On teaching approaches

[susan.penfield]

Phil and all,
My two cents is that the notion of content itself should be community-driven
-- although, there are ways to look at content which bridges the
language/culture interface in a general way that could invite community
definition, but still accomplish very focused attention on linguistic
structure. I'm reminded here of the move in the 1980's to build syllabi for
language teaching around 'speech acts' or pragmatics -- like 'politeness
formulas' -- or even around how to talk about community events -- Staging
the content to be relevant first, then focusing on particular syntactic
constructions recurring in this type of content still seems like a logical
and somewhat organized approach to bridging the language / culture /content
issues.

S.

On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 2:47 PM, phil cash cash
<cashcash at email.arizona.edu>wrote:

> 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 <wjposer at ldc.upenn.edu>:
>
> > 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
>
>


-- 
**********************************************************************************************
Susan D. Penfield, Ph.D.
(Currently on leave to the National Science Foundation.
E-mail: spenfiel at nsf.gov)


Department of English (Primary)
Faculty affiliate in Linguistics, Language, Reading and Culture,
Second Language Acquisition and Teaching (SLAT),
American Indian Language Development Institute (AILDI)
The Southwest Center
University of Arizona,
Tucson, Arizona 85721
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ilat/attachments/20090115/a6ed034e/attachment.htm>