1S3 What Is Applied Lingistics [PDF]

Zitiervorschau

ADVANCED APPLIED LINGUISTICS

What is Applied Linguistics?

Instructor: Prof. Dr. Siusana Kweldju

Origin The development and the focus of applied linguistics are affected by the global spread of English and the instruction of the language in different situations, and, of course, the development in the scientific study of language itself. Basically, for some linguists, applied linguistics deals with the application of linguistic theories, but linguists, like Hudson (1999), for example, conceives of applied linguistics includes linguistics, but not solely focused on linguistics; it is a synthesis of research from many disciplines (Hudson, 1990). In its early stages until fairly recently, AL was practically identified with scientific language teaching. Robert Lado’s book Language Teaching bore the carefully chosen subtitle A Scientific Approach (Lado, 1964). Allen and Corder (1975) began their editorial preface to volume 2 of the Edinburgh Course in Applied linguistics with the following words: Our aim in AL is to make use of the knowledge and insights gained from scientific investigations into the nature of language, in the hope that we may solve some of the problems which arise in the planning and implementation of language teaching programs

Relationship between Applied Linguistics and General Linguistics, and the Development Therefore, until today we are still talking about the scientific status of AL as a field of inquiry, entailing its nature and scope. In other words, we are still seeking to understand the philosophy of applied linguistics. One big question is what precisely the nature of the relation between AL and its parent discipline, theoretical/general linguistics. Is applied linguistics only destined to remain forever subaltern to its parent discipline? Could it be the case that exaggerated

subservience to its parent discipline has only stifled the growth of applied linguistics? We have learned a number of definitions of applied linguistics, specifying its nature and scope of investigation. Since it was first established by Pit Corder in the 50s it has developed into new areas such as first language acquisition, computational linguistics, forensic linguistics, speech therapy, neurolinguistics, second language acquisition research, and a lot more. Gradually, however, many areas have declared unilateral independence from applied linguistics, and evolved into new disciplines. Applied linguistics is difficult to define because of the coexistence of several different conceptualizations of the diverse field. Thus, it affects what courses to offer in the applied linguistics program, what kind of faculty to hire, and what type of research programs shall be funded, and what should be the linguist’s social responsibility. In many cases, applied linguistics is defined according to the researcher’s interest on a particular field or theoretical preoccupation rather than the practical problems of learning or using language in specific contexts. For example, the study of SLA for validating linguistic theory. In its broader definition of applied linguistics, for some scholars sociolinguistics, which is a particular area of investigation or a discipline, is part of it. Applied linguistics is a larger categorization of linguistics that encompasses multiple disciplines, one of which is sociolinguistics. However, Krashen still highlighted that although linguistics, sociolinguistics and applied linguistics overlap as they develop alongside each other, applied linguistics concentrates on the learner and their needs, whilst theoretical linguists study language in the abstract. Sociolinguistics in the domain of applied linguistics investigates, among others, what social factors affect language learning. In another situation, the initial interest of applied linguists is learning and teaching issues, but later they expand to broader sociolinguistic concerns, while paying close attention to continuing education in a context of multilingual communities. They are concerned with how to analyze complex linguistic situations and the components of their mainly bilingual communicative repertoires, in relation to status, attitudes, and consciousness.

That more and more students are interested in taking applied linguistics courses as job openings today are mostly not on the theoretical pure/formal linguistics, but applied linguistics, which needs additional expertise in non-theoretical areas, such as psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, anthropological linguistics, computational linguistics, and more practical areas such as language teaching, and foreign anguage teacher preparation programs, bilingual education, freshman composition and rhetoric, and so on. Field of Inquiry: the Radical vs the Current Researchers The issue concerning the scope of applied linguistics today is the opposing concerns between the radical proponents and the current researchers. The former perceives that applied linguistics should be solely concerned with language problems in classroom setting, while the latter considers applied linguistics as an open field of meticulous enquiry into diverse contexts of application where language, and not necessarily English, is the main focus. Unlike the traditional applied linguists who focused on making language pedagogy more effective, the contemporary ones see applied linguistics as an eclectic, interdisciplinary field. It does not only focus on pedagogic interests, but also political interest, socio-cultural concerns, socio-cognitive approaches, visual semiotics, in addition to interests and applications that attempt to solve contemporary concerns where language, in all its forms, is the main feature. In other words, the field of applied linguistics has expanded in recent years to focus on all aspects of language use. It may also be concerned with politics and institutional discourse, language of advertisement and electronic texts, the role of new technologies in supporting the development of language and literacy skills, racial prejudice in language, discourse prosody, and sociocognitive approaches in discourse analysis, language rituals and language play, language use to maintain institutional identities among inmates, visual semiotics in relation to gender and identity. The current applied linguistic theories are rooted in the post-modernist and post-structuralist thoughts of the 1980s. It transcends theoretical linguistic models and is at the same time not restricted to language teaching. Language analysis is beyond the correct applications of grammar and phonologic rules. It considers the stakeholders’ sociolinguistic conditions of the language

contact, explicitly in terms of attitudes, perceptions, ideologies, identity and planning. (a) The critical theoretical model Fairclough (1989) advocates a critical theoretical model of language studies in which a theory on language study is not only on language units, but also language in its holistic way and the application of critical discourse technique, such as connections between language, power and ideology, while Pennycook (1994) offers the inclusion of the context of language users, that is the speakers and their interaction in a wider social, cultural and political context. Post-structuralist and post-modernist critiques on language study, therefore, paved the way for an explanatory theory on language that extends beyond the linguistic or social normative to account for centripetal and centrifugal forces entwined with the language application. (b) The Extreme Open Model Extreme open model is in response to super-diversity (Ramton, 2011) that is characterised by a tremendous increase in the categories of migrants, not only in terms of nationality, ethnicity, language and religion, but also in terms of motives, patterns, and itineraries of migration, processes of insertion into the labour and housing markets of the host societies, and so on. In this context Rampton (1997) proposes a fluid theoretical model of applied linguistics that involves all users. Rampton’s (1997) model is “understood as an open field of interest in language, in which those inhibiting or passing through simply show a common commitment to the potential value of dialogue with people who are different, there is no knowing where, between whom or on what the most productive discussions will emerge.