1990, p.l972 in Volumes 1 and 2 °f the encyclopedia woRTERBUCHER/DlcnoNARlES/DlcnoNNAIRES) have commented on the relative neglect of the bilingual dictionary in comparison with the unilingual learner's dictionary. Hartmann, University of Exeter Learner's references: from the monolingual to the bilingual dictionary ABSTRACT: The Innovations of the English learner's dictionary are wellknown and Justly praised, but some authorities have begun to question the Anglo-Saxon ethnocentriclty of these monolingual dictionaries and wondered If thls genre Is Ideal for foreign learners, WhIIe we should avoid the extreme fallacy of the one-to-one lexk:al equivalent which constitutes the maln limitation of the traditional blllngual dictionary, the commercial success of various 'blllnguallsed' types and other pedagogical dictionaries discussed In the literature of metalexlcography ought to make us re-thlnk the design features of the Ideal learner's dictionary, for English and other languages.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |