Refer to the diagram on page 9 in Aitchison’s linguistics. How do you combine different disciplinary perspectives to formulate a more holistic understanding of your target language? Do you give preference to one disciplinary approach over the others? How will your knowledge of language structures and disciplinary methodologies inform the trajectory of your learning plan?
You need to be a member of The SDLAP Ning to add comments!
Replies
Language is centered around the idea of culture. Specifically, it can be shown by the imagination of language and culture as chicken and eggs. Without either, it implies discontinuation. Therefore, during the course of language learning, study in depth of culture of the target language is equally important as speaking, writing, and others. Based on my experiences, cultural studies of a language is indeed indispensable in order to fully understand a language. If we look at the challenges brought by not knowing the cultural aspect of a language, we will comprehend its significance. For example, in New Guinea, there is a tribe of indigenous people who speak one language. The anthropologists would likely study a society and the way that language is used to socialize its young instead of trying to systematically organize its grammar. May 30, 2019Anthropological linguistics’ would assist me to perform better in my target language since comparative learning between different cultures signify the distinction which will help my memorization and differentiation of the languages.
While studying Italian, one cannot help but draw the similarities between Italian and Latin in forms, sounds, and etc. However, the studies of Roman History is extremely important to my course of studies. That is also why I find my textbooks for Latin very helpful because it provides a sufficient historical and anthropological linguistics regarding Latin.
Growing up taking middle & high school language courses, there is little focus on culture, but culture is crucial to learning a language. Yes, as seen in Aitchison's diagram, phonetics, phonology, and syntax are at the core of linguistics, but the outer rings that relate more to culture -- anthropology, sociology, etc -- are just as important. I think, at least for me, learning a language should not work from the inside of the diagram out like many language courses. In order to understand the language, culture etc, I need to learn about the cultural foundations of a language in tandem with the phonetics and phonology. Generally, I feel that Americans are pretty bad at understanding different perspectives and cultures, so I want to make sure I understand the reasons behind the thought processes of others as I study Dutch. I believe reading about Dutch culture and consuming Dutch media will help accomplish this goal. I'd like to get a good understanding of the psycholinguistics and Sociolinguistics of my target language.
AAccording to the diagram shown at Aitchison's linguistics in page 9 we can see that we can clasify the language as different 'tree rings'. As in everything, in the language there are some things more important than the others and whose value is higher.
For the learning of my target language different perspective can be combined, and that will depend on each individuals preferences. Between the different perspectives that can be taken, I would choose as the most important for me, the languages perspective (applied linguistics).
Each of the different disciplinary approaches involve the different ‘tree rings’ that form the language, and they help to understand better your target language. Moreover, ‘anthropological linguistics’ would also help me to perform better in my target language since I suppose it is based on a comparison between different human cultures, and as we learned culture is what make a language have sense.
Each of those rings must be taken into account for the learning of a language, and the approaches will vary depending on the individual preferences. That is why this rings and the different approaches will be considered in a learning plan. Moreover, those rings are the responsible of the evolution through the learning process, and you will learn form the essentials (phonetics) to ‘pragmatics’, which refers to the use of the adequated communication in each social situation.
Aitchison structured his diagram in an interesting way, placing phonetics in the center followed by phonology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and then various disciplinary perspectives on the outer realm. Before addressing the disciplinary perspectives, I agree with Aitchison’s basic structure that I must gain an understanding of Moroccan Arabic’s phonetics and phonology since sound, and the way in which it is structured, is the base of language. Indeed, Moroccan Arabic differs from Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) in both phonetics and phonology because it uses sounds which do not exist in MSA such as the sounds expressed by “g,” “v,” “ch,” and “p” in English. Furthermore, its patterning of sounds mimics the phonology of the Amazigh languages rather than Arabic, employing many consonants and very few vowels. Thus, it is imperative that I begin my study of Moroccan Arabic by examining its phonetics and phonology.
On the issue of disciplinary perspectives, I think each one is important for understanding the target language and, also, culture. Being able to understand philosophical linguistics would allow me to examine how Moroccan Arabic expresses logical thought and thus how Moroccans think in their language. This disciplinary perspective would complement a study of anthropological linguistics which would allow me to examine not just how Moroccans express logical thought but how Moroccan culture, history, and ethnic diversity has led to the emergence of a specifically “Moroccan” Arabic in the first place. I am particularly interested in studying this latter perspective, anthropological linguistics, because Moroccan Arabic is indeed a product of Morocco’s diverse history. Its Amazigh phonology and structure attests to the Amazigh people as the natives of Morocco while its use of primarily Arabic vocabulary and the Arabic alphabet show the influence of the Arab conquest on Morocco, and the effect of French and Spanish colonialism is shown by the many Spanish and French words which Moroccans began using in place of Amazigh or Arabic words.
Knowing the language structures and disciplinary perspectives will allow me to create a more specific plan than simply approaching a new language through “randomly” studying the vocab, grammar, alphabet, etc. Because of the importance of phonetics and phonology as the base of language, I will first focus on studying the Moroccan Arabic alphabet and then the unique, consonant-heavy sound patterns in Moroccan Arabic. Having a strong linguistic base, I will be able to approach the issues of syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and then anthropological linguistics with greater confidence.
When learning a language, you are not only learning how to speak the language but also the culture, history, written form, etc that embodies the target language. In Aitchison’s diagram with the different perspectives, this shows how learning a language can involve multiply disciplines to gain a better understanding of the target language through speaking, writing, listening, and reading. These disciplines remind me of the styles of learning: visual, auditory, reading/writing, and kinesthetic. I would not identify myself as only one type of learner; instead, I would say that I learn best in an environment with visual and auditory cues. Therefore, in relation to Aitchison’s diagram, some language learners may not achieve the best outcome through only one perspective. A combination of perspectives gives the learner a chance to understand the language through differnet lens.
Because I am native Cantonese speaker and intermediate Mandarin speaker, I believe anthropological linguistics would benefit me the most in learning Korean. Anthropological linguistics examines the similarities and differences in language between cultures. Chinese and Korean cultures share many similarities including phonetics and formality. For an example, 죽 (juk) is the Korean character for porridge while 粥 is the Chinese character for porridge. Mandarin speakers pronounce porridge as “zhou” while Cantonese speakers pronounce it as “jo-kuh” (lighter pronounciation on the "kuh"). In this example, Korean and Cantonese speakers find similarities in a cultural dish through similar pronunciation. This is often the tactic that I use when learning Korean vocabulary because I can recall the pronunciation from memory better when I find patterns.