Academic English S.A. Zhabotynska Dr. of Linguistics, Professor Department of English Philology Bohdan Khmelnisky National University in Cherkasy THESAURUS DICTIONARY OF ACADEMIC CLICHES AND ITS APPLICATION IN THE LANGUAGE CLASSROOM Academic English

PLAN Part 1 Mind-based ontology of a thesaurus dictionary. English-Ukrainian-Russian Thesaurus of Academic Clichés: principles of organization. Part 2 Thesaurus in the Academic English classroom. Part 3 (supplementary) A scholarly paper: from authentic vocabulary to authentic perspectivization.

Part 1. MIND-BASED ONTOLOGY OF A TESAURUS DICTIONARY Part 1. MIND-BASED ONTOLOGY OF A TESAURUS DICTIONARY

PROBLEM Contemporary methods employed by Ukrainian teachers of foreign languages are broadly defined as traditional and non-traditional. The traditional (grammar-translation) method is teacher-centered. It is concerned with the systemic study of phonetics, lexicon, and grammar, which enables development of students reading and translation skills. This method, dominant in the Soviet school, has become deeply entrenched, and has maintained its position till present.

The non-traditional methods tend to be student-centered. They focus on (a) enhancing memorization of linguistic information via addressing the subconscious spheres of the mind (e.g. Losanovs method); (b) providing quick intensive learning of a foreign language via substituting the theory of language by its intensive application in speech. The latter group of methods, termed the communicative approach, concentrates on simulating various communicative situations in the language classroom.

Nowadays, the grammar-translation and communicative methods are applied in the language classroom as complementary, and they become efficient if they are skillfully employed by a teacher for providing students with comprehensive, easily remembered information about the system of a studied language, and the use of this system for communicative needs; the students knowledge of language obtained in the classroom becomes entrenched due to their further exposure to authentic linguistic environment, where communicative simulations are substituted by real communicative practices which, if required, will repair the deficiencies of artificially created interaction.

Ukrainian students poor knowledge of a foreign language results from the shortcomings related to both of the above factors, i.e. lack of coherence in presenting linguistic information (both systemic and communicative) in the classroom, and insufficient communicative environment for the further application of a learned foreign language.

These two issues may be considered from a COGNITIVE PERSPECTIVE. Language is both NATURE and NURTURE (a) Since linguistic structures are immediately (iconically) related to the natural, inborn structures of the mind, the latter should be involved in presenting linguistic information. b) Language acquisition requires entrenchment of linguistic structures in the human memory, which, besides sufficiency of their occurrence in speech, may be facilitated through involvement of the minds natural capacities that are not restricted to language per se, i. e: workings of attention, conscience and subconscious perception, the kinds of memory (procedual and declarative), the minds multiple intelligence (Gardner), the role of emotions, motivation, self-esteem, etc. BRAIN-BASED LEARNING ? MIND-BASED LEARNING

This paper pursues the MIND-BASED LEARNING approach, and addresses the issue of coherent and comprehensive presentation of linguistic information (both systemic and communicative) in the language classroom. Such presentation can be grounded on the insights of Cognitive Linguistics which studies the relation between language / speech and the mind.

The mind is a natural system that employs a set of inborn conceptual structures intended for processing both non- linguistic and linguistic information. Application of these structures in language teaching may sufficiently facilitate acquisition of the system of language per se, and construing the communicative situations compatible with the authentic ones. LANGUAGE SPEECH

DISCUSSION OUTLINE 1.Semantics of Lingual Networks (SLN): a set of the minds basic conceptual schemas. 2. Conceptual schemas in teaching grammar and lexicon. 3. Conceptual schemas in construing speech ontologies Ontology: definition Ontology for a thesaurus dictionary of English academic clichés A thesaurus dictionary of English academic clichés as the foundation for teaching an Academic English class.

Semantics of Lingual Networks / SLN (Zhabotynska ) describes 17 basic propositional schemas, or most abstract conceptual structures, exposed in the meanings and forms of linguistic units that belong to different levels of language and speech. Therefore, these structures are the minds universal tool for processing information.

The basic schemas are thematically arranged in 5 operational frames: the Thing Frame / being schemas – (quantitaive, qualitative, locative, temporative, and mode of being); the Action Frame / action schemas – (state/process, contact, and causation); the Possession Frame / possession schemas (part-whole, inclusion, and ownership; the Identification Frame / identification schemas (personification, classification, and characterization); the Comparison Frame / comparison schemas (identity, similarity, and likeness).

The basic frames emerge from the analysis of diverse linguistic phenomena – lexical, derivational, syntactic, and part-of-speech meanings. framesbasicThe frames are called basic because they demonstrate the initial, most schematic principles of categorizing and organizing information that humans acquire from the experienced world and manifest with language. not some entitiessets of instrumentsFrames are not some entities; they are sets of instruments with the help of which our mind processes and arranges information. propositional schemasThe basic frames are constituted by propositional schemas the types of which are defined by the frames they belong to.

The THING FRAME: being schemas Quantitative schema X is THAT MANY Locative schema X is/exists THERE-place Temporative schema X exists THEN-time Mode of being schema X exists SO SHE is SMALL SHE is ONE SHE is IN THE YARD SHE is THERE NOW SHE is AWAKE/ASLEEP Qualitative schema X is SUCH

The IDENTIFICATION FRAME: identification schemas Personification schema X-identified is PN-proper name Specification schema X-identified is SP-specifier SHE / ALICE is A DOG SHE is ALICE SHE / ALICE is THE DOG OF MY FRIEND Classification schema X-identified is CL-classifier

The POSSESSION FRAME: possession schemas Part-whole schema X-whole has PR-part CR-content has X-container Ownership schema X-owner has OD-owned OW-owned has X-owner HER HEAD has BRAINS THE DOG has BIG EYES THE DOG has A MASTER THE MASTER has A DOG Inclusion schema X-container has CT-content

The ACTION FRAME: action schemas State / process schema X-agent acts X-agent acts upon AF-affected Causation schema X-causer makes FT-factitive THE DOG chases CATS THE DOG scares CATS THE DOG barks THE DOG makes NOISE Contact schema X-agent acts upon PT-patient

The ACTION FRAME: role extensions of the action schemas Circumstance Circumstance: attendant, aid, instrument (with) Recipient: Recipient: addressee (to), benefactor, malefactor (for) Stimulus: Stimulus: cause, goal (because, for) Prerequisite: Prerequisite: condition (if), concession (though) Locative: THERE-placeTemporative: THEN-time THE DOG barked IN THE YARD YESTERDAY THE DOG chases CATS FOR PLEASURE IF IT RAINS, I wont walk THE DOG THOUGH IT RAINS, Ill walk THE DOG I speak TO MY DOG I made A DOG-HOUSE FOR MY DOG I invented PUNISHMENT FOR MY DOG THE DOG WITH THE CAT made NOISE THE DOG scared ME WITH HER BARKING

The COMPARISON FRAME: comparison schemas Identity schema (metamorphosis) is (as) X-compared is (as) MS-correlate Likeness schema (metaphor) is as if X-compared is as if MT-correlate THIS DOG is as THAT ONE THIS MAN is A DOG (человек-собака) THIS DOG is (as if) / like A DIAMOND Similarity schema (analogy) is as X-compared is as AN-correlate

Frame Network Identification Frame Action Frame Comparison Frame Thing Frame Possession Frame

Basic propositional schemas may be employed for teaching grammar and lexicon. E.g. This student AG Linguistics PT acts upon knows knowledge about linguistics has (s) knowledgeable about linguistics is SUCH OW OD is a knowledgeable person in linguistics ID CL

Basic propositional schemas may be employed for construing ontologies. In knowledge engineering, an ontology is a conceptual (mental) model of some domain of objects – a model that includes a hierarchy of concepts, their relations and the rules by which this model functions (Воинов, Гаврилова 2008). In teaching languages, an ontology is a conceptual model of the information relevant for thematically focused speech.

Mind-based methodology employed for enhancing speaking skills in a thematically coherent discussion includes four major steps: collecting the linguistic data (words, collocations and idioms) from numerous authentic texts; arranging these data in the thesaurus dictionary grounded on a conceptual ontology built with the help of basic propositional schemas; applying the ontology of a coherent discussed topic for building conceptual modules to be worked with in the language classroom; using the conceptual modules for developing a set of exercises aimed to train grammar and lexicon, and to entrench students speaking skills.

ILLUSTRATION: a sample of teaching ACADEMIC ENGLISH (advanced level)

Academic English S.A. Zhabotynska I.V. Brovchenko O.V. Vakhovska An English-Ukrainian-Russian Thesaurus of Scholarly Clichés (5,000 units) An English-Ukrainian-Russian Thesaurus of Scholarly Clichés (5,000 units)

SCHOLARLY RESEARCH: ontology of the mental space SCHOLARLY RESEARCH: ontology of the mental space SMB Scholar ACTS UPON realizes SMTH problem SMTH problem SMTH field SMTH field SMTH topic SMTH topic MAKES formulate s SMTH hypothesis SMTH hypothesis MAKES creates SMTH text SMTH text SMTH theory SMTH theory SMTH goal SMTH goal SMTH data SMTH data SMTH evidence SMTH evidence SMTH conclusion SMTH conclusion SMTH methodology SMTH methodology ACTS UPON studies (a study) ACTS UPON studies (a study) ACTS UPON obtains MAKES formulates ACTS UPON discusses (a discussion) ACTS UPON discusses (a discussion) THERE: Place PatientWhole Part Result Causer Agent Result GoalInstrument Patient Result Content Container Patient is has for with has

Domain: THEORY 1. ТЕОРІЯ ТЕОРИЯ theory doctrine conception framework approach 1. ТЕОРІЯ ТЕОРИЯ theory doctrine conception framework approach 2. ТРАДИЦІЯ ТРАДИЦИЯ tradition 2. ТРАДИЦІЯ ТРАДИЦИЯ tradition 3. ПАРАДИГМА ПАРАДИГМА paradigm 3. ПАРАДИГМА ПАРАДИГМА paradigm 4. СВІТОГЛЯД МИРОВОЗЗРЕНИЕ worldview 4. СВІТОГЛЯД МИРОВОЗЗРЕНИЕ worldview 5. ПРОГРАМА ПРОГРАММА program 5. ПРОГРАМА ПРОГРАММА program 6. МОДЕЛЬ МОДЕЛЬ model 6. МОДЕЛЬ МОДЕЛЬ model 7. ТРАКТУВАННЯ ТРАКТОВКА account 7. ТРАКТУВАННЯ ТРАКТОВКА account 8. ПОНЯТТЯ, ІДЕЯ ПОНЯТИЕ, ИДЕЯ concept idea observation principle tenet view argument belief 8. ПОНЯТТЯ, ІДЕЯ ПОНЯТИЕ, ИДЕЯ concept idea observation principle tenet view argument belief is has ID CL PR WH PR WH PR

Units in a parcel: the network of properties SMTH SUCH (quality ) is of is has L PRCNCTWHCNCTAGCRAGCRPTFT ACTS ACTS upon MAKES ACTS upon MAKES

Unit: CONCEPT (Domain: THEORY, Parcel: IDEA, CONCEPT) CONCEPT(s) realm of overtone of property of realm of overtone of property of basic natural key core general obscure basic natural key core general obscure within the reach of to articulate to adopt to define to accept to import ~ from to admit ~ from one system to another to attack ~ obliquely to destroy to ban ~ from to elevate to disparage to articulate to adopt to define to accept to import ~ from to admit ~ from one system to another to attack ~ obliquely to destroy to ban ~ from to elevate to disparage arises comes out of sits in the center of represents a middle ground between holds smth together strengthens permits smb to do smth assumes importance plays a crucial (appropriate) role differs from puts smth in conflict with smth arises comes out of sits in the center of represents a middle ground between holds smth together strengthens permits smb to do smth assumes importance plays a crucial (appropriate) role differs from puts smth in conflict with smth

to ban ~ from /укр./ виключати поняття з; /рус./ исключать понятие из: Quine argued that the general concept of a set should be banned from formal languages used in responsible philosophical discussion (Lakoff 1987, 208).

Conceptual space: SCHOLARLY RESEARCH FIELD PROBLEM TOPIC realizes SCHOLAR formulates creates HYPOTHESIS THEORY TEXT GOALMETHO- DOLOGY DATA EVIDENCE CONCLU- SION studie s obtain s formulate s discusses THEORY theory doctrine conception framework approach TRADITION tradition PARADIGM paradigm WORLDVIEW worldview PROGRAM program ACCOUNT account MODEL model CONCEPT, IDEA concept idea observation principle tenet, etc realm of overtone of property of natural basic key, core general obscure CONCEPT(s) within the reach of arises comes out of sits in the center of represents a middle ground between holds smth together permits smb to do smth assumes importance plays a crucial (appropriate) role differs from puts smth in conflict with smth to articulate to adopt, to accept to define to import ~ from to admit ~ from one system to another to attack ~ obliquely to destroy to ban ~ from to elevate to disparage to ban ~ from /укр./ виключати поняття з; /рус./ исключать по- нятие из: Quine argued that the general concept of a set should be banned from formal languages used in responsible philosophical discussion (Lakoff 1987, 208).

Part 2. TESAURUS IN THE ACADEMIC ENGLISH CLASSROOM Part 2. TESAURUS IN THE ACADEMIC ENGLISH CLASSROOM

1. Portraits of focal concepts Most focal concepts constituting the domains (PROBLEM, SCIENCE, HYPOTHESIS, etc.) are typically manifested with multiple clichés, the syntactic structures of which are compatible with the particular propositional schemas represented in the network model of a concepts properties:

SMTH SUCH (quality ) is of is has L PRCNCTWHCNCTAGCRAGCRPTFT ACTS ACTS upon MAKES ACTS upon MAKES Units in a parcel: the network of properties

These syntactic structures, when filled with words, enable the description of a focal concept per se. Such a description employs the groups of synonyms / antonyms, and may evolve as follows:

E.g. HYPOTHESIS Some phenomenon exists under (on/upon, according to) the hypothesis. There exist sets of hypotheses, and versions of one and the same hypothesis. A hypothesis may be: specific and general, working, radical, fundamental, guiding and auxiliary, priming, central, and peripheral, extravagant, valid and invalid, plausible and ephemeral, sound, convincing, fruitful and fallacious.

E.g. HYPOTHESIS A scholar or science launches, puts forward, generates; outlines, formulates, postulates, lays out; labels the hypothesis; starts it with sth (….), extends, examines, scrutinizes, reforms, refines, and tests the hypothesis; compares it with the similar hypotheses. The evidence and conclusion may be compatible and consistent with this hypothesis. They prop it up. The other scholars evaluate, support, endorse, favor, adopt and use this hypothesis. They may also disfavor, turn down, and slay the hypothesis.

E.g. HYPOTHESIS The scholars hypothesis comes, stems from sth (…); it aims to solve the problem, it assumes, implies, presupposes, suggests, predicts sth (…); it makes claims about sth (…), says, argues and states that something takes place; it offers and requires sth (…), accounts for sth (…), holds for sth (…), and supports sth (…); it leads to sth (…) and entails sth (…); it enables sth (…), and gives rise to sth (…); therefore, it rules the work in the field.

The above portrait my be expanded with the clichés borrowed from the other parts of the Thesaurus, and with the clichés not included into the Thesaurus and found by students themselves due to their exposure to authentic scholarly texts.

The portraits of most informative focal concepts (such as RESEACH and THEORY) should be split into parts; e.g. advent, development and decay of a theory, actions of a theory, praise of a theory, criticisms of a theory, etc.

2. Frame modules The Thesaurus serves as a data source for building concise frame modules applied in the classroom. The modules establish diverse links between a limited number of focal concepts:

SMB Scholar ACTS UPON realizes SMTH problem SMTH problem SMTH field SMTH field SMTH topic SMTH topic MAKES formulate s SMTH hypothesis SMTH hypothesis MAKES creates SMTH text SMTH text SMTH theory SMTH theory SMTH goal SMTH goal SMTH data SMTH data SMTH evidence SMTH evidence SMTH conclusion SMTH conclusion SMTH methodology SMTH methodology ACTS UPON studies (a study) ACTS UPON studies (a study) ACTS UPON obtains MAKES formulates ACTS UPON discusses (a discussion) ACTS UPON discusses (a discussion) THERE: Place PatientWhole Part Result Causer Agent Result GoalInstrument Patient Result Content Container Patient is has for with has SCHOLARLY RESEARCH: ontology of the mental space

In a module, some linked focal concepts construe a frame (a backbone) for further extending the students speech / writing beyond the boundaries of a particular focal concept.

E.g. Domain PROBLEM Module 1. FIELD / THEORY – PROBLEM – QUESTION / ISSUE The module is constructed by cards with semantically related expressions. The cards are arranged around the focal concepts, whose links surface in syntax: The FIELD/THEORY has (+ V) a PROBLEM (s) which has (have) / concerns (concern) the QUESTION(s) / ISSUE(s)

Module 1. FIELD / THEORY – PROBLEM – QUESTION / ISSUE FIELD / THEORY PROBLEM(s) QUESTION(s) / ISSUE(s) number of array of host of layer of wash of set of faces runs into inherits the ~ from raises, introduces, brings to attention, brings into the open, sheds / throws light on theoretically (practically) oriented, theory-neutral general, particular, non-trivial fundamental foundational deeply seated traditional, long-standing, lasting, perennial genuine, ill-conceived, ill-formed, fuzzy, ephemeral, smokescreened, mysterious contested, irreconcilable related, (ir)relevant, removed (in) tractable, clearly-cut, subtle big, broad, deep, profound, growing, ripe, burning, urgent, sharp, hard, tricky, thorny, amenable central, basic, essential, key, crucial concern(s) has

Students are requested to make up various sentences that derive from the module and fit the syntactic structure; e.g.

Module 1. FIELD / THEORY – PROBLEM – QUESTION / ISSUE FIELD / THEORY PROBLEM(s) QUESTION(s) / ISSUE(s) number of array of host of layer of wash of set of faces runs into inherits the ~ from raises, introduces, brings to attention, brings into the open, sheds / throws light on theoretically (practically) oriented, theory-neutral general, particular, non-trivial fundamental foundational deeply seated traditional, long-standing, lasting, perennial genuine, ill-conceived, ill-formed, fuzzy, ephemeral, smokescreened, mysterious contested, irreconcilable related, (ir)relevant, removed (in)tractable, clearly-cut, subtle big, broad, deep, profound, growing, ripe, burning, urgent, sharp, hard, tricky, thorny, amenable central, basic, essential, key, crucial Linguistics concern(s) has related, (ir)relevant, removed

At the next stage, the module may be modified in two ways: a) via substituting (adding) the cards;

Module 1. FIELD / THEORY – PROBLEM – QUESTION / ISSUE FIELD / THEORY PROBLEM(s) QUESTION(s) / ISSUE(s) number of array of host of layer of wash of set of faces runs into, inherits the ~ from raises, introduces, brings to attention, bring into the open, sheds / throws light on theoretically (practically) oriented, theory-neutral general, particular, non-trivial fundamental foundational deeply seated traditional, long-standing, lasting, perennial genuine, ill-conceived, ill-formed, fuzzy, ephemeral, smokescreened, mysterious contested, irreconcilable related, (ir)relevant, removed (in)tractable, clearly-cut, subtle big, broad, deep, profound, growing, ripe, burning, urgent, sharp, hard, tricky, thorny, amenable central, basic, essential, key, crucial Linguistics addresses, discusses, deals with, touches upon, taps into, approaches, turns to puts, covers, views examines, reexamines has concern(s) has

b) via changing links between the focal concepts.

Module 1. FIELD / THEORY – PROBLEM – QUESTION / ISSUE FIELD / THEORY PROBLEM(s) QUESTION(s) / ISSUE(s) number of array of host of layer of wash of set of theoretically (practically) oriented, theory-neutral general, particular, non-trivial fundamental foundational deeply seated traditional, long-standing, lasting, perennial genuine, ill-conceived, ill-formed, fuzzy, ephemeral, smokescreened, mysterious contested, irreconcilable related, (ir)relevant, removed (in)tractable, clearly-cut, subtle big, broad, deep, profound, growing, ripe, burning, urgent, sharp, hard, tricky, thorny, amenable in central, basic, essential, key, crucial emerges, comes up, surfaces enters, invades, faces, confronts, drives, dominates concerns, addresses turns to coves relates to hinges on lies with

The sentences made up by students partly retain the familiar clichés and add the new ones required by the change of syntax. Besides, this stage implies more extensive use of professional terms; e.g.

Module 1. FIELD / THEORY – PROBLEM – QUESTION / ISSUE FIELD / THEORY PROBLEM(s) QUESTION(s) / ISSUE(s) number of array of host of layer of wash of set of theoretically (practically) oriented, theory-neutral general, particular, non-trivial fundamental foundational deeply seated traditional, long-standing, lasting, perennial genuine, ill-conceived, ill-formed, fuzzy, ephemeral, smokescreened, mysterious contested, irreconcilable related, (ir)relevant, removed (in)tractable, clearly-cut, subtle big, broad, deep, profound, growing, ripe, burning, urgent, sharp, hard, tricky, thorny, amenable in central, basic, essential, key, crucial Semantics emerges, comes up, surfaces enters, invades, faces, confronts, drives, dominates concerns, addresses turns to coves relates to hinges on lies with of polysemy of conceptual structures of language acquisition Cognitive Linguistics of language instinct

The other potential modules are: SCHOLAR / PAPER – PROBLEM – QUESTION / ISSUE RESEARCH – PROBLEM – QUESTION / ISSUE DATA – PROBLEM – QUESTION / ISSUE etc. (see the ontology of the mental space) The increase of number of focal concepts (and their satellites) in a module facilitates development of more extended coherent texts.

3. Examples of exercises 3.1. Lexical substitutions a) of the satellites: This problem addresses (discusses, deals with, touches upon, taps into, approaches, turns to puts, covers, views, examines) the issue of… b) of nuclear words: The field of… (the scholar, this paper / study / research) addresses the problem of…

3. Examples of exercises 3.2. Grammatical transformations a) change of the Active Voice into the Passive Voice: Linguistics inherits this problem from philosophy > This problem is inherited by linguistics from philosophy. b) change of the sentence structure: In the mid of the previous century, Linguistics was invaded by the problem of language in the mind. > The problem of language in the mind invaded linguistics in the mid of the previous century. > Invasion of the problem of language in the mind into linguistics took place in the mid of the previous century.

3.3. Creative tasks a) Define the general and particular problems in your field and provide their description. b) Speak about the major problem you study and relate it to the other problems of your research. c) Relate the major problem of your study to the contribution of other scholars. d) Etc. 3. Examples of exercises

Part 3 (supplementary) A scholarly paper: from authentic vocabulary to authentic perspectivization Part 3 (supplementary) A scholarly paper: from authentic vocabulary to authentic perspectivization

A.Kertesz (ed.). Approaches to the Pragmatics of Scientific Discourse. – Frankfurt a.o.: Peter Lang, – P. 73 – 89. AUTHOR-PROFILE IN SCHOLARLY PAPERS: ANGLO-AMERICAN vs. UKRAINIAN/RUSSIAN Svitlana Zhabotynska Cherkasy State University, Ukraine

The Author-Profile integrated into the overall information space of a research paper is structured by the frame model which comprises four focal concepts. The central focus, I: AUTHOR, is related to the other foci: WORK done by the author, THEY: CONTRIBUTORS, the scholars who have already considered the problem addressed by the author, and YOU: ADDRESSEE, the readers of the paper. The readers and the author converge into one entity WE (I & YOU): CO-THINKERS.

THEY WORK IYOUWE I + WORK: Authors Self-Reference I + THEY: Authors Reference to the Contributors I + YOU = WE: Authors Interaction with the Readers

Academic