Leonora BARZDŽIUKIENĖ, Vida LIOLIENĖ

SHORTCOMINGS IN ORAL COMMUNICATION BETWEEN LECTURERS AND STUDENTS

There is no cultural sphere that is not influenced by language in some way and in which it does not manifest itself. In a sense, language shapes culture, and culture shapes language. “The mother tongue is like a gateway through which all great and fruitful ideas reach the human soul” (L. Rėza). Thus, language encompasses the whole of culture, since it expresses the aims and interests of communication. The main aim of communication between lecturers—linguists and specialists in other fields—and students is to ensure that as many treasures of native and world culture as possible reach students’ minds in a correct, logical form.

A good command of one’s mother tongue is a sign of a cultured person. A person’s social and professional activity depends on it. Therefore, it is very important that our students have a good command of their mother tongue.

In general education secondary schools, language instruction is organized into concentrations, that is, sections of the subject being taught that are uniform in their core content but differ in breadth and depth of instruction. This is the so-called tiered system of education (tier 1—I–IV grades; tier 2—V–IX grades; tier 3—X–XII grades). At higher education institutions, the concentrations are expanded by giving them a professional orientation. This should constitute a fourth tier. Individual topics must not be separated from a concentration. The overall teaching system must be followed—all the topics set out in the curriculum must be covered: students should be taught pronunciation standards while also developing spelling skills; rules and principles of stress should be reviewed, with attention paid to the most common cases of their violation. The course in lexis and phraseology is no less important. When teaching it, attention should be paid to the various lexical strata of the language and to phraseological units. The system of morphological forms is particularly complex, its main components being word formation and inflection. Major violations of language norms occur both in forming neologisms and in using various word forms. To avoid this, the rules of Lithuanian word formation and the rules for using morphological forms must be learned thoroughly; these will also help students construct sentences with a correct grammatical structure. The result of all this would be language that is stylistically apt and suited to each context of use.

39

The students of specialized secondary schools are particularly poorly prepared. They very often do well in the exact sciences and excel at technical drawing, because these subjects receive especially great attention at those schools. The number of hours allotted to Lithuanian amounts to only half the number stipulated in general education school curricula. As a result, there is not enough time to cover the curriculum, and little time is devoted to developing language skills. Graduates of specialized secondary schools do not grasp the structure of their mother tongue, do not know its norms, and have not learned the basic rules of Lithuanian grammar. Particularly many graduates of specialized secondary schools enroll in distance-learning programs. How can they be taught remotely, through consultations alone? Yet everything has to be taught from the beginning: correct pronunciation, spelling, punctuation, lexis, word formation and inflection, syntax, and the requirements of stylistically appropriate language. Few hours are allotted to teaching Lithuanian language culture. We find ourselves in a vicious circle: we teach the use of various word forms, while students often cannot distinguish a participle from a gerund or a half-participle.

The result is student language that is highly incorrect and rife with spelling and punctuation errors. The language used in the theses and diploma papers of several dozen master’s students was analyzed. It is very sad that it reveals our students’ complete lack of linguistic education.

The result is student language that is highly incorrect and full of spelling and punctuation errors. The language of several dozen master’s theses and diploma papers was analyzed. It is very sad that it reveals our students’ complete lack of linguistic knowledge.

The papers contain numerous spelling errors, e.g.: relationship, interaction, stam-biūjų, possible, firstly, gelis, structure, not enough, also, cube, mill, variant, optimal, earlier, etc.

Punctuation is no better. Master’s students fail to distinguish even homogeneous sentence parts and parenthetical elements, separate the subject from the predicate, and very often put a comma before and (perhaps confusing it with but); they set off non-expanded adverbials, but do not set off postpositive modifiers, e.g.:¹ 1. It is convenient to use a thyristor model consisting of a diode and a switch controlled by voltage sources. 2. The dependence of current in the load resistance on the frequency of the thyristor control-pulse sequence = was determined kei-

¹ Incorrect punctuation is underlined with hyphens.

40

ing the frequency in the interval.

There are many errors in the use of grammatical forms. Plural forms are made from singular nouns, for example: cement – cements, activity – activities, protection – protections, dependence – dependencies, etc.

In terminology, definite forms are generally used to denote specific characteristics of objects or concepts. Master’s students are almost unfamiliar with this means of word formation. In general, they most often do not know how to use definite forms, for example: 1. There is no special (= definite) literature. 2. It differs from the first (= first) method only in the greater mixing of the components (= in that the components are mixed better).

Errors occur in the use of reflexive verb forms, for example: This is visible (= can be seen) in the graphs shown in Appendix 1. Such mixtures become well compacted (= become denser).

Most errors involve the use of case forms. Lithuanian constructions have been replaced here by foreign ones, for example: Due to imperfections in mathematical calculation methods (= imperfection) problems arise in the calculation (= when calculating) (= problems). As a consequence of that (= As a result), a sinusoidal voltage is obtained.

There are also many errors in the use of prepositions. It is characteristic that Lithuanian constructions without prepositions are replaced by prepositional ones, for example: With this composition (= this composition) several mixtures were produced.

Besides the incorrect use of cases and prepositions, we find many other instances of violations of sentence syntactic structure. Word order in the sentence is incorrect: the modifier often follows the word it modifies, and a relative clause modifying a noun does not follow the word it explains. Particles are used especially incorrectly. We know from grammar that a particle stands before the word whose meaning it shades; when it occurs elsewhere, it becomes a filler word.

The gerund nežiūrint (‘notwithstanding’) becomes a conjunction introducing a subordinate clause, for example: Notwithstanding the difficulties (= Although there are many difficulties, however difficult it may be), production must be improved.

Calques from Russian using the conjunction kad (‘that’) are very common, for example: In order to get out (= for us to get out) of this situation, it is necessary to start

41

(= switch on) the current.

Graduate students’ papers contain many violations of Lithuanian lexical norms. Some have arisen from inaccurate word choice and disregard for synonyms; others—from the influence of foreign languages, e.g.: The calculation results are issued (= presented) in graphic form (= graphically). Technical properties remain unused (= for a number of) (= many) reasons.

When translating from Russian, the rules of Lithuanian word formation are continually violated, producing so-called hybrids (words formed with foreign derivational elements). Calques of suffixes are abundant.

There are particularly many cases of incorrect word formation with prefixes, e.g.: The capacitor is charged (= charged). Coefficients can be calculated (= calculated). Filled with air (= filled with air).

Graduate students’ papers are rife with various stylistic errors. A particularly serious stylistic flaw is the pseudo-scientific and convoluted presentation of ideas. Here are several typical examples, which are not only poorly written but also contain many other kinds of errors: The larger the particle size, the larger this nucleus is. To get out of this situation, there is one solution.

These are all errors in graduate students’ theses. Some faculties collaborate with Lithuanian-language specialists and, when asked, submit students’ research papers for analysis, but unfortunately, not all do.

In the spring of 1993, exemplary diploma projects by nearly all graduating students from two faculties—Mechanical Engineering and Chemical Technology—and from all faculties were edited (272). The errors in language, academic style, and terminology in those projects were classified and summarized and, with relevant theoretical explanations added, presented to students in the form of an information booklet: “Linguists’ Advice for Students of Technical Specialties” (1994—113 pp.). An appendix to the booklet is a glossary of inadmissible terms used in various technical-science specialties, divided into subgroups by specialty. The authors of the booklet hope that it will be useful to students writing research papers and to lecturers supervising students’ research work.

That the written and spoken language of lecturers is not much better than

42

student work, as shown by collections of analyzed scientific theses, published lecture notes, and other methodological publications. These too are rife with errors in spelling, punctuation, vocabulary, word formation, inflection, syntax, style, and logic. Here are a few examples:

Spelling errors: grafo-analizinis, varijantas, armonijakas.

Punctuation errors: We check whether these current and voltage values satisfy (= correspond to) the system of Kirchhoff’s equations.

Nor can one be pleased with lecturers’ speech during lectures. They make many pronunciation and stress errors. Short stressed vowels are lengthened i, u: turi, skelbi:mas, sti:lius, pu:slapis; in international words o: fo:nas and so on; stress is shifted from the end of a word to its stem, e.g.: apskritimus (= ap-skritimus), nėra (= nėrà), aštuoni (= aštuoni), tieses (= tiesès), ribo-se (= ribosè), režimus (= režimùs), stačiakampius (= stačiakampius), klavišus (= klavišùs) and so on. International words are stressed incorrectly, e.g.: temperamentas (= temperamentãs), ornamentas, or-namentu (= ornamentãs, ornamentù), katalogas (= katalògas), kla-višas (= klavišas) and so on. The word inžinierius... is still not being stressed correctly.

Language-culture errors

Various grammatical forms are used incorrectly, especially participles, adverbial participles, and half-participles, e.g.: These devices must operate as well as possible (= as well as they can). Having calculated (= Having calculated) the first (= first) two points, we draw (= plot) a line through them.

Among syntactic constructions, most cases involve incorrect use of cases and prepositions, e.g.: The greatest difficulties (= The greatest difficulty) arise when selecting protections (= protection) for lines operating in ring networks (= protection for lines operating in ring networks). The measurement was performed at three different voltage values (= with three different voltage values).

Sentences with incorrect word order also occur, e.g.: The sensitivity coefficient can be increased (= can be increased) by reducing the tripping current (= the current, the operating current).

In order to increase (= so that we increase, so that we could increase) the counter.

43

Communication turns out (= becomes) mutually beneficial.

Every substance can be in a gaseous, liquid, or solid state (= gaseous, liquid, and solid).

Later, with the help of scientists, it was established (= Later, it was established by scientists).

Errors of logic (style)

Look, you know, if something is written, don’t pay attention! It turned out to be a typical Lithuanian example (?). Your group shows greater dispersion... How do you feel about your results? We need to see where you are as individuals. When working under a heavy load, computers stop. In designing a block, we should think through what data it will output. The course is narrow, so we won’t cover this topic, although we’ll go through two topics each session. Such questions can be raised when we want to probe the situation. First, mark down... mark down the dimensions.

The language of lecturers at other non-humanities higher education institutions is evidently no better. V. Rudaitienė, a first-year student at Vilnius Technical University, vividly portrays lecturers’ speech in the lecture hall in her article “Can We Learn Beautiful Language from Our Lecturers?” (Gimtoji kalba, 1990, No. 6). The author assures lecturers that “weighty scientific truths will gain greater value if we clothe them in beautiful Lithuanian attire and present them using Lithuanian vocabulary and Lithuanian sentence structure...”

The French scholar A. Meillet once said: “Languages are what the society that speaks them makes of them. It is up to those who use these languages to shape and cultivate them.”

The Language of Meetings and Consultations

During meetings and consultations, university scholars and teachers pay little attention to their speech and “let themselves go.” They make especially many stress-placement errors in words heard everywhere—on television, during language programs, and perhaps even from students. These include: Senatė (= Senatė), inžinierius (= inžinierius), parlamentas (= parlamentas), raštinė

44

(= office), dean (= deanùs), in the library (= bibliotèkoj), budget (= biudžètas), questions (= kláusimų), competition (= konkùrsas), experts (= ekspèrtai), students (= studentù), project (= projèktas), telephone (= telefònas), method (= metòdas), committee (= komitètas), is (= yrà), is not (= nèra), equipment (= aparatūrā), argument (= argumentàs), process (= procèsas), buffet (= bufètas)...

Some scholars and administrative representatives speak haltingly and incorrectly; they use many calques, semantic calques, and “Slavic” constructions. Typical errors include: composition of the commission, conduct questionnaires, fully understand, speak generally, I cannot credit [it] under the best conditions, voted as follows, let [us] know, the department must determine, so-called..., somewhere or other..., some kind of..., sometime or other..., take as a basis; from one edition to the next it improved... completely clear..., at this point I would like to say, put a whole series of doctoral students on the right track; the proposals were not fully accepted; before starting to discuss the matter, I would like... to introduce the words... to postpone the structure of a whole series of departments...; after the university spirit...; the question is being considered intensely..., among other things I consider..., general academic workload..., connect with the administration..., from next month, the topic partly determines the classes, remove the scholarship; as a rule; to what extent I will be right..., as regards; go directly to the company; where I want to steer [the discussion]; in order to strengthen the university; in order to evaluate...

Not to repeat oneself; it looks, it turns out, I’ll repeat myself; the cooperative is being built; [he/she] is doing an internship in the laboratory.

You will not be left disadvantaged... at the faculty; during the week; as a result, at the level of application, in a month, completely clear; the problem is that...; in that number; consider as the first question.

We do not provide corrections, but only write down incorrect words or entire phrases. In the future, we will again try to analyze and compare the correctness of language.

Linguists face the long and difficult task of persuading lecturers that they must have a good command of the standard language. The attitude “after all, we can all communicate” cannot be tolerated. Lecturers’ speech, like their personalities, must serve as an example for students to follow. “From the way people value

45

their mother tongue, defend and protect it, and observe its norms, one can judge their national self-awareness, respect for traditions, intelligence, degree of socialization, and other value orientations” (K.Stoškus).

To improve the language of both students and lecturers, the following work should be undertaken:

1. Establish a language supervision committee at the university to monitor the language used in all scholarly theses, articles, and methodological works published at the university;

2. Students’ term papers and diploma projects, master’s theses, and doctoral dissertations must be written in correct language. Diploma theses and dissertations should not be accepted for defense without a favorable review by a Lithuanian-language specialist.

3. Since university scholar-educators play a particularly active role in shaping the linguistic environment, it is necessary to ensure that one of the most important qualification requirements is included in the regulations for lecturer certification: a good command of standard Lithuanian.

46