On teaching approaches

[phil cash cash]

Bill & everybody,
My feeling is that one should never be too reductive in recognizing one's own
linguistic diversity (such as reducing it to grammar/structure).  For most
community advocates, grappling with a preferred grammar-centric view is a
continuous quandary and challenge because such views often eliminate the vital
links to culture entirely.  Linguists and native scholar/community educators
who have taken a committed approach to diversity and endangerment repeatedly
show that an integrated approach is a worthwhile endeavor.  When I go to
conferences like Stabilizing Indigenous Languages and the like, I no 
longer see
the diversity & flux of teaching strategies as "fads" (as I once did) rather
they all seem to privilege the notion of whole utterances & constructions
(usage-based) rather than simply grammar in isolation.  I like your/Bill's
idea that "content" has to come first...but the question emerges whose
conception of "content"?  Recognizing the real diversity of indigenous
languages may be at least part of the answer in addition to real acts of
revitalization. 
later,
Phil Cash Cash
UofA
Quoting William J Poser :

> Perhaps the general point that should be made about teaching techniques
> is that what needs to be taught is determined by the nature of the
> language, not by what teaching methods may be felt to be effective
> or culturally preferred. If a language has a complex verbal system
> and you don't provide that content your students will not learn the
> language, regardless of what the fad is in language teaching methods
> or what politicians claim about traditions. The content has to come
> first. Once you know what you have to teach you can try to find the
> best way to do it.
>
> Bill

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ilat/attachments/20090114/4a7aa940/attachment.htm>