Lexical simplification–the process and/or result of making do with less words–can be studied in a variety of linguistic contexts: translation, the usage of language learners, the usage of language teachers, pidginization, foreigner talk, simplified reading texts for learners. It operates according to universal principles that derive from semantic competence in the mother tongue. By means of a comparative study of some of these contexts–translation, the usage of second language learners and teachers, simplified reading texts–the operation of these universal principles is demonstrated. Aspects of simplification examined in detail include the use of superordinate terms, approximation, synonymy, transfer, circumlocution and paraphrase. A distinction is drawn between strategies and processes of simplification. “Strategy” refers to the way the learner/user arrives at a certain usage at a specific point in time, and “process” refers to the systematic series of steps by which the learner/user arrives at the same usage over time. Strategies may be process‐initiating (e.g. over‐generalization, transfer) or situation, bound (e.g. circumlocution, paraphrase).

Our main aim in this paper is to explore the interlanguage pragmatics of learners of Hebrew and English. We focus on the use of pragmatic indicators, both lexical [please/bevaqasa; perhaps/ulay) and grammatical (e.g., the difference between could I borrow and could you lend), with particular reference to deviations from native-speaker norms in the speech of non-native speakers. The analysis follows the analytical framework developed for the Cross-Cultural Speech Act Realization Project (CCSARP). Data from two sets are analyzed: (a) native and non-native Hebrew, and (b) native and non-native English (with occasional reference to other CCSARP data sets). The results suggest that non-native speakers' misuse of pragmatic indicators can have serious interactional consequences, ranging from inappropriateness to pragmatic failure.

L'analyse syntaxique comparee de deux langues peut £tre presentee sous la forme de "paradigmes de traduction" faisant figurer une categoric grammatical d'une langue A en face de toutes ses traductions possibles en termes de categories grammaticales d'une deuxieme langue B.Des notes ajoutees au paradigme peuvent specifier les differents criteres gouvernant le choix de Tune ou l'autre des categories equivalentes pour un tel paradigme.Une presentation de ce genre exige une description complete des deux langues en presence. L'auteur donne de nombreux exemples empruntes a l'anglais et a Thebreu moderne, utilisant la theorie des categories grammaticales de Halliday. L'auteur poursuit actuellement Fanalyse de transcriptions faites d'apres des conversations en hebreu et de leurs traductions en anglais -les exemples fournis dans le present article derivent de ce materiel.Les "paradigmes de traduction" peuvent aider le professeur de langues a identifier, chez un etudiant, la source d'une erreur due a Finfluence de sä langue maternelle. L'ensemble de ces paradigmes forme une sorte de dictionnaire bilingue, opposant les categories grammaticales des deux langues, et non les mots par lesquels ell es s'actualisent.Die vergleichende syntaktische Analyse zweier Sprachen kann in der Form von "Übersetzungsparadigmen" dargestellt werden. Diese Paradigmen stellen eine grammatische Kategorie der Sprache A mit Hilfe aller möglichen Übersetzungen in die entsprechenden Kategorien der 2. Sprache dar.Dem Paradigma beigefügte Anmerkungen können die verschiedenen Kriterien spezifizieren, die die Wahl der einen oder anderen für ein solches Paradigma equivalenten Kategorie bestimmen.Eine Darstellung dieser Art fuhrt zu einer vollständigen Beschreibung der zwei behandelten Sprachen. Vf. gibt zahlreiche Beispiele aus dem Englischen und dem modernen Hebräisch, wobei er Hallidays Theorie der grammatischen Kategorien benutzt. Diese Beispiele beruhen auf der Analyse von Transkriptionen hebräischer Konversation und deren Übersetzung ins Englische.Die " Übersetzungsparadigmen" können dem Sprachlehrer dazu verhelfen, beim Schüler die im muttersprachlichen Einfluß begründete Fehlerquelle zu identifizieren.Die Gesamtheit dieser Paradigmen bildet eine Art zweisprachiges Wörterbuch, das die grammatischen Kategorien der beiden Sprachen einander gegenüberstellt, nicht aber die Wörter, durch welche diese ausgedrückt werden.One way of presenting the syntactic differences between languages is what may be called a "translation-paradigm". A grammatical category from language Brought to you by | University of Michigan Authenticated Download Date | 6/27/15 4:56 AM

The following paper is an account of empirical research in lexical acquisition, an ongoing study whose preliminary findings were reported at the Neucha"tel colloquium May 1976 (Levenston and Blum 1977). A discussion of the research methodology has also been published (Levenston and Blum 1978), as well as an attempt to link this work with studies of lexical simplification in other linguistic contexts (Blum and Levenston 1977)-Before discussing in detail the current findings, it seems appropriate to summarize briefly the preceding research, of which they form an integral part.Our focus of attention is the QUALITATIVE aspect of lexical acquisition. We are interested in the semantics of interlanguage formation. Our basic claim is that L2 lexical acquisition involves processes and strategies of LEXICAL SIMPLIFICATION that operate according to UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLES. These principles derive from certain aspects of every speaker's LI semantic competence; the native speaker is able, when the need arises, to express complex meanings by indirect means. The systematic relationships between lexical items that enable him -partly -to simplify are differently realized in each language. Besides the need to memorize vocabulary in the L2, the language learner is faced with the immense task of internalizing the exact nature of these inter-relationships between lexical items (Richards 1976:81). The learner's need to simplify is thus explained by the complexity of the task of acquiring command of all aspects of the native speaker's competence; his ability to simplify derives from his own semantic competence in his first language.Empirically we seek answers to the following questions: i) What are the PROCESSES' of lexical simplification, i.e. can we account systematically for the L2 learner's PREFERENCE for certain lexical items and AVOID-ANCE of others? U ) What are the STRATEGIES of lexical simplification, i.e. what strategies do L2 learners use to communicate when certain lexical items are not available?The basic research tool is sentence completion or rather, more precisely, minimal discourse completion, since there is no requirement that the test item be limited in length to a single sentence. Learners' and native speakers' performance in the completion of such tests is compared. Items are devised which native speakers, we hypothesize, will complete with a specific word. However, unanimity of choice among native speakers is rare, except in the

No abstract