Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Inference
View graph of relations

Inference: procedures and implications for ELT

Research output: Contribution in Book/Report/Proceedings - With ISBN/ISSNChapter

Published

Standard

Inference: procedures and implications for ELT. / Gabrielatos, Costas.
Research Methodology: Discourse in teaching a foreign language. ed. / Radislav P. Millrood. Tambov, Russia: Tambov State University Press, 2002. p. 30-52.

Research output: Contribution in Book/Report/Proceedings - With ISBN/ISSNChapter

Harvard

Gabrielatos, C 2002, Inference: procedures and implications for ELT. in RP Millrood (ed.), Research Methodology: Discourse in teaching a foreign language. Tambov State University Press, Tambov, Russia, pp. 30-52.

APA

Gabrielatos, C. (2002). Inference: procedures and implications for ELT. In R. P. Millrood (Ed.), Research Methodology: Discourse in teaching a foreign language (pp. 30-52). Tambov State University Press.

Vancouver

Gabrielatos C. Inference: procedures and implications for ELT. In Millrood RP, editor, Research Methodology: Discourse in teaching a foreign language. Tambov, Russia: Tambov State University Press. 2002. p. 30-52

Author

Gabrielatos, Costas. / Inference : procedures and implications for ELT. Research Methodology: Discourse in teaching a foreign language. editor / Radislav P. Millrood. Tambov, Russia : Tambov State University Press, 2002. pp. 30-52

Bibtex

@inbook{2c74999940c94566ba32883d89d8a51c,
title = "Inference: procedures and implications for ELT",
abstract = "Inferencing is essential for effective communication for two reasons. Firstly, the conventional meaning of lexis is not always a clear indicator of the intended message of speakers/ writers (e.g. Grice, 1975). Secondly, {\^a}��discourse rarely provides us with a fully explicit description of a situation{\^a}�� (Eysenck, 1990: 224); therefore, we usually have to fill in the missing information (see also Clark & Clark, 1977: 96-98). It seems wise then for foreign language teachers and materials writers to take account of the clues and procedures involved in language interpretation. But how is inferencing achieved? That is, how do we understand more than (or even something different from) what the actual words seem to denote? What knowledge and clues do we use? What processes take place in our minds? As far as ELT is concerned, what are the implications for decision-making, materials-writing and classroom practice? In other words, what is it that teachers and materials writers need to know about inferencing, and how can they translate this knowledge into teaching materials and procedures? In Part 1 I discuss the clues provided by speakers/writers, as well as the clues and thinking processes used by listeners/readers in order for successful inferencing to take place. This outline will draw on Pragmatics, Discourse Analysis and Psycholinguistics. I will also provide examples of (in)effective communication, and will discuss the use of specific clues and procedures. In Part 2, I briefly discuss the implications for the learning/ teaching of English as a foreign language.",
keywords = "Inference, reading, writing, lexis, grammar, context, co-text, background knowledge, ELT.",
author = "Costas Gabrielatos",
note = "The paper is a unified and revised version of: Gabrielatos, C. (1999). Inference: Procedures and implications for TEFL. Part 1: Background. TESOL Greece Newsletter 63, 15-20. Available online: http://www.gabrielatos.com/InferenceTEFL-1.pdf, and Gabrielatos, C. (1999). Inference: Procedures and implications for TEFL. Part 2: Examples and teaching implications. TESOL Greece Newsletter 64, 10-15. Available online: http://www.gabrielatos.com/InferenceTEFL-2.pdf",
year = "2002",
language = "English",
pages = "30--52",
editor = "Millrood, {Radislav P.}",
booktitle = "Research Methodology",
publisher = "Tambov State University Press",

}

RIS

TY - CHAP

T1 - Inference

T2 - procedures and implications for ELT

AU - Gabrielatos, Costas

N1 - The paper is a unified and revised version of: Gabrielatos, C. (1999). Inference: Procedures and implications for TEFL. Part 1: Background. TESOL Greece Newsletter 63, 15-20. Available online: http://www.gabrielatos.com/InferenceTEFL-1.pdf, and Gabrielatos, C. (1999). Inference: Procedures and implications for TEFL. Part 2: Examples and teaching implications. TESOL Greece Newsletter 64, 10-15. Available online: http://www.gabrielatos.com/InferenceTEFL-2.pdf

PY - 2002

Y1 - 2002

N2 - Inferencing is essential for effective communication for two reasons. Firstly, the conventional meaning of lexis is not always a clear indicator of the intended message of speakers/ writers (e.g. Grice, 1975). Secondly, �discourse rarely provides us with a fully explicit description of a situation� (Eysenck, 1990: 224); therefore, we usually have to fill in the missing information (see also Clark & Clark, 1977: 96-98). It seems wise then for foreign language teachers and materials writers to take account of the clues and procedures involved in language interpretation. But how is inferencing achieved? That is, how do we understand more than (or even something different from) what the actual words seem to denote? What knowledge and clues do we use? What processes take place in our minds? As far as ELT is concerned, what are the implications for decision-making, materials-writing and classroom practice? In other words, what is it that teachers and materials writers need to know about inferencing, and how can they translate this knowledge into teaching materials and procedures? In Part 1 I discuss the clues provided by speakers/writers, as well as the clues and thinking processes used by listeners/readers in order for successful inferencing to take place. This outline will draw on Pragmatics, Discourse Analysis and Psycholinguistics. I will also provide examples of (in)effective communication, and will discuss the use of specific clues and procedures. In Part 2, I briefly discuss the implications for the learning/ teaching of English as a foreign language.

AB - Inferencing is essential for effective communication for two reasons. Firstly, the conventional meaning of lexis is not always a clear indicator of the intended message of speakers/ writers (e.g. Grice, 1975). Secondly, �discourse rarely provides us with a fully explicit description of a situation� (Eysenck, 1990: 224); therefore, we usually have to fill in the missing information (see also Clark & Clark, 1977: 96-98). It seems wise then for foreign language teachers and materials writers to take account of the clues and procedures involved in language interpretation. But how is inferencing achieved? That is, how do we understand more than (or even something different from) what the actual words seem to denote? What knowledge and clues do we use? What processes take place in our minds? As far as ELT is concerned, what are the implications for decision-making, materials-writing and classroom practice? In other words, what is it that teachers and materials writers need to know about inferencing, and how can they translate this knowledge into teaching materials and procedures? In Part 1 I discuss the clues provided by speakers/writers, as well as the clues and thinking processes used by listeners/readers in order for successful inferencing to take place. This outline will draw on Pragmatics, Discourse Analysis and Psycholinguistics. I will also provide examples of (in)effective communication, and will discuss the use of specific clues and procedures. In Part 2, I briefly discuss the implications for the learning/ teaching of English as a foreign language.

KW - Inference

KW - reading

KW - writing

KW - lexis

KW - grammar

KW - context

KW - co-text

KW - background knowledge

KW - ELT.

M3 - Chapter

SP - 30

EP - 52

BT - Research Methodology

A2 - Millrood, Radislav P.

PB - Tambov State University Press

CY - Tambov, Russia

ER -