1887
Volume 68, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0521-9744
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9668
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article reports on a pilot study that aims to shed some light on how translation students construe specialized terms. More specifically, we verified their ability to associate environment terms with specific conceptual situations (as understood by Frame Semantics [Fillmore 1976Fillmore and Baker 2010]). Respondents (27) were asked to complete a questionnaire containing 10 different questions that assessed the association of terms with conceptual situations from different angles. Results show that respondents can associate related terms and link sets of terms to conceptual situations and can make distinctions between the different components of conceptual situations when asked to produce lists of terms or select terms from a predefined list. However, when asked to assess the similarity or difference between specific terms, respondents are less likely to produce the anticipated answer. Our findings suggest that teaching and learning activities inspired by Frame Semantics may be helpful for students to structure their terminological analysis and deal with challenges such as ambiguity and fine semantic distinctions. We hope this can ultimately contribute to helping them make informed, precise and coherent terminological choices.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/babel.00254.lho
2022-03-11
2022-05-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alipour, Marjan
    2018 “Approche socioconstructiviste pour l’enseignement-apprentissage du lexique spécialisé : apport du corpus dans la conception d’activités lexicales.” Ph.D. diss., Université de Montréal.
  2. Croft, William, and D. Alan Cruse
    2004Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511803864
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803864 [Google Scholar]
  3. De Deyne, Simon, Danielle J. Navarro, Amy Perfors, Marc Brysbaert, and Gert Storms
    2018 “The ‘Small World of Words’ English Word Association Norms for over 12,000 Cue Words.” Behavior Research Methods51 (3): 987–1006. 10.3758/s13428‑018‑1115‑7
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1115-7 [Google Scholar]
  4. Désilets, Alain, Christiane Melançon, Geneviève Patenaude, and Louise Brunette
    2009 “How Translators Use Tools and Resources to Resolve Translation Problems: An Ethnographic Study.” Proceedings of Beyond Translation Memories: New Tools for Translators, MT Summit XII 2009, Ottawa, Canada, 26 Aug. 2009. https://aclanthology.org/2009.mtsummit-btm.5
    [Google Scholar]
  5. DiCoEnviro. Dictionnaire fondamental de l’environnement
    DiCoEnviro. Dictionnaire fondamental de l’environnement. Montreal: Observatoire de linguistique Sens-Texte. olst.ling.umontreal.ca/cgi-bin/dicoenviro/search.cgi
  6. Dolbey, Andrew, Michael Ellsworth, and Jan Scheffczyk
    2006 “BioFrameNet: A Domain-specific FrameNet Extension with Links to Biomedical Ontologies.” InProceedings of the Second International Workshop on Formal Biomedical Knowledge Representation: “Biomedical Ontology in Action” (KR-MED 2006), Baltimore, Maryland, 8 Nov. 2006, 87–94. ceur-ws.org/Vol-222/krmed2006-p10.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Faber, Pamela
    ed. 2012A Cognitive Linguistics View of Terminology and Specialized Language. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110277203
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110277203 [Google Scholar]
  8. Faber, Pamela, Juan Verdejo, Pilar León Araúz, Arianne Reimerink, and Gloria Guzmán
    2014 “Neural Substrates of Specialized Knowledge Representation: An fMRI Study.” Revue française de linguistique appliquée [French journal of applied linguistics] 19 (1): 15–32. 10.3917/rfla.191.0015
    https://doi.org/10.3917/rfla.191.0015 [Google Scholar]
  9. Fillmore, Charles J.
    1976 “Frame Semantics and the Nature of Language.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences: Conference on the Origin and Development of Language and Speech280: 20–32. 10.1111/j.1749‑6632.1976.tb25467.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1976.tb25467.x [Google Scholar]
  10. 1982 “Frame Semantics.” InLinguistics in the Morning Calm, edited byThe Linguistic Society of Korea, 111–137. Seoul: Hanshin.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 1985 “Frames and the Semantics of Understanding.” Quaderni di Semantica6: 222–254.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Fillmore, Charles J., and Beryl T. Atkins
    1992 “Toward a Frame-based Lexicon: The Semantics of RISK and its Neighbors.” InFrames, Fields and Contrasts: New Essays in Semantic and Lexical Organization, edited byA. Lehrer, and E. Feder Kittay, 75–102. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Fillmore, Charles J., and Collin Baker
    2010 “A Frames Approach to Semantic Analysis.” InThe Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis, edited byBernd Heine and Heiko Narrog, 313–339. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Framed DiCoEnviro
    Framed DiCoEnviro. Montreal: Observatoire de linguistique Sens-Texte. olst.ling.umontreal.ca/dicoenviro/framed/index.php
  15. FrameNet
    FrameNet. Berkeley: International Computer Science Institute. https://framenet.icsi.berkeley.edu/fndrupal/
  16. Ghazzawi, Nizar
    2016 “Du terme prédicatif au cadre sémantique : méthodologie de compilation d’une ressource terminologique pour des termes prédicatifs arabes en informatique.” Ph.D. diss., Université de Montréal.
  17. Gough, Joanna
    2016 “The Patterns of Interaction between Professional Translators and Online Resources.” Ph.D. diss., University of Surrey.
  18. Kübler, Natalie, Alexandra Mestivier, and Mojca Pecman
    2018 “Teaching Specialised Translation Through Corpus Linguistics: Translation Quality Assessment and Methodology Evaluation and Enhancement by Experimental Approach.” Meta63 (3): 806–824. 10.7202/1060174ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/1060174ar [Google Scholar]
  19. L’Homme, Marie-Claude
    2012 “Adding Syntactico-semantic Information to Specialized Dictionaries: An Application of the FrameNet Methodology.” Lexicographica28: 233–252. 10.1515/lexi.2012‑0012
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lexi.2012-0012 [Google Scholar]
  20. 2018 “Maintaining the Balance between Knowledge and the Lexicon in Terminology: A Methodology Based on Frame Semantics.” Lexicography. Journal of Asialex4 (1): 3–21. 10.1007/s40607‑018‑0034‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s40607-018-0034-1 [Google Scholar]
  21. L’Homme, Marie-Claude, Benoît Robichaud, and Carlos Subirats
    2020 “Building Multilingual Specialized Resources Based on FrameNet: Application to the Field of the Environment.” InInternational FrameNet Workshop 2020. Towards a Global, Multilingual FrameNet. Proceedings, Workshop of the Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC 2020, 94–102. Marseille: ELRA.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Malm, Per, Shafqat Mumtaz Virk, Lars Borin, and Aanju Saxena
    2018 “LingFN: Towards a FrameNet for the Linguistics Domain.” InInternational FrameNet Workshop 2018. Multilingual FrameNets and Constructions. Proceedings of Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2018), Miyazaki, Japan, 12 May 2018, 37–43. Miyazaki: ELRA.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Martin, Willy
    1998 “Frames as Definitions Models for Terms.” InProceedings of the International Conference on Professional Communication and Knowledge Transfer, Vienna, Austria, 24–26 Aug. 1998, 189–221. Vienna: TermNet.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Massey, Gary, and Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow
    2011 “Investigating Information Literacy: A Growing Priority in Translation Studies.” Across Languages and Cultures12 (2): 193–211. 10.1556/Acr.12.2011.2.4
    https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.12.2011.2.4 [Google Scholar]
  25. Nelson, Douglas L., Cathy L. McEvoy, and Thomas A. Schreiber
    2004 “The University of South Florida Free Association, Rhyme, and Word Fragment Norms.” Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers36 (3): 402–407. 10.3758/BF03195588
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195588 [Google Scholar]
  26. Pimentel, Janine
    2013 “Methodological Bases for Assigning Terminological Equivalents. A Contribution.” Terminology19 (2): 237–257. 10.1075/term.19.2.04pim
    https://doi.org/10.1075/term.19.2.04pim [Google Scholar]
  27. Ruppenhofer, Josef, Michael Ellsworth, Miriam R. L. Petruck, Christopher R. Johnson, Collin F. Baker, and Jan Scheffczyk
    2016FrameNet II: Extended Theory and Practice. Berkeley: International Computer Science Institute.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Schank, Roger C., and Robert P. Abelson
    1977Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding: An Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structures. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Schmidt, Thomas
    2009 “The Kicktionary – A Multilingual Lexical Resources of Football Language.” InMultilingual FrameNets in Computational Lexicography: Methods and Applications, edited byHans C. Boas, 101–132. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Torrent, Tiago T., Maria Margarida M. Salomão, Fernanda C. A. Campos, Regina M. M. Braga, Ely E. S. Matos, Maucha A. Gamonal, Julia A. Gonçalves, Bruno C. P. Souza, Daniela S. Gomes, and Simone R. Peron
    2014 “Copa 2014 FrameNet Brasil: A Frame-based Trilingual Electronic Dictionary for the Football World Cup.” InCOLING 2014: The 25th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations, Dublin, Ireland, 23–29 Aug. 2014, 10–14. Dublin: Dublin City University and Association for Computational Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/babel.00254.lho
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/babel.00254.lho
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error