students to an information-meeting on the exams in English Linguistics. This
meeting is ... NOTE: The examination questions test the following competences:.
University of Lausanne Procedure for BA exams in English Linguistics
Sources of information for the BA exam 1. Information meeting At the beginning of each semester, the English Linguistics staff invites interested students to an information-meeting on the exams in English Linguistics. This meeting is intended to clarify organisational issues and the examination procedure, to communicate our expectations, and to alleviate potential concerns/fears that are related to the exam. 2. Exam-related information on the departmental website The staff publishes all the necessary information concerning the 2nd year exams. On the departmental website. We expect students to make use of these sources of information rather than flood the staff members with exam-related e-mails.
The BA-EXAM Procedure
STEP 1: Requirements:
The BA exam-procedure
Students who want to take an exam in English Linguistics are expected to attend at least 1 cours/cours-séminaire/séminaire in English linguistics in their 3rd year. If they want to take two exams (which is possible if no exam in English Linguistics was taken in the 2nd year), they must have attended 2 cours/cours-séminaire/séminaire in English linguistics in their 3rd year. In addition, students taking an exam must have written at least one satisfactory paper in English linguistics before they sit the exam(s). This paper should be written on a topic that is related to a 3rd year BA seminar (see special requirements for papers).
STEP 2: Application Choose an examiner (P. Ronan, D. Smyk-Bhattacharjee, N. Zein, A. Langlotz) Students can choose to take either a written exam (4hrs.) or an oral exam (30 mins.). The requirements are the same for the written For their application the students must follow the official procedure defined by the Décanat de la faculté des lettres. Please check the deadlines carefully, as students must sign up for exams online by the end of the fourth week of each term: Online Registration : http://www.unil.ch/lettres/page28390.html To apply for the BA exam, students must arrange an office hour with their examiner before the end of Week 11 of each term. You will receive more information regarding this deadline via email in the course of the Semester. Students must bring their dossier linguistique to the meeting. This dossier consists of the topic chosen from the pool of possible BA examination topics (see below). At the meeting, the students are to make a definite choice of their topic (following the list of possible BA exam topics). Note that the topic must correspond to the topics that are offered by your examiner. The examiner must accept the dossier linguistique in order to accept the candidate.
STEP 3: Exam preparation: On the basis of their topic and the corresponding reading matter, the examinees have to formulate 5 relevant thesis statements or essential research questions. These thesis statements constitute a specialization and an orientational guideline for the examiner to specify more detailed examination questions. They thus constitute the common ground between the students’ core interests and the examiner’s choice of examination questions. The 5 thesis statements/research questions have to be submitted 3 weeks before the exam at the latest.
STEP 4: Exam Students will receive the official dates (and place) for the written/oral exam from the Décanat de la faculté des lettres. The 4h written exam consists of one essay. Following your area of specialization, 2 essay topics will be provided. The candidate must deal with one. For the 30mins. oral exam 3 questions will be provided. 2 have to be answered. The candidates have 30 mins. before the exam to prepare their answers. The examinees are not supposed to use any aids beyond the ones provided. NOTE: The examination questions test the following competences: a) Factual knowledge/definition b) Comprehension c) Application/analysis d) Critical reflection/synthesis Examiners set up the exam questions according to this scale of competences.
STEP 5: Marking The exam is corrected and marked (written) or evaluated (oral). A grade will be given with quarter grades being possible. The exam is marked/evaluated according to the following criteria (NOTE that we do not look for perfection but for what can be expected in an exam situation): a) Precision: the student answers the questions precisely and is able to provide straightforward definitions and explanations. b) Depth and/or range: the student covers an appropriate range of issues in depth. c) Insight: the student demonstrates good comprehension of the examination topic d) Language and conversational skills: the student has an appropriate command of English and communicative competence. Each exam is double-checked by an expert.
STEP 6: Retake In case of failure the exam can be retaken once. Preferably, the exam is to be retaken in the following exam session. The faculty policies on exams and retakes are available on the website of the Faculté des lettres: http://www.unil.ch/lettres/page63635.html
University of Lausanne Pool of BA examination topics (examples!!!) The following lists exemplify the pool of potential BA examination topics for the BA in English Linguistics. Students are expected to choose one topic. The examiners make sure that the texts are available for download (PdFs) or for copying from a reference library. Note that alternatives to the suggested reading list may be arranged with the examiner.
BA Topics in English Linguistics
Note that the amount of reading differs per topic as a function of the difficulty of the texts. As a rule of thumb the reading list comprise approximately 2 books and 5-8 articles. However, the distribution of books vs .articles varies according to the topic.
Cognitive Semantics (Langlotz)
Coulson, Seana & Oakley, Todd 2000. Blending Basics. Cognitive Linguistics, 11, 175196 Evans, Vyvyan & Green, Melanie 2006. Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. (chapters on cognitive semantics) Fauconnier, G. and M. Turner 1998. Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science 22/2, pp. 133-187. Lakoff, George and Johnson, Mark 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Sandikcioglu, Esra 2000. More metaphorical warfare in the Gulf: Orientalist frames in news coverage. In Barcelona, Antonio (ed.). Metaphors and Metonymy at the Crossroads. A Cognitive Perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter; pp. 299-320. Ungerer, Friedrich, 2000, Muted metaphors and the activation of metonymies in advertising, in: Barcelona, Antonio (ed.), Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 321-340. Ungerer, Friedrich & Schmid, Hans-Jörg 2006. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. Harlow: Pearson Longman.
Linguistic Humour (Langlotz)
Attardo, Salvatore 1994. Linguistic Theories of Humor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Boxter, D. and Cortés-Condé, F. 1997. From bonding to biting: conversational joking and identity display. Journal of Pragmatics 27, 275-294. Coulson, S. 2001. Semantic Leaps. Frame-Shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, (1-70) Fine G. A. and de Soucey, M. 2005. Joking cultures: Humor themes as social regulation in group life. Humor, 18/1, 1-22. Giora, R. 1991. On the cognitive aspects of the joke. Journal of Pragmatics, 16, 465485. Giora, R. 2003. On Our Mind: Salience, Context, and Figurative Language. New York: Oxford University Press. Ch.6 & 7, 167-184. Holmes, J. and Marra 2002. ‘Over the edge? Subversive humour between colleagues
and friends. Humor, 15, 65-87. Holmes, J. and Marra, M. 2002. Having a laugh at work: how humour contributes to workplace culture. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1683-1710. Norrick, N.R. 2003. Issues in conversational joking. Journal of Pragmatics 35, 13331359. Kotthoff, H. 2006. Pragmatics of performance and the analysis of conversational humor. Humor, 19/3, 271-304. Norrick, N.R. 2006. Humor in Language. In Brown, K. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics [425-426]. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Ross, Alison 1998. The Language of Humour. London & New York: Routledge. Veale, T. Feyaerts, K, and Brône, G. 2006. The cognitive mechanisms of adversarial humor. Humor, 19/3, 305-338. Language in the Workplace (Langlotz)
Cameron, Deborah 2000. Good to Talk? Living and Working in a Communication Culture. London: Sage. Holmes, Janet & Stubbe, Maria 2003. Power and Politeness in the Workplace. A Sociolinguistic Analysis of Talk at Work. London: Pearson. Koester, Almut 2004. The Language of Work. London: Routledge. Koester, Almut 2006. Investigating Workplace Discourse. London: Routledge. Sarangi, Srikant & Celia Roberts (Eds.) 1999. Talk, Work and Institutional Order. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. (choose 3 articles)
