Demo instance: a JournTech demo prepared by HB Tech for Hacettepe University, not an official university site. Records are samples from public sources; submissions and reviews are fictional.
TR
Article

Contribution of Studies on Semantic Preference to Vocabulary Teaching: A Study on the Words of “fiyat/ücret/bedel”

Title and abstract are a translation · original language: Turkish

  1. MERSİN ÜNİVERSİTESİ

Hacettepe University Journal of the Faculty of Letters, Volume 36, Issue 1 (2018) pp. 75–84

CiteAccess the publication on the external site

This record comes from the journal's DergiPark archive; original page: DergiPark

Abstract

The aim of this study is to show what kind of contextual differences the words “fiyat/ücret/bedel,” that share the samesemantic field, put forth in the linguistic pattern, in other words, with which semantic extensions they are systematized.This study has benefitted from the database of the demo version of TNC (Turkish National Corpus). The use of thewords “fiyat/ücret/bedel” in bound indexes has been checked by means of the aforementioned corpus, and the thematicanalysis method has been used in order to interpret the findings. In conclusion, it has been observed that although theaforementioned words share the same semantic field, they prefer different systemic elements and, concordantly,constitute different semantic extensions. It is anticipated that this study will contribute to the field of vocabularyteaching in terms of drawing the semantic boundaries of a particular group of words and giving contextual informationabout those words in particular and putting forward a methodological proposal in line with the researches on corpuslinguistics and semantic preference in general .

Abstract (Turkish)

Anlam Tercihi Araştırmalarının Sözcük Öğretimine Katkısı: “fiyat/ücret/bedel” Sözcükleri Üzerine Bir Araştırma

Bu çalışmada aynı anlamsal alanı paylaşan “fiyat/ücret/bedel” sözcüklerinin dilsel örüntüde ne tür bağlamsalfarklılıklar ortaya koyduğunu, diğer bir deyişle hangi anlam bilimsel uzanımlarla kullanıldığını ortaya koymakamaçlanmıştır. Çalışmanın veritabanını Türkçe Ulusal Dil Derlemi Tanıtım Sürümü oluşturmaktadır. Söz konusuderlem aracılığıyla “fiyat/ücret/bedel” sözcüklerinin bağlamlı dizinlerdeki kullanımları denetlenmiş, elde edilen verilertematik analiz yöntemiyle çözümlenmiştir. Sonuç olarak, incelenen sözcükler her ne kadar aynı anlam alanını paylaşsada dizgesel olarak birbirinden farklı eşdizimsel ögeleri tercih etmekte ve buna paralel olarak söz konusu ögelerle farklıanlamsal uzanımlar kurabilmektedir. Çalışmanın özelde belirli bir sözcük grubunun anlamsal sınırlarını çizme ve busözcüklere ilişkin bağlamsal bilgiler verme açısından, genelde anlam tercihi araştırmaları doğrultusunda biryöntembilimsel öneri ortaya konması açısından sözcük öğretimi alanına katkıda bulunacağı öngörülmektedir.

Keywords

Files

Only the metadata of this record is published.

References

  1. Aksan, D. (2004). Anlambilim. Ankara: Engin Yayınevi.
  2. Aksan, Y. vd. (2008). Türkçede Yakın Anlamlı Sözcükler: Bir Derlem Çalışması. 22. Ulusal Dilbilim Kurultayı Bildirileri. 8-9 Mayıs -Van. s. 559-566.
  3. Aksan, Y. vd. (2011). İlköğretim Türkçe Ders Kitapları Derlemi ve Türkçe Ulusal Dil Derlemi Örneklemindeki Sözcük Sıklıkları. (İçinde) Türkçe Öğretimi Üzerine Çalışmalar. Edt. V. D Günay, Ö. Fidan, B. Çetin, F. Yıldız.) 397-407. İzmir: DEDAM Yayınları.
  4. Atkins, S. vd., (1992). Corpus Design Criteria. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 7(1), s. 1-16.
  5. Baker, P., Hardie, A. ve McEnery, T. (2006). A Glossary of Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  6. Erkuş, A. (2009). Davranış Bilimleri İçin Bilimsel Araştırma Süreci. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  7. Glesne, C. (2013). Nitel Araştırmaya Giriş. (Çev. A. Ersoy ve P. Yalçınoğlu) Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  8. Leech, G. (1992). Introducing English Grammar. London: Penguin.
  9. McEnery, T. (2003). Computational Linguistics. İçinde: Corpus Linguistics (Edt. R. Mitkov). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  10. McEnery, T. ve Hardie, A. (2012). Corpus Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  11. McEnery, T. ve Xiao, R. (2010). What Corpora Can Offer in Language Teaching and Learning. Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning. (Edt. E. Hinkel). New York : Routledge.
  12. Römer, U. (2009). Corpus Research and Practice: What Help Do Teachers Need and What Can We Offer?. Corpora and Language Teaching. (Edt. K. Aijmer). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  13. Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  14. Stubbs, M. (2001a) Texts, Corpora, and Problems of Interpretation: a Response to Widdowson. Applied Linguistics. 22. s. 149–172.
  15. Tavşancıl, E.ve Aslan A.E. (2001). İçerik Analizi ve Uygulama Örnekleri. İstanbul: Epsilon Yayınevi.
  16. Tsui，A. (2004)．What Teachers Have Always Wanted to Know and How Corpora Can Help. How To Use Corpora in Language Teaching. s. 39-61. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: J. Benjamins.
  17. Vardar, B. (1998). Dilbilimin Temel Kavram ve İlkeleri. İstanbul: Multilingual Yayınları.

Cite this publication

APA 7

Gündoğdu, A. E. (2018). Contribution of Studies on Semantic Preference to Vocabulary Teaching: A Study on the Words of “fiyat/ücret/bedel”. Hacettepe University Journal of the Faculty of Letters, 36(1), 75–84. https://doi.org/10.32600/huefd.429309

BibTeX

@article{gundogdu2018contribution,
  author = {G{\"u}ndo{\u{g}}du, Ay{\c{s}}e Eda},
  title = {{Contribution of Studies on Semantic Preference to Vocabulary Teaching: A Study on the Words of ``fiyat/{\"u}cret/bedel''}},
  journal = {Hacettepe University Journal of the Faculty of Letters},
  volume = {36},
  number = {1},
  pages = {75--84},
  publisher = {Hacettepe {\"U}niversitesi},
  year = {2018},
  month = {5},
  issn = {1301-5737},
  doi = {10.32600/huefd.429309},
  url = {https://hacettepe.hbtech.com.tr/en/publication/anlam-tercihi-arastirmalarinin-sozcuk-ogretimine-katkisi-fiyat-ucret-bedel-sozcukleri-uzerine-bir-arastirma},
  language = {tr},
  keywords = {: Semantic preference, Teaching Turkish, teaching vocabulary, corpus},
  abstract = {The aim of this study is to show what kind of contextual differences the words ``fiyat/{\"u}cret/bedel,'' that share the samesemantic field, put forth in the linguistic pattern, in other words, with which semantic extensions they are systematized.This study has benefitted from the database of the demo version of TNC (Turkish National Corpus). The use of thewords ``fiyat/{\"u}cret/bedel'' in bound indexes has been checked by means of the aforementioned corpus, and the thematicanalysis method has been used in order to interpret the findings. In conclusion, it has been observed that although theaforementioned words share the same semantic field, they prefer different systemic elements and, concordantly,constitute different semantic extensions. It is anticipated that this study will contribute to the field of vocabularyteaching in terms of drawing the semantic boundaries of a particular group of words and giving contextual informationabout those words in particular and putting forward a methodological proposal in line with the researches on corpuslinguistics and semantic preference in general .},
  affiliation = {MERS{\.I}N {\"U}N{\.I}VERS{\.I}TES{\.I}}
}
.bib

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Gündoğdu, Ayşe Eda
TI  - Contribution of Studies on Semantic Preference to Vocabulary Teaching: A Study on the Words of “fiyat/ücret/bedel”
T2  - Hacettepe University Journal of the Faculty of Letters
VL  - 36
IS  - 1
PY  - 2018
DA  - 2018/05/31/
SP  - 75
EP  - 84
PB  - Hacettepe Üniversitesi
SN  - 1301-5737
DO  - 10.32600/huefd.429309
UR  - https://hacettepe.hbtech.com.tr/en/publication/anlam-tercihi-arastirmalarinin-sozcuk-ogretimine-katkisi-fiyat-ucret-bedel-sozcukleri-uzerine-bir-arastirma
AB  - The aim of this study is to show what kind of contextual differences the words “fiyat/ücret/bedel,” that share the samesemantic field, put forth in the linguistic pattern, in other words, with which semantic extensions they are systematized.This study has benefitted from the database of the demo version of TNC (Turkish National Corpus). The use of thewords “fiyat/ücret/bedel” in bound indexes has been checked by means of the aforementioned corpus, and the thematicanalysis method has been used in order to interpret the findings. In conclusion, it has been observed that although theaforementioned words share the same semantic field, they prefer different systemic elements and, concordantly,constitute different semantic extensions. It is anticipated that this study will contribute to the field of vocabularyteaching in terms of drawing the semantic boundaries of a particular group of words and giving contextual informationabout those words in particular and putting forward a methodological proposal in line with the researches on corpuslinguistics and semantic preference in general .
KW  - : Semantic preference
KW  - Teaching Turkish
KW  - teaching vocabulary
KW  - corpus
LA  - tr
AD  - MERSİN ÜNİVERSİTESİ
ER  -
.ris