Hostname: page-component-5d59c44645-kw98b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-02-28T23:57:35.459Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Language learner perspectives on the functionality and use of electronic language dictionaries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2015

Mike Levy
Affiliation:
The University of Queensland, School of Languages and Comparative Cultural Studies, 3rd Floor, Gordon Greenwood Building, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, 4072, Australia (m.levy@uq.edu.au)
Caroline Steel
Affiliation:
La Trobe University, La Trobe Learning & Teaching, Cnr Plenty Road and Kingsbury Drive, Melbourne, 3086, Australia (c.steel@latrobe.edu.au)

Abstract

This paper investigates the extent of electronic dictionary use by language learners in an Australian university. All students in the study are formally enrolled in language courses across ten languages at first, second or third year level. The study places a particular emphasis on gauging student perceptions of the beneficial aspects of electronic dictionaries as judged by learners themselves in circumstances where they are able to act independently. As these benefits are often described in terms of usability and functionality, these particular terms are defined and introduced in the literature review, and then later they are employed to help structure and describe the results.

The arguments for the discussion are supported by the use of empirical data taken from a large-scale survey conducted in 2011 (n=587) where comments from students were obtained on why and how dictionary-type resources were accessed and used (see also Steel & Levy, 2013). The paper restricts itself to the quantitative and qualitative data gathered on mobile phones, translators, dictionaries and web conjugators and related items (e.g. discussion forums). The particular functions that students use and the ways in which they use them are described and categorised, with the discussion supported by student comments.

The data exhibits a remarkable range of resources available to students to look up unknown words or to see translations and, consequently, our understanding of what exactly an electronic dictionary might comprise is challenged. Many students’ comments demonstrate a sophistication and knowledge about the effective use of these dictionary tools together with a keen awareness of their limitations.

Type
Regular papers
Copyright
Copyright © European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cohen, A. D. and White, C. (2008) Language learners as informed consumers of language instruction. In: Stavans, A. and Kupperberg, I. (eds.), Studies in language and language education. Jerusalem, Israel: The Hebrew University Magnes Press, 185205.Google Scholar
Dziemianko, A. (2012a) On the use (fullness) of paper and electronic dictionaries. In: Granger, S. and Paquot, M. (eds.), Electronic Lexicography. Oxford: Oxford Scholarship Online, 319342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dziemianko, A. (2012b) Why one and two do not make three: Dictionary form revisited. Lexikos, 22: 195216.Google Scholar
Granger, S. (2012a) How can we make electronic dictionaries more effective? In: Granger, S. and Paquot, M. (eds.), Electronic Lexicography. Oxford: Oxford Scholarship Online, 343362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granger, S. (2012b) Online dictionary use: Key findings from an empirical research project. In: Granger, S. and Paquot, M. (eds.), Electronic Lexicography. Oxford: Oxford Scholarship Online, 426458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granger, S. and Paquot, M. (2012) Electronic Lexicography. Oxford: Oxford Scholarship Online.Google Scholar
Hamel, M-J. (2012) Testing aspects of the usability of an online learner dictionary prototype: A product- and process-oriented study. Computer-Assisted Language Learning 25(4): 339365.Google Scholar
Hamel, M-J. and Caws, C. (2010) Usability tests in CALL development: Pilot studies in the context of the Dire autrement and Francotoile Projects. CALICO Journal, 27(3): 491504.Google Scholar
Hanks, P. (1987) Definitions and explanations. In: Sinclair, J. (ed.), Looking up: an account of the COBUILD Project in lexical computing. Collins: London, 116136.Google Scholar
Humblé, P. (2001) Dictionaries and language learners. Haag & Herchen Verlag: Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
Krishnamurthy, R. (1987) The process of compilation. In: Sinclair, J. (ed.), Looking up: an account of the COBUILD Project in lexical computing. Collins: London, 6285.Google Scholar
McGrenere, J. and Ho, W. (2000) Affordances: Clarifying and evolving a concept. Graphics Interface, 2000: 179186.Google Scholar
Loucky, J. (2010) Comparing electronic dictionary functions and use. CALICO Journal, 28(1): 156174.Google Scholar
Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M. (1994) Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Nielsen, S. (2008) The effect of lexicographical information cost on dictionary making and use. Lexicos, 18: 170181.Google Scholar
Nogier, J. F. (2008) Ergonomie du logiciel et design web: Le manuel des interfaces utilisateur (4ème éd). Paris: Dunod.Google Scholar
Prichard, C. (2008) Evaluating L2 readers’ vocabulary strategies and dictionary use. Reading in a Foreign Language, 20(2): 216231.Google Scholar
Renouf, A. (1987) Moving on. In: Sinclair, J. (ed.), Looking up: an account of the COBUILD Project in lexical computing. Collins: London, 167178.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. (ed.) (1987a) Looking up: an account of the COBUILD Project in lexical computing. Collins: London.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. (1987b) Introduction. In: Sinclair, J. (ed.), Looking up: an account of the COBUILD Project in lexical computing. Collins: London, viiv.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. (1987c) Grammar in the dictionary. In: Sinclair, J. (ed.), Looking up: an account of the COBUILD Project in lexical computing. Collins: London, 104115.Google Scholar
Steel, C. and Levy, M. (2013) Language students and their technologies: charting the evolution 2006–2011. ReCALL, 25(3): 306320.Google Scholar
Tono, Y. (2011) Application of eye-tracking in EFL learners’ dictionary look-up process research. International Journal of Lexicography, 24(1): 124153.Google Scholar