| dc.description.abstract | It is believed that a broader knowledge of the lexicon is paramount for a learner to go beyond
the common repertoire, building favorable environments for proper communication in
different social contexts. (LEWIS, 1993, 1997, 2000; LEFFA, 2000). In this perspective,
knowing the lexicon well is an indispensable condition for a richer communicative
competence in BP (ANTUNES, 2012, TEODORO, 2018). However, although the relevance
of such knowledge is a consensus among the majority of professionals working in the area,
there is a feeling that it has been minimized, given that it seems to be present only in most
teachers’ rhetoric, as well as absent not only from the initial and continuing education of
teachers, but also from syllabus that are part of Brazilian Portuguese Textbooks (BPTs). This
work is characterized by a qualitative documentary research, aiming to investigate the place
occupied by the lexicon in BPT through the analysis of exercises of this linguistic knowledge.
With this purpose, the 9th edition of the “Português: Linguagens” (HS) collection, by William
Roberto Cereja and Thereza Anália Cochar Magalhães, was selected among the ten
collections recommended by PNLD 2015. The collection was published by Editora Saraiva
and used from 2015 to 2017. After selecting it, we identified the vocabulary exercises in the
textbooks, analyzed the corpus, and made a comparison between the space given to the
lexicon and to grammar in the collection. Based on the guidelines of Lexicology (ANTUNES,
2012; CARVALHO, 2009, 2011; BIDERMAN, 2001; TEODORO, 2018) and the Lexical
Approach (LEWIS, 1993, 1997, 2000; LEFFA, 2000; ZIMMERMAN, 1997, MELKA, 1997;
BINON , 2000; ELLIS, 1997 and others), this research also alludes to the Common European
Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and the Framework of Reference for the
Teaching of Portuguese Abroad (QuaREPE). It is observed that the Lexical Approach (LA),
the CEFR and the QuaREPE place lexical competence at the top of those identified as the
most relevant ones to the knowledge of a language, defending a language concept based on
“chunks” (lexical portions). It is seen as a lexicalized and non-grammatical phenomenon,
differently from what happens in traditional teaching, in which knowing the grammar is often
mistaken for knowing the language. The integrated teaching of lexical-grammatical patterns
(lexicon + grammar) is defended in detriment of a dichotomous approach (lexicon x
grammar). The option of adopting LA (which places the lexicon at the center of the teachinglearning process), even if conceived for the teaching of the English language, is justified by
the lack of a national approach to work on PL lexicon (BORTONI-RICARDO, 2005; SEIDE;
DURÃO, 2015). Our conclusion is that BPTs still focus on the study of grammar (language as
a code), neglecting the study of the lexicon. Moreover, when this study is present, words
continue to be seen in isolation, detached from their context, with only few exceptions. In the
end, we hope this research will fill some gaps in the existing investigations on the theme,
leaving a contribution that pique the interest of other researchers who address issues regarding
the way lexicon is taught in BPT. We also hope it sparks the interest of HS teachers, mainly
by pointing out paths that can be followed in order to obtain better results in their teaching
practice, especially when it comes to teaching PL lexicon. | eng |
