语言学与教育.pptVIP

Linguistics and education Richard Hudson University of Westminster October 2007 What can these people … …say to these people? After all, … Linguistics is technical and abstruse. It’s all about velarization, subjacency, etc. What’s it got to do with anything, let alone education? The school syllabus has no room for more. They’ve just added Citizenship, Thinking skills and Functional skills. The only point of schools is league tables. But I think … Every teacher should know elementary linguistics. English and FL teachers should know BA linguistics. They should teach elementary linguistics in class. In fact, it’s happening already! A-level English Language National Curriculum for English Primary phonics National Curriculum for Foreign Languages But will it last? Plenty of good ideas on paper, but: Teachers lack subject knowledge. HE is part of the problem. It doesn’t produce the teachers we need. Without changes in HE the reforms may peter out. Moreover, … Linguists are a special part of the problem. Linguistics courses ignore education. Because linguistics research ignores it. So, here are my thoughts on linguistics and education. The agenda What every teacher should know Ideas, e.g. Bilingualism is OK. Models, e.g. Letters and sounds are different. Descriptions, e.g. Long i = /ai/ - but only in English. What English teachers should know Ideas, e.g. Form and function are different but related. Models, e.g. Words in a phrase modify its head. Descriptions, e.g. Determiners are different from adjectives. What Foreign-language teachers should know Ideas, e.g. Different languages structure the world differently. Models, e.g. Vowel qualities are organised in a triangle. Descriptions, e.g. French r is uvular. What pupils should know Ideas, e.g. What they speak at home is a proper language. Models, e.g. Words form lexically related ‘families’. Descriptions, e.g. Adjective + -ness = Noun u can be consonant + vowel (so: a unit) But do linguists agree? Yes. We don’t not