(3) International Network for Educational Linguistics as a Discipline (INFELAD)

[Educational Linguistics]

Thank you for further responses. Jane's ideas seem to deserve some wider
discussion and exploration.

Yes, to a certain extent, applied linguistics (AL) seems to be related,
directly or indirectly, quite heavily to language learning/pedagogy perhaps
largely because of certain historical and practical reasons. Historically,
the first free-standing applied linguistics department in the world was
established mainly for pedagogical purposes, and there has been a strong
practical need for this particular aspect of applied linguistics so somehow
it has appeared to overshadow the other AL domains. What do you think about
this explanation or situation?

However, applied linguistics tends to be considered a "branch" of
linguistics, e.g.: http://www.lsadc.org/web2/fldcont.html which in turn is
more a field of arts and humanities. So, should educational linguistics
belong to linguistics (arts/humanities) or education (social sciences)? or
neither? or both?

As for the potential conflict indicated by Jane, I suppose academia and
professions could be developed not just by the contributions made by
"insiders" as it were. In our case, everybody who has interest in or cares
about language and education issues, should have equal chance and right to
contribute. I stress that this is for academic/professional purposes simply
because I don't want the (virtual) network to be exploited for other
purposes.

Finally, thank you for Jane sharing her experiences and ideas. If there were
some non-Westerners who would like to say something, they would be most
welcome though the discussion, as always, is open to all.


*Please note that this is purely for academic/professional purposes.*







>From: "Jane Freeland" <jane at freelanj.demon.co.uk>
>Reply-To: lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu
>To: <lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu>
>Subject: Re: (2) International Network for Educational Linguistics as a
>Discipline (INFELAD)
>Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2002 19:50:08 +0100
>
>Hi
>Yes, I did wonder when the comments would start! Especially as my first
>reaction was one of doubt, since Applied Linguistics, at least here in GB,
>seems to have a strong educational focus, and I couldn't see what
>differences the new discipline / interest grouping had in view.  So I
>actually needed answers to questions 1) and 2) and found your additional
>comments helpful, thanks.
>
>I'm particularly attracted to two of the points you highlight: the
>potential
>open-ness of discussion lists to views from participants at all "levels"
>(?)
>of educational systems; and the potential of such a grouping to air
>'non-Western' views - very much needed in the area of language policy and
>planning for indigenous languages - in which I work - where Western notions
>of what constitutes a language, how to conceptualise its revitalisation,
>maintenance, etc., seem to prevail, and are difficult to contest, since
>much
>of the process of subordination and downgrading of these languages has been
>justified within precisely these western frameworks of analysis.
>Consequently, revitalisation, revival, etc., run the risk of simply
>compensating for this downgrading, in the same terms...
>
>But, in relation to these two points:  we'd perhaps need to address a
>potential conflict between the network's being 'for academic / professional
>purposes' (as you put it) and its being open to different perspectives from
>within education systems.  I'd also highlight the need to conciously
>consider discussion strategies that take account of *all kinds* of
>difference in educational systems across the world (ideological goals,
>internal political structures, organizational assumptions, etc.),
>especially
>if this aims to be an international network promoting meaningful discussion
>across educational systems.
>
>You asked for comments from members of different Applied Linguistics
>Associations.  I'm a member of BAAL, which is now developing Special
>Interest Groups (SIGs) in response to the enormous spread of Applied
>Linguistics these days.  The goal of the SIGs is to enable people to come
>together around particular areas of interest with people who share these
>interests, encouraging transdisciplinary contact where possible - something
>else we should think about? - without becoming overly 'cliquey' and losing
>the sense of how SIGs fit into and could influence the whole Applied
>Linguistics field.  My (relatively short) experience with one of these
>(ethnography of language, which has been 'around' in some sense for about 2
>years) suggests that this is a multi-faceted, baggy, sort of process. By
>dint of theorising around our practices, trying both to "focus" (in Le Page
>and Tabouret-Keller's sense) and keeping boundaries open, we may or may not
>end up defining a new field, but we are certainly enriching our work. It
>now
>includes a web-site and discussion list, two face-to-face seminars one of
>whose most valuable features is that, among friends, we have been able to
>essay of ideas we might otherwise feel cautious about expressing, a
>symposium at the annual conference, shortly to be followed by another.
>
>I would see an informal discussion network of this kind as perhaps a first
>stage in such a process, which would help us begin to feel our way towards
>a
>definition of our differences from and links with the field as a whole -
>which I think is necessarily 'emergent' over time.
>
>That's probably enough for now - I look forward to further discussions
>
>Jane Freeland
>(Honorary Senior Lecturer, University of Portsmouth, UK
>Visiting Research Fellow, University of Southampton, UK)
>3, Greville Road
>Shirley
>Southampton SO15 5AW
>Tel: +44 (0)23 80496211
>
>
>


_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com