CC BY
20DOI: 10.24412/2226-0773-10-7-939-949
On the experience of English e-learning terminology frame modeling
D.O. Ossokina¹, O. Smith²
¹Казахский университет международных отношений и мировых языков имени Абылай хана
Казахстан, 050022, г. Алматы, Муратбаева, д. 200
Kazakh Ablai khan university of international relations and world languages
Muratbaev str., 200 Almaty 050022 Kazakhstan
e-mail: [email protected]
²Университет Центрального Ланкашира
Престон, PR1 2HE, Ланкашир, Великобритания.
University of Central Lancashire
Preston, PR1 2HE, Lancashire, United Kingdom
e-mail: [email protected]
Ключевые слова: когнитивная лингвистика, концепция, фрейм, моделирование фрейма, слот, терминология, электронное обучение, термин.
Key words: cognitive linguistics, concept, frame, frame modeling, slot, terminology, e-learning, term.
Резюме: Данная статья посвящена описанию опыта моделирования фрейма терминологической системы электронного обучения. Для построения данной модели анализируется теория фреймов и применяется метод фреймового анализа терминологии электронного обучения. Фреймовое моделирование представляет собой способ взаимодействия и получения знаний о сущности, а ситуативная концептуализация включает представление о том, как сущности взаимодействуют друг с другом. Терминологическая система электронного обучения исследуется с точки зрения семантики фреймов, так как фрейм - это семантическая структура, в которой основной объем и содержание когнитивной структуры концентрируется в процессе ее вербализации. Таким образом, цель данного исследования заключается в построении фреймовой модели терминосистемы электронного обучения. Для реализации поставленной цели в данной работе решается ряд задач: выявление базовых концептов, лежащих в основе терминосистемы электронного образования, категоризация терминов согласно выявленным базовым принципам и построение фреймовой схемы всей изучаемой профессиональной сферы. Полагаем, что рассматриваемое фреймовое моделирование терминологической системы электронного обучения является эффективным инструментом упорядочивания терминологической системы и способом представления профессиональных знаний изучаемой области по следующим причинам. Фреймы, взятые как представления стереотипных знаний в формате заполненных слотов, могут действовать как модели определений, предлагая более последовательные и гибкие представления концептуальной структуры. Определения терминов можно рассматривать как представления минимальных знаний, которые являются контуром для каждой категории. Определения, как шаблон концептуального содержания, активируют более широкие концептуальные структуры в форме фреймов, которые раскрывают прототипную структуру концептуального описания объекта.
Abstract: This article describes the experience of modeling the frame of the e-learning terminology system. The theory of frames is analyzed to build this model, and the method of frame analysis of e-learning terminology is applied. Frame-based modeling is a way of interacting and gaining knowledge about an entity, while situational conceptualization involves understanding how entities interact with each other. The terminological system of e-learning is investigated from the point of view of the semantics of frames, since a frame is a semantic structure in which the bulk and content of the cognitive structure is concentrated in the process of its verbalization. Thus, the purpose of this study is to build a frame model for the e-learning terminology system. To achieve this goal, a number of objectives are realized in this research: identifying the basic concepts that underlie the terminology system of electronic education, categorizing terms according to the identified basic principles and constructing a frame scheme for the entire studied professional sphere. We believe that the considered frame modeling of the e-learning terminological system is an effective tool for systematize the terminological system and a way of presenting professional knowledge of the studied area for the following reasons. Frames, taken as representations of stereotyped knowledge in a filled-slot format, can act as definition models, offering more consistent and flexible representations of conceptual structure. The definitions of the terms can be considered as representations of the minimum knowledge that serve as an outline for each category. Definitions, as a template for conceptual content, activate broader conceptual frameworks in the form of frames that reveal the prototypical structure of the conceptual description of an object.
[Осокина D.O.1, Смит О.2 Об опыте моделирования фреймов терминологии электронного обучения английского языка]
Introduction
Within the framework of cognitive linguistics, all linguistic and speech phenomena are considered in the broad context of knowledge about the world, which is the result of human activity in all its diversity. Each lexical unit represents a significant layer of knowledge about the world, which is only partially conveyed by linguistic meanings. The bulk of knowledge about the world is stored in human memory in the form of cognitive models, scenarios, frames, schemes, propositions and similar structures. The experience of terminological work in recent years, both domestic and international, has shown that the optimal method for modeling terminological systems is the frame approach, which is based on linguistic and cognitive foundations, thereby reflecting the actually existing system of knowledge and their linguistic representation in this professional field. Thus, the professional area of knowledge, that is, the subject area, can be represented as a concept sphere with visualization in the form of a diagram or table.
Methodology
The methodology of this research includes observation, description, definitional analysis, quantitative material processing and frame modeling of the concept sphere. The purpose of this study is to reconstruct the frame model of the e-learning concept sphere. This goal assumes the issues such as the identification of basic concepts that underlie the fragmentation of the subject area of special knowledge. Highlighting basic features that form the basis for categorization criteria and building a frame scheme for the entire structure of the e-learning sphere as a whole.
Literature review
An increasing number of modern researchers use the frame as a tool for ordering the terminology system (Ryabko, 2003; Guseva, 2004; Nikonova, 2007; Razduev, 2013, etc.), understood as an organized set of terms in a certain area of knowledge. We believe that of all cognitive models, it is the frame that is most suitable for describing the structures of knowledge, verbalized in English terms in the sphere of e-learning. A frame is a loosely fixed structure that simulates a field of specialized knowledge and has a certain hierarchical structure, whereby sub frames, slots, and sub slots are connected using hyper hyponymic (generic) relationships (Boldyrev, 2002: 10-14; Kubryakova, 1997; Popova, Sternin, 2001; Novodranova, 1998: 13-16, 58-59; Manerko, 2003: 120-126; Faber 2009: 107-134; Faber, 2012, etc.). It is difficult to overestimate the importance of the concept sphere of e-learning in the life of human and mankind in general. Defining this concept sphere as a multi-level cognitive unit, we distinguish subordinate frames in its structure, guided by the natural sequence of the e-learning process.
The distribution of the material was based, first of all, on professional knowledge of this subject area. Further, the principles of categorization, specific for the scientific and technical sphere, were taken as a basis. An example of such categorization was a system of seven conceptual categories, clearly representing the "system of meanings of scientific and technical terminology": objects; processes; states; signs; quantities and units of measurement; sciences and industries; professions and occupations given in the work of T.L. Kandelaki (Kandelaki, 1997: 41). Then, based on the analysis of terms' definitions, various types of semantic relations were identified in accordance with the concept of frame modeling by P. Faber (Faber, 2005; 2014; Faber, León-Araúz, Reimerink, 2014).
Taking into account the blurred boundaries between the terms concept, frame, concept sphere, subframe, slot (terminal), caused largely by the confusion of several scientific paradigms, in this study, it was decided to use the term notion when it comes to the mental entity, the sign of which is the term; the essential features of the concept are reflected in the definition of the term. The term concept is used in this study when constructing and describing the frame structure of the e-learning domain as a meaningful unit of consciousness. The frame within which the concepts function is understood as “a structured unit of knowledge in which certain components and relations between them are distinguished; this is a kind of cognitive model that conveys knowledge and opinions about a certain situation or object” (Boldyrev, 2001: 29). The frame has a hierarchical structure and contains a set of subordinate subframes, which, in turn, consist of many slots (terminals) detailing individual aspects of the frame.
For further division of the selected frames into subframes, the definitions of terms were taken as a basis. As a result of their careful analysis, a list of semantic relations was formed, which made it possible to group terms based on the generality of the represented relations. The course of this stage of the research is based on the method of P. Faber used in the study of environmental terminology on the basis of the concept of FBT developed by the scientist and her school - “Frame-based terminology” (Faber, 2005; 2012; 2014), and also, in many respects similar to the principles of categorization ecological terminology "EcoLexicon" (ecolexicon.ugr.es) in the form of a systemic multilingual terminological knowledge base on ecology, the concepts of which are interrelated and highlighted on the basis of the realities of the professional sphere.
This theory has much in common with the approach of terminologist MT Cabre "Communicative Theory of Terminology" (Cabre, 1999), based on the study of terms in the context of professional communication. A distinctive feature of this approach is the study of terms in context, since the same terms in combination with different units of professional language can express different conceptual relationships. This theory emphasizes the importance of assimilating scientific and professional knowledge in a structured and systematic form.
Analyses and results
The material for this study was a terminological sample of 1600 units related to the e-learning sphere, compiled by continuous review of current professional articles in modern scientific periodicals and lexicographic sources. A detailed analysis of the used set of terms was previously presented in the study of e-learning terms meaning specialization (Ossokina, Murzalina, 2021).
As a result of the analysis of terms definitions and the allocation of basic concepts, the structure of knowledge, which are represented through the lexical units of the English terminological system of the sphere of e-learning, can be represented in the form of a frame model (Diagram 1).
We shall address the model in more detail. This model is a hierarchical structure, its blocks are filled with specific information related to e-learning, and the correlation of partial blocks of the frame model is determined by the conceptual structure of the term and, as a consequence, its place in the terminology system.
When considering the frame of the e-learning term system, its certain similarity with the frame structures of other terminological systems is obvious, in particular, in terms of vertical proliferation (species detailing) and horizontal proliferation (generic variety of concepts). A frame is one of the main forms of professional knowledge presentation, which gives a complete picture of e-learning existence as a professional sphere and its division into smaller spheres, branches and sub-branches, which make it possible to single out the main concepts, take a comprehensive look at this area of scientific knowledge.
The top of the model is the cell-name of the «E-learning» frame. The field of e-learning is quite complex and multifaceted and includes various sub-areas, therefore the frame of the e-learning term system also has a rather complex and branched structure. Seven subframes represent the second level of the frame structure:
«E-learning participants», «E-learning environment», «E-learning events», «E-learning principles», «E-learning management», «E-learning content» and «E-learning resources».
Let us consider the structure of the subframes above in more detail.
In general, the frame of the conceptual structure
«E-learning» we have constructed consists of eight sub frame structures and is a branched and developed structure in terms of content.
Each of the subframes that make up the overall model consists of at least two slots. As a result of analyzing a sample of English e-learning terminology, it was found that subframes have approximately the same number of slots, for example, two - «E-learning management»: «administrative», «instructional»; «E-learning content»: «curriculum», «elements». The rest of the sub frames have three slots in their structure.
The first sub frame «E-learning participants» includes information about users, students, teachers, administration, technical support specialists. The sub frame is represented by three slots: "users" (with the sub-slots "e-learner", "teaching staff"), "administration", "technical support specialists". It is united by the conceptual link "a person involved into the e-learning process" and has a rather branched structure. This sub frame is verbalized by 166 English terminological units (10.38% from overall number of terminological units in the field of e-learning sampled for the research). Among the most common terms, in our opinion, following should be noted: e-learning designer, content provider, course developer, e-learner, course mentor, e-lecturer etc.
The second sub frame «E-learning environment» includes information about educational institutions, organizations, platforms and systems that provide an opportunity for learning in an electronic environment. The sub frame is represented by three slots: «educational institutions», «virtual environments», «training organizations». This subframe is verbalized by 26 English terminological units (1.63%). Among the most common terms are: distance-delivery university, on-line institution, open universities, MOOCs, e-learning centers, e-learning platforms, corporate learning management systems, learning experience platforms, LMS etc.
The next sub frame «E-learning events» contains information about the types of educational and teaching activities, teacher's functions, student activities, organization of the educational process, control and assessment of knowledge and academic performance. In this sub frame, we have identified three first-order slots: «instructional events», «learning events» and also, «evaluation» with slots of the second order «diagnostics», «control of learning process» and «assessment», which in turn fall into sub slots: «methods», «means», «criteria», «functions», «goals». All the terms in this subsystem are characterized by the conceptual feature «educational event». This sub frame is verbalized by 512 English terminological units (32% of the total number). Among the most common terms, in our opinion, following should be noted: to monitor learning behavior, to assess performance, to assess students contributions, to moderate text-based synchronous discussions, to provide motivational support, to view learner reports, to launch a lesson, to tutor, to evaluate courses, to access recourses, to evaluate assignments, to measure performance, to check peer scores etc.
In the sub frame «E-learning principles» or concepts in the field of e-learning, three slots are identified: «e-learning approaches», « e-learning methods» and «e-learning standards». All terms verbalizing this sub frame are characterized by the presence of a conceptual attribute "theoretical principle". This sub frame is verbalized by 336 English terminological units, which is 21% of the total sample. For example, connected learning, collaborative learning, active learning, personalized learning, students engagement, reflexive teaching, blended training methods, team – based approach, project-based method etc.
The sub frame «E-learning management» includes two slots: «e-learning administration», «content management» and «knowledge management» united by the conceptual attribute «management of elements and resources of e-learning, organization, management and maintenance of electronic educational system» and has a fairly branched structure. This sub frame is verbalized by 160 English terminological units (10%). The most common terms, in our opinion, are: to enroll in online education, to cancel registration online, to manage enrollments, to update the content, to distribute educational, content, to modify learner information, to modify course websites, to store class materials, to deliver learning content, to store learning content, to delete users, to report information, to track information, to track student progress, to track record of success и т.д.
The next sub frame «E-learning content» includes terms and terminological phrases with the general conceptual attribute «digital information source». The sub frame is represented by two slots of the first order: «e-learning curriculum» and «e-learning elements» which in turn splits into slots of the second order «disciplines», «learning materials», «modules» and «courses», «programs», «activities» correspondently. This sub frame is verbalized by 208 English terminological units (13%). For example, module, multimedia module, e-learning module, Reusable Learning Object (RLO), sharable content object (SCO), learning object (LO), content, visual content, e-learning content, auditory content, digital content, educational content, electronic content, online supplements, real time database, learning information, learning resource, e-Learning resources, on-line material, webliography, public blog, online-course material, virtual exhibit и т.д.
The last analyzed sub frame «E-learning resources» includes information about the platform software, learning technologies, educational process management, and educational content development. This sub frame contains three slots of the first order: «technology resources», «information resources» and «financial resources». In turn, the slots «technology resources» and «information resources» are divided into slots of the second order: «equipment», «software», «applications», «tools» and «types of information resources» respectively. Terminological units verbalizing a given sub frame have a common conceptual attribute «e-learning tool». The following examples are traced in the terminology group: authoring tool, online help system, Interactive Software Simulations, learning management software, collaborative software, communications platform, learningware, courseweb, self help guide, e-technologies, e-tool. This sub frame is verbalized by 192 English terminological units (12%).
The quantitative results of the frame analysis are presented in diagram 2.
Diagram 1. Frame model of the English e-learning terminology.
Diagram 2. Proportion of e-learning terms and subframes.
Conclusion
A substantial and multidimensional fragment of objective reality, which includes stereotyped knowledge in the field of e-learning, is a meaningful invariant of the macro frame of e-learning terminology. The base slots of a frame, which express the basic concepts of a given professional industry, include other frames, subframes, and low-level slots. The allocation of basic concepts in the e-learning terminology frame is of great interest due to the fact that it will give a clear idea of the conceptual apparatus on which all the variety of complex relations between subjects and objects of e-education is based.
One of the important characteristics of frame representation of e-learning terminology knowledge is the connectedness of its elements with relationships of different types, as a result of which its “vertical” structure is complemented by a “horizontal” one that describes a sequence of standard, sequential events in the field of e-learning. At the same time, in the ratio of frames and slots, generic-specific relationships of denotations are realized. In addition, there are inclusive relations between generic and specific concepts, that is, the inclusion of the lower level of the hierarchy to the higher. Therefore, in the sense of the terms e-learning included in the frame, there are two semantic features: integral and differential. feature gives grounds to identify the term to a certain level of the hierarchy of the frame structure, the differential feature allows you to distinguish one term within the frame from another.
In our opinion, the presented frame scheme of e-learning terminology is a kind of outline of this professional sphere. At the same time, supporting concepts with rather complex frame structures of the second and third order, filled with their own slots, and therefore the disclosure of their conceptual composition gives an idea of the terminology of the studied professional sphere. Based on the results obtained, we believe that in the study of this topic there is the prospect of a more complete "decoding" of the content of basic concepts that make up the foundation of the frame scheme of e-learning terminology, and further in-depth and extended analysis of the subframes and slots that it includes will allow building a scenario of the e-learning terminology.
REFERENCES
Boldyrev N.N. 2001. Concept and meaning of the word. Methodological problems of cognitive linguistics. Ed. I.A. Sternin. Voronezh.
Boldyrev N. N. 2002. Compositional semantics as a consequence of the evaluative categorization of the world. Compositional semantics: materials of the 3rd Intern. school-seminar on cognitive linguistics. Tambov. Pp. 10-14
Guseva I.G. 2004. Cognitive-discourse analysis of intersectoral ecological terminology in the field of fisheries (based on the English language) [Text]: author. dis. ... Cand. philol. sciences. M. 25 p.
Kandelaki T.L. 1977. Semantics and motivation of terms. M.: Nauka. 168 p.
Kubryakova E.S. 2001. On cognitive linguistics and semantics of the term "cognitive". - Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication. 1: 4-10.
Manerko L.M. 2003. Sources and foundations of cognitive and communicative terminology. Terminology. Stylistics. M.: Ryazan. Pp. 120-126.
Nikonova Zh.V. 2007. Frame analysis as a method of linguistic description of verbal structures. - Bulletin of TSU. 6 (50): 229-234.
Novodranova V.F. 1998. Cognitive aspects of terminology. First international school-seminar on cognitive linguistics. Tambov. Pp. 13-16.
Popova Z.D. 2001. Essays on cognitive linguistics. Voronezh: Istoki. 191 p.
Razduev A.V. 2013. Modern English sublanguage of nanotechnology: structural-semantic, cognitive-frame and lexicographic models [Text]: dis. ... Cand. philol. Sciences. Pyatigorsk. 242 p.
Ryabko O.P. 2003. Complex structural floronyms in English: cognitive-frame and motivational-nominative interpretation [Text]: dis. ... doct. philol. sciences. Pyatigorsk. 409 p.
Cabré M.T. 1999. Terminology: theory, methods and applications. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Faber P., Márquez C., Vega M. 2005. Framing terminology: A process-oriented approach. - Meta: Translators’ Journal. 50 (4).
Faber P. 2009. The cognitive shift in terminology and specialized translation. P. 107134. [Electronic resource] - URL:http://www. lexicon.ugr.es/fbt [18.09.2021].
Faber P. 2014. Frames as a framework for terminology. Handbook of Terminology. Kockaert H. J., Steurs F. (eds). Vol. 1. Amsterdam. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Faber P., León-Araúz P., Reimerink A. 2014. Representing environmental knowledge in EcoLexicon. - In: Languages for specific purposes in the digital era. Educational linguistics. 19: 267-301.
Faber P., León Araúz P., Prieto Velasco J.A., Reimerink A. 2007. Linking images and words: The description of specialized concepts. - International Journal of Lexicography. 20 (1): 39‐65.
Faber P. (ed.). 2012. A cognitive linguistics view of terminology and specialized language. Berlin; Boston: Walter de Gruyter.
Ossokina D., Murzalina B. 2021. Semantic shift as a way of meaning specialization: the case of English e-learning terms. - XLinguae. 14 (2): 286-301.
Received: 26.09.2021
Accepted: 01.10.2021
