3 Outline Overview of linguistics in language teaching Key points from Rothman (2010) Communicative language teaching model Some examples of linguistics in action
4 Linguistics in Language Teaching Structuralist influence (1950s-60s) –Audio lingual method –Contrastive analysis Transformational grammar I (1970s) –Innatism; Critical Period Hypothesis –Interlanguage – learner’s language as a system –Cognitive code approach
5 Linguistics in Language Teaching Communicative approaches (1970s-80s+) –Influence of sociolinguists (Hymes) –Focus on communicative competence Transformational grammar II (1980s) –Innatism; Krashen’s Input Hypothesis; Natural Order –Critical period replaced by affective filter –UG approaches (e.g., parameter setting)
6 Linguistics in Language Teaching Interactionist approaches (1990s ) –Both input and output necessary –Noticing hypothesis –Processability theory Sociocultural approaches (1990s ) –Collaboration & scaffolding –Closer links to sociolinguistics
7 Rothman (2010) Relation of linguistics and teaching Types of grammars –Prescriptive – tells NS’s what is “right” –Pedagogical – tells NNS’s what is “right” and how to learn it (often by contrast with L1) –Descriptive – systematizes NS intuitions and data from language use
8 Rothman (2010) Example: pronominal subjects in Spanish –Grammatical distinctions John believes that we/*Ø are good people Juan cree que nosotros/Ø are good people –Pragmatics in “optional” use Who spoke to Roberto yesterday? I/*Ø spoke to him ¿Quien habló con Roberto ayer? Yo/*Ø le hablé
9 Linguistics in perspective: a “standard” communicative model Learning goal: develop “communicative competence”: (Savignon, 2001) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communicative_competence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communicative_competence –Grammatical competence –Sociocultural competence –Discourse competence –Strategic competence
10 Linguistics in perspective: a “standard” communicative model See also the SIL classification SIL classification
11 Useful knowledge for teachers Phonetics and phonology Teaching lexical items: challenges –Idioms –Synonyms, antonyms, and items in the same semantic fields Speech acts (English is more indirect than students believe) Verb subcategorization
12 Verb subcategorization The woman boiled the water/*cried the baby. I am studying/*knowing French. Fred called his friend up/*ran his friend into. She told/*explained me the schedule. They didn’t allow/*let him to come
13 Examples For each set of sentences in the handout, try to determine the nature of the problem (if any) and what you might do to help ESL learners understand it. Work in groups of 2-3—feel free to link to outside sources if you have the means.
14 Group 1 Examples Infinitive vs. gerund Gerund after a preposition Test for preposition: can you replace the verb form with a noun phrase while maintaining the basic meaning? –I look forward to the party. –I’m not accustomed to such treatment. –We were used to his complaints.
15 Group 2 Examples Bolinger Principle (from The Grammar Book): To-infinitive = hypothetical, future, unfulfilled relative to the main verb time Gerund = real, vivid, fulfilled relative to the main verb time
16 Group 3 Examples All the verbs are unaccusative. That is, they have a single argument that is semantically more like what we expect to see as a direct object in a transitive verb (e.g., a patient). Such verbs behave differently in many languages, and thus language learners often produce passive-like structures with these verbs, but not with agentive intransitives: “John was spoke first.”
17 Conclusion Knowledge of linguistics is quite helpful for language teaching However, being a linguist doesn’t automatically make you a better language teacher If interested, consider Linguistics 191/291 next quarter (shameless plug): www.stanford.edu/~efs/ling291 www.stanford.edu/~efs/ling291