Andekuse kollokatsioonid keelekorpustes ning laste ja lastevanemate andekustõlgitsused
Abstract
Artikkel püüab avada andekusfenomeni sotsiaalset tähendust laiemas kultuurikontekstis ning näidata selle tõlgitsusvõimalusi laste ja lastevanemate kui fenomeniga tihedalt seotud ühiskonnarühmade arusaamades. Selleks uuritakse andekuse tõlgitsemist fenomeni sünonüümsete tähistajate sagedamate kollokatsioonide kaudu eri keelte korpustes ning laste ja lastevanemate intervjuudes. Korpuste kvantitatiivse analüüsi taustal demonstreeritakse 15 avatud intervjuu kriitilise diskursuseanalüüsi abil, missuguste keelevahendite ja seoste toel fenomeni tähendusi luuakse. Selgub, et andekust seostatakse enamasti lastega ja kindlate andelaadidega, tõstetakse esile nähtuse atraktiivsust ning eristumist. Laste jaoks on andekus mitmemõõtmeline ega saa haridussüsteemis piisavalt tähelepanu, lastevanemate jaoks on see jumala and, mis nõuab neilt pühendumist ja on koolis piisavalt toetatud. Laste arusaamade kaudu avaneb fenomeni positiivne ja koostöövalmidust pakkuv sotsiaalne tähendus.
***
The collocations of giftedness in language corpora and construing the phenomenon in children’s and parents’ perceptions
The study is an attempt to unfold the social meaning of the phenomenon of giftedness in expanded cultural context. Construal of the concept is first studied by the frequency of collocations of the synonymous signifiers of the term of giftedness in the Estonian Reference Corpus, German Reference Corpus, and British National Corpus.
After that, the construction of meaning of giftedness is qualitatively studied by interviewing children and parents (15 qualitative open and non-directive mode interviews). Critical discourse analysis (Fairclough 2001) is used to show the linguistic choices and their links to discourses through which the interviewees construe the concept of giftedness, pointing to certain social relations and meanings.
Results showed that giftedness was associated with childhood, highlighting the attractiveness and distinction of the phenomenon. In different languages, giftedness is associated with relatively similar features (development attractiveness, differentiation, domain-specificity) but the perceptions are different for children and parents. For children, giftedness is multidimensional but it does not get enough attention at school, whereas for parents, it is a gift from God that needs their dedication although supported by the educational system. The positive meanings of the phenomenon are made visible by children.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Baudson, Tanja 2016. The mad genius stereotype: Still alive and well. – Frontiers in Psychology, 7 (368). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00368
Baudson, Tanja; Preckel, Franzis 2013. Teachers’ implicit personality theories about the gifted: An experimental approach. – School Psychology Quarterly, 28 (1), 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000011
Berlin, Judith Ellen 2009. It’s all a matter of perspective: Student perceptions on the impact of being labelled gifted and talented. – Roeper Review, 31 (4), 217–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190903177580
Borland, James H. 1997. The construct of giftedness. – Peabody Journal of Education, 72 (3−4), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.1997.9681863
Burr, Vivian 1995. An Introduction to Social Constructionism. London: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203299968
Caldas-Coulthard, Carmen; Moon, Rosamund 2010. ʽCurvy, hunky, kinkyʼ: Using corpora as tools for critical analysis. – Discourse & Society, 21 (2), 99–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926509353843
Cigman, Ruth 2006. The gifted child: A conceptual enquiry. – Oxford Review of Education, 32 (2), 197–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054980600645388
Coleman, Laurence; Cross, Tracy 2014. Is being gifted a social handicap? – Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37 (1), 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353214521486
Coleman, Laurence; Micko, Karen; Cross, Tracy 2015. Twenty-five years of research on the lived experience of being gifted in school: Capturing the students’ voices. – Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 38 (4), 358–376. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353215607322
Cotterill, Janet 2001. Domestic discord, rocky relationships: Semantic prosodies in representations of marital violence in the O. J. Simpson Trial. – Discourse & Society, 12 (3), 291–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926501012003002
Cross, Tracy; Coleman, Laurence 2014. School-based conception of giftedness. – Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37 (1), 94–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353214521522
Ericsson, Anders; Nandagopal, Kiruthiga; Roring, Roy 2005. Giftedness viewed from the expert-performance perspective. – Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 28 (3/4), 287–311. https://doi.org/10.4219/jeg-2005-335
Fairclough, Norman 2001. Language and Power. 2. ed. New York: Longman.
Feldhusen, John 2005. Giftedness, talent, expertise, and creative achievement. – R. J. Sternberg, J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of Giftedness. 2nd ed. NY: Cambridge University Press, 64–79.
Gagné, Françoys 2004. Transforming gifts into talents: The DMGT as a developmental theory. – High Ability Studies, 15 (2), 119–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359813042000314682
Galton, Francis 1869. Hereditary Genius. [Veebiversioon.] http://www.mugu.com/galton/books/hereditary-genius/ (14.8.2017).
Gardner, Howard 1993 [1983]. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. 2nd ed. London: Fontana Press.
Gosain, Yukti; Maitra, Krishna 2005. Children’s conception of giftedness: An implicit
theory. – Gifted Education International, 20 (3), 391–402. https://doi.org/10.1177/026142940502000314
Halliday, Michael A. K. 2005. On matter and meaning: The two realms of human experience. – Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 1 (1), 59–82.
Hariduse ja kasvatuse sõnaraamat: eesti, inglise, saksa, soome, vene. Tiiu Erelt, Mari Kadakas, Ulve Kala-Arvisto, Inger Kraav, Viivi Maanso, Helin Puksand, Eva Tamm, Inge Unt; toimetaja Tiiu Erelt. Tallinn: Eesti Keele Sihtasutus, 2014.
Heller, Kurt A. 2013. Findings from the Munich Longitudinal Study of giftedness and their impact on identification gifted education and counselling. – Talent Development & Excellence, 5 (1), 1–64.
Kasik, Reet 2008. Meediateksti analüüs: eesmärgid ja metoodika [‘Analysis of the media texts: Aims and methods’]. – Reet Kasik (Toim.), Meediatekstide keelekasutus ja selle sotsiokultuurilised taustad. Tekstid ja taustad V. Tartu: TÜ Kirjastus, 10–43.
Kaufman, Scott Barry; Sternberg, Robert 2008. Conceptions of giftedness. – Steven I. Pfeiffer (Ed.), Handbook of Giftedness in Children. Psychoeducational Theory, Research, and Best Practices. NY: Springer, 71–93.
Kerge, Krista 2008. Vilunud keelekasutaja. C1-taseme eesti keele oskus. Tallinn: EKSA.
Makel, Matthew C.; Snyder, Kate E.; Thomas, Chandler; Malone, Patrick S.; Putallaz, Martha 2015. Gifted students’ implicit beliefs about intelligence and giftedness. – Gifted Child Quarterly, 59 (4), 203–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986215599057
Mazzoli Smith, Laura; Campbell, Jim 2012. Families, Education and Giftedness. Case Studies in the Construction of High Achievement. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Mudrak, Jiri 2011. ‘He was born that way’: Parental constructions of giftedness. – High Ability Studies, 22 (2), 199–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2011.622941
Muischnek, Kadri 2006. Verbi ja noomeni püsiühendid eesti keeles [‘Fixed expressions consisting of verbs and nouns in Estonian’]. Dissertationes linguisticae Universitatis Tartuensis 17. Tartu: TÜ Kirjastus. http://hdl.handle.net/10062/603
Peine, Marie; Coleman, Laurence 2010. The phenomenon of waiting in class. – Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34 (2), 220–244.
Piits, Liisi 2015a. Sagedamate inimest tähistavate sõnade kollokatsioonid eesti keeles [‘Collocations of the most frequent Estonian words for ‘human being’’]. Dissertationes linguisticae Universitatis Tartuensis 23. Tartu: TÜ Kirjastus. http://hdl.handle.net/10062/45723
Piits, Liisi 2015b. Kollokatsioonid sõna tähenduse ja kultuurikonteksti avajatena. – Oma Keel, 31, 3–8.
Plunkett, Margaret; Kronborg, Leonie 2011. Learning to be a teacher of the gifted: The importance of examining opinions and challenging misconceptions. – Gifted and Talented International, 26 (1–2), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2011.11673587
Põlda, Halliki 2014. Andekusmõistestik teadus- ja üldkeeles ning andekuse diskursuse diakrooniline konstrueerimine meediatekstides [‘Concepts of giftedness in scientific and common language, and the diachronic construction of the discourse of giftedness in media texts’]. – Krista Kerge (Toim.), Uurimusi keele omandamisest, õppimisest ja korpustest. Tallinna Ülikooli eesti keele ja kultuuri instituudi toimetised 16. Tallinn: Tallinna Ülikool, 228–253.
Põlda, Halliki 2015. The linguistic construction of the giftedness discourse in the media texts of historical and digital times. – Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Ühingu aastaraamat, 11, 223−239. https://doi.org/10.5128/ERYa11.14
Põlda, Halliki; Aava, Katrin 2016a. Muutunud õpikäsituse keeleline konstrueerimine [‘Linguistic construction of a changed learning approach’]. – Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Ühingu aastaraamat, 12, 201−217. https://doi.org/10.5128/ERYa12.12
Põlda, Halliki; Aava, Katrin 2016b. Andekuse kui haridusliku erivajaduse tähenduse konstrueerimine Eesti muutunud õpikäsituse kontekstis [‘Construction of the meaning of giftedness as a special educational need in the context of the changed learning approach in Estonia’]. – Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri, 4 (2), 89–117. https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2016.4.2.05
Renzulli, Joseph S. 1978. What makes giftedness? Re-examining a definition. – PDK. Phi Delta Kappan, 60 (3), 180–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171109200821
Saul, Hillar; Sepp, Viire; Päiviste, Monika 2007. Andekus kui hariduslik erivajadus: olukord Eesti üldhariduskoolides. Tartu Ülikool. http://hdl.handle.net/10062/40910
Schmitt, Carrie; Goebel, Vella 2015. Experiences of high-ability high school students: A case study. – Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 38 (4), 428–446. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353215607325
Sepp, Viire 2015. Andekate hariduse trendid maailmas. – Ettekanne TÜ teaduskooli 50. juubelile pühendatud konverentsil “Tulevik on meie kätes”, 6.11.2015.
Subotnik, Rena; Olszewski-Kubilius, Paula; Worrell, Frank 2011. Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. – Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12, 3–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100611418056
Uiboaed, Kristel 2010. Statistilised meetodid murdekorpuse ühendverbide tuvastamisel [‘Statistical methods for phrasal verb detection in Estonian dialects’]. – Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Ühingu aastaraamat, 6, 307–326. https://doi.org/10.5128/ERYa6.19
Vogl, Katharina; Preckel, Franzis 2014. Full-time ability grouping of gifted students: Impacts on social self-concept and school-related attitudes. – Gifted Child Quarterly, 58 (1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986213513795
Winner, Ellen 1996. Gifted Children: Myths and Realities. New York: Basic Books.
ÕS 2013 = Tiiu Erelt, Tiina Leemets, Sirje Mäearu, Maire Raadik (Koost.) 2013. Eesti õigekeelsussõnaraamat ÕS 2013. Tallinn: EKSA. http://www.eki.ee/dict/qs2013/ (22.8.2017).
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5128/ERYa14.08
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2018 Halliki Põlda
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
ISSN 1736-2563 (print)
ISSN 2228-0677 (online)
DOI 10.5128/ERYa.1736-2563