The Dictionary As A Secondary Source in Language Learning Author(s) : Joel Walz Source: The French Review, Vol. 64, No. 1 (Oct., 1990), Pp. 79-94 Published By: Stable URL: Accessed: 27/01/2015 10:54

The Dictionary as a Secondary Source in Language Learning
Author(s): Joel Walz

Source: The French Review, Vol. 64, No. 1 (Oct., 1990), pp. 79-94
Published by: American Association of Teachers of French
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/395666 .
Accessed: 27/01/2015 10:54
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
American Association of Teachers of French is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The French Review.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 10:54:43 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THEFRENCH Vol. 64, No. 1, October 1990
REVIEW, Printed in U.S.A.
The Dictionary as a SecondarySource

in LanguageLearning
byJoelWalz
II y avaitdescanardssur le'ang qui criaient

<Charlatan!Charlatan!>
VERY FEWTEACHERS have never laughed or groaned at student compositions

that contain errors such as the one above. Even though we know exactly
what the source is-improper use of a dictionary-we nevertheless permit
such errors to recur year after year. The problems are polysemy,or a word
having more than one meaning, and homonyms,which are different words
that are pronounced or spelled alike. When students look up an English
word in a bilingual dictionary, they find most or all of its meanings repre-
sented by French equivalents. Since many dictionaries do not give the
semantic field of each translation (Al-Kasimi 67; Ianucci), the student de-
cides to guess. Even when the dictionary does add fields, students do not
understand or do not pay attention and end up choosing the wrong word.
Thus, the student quoted above who looked up quack may have found
charlatan;coin-coinand not realized that the semi-colon separated the se-
mantic fields of dubious professions and animal noises.
We must ask ourselves whether students have the right abilities to ac-
complish the tasks we demand of them. In the first few weeks of instruc-
tion, we sometimes ask for totally original compositions for which we
provide no structure. A survey of foreign language teaching literature of
the last twenty years shows relatively little information on dictionary use.1
One could therefore question whether foreign language teachers consider
dictionary use a skill worth teaching. The purpose of this article is to
examine this question and to determine what teachers can do to improve
the situation.
Students associate many negatives with the foreign-language dictionary.
The very word itself conjures up images of a yellowing, dog-eared paper-
back missing about half the words a student wants to know. As Heilenman
states, it is "a nice place to visit, but no one wants to live there" (43).
Dictionary use is synonymous with failure; students use it almost exclu-
sively to look up words in a reading passage that they do not know (decod-
ing) or to find a French equivalent of an English word that they want to use
79

80 FRENCHREVIEW
in a composition (encoding). In both cases, the task slows down and frustra-
tion increases (Hughes and Chinn). Excessive dictionary use in reading can
cause students to lose sight of the content of the passage (Jones). The very
fact of slowing down reading has a negative effect on comprehension (Ray-
mond). Bensoussan finds that dictionary use made no difference in the
results of a reading comprehension test she administered to ESL students.
In writing, students will find several translations for each word and not be
inclined to pursue the matter.
Indeed, many experts feel that the two principal uses of the dictionary
may be the two worst uses. With reading in particular, most agree that
dictionary use should be a last resort and that teachers should spend their
time teaching students how to guess the meaning of words from context
(Hosenfeld et al.). Current theory takes a much more global approach to
reading and writing (Omaggio) than the previous audio-lingual period. For
example, in a review of literature on reading theory, Swaffar found that
discursive and thematic relationships are more important than dictionary
definitions and that more time should be spent talking about general types
of vocabulary that relate to students' pre-established schemata than about
individual words (137). The same is true of writing: specialists prefer a text-
processing approach over one that stresses discrete items (Magnan). Fur-
thermore, anyone who claims that a dictionary will help increase students'
vocabulary must face the argument that words must be learned in context
if the student is to retain them (see Judd 73 and his references). Words
arranged in alphabetical order are as devoid of context as possible, and
while many teachers get lost with fascination in a dictionary while looking
up a word, it is unlikely that many of our students do.
On the other hand, there are many good reasons to reconsider the
importance dictionaries play in our classrooms. The new approaches to
reading and writing may increase their use instead of decrease it. Few of
the scholars publishing books and articles on reading that stress guessing
words from context (i.e. virtually everyone in the last ten years) point out
that guessing depends on students' knowing enough of the other words in
the sentence to create a context. Often, this is not the case. Lorraine
Strasheim used to tell the story of a Russian student who, after months of
study, thought that Do Svidanya meant "Classed dismissed" because every
time the teacher said it, the students got up and left. In a survey of ESL
classes, Groebel found that while no teachers recommended looking up all
unknown words in a reading passage, over half the students thought they
should.2 During the audio-lingual period, specialists recommended that
reading passages contain no more than one new word every thirty-five
(Northeast Conference). Now we are supposed to use documentsauthentiques
that have not been edited. The text-processing approach has appeared in
textbooks, including at least one that has no lexicon at the end; the authors
instead encourage students to use cognates, word families, and contextual
guessing (Schofer and Rice). Haynes found that students guessed correctly

DICTIONARYIN LANGUAGELEARNING 81
less than half the time when confronted with a global, as opposed to a local,
context. Allen et al. found that all students in their test understood at least
something from the authentic passages they read. However, for many
students "something" is not enough. They need a dictionary, and they need
to know how to use it.
Perhaps the best argument for dictionary use is that it is the essential
source for information about words in a language (Marckwardt). Peda-
gogues have long decried the lack of attention paid to vocabulary in
foreign-language teaching (e.g. Nemni, Carter). Proper vocabulary use is
an essential part of communicative interaction. While reading experts
stress guessing words from context, many place vocabulary as the most
important element in understanding (see Adams 155 and her references).
Many of the native-speaker reaction studies done several years ago found
that errors in vocabulary had a more profound effect on comprehensibility
and sensitivity than did errors of grammar or pronunciation (Ludwig 276).
Bonin tested advanced undergraduate French majors to see whether they
could understand spoken, colloquial French. She found that vocabulary
created more misunderstandings than any other aspect of oral language.
More recently, scholars interested in testing oral proficiency have devel-
oped a chart of the relative contribution of each aspect of language to total
production (Higgs and Clifford 711). At the novice level, vocabulary is far
ahead of the other components (grammar, pronunciation, etc.). Since the
vast majority of foreign language students in this country operate at the
novice level, we cannot overlook this aspect of language.
A second major reason for teaching dictionary use is that it can be a tool
for lifelong learning. Linguists have pointed out that native speakers learn
the syntax of a language in very few years, but they add to their vocabular-
ies throughout their entire lives (Richards 83). Currently, much of what is
recommended in foreign language pedagogy is based on the false assump-
tion that we can predict what vocabulary our students will need in the
future (Twaddell). A good example of this tendency is the "proficiency-
oriented teaching" that is currently in vogue. Proponents specify exactly
what semantic fields should be taught at the early levels (ETS, Omaggio).
Many states are following this advice and repeating the fields in state
curriculum guides. Teachers will not object because the topics are generally
those taught in first-year textbooks already (foods, clothing, colors, family
members). However, we should not classify this as responding to student
needs since students themselves may not know what their needs are. It is
important to teach the skills needed to continue expanding one's vocabu-
lary (Rivers, TeachingForeign466; Twaddell).
If we are to develop a nation of bilinguals, we need to place more empha-
sis on language learning after traditional instruction has stopped. Studies of
loss and maintenance of language skills are in their early stages (Freed and
Lambert). Certainly dictionary use is an essential skill, perhaps the most
important one, for a person who needs to revive language skills, but who

82 FRENCHREVIEW
has no human source of information. We also need to consider the non-

traditional student in our language classes (see Joiner). With older learners
and returning students we are even less likely to be able to predict their
needs. Thus, it seems essential to develop students' ability to continue
learning on their own or, at least, to branch out in the directions that their
specific interests take them. For example, students may need to know
about the availability of and how to use specialized dictionaries, such as
those for business, data processing, medecin, and economics (for a complete
listing, see section 03 0.3 Dictionnairestechniquesof the subject volume of Les
Livresdisponibles).The AATF Commission on Professional Standards states
that every teacher of French should have dictionary skills and should know
how to teach them (AATF 15).
A third reason for teaching the use of the dictionary is that it is not a dull,
dry reference book and that it can be used for more than just practicing safe
lex. (Those who think dictionaries are boring have never looked up mec or
nana in the Dictionnaire
du franfaisargotique
et populaire!)
Some of the new
dictionaries in particular are so fascinating that they can be considered as
documentsauthentiquesin their own right and potentially as interesting as
many of the periodicals that teachers use in class. If presented in the proper
way, many dictionaries will entertain as well as instruct.
Dictionaires are useful in two distinct ways in language learning. As a
secondary source, they help bring about the understanding of a text, the
primary source as received or produced by students, provided that teachers
have developed in their students the skills necessary to use dictionaries
correctly. These skills will be the subject of the second part of this article.
Many scholars have called for the teaching of these skills (Al-Kasimi 108;
Herbst and Stein; Loew; Medley; Rivers, Teaching French304-08.) I will
attempt to summarize and expand upon their ideas and provide a model for
implementation. Dictionaries also vary widely in form and content and can
provide learning opportunities in and of themselves. Such activities will be
presented in the December issue of The FrenchReviewin an article entitled
"The Dictionary as a Primary Source in Language Learning."
Two important questions to consider are how and when to teach diction-
ary skills in class. The first has several answers. In limited cases, teachers
can ask students to bring their dictionary with them to class. This is not
practical very often since there are many basic dictionaries from which
students can learn, and few students buy more than one. A more reason-
able system would be to have a learning area in class (Hammerly 578) or in
the library where students have a variety of dictionaries available and
where they can work in small groups on the same book. At colleges and
universities this situation will be less of a problem since they have larger
budgets for reference works. Faculty will want to verify the possibilities
and expand on titles or acquire more recent editions as funding permits.
High school budgets are smaller, but, in dealing with authorities, teachers

may be able to use the call by the AATF Commission on Professional

Standards for library purchase of reference works as leverage (AATF 20).
The when of teaching dictionary use can be quite flexible. It can be an
integral part of the language course and include a lecture on the first day of
class as to what dictionary students should buy, or at least use. The teacher
then continues throughout the course with comments and explanations of
competitors' books and other types of dictionary. Another approach is to
assign one day a week or every two weeks as "dictionary day." This may be
the day that compositions are due so that students do not have to write a
composition and prepare a normal textbook lesson for the same class. They
concentrate on finishing the composition while the teacher develops the
presentation of a dictionary and exercises to complete in class. A third
approach is to develop learning packets that were popular with individual-
ized instruction of the 1970s (Logan). A packet is a self-contained unit with
explanations and specific directions for student activities. The teacher uses
the packets in many situations: during absences for professional travel or
illness, in classes of mixed levels that are prevalent at the high school level
(Book), or for independent study or additional assignments for specific
students. Even at the graduate level, work with dictionaries can prove
useful, especially since so few undergraduates receive instruction in this
area. Many departments offer research methods, bibliography, or stylistics
courses where this type of work would fit in well. Another advantage of
learning dictionary use is flexibility; it can be teacher-directed or indepen-
dent. It can be the focus of the lesson or an addition. It can be long or short,
elementary or advanced.
The most dramatic use of dictionaries in language learning would be a
course in lexicography. Since Les Livresdisponibleshas almost 2000 entries
under its subject heading for dictionaries, there is certainly no lack of
material for an entire course on dictionaries. If the course emphasizes
learning French through the use of these books as a primary source rather
than teaching how to compile a dictionary, the course would not be lexicog-
raphy in the strictest sense. It would, however, be a productive learning
experience.
Before planning lessons based on dictionaries, one should consider three
of the most frequently asked questions concerning their use: whether to
use a monolingual or bilingual dictionary; when to look up a word (and, by
extension, what words) while reading; and what is currently the "best"
dictionary of each type. The fact that teachers have debated these questions
for generations without coming to any universally-accepted conclusions
does not bode well for this discussion, but a review of the literature may
prove helpful.
Most teachers have probably decided what type of dictionary-monolin-
gual (MD) or bilingual (BD)-students should use; many either order or
recommend a specific title. Interestingly, two researchers who have sur-
veyed published opinion concerning the merits of each type reached oppo-

84 FRENCH
REVIEW
site conclusions. Ard prefers MDs because BDs do not handle meaning
distinctions of equivalent translations well, and they provide no informa-
tion on permissible word combinations, frequency of use, connotations,
and opposing choices. By studying writing samples, he discovered that
using BDs invariably lead students to specific types of errors. Thompson,
on the other hand, concludes that BDs are preferable because to use MDs,
the student must know what word to look up, a process not possible while
encoding. He also believes that students have trouble with MDs because
they must also look up words in the definition. They also find the use of
circular definitions: A = B = C = A.
Richards states that knowing a word implies knowing its functions, its
uses, its limitations (83), and what words occur with it (79). We could take
this as an argument for MDs, since BDs provide none of this information.
Baxter also prefers MDs since they provide the means to use words, while
lanucci points out that only MDs help with the problem of polysemy men-
tioned above. Lindstrom makes the point that BDs are misleading since
they give the impression that there is a target language equivalent for
every word in one's native language (718). By extension, we can conclude
that BDs may lead students to believe that communicating in a foreign
language is tantamount to substituting one string of words for another.
BDs also have more practicalproblems, such as often being out of date (e.g.
Joseph) or translating into a native language dialect not that of the user
(Denoeu).
On the other hand, Nemni points out that the short, frequent words
used in early language instruction are often the hardest to explain (e.g. rire,
1030). She wonders how a student who looks up one unknown word will
understand all the words of the definition. Hammerly sees BDs as prefera-
ble, even necessary, at the elementary and intermediate levels. He cites
Dodson's "eureka experience" (572), where the student, upon understand-
ing a definition, immediately converts it to a native-language equivalent.
Al-Kasimi presents the same arguments in favor of BD use at all levels of
instruction (103-04; see Ilson also for other arguments). One might con-
clude that the controversy is not an easy one to solve. While decoding
(reading and perhaps listening), students will probably save time by using
BDs to avoid converting the definition to a native equivalent. With encod-
ing (writing and perhaps speaking), students could use MDs to reduce
errors and BDs to increase the possibilities of communication. The activi-
ties below teach the use of both.
The second question concerning dictionaries that teachers often ask is
when a learner should consult a dictionary. Most researchers have com-
mented only on reading in this respect, and the verdict has been nearly
unanimous for over thirty years: only as a last resort (Jones, 1957; Hosen-
feld et al.; Medley; Rivers, Teaching Foreign304). "Last resort" has been
variously defined as after reading the entire passage (Jones 128) or at least a
complete sentence (Twaddell 76). The problem reading experts have not

addressed is how students are to know when they have guessed wrong, a
problem that occurs not infrequently (see reference to Haynes, above).
When the last resort is reached, students must have the skill to decode the
message properly.
The corollary to this question is what words students should verify. The
facetious answer-words they do not know-is incorrect since faux amis
appear obvious but are not. Research does not tell us whether certain parts
of speech will help more than others while decoding. Intuitively, one would
guess nouns and verbs over all others, but interjections (Chouette!) carry
an enormous amount of information also. With current reading research
stressing that the whole (meaning) is greater than the sum of its parts
(words), it is unlikely that such research would be productive. As men-
tioned above, Bensoussan finds that dictionary use does not necessarily
improve reading comprehension. The problem is equally one of encoding.
Given the sentence The childrenare lookingat television,many elementary
French students might look up (or at least translate) are, looking,and at, but
use no article with television.An exercise that follows will help students
divide sentences into units that they can find in a dictionary.
The third question (which dictionary is best) is also difficult, if not impos-
sible, to answer. It is important to compare similar dictionaries, making a
classification system, such as that of Geeaerts, useful. Girardin points out
that monolingual French dictionaries fall into three categories: "destineau
public cultiv, . . . au grand public ... aux apprenants"(86-87). Obviously,
this does not include many specialized types, such as those for children.
Teachers would also do well to keep up with the reviews of new dictionar-
ies, which appear in the major professional journals, and with occasional
articles that compare them (Ibrahim). Yorkey provides criteria for evaluat-
ing dictionaries for ESL students that could be adapted to French. Mitte-
rand's article comparing the Petit Robert and the Dictionnairedu francais
contemporain can serve as a model for comparing any two similar dictionar-
ies, and it will be used in the sequel article as an activity for advanced
language classes.
Teachers much choose relevant words and then verify that the exercise
is possible with the specific dictionary being used (MD or BD). The follow-
ing examples of learning activities may serve as a guide to teachers who will
want to replace or supplement them with examples more appropriate to
their own situation. The class textbook proves a better source of vocabu-
lary for any given assignment. Student compositions and readings provide
a good beginning for expanding vocabulary. Even current events may play
a role in determining the type of work teachers will want students to do.
Teachers who prepare printed lessons for independent study will have to
update them regularly to ensure an interesting and useful vocabulary.
Above all, the vocabulary and the contexts must be appropriate to the
students' level.

86 FRENCHREVIEW
LearningActivities
For suggestions about what to teach I have chosen the two most impor-
tant types of dictionaries available for student use. To understand and
produce target language utterances, several scholars recommend introduc-
ing dictionaries to students before they begin specific assignments. Medley
suggests examining the table of contents, learning abbreviations, and
teaching parts of speech. Wallace deals with the problems of alphabetical
order, finding derivatives, determining pronunciation from phonetic sym-
bols, checking spelling, and discovering morphological variants (82-84). For
Rivers (TeachingFrench305), an introduction should increase students' in-
terest in the dictionary as a learning tool rather than simply build a skill.
She recommends starting with the encyclopedic second half of the Petit
Larousse,with its maps, historical sketches, and various color plates, so that
students become accustomed to seeking information in a dictionary (305-
06). Rossner's suggestions to have students determine why an author uses
a certain word is applicable only to advanced classes.
The most complete introductions are the books published by Longman
(Whitcut) and Oxford UP (Underhill) to accompany their dictionaries for
foreign students. For example, Underhill recommends starting with a sam-
ple entry and discussing its various parts, including the significance of
various type faces. Without benefit of these workbooks for French diction-
aries, teachers can use a photocopier that enlarges, then transfer a sample
entry to a transparency or a stencil for group analysis in class.3 The Collins-
RobertBD has a detailed presentation of its entries in the introduction (xii-
xxiv) and the PetitLarousse1989 a briefer one (24).
DecodingI Monolingual Dictionaries (examples from the PetitLarousse4)
A student decodes while reading or listening. Scholfield provides the
most detailed analysis of learning to retrieve the correct meaning of a word.
He criticizes the Underhill and Whitcut workbooks for describing in detail
without teaching students to develop strategies. The first of his seven steps
involves understanding alphabetical order, which should be no problem for
our students. His second step is to remove inflections (186). French
teachers can have students practice this important skill by presenting a list
of words (even if the students do not know them) and asking students to
mark out any inflections that might hinder finding the word. Note that the
smaller the dictionary that students use, the more important this skill
becomes."
A. Rayezlesprffixeset lessuffixesdesmotssuivants,s'il y a lieu.
inaccessible preconsonantique
pitoyablement incrtdulith
enrichissons anticonstitutionnel
parlement rtduisant
archifaux anhimoine

(Parlement and antimoine are traps, words that must be looked up in their
entirety.)
Another step in Scholfield's system is to reduce multiple entries by elimi-
nation. Students must recognize parts of speech, grammatical information
(e.g. transitive or intransitive), level of style, word combinations, and infer-
ences. The person who composes the exercise should look for words that
students do not know in a context that they will understand.
B. Cherchezlesmotssoulignesdansvotredictionnaire
et ecrivezla definition
quiy
au-dessous
correspond de la phrase.
1. I1fautquej'aillechercher
destimbres
aubureau
deposte.
2. Vousn'avezpasle droitdemedirecela.
3. Sonfianceluia offertunbraceletenargent.
4. Un telinvestissement
nevousrapportera rien.
5. Elleestpartieacheter
despilespoursonwalkman.
6. Aprs l'inondation,sonchamp 6taitcouvertdevase.
7. Il estrevenuduvind'honneur compkltement noir.
8. Puisque l'eauavaitungoatinfect,je I'aibalancie.
Underhill and Whitcut recommend similar exercises based on polysemy,
but since students are all consulting the same dictionary, they can use the
number of the correct definition instead of writing it out. Scholfield em-
phasizes fitting the right definition into the context of the sentence (his
sixth step). Exercise B above can be done with an entire class in order to
find out which word(s) give the key to the correct meaning, or the teacher
can ask students to circle them. For example, in sentence eight, the word
infect suggests that the underlined word means to throw out. Using words
students know, but in a different sense (argent, noir), or false cognates
(vase, balanc&e),will encourage them to read the complete entry. A varia-
tion of exercise B is also possible; Underhill takes one word with several
meanings, gives a sample sentence for each, then asks students to pair
usage and definitions (32-33).
Decoding/ Bilingual Dictionaries (examples from Collins-Robert)
The first characteristic of bilingual dictionaries to examine is whether or

not they separate the English equivalents of French entries into semantic
fields. BDs will always have many more equivalents than BDs have defini-
tions because the former list synonyms. An older dictionary may separate
semantic groups by semi-colons and synonyms within a group by commas.
For example, the 1962 edition of Cassell's gives nineteen English verbs for
gener separated by five semi-colons (i.e. six semantic groups), before giving
five examples. The Collins-Robert(1987) separates four fields (physique-
ment, deranger, financierement, and mettre a l'aise). It subdivides the first
two and gives nineteen examples in all.
An exercise to practice finding the right native language equivalent

88 FRENCHREVIEW
would resemble B since MD definitions are roughly equivalent to MD

semantic fields. Bensoussan and Schofer and Rice state that choosing the
correct meaning of a word according to its context is an essential skill. The
teacher can help develop it by presenting a word (preferably unknown) in
an easily understandable context, then asking for either a translation of the
underlined word, or, in order to prevent students who know the word
from not using the dictionary in this skill-developing exercise, the semantic
field. Exercise C asks for both.
C. Cherchez
lesmotssoulignesdansvotredictionnaire
bilingueet donnez-en
le champ
et unetraduction
semantique possible.
1. Ils ontrefus4depayerla note.
2. Nos voisinspratiquent la culturedesroses.
3. Lebibiveutqu'onchangesa couche.
4. Quandvousserez& la
ha"uteur eJ'glise,vousverreztout.
5. I y a unepetitebatesur votre'paule.
6. Cetteroutevousmnera 1l' roitquevouscherchez.
7. a prisenth
11I desides trisnettessur cettequestion.
8. 11a echoutparcequ'ila manquetropdeclasses.
Translating only one word instead of an entire sentence will help stu-
dents concentrate on developing their skill in using the dictionary. It corres-
ponds more closely with decoding a passage where only certain words are
unknown, while converting an entire sentence would simply be a transla-
tion exercise.
/ Monolingual dictionaries
Encoding
The great advantage for using MDs for encoding is that it limits students
to using words they already know. They can verify the correct spelling,
look for a verb conjugation, recheck meanings (to avoid faux amix, for
example), or see what words go together, that is, collocations. We try to
avoid clich6s in our native speech but seek them out in a foreign language.
The only collocation dictionary for French (Lacroix) is out of print; Haus-
mann feels that no good dictionary of this type is feasible because word
combinations are too unpredictable. On the other hand, he describes learn-
ing a language as learning its collocations (195).
Teachers spend a considerable amount of time teaching fixed combina-
tions of words. Even elementary texts have lessons on which prepositions
follow verbs and idiomatic expressions with avoir and faire. Exercise D is
based on the Petit Robertsince the Petit Larousseis less suited for finding
word combinations.
D. Complrtez
lesphrasessuivantesaveclesmotsqui conviennent.
1. Vousvoulez le petitdbjeuner
maintenant?
2. Vousjouezau tennis?Quelsautressports -vous?
3. N'entrezpasdansleurjardin!Ils ontun chien

4. J'hesite vous reprochercela parceque j'ai fait la meme

erreur.
5. Elles se ressemblentbeaucoup;elles sont comme gouttes
d'eau.
6. Quandil a annoncdla nouvelle,il a la panique.
7. On le reconnatt facilement sa barbiche.
8. Je ne sais pas ce quej'ai, maisje ne suis pas monassiette.
Some sentences may allow more than one answer (#1, 3) but students will
be able to reach a consensus if the context is clear.
Underhill gives exercises that let students learn to use the dictionary to
find synonyms, to distinguish words that are often confused (loose,lose),and
to use prefixes and suffixes to form new words (employ-> unemployable)
(Chapter 5). Whitcut emphasizes word use and collocations. All of these are
adapatable to French.
/ Bilingual dictionary
Encoding
Most trouble that students encounter using a dictionary probably con-

cerns encoding with a BD; the inscription at the beginning of this article is
an authentic example. A first step to proper BD use is to show students the
necessity of looking up a word in both sections of the dictionary (Heilen-
man; Rivers, TeachingFrench307). They look up the English word and find
possible French equivalents. They then look up each equivalent in the
French section (especially if their BD does not give semantic fields) to see
what each means in English. A good example to start with is the word
poisonous.The dictionary entry in Collins-Robertincludes:
snakevenimeux; plantveneneux; gas fumes toxique
The concept is simple: English has one word, but French distinguishes
among the carriers of the poison. Darbelnet calls this phenomenon a bifur-
cation (240). Students learn some frequent ones in elementary classes: to
know-savoir or connaitre and can-pouvoir or savoir. The reverse also
exists: faire-to make or to do and dire-to say or to tell. Words to look up
might include: to run (a store), to work (i.e. machine), to drive (someone
crazy), size (of a coat), and drinkable.
Not only do individual words have several meanings, and therefore
many equivalents in the other language, but homonyms also add to the
problem of finding an appropriate equivalent. Students must again use
semantic fields and both halves of the BD to find the right word, just as
they would search for the right meaning with MDs. Rivers presents an
exercise to practice looking for multiple meanings; she lists eight sentences
with the word pictureused in different ways that students are to translate.
The advantage of the exercise is that it forces students to confront multiple
entries that exhaust almost all possibilities and that it integrates semantic

90 FRENCHREVIEW
fields and parts of speech (pictureis used as a noun and a verb). Underhill
simplifies the task by giving pairs of sentences using words with different
meanings and asking for definitions (34), while Whitcut asks for choices
(47). French students can give translations.
E. Traduisezlesmotssoulignis.(Bifurcations)
1. Let'smeetat therestaurant.
2. It'snicetomeetyou.
3. It'sa badmovie.
4. He'saTadchild.
(Polyshmie)
5. Do youknowhowtopro ama computer?
6. Whatprogram areyouwatching?
7. Do I havetoweara tie?
8. We'llhavetotieit.
If the encoding is a translation of complete sentences, students need to
recognize lexical units that they can find in a dictionary. A pre-translation
exercise would have students divide English sentences with slash lines to
indicate the units. For example, with the sentence I was taking off my suit
when you droppedby students must know that was taking off and droppedby
are each one unit, and they must find them as such in the dictionary.
Another way to deal with the problem of choosing the right word is to
select an obvious dictionary error in each student composition, mark it in a
special way (e.g. a green rectangle), and require that each student research
the proper word. Students write down the English word they looked up
originally and all its French equivalents. They look up the word they had
chosen incorrectly and explain why it is wrong. As a last step, they find the
right word and explain why it is correct. They could also do this by photo-
copying pages and circling equivalents to make the exercise go more
quickly.
Certainly, students cannot develop these skills to their maximum poten-
tial if they do only five exercises. However, teachers can direct the use of
monolingual and bilingual dictionaries so that students learn how to use
them in a judicious manner and that they find correct meanings and equi-
valents. In this way the dictionaries serve as a secondary source to help in
the comprehension of the written and oral texts that are the primary
source of learning. These texts are thus more enjoyable, and learning is
enhanced.
UNIVERSITYOF GEORGIA
Notes
1Most of the work I found comes from ESL publications (see references). Since ESL
teachers often have students of widely varying native languages in these classes, they are

DICTIONARY IN LANGUAGE LEARNING 91
unlikely to be able to provide target language equivalents. Thus, dictionary skills are probably
even more important in ESL classes. A second important difference is that ESL students often
have very specific and highly technical needs related to their profession, while we tend to
group French-as-a-foreign-language students together. Several journals have devoted entire
issues to dictionaries, however: Applied Linguistics2.3 (1981); Etudesde LinguistiqueAppliquee49
JournalofAmericanLinguistics,28.2,
(1983);International pt. 4 (1962);LangueFranfaise
43 (1979);
and Lexique,vol. 2 (n.d.). Cowie has an extensive bibliography (260-71). See Ilson also.
2There is quite a bit of information on how people use dictionaries. For native speakers, see
the survey by Quirk. In second/foreign language classrooms, see Baxter, Bejoint, Galisson,
Groebel, and Tomaszczyk. Hartmann presents an overview of several studies.
3Lagane edited a supplementary booklet to train users of the Dictionnairedu francais contem-
porain.It is for native speakers, but can be adapted for advanced learners. Porteouvertesur ...
les dictionnaireset les encyclopidiespresents exercises for children to learn to use reference
works. Many of them are also adaptable to American students, especially those that compare
dictionaries.
41 chose the Petit
Laroussebecause students enjoy it more and because it is always the first
dictionary to list new words in the French language. More advanced language students would
probably want to use the Petit Robert(Rivers, TeachingFrench305).
5This exercise is simple to create. Look through the standard prefixes in a dictionary that is
larger than the one students use and pick words that are not in the latter. In Exercise A, only
archifaux and pr&consonantique, as well as verb forms, are not in the Petit Larousse.
WorksCited
Adams, Shirley J. "Scripts and the Recognition of Unfamiliar Vocabulary: Enhancing Second
Language Reading Skills." ML] 66 (1982): 155-59.
Al-Kasimi, Ali. Linguisticsand Bilingual Dictionaries. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1977.
Allen, Edward D., Elizabeth B. Bernhardt, Mary Th&rese Berry, and Marjorie Demel.
"Comprehension and Text Genre: An Analysis of Secondary School Foreign Language
Readers." ML] 72 (1988): 163-72.
American Association of Teachers of French. The Teaching of French.A Syllabus of Compe-
tence.The PreliminaryReportof the Commission
on Professional
Standards.
AATF National
Bulletin 13, Spec. issue (1987).
Ard, Josh. "The Use of Bilingual Dictionaries by ESL Students While Writing." ITL Review of
Applied Linguistics58 (1982): 1-27.
Baxter, James. "The Dictionary and Vocabulary Behavior: A Single Word or a Handfull?"
TESOL Quarterly 14 (1980): 325-36.
Bejoint, Henri. "The Foreign Student's Use of Monolingual English Dictionaries: A Study of
Language Needs and Reference Skills." Applied Linguistics2 (1981): 207-22.
Bensoussan, Marsha. "Dictionaries and Tests of EFLReading Comprehension." ELT Journal
37 (1983): 341-45.
Bonin, Th&rese M. "The Role of Colloquial French in Communication and Implications for
Language Instruction." ML] 62 (1978): 90-102.
Book, Leon C. "Teaching Multi-Level Classes: A Lesson from the Past." Second-Language
Acquisition: Preparing for Tomorrow. Ed. Barbara Snyder. Report of the Central States
Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. Lincolnwood, IL: National Text-
book, 1986: 109-14.
Caradec, Frangois. Dictionnaire du francais argotiqueet populaire.Paris: Larousse, 1977.
Carter, Ronald. "Vocabulary and Second/Foreign Language Teaching." Language Teaching
20 (1987): 3-16.
Collins-Robert
French-EnglishEnglish-FrenchDictionary.2nd ed. London:Collins,1987.
Cowie, Anthony, ed. The Dictionaryand the LanguageLearner.Papersfrom the EURALEX

92 FRENCH REVIEW
Seminar at the University of Leeds, 1-3 April 1985. Lexicographica Series Maior 17.
Tiibingen: Niemeyer, 1987.
Darbelnet, Jean. Penseeet structure.New York: Scribner's, 1977.
Denoeu, Francois. "Americaniser les dictionnaires franqais-anglais."FR 34 (1960): 67-73.
"Dictionnaires et encyclopedies." Le Franfais dans le Monde 214 (1988): 71-73.
Educational Testing Service. ETS Oral ProficiencyTestingManual. Princeton: ETS, 1982.
Freed, Barbara F. and Richard D. Lambert, eds. The Loss of Language Skills. Rowley, MA:
Newbury House, 1982.
Galisson, Robert. "Image et usage du dictionnaire chez des 6tudiants (en langue) de niveau
avance." Etudesde LinguistiqueAppliqu&e49 (1983): 5-88.
Geeraerts, D. "Dictionary Classification and the Foundations of Lexicography."ITL Review of
Applied Linguistics63 (1984): 37-63.
Girardin, Chantal. "Contenu, usage social et interdits dans le dictionnaire."Languefranfaise 43
(1979): 84-99.
Groebel, Lillian. "Reading: The Students' Approach as Compared to Their Teachers' Rec-
ommended Method." ETL 35 (1981): 282-87.
Hammerly, Hector. "Conveying Lexical Meanings in Second-Language Teaching." Canadian
Modern LanguageReview35 (1979): 567-80.
Hartmann, R.R.K. "Four Perspectives on Dictionary Use: A Critical Review of Research
Methods." Cowie 11-28.
Hausman, F. "Un dictionnaire de collocations est-il possible?" Travaux de Linguistiqueet de
Litt&rature17, i (1979): 187-95.
Haynes, Margot. "Patterns and Perils of Guessing in Second Language Reading." On TESOL
'83: The Questionof Control.Ed. Jean Handscombe, Richard A. Orem, and Barry P. Taylor.
Washington, DC: TESOL, 1984, 163-76.
Heilenman, Laura K. "Foreign Language Vocabulary Learning and Native Language Pro-
cesses."Personalizing Instruction:
ForeignLanguage StylesandTeachingOptions.Ed.
Learning
Renate A. Schultz. Skokie, IL: National Textbook Co., 1977, 43-52.
Herbst, Thomas and Gabriele Stein. "Dictionary-Using Skills: A Plea for a New Orientation in
Language Teaching." Cowie 115-27.
Higgs, Theodore V. and Ray Clifford. "The Push Toward Communication." CurriculumCom-
petenceand the Foreign LanguageTeacher.ACTFL Foreign Language Education Series. Ed.
Theodore V. Higgs. Lincolnwood, IL:National Textbook, 1982, 57-79.
Hosenfeld, Carol, Vicki Arnold, Jeanne Kirchofer, Judith Laciura and Lucia Wilson. "Second
Language Reading: A Curriculum Sequence for Teaching Reading Strategies." Foreign
LanguageAnnals 14 (1981): 415-22.
Hughes, George and Clark Chinn. "Building Reading Vocabulary through Inference: A Better
Classification of Context Clues." Second-LanguageAcquisition: Preparingfor Tomorrow.Ed.
Barbara Snyder. Report of the Central States Conference on the Teaching of Foreign
Languages. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook, 1986, 93-108.
Iannucci, James E. "Meaning Discrimination in Bilingual Dictionaries." Problems in Lexico-
graphy. Ed. Fred W. Householder and Sol Saporta. InternationalJournalof American Linguis-
tics 28.2, Part IV (1962): 201-16.
Ibrahim, Amr Helmy. "Choisir un dictionnaire."Le Francaisdans le Monde 218 (1988): 48-53.
Ilson, Robert, ed. Dictionaries,Lexicographyand LanguageLearning.Oxford: Pergamon, 1985.
Joiner,ElizabethG. The OlderForeignLanguage
Learner:
A Challenge and Universi-
for Colleges
ties. Languagein Education:Theory and Practice34. Washington, DC: Center for Applied
Linguistics, 1981.
Jones, Willis Knapp. "Cultivating Reading Speed in Spanish." ML] 41 (1957): 126-30.
Joseph, John Earl. Review of Cassell'sFrenchand English Dictionary.ML] 71 (1987): 94.
Judd, Elliott L. "Vocabulary Teaching and TESOL: A Need for Reevaluation of Existing As-
sumptions." TESOL Quarterly 12 (1978): 71-76.

Lacroix,U. LesMots et les idies:dictionnaire

destermescadrantavecles id6es.Editionnouvelle.
Paris: Fernand Nathan, 1967.
du francaiscontemporain:
Lagane,Rend,ed. Dictionnaire livretmithodologique.
Paris:Larousse,
1971.
Lindstrom, Naomi. "Making the Bilingual Dictionary Safer for Students." Hispania 63 (1980):
718-23.
LesLivresdisponibles1989. Paris: Editions du Cercle de la Librairie, 1988.
Loew, Helen Z. "Developing Strategic Reading Skills."ForeignLanguageAnnals 17 (1984): 301-
03.
Logan, Gerald E. "Curricula for Individualized Instruction." Individualizationof Instruction.
ACTFL Review of Foreign Language Education. Vol. 2. Ed. Dale Lange. Skokie, IL: Na-
tional Textbook, 1972, 133-55.
Ludwig, Jeannette. "Native-Speaker Judgments of Second-Language Learners' Efforts at
Communication: A Review." MLJ 66 (1982): 274-83.
Magnan, Sally Sieloff. "Teaching and Testing Proficiency in Writing: Skills to Transcend the
Classroom."Proficiency,
Second-Language Articulation:
Curriculum, TheTiesThatBind.Ed.
Alice C. Omaggio. Middlebury, VT: Northeast Conference on the Teaching of Foreign
Languages, 1985. 109-36.
Marckwardt, Albert H. "The Dictionary as an English Teaching Resource." TESOL Quarterly
7 (1973): 369-79.
Medley, Jr., Frank W. "Reading Assignments versus Reading Instruction: Native Language
Strategies and Techniques for Use in the Foreign Language Classroom." Personalizing
Instruction:
ForeignLanguage LearningStylesand Options.Ed.RenateA. Schulz.Skokie,IL:
National Textbook, 1977, 29-42.
Mitterand, Henri. "Deux dictionnaires franqais: le Petit Robertet le Dictionnaire du Francais
Contemporain." Le Franfais dans le Monde 59 (1968): 24-29.
Miiller, Bodo. Le Francaisd'aujourd'hui.Trans. Annie Elsass. Paris: Klincksieck, 1985.
Nemni, Monique. "Les Maux des mots." Canadian Modern LanguageReview 41 (1985): 1020-
40.
TheNew Cassell'sFrenchDictionary.French-English
EnglishFrench.New York:Funkand Wag-
nalls, 1962.
Northeast Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. "Language Learning: The
Intermediate Phase." Reportsof the Working Committees.Ed. William F. Bottiglia. Middle-
bury, VT: Northeast Conference, 1963.
Omaggio, Alice C. TeachingLanguagein Context:A Proficiency-Oriented
Approach.Boston:
Heinle and Heinle, 1986.
Petit Larousseillustre 1989. Paris: Larousse, 1988.
Porteouvertesur. . . les dictionnaireset les encyclopidies.Paris: Hachette, 1984.
Quirk, Randolph. "The Image of the Dictionary." The Linguist and the English Language.
London: Edward Arnold, 1974, 148-63.
Raymond, Patricia. "Interference in Second Language Reading." Canadian Modern Language
Review 44 (1988): 343-49.
Richards, Jack C. "The Role of Vocabulary Teaching." TESOL Quarterly 10 (1976): 77-89.
Rivers, Wilga M. TeachingForeign-LanguageSkills. 2nd ed. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1981.
TeachingFrench:A PracticalGuide. 2nd ed. Lincolnwood, IL:National Textbook, 1988.
Robert, Paul. Le PetitRobert1. Dictionnaire et analogiquede la languefranfaise.
alphabitique
Nouvelle 6dition. Paris: Le Robert, 1985.
Rossner, Richard. "The Learner as Lexicographer: Using Dictionaries in Second Language
Learning." Ilson 95-102.
Schofer,Peter and DonaldRice.Autourde la litt&rature: et lectureaux coursmoyensde
kcriture
francais. Boston: Heinle & Heinle, 1987.
Scholfield, Phil. "Using the English Dictionary for Comprehension." TESOL Quarterly 16
(1982): 185-94.

94 FRENCH REVIEW
Swaffar, Janet K. "Readers, Texts and Second Languages: The Interactive Processes." ML] 72
(1988): 123-49.
Thompson, Geoff. "Using Bilingual Dictionaries." ELT Journal41 (1987): 282-86.
Tomaszczyk, Jerzy. "Dictionaries: Users and Uses" Glottodidactica12 (1979): 103-19.
Twaddell, Freeman. "Vocabulary Expansion in the TESOL Classroom." TESOL Quarterly 7
(1973): 61-78.
Underhill, Adrian. Use Your Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1980.
Wallace, Michael J. Teaching Vocabulary.London: Heinemann, 1982.
Whitcut, Janet. LearningWith LDOCE. Harlow: Longman, 1979.
Yorkey, Richard. "Which Desk Dictionary is Best for Foreign Students of English?" TESOL
Quarterly 3 (1969): 257-70.


The Dictionary As A Secondary Source in Language Learning Author(s) : Joel Walz Source: The French Review, Vol. 64, No. 1 (Oct., 1990), Pp. 79-94 Published By: Stable URL: Accessed: 27/01/2015 10:54

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

The Dictionary As A Secondary Source in Language Learning Author(s) : Joel Walz Source: The French Review, Vol. 64, No. 1 (Oct., 1990), Pp. 79-94 Published By: Stable URL: Accessed: 27/01/2015 10:54

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

The Dictionary as a Secondary Source in Language Learning

Author(s): Joel Walz

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Tue, 27 Jan 2015 10:54:43 AM