Principles of Language Learning and Teaching by H. Douglas BrownThis was the book I read thoroughly once I was getting my EFL certificate from Cavendish College of England. Now I would like to re-read parts of it to help me in writing my own book.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
A look at the past
Principles of Language Learning and Teaching by H. Douglas BrownThis was the book I read thoroughly once I was getting my EFL certificate from Cavendish College of England. Now I would like to re-read parts of it to help me in writing my own book.
Sunday, December 21, 2008
The three phenomena in effect
The author in Chapter 8 (The Tower of Babel) goes on, in three consecutive parts to elaborate on the three major factors (learning, innovation and migration) responsible for the variations of the language throughout the world despite the conviction that there is one innate language all the others drive from. Somehow the author manages to explain the third phenomenon in more irrelevant or unnecessary details than is either fathomable or memorable by the average mind. In my opinion he fails to present more scientific facts to support or elucidate the two others which deserve more attention. Or simply they are more fascinating phenomena than the third one in my mind's eye. I might try to find other sources either from the back of the book or the internet to follow up on them.
The learning trend declares that only some parts of a certain grammar would become innate through the human evolution and the rest remain to be learned by the children born into those languages through interactions with the community and it is even learned within a community itself when some inventions or use of a natural thingamabob requires them to invent a word as well. Another reason for not having the whole codes of language innately placed in our brains is that the language by nature is a sharing code event within people. It according to the author is useless to be possessed by only one person and it will soon "fall out of register with everyone else's". "It would be like a Tango for one", Pinker says.
Anyhow, it still somehow falls short of my clearest comprehension. I need to read more on this one.
The innovation experience is even more intriguing and although more explained than the first one, some details of it still evades my understanding. Perhaps I need to read it or explore it more , too.
To put it simply this event initially happens when some language speaker "starts to speak differently" and then it spreads like a contagious incident. The change in speech can happen for a variety of reasons: a word coined, a borrowed term, a stretch in meaning, new jargon or styles that seemed too cool to let go of and gradually penetrated the "mainstream". Language innovation also happens for a more fascinating reason as the author professes: it can occur when a person's brain "reanalyzes" part of a language he mishears or is vague or incomplete. In doing so, he produces something quite new. This trend can be established in different linguistic context: syntactic, phonological, morphological and so on. (P.243-246)
The third phenomenon relates to the history of languages' origin which is not fully solved or explored and has resulted in controversial theories. It also contains the issue of language families which in turn are not fully discovered. This third factor or the way it was explored by the author did not quite charm me. It was either the long display of unfamiliar linguistic terms or the undeveloped and contentious research on the families of the language and their origin that made me lose interest. However, the alarming notion of some languages' extinction due to our modern ways of life, migration and extinction of some ancient cultures is what to which Pinker succeeds to draw the attention.
What if only one language remains at the end?
Should we intervene in the process of language extinction?
What if the natives of such languages don't want the intervention?
What happens to all that literature and language produced?
There is some hope, Pinker confesses: We could still record it. We could produce instructional material in those languages. This seems inadequate to me, as the author himself in a preceding paragraph declares that only children born to those languages can save them from elimination. With the facts above, we can say that children probably can save the oral part of the language more thoroughly.
The learning trend declares that only some parts of a certain grammar would become innate through the human evolution and the rest remain to be learned by the children born into those languages through interactions with the community and it is even learned within a community itself when some inventions or use of a natural thingamabob requires them to invent a word as well. Another reason for not having the whole codes of language innately placed in our brains is that the language by nature is a sharing code event within people. It according to the author is useless to be possessed by only one person and it will soon "fall out of register with everyone else's". "It would be like a Tango for one", Pinker says.
Anyhow, it still somehow falls short of my clearest comprehension. I need to read more on this one.
The innovation experience is even more intriguing and although more explained than the first one, some details of it still evades my understanding. Perhaps I need to read it or explore it more , too.
To put it simply this event initially happens when some language speaker "starts to speak differently" and then it spreads like a contagious incident. The change in speech can happen for a variety of reasons: a word coined, a borrowed term, a stretch in meaning, new jargon or styles that seemed too cool to let go of and gradually penetrated the "mainstream". Language innovation also happens for a more fascinating reason as the author professes: it can occur when a person's brain "reanalyzes" part of a language he mishears or is vague or incomplete. In doing so, he produces something quite new. This trend can be established in different linguistic context: syntactic, phonological, morphological and so on. (P.243-246)
The third phenomenon relates to the history of languages' origin which is not fully solved or explored and has resulted in controversial theories. It also contains the issue of language families which in turn are not fully discovered. This third factor or the way it was explored by the author did not quite charm me. It was either the long display of unfamiliar linguistic terms or the undeveloped and contentious research on the families of the language and their origin that made me lose interest. However, the alarming notion of some languages' extinction due to our modern ways of life, migration and extinction of some ancient cultures is what to which Pinker succeeds to draw the attention.
What if only one language remains at the end?
Should we intervene in the process of language extinction?
What if the natives of such languages don't want the intervention?
What happens to all that literature and language produced?
There is some hope, Pinker confesses: We could still record it. We could produce instructional material in those languages. This seems inadequate to me, as the author himself in a preceding paragraph declares that only children born to those languages can save them from elimination. With the facts above, we can say that children probably can save the oral part of the language more thoroughly.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Languages and Mammals!
The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language by Steven PinkerI can't help but wowing each time I read this book. The range, the depth, the exactness, the details and finally the clarity with which the author describes the languages just goes beyond imagination. Or maybe what fascinates me is the real dimensions of this phenomenon called "language" which unfolds itself by each explanation, comparison or intuition.
In the chapter called: "The Tower of Babel" (p.238-239), he most admirably and point to pointedly compares the diversity of languages to the diversity of mammals as a sub-specie descendants of animals. There is one and only one universal language from which all the other languages of the world come from. The grammar of this universal language is innately curved into our brains and is what we call the language instinct. Just as the mammals have a number of unchangeable shared characteristics among them, so do the languages.They all have subjects, verbs, objects; they all possess derivatives (to form new words) and inflections (to fit a word into its role in a sentence); they all deal with flexible and non-flexible word positions in a sentence and so on and so forth.
Through the centuries as the humans evolve (Darwinism), so do the languages of the world, getting its stamina or substance from three phenomena:innovation, learning and immigration. People of different cultures most strongly identify themselves with the language they speak. They evolve and they make the language evolve accordingly.
WOw...
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Some hope and hints
What I failed to mention in my previous post was my conclusion to one of the second language theories cited in the book. My reckoning could be auspicious for non native teachers of the second language ( NNS). According to the interactionist theory, one of the recent psychological ones; second language learners advance in levels of a language more effectively by interacting with those who are more knowledgable than them. This is where the theory of the "zone of proximal developement" by Vygotsky comes to attention.(P.44) This very theory coupled with the interactionist position entice me to resolve that the NNS teachers, contarary to the general belief, can be and are the reliable candidates for instructiong SLLs (Second Language Learners). They can simply be considered as more knowledgable interlocutors- the critical part to the efficiency of this theory. This, however, cannot overlook the other positive aspects of having a NNS teacher, like self-experience, sympathy, structural knowledge and so forth.
On the whole I beleive that a native speaker becomes eligible to be compared to an NNS teacher in other aspects of teaching, only if he has acquired at least a second language and is knowledgable in the structure of the language he is teaching (It is anecdotal that some native speakers of the language due to the lack of grammatical studies of the language, are ignorant of the grammar rules and therefore not neccessarily suitable for teaching their native language.). Otherwise, an NNS teacher is no less than a native one.
Other valuable material in this book for me is the areas of study which the authors claim have not been yet fully explored. These reports can be a source for me to start my own research in the future:
As stated by the authors, although much has been done on the expansion of the learning style assessment instruments; far less research has studied the interaction between different learning styles and success in SLA. (P. 58)
Also, little research investigates the effect of learners' choice of strategy on how successful they would be in learning. The authors though emphasise that a non-flexibale belief in a certain startegy is detrimental to the process of learning. They suggest that teachers showcase an array of strategies and encourage the students to use them along with their self-chosen ones. This point was especially valuable to me to make sure I provide a variety of strategies in my book for the teachers of a second language. Because personally I believe that taking advantage of as many sources as available is the key to successful learning. (P. 59)
And prolonging my learning process, here are the other points I found worth knowing:
*The differences in aptitude of SLLs and their effect on second language learning has cuased the educators to introduce the special programms for the learners of French in Canadian schools in which different apptitudes are treated by their accordingly designed programms. This, although not financially possible for every school, can give a hint to the teachers to consider varying their teaching strategies and their classroom activities to cover the range of aptitudes in their classes. (P.54)
**"...early intensive exposure to the second language" as said by the authors may result in the "loss or incomplete development of the child's first language." (P.68) Mothers! Be aware!
And over to my final analysis and wondering:
In the section dedicated to the effect of age in SLA, extensive research (including that of Johnson and Newport 1989) shows that the learners of English who started their learning at a relatively young age of 10 to 15 have shown significant success compared to those who started it at an older age. What these reaserches neglect,and in my eyes are very substantial is the decision for determining the starting point of the process of learning. In these studies they have completely ignored the amount of English to which the candidates were already exposed before entering the United States. They assume that the learning have simply been started as they have entered the United States as immigrants.
Another thing that makes me wonder is that I think the effect of four to five years of study in an exclusively English environmnet like that of a high school is also ignored in these researches. (P.64)
On the whole I beleive that a native speaker becomes eligible to be compared to an NNS teacher in other aspects of teaching, only if he has acquired at least a second language and is knowledgable in the structure of the language he is teaching (It is anecdotal that some native speakers of the language due to the lack of grammatical studies of the language, are ignorant of the grammar rules and therefore not neccessarily suitable for teaching their native language.). Otherwise, an NNS teacher is no less than a native one.
Other valuable material in this book for me is the areas of study which the authors claim have not been yet fully explored. These reports can be a source for me to start my own research in the future:
As stated by the authors, although much has been done on the expansion of the learning style assessment instruments; far less research has studied the interaction between different learning styles and success in SLA. (P. 58)
Also, little research investigates the effect of learners' choice of strategy on how successful they would be in learning. The authors though emphasise that a non-flexibale belief in a certain startegy is detrimental to the process of learning. They suggest that teachers showcase an array of strategies and encourage the students to use them along with their self-chosen ones. This point was especially valuable to me to make sure I provide a variety of strategies in my book for the teachers of a second language. Because personally I believe that taking advantage of as many sources as available is the key to successful learning. (P. 59)
And prolonging my learning process, here are the other points I found worth knowing:
*The differences in aptitude of SLLs and their effect on second language learning has cuased the educators to introduce the special programms for the learners of French in Canadian schools in which different apptitudes are treated by their accordingly designed programms. This, although not financially possible for every school, can give a hint to the teachers to consider varying their teaching strategies and their classroom activities to cover the range of aptitudes in their classes. (P.54)
**"...early intensive exposure to the second language" as said by the authors may result in the "loss or incomplete development of the child's first language." (P.68) Mothers! Be aware!
And over to my final analysis and wondering:
In the section dedicated to the effect of age in SLA, extensive research (including that of Johnson and Newport 1989) shows that the learners of English who started their learning at a relatively young age of 10 to 15 have shown significant success compared to those who started it at an older age. What these reaserches neglect,and in my eyes are very substantial is the decision for determining the starting point of the process of learning. In these studies they have completely ignored the amount of English to which the candidates were already exposed before entering the United States. They assume that the learning have simply been started as they have entered the United States as immigrants.
Another thing that makes me wonder is that I think the effect of four to five years of study in an exclusively English environmnet like that of a high school is also ignored in these researches. (P.64)
Monday, December 01, 2008
The elephant in the dark
How Languages Are Learned by Patsy LightbownIt is mainly an academic book and useful to have a quick brush up on theories of language learning as it does not go much into the details but provides excellent list of books on the areas mentioned for further reading.
So I only needed to know the theories of the second language learning for two reasons:
1) For my own curiosity as a second and third language learner and 2)To have a better idea and plan for how I want my book to look like. It definitely would not look like any thing like these sort of books. It would be mostly about my experience as a learner peppered with some relevant theories. So I started reading it from page 38 after having reviewed the first part through the list of the contents.
As I was reading the different theories, it sounded like all the theoreticians were standing in the same dark room with an elephant, each touching and discovering one part of it using their intuition. Being a successful language learner myself, I could clearly see the significance of each of these theories in my learning.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Friends-making with dry subjects
The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language by Steven PinkerFinally got the chance to put the link of the book here. It seems Pinker is in a mission to make the dry parts of the language science, like syntax, morphology and phonology juicier in three consecutive chapters (4,5,6).
As an NNS (non-native speaker) the word "cognoscenti" has captured my attention;so has the word: "curmudgeonly". I love encountering interesting words like these. Still I wonder if the native speakers can pronounce the first one correctly? Most probably yes.
I wonder how a second language learner's brain works around the rules of morphemes and sound production. I need to find some literature on that. I am so inquisitive about it.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Mentalese
I forgot to squeeze in the two fundamental attributes of Mentalese: one is that the language it produces is arbitrary and the words in the language have no connection whatsoever to their underlying meaning. (We drive in the parkway and we park in the driveway.)
The other specification of Mentalese is that it can produce meaningful sentences containing infinite number of words.
The other specification of Mentalese is that it can produce meaningful sentences containing infinite number of words.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
An outsider's conclusion
Two days a go, I read this research paper called: "How can SLA researchers contribute to teacher's practice?"
by Julie Kerekes.* She had done a thorough action research during which she had observed, taught and questioned some 12 American teachers within a specific time frame.
Although initially she mentions that ESL teachers due to their extensive experience in the field, tend to be non-responsive to the SLA researchers' attempt to tell them how to teach; she finds out at the end that her action research has resulted to some if not overwhelming changes in the attitudes of teachers in her study towards SLA and subcequently their teaching.
She also mentions that ESL teachers due to their heavy workload are not able to study the new SLA researches on their own. So this coupled with the fact cited above about their unwillingness to learn through SLA researchers; makes me think of an alternative solution. If some experienced ESL teachers will be given some incentives like a raise in Salary and a reduction of the course load; then they would be able to devote their time to studying the SLA researches and match them with their experience and produce lesson plans and unit plans for teachers to use in their ESL classes. I wonder if such jobs already exist in let's say ministry of Education or Ontario College of teachers.
* From: "Research and Practice in Language Teacher Education: Voices from the field"; University of Minnesota
by Julie Kerekes.* She had done a thorough action research during which she had observed, taught and questioned some 12 American teachers within a specific time frame.
Although initially she mentions that ESL teachers due to their extensive experience in the field, tend to be non-responsive to the SLA researchers' attempt to tell them how to teach; she finds out at the end that her action research has resulted to some if not overwhelming changes in the attitudes of teachers in her study towards SLA and subcequently their teaching.
She also mentions that ESL teachers due to their heavy workload are not able to study the new SLA researches on their own. So this coupled with the fact cited above about their unwillingness to learn through SLA researchers; makes me think of an alternative solution. If some experienced ESL teachers will be given some incentives like a raise in Salary and a reduction of the course load; then they would be able to devote their time to studying the SLA researches and match them with their experience and produce lesson plans and unit plans for teachers to use in their ESL classes. I wonder if such jobs already exist in let's say ministry of Education or Ontario College of teachers.
* From: "Research and Practice in Language Teacher Education: Voices from the field"; University of Minnesota
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
The language instinct 1
Wow , I had never thought I would blog about this. It is only recently that I have decided to do so. I felt I need to register my insights from my linguistics readings somewhere. I thought talking about a science should be done in the language of science; since the language itself as Pinker (1994) has prophesied is considered beginning to "submit"to this phenomenon.
Currently I am reading "The language Instinct"by Steven Pinker. I finished chapter four last night.
The feeling I get after finishing each chapter is one of astonishment and awe-struck and it is more due to the awe-inspiring topic (language) than to Mr. Pinker's style of writing. I know I am not much better.
It seems to me that in each chapter he has a brief introduction after which he starts throwing in a bunch of seemingly unrelated ideas which makes the text hard to follow. Then finally, after pages of trailing breathlessly, you stumble over the conclusion explained in a clear language.
He starts his book by sketching a not complete but fathomable picture of what Chomsky has said before, on the Universal Grammar as a system on which all the languages of the world are based. Then in chapter two he goes on, amid interesting and funny examples, to profess that language is an instinct.
In chapter three, it was interesting to me that I could come up with the same conclusion plus a question that was raised after reading his.
He had invented the term "Mentalese" as the underlying language system in the brains of all human beings. Initially I guessed the same thing as I was monitoring him. The Mentalese is a language system installed in human brain since birth. This system allows the children to produce language even if they have not been exposed to one or in case of pidgin languages, to improve them into more structured and understandable ones.
What remains as a question to me is the possibility of producing new languages by placing children in a controlled environment where they are only exposed to a certain predetermined factors. My idea is extremely raw. I know. I can't argue the moral aspects of it either. At this point it is more of an intellectual retailing of my mind that might or might not go anywhere. After all I am only beginning to develop a researcher's mind.
And finally, what amazes me in chapter four is the universal grammar, anatomized in an understandable language which makes me like syntax as a linguistics subject.
In one part he proves that the function words form their own "closed club" that makes it impossible for people to generate new ones. That's why the attempts to produce "gender-neutral" pronouns ("hesh, thon",etc) have failed. This prompts my second muse: If this is true; then considering the existence of Mentalese; it must be a sexist language system. But then what about the languages without such gender-distinct pronouns? Is our mind sexist?
Maybe children being raised in such languages environments, not hearning them at all, will dismiss this part of predetermined grammar in their minds.
To be continued...
Currently I am reading "The language Instinct"by Steven Pinker. I finished chapter four last night.
The feeling I get after finishing each chapter is one of astonishment and awe-struck and it is more due to the awe-inspiring topic (language) than to Mr. Pinker's style of writing. I know I am not much better.
It seems to me that in each chapter he has a brief introduction after which he starts throwing in a bunch of seemingly unrelated ideas which makes the text hard to follow. Then finally, after pages of trailing breathlessly, you stumble over the conclusion explained in a clear language.
He starts his book by sketching a not complete but fathomable picture of what Chomsky has said before, on the Universal Grammar as a system on which all the languages of the world are based. Then in chapter two he goes on, amid interesting and funny examples, to profess that language is an instinct.
In chapter three, it was interesting to me that I could come up with the same conclusion plus a question that was raised after reading his.
He had invented the term "Mentalese" as the underlying language system in the brains of all human beings. Initially I guessed the same thing as I was monitoring him. The Mentalese is a language system installed in human brain since birth. This system allows the children to produce language even if they have not been exposed to one or in case of pidgin languages, to improve them into more structured and understandable ones.
What remains as a question to me is the possibility of producing new languages by placing children in a controlled environment where they are only exposed to a certain predetermined factors. My idea is extremely raw. I know. I can't argue the moral aspects of it either. At this point it is more of an intellectual retailing of my mind that might or might not go anywhere. After all I am only beginning to develop a researcher's mind.
And finally, what amazes me in chapter four is the universal grammar, anatomized in an understandable language which makes me like syntax as a linguistics subject.
In one part he proves that the function words form their own "closed club" that makes it impossible for people to generate new ones. That's why the attempts to produce "gender-neutral" pronouns ("hesh, thon",etc) have failed. This prompts my second muse: If this is true; then considering the existence of Mentalese; it must be a sexist language system. But then what about the languages without such gender-distinct pronouns? Is our mind sexist?
Maybe children being raised in such languages environments, not hearning them at all, will dismiss this part of predetermined grammar in their minds.
To be continued...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
