Abstract This paper is an effort to analyse the relationship between linguistics and linguistic communication instruction. Linguistics is a scientific discipline and learning while proficient is besides an art yet they are closely related to each other in the instance of linguistic communication instruction. The foreign linguistic communication instructors need to include ‘selection’ . ‘grading’ and ‘presentation’ as their chief stairss. Linguistics plays an of import function in the whole procedure of learning by assisting to ease a teacher’s apprehension of the workings and systems of the linguistic communication they teach. Applied Linguistics is truly about the melding of these 2 actions.
The Relationship between Linguistics and Language Teaching. Linguistics is defined as the scientific survey of linguistic communication. Linguistics is so divided into several subdivisions which study different accepts of its usage. Descriptive linguistics. historical and comparative linguistics. which it is based on methodological analysis. Synchronic and Diachronic linguistics. which it is based on the facet of alterations over clip. Phoneticss. phonemics. morphology. sentence structure and semantics. which is based on a linguistic communication as a system. Sociolinguisticss this is related to or combined with the subjects of linguistics and sociology.
Its involvement is in the relationship between linguistic communication and society. It works to explicate why people Use different address in different societal contexts. It’s country of survey is the societal maps of linguistic communication to convey societal significance. The societal relationships in a community. and the manner people signal facets of their societal individuality through their linguistic communication ( Jenet Holmes. 2001 ) . Sociolinguisticss besides is concerned with the interaction of linguistic communication and scenes. ( Carol M. Eastman. 1975 ; 113 ) .
The other expert defines it as the survey that is concerned with look intoing the relationship between linguistic communication and society with the end of a better apprehension of the construction of linguistic communication and of how languages map in communicating ( Ronald Wardhaugh. 1986: 12 ) Psycholinguistics relates to the combined subjects of psychological science and linguistics.
Psychology is defined as the systematic survey of human experience and behaviour or as the scientific discipline that surveies the behaviour of work forces and other animate beings. Knight and Hilgert in Abu Ahmadi. ( 1992 ) . It covers linguistic communication development. ( Lim Kiat Boey ) . The other definition of psycholinguistics is that it is the survey of human language-to-language comprehension. linguistic communication production. and linguistic communication acquisition ( E. M. Hatch ) .
The research done on the relationship between lingual theory and linguistic communication instruction can be traced back to the late nineteenth century. Its relationship has been discussed and debated for many old ages and researched extensively. Since this clip different research proposed by different bookmans has been debatable and found to be mostly inconclusive. In the sixtiess it was decided that at that place needed to be a reappraisal.
The decision that was formed went in two two chief waies of idea with differing points of position. One point of view was that linguistics is non every bit relevant as it was foremost thought to be. and its importance was overrated.
Such linguists as Lamendella ( 1969 ) and Johnson ( 1967 ) expressed their dissension to see linguistics as the footing of a scheme of larning. Lamendella ( 1969 ) thought that it was a error to look to transformational grammar or any other theory of lingual description to supply the theoretical footing for 2nd linguistic communication teaching method. What is needed in the field of linguistic communication instruction are non applied linguists but instead applied psychologists. The other point of position was to acknowledge that the general part of linguistics was of import.
This came though with a provision that learning linguistic communication was non to be bound to merely follow one theory entirely. The thought being that different lingual theories can offer different positions on linguistic communication. and they can all be treated as tantamount resources utile for learning. Levenson ( 1979 ) one time said. ‘no one school of lingual analysis has a monopoly of truth in the description of the phenomena of speech…traditional school grammar. TG grammar. …all these and more can be shown to hold their ain peculiar relevancy to the linguistic communication learning state of affairs.
By1960 the United States. reached its extremum of the influence of structural linguistics upon linguistic communication Teaching. Structural linguistics stressed the importance of linguistic communication as a system and investigates the topographic point that lingual units such as sounds. words and sentences have within this system. This so associated with behaviourism provided the chief theoretical footing of the audio linguistic theory. This so influenced linguistic communication instruction stuffs. techniques and the instructors instructions. Behaviorism led to theories. which explained how an external event. causes a alteration in the behaviour. without any sort of mental interaction.
It besides stressed the importance of repeat and pattern in larning a 2nd linguistic communication. this I think is a critical factor in larning a foreign linguistic communication. If we look at the audio-lingual method. it emphasizes: ( 1 ) The instruction of speech production and listening before reading and authorship ; ( 2 ) The usage of duologues and drills ; ( 3 ) The turning away of the usage of the female parent lingua in the schoolroom. Audio-lingual method respects talking and listening as the basic accomplishments. this is in line with today’s English instruction state of affairs. The Mentalist Approach In the 1960s Chomsky formulated the mentalist attack.
The hypothesis was considered that human behaviour is much more complex than carnal behaviour. Chomsky. felt that we are born with a Language Acquisition Device ( LAD ) . which enables a kid to do a hypotheses about the constructions of a linguistic communication in general. and besides the construction of the linguistic communication being learned more significantly. By the terminal of the sixties’ . there were new developments in learning linguistic communication get downing to happen. The TG theory had a large impact ensuing in a alteration in learning methods. It was opposed to the empiricist theory. that is. learning audio linguistics. linguistically structural linguistics and psychologically behaviourism.
TG theory. 1 It stresses mental activity. 2 It postulates that all human existences have an unconditioned ability to larn a linguistic communication. 3 That it is an congenital instinctual ability and non pattern that made human existences obtain the regulations of a linguistic communication and understand and can bring forth infinite Numberss of sentences. The Natural Method was successfully used in assorted linguistic communication schools in the USA and Europe in the late 19th and the early twentieth century. In the post-World War I decades. the direct method was adopted into English linguistic communication instruction ( ELT ) this laid a solid rational and practical foundation for developing ELT as an independent profession.
Some linguists. like Diller ( 1970 ) . openly declared his penchant for the cognitive place ; while others. like Chastain ( 1976 ) and Rivers ( 1981:25-27 ) held that the two theories were complementary and served different types of scholars or instructors or represented different stages of the linguistic communication larning procedure. Applied Linguists brought about the situational attack and the notional/functional method. It is based on a broader model for the description of linguistic communication usage called communicative competency proposed by Hymes. This brought about the communicative attack to linguistic communication learning came into being.
In 1970s. a group of bookmans including Oller ( 1970 ) and Widdowson ( 1978 ) . were linguists but at besides closely in touch with learning pattern. They gave linguistic communication instruction and linguistic communication pedagogy the lingual way they regarded as necessary. Since they were in touch with linguistic communication instruction pattern and lingual so had a bipartisan position of the job. they placed accent on existent linguistic communication and its communicating and usage. To take Oller’s involvement in pragmatics as an illustration.
Oller ( 1970:507 ) claimed that pragmatics has deductions for linguistic communication instruction ; it defines the end of learning a linguistic communication as motivating the pupils non simply to pull strings meaningless sound sequences. but to direct and have messages in the linguistic communication. The pupils in China start English when they are in primary school. In the yesteryear. more attending was paid to the grammar. the consequence was really dissatisfactory: Now the accents is on speech production and hearing. The audio-lingual method is now used in the schoolroom. In China. more people need to larn English in order to hold the ability to pass on with aliens.
In this instance. speech production and hearing is much more of import than being able to read and compose. They are non expected to hold a high degree of English and their purpose is simple. they need to pass on with a alien so they can understand their words and express themselves good. This is based on simple day-to-day conversation. A market sale and concern or being able to work in the touristry industries. Basic conversation and apprehension can be really helpful in mundane conversation exchanges. The Audio-lingual method stressed the repeat and it theorizes that a linguistic communication is learnt through the formation of wonts.
To talk English fluently. without changeless pattern. is impossible. So in our English instruction. we must assist our pupils speak and listen good. Expressing ourselves decently is non ever an easy thing. particularly if it’s an emotionally charged subject. Even an English major may sometimes happen it debatable to show precisely what they mean so it is understood by the other individual in a manner that is understood by all. When I go to Cambodia I find the by and large that the population though non taught English in school has good English conversation capacity.
They may non read or compose but I feel if they had the chance to larn now they have grasped the basic linguistic communication that they would with more easiness. There is a demand for them to speak and sell to aliens so they have had a demand and inducement to larn and the fact that their utilizing it every twenty-four hours besides helps. Though there are of class gifted pupils I find in Thailand the communicating degree is non good as a batch of accents is but on reading. authorship and grammar. that many times. is non truly understood or comprehended. Tai pupils learn form primary but they do non ever have a ground to talk out of the schoolroom.
One lesson a hebdomad in speech production and 3 of grammar I find makes the pupils scared to utilize the linguistic communication. I teach with Thailand instructors and due to a some general pronunciation jobs the pupils are confused about the sounds of the words and how to thread them together. Assurance helps a batch merely speaking even if it is incorrect. I ever attempt to animate assurance as I feel it is really of import for address. In my sentiment. linguistics and linguistic communication instruction relationship is a double one.
There are some theories of linguistics that can be applied to linguistic communication instruction. i. e. linguistics ushers in development of linguistic communication learning theory. On the other manus. a linguistic communication learning theory expresses or implies replies to inquiries about the nature of linguistic communication. It is necessary for a linguistic communication instructor has some cognition about. the systems of linguistic communications.
A instructor should understand how the linguistic communication works and expresses significance and the constructions that are used in the linguistic communication being taught. A instructor needs to cognize how to do the phonic sounds and the mechanics to bring forth these sounds. This helps with pronunciation jobs that pupils will meet.
By analyzing linguistics a instructor will hold a deeper penetration into the nature of linguistic communication and the linguistic communication the pupil speaks as they’re first linguistic communication. If we agree that the usage of a linguistic communication is a affair of wonts and pattern. so a instructor needs to engraft the wont of utilizing it for communicating until it becomes 2nd nature. Conclusion Linguistic theory is continually developing and learning theories are invariably altering as is the linguistic communication itself. This alone demands a lasting survey of linguistic communications and the relationships between lingual theory and linguistic communication instruction methods.
There are many techniques and theories but no one construct or technique can take in the Different demands pupil may hold and the differing ways people learn. This is a scientific discipline in its ego. There can be many differences in understanding between the L1 and L2 linguistic communication from different cultural apprehensions and different sounds that may be new to the scholar. There are many ways a civilization will show its ego along with foibles and local cognition of the mundane life in the civilization. They say when you understand humour you start to cognize a linguistic communication.
If one could take every pupil as an person and learn them the best manner they learnt one would be assured of good consequences. Knowing the basic single attributes the kid had can enable to teacher to make categories designed for their single demands. This is a luxury that coachs can give their pupils but in the schoolroom one dosage non hold so much control. A practical model designed to accommodate the most pupils and the context that is the most appropriate. The Relationship of Linguistic Materials for the Second Language Teacher.
Because of political. economic and besides proficient alterations. English has become widely taught as an official concern linguistic communication worldwide. besides as a 2nd linguistic communication to immigrants in English-speaking states to derive entry and work. and as a foreign linguistic communication in many non-English-speaking states. This is besides mostly due to the computing machine so there is a cosmopolitan linguistic communication for coding and concern. There are many theories on different ways to learn and different scholarly ideas on the best procedure. I feel that this depends on the type of English you are learning.
Since there are many different needs a pupil may hold. In China the accents is on communicating with aliens on a day-to-day footing like selling them something in a market or making concern. In other states such as Thailand the accents is put on Grammar and composing and reading and merely a little portion into communicating. So while there are still many theories on the best manner to learn I feel in my cognition so far that it is best to larn as many ways as possible and how they work in the different environments. Applied Linguistics is truly about the melding of these two actions but non the range of this essay.
One of the most antic Linguistic aid I think the principal is one of the best ways to acquire relevant vocabulary for your pupils. This is helpful for Syllabus and course of study planning and for all countries of linguistic communication instruction. Mentions Chastain. K. ( 1976 ) . Developing Second-Language Skills: Theory to Practice. Chicago: Rand McNally. Diller. K. C. ( 1970 ) . ‘Linguistic theories of linguistic communication acquisition’ in Hester 1970:1-32. Johnson. M. ( 1967 ) . Definitions and theoretical accounts in course of study theory. Educational Theory. 17:127-40. Lamendella. J. T. ( 1969 ) . On the irrelevancy of transformational grammar to 2nd linguistic communication teaching method.
Language Learning. 19:255-70. Levenson. E. A. ( 1979 ) . Second linguistic communication lexical acquisition: issues and jobs. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin. 4:147-60. Oller. J. W. ( 1970 ) . Transformational theory and pragmatics. Modern Language Journal. 54:504-507. Rivers. W. M. ( 1981 ) . Teaching Foreign-Language Skills. Second edition. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Widdowson. H. G. . ( 1978 ) . Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. . ” ? Zeki Hamawand. Z. Morphology in English: Word formation in cognitive grammar. continuum. Publication. ( Zeki Hamawand. Z. ( 2011 ) .
