FUNKNET Digest, Vol 85, Issue 16
s.t. bischoff
bischoff.st at gmail.com
Fri Oct 22 17:31:48 UTC 2010
In his book *Guns, Germs, and Steel* Jerad Dimond makes a reference to
glottal chronology to account for human population movement, sorry I don't
recall the page. A few years ago there was an article in the New York Times
comparing string theory in physics to generative grammar in linguistics and
raising the question what role a *charismatic* leader has in a field of
study. Linguistics is also invoked by scholars outside linguistics when
discussing human migration patterns. PBS did a special on birds "Bird
Brains" which shows interviews with a number of biologist, some working with
linguists. You should be able to find the link at PBS.org and searching for
"bird brains". There are also a number of mathematicians that take Chomskian
Generative Grammar to task for flouting mathematical axioms, especially
Chomsky 1995. The "Stanford Challenge" was computer scientist and some
computational linguists challenging the validity of Chomskian Generative
Grammar as computational (see the linguist list). Finally, in 2004(?)
Linguistic Review had a special volume on Generative Grammar as Cognitive
Science, with Cognitive Scientists weighing in (they said it isn't).
cheers,
Shannon
PS it would be great you could put a list together of what you find and send
it to funknet
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 1:00 PM, <funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu> wrote:
> Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to
> funknet at mailman.rice.edu
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics (Craig Hancock)
> 2. The view of mathematicians is quite negative (Yuri Tambovtsev)
> 3. Re: Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics
> (Brian MacWhinney)
> 4. Re: Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics (Mark P. Line)
> 5. Re: Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics (Thomas E. Payne)
> 6. Re: Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics (Craig Hancock)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 13:08:28 -0400
> From: Craig Hancock <hancock at albany.edu>
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics
> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu
> Message-ID: <4CC0738C.3020900 at albany.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> For an international take on this see /Beyond the Grammar Wars,/
> edited by Terry Locke, Routledge, 2010. It includes an article I
> co-authored (with Martha Kolln) on the story of English grammar
> instruction in the states.
> Unfortunately, the teachers in the states are still resistant to
> direct attention to language outside of minimalist intervention (error
> attention) in writing and what they call "literary elements" in
> literature. In general, the prevailing idea is that learning a native
> language takes care of itself. What needs to be attended to (with as
> little metalanguage as possible) are discrepencies between the child's
> language and Standard English. English teachers take many courses in
> literature, a course or two in composition, and typically a single
> course in language, which may include theories about why teaching
> directly about language is unproductive. Much of this dates back to the
> sixties. If grammar is thought of as a formal system, largely
> independent of discourse and cognition, then there's no direct transfer
> to writing. There's little awareness that alternative approaches to
> language are not only possible, but increasingly well developed.
> I believe the US system is ripe for change, but as Dick points out,
> it's hard to have a conversation with people who have very little
> background in language.
>
> Craig
>
> On 10/21/2010 5:47 AM, Richard Hudson wrote:
> > As a postscript, I can answer your question more directly by saying
> > that linguistics has had a great deal of explicitly recognised
> > influence on official policy in the education of England (and maybe
> > other bits of the UK), which I document in my paper "How linguistics
> > has influenced schools in England"
> > (http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/papers.htm#influence). The snag
> > is, of course, that most teachers don't know enough about language to
> > apply the official policy (because, as I said before, linguistics
> > isn't part of their university curriculum). But the fact is that
> > 'knowledge about language' and 'language awareness', both of which are
> > derived directly from (Hallidayan) linguistics, are part of the
> > official curriculum.
> >
> > Dick
> >
> > Richard Hudson www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm
> >
> > On 21/10/2010 09:34, Richard Hudson wrote:
> >> Dear Fritz,
> >> I agree entirely with Olga. The discussion has a very anglo-phone
> >> bias away from education - the UK, USA etc all have a tradition in
> >> which school teachers aren't expected to have learned anything about
> >> language at university, so academic research on language isn't
> >> relevant to education. We're very different from many parts of
> >> Europe, where grammar teaching is an important part of the school
> >> curriculum and trainee teachers update their understanding at
> >> university. I'm sure in a country like that, linguistics would be
> >> justified in part by its contribution to education. I don't know of
> >> any bibliographical source for this - if anyone does, I'd love to see
> >> it. I've written quite a bit about the value of linguistics for
> >> education (see www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/papers.htm) but haven't
> >> been able to do much on that line except pick up odds and ends from
> >> gossip. (I do have evidence that school kids know a great deal more
> >> grammar in countries such as Spain - see
> >> http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/ec/ba-kal/ba-kal.htm.)
> >>
> >> Dick (Hudson)
> >>
> >> Richard Hudson www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm
> >>
> >> On 20/10/2010 18:43, Yokoyama, Olga wrote:
> >>> Fritz,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I take it that your article is about the academic community's
> >>> attitudes towards linguistics. Although not part of your topic but
> >>> still very important for the status of linguistics and the budgetary
> >>> decisions made especially in public institutions are attitudes
> >>> towards linguistics in the lay society. We all have experienced the
> >>> routine questioning along the lines of "Oh, you're a linguist? So
> >>> how many languages do you know?". Misunderstandings out there are
> >>> vast and we linguists need to address them. One way my department
> >>> did it this summer was by addressing the Arizona ruling on teachers
> >>> with accented English in a public conference, which combined
> >>> international scholars and practitioners in one room
> >>> (http://sites.google.com/site/uclalinguisticdiversconf2010/). U.
> >>> Oregon's Olympiad for secondary school students is another step in
> >>> the right direction. Linguists need to start talking to the public
> >>> at large and make sure that the future generations don?t vote for
> >>> closing linguistics and language departments (cf. the latest SUNY
> >>> Albany case) based on budget considerations combined with glaring
> >>> ignorance about what language studies are.
> >>>
> >>> Olga
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Olga T. Yokoyama
> >>>
> >>> Professor and Chair
> >>>
> >>> Department of Applied Linguistics and TESL
> >>>
> >>> University of California, Los Angeles
> >>>
> >>> Tel. (310) 825-4631
> >>>
> >>> Fax (310) 206-4118
> >>>
> >>> http://www.appling.ucla.edu
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu
> >>> [mailto:funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Frederick J
> >>> Newmeyer
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 10:13 AM
> >>> To: Funknet
> >>> Subject: [FUNKNET] Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> For a survey article that I'm writing, I plan to assemble quotes
> >>> from people outside the field of linguistics on what they see as the
> >>> value, or lack of value, of work done in linguistics. So I would
> >>> like to cite published quotes from psychologists, anthropologists,
> >>> literary specialists, etc. on their views about the value/relevance
> >>> of linguistics for their particular concerns and its value/relevance
> >>> in general. Can anybody help me out by pointing me to relevant quotes?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Let me give one example of the sort of thing that I am looking for.
> >>> The late computational linguist Fred Jelinek reportedly wrote:
> >>> 'Whenever I ?re a linguist our system performance improves'.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks. I'll summarize.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Best wishes,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --fritz
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> fjn at u.washington.edu
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Frederick J. Newmeyer
> >>>
> >>> Professor Emeritus, University of Washington
> >>>
> >>> Adjunct Professor, University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser
> >>> University
> >>>
> >>> [for my postal address, please contact me by e-mail]
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 01:51:19 +0700
> From: "Yuri Tambovtsev" <yutamb at mail.ru>
> Subject: [FUNKNET] The view of mathematicians is quite negative
> To: <funknet at mailman.rice.edu>
> Message-ID: <8D347151772C4604A66263301B32B2DD at ngufa28a6c2639>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Dear Fred, I attend the joint seminar of mathematicians, philosophers and
> linguists. So, I can tell you that the view of mathematicians on linguistics
> is quite negative. Half of philosophers support them. What makes them sad is
> that there is too much "water" in the articles and report of linguists. That
> means that the usual linguistic opus lacks strong definitions and proof. I
> began to notice recently it is true. Even if you take the best linguistic
> journal "Language" it is true. The usual drawback is there is no proof.
> Instead of proving his theory a linguist makes references to other
> linguists. It does not matter what is or that linguist said about this or
> that. One must prove his point by facts from the language. Every linguist
> knows that comparative method does not work. If one takes Romance languages,
> one can't reconstruct Latin. Yet, this method has been applied and is
> applied to different language families. It is quite vivid with Finno-Ugric
> family. They put Hungarian
> into the Ugric subgroup of the Finno-Ugric family together with Mansi and
> Hanty. However, Hungarian is so different from them that it pricks the eye.
> Hungarian is quite different on the phonetic, lexical and grammatical level.
> May be, it is better to open for Hungarian a new group, rather than crush it
> into the Ugric subgroup. May be, because of its weak fundamental, many
> linguistics departments are closed at different universities first. I should
> say Prof. Frederick J. Newmeyer meant it when he put his global question to
> this list. Nevertheless, though the discussion went astray, it was quite
> interesting. I am dealing with phonological statistics for some 40 years.
> What I like about it is that it is quite reliable. I have computed about 300
> languages. So, who can prove the reverse if the particular speech sound has
> the particular frequency of occurrence in the particular language? That is
> that. Looking forward to hearing your comments about the proof in
> linguistics to yutam
> b at mail.ru Be well, yours sincerely Yuri Tambovtsev, NPU, Novosibirsk,
> Russia.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 16:01:28 -0400
> From: Brian MacWhinney <macw at cmu.edu>
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics
> To: Funknet <funknet at mailman.rice.edu>
> Message-ID: <1A8B71FA-522C-45F5-87A1-E9B2E9630E14 at cmu.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Sorry not to be responsive to Fritz's original question, but the theme of
> the role of linguistics within language teaching is itself a great one. As
> Craig notes, the crux of the issue is about which theory of grammar is to be
> applied. When I write a morphological parser for Spanish, I rely heavily on
> cyclical rule application and principles of feeding and bleeding. But, I
> don't think for a moment that a second language learner of Spanish sets up
> ordered rule application in their head. Instead, irregular forms trump
> regular forms because of their frequency, a la Bybee and many others. But,
> it is still helpful to teach learners that the Spanish subjunctive derives
> from the first singular present. In fact, once you tell this to learners,
> they sometimes have a bit of an ah-ha experience. There are hundreds of
> cues that can be stated in simple explicit ways to markedly help L2
> learners, whether it is about mountains and deserts taking the definite
> article in English or Fren
> ch nouns ending in -age being masculine. Of course, the learner must
> eventually proceduralize use of these cues. But if they are stated in
> simple ways, then learners can get them. So, yes, linguistics is solidly
> relevant here, but only if the patterns are clearly and simply formulated,
> as I noted in my SSLA commentary in 1997. Does this amount to "watering
> down" linguistics? Sort of "linguistics light"? I am not sure.
>
> I am not saying that this is the only possible input from linguistics to
> SLA. There are several more and elaborating each of them would make this a
> very long email. The point is basically the one that Craig makes -- it
> depends on how linguistics is packaged.
>
> OK. I will add a disclaimer. I have only done a very small amount of
> language teaching myself, but I have spent a great deal of time in
> curriculum development for cyberlearning. Classroom contact and/or native
> speaker contact is crucial, but learners can also benefit from books,
> computers, films, dictionaries, and so on. Use of any one method does not
> preclude the use of others.
>
> -- Brian MacWhinney
>
>
>
> On Oct 21, 2010, at 1:08 PM, Craig Hancock wrote:
>
> > For an international take on this see /Beyond the Grammar Wars,/
> edited by Terry Locke, Routledge, 2010. It includes an article I co-authored
> (with Martha Kolln) on the story of English grammar instruction in the
> states.
> > Unfortunately, the teachers in the states are still resistant to
> direct attention to language outside of minimalist intervention (error
> attention) in writing and what they call "literary elements" in literature.
> In general, the prevailing idea is that learning a native language takes
> care of itself. What needs to be attended to (with as little metalanguage as
> possible) are discrepencies between the child's language and Standard
> English. English teachers take many courses in literature, a course or two
> in composition, and typically a single course in language, which may include
> theories about why teaching directly about language is unproductive. Much of
> this dates back to the sixties. If grammar is thought of as a formal system,
> largely independent of discourse and cognition, then there's no direct
> transfer to writing. There's little awareness that alternative approaches to
> language are not only possible, but increasingly well developed.
> > I believe the US system is ripe for change, but as Dick points out,
> it's hard to have a conversation with people who have very little background
> in language.
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > On 10/21/2010 5:47 AM, Richard Hudson wrote:
> >> As a postscript, I can answer your question more directly by saying that
> linguistics has had a great deal of explicitly recognised influence on
> official policy in the education of England (and maybe other bits of the
> UK), which I document in my paper "How linguistics has influenced schools in
> England" (http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/papers.htm#influence). The
> snag is, of course, that most teachers don't know enough about language to
> apply the official policy (because, as I said before, linguistics isn't part
> of their university curriculum). But the fact is that 'knowledge about
> language' and 'language awareness', both of which are derived directly from
> (Hallidayan) linguistics, are part of the official curriculum.
> >>
> >> Dick
> >>
> >> Richard Hudson www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm
> >>
> >> On 21/10/2010 09:34, Richard Hudson wrote:
> >>> Dear Fritz,
> >>> I agree entirely with Olga. The discussion has a very anglo-phone bias
> away from education - the UK, USA etc all have a tradition in which school
> teachers aren't expected to have learned anything about language at
> university, so academic research on language isn't relevant to education.
> We're very different from many parts of Europe, where grammar teaching is an
> important part of the school curriculum and trainee teachers update their
> understanding at university. I'm sure in a country like that, linguistics
> would be justified in part by its contribution to education. I don't know of
> any bibliographical source for this - if anyone does, I'd love to see it.
> I've written quite a bit about the value of linguistics for education (see
> www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/papers.htm) but haven't been able to do much
> on that line except pick up odds and ends from gossip. (I do have evidence
> that school kids know a great deal more grammar in countries such as Spain -
> see http://www.phon.u
> cl.ac.uk/home/dick/ec/ba-kal/ba-kal.htm.)
> >>>
> >>> Dick (Hudson)
> >>>
> >>> Richard Hudson www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm
> >>>
> >>> On 20/10/2010 18:43, Yokoyama, Olga wrote:
> >>>> Fritz,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I take it that your article is about the academic community's
> attitudes towards linguistics. Although not part of your topic but still
> very important for the status of linguistics and the budgetary decisions
> made especially in public institutions are attitudes towards linguistics in
> the lay society. We all have experienced the routine questioning along the
> lines of "Oh, you're a linguist? So how many languages do you know?".
> Misunderstandings out there are vast and we linguists need to address them.
> One way my department did it this summer was by addressing the Arizona
> ruling on teachers with accented English in a public conference, which
> combined international scholars and practitioners in one room (
> http://sites.google.com/site/uclalinguisticdiversconf2010/). U. Oregon's
> Olympiad for secondary school students is another step in the right
> direction. Linguists need to start talking to the public at large and make
> sure that the future generations don?t vote for closing lin
> guistics and language departments (cf. the latest SUNY Albany case) based
> on budget considerations combined with glaring ignorance about what language
> studies are.
> >>>>
> >>>> Olga
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Olga T. Yokoyama
> >>>>
> >>>> Professor and Chair
> >>>>
> >>>> Department of Applied Linguistics and TESL
> >>>>
> >>>> University of California, Los Angeles
> >>>>
> >>>> Tel. (310) 825-4631
> >>>>
> >>>> Fax (310) 206-4118
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.appling.ucla.edu
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto:
> funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Frederick J Newmeyer
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 10:13 AM
> >>>> To: Funknet
> >>>> Subject: [FUNKNET] Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> For a survey article that I'm writing, I plan to assemble quotes from
> people outside the field of linguistics on what they see as the value, or
> lack of value, of work done in linguistics. So I would like to cite
> published quotes from psychologists, anthropologists, literary specialists,
> etc. on their views about the value/relevance of linguistics for their
> particular concerns and its value/relevance in general. Can anybody help me
> out by pointing me to relevant quotes?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Let me give one example of the sort of thing that I am looking for.
> The late computational linguist Fred Jelinek reportedly wrote: 'Whenever I
> ?re a linguist our system performance improves'.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks. I'll summarize.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Best wishes,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --fritz
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> fjn at u.washington.edu
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Frederick J. Newmeyer
> >>>>
> >>>> Professor Emeritus, University of Washington
> >>>>
> >>>> Adjunct Professor, University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser
> University
> >>>>
> >>>> [for my postal address, please contact me by e-mail]
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 19:24:22 -0500
> From: "Mark P. Line" <mark at polymathix.com>
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics
> To: "Funknet" <funknet at mailman.rice.edu>
> Message-ID:
> <529225deab90693320421ae01a944fb7.squirrel at sm.webmail.pair.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Though his extended kerfuffle with Chomsky(ans) may be too dated for your
> purpose, the cognitive scientist Roger Schank does come to mind:
>
> "The MIT linguist Noam Chomsky represents everything that's bad about
> academics."
>
> from: http://www.edge.org/documents/ThirdCulture/q-Ch.9.html
>
>
> -- Mark
>
> Mark P. Line
> Bartlesville, OK
>
>
>
>
> Roger Schank comes to mind
>
> Frederick J Newmeyer wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > The comments so far re language pedagogy, language policy, language
> > revitalization, etc. are all very interesting and I thank you for them.
> > But what I am really looking for are quotes from cognitive scientists,
> > anthropologists, philosophers, and others in research-oriented (rather
> > than applied) fields on the great value / great worthlessness of current
> > linguistic theory (of whatever variety).
> >
> > --fritz
> >
> >
> > Frederick J. Newmeyer
> > Professor Emeritus, University of Washington
> > Adjunct Professor, University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser
> > University
> > [for my postal address, please contact me by e-mail]
> >
> > On Thu, 21 Oct 2010, A. Katz wrote:
> >
> >> John,
> >>
> >> I have some experience with linguists running language pedagogy seminars
> >> in
> >> the United States. The people running the seminars had never taught a
> >> foreign
> >> language, and they were mostly monolingual English speakers. The people
> >> teaching the foreign languages who were forced (yes, forced!) to attend
> >> the
> >> seminar were mostly native speakers of the languages they taught who did
> >> not
> >> have tenure. (The tenured foreign language professors were apparently
> >> spared
> >> this.) It was a complete farce.
> >>
> >> --Aya
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, 21 Oct 2010, john at research.haifa.ac.il wrote:
> >>
> >>> Exactly my point. Where language teaching is taken seriously, the need
> >>> for
> >>> linguistics is self-evident. In the United States, it's much harder.
> >>> John
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Quoting "Danielle E. Cyr" <dcyr at yorku.ca>:
> >>>
> >>>> Canada's official bilingualism makes the teaching of linguistics very
> >>>> important
> >>>> both in English departments, French Studies and general linguistics.
> >>>> In my
> >>>> French Studies department, for example, students enter with the mere
> >>>> intention
> >>>> to learn and teach French. All of them have to take an introductory
> >>>> course
> >>>> to
> >>>> linguistics and 18 more credits in more advanced courses in
> >>>> linguistics.
> >>>> At
> >>>> the
> >>>> introductory course level I make sure that, for every aspect of
> >>>> internal
> >>>> and
> >>>> external linguistics, I make my students aware of the jobs attached to
> >>>> that
> >>>> chunk of knowledge:
> >>>>
> >>>> INTERNAL LINGUISTICS:
> >>>> - for phonetics/phonology :speech re-education, voice recognition,
> >>>> cochlear
> >>>> implants, digital song editing, and even linguistic spying;
> >>>> - for morphology : speech therapy, language teaching and language
> >>>> teaching
> >>>> materials, lexicography, artificial intelligence, among others;
> >>>> - for syntax : language teaching, artificial intelligence, language
> >>>> re-education;
> >>>> - for semantics : lexicography, literature; philosophy, psychology,
> >>>> history,
> >>>> intercultural studies, political studies, law, commerce, diplomacy;
> >>>> EXTERNAL LINGUISTICS:
> >>>> - for socio- and psycholinguistics: a better access to individual and
> >>>> social
> >>>> understanding, among others workplace relationships, psychology,
> >>>> ethics,
> >>>> intercultural studies, etc.
> >>>> - for historical linguistics: the history of social change, the
> >>>> history of
> >>>> international contacts through time and space, the history of ideas,
> >>>> etc.
> >>>> - for political linguistics (history of language laws in Canada): a
> >>>> better
> >>>> understanding of Canada's history, ofCanada's populations's history,
> >>>> of
> >>>> the
> >>>> making of ideas and identities, of the role of languages in the
> >>>> building
> >>>> of
> >>>> nationhoods, etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> They also say that linguistics helps them in their acquisition of
> >>>> French
> >>>> and,
> >>>> for those who are in a concurrent program in Education, that it helps
> >>>> them
> >>>> in
> >>>> their teaching practicum. Most of them reckon that linguistics helps
> >>>> them
> >>>> in
> >>>> all areas of their college courses and contribute their linguistic
> >>>> knowledge
> >>>> in
> >>>> their other class discussions.
> >>>>
> >>>> In the end many of my students are convinced that studying linguistics
> >>>> makes
> >>>> them more enlightened human beings and citizens. They are also aware
> >>>> that
> >>>> their
> >>>> studies in linguistics can make them better teachers, lawyers,
> >>>> jurists,
> >>>> diplomats, psychologists, writers, physicians, journalists,
> >>>> translators,
> >>>> merchants, parents, caregivers, etc. etc. etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> Not bad after all. And, when after twenty years in the profession of
> >>>> linguist, I
> >>>> count that I have help producing at least 2,000 such citizens, I have
> >>>> no
> >>>> problem
> >>>> explaining to the general population that linguistics is really useful
> >>>> and
> >>>> also
> >>>> a source of pleasure and happiness :)
> >>>>
> >>>> Danielle
> >>>>
> >>>> P.S. By the way, some years ago I picked the following quotation
> >>>> somewhere. I
> >>>> liked it so much that I use it in my signature. However, I don't know
> >>>> who
> >>>> the
> >>>> author i and it makes me feel bad that I am using someone's wisdom
> >>>> without
> >>>> acknowledging him/her. Would any of you recognize its source?
> >>>>
> >>>> "The only hope we have as human beings is to learn each other's
> >>>> languages.
> >>>> Only
> >>>> then can we truly hope to understand one another."
> >>>> Quoting john at research.haifa.ac.il:
> >>>>
> >>>>> It isn't just grammar teaching, it's also foreign language teaching
> >>>>> in
> >>>>> general.
> >>>>> English speakers tend not even to think of this since in
> >>>>> English-speaking
> >>>>> countries there is no serious expectation that foreign language
> >>>>> classes
> >>>> will
> >>>>> produce students who can actually practically use the language that
> >>>>> they're
> >>>>> supposedly learning. But in countries in which foreign language
> >>>>> teaching
> >>>>> is
> >>>>> taken seriously, people naturally recognize the connection to
> >>>>> linguistics.
> >>>>> When people in Israel ask me what being a linguist entails, my first
> >>>>> stock
> >>>>> answer is 'we train people to be English teachers.'
> >>>>> John
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Quoting Richard Hudson <dick at ling.ucl.ac.uk>:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Dear Fritz,
> >>>>>> I agree entirely with Olga. The discussion has a very anglo-phone
> >>>>>> bias
> >>>>>> away from education - the UK, USA etc all have a tradition in which
> >>>>>> school teachers aren't expected to have learned anything about
> >>>>>> language
> >>>>>> at university, so academic research on language isn't relevant to
> >>>>>> education. We're very different from many parts of Europe, where
> >>>>>> grammar
> >>>>>> teaching is an important part of the school curriculum and trainee
> >>>>>> teachers update their understanding at university. I'm sure in a
> >>>>>> country
> >>>>>> like that, linguistics would be justified in part by its
> >>>>>> contribution to
> >>>>>> education. I don't know of any bibliographical source for this - if
> >>>>>> anyone does, I'd love to see it. I've written quite a bit about the
> >>>>>> value of linguistics for education (see
> >>>>>> www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/papers.htm) but haven't been able to
> do
> >>>>>> much on that line except pick up odds and ends from gossip. (I do
> >>>>>> have
> >>>>>> evidence that school kids know a great deal more grammar in
> >>>>>> countries
> >>>>>> such as Spain - see
> >>>>>> http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/ec/ba-kal/ba-kal.htm.)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Dick (Hudson)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Richard Hudson www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 20/10/2010 18:43, Yokoyama, Olga wrote:
> >>>>>>> Fritz,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I take it that your article is about the academic community's
> >>>>>>> attitudes
> >>>>>> towards linguistics. Although not part of your topic but still very
> >>>>> important
> >>>>>> for the status of linguistics and the budgetary decisions made
> >>>>>> especially
> >>>>> in
> >>>>>> public institutions are attitudes towards linguistics in the lay
> >>>>>> society.
> >>>>> We
> >>>>>> all have experienced the routine questioning along the lines of "Oh,
> >>>> you're
> >>>>> a
> >>>>>> linguist? So how many languages do you know?". Misunderstandings out
> >>>> there
> >>>>>> are vast and we linguists need to address them. One way my
> >>>>>> department
> >>>>>> did
> >>>>> it
> >>>>>> this summer was by addressing the Arizona ruling on teachers with
> >>>> accented
> >>>>>> English in a public conference, which combined international
> >>>>>> scholars
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>> practitioners in one room
> >>>>>> (http://sites.google.com/site/uclalinguisticdiversconf2010/). U.
> >>>>>> Oregon's
> >>>>>> Olympiad for secondary school students is another step in the right
> >>>>>> direction. Linguists need to start talking to the public at large
> >>>>>> and
> >>>> make
> >>>>>> sure that the future generations don???t vote for closing
> >>>>>> linguistics
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>> language departments (cf. the latest SUNY Albany case) based on
> >>>>>> budget
> >>>>>> considerations combined with glaring ignorance about what language
> >>>> studies
> >>>>>> are.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Olga
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Olga T. Yokoyama
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Professor and Chair
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Department of Applied Linguistics and TESL
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> University of California, Los Angeles
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Tel. (310) 825-4631
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Fax (310) 206-4118
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> http://www.appling.ucla.edu
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu
> >>>>>> [mailto:funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Frederick J
> >>>> Newmeyer
> >>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 10:13 AM
> >>>>>>> To: Funknet
> >>>>>>> Subject: [FUNKNET] Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> For a survey article that I'm writing, I plan to assemble quotes
> >>>>>>> from
> >>>>>> people outside the field of linguistics on what they see as the
> >>>>>> value,
> >>>>>> or
> >>>>>> lack of value, of work done in linguistics. So I would like to cite
> >>>>> published
> >>>>>> quotes from psychologists, anthropologists, literary specialists,
> >>>>>> etc.
> >>>>>> on
> >>>>>> their views about the value/relevance of linguistics for their
> >>>>>> particular
> >>>>>> concerns and its value/relevance in general. Can anybody help me out
> >>>>>> by
> >>>>>> pointing me to relevant quotes?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Let me give one example of the sort of thing that I am looking for.
> >>>>>>> The
> >>>>>> late computational linguist Fred Jelinek reportedly wrote: 'Whenever
> >>>>>> I
> >>>>> ???re
> >>>>>> a linguist our system performance improves'.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks. I'll summarize.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Best wishes,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --fritz
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> fjn at u.washington.edu
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Frederick J. Newmeyer
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Professor Emeritus, University of Washington
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Adjunct Professor, University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser
> >>>>>> University
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> [for my postal address, please contact me by e-mail]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa
> >>>>> University
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> "The only hope we have as human beings is to learn each other's
> >>>> languages.
> >>>> Only
> >>>> then can we truly hope to understand one another."
> >>>>
> >>>> Professor Danielle E. Cyr
> >>>> Department of French Studies
> >>>> York University
> >>>> Toronto, ON, Canada, M3J 1P3
> >>>> Tel. 1.416.736.2100 #310180
> >>>> FAX. 1.416.736.5924
> >>>> dcyr at yorku.ca
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa
> >>> University
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> -- Mark
>
> Mark P. Line
> Bartlesville, OK
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 17:52:38 -0700
> From: "Thomas E. Payne" <tpayne at uoregon.edu>
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics
> To: <funknet at mailman.rice.edu>
> Message-ID: <1621CEF7903E473FA6F34D2EC4A664CF at TEPAYNEPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> If this is teachers' experience with linguists, I can understand why they
> are suspicious of us! No one likes to be told how to do their jobs by "ivory
> tower" idealists.
>
> I realize this is off the track from Fritz's original question (sorry
> Fritz), but this is something I'm interested in. For any of you who are
> bothered by this "disconnect" between linguists and school teachers in the
> USA, please consider coming to the meeting of the "Language in the School
> Curriculum" committee at the LSA meeting in January.
>
> Tom
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto:
> funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of A. Katz
> Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 08:32
> To: john at research.haifa.ac.il
> Cc: Richard Hudson; funknet at mailman.rice.edu; Danielle E. Cyr
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics
>
> John,
>
> I have some experience with linguists running language pedagogy seminars in
> the United States. The people running the seminars had never taught a
> foreign language, and they were mostly monolingual English speakers. The
> people teaching the foreign languages who were forced (yes, forced!) to
> attend the seminar were mostly native speakers of the languages they taught
> who did not have tenure. (The tenured foreign language professors were
> apparently spared this.) It was a complete farce.
>
> --Aya
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2010, john at research.haifa.ac.il wrote:
>
> > Exactly my point. Where language teaching is taken seriously, the need
> > for linguistics is self-evident. In the United States, it's much harder.
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> > Quoting "Danielle E. Cyr" <dcyr at yorku.ca>:
> >
> >> Canada's official bilingualism makes the teaching of linguistics very
> >> important both in English departments, French Studies and general
> >> linguistics. In my French Studies department, for example, students
> >> enter with the mere intention to learn and teach French. All of them
> >> have to take an introductory course to linguistics and 18 more
> >> credits in more advanced courses in linguistics. At the introductory
> >> course level I make sure that, for every aspect of internal and
> >> external linguistics, I make my students aware of the jobs attached
> >> to that chunk of knowledge:
> >>
> >> INTERNAL LINGUISTICS:
> >> - for phonetics/phonology :speech re-education, voice recognition,
> >> cochlear implants, digital song editing, and even linguistic spying;
> >> - for morphology : speech therapy, language teaching and language
> >> teaching materials, lexicography, artificial intelligence, among
> >> others;
> >> - for syntax : language teaching, artificial intelligence, language
> >> re-education;
> >> - for semantics : lexicography, literature; philosophy, psychology,
> >> history, intercultural studies, political studies, law, commerce,
> >> diplomacy; EXTERNAL LINGUISTICS:
> >> - for socio- and psycholinguistics: a better access to individual and
> >> social understanding, among others workplace relationships,
> >> psychology, ethics, intercultural studies, etc.
> >> - for historical linguistics: the history of social change, the
> >> history of international contacts through time and space, the history of
> ideas, etc.
> >> - for political linguistics (history of language laws in Canada): a
> >> better understanding of Canada's history, ofCanada's populations's
> >> history, of the making of ideas and identities, of the role of
> >> languages in the building of nationhoods, etc.
> >>
> >> They also say that linguistics helps them in their acquisition of
> >> French and, for those who are in a concurrent program in Education,
> >> that it helps them in their teaching practicum. Most of them reckon
> >> that linguistics helps them in all areas of their college courses and
> >> contribute their linguistic knowledge in their other class
> >> discussions.
> >>
> >> In the end many of my students are convinced that studying
> >> linguistics makes them more enlightened human beings and citizens.
> >> They are also aware that their studies in linguistics can make them
> >> better teachers, lawyers, jurists, diplomats, psychologists, writers,
> >> physicians, journalists, translators, merchants, parents, caregivers,
> >> etc. etc. etc.
> >>
> >> Not bad after all. And, when after twenty years in the profession of
> >> linguist, I count that I have help producing at least 2,000 such
> >> citizens, I have no problem explaining to the general population that
> >> linguistics is really useful and also a source of pleasure and
> >> happiness :)
> >>
> >> Danielle
> >>
> >> P.S. By the way, some years ago I picked the following quotation
> >> somewhere. I liked it so much that I use it in my signature. However,
> >> I don't know who the author i and it makes me feel bad that I am
> >> using someone's wisdom without acknowledging him/her. Would any of you
> recognize its source?
> >>
> >> "The only hope we have as human beings is to learn each other's
> languages.
> >> Only
> >> then can we truly hope to understand one another."
> >> Quoting john at research.haifa.ac.il:
> >>
> >>> It isn't just grammar teaching, it's also foreign language teaching
> >>> in general.
> >>> English speakers tend not even to think of this since in
> >>> English-speaking countries there is no serious expectation that
> >>> foreign language classes
> >> will
> >>> produce students who can actually practically use the language that
> >>> they're supposedly learning. But in countries in which foreign
> >>> language teaching is taken seriously, people naturally recognize the
> connection to linguistics.
> >>> When people in Israel ask me what being a linguist entails, my first
> >>> stock answer is 'we train people to be English teachers.'
> >>> John
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Quoting Richard Hudson <dick at ling.ucl.ac.uk>:
> >>>
> >>>> Dear Fritz,
> >>>> I agree entirely with Olga. The discussion has a very anglo-phone
> >>>> bias away from education - the UK, USA etc all have a tradition in
> >>>> which school teachers aren't expected to have learned anything
> >>>> about language at university, so academic research on language
> >>>> isn't relevant to education. We're very different from many parts
> >>>> of Europe, where grammar teaching is an important part of the
> >>>> school curriculum and trainee teachers update their understanding
> >>>> at university. I'm sure in a country like that, linguistics would
> >>>> be justified in part by its contribution to education. I don't know
> >>>> of any bibliographical source for this - if anyone does, I'd love
> >>>> to see it. I've written quite a bit about the value of linguistics
> >>>> for education (see
> >>>> www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/papers.htm) but haven't been able to
> >>>> do much on that line except pick up odds and ends from gossip. (I
> >>>> do have evidence that school kids know a great deal more grammar in
> >>>> countries such as Spain - see
> >>>> http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/ec/ba-kal/ba-kal.htm.)
> >>>>
> >>>> Dick (Hudson)
> >>>>
> >>>> Richard Hudson www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm
> >>>>
> >>>> On 20/10/2010 18:43, Yokoyama, Olga wrote:
> >>>>> Fritz,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I take it that your article is about the academic community's
> >>>>> attitudes
> >>>> towards linguistics. Although not part of your topic but still very
> >>> important
> >>>> for the status of linguistics and the budgetary decisions made
> >>>> especially
> >>> in
> >>>> public institutions are attitudes towards linguistics in the lay
> society.
> >>> We
> >>>> all have experienced the routine questioning along the lines of
> >>>> "Oh,
> >> you're
> >>> a
> >>>> linguist? So how many languages do you know?". Misunderstandings
> >>>> out
> >> there
> >>>> are vast and we linguists need to address them. One way my
> >>>> department did
> >>> it
> >>>> this summer was by addressing the Arizona ruling on teachers with
> >> accented
> >>>> English in a public conference, which combined international
> >>>> scholars and practitioners in one room
> >>>> (http://sites.google.com/site/uclalinguisticdiversconf2010/). U.
> >>>> Oregon's Olympiad for secondary school students is another step in
> >>>> the right direction. Linguists need to start talking to the public
> >>>> at large and
> >> make
> >>>> sure that the future generations don???t vote for closing
> >>>> linguistics and language departments (cf. the latest SUNY Albany
> >>>> case) based on budget considerations combined with glaring
> >>>> ignorance about what language
> >> studies
> >>>> are.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Olga
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Olga T. Yokoyama
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Professor and Chair
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Department of Applied Linguistics and TESL
> >>>>>
> >>>>> University of California, Los Angeles
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Tel. (310) 825-4631
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Fax (310) 206-4118
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.appling.ucla.edu
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu
> >>>> [mailto:funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Frederick J
> >> Newmeyer
> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 10:13 AM
> >>>>> To: Funknet
> >>>>> Subject: [FUNKNET] Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For a survey article that I'm writing, I plan to assemble quotes
> >>>>> from
> >>>> people outside the field of linguistics on what they see as the
> >>>> value, or lack of value, of work done in linguistics. So I would
> >>>> like to cite
> >>> published
> >>>> quotes from psychologists, anthropologists, literary specialists,
> >>>> etc. on their views about the value/relevance of linguistics for
> >>>> their particular concerns and its value/relevance in general. Can
> >>>> anybody help me out by pointing me to relevant quotes?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Let me give one example of the sort of thing that I am looking
> >>>>> for. The
> >>>> late computational linguist Fred Jelinek reportedly wrote:
> >>>> 'Whenever I
> >>> ???re
> >>>> a linguist our system performance improves'.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks. I'll summarize.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best wishes,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --fritz
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> fjn at u.washington.edu
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Frederick J. Newmeyer
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Professor Emeritus, University of Washington
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Adjunct Professor, University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser
> >>>> University
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [for my postal address, please contact me by e-mail]
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> ---- This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa
> >>> University
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> "The only hope we have as human beings is to learn each other's
> languages.
> >> Only
> >> then can we truly hope to understand one another."
> >>
> >> Professor Danielle E. Cyr
> >> Department of French Studies
> >> York University
> >> Toronto, ON, Canada, M3J 1P3
> >> Tel. 1.416.736.2100 #310180
> >> FAX. 1.416.736.5924
> >> dcyr at yorku.ca
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -- This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa
> > University
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 08:34:38 -0400
> From: Craig Hancock <hancock at albany.edu>
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics
> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu
> Message-ID: <4CC184DE.7060000 at albany.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> Brian,
> You can think of linguistics as a body of knowledge (hardly unified
> and uncontested) that needs to be packaged. And there is a great deal in
> that knowledge field that can be thought of as directly useful, though
> that would require some sorting out. An alternative approach is to think
> of literacy as a public need that linguists have yet to adequately
> address. Biology would have little to say about human health if it did
> not address it as a top priority, but linguists have pretty much stayed
> away. And by this, I mean L1 instruction. It is somewhat commonplace for
> composition people to say that you don't need to teach native speakers
> their native language, but that pretty much ignores the fact that
> many--more than half in some neighborhoods and communities--never
> achieve anything like an adequate level of literacy. Given the
> generative model, I'm not sure why more eight year olds don't win
> Pulitzer Prizes. If language is not simply a system of forms, but a
> resource for use, then we haven't acquired it until we know how to use
> it, and that is not a finite goal.
> What I want to say, in short, is that there is room for blame on
> both sides.
>
> Craig
>
> On 10/21/2010 4:01 PM, Brian MacWhinney wrote:
> > Sorry not to be responsive to Fritz's original question, but the theme of
> the role of linguistics within language teaching is itself a great one. As
> Craig notes, the crux of the issue is about which theory of grammar is to be
> applied. When I write a morphological parser for Spanish, I rely heavily on
> cyclical rule application and principles of feeding and bleeding. But, I
> don't think for a moment that a second language learner of Spanish sets up
> ordered rule application in their head. Instead, irregular forms trump
> regular forms because of their frequency, a la Bybee and many others. But,
> it is still helpful to teach learners that the Spanish subjunctive derives
> from the first singular present. In fact, once you tell this to learners,
> they sometimes have a bit of an ah-ha experience. There are hundreds of
> cues that can be stated in simple explicit ways to markedly help L2
> learners, whether it is about mountains and deserts taking the definite
> article in English or Fr
> ench nouns ending in -age being masculine. Of course, the learner must
> eventually proceduralize use of these cues. But if they are stated in
> simple ways, then learners can get them. So, yes, linguistics is solidly
> relevant here, but only if the patterns are clearly and simply formulated,
> as I noted in my SSLA commentary in 1997. Does this amount to "watering
> down" linguistics? Sort of "linguistics light"? I am not sure.
> >
> > I am not saying that this is the only possible input from linguistics to
> SLA. There are several more and elaborating each of them would make this a
> very long email. The point is basically the one that Craig makes -- it
> depends on how linguistics is packaged.
> >
> > OK. I will add a disclaimer. I have only done a very small amount of
> language teaching myself, but I have spent a great deal of time in
> curriculum development for cyberlearning. Classroom contact and/or native
> speaker contact is crucial, but learners can also benefit from books,
> computers, films, dictionaries, and so on. Use of any one method does not
> preclude the use of others.
> >
> > -- Brian MacWhinney
> >
> >
> >
> > On Oct 21, 2010, at 1:08 PM, Craig Hancock wrote:
> >
> >> For an international take on this see /Beyond the Grammar Wars,/
> edited by Terry Locke, Routledge, 2010. It includes an article I co-authored
> (with Martha Kolln) on the story of English grammar instruction in the
> states.
> >> Unfortunately, the teachers in the states are still resistant to
> direct attention to language outside of minimalist intervention (error
> attention) in writing and what they call "literary elements" in literature.
> In general, the prevailing idea is that learning a native language takes
> care of itself. What needs to be attended to (with as little metalanguage as
> possible) are discrepencies between the child's language and Standard
> English. English teachers take many courses in literature, a course or two
> in composition, and typically a single course in language, which may include
> theories about why teaching directly about language is unproductive. Much of
> this dates back to the sixties. If grammar is thought of as a formal system,
> largely independent of discourse and cognition, then there's no direct
> transfer to writing. There's little awareness that alternative approaches to
> language are not only possible, but increasingly well developed.
> >> I believe the US system is ripe for change, but as Dick points out,
> it's hard to have a conversation with people who have very little background
> in language.
> >>
> >> Craig
> >>
> >> On 10/21/2010 5:47 AM, Richard Hudson wrote:
> >>> As a postscript, I can answer your question more directly by saying
> that linguistics has had a great deal of explicitly recognised influence on
> official policy in the education of England (and maybe other bits of the
> UK), which I document in my paper "How linguistics has influenced schools in
> England" (http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/papers.htm#influence). The
> snag is, of course, that most teachers don't know enough about language to
> apply the official policy (because, as I said before, linguistics isn't part
> of their university curriculum). But the fact is that 'knowledge about
> language' and 'language awareness', both of which are derived directly from
> (Hallidayan) linguistics, are part of the official curriculum.
> >>>
> >>> Dick
> >>>
> >>> Richard Hudson www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm
> >>>
> >>> On 21/10/2010 09:34, Richard Hudson wrote:
> >>>> Dear Fritz,
> >>>> I agree entirely with Olga. The discussion has a very anglo-phone bias
> away from education - the UK, USA etc all have a tradition in which school
> teachers aren't expected to have learned anything about language at
> university, so academic research on language isn't relevant to education.
> We're very different from many parts of Europe, where grammar teaching is an
> important part of the school curriculum and trainee teachers update their
> understanding at university. I'm sure in a country like that, linguistics
> would be justified in part by its contribution to education. I don't know of
> any bibliographical source for this - if anyone does, I'd love to see it.
> I've written quite a bit about the value of linguistics for education (see
> www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/papers.htm) but haven't been able to do much
> on that line except pick up odds and ends from gossip. (I do have evidence
> that school kids know a great deal more grammar in countries such as Spain -
> see http://www.phon.
> ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/ec/ba-kal/ba-kal.htm.)
> >>>>
> >>>> Dick (Hudson)
> >>>>
> >>>> Richard Hudson www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm
> >>>>
> >>>> On 20/10/2010 18:43, Yokoyama, Olga wrote:
> >>>>> Fritz,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I take it that your article is about the academic community's
> attitudes towards linguistics. Although not part of your topic but still
> very important for the status of linguistics and the budgetary decisions
> made especially in public institutions are attitudes towards linguistics in
> the lay society. We all have experienced the routine questioning along the
> lines of "Oh, you're a linguist? So how many languages do you know?".
> Misunderstandings out there are vast and we linguists need to address them.
> One way my department did it this summer was by addressing the Arizona
> ruling on teachers with accented English in a public conference, which
> combined international scholars and practitioners in one room (
> http://sites.google.com/site/uclalinguisticdiversconf2010/). U. Oregon's
> Olympiad for secondary school students is another step in the right
> direction. Linguists need to start talking to the public at large and make
> sure that the future generations don?t vote for closing li
> nguistics and language departments (cf. the latest SUNY Albany case) based
> on budget considerations combined with glaring ignorance about what language
> studies are.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Olga
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Olga T. Yokoyama
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Professor and Chair
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Department of Applied Linguistics and TESL
> >>>>>
> >>>>> University of California, Los Angeles
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Tel. (310) 825-4631
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Fax (310) 206-4118
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.appling.ucla.edu
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto:
> funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Frederick J Newmeyer
> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 10:13 AM
> >>>>> To: Funknet
> >>>>> Subject: [FUNKNET] Outsiders' views of the value of linguistics
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For a survey article that I'm writing, I plan to assemble quotes from
> people outside the field of linguistics on what they see as the value, or
> lack of value, of work done in linguistics. So I would like to cite
> published quotes from psychologists, anthropologists, literary specialists,
> etc. on their views about the value/relevance of linguistics for their
> particular concerns and its value/relevance in general. Can anybody help me
> out by pointing me to relevant quotes?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Let me give one example of the sort of thing that I am looking for.
> The late computational linguist Fred Jelinek reportedly wrote: 'Whenever I
> ?re a linguist our system performance improves'.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks. I'll summarize.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best wishes,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --fritz
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> fjn at u.washington.edu
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Frederick J. Newmeyer
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Professor Emeritus, University of Washington
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Adjunct Professor, University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser
> University
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [for my postal address, please contact me by e-mail]
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 85, Issue 16
> ***************************************
>
More information about the Funknet
mailing list