Продвинутый английский язык для гуманитарных направлений = Advanced English for Humanities
English Language and Anglophone Literatures Today (3): Book of Abstracts
The volume comprises research articles prepared on basis of presentations for two conference held in Narva College of the University of Tartu in 2012. The large scope of articles attracts wider audience interested in border and English studies. The first part (Crossing Borders: Dialogue of Languages and Cultures) consists of articles which are united under three topics: History of Evolvement of Border Regions; Identity Issues of the Population of Border Regions; and Multicultural Education and Practices of Educational Institutions of Border Regions . The second part (Teaching English and Teaching in English) includes articles which discuss problems and issues of content and language integrated learning, teacher education in the multilingual world and English language teaching and learning. This structure allows to reach a wider scientific audience to acquaint it with good practices and interdisciplinary research on border issues in various areas from the historical, cultural, educational and linguistic perspectives.
The article considers methods to manage mixed ability groups. It point at advantages and disadvantages of each way of teaching. However, to achieve any results a method should be chosen in combination with open discussions on the lesson.
This paper focuses on the cognitive foundation of the semantics of English adjectives that denote mental and moral characteristics of human beings. Research into these adjectives seems a challenging task because they denote abstract qualities that cannot be perceived through vision, hearing, or touch; and here a question arises: How are abstract qualities interpreted in English encoded through adjectives? To answer it, this study follows the idea of two-level semantics, i.e. word semantics is treated as a two-level phenomenon that comprises the semantic (external) level and the conceptual (deep) one. This study is the first to address adjectival semantics from this perspective. Here a novel approach to revealing the cognitive foundation of adjectives is introduced: given that adjectives originated from old syncretic items and a word cognitive model forms at the moment of word creation, cognitive models underlying adjectives' semantics are unearthed via analysis of their etymological data. Our contribution is two-fold. First, the approach has revealed that the image schema CONTAINER guides semantics of an array of various adjectives independent of their morphemic structure or date of origin. The examples demonstrate that abstract human qualities are interpreted via the following container features: boundary, container substance, size, hardness/softness of a container shell, etc. The semantics of affixed or compound adjectives appear to stem from the integration of concepts represented by an affix and a root or two roots, respectively. Second, the findings show that the value given to every container feature appears to predetermine the evaluation conveyed by an adjective. Container features tend to possess ambivalent value, realizing the positive or negative one due to the interaction with a frame in which the CONTAINER is incorporated, therefore the same polysemantic adjective may develop both positive and negative meanings. To reveal the whole inventory of cognitive models that govern adjectival semantics in English, further research needs to be conducted.
This study addresses the metaphoric representation of intercultural communication (IC) based on English and Russian academic texts. Conceptual metaphor analysis results present “overlapping” target areas e.g. communication, language, and culture. Another interrelated sourcing area is spatial metaphor. The closest conversion is subject and premise metaphors, and the main divergence relates to metaphors of space and time. The data show that IC theories in English and Russian attribute common meanings to subject and object as well as man-made construction. Peripheral divergence in categorization of space and time is due to linguistic differences and an archetype perception of the immediate environment.