Q: course ideas - Lg & Culture, Lgs of the World

[PAMELA PRICE KLEBAUM]

        I had a course that covered myriad theoretical approaches to
first language acquisition. It is very hard to do that -- each student
was assigned one chapter/one approach.  A "history of linguistics" would
be good, and it is offered at UCLA periodically.

        PPK


On Wed, 16 Apr 1997, Enrique Figueroa E. wrote:

> No argument about THAT, if you reread me! Problem is: haven't the
> students the right (and isn't it convenient for them as students) to be
> given information as to a) other possible approaches, beside the one
> preferred by the teacher, and b) the proper historical and scientific
> frame to which refer the selected (imposed?) *modeling model*...?
>
> Max E. Figueroa
>
> On Tue, 15 Apr 1997, PAMELA PRICE KLEBAUM wrote:
>
> >
> >       One of the core questions linguistics asks is, how do we acquire
> > our first language?  Describing that undertaking entails modeling
> > languages, which entails "esoteric and highly formalized" rules. This is b)
> > below..
> >
> >       Pamela Price Klebaum
> > On Tue, 15 Apr 1997, Enrique Figueroa E. wrote:
> >
> > > Which, on the other hand, does NOT mean, I surely hope, that taking
> > > linguistics itself and -most important!- its history is NOT necessary,
> > > useful and healthy. My experience is almost the opposite to that
> > > mentioned by David Tuggy: many students are forced to assimilate and
> > > apply esoteric and highly formalized LX to one or the other language,
> > > without having been ever given at least the chance to a) choose a
> > > different perspective and b) find out whence cometh and whither goeth the
> > > "theory" imposed upon him...
> > >
> > > Best regards! Max
> > >
> > > On Mon, 14 Apr 1997 David_Tuggy at SIL.ORG wrote:
> > >
> > > >      On 4/9/97 Noel Rude wrote:
> > > >
> > > >         'A number of years ago I helped develop an intro-level undergrad course
> > > > titled "Languages of the World".  The course sprang from the observation
> > > > that in our obsession with scientific principles most of our students
> > > > were terribly ignorant of basic facts.  It seemed good that they should
> > > > know something about Bantu.  In all our other courses we teach
> > > > principles, methodology, how to DO linguistics, and this is good.  But
> > > > we were old fashioned.  We thought students ought to know some specific
> > > > facts too.  ...  I may sound cynical, but I still think the effort is
> > > > worthwhile.'
> > > >
> > > >      Too much of the linguistics that I have seen taught didn't even deal
> > > >      with how to DO linguistics, but rather with the history of
> > > >      linguistics, the philosophies involved in this or that model, etc.
> > > >      Instead of using linguistics to look at language (much less any
> > > >      particular language) it is easy to take linguistics as the object of
> > > >      study. I agree that knowing and having to deal with some specific
> > > >      facts is a much-needed antidote.
> > > >
> > > >      --David Tuggy
> > > >
> > >
> >
>