Mathioudakis 11ICGL pp.1054-1069

UNIVERSITY OF THE AEGEAN - FACULTY OF HUMANITIES
DEPARTMENT OF MEDITERRANEAN STUDIES
11th International Conference

on Greek Linguistics
(Rhodes, 26-29 September 2013)
Selected Papers / Πρακτικά
Edited by
G. Kotzoglou, K. Nikolou, E. Karantzola,
K. Frantzi, I. Galantomos, M. Georgalidou,
V. Kourti-Kazoullis, Ch. Papadopoulou, E. Vlachou
RHODES 2014
Selected Papers of the

11th International Conference on Greek Linguistics
Rhodes, 26-29 September 2013
Organizing committee
K. Frantzi, I. Galantomos, M. Georgalidou, E. Karantzola, G. Kotzoglou,
K. Nikolou, V. Kourti-Kazoullis, Ch. Papadopoulou, E. Vlachou
Secretariat support
M. Fesopoulos, A. Antonakis, F. Bilali, I. Danaki, K. Daraviga, A. Drobaniku,
P. Eldachan-Apergi, M. Iliopoulou, D. Kallas, A. Kallianos, M.R. Kapetanaki,
K. Kefalopoulou, S. Kotzampougiouki, V. Kyprioti, M.-M. Makri, Ch. Pagoni,
N. Polia, M. Stella, K. Tsafa, M. Fotopoulou
Τext editing
M. Fesopoulos
Layout
A4_artdesign
ISBN 978-960-87197-9-8
© Rhodes 2014
Εργαστήριο Γλωσσολογίας ΝΑ Μεσογείου
Τμήμα Μεσογειακών Σπουδών, Πανεπιστήμιο Αιγαίου
Laboratory of Linguistics of the SE Mediterranean

Department of Mediterranean Studies, University of the Aegean
UNIVERSITY OF THE AEGEAN - FACULTY OF HUMANITIES
DEPARTMENT OF MEDITERRANEAN STUDIES

Selected Papers / Πρακτικά
Edited by
G. Kotzoglou, K. Nikolou, E. Karantzola,
K. Frantzi, I. Galantomos, M. Georgalidou,
V. Kourti-Kazoullis, Ch. Papadopoulou, E. Vlachou
Laboratory of Linguistics
of THE SOUTHEASTERN Mediterranean
Table of Contents
Preface .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Plenary Papers ............................................................................................................................................................................................. [5-61]

Brian D. Joseph
Language and sustainability in the Greek context ..................................................................................................................................... 5
Μαριάνθη Μακρή-Τσιλιπάκου
Πρακτικές κοινωνι(ογλωσσι)κής κατηγοριοποίησης: Κατηγορίες μέλους ....................................................................................... 19
Angela Ralli
Morphological variation in Modern Greek and its dialects ................................................................................................................ 46
PAPErs from the main session and the workshops ....................................................................................................... [65-1868]
Ζωή Αλεξοπούλου, Σοφία Μαντζανίδου & Ουρανία Μήλιου
Μελετώντας Γλώσσα και Περιβάλλον: Μία πρόταση διδακτικής εφαρμογής
στη Μελέτη Περιβάλλοντος της Δ΄Δημοτικού .............................................................................................................................................. 65
Μανώλης Αμβροσιάδης & Κατερίνα Φραντζή
Φύλο και χρήση επιθέτων στον κοινοβουλευτικό λόγο ............................................................................................................................ 80
Άννα Αναστασιάδη-Συμεωνίδη
Νέο Πρόγραμμα Σπουδών για τη Νεοελληνική Γλώσσα στην υποχρεωτική εκπαίδευση ........................................................... 93
Άννα Αναστασιάδη-Συμεωνίδη, Ελευθερία Ζάγκα & Μαρίνα Ματθαιουδάκη
Συνδυαστικές προσεγγίσεις στη γλωσσική διδασκαλία: Η περίπτωση του CLIL ......................................................................... 102
Μαρία Αντωνίου
Μεταφράζοντας τίτλους άρθρων εφημερίδων: Η περίπτωση της Monde Diplomatique ....................................................... 114
Βενετία Αποστολίδου, Νικολίνα Κουντουρά & Ελένη Χοντολίδου
Το νέο Πρόγραμμα Σπουδών για το μάθημα της Λογοτεχνίας στην υποχρεωτική εκπαίδευση .............................................. 125
Αργύρης Αρχάκης
Φωνές αντίστασης σε μαθητικά κείμενα μεταναστών ............................................................................................................................ 138
Φρειδερίκος Βαλετόπουλος & Ελένη Μότσιου
Φόβος και έκπληξη: Ορισμός και περιγραφή ............................................................................................................................................ 151
Maria Barouni
Disambiguating concessive at least .............................................................................................................................................................. 166
Ευαγγελία Βλάχου, Χρυσούλα Παπαδοπούλου, Σταματία Στελλά & Μάριος Φεσόπουλος
Η έννοια της ποσοδεικτικότητας διαγλωσσικά: Συγκριτική μελέτη ελληνικών-εβραϊκών ...................................................... 179
Μαριάνθη Γεωργαλίδου & Βεράνα Κυπριώτη
Αφήγηση και ταυτότητα: Η περίπτωση των δίγλωσσων στα ελληνικά
και τουρκικά μουσουλμάνων της Ρόδου ...................................................................................................................................................... 196
Μιχάλης Γεωργιαφέντης
Ποικιλία στη σειρά των προτασιακών όρων στις αναιτιατικές και
ανεργαστικές δομές της ελληνικής .................................................................................................................................................................. 210
Stergios Chatzikyriakidis
Polydefinites in Modern Greek: The missing LINK . . ............................................................................................................................. 218
Valentina Christodoulou
The construction of membership identities in a Greek-Cypriot student society:
Forms of participation and language choices ......................................................................................................................................... 237
[ v ]
Katerina Christopoulou & George J. Xydopoulos
Η μεταφορά και η μετωνυμία στο περιθωριακό λεξιλόγιο της ΝΕ .................................................................................................... 248
Μαρία Γιάγκου, Βίκυ Κάντζου & Σπυριδούλα Σταμούλη
Ο γραπτός αφηγηματικός λόγος των αλλόφωνων μαθητών: Μελέτη των γλωσσικών
χαρακτηριστικών που διακρίνουν επίπεδα γλωσσομάθειας ................................................................................................................. 261
Έφη Γκαρέλη, Έφη Καπούλα, Στέλα Νεστοράτου, Ευαγγελία Πρίτση,
Νίκος Ρουμπής & Γεωργία Συκαρά
Η διδασκαλία της νέας ελληνικής σε τμήματα φοιτητών Erasmus:
Προβληματισμοί και διδακτικές προτάσεις ................................................................................................................................................. 277
Μαριάννα Γκιουλέκα
Δηλώνοντας μορφολογικά την οριστικότητα: Δεδομένα από την ποντιακή
και την καππαδοκική ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 294
Διονύσης Γούτσος & Γιώργος Πολυμενέας
Η ταυτότητα ως συνάρτηση του τόπου στον λόγο του κινήματος των πλατειών .......................................................................... 306
Διονύσης Γούτσος & Γεωργία Φραγκάκη
Πρόσφατη γλωσσική αλλαγή στα ελληνικά: Σχεδιασμός του διαχρονικού σώματος
ελληνικών κειμένων του 20ού αιώνα ............................................................................................................................................................ 318
Δήμητρα Δελλή
Η πολυσημία του ρήματος (επι)νέμω και των παραγώγων του στις διαλέκτους
της αρχαίας ελληνικής: Το παράδειγμα της αρχαίας Μεσσήνης ......................................................................................................... 330
Μαρία Δημάση & Παρασκευή Σαχινίδου
Η συγκειμενική διακειμενικότητα της κατανόησης και παραγωγής λόγου στα πλαίσια
του γλωσσικού μαθήματος: Δείκτης γλωσσικής αξιολόγησης και κειμενοποίηση
της ταυτότητας του υποκειμένου ...................................................................................................................................................................... 347
Ειρήνη Δημητροπούλου
«Παλαβολέξης» στη Χορτιάτη: Οι νεολογισμοί και οι λειτουργίες τους ......................................................................................... 361
Angeliki Efthymiou, Georgia Fragaki & Angelos Markos
Aspects of productivity of the Modern Greek prefix iper-: A corpus-based study .................................................................... 373
Alexis Evangeliou
The morphosyntactic structure of the Greek past/passive participle ............................................................................................. 384
Ελευθερία Ζάγκα, Μαρία Μητσιάκη & Μαρία Τζεβελέκου
Η διδασκαλία της ελληνικής ως δεύτερης γλώσσας (Γ2) στο νέο Πρόγραμμα Σπουδών
για τη Νεοελληνική Γλώσσα .............................................................................................................................................................................. 403
Μαρία Ζέρβα
Πώς η κουβέντα γίνεται εθνική αφήγηση .................................................................................................................................................... 416
Valantis Fyndanis, Michaela Nerantzini, Irini Choudala & Eva Maria Tsapakis
Production of functional categories in agrammatic aphasia and task-related
processing demands: The role of ±distant cues ....................................................................................................................................... 428
Alejandro García-Aragón
Knowledge acquisition by means of etymological reasoning: The Environment
seen through the Modern Greek lens ........................................................................................................................................................... 439
Alejandro García Aragón & Miguel Sánchez Ibáñez
The lexical paradox of Boomerang terms: Terminological dependency of Modern
Greek in the environmental domain ............................................................................................................................................................. 451
Zoe Gavriilidou
Intensifying prefixes in Greek .......................................................................................................................................................................... 468
Zoe Gavriilidou, Kostandinos Petrogiannis, Achilles Bardos,
Penelope Kambakis-Vougiouklis, Lydia Mitits & Nursen Molla
Translation and cultural adaptation of the SILL into Western Thracian Turkish
for measuring strategy use in Muslim students learning Greek as a second language ......................................................... 479
[ vi ]
Chiara Gianollo & Nikolaos Lavidas
Greek cognate datives: From modification to focus .............................................................................................................................. 488
Voula Giouli & Aggeliki Fotopoulou
Developing language resources for sentiment analysis in Greek .................................................................................................... 501
Δήμητρα Θεοφανοπούλου-Κοντού
Προτασιακές συγκριτικές δομές της νέας ελληνικής: Οι δείκτες απ’ όσο(ς), απ’ ό,τι ............................................................... 512
Ευαγγελία Θωμαδάκη
Πληθυντικός και περιληπτικά ..................................... ...................................................................................................................................... 524
Ευαγγελία Θωμαδάκη & Χριστίνα Μάρκου
Εκφράζοντας έκπληξη: Γλωσσικά μέσα στην ελληνική και στη βουλγαρική γλώσσα ................................................................ 537
Παρασκευή Θώμου
Αφαιρετικά σχήματα (patterns) σε ένα λεξικό πολυλεκτικών λεξικών μονάδων
(multi-word units) της ΝΕ ................................................................................................................................................................................. 549
Παρασκευή Θώμου & Aσπασία Χατζηδάκη
Διδασκαλία πολυλεκτικών λεξικών μονάδων (multi-word units) της νέας ελληνικής
ως δεύτερης γλώσσας σε ηλεκτρονικό περιβάλλον μάθησης ............................................................................................................... 560
Evia Kainada
F0 alignment and scaling as markers of prosodic constituency ...................................................................................................... 580
Evia Kainada & Mary Baltazani
The vocalic system of the dialect of Ipiros ................................................................................................................................................. 591
Konstantinos Kakarikos
Gender agreement and nominal inflection in Ancient Greek ............................................................................................................. 603
Aikaterini-Lida Kalouli
“Translating” Modern Greek to a computational language ............................................................................................................. 616
Μαρία Καμηλάκη
Γλωσσικές αναπαραστάσεις γυναικών και έμφυλα στερεότυπα στον σύγχρονο
ελληνικό κινηματογράφο: H περίπτωση της κωμωδίας ......................................................................................................................... 632
Πηνελόπη Καμπάκη-Βουγιουκλή & Άγγελος Μάρκος
Aυτοαξιολόγηση της γνώσης διαλέκτων/ιδιωμάτων από φοιτητές της φιλολογίας
με τη χρήση της ράβδου ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 645
Αφροδίτη Καποθανάση
Η διδασκαλία του φαινομένου της ομοηχίας στην υποχρεωτική εκπαίδευση:
Η περίπτωση των εγχειριδίων Γραμματικής του Γυμνασίου ............................................................................................................... 658
Ioanna Kappa
Epenthetic consonants in the Western Cretan dialect ........................................................................................................................... 674
Ελένη Καραντζόλα & Μαρία Χαλβατζιδάκη
Πρώιμη κρητική σε αφηγηματικά και νοταριακά κείμενα (16ος αι.) ............................................................................................... 689
Βασιλική Καρκαντζού & Σταματία Κουτσουλέλου
Μάνα δεν είναι μόνο μία: Η ανίχνευση της ταυτότητας της «μάνας» μέσα
από χρήση συμπλεγμάτων σε σώματα θεατρικού λόγου ........................................................................................................................ 703
Kalliopi Katsika & Shanley Allen
Processing subject and object relative clauses in a flexible word order language:
Evidence from Greek ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 715
Γεωργία Κατσούδα & Μαρία Βραχιονίδου
Η μητρωνυμία στα νεοελληνικά ιδιώματα και διαλέκτους ................................................................................................................... 727
Σύλα Κλειδή & Αγγελική Τσόκογλου
Υπό έλεγχο ή εκτός ελέγχου; ............................................................................................................................................................................. 738
[ vii ]
Μαρία Κολιοπούλου, Θεόδωρος Μαρκόπουλος & Νικόλαος Παντελίδης
Πόντος, Καππαδοκία, Αϊβαλί: Προκλήσεις ενός ψηφιακού σώματος γραπτού υλικού ............................................................. 750
Βασιλεία Κούρτη-Καζούλλη, Γιάννης Σπαντιδάκης & Άσπα Χατζηδάκη
Η εκμάθηση της ελληνικής ως δεύτερης/ξένης γλώσσας μέσα από το πρόγραμμα κοινοτήτων
μάθησης του διαδικτυακού μαθησιακού περιβάλλοντος για τη διασπορά ...................................................................................... 760
Δημήτρης Κουτσογιάννης, Βασιλική Αδάμπα, Σταυρούλα Αντωνοπούλου,
Μαρία Παυλίδου & Ιωάννα Χατζηκυριάκου
Όψεις της διαλογικότητας στις διδακτικές πρακτικές διδάσκοντος την ελληνική γλώσσα ...................................................... 775
Σταματία Κουτσουλέλου
Φύλο και γλωσσικές επιλογές: Μια προσέγγιση μέσα από σώματα θεατρικού λόγου ............................................................... 788
Μαρία Κουφάκη
Οι υπαρκτικές δομές στα νέα ελληνικά .. ....................................................................................................................................................... 800
Σπύρος Κρουσταλάκης
Από τη θεωρία στην πράξη: Διδάσκοντας γλώσσα με αφορμή την ιστορική γνώση
στην Α’ Γυμνασίου ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 820
Μαγδαληνή Κ. Κωνσταντινίδου
Στοιχεία για το ιδίωμα της επαρχίας Άργους (Δυτική Αργολίδα) ...................................................................................................... 830
Μαρία Κωνσταντίνου & Fabienne Baider
Εννοιολογικές μεταφορές και αρνητικά συναισθήματα στον εξτρεμιστικό λόγο της Χρυσής Αυγής .................................... 843
Chryssoula Lascaratou
From metaphor to empathy: Conceptual vs. experiential understanding of pain ................................................................... 855
Angelos Lengeris & Katerina Nicolaidis
Greek consonant confusions by native listeners in quiet and noise .............................................................................................. 866
Angelos Lengeris, Ioanna Kappa, Nitsa Paracheraki & Kostandinos Sipitanos
On the phonetics of retroflexion in the (western) Cretan Dialect ................................................................................................... 874
Nikos Liosis
Language varieties of the Peloponnese: Contact in diachrony ....................................................................................................... 884
Nikos Liosis & Eirini Kriki
Towards a typology of relative clauses in late Medieval Greek ...................................................................................................... 895
Ευγενία Γ. Μαγουλά
Φωνολογία και εκπαιδευτική γλωσσολογία ............................................................................................................................................... 909
Βασιλική Μακρή, Μάριος Ανδρέου & Νίκος Κουτσούκος
Ενσωμάτωση δάνειων λέξεων: Απόδοση γένους στα ουσιαστικά της κατωιταλικής ................................................................ 920
Angeliki Malikouti-Drachman & Gaberell Drachman
On the status of the foot in Greek phonology .......................................................................................................................................... 933
Ευάγγελος Μαλμέν
Το γνωστικό αντικείμενο της Λογοτεχνίας ως έρεισμα για τη διδασκαλία γλώσσας:
Διδακτική εφαρμογή ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 941
Ειρήνη Μανιού, Μαριάννα Κονδύλη & Λίζα Παΐζη
Γραμματικά σύνδρομα της ονοματοποίησης στην ελληνική ................................................................................................................ 953
Έλενα Μάντζαρη & Μαβίνα Πανταζάρα
Γενικά και ειδικά ηλεκτρονικά λεξικά της νέας ελληνικής .................................................................................................................. 968
Stella Markantonatou, Antonis Anastasopoulos & Yanis Maistros
Using object noun and clitic frequencies in the study of transitivity and
verb polysemy in Modern Greek ................................................................................................................................................................... 987
Χριστίνα Μάρκου
Φρασεολογικές μονάδες δηλωτικές χρώματος στην ελληνική, τη ρωσική
και τη βουλγαρική ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 998
[ viii ]
Maria Martzoukou
Prosodic cues in sentence comprehension: Evidence from subject/object
ambiguities in Greek ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 1013
Κατερίνα Μαρωνίτη & Αναστασία Στάμου
Κοινωνιογλωσσικές αναπαραστάσεις του φύλου σε κείμενα μαζικής κουλτούρας για παιδιά:
Η περίπτωση των κινουμένων σχεδίων ................................................................................................................................................... 1027
Maria Mastropavlou
The status of grammatical gender in the lexicon: Exploring the role of suffixes in online
gender processing and lexical access in Greek ................................................................................................................................... 1040
Nikos Mathioudakis
The fuzzy areas of guessing or inferencing the idiosyncractic vocabulary
of Kazantzakis’ Odys(s)ey ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1054
Nikos Mathioudakis & Athanasios Karasimos
Dialectic and idiomatic aspects in Odys(s)ey by Nikos Kazantzakis ........................................................................................ 1070
Elizabeth Mela-Athanasopoulou
Dialect fieldwork evidence of the Ionian Sea islands and the notion of word
identification in Modern Greek ................................................................................................................................................................... 1089
Dionysios Mertyris
Deflexion in Northern Greek: The loss of the genitive ..................................................................................................................... 1100
Milena Milenova
The acquisition of new and similar sounds: Εvidence from bulgarian learners of Modern Greek ............................... 1113
Lydia Mitits
Language learning strategy use in Greek as a second versus English as a foreign language ....................................... 1122
Ricardo Moreno-Briseño
Is Greek viewpoint aspect translatable into English and Spanish? ............................................................................................ 1135
Ιφιγένεια Μουλίνου
Δραστικότητα και ευθύνη στο δίκαιο των ανηλίκων ........................................................................................................................... 1144
Israel Muñoz Gallarte
The Greek-Spanish dictionary of the New Testament (DGENT): Contextual factors
and some practical examples ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1152
Thanassis Nakas & Georgia Katsouda
Lexical blending: A new typology ............................................................................................................................................................. 1165
Στέλα Νεστοράτου
Γλωσσικός σεξισμός στη διδασκαλία των ονομάτων της ελληνικής
ως δεύτερης ή ξένης γλώσσας ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1177
Katerina Nicolaidis & Mary Baltazani
An investigation of acoustic and articulatory variability during rhotic
production in Greek ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 1192
Καλομοίρα Νικολού, Μαρία Ξεφτέρη, Παναγιώτα Γκουτζηγιάννη
& Μαρία Παπουτσάκη
Η σύνθεση στα κυκλαδικά ιδιώματα: Μια πρώτη προσέγγιση ........................................................................................................ 1208
Νικόλαος Ντάγκας
Φωνολογική περιγραφή του ιδιώματος των Βεντζίων Γρεβενών .................................................................................................. 1226
Θεόδωρος Ξιoύφης
H κωδικοποίηση της συναισθηματικής αιτιότητας μέσω των προθέσεων
της νέας ελληνικής γλώσσας ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1239
Μαριάνθη Οικονομάκου & Μανόλης Σοφός
Γλωσσικά «λάθη», γλωσσική ιδεολογία και διδασκαλία της γλώσσας:
Μια έρευνα πεδίου ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 1250
[ ix ]
Ευγενία Δ. Παγκουρέλια & Μαρία Παπαδοπούλου
Πτυχές της τροπικότητας στον επιχειρηματολογικό λόγο: Πόσο συνειδητά επιχειρηματολογούν
οι μαθητές στα γραπτά τους; ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1263
Ιωάννης Παπαγιαννόπουλος & Μαριάννα Κονδύλη
Συμπύκνωση και σύνδεση της εμπειρίας: Γλωσσική ανάλυση των σχολικών κειμενικών
ειδών της Ιστορίας και της Βιολογίας στη δευτεροβάθμια εκπαίδευση ........................................................................................ 1275
Ασπασία Παπαδήμα & Ευάγγελος Κουρδής
Yποτιτλίζοντας κείμενα μαζικής κουλτούρας σε κυπριακή διάλεκτο ............................................................................................ 1289
Δέσποινα Παπαδοπούλου, Αλέξανδρος Τάντος, Maja Pejčić & Σωτήρης Τάντος
Η προτεραιότητα του φορέα εμπειρίας: Θεματικοί ρόλοι και σειρά όρων στα ελληνικά ..................................................... 1301
Lena Papadopoulou
“My deepest condolences”: Greek pragmatemes [in a funeral] ................................................................................................. 1315
Lena Papadopoulou & Elina Chadjipapa
The semantic class <material> of Greek adjectives: Lexicographical treatment and
applications on machine translation (GR-ES) and learning Greek ............................................................................................. 1325
Αικατερίνη Πάππου-Ζουραβλιόβα
Ουρανικοποίηση/ουράνωση στις νεοελληνικές διαλέκτους της πρώην Σοβιετικής Ένωσης,
σε σύγκριση με τα ελληνικά ........................................................................................................................................................................... 1333
Αικατερίνη Πάππου-Ζουραβλιόβα & Κλειώ Μάρκου
Συγκριτική μελέτη του συστήματος τονισμού της ρωσικής και ελληνικής
(στο πλαίσιο της διδασκαλίας της ρωσικής σε ελληνόφωνους) ...................................................................................................... 1347
Anna Piata
Emotion and time conceptualization in poetic discourse ................................................................................................................ 1361
Περικλής Πολίτης & Ευάγγελος Κουρδής
Η χρήση γεωγραφικών διαλέκτων σε τηλεοπτικές διαφημίσεις: Μια πρόταση
για τη διδακτική τους αξιοποίηση ............................................................................................................................................................... 1377
Maria Pontiki, Zoe Angelou & Haris Papageorgiou
Sentiment analysis: Building bilingual lexical resources ............................................................................................................... 1390
Apostolos Poulios
Transporting age identities across situations: The case of the elderly ..................................................................................... 1401
Προκόπης Προκοπίδης, Αλεξάνδρα Μπέλλος, Χάρης Παπαγεωργίου
& Γιώργος Μαρκόπουλος
Δεδομένα και πειράματα για την αυτόματη συντακτική ανάλυση ελληνικών κειμένων ........................................................ 1412
Αθηνά Προύντζου & Γιώργος Ι. Ξυδόπουλος
Μια πρώτη περιγραφή του διαλεκτικού λεξιλογίου περιοχών της ορεινής
και πεδινής Ηλείας ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 1424
Angeliki Psaltou-Joycey, Areti-Maria Sougari, Eleni Agathopoulou
& Thomaï Alexiou
The role of age, gender and L1 strategies in the L2 strategies of primary
school children in Greece ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1436
Βαρβάρα Πυρομάλη
Παράγοντες που επηρεάζουν τη χρήση γαλλικών δάνειων λέξεων στη νέα
ελληνική γλώσσα: Μια έρευνα στις ψευδόφιλες μονάδες ................................................................................................................. 1449
Anka Rađenović & Ivana Milojević
Multiple choice tests: Guessing or knowing? ...................................................................................................................................... 1462
[ x ]
Ανθή Ρεβυθιάδου, Βασιλεία Κούρτη-Καζούλλη, Αμαλία Ρόντου-Γκόρου,
Τάνια Ζουράβλεβα, Ιωάννης Σπαντιδάκης, Μαίρη Σουκαλοπούλου,
Κωνσταντίνος Κωνσταντουδάκης, Χρήστος Ζάρρας, Αλέξης Νικολαΐδης
& Νέστορας Πελεσόγλου
Τα 7 κλειδιά του δράκου: Ένα ηλεκτρονικό μαθησιακό περιβάλλον για την αλβανική
και τη ρωσική ως γλώσσες κληρονομιάς ................................................................................................................................................. 1471
Antonio Puigdollers Revuelta
(In)equality comparison in Modern Greek .......... .................................................................................................................................. 1483
Dámaris González Romero
The influence of the contextual factor in the New Testament adjectives .................................................................................. 1495
Θεοδώρα Σαλτίδου, Αναστασία Γ. Στάμου & Τριαντάφυλλος Η. Κωτόπουλος
Η «γλώσσα των νέων» ως υφολογικός πόρος όλων των ηλικιών στον τηλεοπτικό λόγο:
Το παράδειγμα των ελληνικών σειρών ................... .................................................................................................................................. 1504
Ειρήνη Σανουδάκη
Επίσημα συμφωνικά συμπλέγματα στην ελληνική παιδική γλώσσα:
Δεδομένα μιας δοκιμασίας επανάληψης ψευδολέξεων ...................................................................................................................... 1520
Matthew J.C. Scarborough
On the phonology and orthography of the Thessalian mid-long vowels .................................................................................. 1535
Δήμητρα Σερακιώτη
Σκιαγράφηση προσώπου μέσα από θεατρικό κείμενο βάσει των γλωσσικών επιλογών ...................................................... 1549
Μαρία Σηφιανού & Αγγελική Τζάννε
Σύντομες επαγγελματικές συνδιαλλαγές ................................................................................................................................................... 1561
Ελπίδα Σκλήκα
Εξέταση των λημμάτων αποτέλεσμα, συνέπεια, επίπτωση, επίδραση σε ηλεκτρονικά
σώματα κειμένων ............................................................ .................................................................................................................................. 1574
Ελένη Σκούρτου, Πολυξένη Λάμπρου & Μάνος Δεληγιαννάκης
Ημερολόγια και κείμενα ταυτότητας παιδιών Ρομά στην Ελλάδα: Ζητήματα ταυτότητας,
γραμματισμού και γλωσσικής ποικιλομορφίας ...................................................................................................................................... 1587
Eleni Staraki
Imperatives and deontic modality ............................................................................................................................................................. 1593
Pepi Stavropoulou, Dimitris Spiliotopoulos & Georgios Kouroupetroglou
Where Greek text to speech fails: Requirements for speech synthesis in spoken dialogue systems ............................. 1604
Vojkan Stojičić, Predrag Mutavdžić & Πολύδωρος Γκοράνης
Περί ελληνικών φρασεολογισμών και των αντίστοιχών τους σερβικών ..................................................................................... 1621
Γεωργία Στύλου
Η σύνθεση σε δίγλωσσους μαθητές στη Γερμανία ............................................................................................................................... 1632
George Tambouratzis, Marina Vassiliou & Sokratis Sofianopoulos
PRESEMT: A hybrid machine translation system based on large monolingual corpora ................................................... 1642
Alexandros Tantos, Despina Papadopoulou & Andreas Charatzidis
Discourse and grammatical effects on pronoun resolution in Greek ......................................................................................... 1655
Anne Temme & Elisabeth Verhoeven
Clitic-left dislocation vs. scrambling: Comparing the linearization properties of German
and Greek experiencer verbs ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1668
Δημήτριος Τζιμώκας
Ηλεκτρονικό σώμα κειμένων (ΗΣΚ) εκμάθησης της ελληνικής ως δεύτερης γλώσσας:
Προκαταρκτικές παρατηρήσεις .................................................................................................................................................................... 1679
Larisa V. Topka
Certainty and uncertainty in terms of prototypical situation ........................................................................................................ 1695
[ xi ]
Radoslava Trnavac & Maite Taboada
Discourse relations and affective content in the expression of opinion in texts .................................................................... 1705
Βάσια Τσάμη, Αργύρης Αρχάκης, Σοφία Λαμπροπούλου & Βίλλυ Τσάκωνα
H αναπαράσταση της γλωσσικής ποικιλότητας σε τηλεοπτικά κείμενα μαζικής κουλτούρας ............................................. 1716
Ianthi M. Tsimpli, Maria Andreou, Eleni Agathopoulou & Elvira Masoura
Narrative production, bilingualism and working memory capacity: Α study
of Greek-German bilingual children ........................................................................................................................................................ 1730
Marina Tzakosta & Aristea Kalantzi
How loose are loose compounds? Evidence from experimental data ....................................................................................... 1743
Marina Tzakosta & Efrosini Stavroulaki
Variable phonological patterns in morphologically complex and morphologically
simple Greek pseudowords: Εvidence from (a)typically developing children ....................................................................... 1759
Katerina Tzortzi & Stella Markantonatou
The ‘medical event’ in a conceptually organized lexicon ............................................................................................................... 1774
Άννα Φτερνιάτη
Δεξιότητες γραμματισμού μαθητών του δημοτικού σχολείου και ισχύον διδακτικό υλικό .................................................. 1786
Michael Vereno
The bagpipe in antiquity – A Greek instrument? ................................................................................................................................ 1803
Christos Vlachos
Remarks on (Modern Greek) gapping ..................................................................................................................................................... 1813
Ουρανία Χατζηδάκη & Ιωάννα Κ. Λεκέα
Η ρητορική στρατηγική της αυτοαπαλλαγής από την ευθύνη για τον θάνατο
του Αθ. Αξαρλιάν στις προκηρύξεις της «επαναστατικής οργάνωσης 17 Νοέμβρη» .............................................................. 1827
Ιωάννα Χατζηκυριάκου
Εφαρμόζοντας κριτική ανάλυση λόγου στην τάξη: Το γλωσσικό μάθημα .................................................................................. 1839
Αναστασία Χριστοφίδου, Αθανάσιος Καρασίμος & Βασιλική Αφεντουλίδου
Έλεγχος, παρακολούθηση και ταξινόμηση νεολογισμών με το ηλεκτρονικό πρόγραμμα
ΝεοΔημία: Η προσέγγιση των νέων δανείων ......................................................................................................................................... 1850
[ xii ]
THE FUZZY AREAS OF GUESSING OR INFERENCING
THE IDIOSYNCRATIC VOCABULARY OF KAZANTZAKIS’S ODYS(S)EY
Nikos Mathioudakis
Democritus University of Thrace & Kazantzakis Publications
nikosmathious@gmail.com
Abstract
In the present study, it is investigated whether and to what extent university students
have the competence of decoding and comprehending the language of literature, the
poetic grammar, of individual authors. More specifically, we are interested in
Kazantzakis’s language and his talent of creating new words or bringing idiomatic
words of several Greek dialects back in use, in his unique epic poem Odys(s)ey.
Moreover apart from the accuracy of inferencing, we investigate the learners’ own
confidence that they have guessed correct and they have understood not only the
specific word they are asked to decode but also the underlying meaning of the whole
sentence.
Keywords: reading comprehension strategies, inferencing, guessing, accuracy,

confidence, fuzziness, Odys(s)ey, Kazantzakis
1. Introduction
On the one hand, Mukařovský (1964) considers that violations of the rule of the
common language in poetry are legitimate and necessary, because without them there
would be no poetry, so whoever criticizes the deviations from the norm of language as
mistakes means that he rejects the poetry itself. On the other hand, Peirce (1931) claims
that nothing is a sign unless it is interpreted as a sign and if this is true for everyday
language, this is more so for literature and poetic grammars created by the authors.
Thus, the most interesting issues in education diachronically are the familiarization of
pupils with literature, both national and international.
The empirical approach to exploring the idiosyncratic vocabulary of an author such
as the vocabulary of the Odys(s)ey1 by Nikos Kazantzakis, is a real challenge, and
shows great interest in linguistics, especially in terms. The vocabulary of the Odys(s)ey
constitutes a true linguistic treasure, which remains for several decades, the adoption of
the saga to date, scientifically unexplored and unexploited linguistically.
The Odys(s)ey by Kazantzakis is a literary product, which presents a variety of
difficulties both in a linguistic and philosophical level, because of the multitude of
unfamiliar and difficult words contained in the epic. It is characteristic that the author
himself in the first edition of the poem in 1938 decided and included a detailed
vocabulary with meanings and concepts of the most difficult –in his opinion– words.

1
The title of the poem is written Odys(s)ey, in proportion to the original title of Kazantzakis’s epic
ΟΔΥΣΕΙΑ issued in majuscule script with an “Σ” in the first edition (1938). Researchers adopt
proportionally similar script and in English, by one as mark of respect author’s will and the other as a
distinct point to avoid confusion with the title of the famous epic of Homer's Οδύσσεια (in English:
Odyssey), which is written with two “σ”. In this study we use a later version of the poem (1967), such as
that released by Kazantzakis Publications until today.
In G. Kotzoglou et al. (eds), 2014, Selected Papers of the 11th International Conference on Greek Linguistics,
1054-1069. Rhodes: University of the Aegean.
s e l e c t e d pa p e r s / π ρα κτ ι κ α
It is my belief that Kazantzakis’s epic poem is an important task of the literary era
that had as its main objective to preserve and pass on to younger generations a real
linguistic treasure of our demotic language, which tended to be destroyed by ignorance
but also maybe by the refusal of the makers of arts and literature to study and record
the true new Greek language, as expressed by the mouth of the spontaneous and genuine
people with a particular creative and productive force. Also, about the poetic words of
neological undictionaried words of Odys(s)ey, I think they may not be quite as non-
understandable because they were created by the creative ability of ordinary speakers
aiming to communicate and service their daily needs. Finally, I believe it is particularly
interesting to detect some cases with a vocabulary idiosyncratic character like
neological undictionaried words of Kazantzakian poem, which could be a good and
proper exercise of the imagination of every reader, once the process of semantic
identification of unknown or difficult words resulting from direct and indirect
knowledge activates a variety of reading strategies and understanding of a literary text.
2. Research background
2.1 Literature Review
There are quite a few researches about the role of language, and lexis more specifically,
in poetry. As for Kazantzakis and his Odys(s)ey, there are not many specific researches
concerning his poetic language (Mathioudakis 2012a,b,c), at least not to our knowledge.
On the one hand, there is, of course, Pantelis Prevelakis’s work, The Poet and The Poem
of Odyssey (1958), which is general and still too academic; while other linguistic works
about Kazantzakis’s language specifically include the following: Kazantzakis’s
Language of Nikolaos Andriotis (1959), KAZANTZAKIS and the Linguistic Revolution
in Greek Literature of Peter Bien (1972), Kazantzakis and Language of Vassilios
Mandilaras (1987), The Language of Odyssey of N. Kazantzakis of Eleftheria
Giakoumaki (1982) and Zur Sprache der Odyssee von Kazantzakis of Alexander
Sideras (1983). On the other hand, the literary epic of Kazantzakis is not used in
educational studies, apart from a few examples, where he was part of qualitative
research, particularly highlighting the reading behavior of the participants. Specifically,
Katsiki-Gkivalou (2009) conducted a survey2 of first-year students (N=252: 206 girls
and 43 boys) of the Faculty of Primary Education (University of Athens), in order to
determine the impact of Kazantzakis on modern young people, particularly, the extent
to which young people understand the spirit of the composition and the ideas that
underlie it.
The linguistic investigation of the Odys(s)ey –apart from some isolated theoretical
studies of language and style– is an original work, since it is the first time an researcher
is dealing more with the vocabulary of the whole epic poem, from the beginning until
the end, in order both to record neological poetic words and to study the degree of
understanding of those words from readers, and the factors that may affect them.
Mathioudakis’s research efforts (2009/unpub, 2009, 2011, 2012c) are the first
empirical approaches of the epic poem by Nikos Kazantzakis, where an attempt is made
to investigate the accuracy of the participants’ effort to understand and find the exact
meaning of unknown words using a strategy of free unconfined guessing, using all the
information provided and evidence. It is worth noting that the researcher gives

2
Illustrative noted that the survey was conducted in 1998.
[ 1055 ]
1 1 t h I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o n f e r e n c e o n G r e e k Li n g u i s t ic s
particular importance to an additional factor which seems to play an important role in

the process of language tests and concerns the certainty or confidence of subjects that
answered correctly and accurately guessed the importance of keyword targets.
Specifically, the study of the agent ‘correctness’ or ‘accuracy’, is, as already
reported, the most frequent inquiries linguistic or non assays, using various strategies,
and texts of general interest, literary, scientific and others. However, after a literature
search it was found that there is lack of research focusing on literary texts of Greek
authors, to determine in what circumstances and under what conditions the readers are
able to understand the meaning of unknown or difficult words during literary reading.
Conversely, the exploration factors of ‘certainty’ or ‘confidence’ occurs primarily in
psychological studies and are not at all common in investigations of language tests. But
the researcher of the present study believes that the consideration of the accuracy and
confidence of participants in a language test –according Kambaki-Vougioukli’s
researches (1990-2013)3– could be beneficial to the learning process, since it is not only
important to someone to be right in his answers but also be confident about his own
ability to answer correctly and thus enhance his self-esteem.
2.1.1 Inferencing
The term ‘inferencing’ was first used by Carton (1971), who invented it in order to
distinguish one type of conclusion that differs from the type of logical conclusion. The
term of Carton was created to fill the need of describing a concept that involves an
element of uncertainty and where it is not possible to detect the logical inference while
on the other hand, involves an element of certainty that comes from using inductive
logical considerations and conclusions. The notion of inferencing differs from the
concept of guessing, which is quite opportunistic in nature. Carton, therefore, mainly
inspired this condition of the science of psychology according to the information theory,
the acquisition of language and the teaching of foreign languages and his views on
language and learning differed in key respects from colleagues, were set in a time when
the science of language was even inspired by the ideas and opinions of representatives
of Behaviorism.
He also suggests that the study of language is not a simple process of making skills
but is a complex intellectual process, in which those who are trying to learn a language
must use their experience and knowledge during processing.
Then, Carton believes that the main purpose in drawing conclusions or assumptions
is the identification of unknown stimuli and thus notes that in learning a language, the
goal is achieved through the acquisition of new morphemes and phonemes in natural
context. Therefore, the notion of inferencing or guessing presents a bipolar character:
(a) as a process of understanding and (b) as a learning process in morphological and
lexical level. This conception of the vision of guessing, in the form of inference, led
him to establish the terms of the three main sources of knowledge through cues or clues:
A) Intra-lingual cues, which are related to inferencing, based on native language
(mother tongue) of people making guesses. According to the specific cues, information
learned can be associated with:
(a) Internal cues, which are inherent in the very word (morphology, phonology,
orthography) and the type of processing strategies on the specific linguistic evidence is
bottom-up reading involved in the process of inferencing or guessing withdrawn from

3
See also Intze (2010) and Mouti (2011).
[ 1056 ]
memory and information related meanings of certain morphemes, so that subjects can
recognize other unknown words.
(b) External cues, which are in the context (syntax, vocabulary, semantics) while the
type of processing strategies on the specific linguistic cue is top-down reading that
highlights the context as an important factor for the interpretation of language.
B) Inter-lingual cues, which relate to the conclusions or assumptions based on the
native language (mother tongue) of the people making guesses or any other language
you happen to know, apart from the native language and the target language.
According to the specific cues, information learned can be associated with:
(a) Internal cues, which are inherent in the word itself (morphology, phonology,
orthography).
(b) External cues, which are inherent in the surrounding context (syntax, vocabulary,
semantics).
C) Extra-lingual cues, which relate to non-linguistic factors that are directly related
to the processes of generalization and abstraction, since it is primarily associated with
general knowledge about the world, held by the person who learns the language and
with ways of using the direct physical framework, such as pictures, objects, imitations
or facial expressions.
In addition, Clarke & Nation (1980) argue that the ability of a reader to guess and
anticipate for the importance of a word, without resorting to a dictionary, is an important
aspect of the process of reading, since the reader saves time by continuing undisturbed
and uninterrupted reading and increasing the efficiency of reading. Thus, they segregate
its strategic importance of inferencing unknown words in four stages:
(a) In the first stage, the reader looks at the word itself and the context, in order to
decide on the part of speech to which the unknown or unrecognized words belong.
(b) In the second step, he notes the direct grammatical context of the word, usually
in the sentence or in the period.
(c) In the third stage, he studies the wider textual context in which the word is usually
beyond the plane of the period and sometimes over several sentences.
(d) In the last step, the reader guesses or infers the meaning of the word and checks
whether the assumption or prediction is correct. Thus, the process of guesswork
emerges as an important requirement during reading.
This study focuses mainly on free lexical inferencing or guessing to export
hypothetical conclusions on the written word, namely, reading and thus to understand
a text. Agreeing with some researchers who argue that the fundamental processes
basically have many features in common, my description of certain processing
strategies is focusing on models and techniques, which are engaged in the process of
reading. However, I believe that the strategies that follow apply not only to reading but
extend to other processes, such as understanding a text.
2.1.2 Vougiouklis & Vougioukli Bar (V squared Bar)
The correctness of guessing (accuracy) and the subjects’ conviction (confidence) about
their answers are two variables, which despite their vagueness and subjectivity which
characterizes them, is possible to greatly enhanced, so as for a subject to answer
correctly in language testing either providing or guessing the appropriate word or giving
the exact meaning, but at the same time, being sure that the answer is correct. An
important role in strengthening the faith of the subjects is played by strengthening the
educational process with methods and techniques to help participants to assume or
[ 1057 ]
predict or guess correctly, managing as much existing or offered informations as

possible; in other words, to teach students the use and combination of various strategies
in reading and understanding a text, especially of a literary work.
The escalation of a variable, such as accuracy or confidence, depends both on its
nature and on the researcher’s judgment. Decisions of this kind are difficult to be made
in cases such as the compilation of questionnaires to be used in linguistic and other
research. There are definitely certain scales which are preferred to others, such as the
5-grade Likert scale:
I completely agree, I rather agree,

I am somewhere between, I rather disagree, I completely disagree.
This type of scale is characterized by certain elements-rules normally identified in

every step of the scale. That is to say, they pinpoint a very positive beginning and a
very negative end. However, the most difficult part is partition and where exactly the
limits of the actual partition lie. The problem of discrimination of those categories is
quite serious for the researcher but it is even more so for the subjects of the research,
who might need tedious explanations and, finally, miss the point of the research.
In order to minimize such risks Vougiouklis and Kambaki-Vougioukli (2008), based
on the fuzzy theory (Zadeh 1965), introduced a new statistical tool, ‘the bar’, as an
alternative to the usually used Likert scales (Kambaki-Vougioukli et al. 2011).
Proposition:
In every question of a questionnaire the scale could be replaced
by the ‘bar’, whose two poles are defined by 0, on the left, and 1 on the right.
The participants, instead of the usual checking of one grade explicitly specified on
the scale, will have to ‘cut’ by a vertical line the continuum space at any point they
think expresses best their answer to the specific question. There are certain advantages
in using the Bar instead of the Scale, such as avoiding time consuming explanations as
for the difference between the grades and having the subjects start the filling in process
straight away.
Moreover, it makes the researcher’s job easier at the level of processing the results
as the researcher can decide how many discriminations she/he wishes and, even more,
she/he can try different discriminations. Such a process gives the researcher a scientific
advantage as she/he can easily investigate parameters she/he possibly had not thought
of before.
Nevertheless, the proposal of Vougiouklis & Kambaki-Vougioukli (2008, 2011,
2012, 2013) enables researchers to process their data accurately converting discrete to
continuous and even more uniquely in multi-valued or vague/fuzzy (Davvaz &
Leoreanu 2007, Corsini & Leoreanu 2003, Vougiouklis 1994 2008, Vougiouklis &
Kambaki-Vougioukli 2008 2011 2012 2013). Therefore, the bar eliminates the
problems of internal limits and allows addressing things as options on the real line,
where it is isomorphic to the continuum [0,1]. Lygeros typically refers to the advantages
of the bar:
“The innovation of Vougiouklis & Kambaki-Vougioukli, regarding the

replacement of the Scale of the Bar, has deep roots in the struggle
between continuous and discrete. The tool proposed is not an additional
mass between the tools, [...], the Bar of Vougiouklis & Kambaki-
[ 1058 ]
Vougioukli is trying to overtake with an artistic mathematical way, the

methodological problems of simplification which creates a model, such
as the Likert’s scale. [...] With the Bar it is easy to apply all the
techniques of the various distributions, such as Bernoulli, Poisson,
Gauss, [...], the Bar can be operated as a screening tool for potential
scales” (Lygeros 2008 2009).
In conclusion, the use of the bar –unlike the scale– is considered to be the desired
research tool for the research approach in both teaching and understanding literary text
or not. The handy tool bar, which is “a mathematical artistic way” («έντεχνο
μαθηματικό τρόπο» Lygeros 2008), applies perfectly to scientific beliefs of the present
research, for this reason and both the bar and the theory of fuzzy sets of the main
theoretical background for the processing of the key variables will be used, namely the
accuracy and confidence.
Finally, I think the V & V Bar (or V2 Bar) is a very serious proposal if implemented
widely; it can bring more advantages which are extremely helpful for researchers and
will be able to identify any shortcomings of the tool and gradually be improved. By
doing this you will create a research tool, which combines objectivity in methodology
and try to identify the ambiguity and subjectivity of survey variables.
2.2 Rational and purpose - Hypothesis
The present research, regarding to the findings of previous studies and the results of
previous pilot studies (Mathioudakis 2009/unpub, 2009, 2011), focused on the study of
students in the Departments of Philology in all Greek Universities. The purpose of this
descriptive and interpretive research, or as it is commonly called field research, is to
study the degree of accuracy and confidence of subjects in the process of reading and
understanding a literary text, using the strategy of ‘open-inferencing’ (ελεύθερο
μάντεμα, Mathioudakis 2012c: Chapter 5: About Strategies: 5.6), to understand some
words that can be regarded as examples of an idiosyncratic vocabulary.
The lack of previous research relevant to understanding the language of the
Odys(s)ey by Nikos Kazantzakis, and the difficulties in reading it, are two important
reasons that make necessary –in my opinion– the research of linguistic skill. Under
Stylistics, several scientists have reported on the usefulness and necessity of personal
study and writing of poetry with a particular grammar for each author, thus proving a
better understanding of his work by contemporary readers. Therefore, the main
objective of the investigation remains the best possible understanding of this saga,
exploring the unknown and/or imaginative words.
According to the results of similar studies, the aim of this study is to clarify the
relationship between the dependent and independent variables, and the degree to which
one variable affects another in a lexical test using the strategy of open-inferencing
(ελεύθερο μάντεμα) so as to achieve the correct interpretation of an unknown or an
abstruse either morphological or semantic word.
Specifically, the research objectives set in this study are to investigate the following:
o Correlation between the accuracy of the answers and confidence of whether

subjects answered/guessed correctly.
subjects answered/guessed correctly and gender.
[ 1059 ]

subjects answered/guessed correctly and year of study.
subjects answered/guessed correctly and foreign languages or/and dialects that
subjects speak and/or understand.
subjects answered/guessed correctly and the educational level of their parents.
subjects answered/guessed correctly and philanagnosia (love of reading).
o Correlation between the contact of subjects with the general work of
Kazantzakis and Kazantzakis’s books and the accuracy of their answers and
confidence of whether they answered/guessed correctly.
3. Research
3.1 Method
3.1.1 Subjects
The research subjects were students of the First (A) and Fourth (D) year of study in the
Department of (Greek) Philology of Universities throughout Greece. Specifically, the
main research sample consisted of five hundred fifty-five (555) subjects-students of
Greek Language and Literature: one hundred fifteen (115) male and four hundred forty
(440) female. Of the total sample –when the survey was conducted (April-May 2011)–
three hundred ten (310) were enrolled in the A year of study, [sixty-nine (69) male and
two hundred and forty one (241) female]; in addition, two hundred forty five (245) were
enrolled in the D year of study [forty-six (46) male and one hundred ninety-nine (199)
female].
The educational institutions which involved in the present research were the
Departments of Greek Philology at the universities of Athens, Thessaloniki, Ioannina,
Crete, Thrace, Patras and Peloponnese. Especially for the fourth year in which the
students were divided into fields, sampling was equally planned out of all section fields
(Classics, Modern Greek and Byzantine Language, Linguistics).
In this research, the number of questionnaires was five hundred fifty-five (N=555);
in other words, more than fifteen percent (15% +) of the total population, so that the
sample is representative and is considered very satisfactory (N>500). According to the
views of many researchers, the proportional stratified sampling acquires representative
character, if it has the form layouts, which depict the same three-dimensional and real
structure, i.e. the actual total population.
3.1.2 Materials and tasks
The data collection tools of the research are divided into two stages: the basic tool and
auxiliary tool. So research tools were: (a) a constructed questionnaire –as a main tool–
and (b) a lexical corpus –as an auxiliary tool.
The questionnaire has twenty-four passages from the epic poem of the author
containing an underlined word, which –in the opinion of the researcher (Mathioudakis
& Kambaki-Vougioukli 2009/unpub 2011, Mathioudakis 2009)– were unknown and
[ 1060 ]
unfamiliar to subjects, since the Odys(s)ey has not been taught in school curriculum
Texts in Modern Greek Literature in secondary education from the 80s until today, but
neither do students choose to read it (Katsiki-Gkivalou 2009, Mathioudakis &
Kambaki-Vougioukli 2009/unpub).
The target words that were included in the questionnaire4 were selected according to
two axes: (a) the main parts of speech, i.e. nouns, verbs and adjectives, and (b) the basic
categories of the typology of undictionaried words (see Mathioudakis 2012b & 2012c:
Chapter 3: Neology and Neological Words: 3.6.2· also, Mathioudakis & Karasimos this
volume), i.e. production, compounding, dialectical and onomatopoetic words. The
questionnaire consisted of eight (8) nouns, eight (8) verbs and eight (8) adjectives, i.e.
8+8+8=24, of which six (6) were derived words, six (6) compound words, six (6)
dialectal words and six (6) onomatopoetic words, i.e. 6+6+6+6=24. The words, as
shown in the table below, were equally spaced in the parts of speech and represented
equally the categories of undictionaried words.
Table 1: Word groups of the questionnaire
3.2 Design
The research variables are divided into the following two categories:
(I) In the ‘Dependent Variables’ (DV), which are those that are affected by the
change in value of another or some other variable, i.e. independent, “showing the degree
of relation or affinity that links the dependent and independent” (Siardos 2004:3).
(II) In the ‘Independent Variables’ (IV), which are those that can affect some
other variable and offer adjustment somehow (Tsopanoglou 2010:51).
The DVs were selected, for this study, are:
(a) the accuracy of the responses of the subjects and
(b) the confidence of the same subject for the correctness of his responses.
The IVs are:
(1) the ‘Experimental Variables’ (EV) that are the questions with the target
words for the interpretive approach. The questions are related to the use of the strategy
to open-inferencing (ελεύθερο μάντεμα), so subjects had to imagine the meaning of each
word, exploring all the elements, such as the context, the analysis of the word, potential
correlations with other similar words, in other words searching for internal and external
cues before taking a final decision on the correct –in their opinion– interpretation.

4
More information about the questionnaire, see Mathioudakis 2012c: 7.4.2.1 & Appendix III.
[ 1061 ]
(2) the ‘Subject Variables’ (SV), which are related to the research subjects: (a)
gender, (b) the year of study, (c) the university, (d) foreign languages and/or dialects
which the subjects speak and/or understand, (e) the educational level of the father, (f)
the educational level of the mother, (g) philanagnosia of subjects (φιλαναγνωσία
information about how often they read literature), (h) subjects’ contact with the general
work of Nikos Kazantzakis and (i) grade of subjects’ reading some of the books by
Nikos Kazantzakis.
3.3 Procedure
The researcher visited the Departments of every university in person. Initially, he urged
teachers to leave the room and return at a particular time when it was estimated that the
process would be fully completed. Then, he asked those students who wished to
participate in the research to remain in the room.
After that, the researcher handed out the questionnaires to the subjects, asking them
warmly to read carefully the instructions that were written on the questionnaire. He did
not offer them any details concerning the lexical test. Also, the researcher asked the
students to answer –as they themselves wanted– without restrictions and letting their
imagination free in any way they believed that they would perform precisely the
thinking.
The time allowed was only half an hour (30΄), in which the subjects were required
to answer all questions according to the instructions that were in the questionnaire and
indicate their confidence about the replies, noting on the bar.
The subjects, after writing the one word or periphrastic interpretations, noted how
confident they were about each of their answers (see Figure 1) on the continuum [0,1],
where 0 = absolutely unsure and 1 = absolutely sure. Essentially, the subjects had to
‘cut’ the bar at the point which stated their confidence (see Figure 2), as follows:
Figure 1: Bar for evaluating the Confidence
absolutely unsure absolutely sure
It is clear that the possible cuts are endless, as points in a line are infinite. For example:
Figure 2: Example bar to evaluate the Confidence
absolutely unsure absolutely sure
[ 1062 ]
3.4 Process - Scoring of Accuracy and Confidence
Still evaluating the accuracy and confidence, the researcher applied the following
method score:
(a) As regards to accuracy, the researcher was able to evaluate the responses of the
subjects based on the theory of fuzzy sets, which tries to objectify subjectivity. As in
literature, anyway, no one can refer to a single interpretative approach of a word,
therefore a score of zero (0) to four (4) was chosen, where:
• Zero (0) means that the answer is completely wrong.

• One (1) means that the answer is almost wrong.
• Two (2) means that the answer is neither right nor wrong.
• Three (3) means that the answer is about right.
• Four (4) means that the answer is absolutely correct.
(b) As regards to confidence, the researcher, after receiving the subjects’

questionnaires, measured –with absolute precision and strictness– the bars (one by one)
for all the answers, using a ruler. The measurement point was made that each subject
on the bar, was the confidence of the subject about this answer. In this research, the
total length of the bar is 6.18 centimeters (≈6.20 cm), so the prices of the subjects’
confidence about the correctness of their responses were from 0 cm up to 6.18 cm.
Although the evaluation of the bar per subject proved a time-consuming process, the
accuracy of the values gives to each researcher a flexibility use in the evaluation and
processing of the survey data, an important factor in the development of research and
mathematization of subjectivity.
4. Results
The values of the results presented in the tables below have interesting aggregated
results. (Of course these results represent the research findings in this sample of subjects
and at a specific time).
On the one hand, in Table 2, the results are excellent in the statistical approach and
the hypotheses tested. A very strong relationship is shown between DV, accuracy and
confidence. Regarding the gender of subjects, the relationship between accuracy and
gender did not show statistical significance, while the relationship between confidence
and gender showed highly statistically significant difference. Regarding the
relationship of year of study both the accuracy and the confidence is highly statistically
significant. Then with regard to languages and/or dialects which subjects speak and/or
understand the research we have the following results: relations between both the
accuracy and confidence with all the languages and dialects, with only foreign
languages and with only dialects have statistically highly significant difference. Finally,
an interesting observation concerning the relative accuracy and confidence only with
the Cretan dialect: The results show that there is very little statistically significant
positive relationship between the Cretan dialect and accuracy, while for the confidence
a non-statistically significant positive relationship is indicated.
[ 1063 ]
Table 2: Aggregated Research Results I
On the other hand, in Table 3, the results obtained are quite different from the
previous table. The relationship between accuracy and the father’s education, and
between accuracy and the mother’s education do not show a statistically significant
difference; respectively, the relationship between confidence and the father’s education,
and between confidence and the mother’s education show no statistical significance
either. Statistics show a highly significant difference in the relationship between
accuracy and philanagnosia and between confidence and reading books of Kazantzakis.
Also, the relationship of both the accuracy and confidence and contact with the work
of Kazantzakis shows a statistically significant difference. While not statistically
significant difference exists in relationships between confidence and philanagnosia, and
between accuracy and reading books of author. (See for more research results,
Mathioudakis 2012c: Chapter 7: Empirical Research).
[ 1064 ]
Table 3: Aggregated Research Results II
5. Conclusion - Further research
In conclusion, the results of this study showed three very interesting and important
things about literary reading, and in particular Kazantzakis’s Odys(s)ey: (a) The
standard issue on gender discrimination regarding the reading of literature is in jeopardy
and under further research, since the above results demonstrate equivalence in the
reading ability between males and females. (b) The theoretical assumption that prevails
among researchers about the language of the saga of the Cretan writer that the poem is
written in the Cretan dialect thus the texture of the words is better understood by people
who speak and/or understand especially the Cretan dialect, was rebutted through most
of the statistical and mathematical approach to literature. (c) A claim of several
scholars, and thus readers, that Kazantzakian Odys(s)ey is not easy to read because of
the difficulty of vocabulary, remains a matter under investigation despite the fact that
the survey results show high levels of understanding both of the language and
idiosyncratic vocabulary of this epic poem.
In addition to the above remarks, it is worth noting that this research, conducted in
men and women students in the Departments of (Greek) Philology of Universities
throughout Greece, could be applied both to students of secondary education and higher
education, colleges and other people of various ages and no longer studying, all of
whom constitute potential readers of the Odys(s)ey by Kazantzakis. The aim will be to
create a comprehensive picture of the accuracy and confidence of the open-inferencing
(ελεύθερο μάντεμα) strategy of native speakers of Greek, in the process of processing
and understanding this epic poem. In other words, the application of this or a similar
research to potential readers of Kazantzakis’s epic would be an enlightening argument
because it would reveal the degree of understanding of the poem, which still remains
“unread” by people and scientifically undeveloped by researchers.
[ 1065 ]
References
Andriotis, Nikolaos [= Ανδριώτη, Νικόλαος]. 1959. “The language of Kazantzakis.”
[in Greek: Η γλώσσα του Καζαντζάκη]. Αφιέρωμα Νίκος Καζαντζάκης Νέα Εστία
66 (779): 90-95.
Bien, Peter. 1972. Kazantzakis and the Linguistic Revolution in Greek Literature.
Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Carton, A. S. 1971. “Inferencing: a process in using and learning language.” In Τ. Quinn
and P. Pimsleur (eds), The Psychology of Second Language learning, 45-58.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clarke, D. F., & Nation, I. S. 1980. “Guessing the meanings of words from context:
strategy and techniques.” System 8: 211-220.
Corsini, P., & Leoreanu, V. 2003. Applications of Hypergroup Theory. Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Davvaz, B., & Leoreanu, V. 2007. Hyperring Theory and Applications. USA: Int.
Academic Press.
Giakoumaki, Eleftheria [= Γιακουμάκη, Ελευθερία]. 1982. “The language of
“ODYSSEY” of N. Kazantzakis” [in Greek: Η γλώσσα της “ΟΔΥΣΣΕΙΑΣ” του Ν.
Καζαντζάκη]. Λεξικογραφικόν Δελτίον 14: 143-167. Αθήνα: Ακαδημία Αθηνών.
Intze, Polyxeni [= Ιντζέ, Πολυξένη]. 2010. The Accuracy and Confidence in Modern
Greek Vocabulary of Native and non-Native Speakers of the Greek Language in
Western Thrace [in Greek: Η ορθότητα και η βεβαιότητα στο νεοελληνικό λεξιλόγιο
φυσικών και μη φυσικών ομιλητών της ελληνικής γλώσσας στη Δυτική Θράκη].
Διδακτορική Διατριβή, Δημοκρίτειο Πανεπιστήμιο Θράκης.
Kambaki-Vougioukli, Penelope. 1990. “Native and non-native accuracy and
confidence when guessing meanings of unknown words.” In Proceedings of BAAL
Annual Conference. Swansea.
Kambaki-Vougioukli, Penelope. 1992a. “Greek and English readers' accuracy and
confidence when inferencing meaning of unknown words.” In Proceedings of
6thInternational Symposium on the Description and/or Comparison of English and
Greek. Thessaloniki: Aristotle University of Thessaloniki.
Kambaki-Vougioukli, Penelope. 1992b. The Accuracy and Confidence of Greek
Learners Guessing English Word Meanings. PhD Dissertation, University of Wales.
Kambaki-Vougioukli, Penelope. 1993a. “Τhe role of advanced Greek learners’
psychotypologies.” In Proceedings of 10th International Symposium for Guessing
English Word Meanings. Amsterdam.
Kambaki-Vougioukli, Penelope. 1993b. “Greeks' guessing of the meanings of unknown
words: the relationship between success and awareness of success.” In Proceedings
of 10th International Symposium for Guessing English Word Meanings. Amsterdam.
Kambaki-Vougioukli, Penelope. 1995. “The lexical decomposition strategy in guessing
meanings of unknown words: users’ competence and confidence.” ERIC Document
Reproduction , Service No. ED.328 096.
Kambaki-Vougioukli, Penelope [=Καμπάκη-Βουγιουκλή, Πηνελόπη]. 2001.
“Linguistic rehabilitation of children repatriated from the former USSR: a
psycholinguistic approach.” [in Greek: Γλωσσική αποκατάσταση παιδιών
επαναπατριζόμενων από την πρώην ΕΣΣΔ: Μια ψυχογλωσσική προσέγγιση].
Phasis, ICPBMGS 4: 71-81.
Kambaki-Vougioukli, Penelope [=Καμπάκη-Βουγιουκλή, Πηνελόπη]. 2002.
“Linguistic rehabilitation Greek-Pontic students: a psycholinguistic approach.” [in
Greek: Γλωσσική Αποκατάσταση Ελληνοπόντιων Μαθητών: Μια ψυχογλωσσική
προσέγγιση]. Στο Ε. Τρέσσου και Σ. Μητακίδου (επιμ.), Η Διδασκαλία της Γλώσσας
[ 1066 ]
και των Μαθηματικών: Εκπαίδευση Γλωσσικών Μειονοτήτων, 518-526.

Θεσσαλονίκη: Παρατηρητής.
Kambaki-Vougioukli, Penelope. 2007. “Teaching the systematic dictionary use for self-
study and confidence building.” In Proceedings of 18th International Symposium on
Theoretical and Applied Linguistics. Thessaloniki: Aristotle University of
Thessaloniki.
Kambaki-Vougioukli, Penelope. 2008. “Teaching the systematic dictionary use as a
strategy for accuracy and confidence building.” In Proceedings of 13th EURALEX
International Congress. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
Kambaki-Vougioukli, Penelope. 2012. “SILL revisited: confidence in strategy
effectiveness and use of the bar in data collecting and processing”. In Z. Gavriilidou,
A. Efthymiou, E. Thomadaki, and P. Kambakis-Vougiouklis (eds), Selected Papers
of the 10th ICGL, 342-353. Komotini: Democritus University of Thrace.
Kambaki-Vougioukli, Penelope. 2013. “Bar in SILL questionnaire for multiple results
processing: users’ frequency and confidence.” Sino-US English Teaching 10 (3):
184-199. ISSN1539-8072. USA: David Publishing Company.
Kambaki-Vougioukli, Penelope, Alexander Karakos, Nikos Lygeros, and Thomas
Vougiouklis. 2011. “Fuzzy instead of discrete.” Annals of Fuzzy Mathematics and
Informatics 2 (1): 81-89.
Katsiki-Gkivalou, Anta (= Κατσίκη-Γκίβαλου, Άντα). 2009. Literary Trails B΄ [in
Greek: Φιλολογικές Διαδρομές Β΄]. Αθήνα: Εκδόσεις Πατάκη.
Kazantzakis, Nikos [= Καζαντζάκης, Νίκος]. 1938. ODYS(S)EY [= ΟΔΥΣΕΙΑ]. Αθήνα:
Εκδόσεις Πυρσός.
Kazantzakis, Nikos [= Καζαντζάκης, Νίκος]. 1967. ODYSSEY [= ΟΔΥΣΣΕΙΑ]. Αθήνα:
Εκδόσεις Καζαντζάκη.
Mandilaras, Vassilios [=Μανδηλαράς, Βασίλειος]. 1987. Kazantzakis and Language
[in Greek: Καζαντζάκης και Γλώσσα]. Αθήνα: Ιδιωτική έκδοση.
Lygeros, Nikos (= Λυγερός, Νίκος). 2008. “Fundamental questions on the
questionnaire’s methodology.” [in Greek: Θεμελιακά ερωτήματα περί μεθοδολογίας
ερωτηματολογίου]. [Accessed February 28, 2014: http://www.lygeros.org/3942-
gr.php].
Lygeros, Nikos. 2009. “Interrogations fondamentales sur la méthodologie du
questionnaire.” Perfection 1055.
Mathioudakis, Nikolaos, and Penelope Kambaki-Vougioukli. 2009 (unpublished).
University Students’ Fuzzy Accuracy and Confidence Guessing the Idiosyncratic
Vocabulary of Nikos Kazantzakis’s ‘ΟΔΥΣΕΙΑ’. Talk in “2009 Graduate Research
Colloquium”. Oxford, UK: 23 May 2009.
Mathioudakis, Nikolaos. 2009. “The fuzzy areas of accuracy and confidence while
guessing the idiosyncratic vocabulary of Nikos Kazantzakis’s ‘ΟΔΥΣΕΙΑ’
(Odyssey).” In K. Chatzopoulou, A. Ioannidou, and S. Yoon (eds), Proceedings of
the 9th International Conference of Greek Linguistics (ICGL 9). 29-31 October
2009, 538-548. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago.
Mathioudakis, Νikolaos, and Penelope Kambakis-Vougiouklis [Μαθιουδάκης,
Νικόλαος, & Καμπάκη-Βουγιουκλή, Πηνελόπη]. 2011. “Epithetic identity of
Odysseas in the epic poem of Nikos Kazantzakis: a hypothesis through fuzzy sets.”
(in Greek: Η επιθετική ταυτότητα του Οδυσσέα στο έπος του Νίκου Καζαντζάκη:
μια πρόταση μέσω των ασαφών συνόλων). In Κ. Α. Δημάδης (επιμ.), Πρακτικά του
Δ΄ Ευρωπαϊκού Συνεδρίου Νεοελληνικών Σπουδών/ Proceedings of the 4th
European Congress of Modern Greek Studies. Γρανάδα, 9-12 Σεπτεμβρίου 2010. vol.
1, 295-314. Αθήνα: Ευρωπαϊκή Εταιρεία Νεοελληνικών Σπουδών (ΕΕΝΣ).
[ 1067 ]
Mathioudakis, Nikolaos [= Μαθιουδάκης, Νικόλαος]. 2012a. “Scribo poesem ergo

sum: about poetic grammars,” (in Greek: Scribo poesem ergo sum: Περί Ποιητικών
Γραμματικών). Στο Π. Καμπάκη-Βουγιουκλή και Μ. Δημάση (επιμ.), Πρακτικά
Συνεδρίου Ζητήματα Διδακτικής της Γλώσσας, 159-167. Θεσσαλονίκη: Εκδοτικός
Οίκος Αδερφών Κυριακίδη.
Mathioudakis, Nikolaos [=Μαθιουδάκης, Νικόλαος]. 2012b. “Poetic Neologisms in
Nikos Kazantzakis’s ODYSSEY: a Thesaurus of Thousands Unknown Words
Seeking their Identity” (in Greek: Ποιητικοί Νεολογισμοί στην ΟΔΥΣΕΙΑ του Νίκου
Καζαντζάκη: χιλιάδες αθησαύριστες λέξεις αναζητούν την ταυτότητα τους). In Z.
Gavriilidou, A. Efthymiou, E. Thomadaki, and P. Kambakis-Vougiouklis (eds),
Selected Papers of the 10th International Conference of Greek Linguistics (10th
ICGL), 905-918. Komotini: Democritus University of Thrace.
Mathioudakis, Nikolaos [=Μαθιουδάκης, Νικόλαος]. 2012c. Neological
Undictionaried Words in Nikos Kazantzakis’s Odyssey: Comprehension Strategies,
Fuzziness and Confidence (in Greek: Νεολογικά Αθησαύριστα στην ΟΔΥΣΕΙΑ του
Νίκου Καζαντζάκη. Στρατηγικές κατανόησης, Ασάφεια και Βεβαιότητα). Διδακτορική
διατριβή, Δημοκρίτειο Πανεπιστήμιο Θράκης.
Mathioudakis, Nikos, and Athanasios Karasimos. this volume. “Dialectic and idiomatic
aspects in Odys(s)ey by Nikos Kazantzakis.” In Proceedings of the 11th
International Conference on Greek Linguistics (11th ICGL). Rhodes: University of
the Aegean.
Mouti, Anna [= Μουτή, Άννα]. 2011. Cognitive Style as a Factor of Differentiation of
Proficiency and of Confidence in Closed-type Testes [in Greek: Το Γνωστικό Στιλ
ως Παράγοντας Διαφοροποίησης της Επίδοσης και της Βεβαιότητας σε Δοκιμασίες
Κλειστού Τύπου]. Διδακτορική Διατριβή, Αριστοτέλειο Πανεπιστήμιο
Θεσσαλονίκης.
Mukařovský, Jan. 1964. “Standard language and poetic language.” In P. Garvin (ed.).
A Prague School Reader on Esthetics, Literary Structure, and Style, 17-30.
Peirce, Charles S. 1931. Collected Writings, 8 Vol., (ed. C. Hartshorne, P. Weiss and
A. W. Burks), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Prevelakis, Pantelis (= Πρεβελάκης, Παντελής). 1958. The Poet and The Poem of
Odyssey (in Greek: Ο Ποιητής και το Ποίημα της Οδύσσειας]. Αθήνα: Βιβλιοπωλείο
της Εστίας.
Siardos, Georgios (= Σιάρδος, Γεώργιος). 2004. Methods of Multivariate Statistical
Analysis [in Greek: Μέθοδοι Πολυμεταβλητής Στατιστικής Ανάλυσης]. Θεσσαλονίκη:
Ζήτη.
Sideras, Alexander. 1983. “Zur Sprache der Odyssee von Kazantzakis.” Folia
Neohellenica-Zeitschrift Für Neogräzisti, Festschrift Nikos Kazantzakis 1883-1983,
Band V, 89-156. Amsterdam: Verlag Adolf M. Hakkert.
Tsopanoglou, Antonios G. (= Τσοπάνογλου, Αντώνιος Γ.). 2010. Methodology of
Scientific Research and Applications in the Assessment of Language Training [in
Greek: Μεθοδολογία της Επιστημονικής Έρευνας και Εφαρμογές της στην
Αξιολόγηση της Γλωσσικής Κατάρτισης]. Θεσσαλονίκη: Ζήτη.
Vougiouklis, Thomas. 1994. Hyperstructures and Their Representations. Monographs
in Mathematics. USA: Hadronic Press.
Vougiouklis, Thomas. 2008. ∂-operations and Hv-fields. Acta Mathematica Sinica.
English Series 24 (7): 1067-1978.
Vougiouklis, Thomas, and Penelope Kambaki-Vougioukli. 2008. “Bar instead of
scale.” Ratio Sociologica 3: 49-56.
[ 1068 ]
Vougiouklis, Thomas, and Penelope Kambaki-Vougioukli. 2011. “On the use of bar.”
China-USA Business Review 10 (6): 484-489.
Vougiouklis, Thomas, and Penelope Kambaki-Vougioukli. [= Βουγιουκλής, Θωμάς, &
Καμπάκη-Βουγιουκλή, Πηνελόπη]. 2012. “Scale or bar?” [in Greek: Κλίμακα ή
Ράβδος;]. Ηώς 2 (1): 5-8.
Vougiouklis Thomas, and Penelope Kambaki-Vougioukli. 2013. “Bar in
questionnaires.” Chinese Business Review 12 (10): 691-697.
Zadeh, Lotfi A. 1965. “Fuzzy sets.” Information and Control 8 (3): 338-353.
[ 1069 ]
Laboratory of Linguistics
of THE SOUTHEASTERN Mediterranean
ISBN 978-960-87197-9-8

Mathioudakis 11ICGL pp.1054-1069

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mathioudakis 11ICGL pp.1054-1069

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNIVERSITY OF THE AEGEAN - FACULTY OF HUMANITIES

DEPARTMENT OF MEDITERRANEAN STUDIES

11th International Conference

Selected Papers / Πρακτικά

Laboratory of Linguistics of the SE Mediterranean

11th International Conference

Plenary Papers ............................................................................................................................................................................................. [5-61]

Keywords: reading comprehension strategies, inferencing, guessing, accuracy,

2.1 Literature Review

particular importance to an additional factor which seems to play an important role in

2.1.2 Vougiouklis & Vougioukli Bar (V squared Bar)

predict or guess correctly, managing as much existing or offered informations as

I completely agree, I rather agree,

This type of scale is characterized by certain elements-rules normally identified in

“The innovation of Vougiouklis & Kambaki-Vougioukli, regarding the

Vougioukli is trying to overtake with an artistic mathematical way, the

2.2 Rational and purpose - Hypothesis

o Correlation between the accuracy of the answers and confidence of whether

o Correlation between the accuracy of the answers and confidence of whether

3.1.2 Materials and tasks

Table 1: Word groups of the questionnaire

Figure 1: Bar for evaluating the Confidence

absolutely unsure absolutely sure

Figure 2: Example bar to evaluate the Confidence

absolutely unsure absolutely sure

3.4 Process - Scoring of Accuracy and Confidence

• Zero (0) means that the answer is completely wrong.

(b) As regards to confidence, the researcher, after receiving the subjects’

Table 2: Aggregated Research Results I

Table 3: Aggregated Research Results II

5. Conclusion - Further research

και των Μαθηματικών: Εκπαίδευση Γλωσσικών Μειονοτήτων, 518-526.

Mathioudakis, Nikolaos [= Μαθιουδάκης, Νικόλαος]. 2012a. “Scribo poesem ergo

You might also like