Diaparonyms in ESP Texts as Potential Causes of Lexical and Semantic Errors in FLSP Teaching

Analysis of the theory and methodology as well as practice of teaching English as a foreign language reveals that lexical and semantic interference resulting from contacts of English and Russian in the context of legal texts has not been investigated yet, which predetermines the topicality of the research described in the article. The research was conducted with the help of methods of analysis and synthesis, classification and description, theory and methodology analysis, and a continuous sampling technique. The aim of the investigation is to model interference that can potentially cause learners' errors, rather than to explore real instances of interference while teaching legal English to Russian learners. To reach the aim, the authors selected legal English texts typical for early stages of teaching taking into account general language (including lexical frequency, density, and complexity) and thematic complexity. The cases of lexical and semantic interference included graphic and/or pronunciation similarity. The lexis so identified included specific and interdisciplinary, economic and business terms, and common vocabulary. It was analysed at the level of dictionary entries and in the context of texts selected for the course of legal English. At the level of dictionary meanings, the majority of the lexis is synonymic diaparonyms, there are a few cases of distant diaparonyms and a very limited number of contact ones. Types of diaparonyms revealed in the context of law are different from those at the level of dictionary entries. Similarly, the majority of cases are synonymic; however, there are more contact and distant ones. The authors project that in some cases one can anticipate interference when translating both or only from Russian, or from English, and there could be instances of positive interference as well. Generally, the authors found several typical situations: when words act as synonymic diaparonyms in plain language, but in legal language contexts there are no overlapping meanings; when meanings are overlapping, but the lexical unit cannot be used in legal contexts due to its stylistic or structural inappropriateness, e.g. collocation inappropriateness; when words are diaparonyms in plain language, but in legal context there is no negative interference; and when in both plain and legal language the meanings are similar. The article concludes with pedagogical recommendations for ESP teachers. They include introduction of a propedeutics stage prior to formal ESP teaching aimed at informing learners of potential lexical and semantic difficulties, shaping vocabulary acquisition strategies of working, in particular the initial semantization, identification of words' meanings in context. It is also recommended to form students' metacognitive knowledge that is required to analyse and describe lexis, as well as to develop skills of using relevant sources and those of self-evaluation.

Keywords

Authors

References