Teacher Discussion Forums

Background:

"Contextual vocabulary acquisition (CVA) is the active, deliberate acquisition of a meaning for a word in a text by
reasoning from context, where “context” includes: (1) the reader’s “internalization” of the surrounding text, i.e., the
reader’s “mental model” of the word’s “textual context” (or “co-text”: Brown & Yule 1983: 46–50, citing Halliday;
Haastrup 1991) integrated with (2) the reader’s prior knowledge (including (a) the reader’s knowledge of language
and (b) meaning hypotheses developed by the reader from prior encounters with the word), but it excludes (3) external
sources of help such as dictionaries or people."

http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~rapaport/Papers/paris.pdf
.............

To NES and NNES. Can you take a look at this and tell me what you think? How does a reader's PK affect the intended meaning of a word, expression, or other? How does it affect the intended cotext (i.e. the textual context)

"Robin" as cotext. How the reader's PK (prior knowledge) can affect the reception of intended cotext.

"Robin decided to wake early that morning. The weather was beautiful, and therefore sleep was not an option. She put on her nightgown and went downstairs to let the cat in."

Did you halt, even for a second, when you came to the pronoun above?

How about here?

"Robin decided to wake early that morning. The weather was beautiful, and therefore sleep was not an option. He shook his head, stretched his eyes wide and leapt onto a nearby branch to better observe her domain.

What happened when you came to the word "leapt" and then the pronoun "her"?

Thanks.

The second example is as twee as it's artificial. Also it is impossible to know who the 'He' and the 'her' refer to. If you miss out what comes before how can we decide what the pronouns refer back to?

Yes, one stops at 'she'. The reason has been clearly explained by Pinker, either in the 'Language Instinct' or in 'Words and Rules'. When you're reading you choose a particular branching before you reach subsequent words; if you have chosen wrong then you go back and revise the prediction. You are not keeping all alternatives in your head and then eliminating them, contrary to what many previously believed.

In the first sentence many of us take 'Robin' to be male. That scheme leaves the pronoun 'she' without a referent, and therefore we have to pause and go back to revise our interpretation to find the referent.

Here's another:

"Sat on the sofa" as cotext. Here's another situation where a reader's PK (prior knowledge) can have an effect upon the interpretation of a text.

"Angry, Mr Patel pushed straight into the room and sat bolt upright in the only available place - the sofa - leaving no room for poor Mrs Patel to rest her weary legs."

"Angry, Brad pushed straight into the room and sat bolt upright in the only available place - the sofa. Janice plonked herself on the sofa too, but at some distance from Brad."

Nice puzzle? What do you think?

Stephen Jones wrote:The second example is as twee as it's artificial. Also it is impossible to know who the 'He' and the 'her' refer to. If you miss out what comes before how can we decide what the pronouns refer back to?

Yes, one stops at 'she'. The reason has been clearly explained by Pinker, either in the 'Language Instinct' or in 'Words and Rules'. When you're reading you choose a particular branching before you reach subsequent words; if you have chosen wrong then you go back and revise the prediction. You are not keeping all alternatives in your head and then eliminating them, contrary to what many previously believed.

In the first sentence many of us take 'Robin' to be male. That scheme leaves the pronoun 'she' without a referent, and therefore we have to pause and go back to revise our interpretation to find the referent.

Well answered, Stephen. Even though I agree with what you say above, If you don't mind, I'd like to get a few more opinions before I respond. Is that OK?

Stephen Jones wrote:The second example is as twee as it's artificial. Also it is impossible to know who the 'He' and the 'her' refer to. If you miss out what comes before how can we decide what the pronouns refer back to?

Just one question. What effect if any does the italicising of "her" have upon you here?

He shook his head, stretched his eyes wide and leapt onto a nearby branch to better observe her domain.

I though the italicizing was done by you

The italicizing would change the intonation. I would hear an intonation expressing scepticism as to the property rights of the mythical 'her'. Perhaps the bird is in a lady's back garden and has Rousseuish ideas about property, or maybe the 'her' is a robinette and he is the victim of an avian feminazi who.

"Angry, Mr Patel pushed straight into the room and sat bolt upright in the only available place - the sofa - leaving no room for poor Mrs Patel to rest her weary legs."

"Angry, Brad pushed straight into the room and sat bolt upright in the only available place - the sofa. Janice plonked herself on the sofa too, but at some distance from Brad."

Not enough information. Is Mrs. Patel using the sofa as a poof, , is she lying on the sofa, is she standing but in the habit of doing one or both of the other two prior things but has now been prevented? Is there anyone else on the sofa but Mr. Patel; perhaps Mrs. Patel entered behind him, carrying the shopping, only to find both children already on the sofa watching TV, the mother-in-law in the armchair, and her husband just having takent the only available seat.

Stephen Jones wrote:I though the italicizing was done by you

The italicizing would change the intonation. I would hear an intonation expressing scepticism as to the property rights of the mythical 'her'. Perhaps the bird is in a lady's back garden and has Rousseuish ideas about property, or maybe the 'her' is a robinette and he is the victim of an avian feminazi who.

<I though the italicizing was done by you >

It was... I wrote the text.

Love the rest. Spot on... though I was thinking more of girl robins than ladies in their gardens. That's PK (prior knowledge) I guess.

How about the "sofa" scenario?

This is a great discussion from you two. I'd love to be in there with you, but you're doing so well that my jumping in would only muddy it up. Stephen in particular is, as you say, M56, spot on with his comments. I fear this is not the kind of discussion that will foster heavy readership because there is, at least so far, no fireworks. But it is highly illuminating, and should be commended. That is my intention here.

Please keep going.

Larry Latham

LarryLatham wrote: I fear this is not the kind of discussion that will foster heavy readership because there is, at least so far, no fireworks.
Larry Latham

As you say, as yet.

Stephen Jones wrote:

"Angry, Mr Patel pushed straight into the room and sat bolt upright in the only available place - the sofa - leaving no room for poor Mrs Patel to rest her weary legs."

"Angry, Brad pushed straight into the room and sat bolt upright in the only available place - the sofa. Janice plonked herself on the sofa too, but at some distance from Brad."

Not enough information. Is Mrs. Patel using the sofa as a poof, , is she lying on the sofa, is she standing but in the habit of doing one or both of the other two prior things but has now been prevented? Is there anyone else on the sofa but Mr. Patel; perhaps Mrs. Patel entered behind him, carrying the shopping, only to find both children already on the sofa watching TV, the mother-in-law in the armchair, and her husband just having takent the only available seat.

It's lovely, innit, the way the mind takes flight? Thing is, for many Indian English speakers, a sofa can be just an armchair. Some Indian English speakers have PK (prior knowledge) of that fact, and so interpret the text in the way it was intended to be. Those of us who have no PK on that, might halt at the "leaving no room for Mrs Patel" and interpret the context in another way.

Cotext and PK often go hand-in-hand.