2010
DOI: 10.1093/ijl/ecq036
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A New Pedagogical Dictionary of English Collocations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…remains a dictionary of a linguist, by a linguist, and for a linguist" (Ptaszy ski, 2011, p. 151). Coffey (2011), who has assessed the Macmillan Collocations Dictionary for Learners of English (2010), finds it well planned as a pedagogical dictionary. It offers learners ways to find relevant collocations easily, for instance, by grouping collocates in semantic sets with their meanings provided.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…remains a dictionary of a linguist, by a linguist, and for a linguist" (Ptaszy ski, 2011, p. 151). Coffey (2011), who has assessed the Macmillan Collocations Dictionary for Learners of English (2010), finds it well planned as a pedagogical dictionary. It offers learners ways to find relevant collocations easily, for instance, by grouping collocates in semantic sets with their meanings provided.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the OOCDE base words are defined minimally, while collocates and whole collocations are not defined at all. The aim of this is to help learners focus on the reference work (Coffey 2010). Besides, as Coffey (2010) also points out, meanings of collocates are supposed to be either known earlier or inferable from their semantic set or demonstrative instances.…”
Section: Differences Between General and Collocation Dictionariesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Spanish universities, in which students are unfamiliar with grammar information. Coffey (2011: 338) also indicates a number of inaccuracies, mainly involving categorisation and labelling. For instance, get across should be presented as V + n (get across facts) instead of V + across.…”
Section: Overall Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%