Assignment 2 551

  • 13,744 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Technology , Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
  • thanks a lot
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
  • I want to thank the presenter of this slide show for a very concise yet effective presentation. I am studying for an examination that required me to look closely at Applied linguistics and I found this really helpful. Thank you and wish you success in all your future presentations. Corrine
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
13,744
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2

Actions

Shares
Downloads
398
Comments
2
Likes
7

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Q.1 Which teaching method do you prefer to teach English in your classroom keeping in view the national educational scenario? Justify your comments with arguments. Ans: In this assignment we are going to study two of the oldest methods of teaching foreign languages, these methods are the grammar translation method and the direct method. We shall look at the main features of both of these methods and see how they can be used by the teacher in the class room. Finally we shall assess each method and see whether or not they have a part to play in English language teaching in Pakistan. Before proceeding to the topic proper it looks appropriate to discuss what approach, method and technique are. Over the years there have been many changes in the ways in which people learn and teach foreign languages. During the second half of this century especially, many different teaching methods have come into fashion and have just as quickly gone out again. When we want to discuss these different methods, there seems to be a problem: the terms approaches, theories, philosophies, methods, techniques, etc. seems to be used interchangeably, with those taking part in the discussion unsure as to exactly what the other participants mean when they use these terms. Therefore, before we start discussing different methods of 1
  • 2. language teaching, let us try to define these terms as we shall be using them throughout this course. Approach: An approach to language teaching is a set of beliefs about language when underlies or prescribes the use of a certain method. For example, if you believe that language is primarily concerned with speaking, then you will follow a method of language teaching which concentrates on developing the spoken skills. If you believe that language is a set of rules, then you will adopt a teaching method which gibes emphasis to the rote learning of grammatical structures and so on… the terms principle, theory, and philosophy can mean the same as approach in this context. Method: A method of language teaching is a complete set of procedures and techniques that follow a systematic scheme. They are often prescribed by the approaches, as we have just seen. For example, the audio-lingual method is based on the view that language consists of grammar, and that we learn it through repetition. Thus a teacher using this method will use drilling, repetition, and reinforcement. Technique: 2
  • 3. This is the narrowest term of the three, and refers to specific procedures within the method. For example, while the teacher is conducting a language drill, he will first call on the whole class to respond, then he will call on a group within the class to respond, and then he will call on an individual. This is a technique within a method. The classical approach to language learning Underlying this method we find the traditional, or classical approach to language teaching; it was believed that modern languages could be taught in exactly the same way as the ancient languages of Greek and Latin had been taught for many centuries. But here we need to ask ourselves a question: what was the purpose in teaching these ancient languages? They had been dead for hundreds of years; nobody actually spoke them anymore. The answer is that they were taught purely as an academic exercise- learning these languages was considered to be an excellent training for the mind. Since the languages themselves were long since dead, there was no question of training students to understand and produce conversational forms; emphasis was thus given to the grammatical system and to the reading and translation of literary texts in the target language. The purpose of learning a modern language, such as English or Japanese, however, may be very different. Usually the student wants to be able to communicate in the language which he is learning, and this means that he must master the skills of 3
  • 4. listening and speaking in the target language just as much (and probably more so ) than those of reading and writing. The classical approach to language learning, however, takes little account of this need. The Grammar Translation method Let us imagine that we are unseen observers in an English class which is being taught by the grammar-translation method. What exactly is happening? When the teacher enters the classroom he will greet the students and carry out any class ‘business’ in the mother tongue. Again in the mother tongue, the class will be directed to open their textbooks at the page where they left off in the last class. The textbooks will contain rather heavy, literary-style texts, and will be unlikely to contain examples of modern conversational-style English. The teacher may say a few words about what was read the day before, and then he will start to read through the text and to translate it section by section. The students hurry to note down the L1 translations of any words they don’t understand. They may be given a word list to memorize as a homework task. Translation is followed by a few comprehension questions in L1, or the students may be asked to gibe an L1 translation of sentences from the text. Finally the teacher may write up a paradigm or model construction about grammar. Advantages of Grammar-translation method: 4
  • 5.  It can be useful for large classes  It can be useful for inexperienced teachers.  It may gibe adult learner confidence.  Students get plenty of practice in reading, grammar and translation. Disadvantages:  The student cannot use the language for communication.  The student cannot use the language appropriately. The Natural Approach to Language Teaching We are now going to look at another approach to language learning and teaching- one which is very different from the classical approach. This is not surprising, as it was developed in the second half of the nineteenth century as a reaction against the strict intellectual confines of the classical approach and its resulting grammar-translation method. In its development we can find a parallel to the reaction against the classical style in literature and the arts. The Romantic Movement, with its emphasis on a ‘return to Nature’. According to the exponents of the Natural Approach, then, language was first to be learnt through speech, since this was the natural route taken by a child when he acquired his first language. Reading and writing followed later. Just as a young child learning his first language rarely, if ever, had the rules of 5
  • 6. grammar explained to him, so in learning a second language he was to follow the same patch by finding out for himself how the language worked. The developing science of psychology was also applied to language learning; the resulting theories called for teachers to help the students learn by enabling them to visualize actual objects and link them with words in the target language; to encourage the students, especially the younger ones, to learn through play, and through activity in everyday situations. Most important of all, language was natural, and the heavy literary texts were to be a thing of the past. Instead, texts were chosen which reflected the day-to-day culture of the countries where the target language was spoken. The Direct Method By now we understand that a new educational approach often gives rise to a new method, and the natural approach was no exception. The principles of this approach to language teaching became enshrined in what came to be known as the direct method. Even so, the grammar-translation method was not cast aside overnight. Indeed, in many parts of the world, it lingers on to this day. Now again we will come to the advantages and disadvantages of this method. Advantages  The language learnt is useful for communication.  The student will gain confidence in speaking. 6
  • 7.  The method is motivating. Disadvantages  Teacher’s refusal to translate can waste time.  Many students feel more confident if they are given some grammar rules.  The direct method needs excellent teachers. To conclude we can rightly say that every method and approach has its merits and demerits. It is now up to the learner and the teacher to get the most benefit of them by using these methods according their situation. An interesting research that was held in Islamabad is given below. Method plays an important role in the teaching of language. It is a planned and systematic effort of the teacher for establishing sequence in the various parts of the teaching. The direct method, as its name suggests, is teaching the foreign language without the interference of mother tongue. It is also called quot;natural methodquot; because the students learn the foreign language in the same way as they learn their mother tongue. In this method, not the word but the sentence is the unit of the grammar, while the traditional method aims at teaching English by word-to-word translation in mother tongue. The child begins to develop his vocabulary from a single word. The Solomon four- group design was used for the treatment of the data. The students of Federal Government boy's secondary schools of 7
  • 8. Islamabad were the population of the study. In this design: Subjects were randomly assigned to four groups. Intelligence test was administered to determine the level of each student before treatment and to equalize the students of four groups. Experimental groups were taught by direct method while the Control groups were taught by traditional method for a period of three months. At the end of the treatment, a posttest was administered and scores of pre-test, posttest and intelligence test served as data of the study. Applying t-test and analysis of variance tested to know the significance of difference between the scores of groups at 0.05 levels. The main objectives of the study were:  to determine the role of direct teaching in the academic achievement of student in English at secondary level,  to determine whether the direct teaching method is more effective than traditional method in teaching of English,  to examine the effects of direct teaching on the academic achievement of high achievers and low achievers,  to investigate whether the students can retain the learning for a longer time when taught through direct method,  To give recommendations for improvement of suitable method of teaching English at secondary level. 8
  • 9. To achieve the objectives of the study, null hypotheses were formulated and tested. Obtained data was analyzed, interpreted and concluded that direct teaching method was more effective as a teaching-learning technique for English as compared to traditional teaching method. Students in the direct teaching method outscored than students working in traditional learning situation. Low achievers in direct teaching showed significant superiority over low achievers learning English by the traditional method. CONCLUSION Thus direct teaching was found to be more effective method for teaching English to the low achievers as compared to traditional method of teaching. High achievers, whether they were taught English by direct method or traditional method, retained learnt material at the same rate. Low achievers taught English by direct method retained more material as compared to low achievers taught by traditional method of teaching. Therefore direct teaching seemed to be more effective teaching learning technique for low achievers 9
  • 10. Q.2 Does the mastery of grammatical structure enable a student to communicate in real language situations? What do you think? Give real life examples in favour of your arguments. Ans: Mastery of grammatical structure no doubt helps a learner to learn language, also helps to understand it but it is not very much helpful for a student to be fluent and use the language in real life situations, though he will be very good at 10
  • 11. writing and reading, he may be well equipped in solving the exercises of direct and indirect speeches, transformation of voices, use of correct very but only in written form, when a need comes to use this skill with some native speaker, he will not be able to communicate properly with him. Why a student who has learnt a foreign language by grammar rules is unable to speak frequently or use in a real life situation? He answer is the student has been consistently out off the language and has studied the highly formal, literary form of it. He is usually unable to communicate with a native speaker .this is hardly surprising that the learner has never got the opportunity to use this language skill with some native speaker at school or college level. When he tends to open his mouth he tends to speak like a nineteenth century prose. The second object on this teaching method is that those who have learned a foreign language, no doubt, they know a lot about the language, but they do not know anything about itself. By this we mean that he has spent years and yeas at school explained at him the grammar rules, but he cannot apply what he has learnt in order to communicate. Such a learner cannot use the language appropriately. Language learnt for its own sake and out of any day-to-day content may be wrongly used when time eventually comes. For example the stiff and formal’ please be seated’ is not going to make a speaker of modern English at ease when he himself expect the less formal ‘have a seat’ wouldn’t you? or do sit 11
  • 12. down. Similarly a foreign learning Urdu needs to know when and to whom to say ‘for example’ ‘baith Jao’ and ‘Tashreef Rakhiay’. So, we can say that students cannot use the language for communication when he is learning rules first and he is given no opportunity to speak at school. Then definitely, he will only keep learning the rules of the new language and when ever he is to face a situation where he has to speak a foreign language, he feels disturbed, rather he faces difficulty to speak the required language. He has learnt the heavy text book words, when he goes for some shopping in a market, if he uses these typical old words, common people will be unable to understand the words used by him. As for forgiveness the word ’pardon’ was used in books. If he uses this word before a common citizen, he will never be excused because people will be unable to understand the word spoken by him. When he wants to speak with someone, he will keep in mind all the rules he has learnt about that when he will recall so much rules, then definitely he will be confused to use the language. He will keep thinking about that and will be unable to speak that. Secondly for communication, communicative competency is required rather than understanding the rules of the language. The communicative competency can be achieved only by frequent use of the target language when a learner is given opportunity to speak the target language according to different situations. For example when a person meets a banker he uses 12
  • 13. different language and the learner gets the opportunity to learn and speak. Similarly when a learner of a new language goes to market and meets shopkeepers and other people he will be able to learn the new words and will also get the opportunity to speak it freely. This will help the person to learn a language which is more useful for him in his common day life. ROLES OF TEACHERS AND STUDENTS In such a class where grammar translation method is being used, there students are only passive listeners. The teacher’s role is active. He takes a book and starts reading from it and explains the lesson in their native language. He does not give the opportunity to the students to speak the language which they are using. Thus the students do not have confidence to speak while they want to use it. Their role remains for years and years of only a passive listener. They cannot use it for communication. The teachers, who are using this method, do not have adequate training in English language teaching. They do not plan anything for their lesson. They only bother about the vocabulary of the text which they have to teach in the class. The teacher does not discuss the lesson except his routine preparation and students are never asked to answer in target language, due to which they cannot use this language as a true learner of a language. 13
  • 14. The students get only plenty of practice in reading and in writing exercises requiring grammatical manipulation. They become only enable to produce reasonable translation in both the target language and in their mother tongue. GRAMMATICAL STRUCTURE CLASSICAL APPROACH Underlying this method we find the traditional, or classical approach to language teaching; it was believed that modern languages could be taught in exactly the same way as the ancient languages of Greek and Latin had been taught for many centuries. But here we need to ask ourselves a question: what was the purpose in teaching these ancient languages? They had been dead for hundreds of years; nobody actually spoke them anymore. The answer is that they were taught purely as an academic exercise- learning these languages was considered to be an excellent training for the mind. Since the languages themselves were long since dead, there was no question of training students to understand and produce conversational forms; emphasis was thus given to the grammatical system and to the reading and translation of literary texts in the target language. THE PURPOSE OF LEARNING MODERN LANGUAGES The purpose of learning a modern language, such as English or Japanese, however, may be very different. Usually the student wants to be able to communicate in the language which he is learning, and this means that he must master the skills of listening and speaking in the target language just as much (and 14
  • 15. probably more so ) than those of reading and writing. The classical approach to language learning, however, takes little account of this need. HOW ONE CAN GET COMPETANCE WITH TRADITIONAL METHOD? Let us imagine that we are unseen observers in an English class which is being taught by the grammar-translation method. What exactly is happening? When the teacher enters the classroom he will greet the students and carry out any class ‘business’ in the mother tongue. Again in the mother tongue, the class will be directed to open their textbooks at the page where they left off in the last class. The textbooks will contain rather heavy, literary-style texts, and will be unlikely to contain examples of modern conversational-style English. The teacher may say a few words about what was read the day before, and then he will start to read through the text and to translate it section by section. The students hurry to note down the L1 translations of any words they don’t understand. They may be given a word list to memorize as a homework task. Translation is followed by a few comprehension questions in L1, or the students may be asked to give an L1 translation of sentences from the text. Finally the teacher may write up a paradigm or model construction about grammar. One can imagine that how can a person get competence in this environment. 15
  • 16. GOAL OF TEACHER So the goals of teachers who use the grammar translation method as a fundamental purpose of learning a foreign language are to make the students able to read literature written in the target language. To do this, students need to know about the grammar rules and vocabulary of the target language. The role of teacher and student is very traditional. The teacher is the authority in the class-room. The students are taught to translate from one language to another language. The students are given the grammar rules and examples and are told to memorize them. Then they are asked to apply these rules to other examples. LANGUAGE USED IN THE CLASS Most of the interaction in the class room is from the teacher to the student is generally literary language. It is considered superior to spoken language and is therefore the language of study. Vocabulary and grammar are emphasized. Reading and writing are primary skills that the students work on. There is much less attention given to speaking and listening. Pronunciation receives a little attention. The meaning of the target language is made clear by translation into native language. The language mostly used in class is students’ native language. Having correct answer from the students is very important. If the students make errors or do not know answer, the teacher supplies them with correct answer. 16
  • 17. CONCLUSION To sum up, I would be accurate to say that by learning grammar rules, learner of a foreign language cannot get mastery over that target language. We cannot get a good cricketer only by telling him about the rules of the cricket without putting him in the play ground and without giving him plenty of practice. Similarly we cannot be a good driver of a car only by cramming the rules of driving without sitting on the steering wheel and having a good practice of drive. We can rightly say that only frequent use of the target language can help to learn a language which can be useful in our daily life. 17
  • 18. Q.3 Explain synthetic and analytic approaches to languages syllabus design. Ans: An approach to language teaching is a set of believes about language which underlies or prescribes the use of a certain method. For example if you believe that language is primarily concerned with speaking, then you will follow a method of language teaching which concentrates on developing the spoken skill if you believe that language is a set of rules, then you will follow such a method which will give emphasis to the rote learning of grammatical structure. The terms principals, philosophy, theory and philosophy can mean the same as approach in this context. The following drill which would be typical of one conducted in an audio-lingual methods class, the syllabus item labeled ‘present continuous and present simple tense’ DRILL Teacher: John writes to his friend every week. 18
  • 19. Students: He is writing to his friend now. Teacher: John plays cricket every afternoon. Students: He is playing now. Teacher: John helps his father every evening. Students: He is helping his father now. The attention of the class is focused on structure or grammatical forms, involved and not on the meanings or functions. This does not mean the students do not understand the sentence, but it would still be possible for them to understand the structure without their understanding the meaning as this non sense sentence shows: Teacher: John manles to his folta every wate. Students: He is mandling his folta now. Nor is it merely a question of understanding the individual words used. The students can also mindlessly carry out the requirements of this drill without understanding the complex array of meaning which the two sentences convey. In addition to this purely grammatical meaning, there is another level at which we can interpret any utterance. We call this level the level of functional or notional meaning. These terms are used often interchangeably and you will come across both terms in your reading. Some writers make a slight distinction between the two, when we speak very often it carry 19
  • 20. out actions. For example, I promise, give an opinion, complain, suggest and so on. These are some of the things we can do with language and are called language functions or notions. We use the grammatical forms of the language in order to express these functions. For example:  Aren’t you rather hungry? If we are asked to describe this utterance grammatically, we should say it is an interrogative. But its functional meaning necessarily interrogative, it may also function as a question or it may be an order to be served with food. For each function of grammar for ‘Aren’t you hungry?’ will remain the same. One language form can express several different functions. There are some useful techniques associated with grammar- translation method. There are some for the analytic and synthetic techniques of grammar-translation method. The students translate the reading passage from the target language into their native language. Then the reading passage provides the focus for several classes, vocabulary and grammatical structure in passage. Since learning of language is most commonly identified with acquiring mastery of its grammatical system, it is not surprising that most of the courses have grammatical or structural organisms. Of course, there is numerous variety in the ways in which language may be presented in grammatically structured teaching material. 20
  • 21. While admitting that in practice these approaches are not necessarily mutually exclusive, regarding them from the linguistic point of view. These can be grouped into two:  Synthetic  Analytic Any actual course or syllabus could be placed some where on the continuum between the wholly synthetic and the wholly analytic. A synthetic language strategy is one in which different parts of language are taught separately. So that acquisition is a process of gradual accumulation of the parts until the whole structure of the language has been built up. In planning the syllabus for such teaching, the global language has been broken down into limited list of lexical items. The learner’s task is to re- synthesize the language that has been broken down into a large number of smaller pieces in the aim of making his language easier. It is only in the final stage of learning that the global language is re-established. In analytic approaches there is no attempt at this careful linguistic control of the learning environment. Components are not seen as building blocks. Much greater variety of linguistic structure is permitted from the beginning blocks which have to be progressively accumulated. The learner’s task is to approximate his own linguistic behaviour more and more closely to the global language. 21
  • 22. SYNTHETIC & ANALATICAL APPROACH. The majority of language courses and syllabus are and probably always have been constructed on synthetic lines. Language learning is a complex task. However, a complex task can usually be broken down into a series off simpler tasks. In recent years and particularly under the influence of advances of psychology of learning the identification of the smaller learning task has been carried out with increasing linguistic sophistication. The tasks are identified with item derived from description of the language. In those courses which are commonly labeled ‘traditional’ the control of new linguistics items introduced in any one text-book lesson. You facilitate learning if you present the learner with pieces of language that have been pre-digested according to the category found in a description of the language. As the methods of teaching have changed, so have the process by which language is selected and graded. In the case of older text-books decisions appear to have been taken on a more or less subjective basis. At least there is in contrast, the language teaching. Literature of past thirty years or so is full of discussion of the various factors to be taken into consideration deciding which forms of language were to be taught and in which order. Although in most modern courses control of vocabulary and of grammatical structure go hand in hand. The methodology was first direction of vocabulary. The aim was to see that the 22
  • 23. vocabulary contents of courses consisted of, in short, the most useful words. The criteria that have been used in establishing the relative usefulness of the words are frequency, range, availability, familiarity and coverage. The notion of coverage is self-evident. Range consists of a distribution of a lexical item over a number of different types of text. Availability accounts for lexical items which may not be particularly frequent but which are rapidly available to the meaning. Pedagogic considerations are not ignored in the process of selection. Some items will be ignored and some will be promoted because they are particularly useful in the classroom situation. The process of selection therefore is less important than that of ordering with the grammar the purpose is rather different. The ultimate goal of a general goal of a general course will be to each virtually the whole of the grammatical system. The syllabus that results from the application of these criteria will be a grammatical syllabus. The use of a grammatical syllabus can be majority of syllabuses and publishers. The vocabulary is secondary in importance and certainly rarely provided the basic structure of a course. The view is widely held that major part of the grammatical systematical system has been learned. What is learned through a grammatical syllabus is of value to the learner. It is rather suggested that this is not the necessary or the most effective way of designing language courses and that, in any way language learning is not complete when the 23
  • 24. content of a grammatical syllabus has been inter4The view is widely held that major part of the grammatical systematical system has been learned. What is learned through a grammatical syllabus is of value to the learner. It is rather suggested that this is not the necessary or the most effective way of designing language courses and that, in any way language learning is not complete when the content of a grammatical syllabus has been interested. One danger in basing a course on a systematic presentation of the elements of linguistic structure is that forms will tend to be taught because they are there. Sometimes, irregular verbs are introduced for the sake of completeness even where they are likely to be of little use of the learning. One characteristic of grammatical syllabuses that what has to be learnt is identified as a form and rarely as a set of meanings. Most syllabuses are in fact an inventory of grammatical forms. It is very rare for grammatical meanings also to be specified. The assumption seems to be that form and meaning are in one- to-one relation, so that the meaning to learn in association with a particular grammatical form would be self-evident. A greater difficulty and one to which there is not an obvious answer lies in the fact that the syllabus is an ordered list of structures. If the content is expressed by use of grammatical terminology, units will be identified by such labels as the indefinite articles, the past tense, transitive sentence, adverbs 24
  • 25. of frequency of course the fundamental facts of syntax are almost inevitably taught but there remain a good deal that is not. The most significant thing about this is that the teacher will normally be understood as he intends to be understood. If this was not so then can communication take place? For learners, probably, the most striking way in which the knowledge of language developed through a grammatical syllabus fails to measure up to their communicational needs is in its lack of situational relevance. They may have learnt through oral active method and have command of grammatical structure. I should add that there is language teaching based on a grammatical syllabus, which is sometimes called situational. The label is most commonly applied to a method of teaching in which language is always taught in association with some physical characteristics of the class room. Objects, pictures and activities are used to illustrate and give meaning to grammatical and lexical forms. Tenses for example are often presented in association with some physical characteristics the class room. It is clear however; that the situations referred to here is a pedagogic, class room situation, not situation of natural language use. It, therefore, cannot meet the natural situational needs. A grammatical syllabus can also be situationalized by presenting language in the syllabus form of dialogue. Therefore, on grounds of linguistic and motivation, there are reasons for 25
  • 26. looking an alternative to the grammatical syllabus as a strategy for structuring the learners’ experience of language. Analytic approaches are behavioural. They are organized in terms of purposes for which people are learning language and the kinds of language performance that are necessary to meet these purposes. The problem in putting an analytic approach into practice of one of the putting and finding way to express what it is that people do with language so that the unavoidable process of limitation or selection can take place. This approach is therefore in contrast with those approaches that rely more upon this capacity of synthesize. Qn.5. Define the term “ Sociolinguistics” and explain the relationship between sociology and linguistics. LINGUISTICS 26
  • 27. It is the scientific study of language, encompassing a number of sub-fields. An important topical division is between the study of language structure (grammar) and the study of meaning (semantics). Grammar encompasses morphology (the formation and composition of words), syntax (the rules that determine how words combine into phrases and sentences) and phonology (the study of sound systems and abstract sound units). Phonetics is a related branch of linguistics concerned with the actual properties of speech sounds (phones), non-speech sounds, and how they are produced and perceived. Over the twentieth century, following the work of Noam Chomsky, linguistics came to be dominated by the Generativist school, which is chiefly concerned with explaining how human beings acquire language and the biological constraints on this acquisition. Generative theory is modularist in character. While this remains the dominant paradigm[2, Chomsky's writings have also gathered much criticism, and other linguistic theories have increasingly gained popularity; cognitive linguistics is a prominent example. There are many sub-fields in linguistics, which may or may not be dominated by a particular theoretical approach: evolutionary linguistics attempts to account for the origins of language; historical linguistics explores language change and sociolinguistics looks at the relation between linguistic variation and social structures. A variety of intellectual disciplines are relevant to the study of language. Although certain linguists have downplayed the 27
  • 28. relevance of some other fields, linguistics — like other sciences — is highly interdisciplinary and draws on work from such fields as psychology, informatics, computer science, philosophy, biology, human anatomy, neuroscience, sociology, anthropology, and acoustics. Fundamental concerns and divisions Linguistics concerns itself with describing and explaining the nature of human language. Relevant to this are the questions of what is universal to language, how language can vary, and how human beings come to know languages. All humans (setting aside extremely pathological cases) achieve competence in whatever language is spoken (or signed, in the case of signed languages) around them when growing up, with apparently little need for explicit conscious instruction. While non-humans acquire their own communication systems, they do not acquire human language in this way (although many non-human animals can learn to respond to language, or can even be trained to use it to a degree. Therefore, linguists assume, the ability to acquire and use language is an innate, biologically- based potential of modern human beings, similar to the ability to walk. There is no consensus, however, as to the extent of this innate potential, or its domain-specificity (the degree to which such innate abilities are specific to language), with some theorists claiming that there is a very large set of highly abstract and specific binary settings coded into the human brain, while others claim that the ability to learn language is a product of general human cognition. It is, however, generally 28
  • 29. agreed that there are no strong genetic differences underlying the differences between languages: an individual will acquire whatever language(s) they are exposed to as a child, regardless of parentage or ethnic origin. Many linguists would agree that these divisions overlap considerably, and the independent significance of each of these areas is not universally acknowledged. Regardless of any particular linguist's position, each area has core concepts that foster significant scholarly inquiry and research. SOCIOLOGY: (from Latin: socius, quot;companionquot;; and the suffix -ology, quot;the study ofquot;, is the scientific or systematic study of society, including patterns of social relations, social stratification, social interaction, and culture Areas studied in sociology range from the analysis of brief contacts between anonymous individuals on the street to the study of global social interaction. Numerous fields within the discipline concentrate on how and why people are organized in society, either as individuals or as members of associations, groups, and institutions. Sociology is considered a branch of the social sciences. Sociological research provides educators, planners, lawmakers, administrators, developers, business leaders, and people 29
  • 30. interested in resolving social problems and formulating public policy with rationales for the actions that they take. Sociology later emerged as a scientific discipline in the early 19th century as an academic response to the challenges of modernity and modernization, such as industrialization and urbanization. Sociologists hope not only to understand what holds social groups together, but also to develop responses to social disintegration and exploitation. The term quot;sociologiequot; was first used in 1780 by the French essayist Emmanuel Joseph Sieyès in an unpublished manuscript. The term was used again and popularized by the French thinker Auguste Comte in 1838. Comte had earlier used the term 'social physics', but that term had been appropriated by others, notably Adolphe Quetelet Comte hoped to unify all studies of humankind - including history, psychology and economics. His own sociological scheme was typical of the 19th century; he believed all human life had passed through the same distinct historical stages (theology, metaphysics, positive science) and that, if one could grasp this progress, one could prescribe the remedies for social ills. Sociology was to be the 'queen of positive sciences. Thus, Comte has come to be viewed as the quot;Father of Sociologyquot;. SOCIOLINGUISTICS 30
  • 31. It is the study of the effect of any and all aspects of society, including cultural norms, expectations, and context, on the way language is used. Sociolinguistics overlaps to a considerable degree with pragmatics. It also studies how lects differ between groups separated by certain social variables, e.g., ethnicity, religion, status, gender, level of education, age, etc., and how creation and adherence to these rules is used to categorize individuals in social class or socio-economic classes. As the usage of a language varies from place to place (dialect), language usage varies among social classes, and it is these sociolectsthat sociolinguistics studies. The social aspects of language were in the modern sense first studied by Indian and Japanese linguists in the 1930s, and also by Gauchat in Switzerland in the early 1900s, but none received much attention in the West until much later. The study of the social motivation of language change, on the other hand, has its foundation in the wave model of the late 19th century. Applications of sociolinguistics For example, a sociolinguist might determine through study of social attitudes that a particular vernacular would not be considered appropriate language use in a business or professional setting. Sociolinguists might also study the grammar, phonetics, vocabulary, and other aspects of this sociolect much as dialectologists would study the same for a regional dialect. 31
  • 32. The study of language variation is concerned with social constraints determining language in its contextual environment. Code-switching is the term given to the use of different varieties of language in different social situations. William Labov is often regarded as the founder of the study of sociolinguistics. He is especially noted for introducing the quantitative study of language variation and change, making the sociology of language into a scientific discipline. Sociolinguistics differs from sociology of language in that the focus of sociolinguistics is the effect of the society on the language, while the latter's focus is on the language's effect on the society. Fundamental Concepts in Sociolinguistics While the study of sociolinguistics is very broad, there are a few fundamental concepts on which many sociolinguistic inquiries. Differences according to class Sociolinguistics as a field distinct from dialectology was pioneered through the study of language variation in urban areas. Whereas dialectology studies the geographic distribution of language variation, sociolinguistics focuses on other sources of variation, among them class. Class and occupation are among the most important linguistic markers found in society. One of the fundamental findings of sociolinguistics, which has been hard to disprove, is that class and language variety are 32
  • 33. related. Members of the working class tend to speak less standard language, while the lower, middle, and upper middle class will in turn speak closer to the standard. However, the upper class, even members of the upper middle class, may often speak 'less' standard than the middle class. This is because not only class, but class aspirations, are important. Class aspiration Studies, have shown that social aspirations influence speech patterns. This is also true of class aspirations. In the process of wishing to be associated with a certain class (usually the upper class and upper middle class) people who are moving in that direction socio-economically will adjust their speech patterns to sound like them. However, not being native upper class speakers, they often hypercorrect which involves overcorrecting their speech to the point of introducing new errors. The same is true for individuals moving down in socio-economic status. Social language codes Basil Bernstein, a well-known British socio-linguist, devised in his book, 'Elaborated and restricted codes: their social origins and some consequences,' a social code system which he used to classify the various speech patterns for different social classes He claimed that members of the middle class have ways of organizing their speech which are fundamentally very different from the ways adopted by the working class 33
  • 34. Restricted code In Basil Bernstein's theory, the restricted code was an example of the speech patterns used by the working-class He stated that this type of code allows strong bonds between group members, who tend to behave largely on the basis of distinctions such as 'male', 'female', 'older', and 'younger'. This social group also uses language in a way which brings people together, and members often do not need to be explicit about meaning, as their shared knowledge and common understanding often bring them together in a way which other social language groups do not experience. The difference with the restricted code is the emphasis on 'we' as a social group, which fosters greater solidarity than an emphasis on 'I'. Differences according to age groups There are several different types of age-based variation one may see within a population. They are: vernacular of a subgroup with membership typically characterized by a specific age range, age-graded variation, and indications of linguistic change in progress. One example of subgroup vernacular is the speech of street youth. Just as street youth dress differently from the quot;normquot;, they also often have their own quot;languagequot;. The reasons for this are the following:  To enhance their own cultural identity 34
  • 35.  To identify with each other,  To exclude others, and  To invoke feelings of fear or admiration from the outside world. Strictly speaking, this is not truly age-based, since it does not apply to all individuals of that age bracket within the community. People tend to use linguistic forms that were prevalent when they reached adulthood. So, in the case of linguistic change in progress, one would expect to see variation over a broader range of ages. Bright (1997) provides an example taken from American English where there is an on-going merger of the vowel sounds in such pairs of words as 'caught' and 'cot' Examining the speech across several generations of a single family, one would find the grandparents' generation would never or rarely merge these two vowel sounds; their children's generation may on occasion, particularly in quick or informal speech; while their grandchildren's generation would merge these two vowels uniformly. This is the basis of the apparent-time hypothesis where age-based variation is taken as an indication of linguistic change in progress. Differences according to gender Men and women, on average, tend to use slightly different language styles. These differences tend to be quantitative rather than qualitative. That is, to say that women make more minimal 35
  • 36. responses than men is akin to saying that men are taller than women (i.e., men are on average taller than women, but some women are taller than some men). The initial identification of a women's register was who argued that the style of language served to maintain women's (inferior) role in society . A later refinement of this argument was that gender differences in language reflected a power difference . However, both these perspectives have the language style of men as normative, implying that women's style is inferior.. Questions Men and women differ in their use of questions in conversations. For men, a question is usually a genuine request for information whereas with women it can often be a rhetorical means of engaging the other’s conversational contribution or of acquiring attention from others conversationally involved, techniques associated with a collaborative approach to language use Therefore women use questions more frequently. In writing, however, both genders use rhetorical questions as literary devices. For example, Mark Twain used them in quot;A War Prayerquot; to provoke the reader to question his actions and beliefs. Self-disclosure Female tendencies toward self-disclosure, i.e., sharing their problems and experiences with others, often to offer sympathy contrasts with male tendencies to non-self disclosure and 36
  • 37. professing advice or offering a solution when confronted with another’s problems. CONCLUSION Sociolinguistics is closely related to both sociology and general linguistics. It is also linked to such disciplines as geography and social-anthropolog, but our concern in this assignment was exclusively with the first two. So, in conclusiono we may rightly maintain that sociolinguistics is shared between sociology and linguistics. 37
  • 38. Q:4 How are three approaches to syllabus design: grammatical, social and national different from each other? Which aproacch is best in our educational system. Ans: Introduction The purpose of this assignment is to examine the currents running through syllabus design and to highlight the issues relevant to teachers considering creating their own curriculum.. It will hopefully also help instructors better evaluate their own programs and course books. It is therefore concerned with linguistic theory and theories of language learning and how they are applied to the classroom. In the past, the focus of syllabuses has shifted from structure to situations, functions and notions to topics and tasks. In fact,with the development of the latter it is palpable that quot;the traditional distinction between syllabus design and methodology has become blurredquot;. So, how should we initially define syllabus? Syllabus: A Definition A syllabus is an expression of opinion on the nature of language and learning; it acts as a guide for both teacher and learner by 38
  • 39. providing some goals to be attained. Hutchinson and Waters define syllabus as follows: At its simplest level a syllabus can be described as a statement of what is to be learnt It reflects of language and linguistic performance. This is a rather traditional interpretation of syllabus focusing as it does on outcomes rather than process. However, a syllabus can also be seen as a quot;summary of the content to which learners will be exposedquot;. It is seen as an approximation of what will be taught and that it cannot accurately predict what will be learnt. Next, we will discuss the various types of approaches available to course designers and the language assumptions they make. The Structural Approach Historically, the most prevalent of syllabus type is perhaps the grammatical syllabus in which the selection and grading of the content is based on the complexity and simplicity of grammatical items. The learner is expected to master each structural step and add it to her grammar collection. As such the focus is on the outcomes or the product. One problem facing the syllabus designer pursuing a grammatical order to sequencing input is that the ties connecting the structural items maybe rather feeble. A more fundamental criticism is that the grammatical syllabus focuses on only one aspect of language, namely grammar, whereas in 39
  • 40. truth there exist many more aspects to language. Finally, recent corpus based research suggests there is a divergence between the grammar of the spoken and of the written language; raising implications for the grading of content in grammar based syllabuses. The Situational Approach It is suggested that the framework for most foreign language teacching is provided by a grammatical syllabus and that dissatisfaction with this shows itself most readily n concern that the language acquires in this way is not adequate for the sittuational needs. It is obvious then that thte most commonly proposed alternative is to take situational need to take as a starting point and thereby to construct a situational syllabus to construct to rreplace a grammatical syllabus. It is the obly other kind of syllabus that is used to replace the grammatical structure to construct teaching material. The argumentt for the situational grammar is fairly straight forward. Although languages are described generral systems, language is always used as situational and social context and cannot be fully understood witthout that context. Our choice of lingistic form may be restricted to some features of social situations and in any way we need a sport of language to face any type of situations. There instead of learning subjecct and their contents. We should take account of learner and his needs. It is more efficient forces because we are concerned with 40
  • 41. what the learner need and what is relevant to the learner.it is more motivating because it is learner rather than subject centered. The distinction betweeen language for learning and languae for use will disappear. Units in the syllabus will have situational instead off grammatical tables. In order to carry out behavioural analysis that underlie the sittuational syllabus. We must have a set of parameters for describing the significant features of situations. The situational courses do exist. They consist of learning units with label like ‘ At the post office’. Buying a heater ticket. Asking the way and so on. In all probability they are successful in what they have placed. But there is a big problem to think whetehr we take them as a model for teaching organisatiions of language taeching. The difficulty language teaching. The difficulty centres on what is meant by situation. The Notional/Functional Approach Wilkins' criticism of structural and situational approaches lies in the fact that they answer only the 'how' or 'when' and 'where' . Instead, he enquires quot;what it is they communicate through languagequot; . Thus, the starting point for a syllabus is the communicative purpose and conceptual meaning of language i.e. notions and functions, as opposed to grammatical items and situational elements which remain but are relegated to a subsidiary role. 41
  • 42. In order to establish objectives, the needs of the learners will have to be analyzed by the various types of communication in which the learner has to confront. Consequently, needs analysis has an association with notional-functional syllabuses. Although needs analysis implies a focus on the learner, critics of this approach suggest that a new list has replaced the old one. Where once structural/situational items were used a new list consisting of notions and functions has become the main focus in a syllabus. White claims that quot;language functions do not usually occur in isolationquot; and there are also difficulties of selecting and grading function and form. Clearly, the task of deciding whether a given function (i.e. persuading), is easier or more difficult than another (i.e. approving), makes the task harder to approach. The above approaches belong to the product-oriented category of syllabuses. An alternative path to curriculum design would be to adopt process oriented principles, which assume that language can be learnt experientially as opposed to the step-by- step procedure of the synthetic approach. Initially, several questions must be posed. Do you want a product or process oriented syllabus? Will the course be teacher or learner led? What are the goals of the program and the needs of your students? This leads to an examination of the degree to which the In light of this background, and given the monolingual nature of Japanese society and the lack of exposure to the target 42
  • 43. language outside the classroom, a task based strategy with a blend of approaches and emphasis on communicative learning, may well be one of the most suitable types of syllabus design on offer for language learners in Japan. Conclusion Clearly, there is a vast amount of material to disseminate when considering syllabus design. The numerous approaches touched on here all offer valuable insights into creating a language program. The grammatical, situational and functional-notional, all have objectives to be attained, a content to be processed and learnt. The foundations of the product syllabuses remain fundamentally similar, whereas the underlying assumptions about language and language learning from the analytic approaches differ greatly: process type syllabuses assert that learning a language is transient and cannot be itemized ; pedagogical procedure takes precedence over content. If our assumptions about the nature of linguistics and language learning is one of quot;language as communicationquot; then a syllabus based around activities and tasks which promote real and meaningful communication will seem advantageous. We have shown that the false beginner in Japan will have learned structural rules to a surprisingly complex degree, yet may find it difficult to use, or indeed, may never have had an opportunity to use the language learned. Consequently, the belief that learning is facilitated by activities that include real 43
  • 44. communication, may be the most suitable belief to adopt in the Japanese classroom. Further points to consider when critically reviewing a syllabus are the objectives of the course as well as the needs of the learners. Ultimately, and perhaps ideally, a hybrid syllabus will result purely due to pragmatic reasons. It is wise to take an eclectic approach, taking what is useful from each theory and trusting also in the evidence of your own experience as a teacher. Thus, to what extent has an integration of the various approaches taken place? Does the syllabus specification include all aspects? If yes, how is priority established? These questions must also form part of the criteria when designing or assessing your own syllabus. 44
  • 45. 45