<html>
<body>
Dan: Thanks. That's what I hoped you meant. That "rich repertoire of
linguistic choices" is the heart of the matter. What we need to
understand better is (a) what it is and (b) how to teach it. A
challenging agenda, but I think we're on the way (even if we're still far
nearer the beginning of the road than its end).<br>
Dick<br><br>
At 14:21 15/12/2003 -0600, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Dick: You raise an important
issue, and help clarify the problem, I think. When I suggest that
we need to understand the nature of language use in the educational
context, I mean that we need to know more about not only the learners'
language use, but what the expectations of the educational system are as
well. What is this "cognitive academic language
proficiency" / school language we educational linguists are
interested in? Helping our learners develop a rich repertoire of
linguistic choices, appropriate for the many contexts they'll find
themselves negotiating as they move through the system and enter the
workplace as adults is what we're about, it seems to me. <br><br>
Cheers,<br>
Dan <br><br>
At 07:26 PM 12/15/2003 +0000, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Dear Dan,<br>
I'm not sure what you mean by this:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite> The bottom line is
understanding the nature of language use in the educational context, it
seems to me, and, as you suggest, tests can be used to encourage teachers
to discover the complex language systems pupils already
control.</blockquote><br>
You seem to be assuming that educational language is just a particular
way of using a child's existing language resources. While agreeing that
there has been a tendency for teachers to underestimate these resources,
I also think there's a danger of overestimating them. One of the
foundations for language work (in L1 English) over here in England is the
(Hallidayan) belief that those resources need to grow - schools teach new
language, in fact a very great deal of it. New vocabulary, new syntax and
new meanings that the children wouldn't have without schooling. Maybe you
wouldn't agree, but if you do, would that be covered by your
"language use"?<br><br>
Dick<br><br>
Richard (= Dick) Hudson<br><br>
Phonetics and Linguistics, University College London,<br>
Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT.<br>
+44(0)20 7679 3152; fax +44(0)20 7383 4108;
<a href="http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm" eudora="autourl">http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm</a><br>
</blockquote>Professor, TESL/Applied Linguistics Program<br>
Co-editor, <i>Language Testing<br>
</i>English Department<br>
Iowa State University<br>
Ames, IA 50011, USA<br>
Phone: (515) 294-9365<br>
Fax: (515) 294-6814</blockquote></body>
<br>
<br>
<div>Richard (= Dick) Hudson</div>
<br>
<div>Phonetics and Linguistics, University College London, </div>
<div>Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT.</div>
+44(0)20 7679 3152; fax +44(0)20 7383 4108;
<a href="http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm" EUDORA=AUTOURL>http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm</a>
</html>