English Language

Showing posts with label sociolinguistics. Show all posts

Learn how to Learn English, or Anything in the World

Sometimes it’s just not about how much we do but about how precise we are while doing so. We dare to say that this rule applies to every field. It doesn’t matter what you are doing, what you are studying, etc. you just need to learn to use your tools effectively. For example, when you are learning how to play an instrument, we need to focus on technique, theory and improvisation. A good recommendation for musicians is to record themselves playing, so that they can play their performance over and over again, to spot the weaknesses and work on them. Improvising and never stopping to listening what you do can be fun, especially because you always play the same scales, so you are in your comfort area. However, what happens when you find yourself in a situation where you have to adjust to new sounds, chords, styles, etc.? This is exactly where the importance of focusing on your weaknesses lies on.

Something similar happens when you are learning languages. For example, when seeking to learn English Cairns students try to be as responsible for their learning as possible. They will get to a point where learning depends on them. Until that moment, they count on native English speaking trainers that are able to explain the cultural nuances behind the technical aspects of the language. If you know you have a grammar weakness but are fluent talking, you shouldn’t just keep doing what’s easy for you and nothing else. Doing what we know how to do might make us feel pleased, however, we will only be fulfilled once we have a good command of every aspect in our learning.

CEO of Language Trainers Alexis Sheldon recommends that students learn to use certain tools outside the classroom in order to complement their language lessons. For example, social networks like Facebook or Twitter can put you in touch with native speakers of the language you aim to learn. This is a great idea especially if your next goal is learning the slang used in different countries, and also if you are good at theory but have a hard time applying what you’ve learnt to daily life.

Anglo-Saxons and Britons

Debate about Anglo-Saxons and Britons continues as to the exact nature of the Anglo-Saxon settlements. Some scholars have seen them as the arrival of a ruling minority who assumed control over British populations, whereas others envisage larger groups of settlers. Such groups may in some cases have lived alongside and integrated with British populations, while in some cases they may have replaced existing British populations.

The Germanic language of the incomers became the dominant one, and there are few traces of Celtic influence on Old English (OE); indeed, the number of Celtic words taken into English in the whole of its history has been very small. The names of some English towns were taken over from the Britons, for example London and Leeds. Rivers often have Celtic names: Avon and Ouse are Celtic words for ‘water’ or ‘stream’; Derwent, Darent and Dart are all forms of the British name for ‘oak river’; the Thames is the ‘dark river’; while Trent has been interpreted as meaning ‘trespasser’, that is, a river with a tendency to flood. Among county names, Kent and Devon are Celtic, and so are the first elements in Cornwall and Cumberland; the latter means ‘the land of the Cymry (that is, the Welsh)’, and testifies to the long continuance of British power in the north-west. A few words for topographical features also suggest Celtic influences, such as OE cumb, a word for a type of valley that may have been influenced by the Old British term from which modern Welsh cwm developed.

These few Celtic words in Old English were merely a drop in the ocean, however. Even in English place-names, where Old British left its biggest mark, Celtic forms are far outnumbered by English ones, and only in areas where the Anglo-Saxons penetrated late are Celtic names at all common for villages. The failure of Old British to influence Old English to any great extent does not mean that the Britons were all killed or driven out.

There is in fact evidence that a considerable number of Britons lived among the Anglo-Saxons, but their language quite possibly had no prestige compared with that of the Anglo-Saxons. Whether or not the prestige associated with the language of a political elite would have been sufficient in itself to achieve the replacement of Old British with Old English remains an open question. Alternatively, one might suppose that the Anglo-Saxons had settled in such large numbers that there could be no question of their absorption by the Britons, but recent work on the genetic make-up of the population of the British Isles has called this model into question. The Old English word wealh, which originally meant ‘foreigner’, seems usually to have been used to mean ‘Briton, Welshman’, but is also used to mean ‘servant, slave’ in some texts, which illustrates both the survival of Britons among the Anglo-Saxons, and their low status in some contexts. The OE wealh has survived as the second syllable of Cornwall, and also in the word walnut (OE wealh-hnutu ‘foreign nut, walnut’). Our word Welsh is from the related adjective, OE wylisc.

Language and Communication

Current pedagogic approaches to modern foreign languages (MFL) teaching focus on communicative competence, which simply means to equip the learner with the knowledge, skills and interpersonal strategies they need effectively to be able to communicate with speakers of the language in question.

Many different perspectives on the nature of language, a “complex phenomenon” as Cunningsworth (1995) comments, can be found both in the theoretical literature and in the coursebooks and materials we use. These perspectives may in certain cases be stated explicitly, while in others they may remain implicit. In either case, however, they are present and influence how the language is presented to students and which aspects of it are selected for study.

On the other hand, “communication” has become a buzz word and an umbrella term which is applied to almost any approach to MFL teaching and learning nowadays. That is why it is important to be clear about its concept and implications

“There are rules of use without which the rules of grammar would be useless”, wrote the sociolinguist D. Hymes in 1972. This marks a before and an after in language teaching. Up to then, language had been seen as made up of phonology, grammar and vocabulary, analysed as separate entities, without much attention being paid to the “appropriate” use of the language in real everyday situations. That is one of the reasons why the methods used produced grammatically competent students but only too often “communicatively incompetent” ones.

The growth of the communicative approach in the 1970s emphasised that language is a tool for achieving communicative goals, and not simply a linguistic system in its own right. At the same time, language is a system, and mastering this system (or parts of it at least) is a meaningful form of communication. A coherent approach to language teaching therefore calls for choices to be made about all these aspects.

That is why this section centres around four main visions of the nature of language as proposed by Tudor (2001), all of them having to do with language as communication:

- Language as a linguistic system.

- Language from a functional perspective.

- Language as self-expression.

- Language as culture and ideology.

Other perspectives exist, and this section does not claim to provide a comprehensive overview of all theories of language, but simply to examine some of the more frequent ways of seeing language which teachers are likely to encounter in the daily practice of teaching.

Now, we will not give you all of them, but only two first. You may read the third and the fourth one in the next posting

Language as a linguistic system

The language system comprises three main elements: phonology, vocabulary and grammar. They are part of linguistic competences, which is one of the components of communicative language competence. Following the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, published by the Council of Europe in 2001, they include lexical, phonological, syntactical knowledge and skills and other dimensions of language as system, independently of the sociolinguistic value of its variations and the pragmatic function of its realisations. This component relates not only to the range and quality of knowledge (e.g. in terms of phonetic distinctions made or the extent and precision of vocabulary) but also to cognitive organisation and the way this knowledge is stored (e.g. the various associative networks in which the speaker places a lexical item) and to its accessibility (activation, recall and availability). Knowledge may be conscious and readily expressible or may not (e.g. once again in relation to mastery of a phonetic system). Its organisation and accessibility will vary from one individual to another and vary also within the same individual (e.g. for a plurilingual person depending on the varieties inherent in his or her plurilingual competence). It can also be held that the cognitive organisation of vocabulary and the storing of expressions, etc., depend, amongst other things, on the cultural features of the community or communities in which the individual has been socialised and where his or her learning has occurred.

Read my next posting about language from a functional perspective, language as self-expression, language as culture and ideology.

Teaching Method

The wide variety of method appears as the teachers’ option in the world sometimes confuses rather than comports. It happened because every method is based on the experts’ views in defining what is language and how a language is learned. All methods have their own views in defining what language is and how a language is learned where every view is very different each other. Some methods also recommend apparently strange and unfamiliar classroom techniques and practices. So, the methods are hard to locate, obscurely written, and difficult to understand. Above all, teacher (practitioner) is often bewildered by the lack of any comprehensive theory of what an approach and method are. Say for example “suggestopedia” is a method that developed by Lazanov where the most conspicuous characteristics of suggestopedia are the decoration, furniture, and arrangement of the classroom, the use of music and the authoritative behavior of the teacher. This method will not effective if it is applied in our country because the method is appropriate for some countries only such as Bulgaria, and Brazil.

Bilingualism and Multilingualism

It is widely accepted norm that most of western people are able to use a single language in their communication at home, school, or in other public places. Such ability is termed as monolingualism and the person who acquires this ability is called monolingual.
However, it is also possible to find out that a single language has two or more varieties or dialects associated with the region where the people live; that is what is named as regional variation. In many countries, regional variation is not simply a matter of two dialects of a single language, but a matter of two or more quite distinct and different languages. For example, Indonesia as archipelagoes countries with different tribes has hundreds of regional languages (vernacular) as their first languages used in every day communication. Therefore, Indonesian people are not monolingual but bilingual who are capable of using their first language and the national language Bahasa Indonesia as their second language. Some of them are multilingual who are proficient to use three or even more languages: their first language, national language and other regional language or international language. The ability to use two languages distinctively is termed as bilingualism; while the ability to use three or more languages refers to multilingualism. In multilingual countries, like Indonesia, it is very possible to appear a situation in which two languages are spoken distinctively. This situation is named as diglossia or diglossic situation. According to Wardhaugh, a diglossic situation exists in a society when it has two codes which show clear functional separation; that is one is employed in one set of circumstances and the other in an entirely different set (1986: 87). Ferguson (Word 15: 336) defines diglossia as follows:
Diglossia is a relatively stable
language situation in which, in
addition to the primary dialects of
the language (which may include a
standard or regional standards),
there is a very divergent, highly
codified (often grammatically more
complex) superposed variety, the
vehicle of a large and respected
body of written literature, either of
an earlier period or in another
speech community, which is
learned largely by formal education
and is used for most written and
formal spoken purposes but is not
used by any sector of the
community for ordinary
conversation.
Diglossia as explained above can be understood in terms of narrow and broad sense. In the narrow sense, diglossia means situation that exists in a society when it has two varieties: high variety and low variety which show clear functional separation. Such a diglossia has three crucial features:
 Two distinct varieties of the same language are used in the community, with one regarded as a high (H) variety and the other a low (L) variety;
 Each variety is used for quite distinct functions: H and L complement each other.
 No one uses the H variety in everyday conversation (Holmes, 2001: 27).
In more detailed explanation, Wardhaugh (1986: 88-9) proposes six features to define diglossia:
 Two varieties are kept quite apart functionally. One is used in one set of circumstances and the other in entirely different set.
 One does not use an H variety in circumstances calling for an L variety, e.g., for addressing a servant; nor does one usually use an L variety when an H is called for, e.g., for writing a serious work.
 The H variety is the prestige variety; the L variety lacks prestige.
 A considerable body of literature is found to exist in H variety and almost none in the other.
 The L variety often shows a tendency to borrow learned words from H variety, particularly when speakers try to use the L variety in more formal ways.
 All children learn the L variety. Based on the features above, diglossia exists in the Central and East Java as there are at least two varieties of Javanese language. Its high variety called Krama Inggil is mostly used by the people with higher social status; while its low variety called Ngoko is mostly used by the people with lower social status. Krama Inggil is also in very formal situation, such as religion ceremonial and literature; while Ngoko is used in everyday communication.
In the broad sense, diglossia means situation that exists in a society when it has two languages: national and regional language which show clear functional separation. There are features to define that diglossia:
 Two distinct languages are used in the community, with one regarded as a national (NL) and regional language (RL).
 Each variety is used for quite distinct functions: NL and RL complement each other.
 One does not use the NL in circumstances calling for the RL, e.g., for addressing a servant; nor does one usually use the RL variety when an H is called for, e.g., for writing research.
 The NL is the prestige language; the RL v lacks prestige.
 Literary works are mostly found to exist in the NL and almost none in the other.
 The RL often shows a tendency to borrow learned words from the NL, particularly when speakers try to use the RL variety in more formal ways.
 All children learn the RL

SOCIOLINGUISTICS AND ITS ROLE IN COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING

This essay is written as the final test of sociolinguistics subject. Sociolinguistics is very important to be learned both teacher and learners. It will be useful especially in teaching and learning process. One of the approaches is Communicative Language Teaching. Why sociolinguistics is important in CTL? You will find the answer in this essay.
Before explaining the importance of sociolinguistics in Communicative Language Teaching, we need to know what sociolinguistics is.
Sociolinguistics
Sociolinguistics is the study of the effect of any and all aspects of society, including cultural norms, expectations, and context, on the way language is used. Sociolinguistics differs from sociology of language in that the focus of sociolinguistics is the effect of the society on the language, while the latter's focus is on the language's effect on the society. Sociolinguistics overlaps to a considerable degree with pragmatics.
It also studies how language varieties differ between groups separated by certain social variables, e.g., ethnicity, religion, status, gender, level of education, age, etc., and how creation and adherence to these rules is used to categorize individuals in social or socioeconomic classes. As the usage of a language varies from place to place (dialect), language usage varies among social classes, and it is these sociolects that sociolinguistics studies.
The social aspects of language were in the modern sense first studied by Indian and Japanese linguists in the 1930s, and also by Gauchat in Switzerland in the early 1900s, but none received much attention in the West until much later. The study of the social motivation of language change, on the other hand, has its foundation in the wave model of the late 19th century.
The study of language variation is concerned with social constraints determining language in its contextual environment. Code-switching is the term given to the use of different varieties of language in different social situations. William Labov is often regarded as the founder of the study of sociolinguistics. He is especially noted for introducing the quantitative study of language variation and change, making the sociology of language into a scientific discipline.
While the study of sociolinguistics is very broad, there are a few fundamental concepts on which many sociolinguistic inquiries depend:
 Speech Community
Speech community is a concept in sociolinguistics that describes a more or less discrete group of people who use language in a unique and mutually accepted way among themselves. Speech communities can be members of a profession with a specialized jargon, distinct social groups like high school students or hip hop fans, or even tight-knit groups like families and friends. Members of speech communities will often develop slang or jargon to serve the group's special purposes and priorities.
 High prestige and low prestige varieties
Crucial to sociolinguistic analysis is the concept of prestige; certain speech habits are assigned a positive or a negative value which is then applied to the speaker. This can operate on many levels. It can be realized on the level of the individual sound/phoneme. An important implication of sociolinguistic theory is that speakers 'choose' a variety when making a speech act, whether consciously or subconsciously
 Social network
Understanding language in society means that one also has to understand the social networks in which language is embedded. A social network is another way of describing a particular speech community in terms of relations between individual members in a community. A network could be loose or tight depending on how members interact with each other.. Recently, social networks have been formed by the Internet, through chat rooms, My Space groups, organizations, and online dating services
 Internal vs. external language
In this context, internal language applies to the study of syntax and semantics in language on the abstract level; as mentally represented knowledge in a native speaker. External language applies to language in social contexts, i.e. behavioral habits shared by a community. Internal language analyses operate on the assumption that all native speakers of a language are quite homogeneous in how they process and perceive language.[citation needed] External language fields, such as sociolinguistics, attempt to explain why this is in fact not the case. Many sociolinguists reject the distinction between I- and E-language on the grounds that it is based on a mentalist view of language. On this view, grammar is first and foremost an interactional (social) phenomenon.

After you know about what sociolinguistics is, it is better you know or understand what I call Communicative Language Teaching is.
Communicative Language Teaching
Communicative language teaching (CLT) is an approach to the teaching of second and foreign languages that emphasizes interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of learning a language. It is also referred to as “communicative approach to the teaching of foreign languages” or simply the “communicative approach”.
Communicative language teaching can be understood as a set of principles about the goals of language teaching, how learners learn a language, the kinds of classroom activities that best facilitate learning, and the roles of teachers and learners in the classroom.
CLT is usually characterized as a broad approach to teaching, rather than as a teaching method with a clearly defined set of classroom practices. As such, it is most often defined as a list of general principles or features. One of the most recognized of these lists is David Nunan’s (1991) five features of CLT:
1. An emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target language.
2. The introduction of authentic texts into the learning situation.
3. The provision of opportunities for learners to focus, not only on language but also on the Learning Management process.
4. An enhancement of the learner’s own personal experiences as important contributing elements to classroom learning.
5. An attempt to link classroom language learning with language activities outside the classroom.
These five features are claimed by practitioners of CLT to show that they are very interested in the needs and desires of their learners as well as the connection between the language as it is taught in their class and as it used outside the classroom. Under this broad umbrella definition, any teaching practice that helps students develop their communicative competence in an authentic context is deemed an acceptable and beneficial form of instruction. Thus, in the classroom CLT often takes the form of pair and group work requiring negotiation and cooperation between learners, fluency-based activities that encourage learners to develop their confidence, role-plays in which students practice and develop language functions, as well as judicious use of grammar and pronunciation focused activities.
Nowadays Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) has become a well-recognized approach in education field. The CLT approach centers on the widely-discussed notion of communicative competence, and it has been well recognized nowadays that foreign language learners cannot really learn the target language well without paying close attention to this aspect of competence. Say for example students in Indonesia. They have often been criticized that their communicative competence in English is substantially limited, for having learned English for at least 9 years (3years at elementary school, 3 years at junior and 3 years at senior high school) before attending college, the majority of these EFL (English as a Foreign Language) learners still show many difficulties employing this language to freely express themselves in everyday situations or even conduct a simple conversation with native English speakers. It has been suggested that the poor performance is closely related to the fact that the English testing practice most Indonesians elementary, junior and senior high school students are faced with is firmly rooted in discrete, reutilized skill goals heavily based on the outdated Grammar Translation Method and/or Audio-lingual Method, rather than in communicative objectives based on CLT.
Sociolinguistics in Communicative Language Teaching
As an extension of the notional-functional syllabus, CLT also places great emphasis on helping students use the target language in a variety of contexts and places great emphasis on learning language functions. Unlike the ALM, its primary focus is on helping learners create meaning rather than helping them develop perfectly grammatical structures or acquire native-like pronunciation. This means that successfully learning a foreign language is assessed in terms of how well learners have developed their communicative competence, which can loosely be defined as their ability to apply knowledge of both formal and sociolinguistic aspects of a language with adequate proficiency to communicate.
As I said that in teaching and learning process especially in the process that uses communicative language teaching sets as its goal the teaching of communicative competence. Communicative competence includes the following aspects of language knowledge:
 Knowing how to use language for a range of different purposes and functions
 Knowing how to vary our use of language according to the setting and the participants (e.g., knowing when to use formal and informal speech or when to use language appropriately for written as opposed to spoken communication)
 Knowing how to produce and understand different types of texts(e.g., narratives, reports, interviews, conversations)
 Knowing how to maintain communication despite having limitations in one’s language knowledge (e.g., through using different kinds of communication strategies)

Sociocultural competence, a broader view of what Canale and Swain (1980) identified as sociolinguistic competence, extends well beyond linguistic forms and is an interdisciplinary field of inquiry having to do with the social rules of language use. Sociocultural competence requires an understanding of the social context in which language is used: the roles of the participants, the information they share, and the function of the interaction. Although we have yet to provide a satisfactory description of grammar, we are even further from an adequate description of sociocultural rules of appropriateness. Yet we use them to communicate successfully in many different situational contexts. Learners cannot be expected to anticipate the sociocultural dimension of every situation. The likelihood of encountering the unexpected is easily seen for a language like English, which serves not only as a .first language in many countries, and within different cultural groups in those countries, but also as a language of wider communication across national and cultural boundaries.
Subtler, perhaps, but no less real variations in style and use in different settings can be observed for all languages. Participants in multicultural communication are sensitive not only to the cultural meanings attached to the language itself but to social conventions concerning language use, such things as taking turns, appropriateness of content, nonverbal language, and tone. These conventions influence how messages are interpreted. In addition to cultural knowledge, cultural sensitivity is essential. Just knowing something about the culture of an English-speaking country will not suffice. What must be learned is a general empathy and openness toward other cultures. Sociocultural competence includes a willingness to engage in the active negotiation of meaning along with a willingness to suspend judgment and take into consideration the possibility of cultural differences in conventions of use.
Together these features might be subsumed under the term “cultural flexibility”, or “cultural awareness”. The “ideal native speaker”, someone who knows a language perfectly and uses it appropriately in all social interactions, exists in theory only. None of us knows all there is to know of a language in its many manifestations, both around the world and in our own backyards. Communicative competence is always relative. The coping strategies that we use in unfamiliar contexts, with constraints arising from imperfect knowledge of rules, or such impediments to their application as fatigue or distraction, are represented as strategic competence. With practice and experience, we gain competence in grammar, discourse, and sociocultural adaptability. The relative importance of strategic competence thus decreases; however, the effective use of coping strategies is important for communicative competence in all contexts and distinguishes highly effective communicators from those who are less so

SOCIOLINGUISTICS AND ITS ROLE IN COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING

Franklin Spanish - English Speaking / Talking Merriam-Webster Pocket-Sized Electronic Dictionary / Translator / Phonetic Spell Corrector with Over 5,000,000 Total Translations, 4,800 Phrases, Grammar Guides & Verb Conjugations - Batteries Included

Nowadays Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) has become a well-recognized approach in education field. The CLT approach centers on the widely-discussed notion of communicative competence, and it has been well recognized nowadays that foreign language learners cannot really learn the target language well without paying close attention to this aspect of competence. Say for example students in Indonesia. They have often been criticized that their communicative competence in English is substantially limited, for having learned English for at least 9 years (3years at elementary school, 3 years at junior and 3 years at senior high school) before attending college, the majority of these EFL (English as a Foreign Language) learners still show many difficulties employing this language to freely express themselves in everyday situations or even conduct a simple conversation with native English speakers. It has been suggested that the poor performance is closely related to the fact that the English testing practice most Indonesians elementary, junior and senior high school students are faced with is firmly rooted in discrete, reutilized skill goals heavily based on the outdated Grammar Translation Method and/or Audio-lingual Method, rather than in communicative objectives based on CLT.
Sociolinguistics in Communicative Language Teaching
As an extension of the notional-functional syllabus, CLT also places great emphasis on helping students use the target language in a variety of contexts and places great emphasis on learning language functions. Unlike the ALM, its primary focus is on helping learners create meaning rather than helping them develop perfectly grammatical structures or acquire native-like pronunciation. This means that successfully learning a foreign language is assessed in terms of how well learners have developed their communicative competence, which can loosely be defined as their ability to apply knowledge of both formal and sociolinguistic aspects of a language with adequate proficiency to communicate.
As I said that in teaching and learning process especially in the process that uses communicative language teaching sets as its goal the teaching of communicative competence. Communicative competence includes the following aspects of language knowledge:
 Knowing how to use language for a range of different purposes and functions
 Knowing how to vary our use of language according to the setting and the participants (e.g., knowing when to use formal and informal speech or when to use language appropriately for written as opposed to spoken communication)
 Knowing how to produce and understand different types of texts(e.g., narratives, reports, interviews, conversations)
 Knowing how to maintain communication despite having limitations in one’s language knowledge (e.g., through using different kinds of communication strategies)

Sociocultural competence, a broader view of what Canale and Swain (1980) identified as sociolinguistic competence, extends well beyond linguistic forms and is an interdisciplinary field of inquiry having to do with the social rules of language use. Sociocultural competence requires an understanding of the social context in which language is used: the roles of the participants, the information they share, and the function of the interaction. Although we have yet to provide a satisfactory description of grammar, we are even further from an adequate description of sociocultural rules of appropriateness. Yet we use them to communicate successfully in many different situational contexts. Learners cannot be expected to anticipate the sociocultural dimension of every situation. The likelihood of encountering the unexpected is easily seen for a language like English, which serves not only as a .first language in many countries, and within different cultural groups in those countries, but also as a language of wider communication across national and cultural boundaries.
Subtler, perhaps, but no less real variations in style and use in different settings can be observed for all languages. Participants in multicultural communication are sensitive not only to the cultural meanings attached to the language itself but to social conventions concerning language use, such things as taking turns, appropriateness of content, nonverbal language, and tone. These conventions influence how messages are interpreted. In addition to cultural knowledge, cultural sensitivity is essential. Just knowing something about the culture of an English-speaking country will not suffice. What must be learned is a general empathy and openness toward other cultures. Sociocultural competence includes a willingness to engage in the active negotiation of meaning along with a willingness to suspend judgment and take into consideration the possibility of cultural differences in conventions of use.
Together these features might be subsumed under the term “cultural flexibility”, or “cultural awareness”. The “ideal native speaker”, someone who knows a language perfectly and uses it appropriately in all social interactions, exists in theory only. None of us knows all there is to know of a language in its many manifestations, both around the world and in our own backyards. Communicative competence is always relative. The coping strategies that we use in unfamiliar contexts, with constraints arising from imperfect knowledge of rules, or such impediments to their application as fatigue or distraction, are represented as strategic competence. With practice and experience, we gain competence in grammar, discourse, and sociocultural adaptability. The relative importance of strategic competence thus decreases; however, the effective use of coping strategies is important for communicative competence in all contexts and distinguishes highly effective communicators from those who are less so.