LE COLLOCAZIONI N-ADJ DELL’ITALIANO ACCADEMICO PARLATO. UN’INDAGINE CORPUS-BASED

Diana Peppoloni

doi:10.54103/2037-3597/27858

Autori/Autrici

Diana Peppoloni Università degli Studi di Perugia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0093-9283

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54103/2037-3597/27858

Abstract

Il contributo si concentra su un aspetto lessicale della lingua accademica italiana parlata di particolare rilievo per gli apprendenti stranieri, ovvero quello delle collocazioni. Difatti, la loro conoscenza e il corretto impiego di tali unità fraseologiche sono indice di un livello avanzato di competenza linguistico-comunicativa del parlante e della sua eventuale appartenenza a un certo gruppo sociale o professionale, come nel caso della comunicazione accademica. Le collocazioni costituiscono un ostacolo anche per apprendenti di livello avanzato, in virtù dell’impredicibilità della combinatoria degli elementi che le compongono, della loro arbitrarietà e convenzionalità. Nonostante il ruolo irrinunciabile delle collocazioni nel percorso acquisizionale, queste possono venire sottostimate nella classe di lingua, spesso a causa di una carenza di materiali e risorse specificatamente dedicati, da cui la necessità di questo studio. Questo descrive i parametri costitutivi e i dati del corpus ASIC (Academic Spoken Italian Corpus), insieme ai risultati di un metodo di estrazione automatica di collocazioni accademiche orali italiane N-ADJ, a partire dai dati di ASIC. L’estrazione automatica degli elementi collocazionali, basata su indici statistici non sembra sufficiente da sola a misurare il grado di associazione che lega i due elementi di una coppia di parole. Occorre effettuare un’analisi a posteriori, basata sull’esperienza e la competenza di parlanti nativi, abituati a comunicare in ambito accademico. Per individuare dunque le collocazioni accademiche realmente attestate, i dati sono stati ulteriormente valutati da un campione di parlanti nativi italiani, coinvolti in un esperimento di crowd sourcing.

Academic spoken italian N-ADJ collocations. A corpus-based study

This paper focuses on a lexical aspect of academic spoken Italian language that is particularly relevant for foreign learners, namely collocations. In fact, knowledge of collocations and the correct use of such phraseological units are predictive of an advanced level of linguistic-communicative competence of the speaker and of his/her belonging to a certain social or professional group, as in the case of academic communication. Collocations are also a hurdle for advanced learners, by virtue of the unpredictability of the combination of their elements, of their arbitrariness and conventionality. Despite the essential role of collocations in the acquisition process, they seem to be marginalised in the language classroom, often due to a lack of specific materials and resources, hence the need for this study. This latter describes the constitutive parameters and data of the ASIC corpus (Academic Spoken Italian Corpus), together with the results of an automatic extraction method of oral Italian academic collocations N-ADJ, starting from the ASIC data. The automatic extraction of collocational elements, based on statistical indices, does not seem to be sufficient by itself to measure the degree of association that links the two elements of a word pair. A further a posteriori analysis was necessary for this purpose, based on the experience and expertise of native speakers, who were familiar with the academic communicative context. Therefore, to identify the academic collocations actually attested, the data were further evaluated by a sample of native Italian speakers, involved in a crowd sourcing experiment.

Downloads

I dati di download non sono ancora disponibili.

Riferimenti bibliografici

Anstrom K., Dicerbo P., Butler F., Katz A., Millet J., Rivera C. (2010), A review of the literature on academic English: Implications for K-12 English language learners, The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education, Arlington.

Bailey A. L., Heritage H. M. (2008), Formative assessment for literacy, grades K-6: Building reading and academic language skills across the curriculum, Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks.

Bialystok E. (2001), Bilingualism in Development: Language, Literacy, and Cognition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Biber D. (2006), University Language: a corpus-based study of spoken and written registers, John Benjamins, Amsterdam.

Biber D., Conrad S., Rappen R. (1998), Corpus linguistics: Exploring language structure and use, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Bourdieu P., Passeron J. C. (1994), “Introduction: Language and relationship to language in the teaching situation”, in Bourdieu P., Passeron J. C., de Saint Martin M. (eds.), Academic Discourse: Linguistic misunderstanding and professorial power, Polity, Cambridge, pp. 1-34.

Callison-Burch C. (2009), “Fast, Cheap, and Creative: Evaluating Translation Quality Using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk”, in Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 286-295.

Corpas Pastor G. (2003), Diez años de investigaciones en fraseología: análisis sintácticosemánticos, contrastivos y traductológicos, Iberoamericana-Vervuet, Madrid.

Cowie A. P. (1988), “Stable and creative aspects of vocabulary use”, in Carter R., McCarthy M. J. (eds.), Vocabulary and Language Teaching, Longman, London, pp. 126-137.

Cowie A. P. (1992), “Multiword Lexical Units and Communicative Language Teaching”, in Arnaud P. J. L., Béjoint H. (eds.), Vocabulary and Applied Linguistics, Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp. 1-12.

Coxhead A. (2000), “A New Academic Word List”, in TESOL Quarterly, 34, pp. 213-38.

Evert S. (2008), “Corpora and collocations”, in Lüdeling A, Kytö M (eds.), Corpus Linguistics. An International Handbook, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, New York, pp. 1212-1248.

Facione P. (1990), Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction, California Academic Press, Millbrae.

Farrell P. (1990), Vocabulary in ESP: A lexical analysis of the English of electronics and a study of semi-technical vocabulary (CLCS Occasional Paper No. 25), Trinity College, Centre for Language and Communication Studies.

Fernando C. (1996), Idioms and idiomaticity, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Fillmore C., Kay P., O’Connor M. C. (1988), “Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: the case of let alone”, in Language, 64, pp. 501-538.

Firth J. R. (1957), “Modes of Meaning”, in Palmer F. R. (ed.), Papers in Linguistics 1934-1951, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 190-215.

Gombert J. E. (1990), Le développement métalinguistique, PUF, Paris.

Grace G. (1987), The Linguistic Construction of Reality, Croom Helm, New York.

Hamp-Lyons L. (2011), “English for Academic Purposes”, in Hinkel E. (ed.), Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning, Routledge, Abingdon, pp. 89-105.

Hyland K. (2002), “Specificity revisited: How far should we go now?”, in English for Specific Purposes, 21, 4, pp. 385-395.

Ježek E., Sprugnoli R. (2023), Linguistica computazionale, il Mulino, Bologna.

Jones S., Sinclair J. M. (1974), “English lexical collocations. A study in computational linguistics”, in Cahiers de Lexicologie, 24, pp. 15-61.

Jordan R. R. (1997), English for academic purposes: a guide and resource book for teachers, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Kilgarriff A., Rychly P., Smrz P., Tugwell D. (2004), “The Sketch Engine”, in Proceedings EURALEX, Lorient, pp. 105-116.

Krishnamurthy R. (2006), “Collocations”, in Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, vol. 2, pp. 596-600.

Laufer B. (2011), “The Contribution of Dictionary Use to the Production and Retention of Collocations in a Second Language”, in International Journal of Lexicography, 24, 1, pp. 29-49.

Marazzini C. (2021), “La lingua di Dante non può parlare di scienza. Il MUR esclude l’italiano nel bando per i fondi FIS”, in Italiano digitale, 19, 4, pp. 181-183.

Mcenery T., Hardie A. (2011), Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Nagy W., Townsend D. (2012), “Words as tools: Learning academic vocabulary as language acquisition”, in Reading Research Quarterly, 47, pp. 91-108.

Nation I. S. P. (2001), Learning vocabulary in another language, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Nattinger J. R., DeCarrico J. S. (1992), Lexical Phrases and Language Teaching, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Nesselhauf N. (2005), Collocations in a learner corpus, John Benjamins Publishing, Amsterdam.

Pawley A., Syder F. H. (1983), “Two puzzles for linguistic theory: nativelike selection and nativelike fluency”, in Richards J., Schmidt R. (eds.), Language and Communication, Longman, London, pp. 191-226.

Peppoloni D. (2018a), Glottodidattica e metalinguaggio, Guerra Editore, Perugia.

Peppoloni D. (2018b), “A corpus-based study of the automatic extraction and validation of V-N Italian oral academic collocations”, in Linguisticae Investigationes, 41, 2, pp. 240-268.

Schleppegrell M. J. (2004), The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Sinclair J. (1991), Corpus, Concordance, Collocation, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Snow R., O’Connor B., Jurafsky D., Ng A. (2008), “Cheap and fast – but is it good?: evaluating non-expert annotations for natural language tasks”, in Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 254-263.

Tiberii P. (2012), Il dizionario delle collocazioni, Zanichelli, Bologna.

Vygotsky L. S. (1987), “Thinking and Speech”, in Rieber R. W., Carton A. S. (eds.), The Collected Works of L. S. Vygotsky (Vol. 1), Problems of General Psychology, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 39-285 (Original Work Published, 1934).

Wang A., Hoang C., Kan M. Y. (2012), “Perspectives on Crowdsourcing Annotations for Natural Language Processing”, in Language Resources and Evaluation, 47, 1, pp. 9-31.

Wray A. (2002), Formulaic language and the lexicon, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Wray A., Perkins M. (2000), “The functions of formulaic language: An integrated model”, in Language & Communication, 20, 1, pp. 1-28.

Yorio C. (1989), “Idiomaticity as an indicator of second language proficiency”, in Hyltenstam K., Obler Lobler L. K. (eds.), Bilingualism across the Lifespan, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 55-72.