- Email: [email protected]
Gender Perspectives on Vocabulary in Foreign and Second Languages
Book reviews / System 40 (2012) 161e174
167
complementary linguistic and gestural metaphors can work together to convey different yet coherent perspectives on the topic being discussed. Chapters 12e15 draw together the various threads of the book and provide a summary of ‘good practice’ in metaphor research as well providing two case studies of metaphor research. In Chapter 12, Low and Todd provide a comprehensive list of ‘issues to consider’ when conducting metaphor research which should serve as a starting point for anyone conducting metaphor research. In Chapter 13, Rivers demonstrates a number of the approaches and issues that have been discussed in the book in her description of her doctoral study, which focuses on the metaphorical content of online learning discussions. In Chapter 14, Cameron does the same through her case study on the role of metaphor in examining public perceptions of terrorism. In Chapter 15, Cameron and Maslen close the book with a forward-looking conclusion, inciting researchers to attend more, in future, to the multimodal nature of metaphor. All in all, this volume provides an excellent introduction for novice metaphor researchers (including researchers who may have come from disciplines outside those conventionally associated with metaphor), on how to conduct metaphor research. Extensive data sets are provided in the appendices that allow the reader to try out some of the forms of metaphor analysis for themselves. All of the studies referred to have a practical focus as well as making theoretical contributions to the field of metaphor studies. The two case studies at the end of the book provide practical exemplifications of many of the methodologies that have been introduced. I would recommend this book as an excellent starting point to anyone embarking upon an academic career in metaphor studies. Jeannette Littlemore Centre for English Language Studies, School of English, Drama, American and Canadian Studies, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom E-mail address: [email protected] doi:10.1016/j.system.2011.12.002
Gender Perspectives on Vocabulary in Foreign and Second Languages, Rosa Marı´a Jime´nez Catala´n (Ed.). Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke (2010). xix þ 269 pp. As a timely gap-filling collection of articles concerning the perspective of gender and language education, or more particularly the acquisition, development, production, and teaching of vocabulary, mainly from Spanish context, Gender Perspectives on Vocabulary in Foreign and Second Languages reflects how researchers value vocabulary in language learning and, thus, investigate it from various perspectives across the globe. Jane Sunderland, in Introduction, ‘Theorizing gender perspectives in foreign and second language learning,’ traces gender and language education to modern women’s movement (Schmitz, 1975), dividing it into three broad areas: (a) the subject matter, second or foreign language in question with possible gender variation, (b) learning and teaching processes, e.g. attitude, style, strategies, beliefs, and so on, and (c) classroom materials; gender representation in different roles, like social and discourse. For Sunderland, gender is an issue in SLA and, particularly in vocabulary acquisition, while in contrast to such variables as age, motivation, learning style, and attitude it is neglected in the field. In the research on gender and vocabulary acquisition, gender is understood as ‘sex’ and studied with varied results, but not theorized further. Sunderland then tries to conceptualize the studies in this collection. The studies are presented in two parts. Part 1 with six chapters concerns ‘Gender tendencies in lexical acquisition, development, and use’. Cindy Brantmeier in ‘More than words: Inferential and incorrect units recalled’ reconsiders, with richer discussion, a series of her earlier scholarly studies, mainly Brantmeier (2003). She finds that the variables gender and passage content affected the literal idea units recalled of the texts, but not the correct inferential ideas drawn. These variables never affected the incorrect ideas recalled from the texts. Brantmeier’s meticulous study is more related to gender and L2 reading comprehension, but not to vocabulary.
168
Book reviews / System 40 (2012) 161e174
‘Gender and L1 influence on EFL learners’ lexicon’ by Mercedes Dı´ez Prados investigates the composition corpus produced by university student subpopulations (Spanish, French or Italian versus German, Dutch or Swedish) and contrasts the results with that of English native speakers of equivalent sociolinguistic characteristics. Generally, the findings on lexical variation, lexical density, and certainty and doubt adverbs favored the gender variable (female versus male) more than the language variable (Romance versus Germanic languages) or being a native speaker versus a learner of English. Focusing on productive use of vocabulary within the context of error analysis in ‘Exploring the role of gender in lexical creations’, Marı´a Pilar Agustı´n Llach shows that, in compositions written by Spanish intermediate (secondary) EFL learners, there is a gender similarity regarding the quantity and type of lexical items invented: foreignizing, literal translation, word coinage, and ambiguous lexical inventions. These similar mechanisms are accounted for based on social or psychosocial factors, not cognitive processes. Studying second-grade secondary school Spanish EFL learners (139 boys and 111 girls), Almudena Ferna´ndez Fontecha in ‘Gender and motivation in EFL vocabulary production’ shows female advantage both in EFL vocabulary production and motivation toward EFL. Both males and females showed extrinsic motivation more than intrinsic motivation, with the latter being statistically significant only for females. Thus, intrinsic motivation predicts more EFL vocabulary achievement. However, it is acknowledged that, in such studies, biological, cognitive, and sociocultural factors, task type, status of the language within community, and so on might affect the outcomes. Chapter 5 ‘Gender tendencies in EFL across vocabulary tests’ by the editor, Jime´nez Catala´n, tries to determine whether variation is observed in the performance of Spanish EFL learners (males and females) across different tests, i.e. multiple-choice tests including the 1000 Word Test (WT) and the 2000 word frequency band from Vocabulary Levels Test (VLT), cue word test, and composition test. Their performance varies across tests but it is equal on the two receptive multiple-choice tests. As for the productive vocabulary tests, there are significant differential patterns in vocabulary performance on a composition and a cue word test. There is also a positive correlation among the four tests under study. Results are interpreted cautiously “since the means obtained for each test cannot be compared on equal terms (p. 128)”. Following Jime´nez who assumes a task effect on girls’ and boys’ vocabulary performance, Soraya Moreno Espinosa describes and analyses ‘Boys’ and girls’ L2 word associations’ in Chapter 6. Studying the characteristics of the productive lexical profile of 225 Spanish EFL learners of primary education (4th, 5th, and 6th grades) who answered Lex30 (Meara and Fitzpatrick, 2000), she reports that, in general, there are no significant differences between males and females regarding the number of types and tokens as well on the basis of Lex30 scores throughout the three-year period. While Part 1 considers relationships between gender and some aspect of vocabulary education, Part 2 with four chapters deals with ‘Gendered words: Representation and identities’. Gender is thus “conceptualized as an idea, often shown through representation” (p. 14). Allyson Jule in Chapter 7, ‘A case study of Mrs Smith’s words and her quiet girls,’ explores how the words of a female language teacher might impact on a consistent silence among nine girls in a mixed ESL classroom and accounts for this lack of linguistic space used by the girls through examining the recurrent discourse patterns; mostly ignoring, interacting through correction, and dismissing girls, among others. Nonetheless, Jule’s valuable study might fall beyond the scope of this volume. ‘Gender identity in words for professional titles in textbooks’ by Mercedes Bengoechea and Jose´ Simo´n tackles how ELE (Spanish as a Foreign Language) materials have approached gender and occupations in the last decade and how teachers’ textbooks depict this debate, i.e. lexicon concerning gender professional identities. With a corpus of 60 ELE books, the authors find that, despite non-sexist linguistic policies within the last decade and due to the influence of the Spanish Academy, (a) male jobs normally precede female jobs in number, priority, and visibility, and (b) the debate is utterly ignored, with the publishers and authors keeping the existing sociolinguistic discourses absent. Longitudinally studying 204 Spanish EFL students who complete the same EFL composition task with an interval of three years, Julieta Ojeda Alba, in ‘Humour, vocabulary and individuality in an EFL task,’ demonstrates that primary students, aged 10, lightly use humor, as represented in their lexical use. However, at the age of around 13 (the first year of secondary school), the same students implement humor more widely to accomplish various purposes and functions. Males use far more humor than females, with males’ humorous endeavors being comparable in both cases. The researcher “assumes that gender is the variable accountable for the differences found” (p. 230) in the corpus and argues that humor has implications for EFL classroom.
Book reviews / System 40 (2012) 161e174
169
Finally, in ‘Lexical encoding of gender relations and identities’, Antonio Garcı´a Go´mez explores how trainee primary English teachers’ discursive construction of gender relations and identities is sustained by particular uses of the lexicon, when creating advertisements for boys’, girls’, and unisex toys. Through appraisal analysis (to cite just Martin and White, 2005) conducted, we understand that these Spanish undergraduates’ lexical choices in creating toy advertisements present negative and distorted images of gender roles. Furthermore, gender-biased attitudes, revealed in the participants’ vocabulary, are still in their minds at the beginning of the 21st century. Garcı´a Go´mez, like some other like-minded researchers, attributes this inequality mainly to traditional discourses and dominant patriarchal society, and hardly to any other possible factor at work, despite the complexity of gender equality. Apparently, many researchers are enthusiastic in transforming patriarchal society to gender equality. However, this enthusiasm might inadvertently lead them to come to gender-biased conclusions in their research as well. Garcı´a Go´mez’ conclusion in this chapter, and probably that of many others, might suggest it. The volume does not seem to picture gender and vocabulary coherently and systematically. However, as a pioneering attempt, it gives a clear and neat structure to the less-organized studies done in the field. Furthermore, despite having a clear and thoughtful lead-in as the introductory chapter, the volume would have served its readers more had it contained a concluding chapter wherein the editor would sum up the 10 contributions of the volume for the readers (a) to further consolidate the ideas presented, (b) to evaluate the studies, (c) to indicate some possible threads running through them, (d) to outline the direction in which the contemporary researchers are generally moving, and (e) to suggest possible avenues for further research from her own perspective. Finally, the book needs another round of editing and proofreading to further facilitate the easy processing of information by the readers without stumbling. Nevertheless, the comments above, intended to add to the richness of the contents, should not devalue the innovation of the volume in this area, care and rigor in methodology and academic work in conducting any individual work presented, and the brave and pioneering work of the editor. The writing throughout was reader-friendly, clear, easy to follow, and fluid. As concluding remarks, Gender Perspectives on Vocabulary in Foreign and Second Languages truly attempts to deal with a gap and can thus be seen as a pioneering collection of scholarly articles with possible implications for language learning in general and vocabulary studies in particular. Therefore, we can recommend it to the graduate students in SLA, the interested researchers in language learning as well as gender-related studies, and responsible teachers striving to teach their students and serve their society in an informed and fair manner. References Brantmeier, C., 2003. Does gender make a difference? Passage content and comprehension in second language reading. Reading in a Foreign Language 15, 1e27. Martin, J.R., White, P.R.R., 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan, London and New York. Meara, P., Fitzpatrick, T., 2000. Lex30: an improved method of assessing productive vocabulary in an L2. System 28, 19e30. Schmitz, B., 1975. Sexism in French language textbooks. In: Robert, C., Lafayette (Eds.), The Cultural Revolution in Foreign Language Teaching. National Textbooks Co, Skokie, IL.
Is’haaq Akbarian University of Qom, Department of English Language and Literature, Old Isfahan Road, Qom, Iran E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] doi:10.1016/j.system.2011.12.001
The Multiliteracies Classroom, Kathy Ann Mills, Multilingual Matters, Bristol (2010). xv þ 152 pp. As Kathy Mills explains in the introduction to The Multiliteracies Classroom, the term “multiliteracies” was first used by the group of literacy experts known as the New London Group (1996, 2000), whose approach to literacy aims at broadening the pedagogical focus from linguistics to include other aspects present in current societies. Their work is
167
complementary linguistic and gestural metaphors can work together to convey different yet coherent perspectives on the topic being discussed. Chapters 12e15 draw together the various threads of the book and provide a summary of ‘good practice’ in metaphor research as well providing two case studies of metaphor research. In Chapter 12, Low and Todd provide a comprehensive list of ‘issues to consider’ when conducting metaphor research which should serve as a starting point for anyone conducting metaphor research. In Chapter 13, Rivers demonstrates a number of the approaches and issues that have been discussed in the book in her description of her doctoral study, which focuses on the metaphorical content of online learning discussions. In Chapter 14, Cameron does the same through her case study on the role of metaphor in examining public perceptions of terrorism. In Chapter 15, Cameron and Maslen close the book with a forward-looking conclusion, inciting researchers to attend more, in future, to the multimodal nature of metaphor. All in all, this volume provides an excellent introduction for novice metaphor researchers (including researchers who may have come from disciplines outside those conventionally associated with metaphor), on how to conduct metaphor research. Extensive data sets are provided in the appendices that allow the reader to try out some of the forms of metaphor analysis for themselves. All of the studies referred to have a practical focus as well as making theoretical contributions to the field of metaphor studies. The two case studies at the end of the book provide practical exemplifications of many of the methodologies that have been introduced. I would recommend this book as an excellent starting point to anyone embarking upon an academic career in metaphor studies. Jeannette Littlemore Centre for English Language Studies, School of English, Drama, American and Canadian Studies, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom E-mail address: [email protected] doi:10.1016/j.system.2011.12.002
Gender Perspectives on Vocabulary in Foreign and Second Languages, Rosa Marı´a Jime´nez Catala´n (Ed.). Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke (2010). xix þ 269 pp. As a timely gap-filling collection of articles concerning the perspective of gender and language education, or more particularly the acquisition, development, production, and teaching of vocabulary, mainly from Spanish context, Gender Perspectives on Vocabulary in Foreign and Second Languages reflects how researchers value vocabulary in language learning and, thus, investigate it from various perspectives across the globe. Jane Sunderland, in Introduction, ‘Theorizing gender perspectives in foreign and second language learning,’ traces gender and language education to modern women’s movement (Schmitz, 1975), dividing it into three broad areas: (a) the subject matter, second or foreign language in question with possible gender variation, (b) learning and teaching processes, e.g. attitude, style, strategies, beliefs, and so on, and (c) classroom materials; gender representation in different roles, like social and discourse. For Sunderland, gender is an issue in SLA and, particularly in vocabulary acquisition, while in contrast to such variables as age, motivation, learning style, and attitude it is neglected in the field. In the research on gender and vocabulary acquisition, gender is understood as ‘sex’ and studied with varied results, but not theorized further. Sunderland then tries to conceptualize the studies in this collection. The studies are presented in two parts. Part 1 with six chapters concerns ‘Gender tendencies in lexical acquisition, development, and use’. Cindy Brantmeier in ‘More than words: Inferential and incorrect units recalled’ reconsiders, with richer discussion, a series of her earlier scholarly studies, mainly Brantmeier (2003). She finds that the variables gender and passage content affected the literal idea units recalled of the texts, but not the correct inferential ideas drawn. These variables never affected the incorrect ideas recalled from the texts. Brantmeier’s meticulous study is more related to gender and L2 reading comprehension, but not to vocabulary.
168
Book reviews / System 40 (2012) 161e174
‘Gender and L1 influence on EFL learners’ lexicon’ by Mercedes Dı´ez Prados investigates the composition corpus produced by university student subpopulations (Spanish, French or Italian versus German, Dutch or Swedish) and contrasts the results with that of English native speakers of equivalent sociolinguistic characteristics. Generally, the findings on lexical variation, lexical density, and certainty and doubt adverbs favored the gender variable (female versus male) more than the language variable (Romance versus Germanic languages) or being a native speaker versus a learner of English. Focusing on productive use of vocabulary within the context of error analysis in ‘Exploring the role of gender in lexical creations’, Marı´a Pilar Agustı´n Llach shows that, in compositions written by Spanish intermediate (secondary) EFL learners, there is a gender similarity regarding the quantity and type of lexical items invented: foreignizing, literal translation, word coinage, and ambiguous lexical inventions. These similar mechanisms are accounted for based on social or psychosocial factors, not cognitive processes. Studying second-grade secondary school Spanish EFL learners (139 boys and 111 girls), Almudena Ferna´ndez Fontecha in ‘Gender and motivation in EFL vocabulary production’ shows female advantage both in EFL vocabulary production and motivation toward EFL. Both males and females showed extrinsic motivation more than intrinsic motivation, with the latter being statistically significant only for females. Thus, intrinsic motivation predicts more EFL vocabulary achievement. However, it is acknowledged that, in such studies, biological, cognitive, and sociocultural factors, task type, status of the language within community, and so on might affect the outcomes. Chapter 5 ‘Gender tendencies in EFL across vocabulary tests’ by the editor, Jime´nez Catala´n, tries to determine whether variation is observed in the performance of Spanish EFL learners (males and females) across different tests, i.e. multiple-choice tests including the 1000 Word Test (WT) and the 2000 word frequency band from Vocabulary Levels Test (VLT), cue word test, and composition test. Their performance varies across tests but it is equal on the two receptive multiple-choice tests. As for the productive vocabulary tests, there are significant differential patterns in vocabulary performance on a composition and a cue word test. There is also a positive correlation among the four tests under study. Results are interpreted cautiously “since the means obtained for each test cannot be compared on equal terms (p. 128)”. Following Jime´nez who assumes a task effect on girls’ and boys’ vocabulary performance, Soraya Moreno Espinosa describes and analyses ‘Boys’ and girls’ L2 word associations’ in Chapter 6. Studying the characteristics of the productive lexical profile of 225 Spanish EFL learners of primary education (4th, 5th, and 6th grades) who answered Lex30 (Meara and Fitzpatrick, 2000), she reports that, in general, there are no significant differences between males and females regarding the number of types and tokens as well on the basis of Lex30 scores throughout the three-year period. While Part 1 considers relationships between gender and some aspect of vocabulary education, Part 2 with four chapters deals with ‘Gendered words: Representation and identities’. Gender is thus “conceptualized as an idea, often shown through representation” (p. 14). Allyson Jule in Chapter 7, ‘A case study of Mrs Smith’s words and her quiet girls,’ explores how the words of a female language teacher might impact on a consistent silence among nine girls in a mixed ESL classroom and accounts for this lack of linguistic space used by the girls through examining the recurrent discourse patterns; mostly ignoring, interacting through correction, and dismissing girls, among others. Nonetheless, Jule’s valuable study might fall beyond the scope of this volume. ‘Gender identity in words for professional titles in textbooks’ by Mercedes Bengoechea and Jose´ Simo´n tackles how ELE (Spanish as a Foreign Language) materials have approached gender and occupations in the last decade and how teachers’ textbooks depict this debate, i.e. lexicon concerning gender professional identities. With a corpus of 60 ELE books, the authors find that, despite non-sexist linguistic policies within the last decade and due to the influence of the Spanish Academy, (a) male jobs normally precede female jobs in number, priority, and visibility, and (b) the debate is utterly ignored, with the publishers and authors keeping the existing sociolinguistic discourses absent. Longitudinally studying 204 Spanish EFL students who complete the same EFL composition task with an interval of three years, Julieta Ojeda Alba, in ‘Humour, vocabulary and individuality in an EFL task,’ demonstrates that primary students, aged 10, lightly use humor, as represented in their lexical use. However, at the age of around 13 (the first year of secondary school), the same students implement humor more widely to accomplish various purposes and functions. Males use far more humor than females, with males’ humorous endeavors being comparable in both cases. The researcher “assumes that gender is the variable accountable for the differences found” (p. 230) in the corpus and argues that humor has implications for EFL classroom.
Book reviews / System 40 (2012) 161e174
169
Finally, in ‘Lexical encoding of gender relations and identities’, Antonio Garcı´a Go´mez explores how trainee primary English teachers’ discursive construction of gender relations and identities is sustained by particular uses of the lexicon, when creating advertisements for boys’, girls’, and unisex toys. Through appraisal analysis (to cite just Martin and White, 2005) conducted, we understand that these Spanish undergraduates’ lexical choices in creating toy advertisements present negative and distorted images of gender roles. Furthermore, gender-biased attitudes, revealed in the participants’ vocabulary, are still in their minds at the beginning of the 21st century. Garcı´a Go´mez, like some other like-minded researchers, attributes this inequality mainly to traditional discourses and dominant patriarchal society, and hardly to any other possible factor at work, despite the complexity of gender equality. Apparently, many researchers are enthusiastic in transforming patriarchal society to gender equality. However, this enthusiasm might inadvertently lead them to come to gender-biased conclusions in their research as well. Garcı´a Go´mez’ conclusion in this chapter, and probably that of many others, might suggest it. The volume does not seem to picture gender and vocabulary coherently and systematically. However, as a pioneering attempt, it gives a clear and neat structure to the less-organized studies done in the field. Furthermore, despite having a clear and thoughtful lead-in as the introductory chapter, the volume would have served its readers more had it contained a concluding chapter wherein the editor would sum up the 10 contributions of the volume for the readers (a) to further consolidate the ideas presented, (b) to evaluate the studies, (c) to indicate some possible threads running through them, (d) to outline the direction in which the contemporary researchers are generally moving, and (e) to suggest possible avenues for further research from her own perspective. Finally, the book needs another round of editing and proofreading to further facilitate the easy processing of information by the readers without stumbling. Nevertheless, the comments above, intended to add to the richness of the contents, should not devalue the innovation of the volume in this area, care and rigor in methodology and academic work in conducting any individual work presented, and the brave and pioneering work of the editor. The writing throughout was reader-friendly, clear, easy to follow, and fluid. As concluding remarks, Gender Perspectives on Vocabulary in Foreign and Second Languages truly attempts to deal with a gap and can thus be seen as a pioneering collection of scholarly articles with possible implications for language learning in general and vocabulary studies in particular. Therefore, we can recommend it to the graduate students in SLA, the interested researchers in language learning as well as gender-related studies, and responsible teachers striving to teach their students and serve their society in an informed and fair manner. References Brantmeier, C., 2003. Does gender make a difference? Passage content and comprehension in second language reading. Reading in a Foreign Language 15, 1e27. Martin, J.R., White, P.R.R., 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan, London and New York. Meara, P., Fitzpatrick, T., 2000. Lex30: an improved method of assessing productive vocabulary in an L2. System 28, 19e30. Schmitz, B., 1975. Sexism in French language textbooks. In: Robert, C., Lafayette (Eds.), The Cultural Revolution in Foreign Language Teaching. National Textbooks Co, Skokie, IL.
Is’haaq Akbarian University of Qom, Department of English Language and Literature, Old Isfahan Road, Qom, Iran E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] doi:10.1016/j.system.2011.12.001
The Multiliteracies Classroom, Kathy Ann Mills, Multilingual Matters, Bristol (2010). xv þ 152 pp. As Kathy Mills explains in the introduction to The Multiliteracies Classroom, the term “multiliteracies” was first used by the group of literacy experts known as the New London Group (1996, 2000), whose approach to literacy aims at broadening the pedagogical focus from linguistics to include other aspects present in current societies. Their work is