1887
Volume 139, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0019-0829
  • E-ISSN: 1783-1490
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

The research to be reported on in this paper was originally motivated by the finding that about 70% of the mistakes made by university students when translating from their mother tongue (Dutch) into their foreign language (French) were lexical in nature (NIENHUIS et al. 1989). This was partially confinned in the investigation described in NIENHUIS et al. (1993). A closer look at the individual errors suggested that many problems were caused by words with more than one meaning which each require different translations in the target language. In the research reported on in this paper, we checked our fmdings in the light of what is known about the structure of the bilingual lexicon and about the ways bilinguals have access to the elements of their two languages. On the basis of the model of the bilingual lexicon presented by KROLL & Sholl (1992) an adapted model is proposed for the processing of lexical ambiguity. This leads to a tentative schema of the mental activities that language learners have to perfonn when they are translating from their mother tongue into a foreign language, The second part of the paper describes two experiments we have carried out in order to find empirical support for such a schema. The last section of the paper contains a discussion of the results obtained as well as the conclusions that can be drawn.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.2143/ITL.139.0.2003201
2003-01-01
2019-12-06
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. ALTARRIBA, J.
    (1992), The representation of translation equivalents in bilingual memory. In: Harris (ed.), 157–174.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BOGAARDS, P. , VAN DER LINDEN, E. , DE WOLF, T. , NIENHUIS, L.J.A.
    (1994), Polysemie en vertaling in een vreemde taal: een experimenteel onderzoek. Toegepaste Taalwetenschap in Artikelen50, 145–156.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. CUTLER, A.
    (1983), Lexical complexity and sentence processing. In: G.B. Flores d'Arcais , R.J. Jarvella (eds.), The process of language understanding, John Wiley, 43–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. DE GROOT, A.M.B.
    (1993), Word-type effects in bilingual processing tasks: support for a mixed-representational system. In: Schreuder & Weltens eds., 27–51.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. DELL, G.S.
    (1986), Spreading activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93, 283–321.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. GIBBS, R.
    (1994), Poetics of Mind. Cambridge: C.U.P.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. HARRIS, R.J.
    ed. (1992), Cognitive processing in bilinguals. Amsterdam: North Holland.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. HEREDIA, R. , McLAUGHLIN, B.
    (1992), Bilingual memory revisited. In: Harris (ed.), 91–103.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. JASTRZEMBSKI, J.E.
    (1981) Multiple meanings, number of related meanings, frequency of occurrence, and the lexicon. Cognitive Psychology, 13, 278–305
    [Google Scholar]
  10. KEATLY, C.W.
    (1992), History of bilingualism research in cognitive psychology. In: Harris (ed.), 15–49.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. KROLL, J.F. , SHOLL, A.
    (1992), Lexical and conceptual memory in fluent and nonfluent bilinguals. In: Harris (ed.), 191–204.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. NIENHUIS, L.J.A. , BOGAARDS, P. , VAN DER LINDEN, E. , VAN WILLIGEN M , DE WOLF, T.
    (1989), De vertaling als schrijfvaardigheidstoets voor ge\'orderden: tekstkeuze en beoordelingsproblematiek. Toegepaste Taalwetenschap in Artikelen, 35, 83–88.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. NIENHUIS, L.J.A. , BOGAARDS, P. , VAN DER LINDEN, E. , VAN WILLIGEN, M , DE WOLF, T.
    (1993), Problemes de traduction Ll-L2: les mots polysemiques. in: Hulk, A. , Melka, F. , Schroten, J. (eds), Du lexique a la morphologie: du cote de chez Zwaan. Textes reunis en I'honneur du soixantieme anniversaire de Wiecher Zwanenburg, Amsterdam, Rodopi, 249–263.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. SCHREUDER, R. , WELTENS, B.
    eds. (1993), The bilingual lexicon. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjarnins.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. STEEN, G.
    (1994), Understanding Metaphor in Literature. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. SWINNEY, D.
    (1979) Lexical access during sentences comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 18, 645–659.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. WEINREICH, U.
    (1953), Languages in contact. Findings and problems. The Hague-Paris: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.2143/ITL.139.0.2003201
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
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