Due by 5pm on Sunday, February 11: Discussion Post #3
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?
Replies
While the readings were at times slightly confusing for me, as someone with no background in linguistics, I do think that there are valuable takeaways from both Aitchison and Crystal's work. Linguists have tried to put languages into certain boxes for the purpose of research in many different ways. The four-level description given by Crystal makes sense as a basic framework to consider language, but I honestly think it is largely irrelevant to the study of language. It makes sense that phonetics and phonology would come before grammar and semantics-- because without the pieces you can't make the puzzle-- but I am not sure that it changes how I consider what I am doing in my language study.
Aitchison expanded on the ideas of phonology, phonetics, grammar, and semantics and added extra context about different methods to study language. I probably prefer to look at linguistics through an anthropological lens since, since my goal is ultimately to be able to be a fluent speaker and essentially to live and travel seamlessly with multiple languages. Since I am working with Portuguese as a decent speaker of Spanish, the historical field of linguistics is also interesting. Similar to how Aitchison described the Indo-European tree branching off, Portuguese and Spanish also branched off from a (more or less) common point during the Middle Ages. So I believe looking at my language through the context of historical evolution could be helpful to my study.
Starting fom inside of the circle, people build up different disciplinary perspective and expanding outer circle. I do not have significant prefer on one disciplinary approach over the others, but I prefer applied linguistics as I can apply my knowledge in real life. I do not think my knowledge of language structure and disciplinary methodologies would greatly influence my learning plan. I know overall phonetics, phonology, and other factors including inside of the circle. The only difference would be that I would be utilizing various ways that are listed outer circle to expand my learning if needed.
Your approach to integrating various disciplinary perspectives for language learning reflects a comprehensive understanding of the subject. Utilizing applied linguistics alongside phonetics and phonology will provide a practical foundation for your learning, allowing you to adapt and expand your knowledge as needed.
I understand your preference (or lack thereof) of any disciplinary approach to learning new languages, I also was in a similar situation when writing this post myself. However, your selection of applied linguistics is a very smart one, since you already have an advanced level of fluency in Korea. I wish one day I can be on your level and expand my linguistics horizons like you are doing at this time.
I will use a combination of pyhscolinguisitcs and anthropological linguistics to approach my target language. I would like to explore more on the Korean culture history, stories, and cultures of those who speak it. combining insights from many disciplines provides a comprehensive understanding of the language. For instance, understanding the phonological rules of a language (phonology) can shed light on its morphological processes (morphology) and syntactic structures (syntax). Although I don't think I have a preference each disciplinary perspective offers valuable insights into deeper aspects of the language. Being knowledgeable of language structures and methodologies informs the learning plan by guiding the selection of relevant materials and methodologies. Knowing language structures will be helpful because I will know the relationship between linguistic behavior and psychological processes. It is also important for me to understand the history and culture to understand the language it can be sometimes difficult to immerse yourself in the language if you are not knowledgeable of the language's culture and history.
I do think combining all the disciplinary perspectives is important, psychology, anthropology, and neuroscience provides a comprehensive understanding of a target language. While I don't give preference to one approach, each offers unique insights; psychology delves into cognitive processes, anthropology provides cultural context, and neuroscience explores brain mechanisms. This interdisciplinary approach informs my learning plan by guiding material selection and study strategies. For instance, understanding language structures aids in grammar acquisition, while insights from anthropology inform cultural nuances in communication. Continuously integrating these perspectives ensures a well-rounded understanding of the language, enhancing proficiency and cultural sensitivity.
One of my main takeaways from the diagram is that these fundamental processes like phonetics, phenology, syntax, and semantics, all compound in a way you can not have one without the other. Looking back to my learning plan I do hit on a few of these but I absolutely need to focus on the bare bones in a sense. As the diagram suggests, you need to almost work from the inside out. This can be seen in my plan as I am starting to learn the basic letters and their pronunciation. I also loved how the graph demonstrates that we really can't build on these interconnected ideas without the basic forms of language, it's the building blocks of everything essentially. Another aspect of Aitchison’s diagram that I would like to incorporate is both psychology and sociology into my study of the Korean language. I am a current psychology student and I think culture has a large overlap with both sociology and psychology. By studying culture I would be able to overlap the two and build more breath to my learning plan. This gives me an exciting new perspective and route to add to my learning goals as I move through my next 3 semesters at U of R.
One could take many routes when combining disciplines to learn a language, such as taking bits from multiple disciplines to form a new one, multiple people working on different disciplines for one big conglomerate, and even finding a way to go beyond the boundaries of the known disciplines like Psychology or AI. Personally, I would give preference to applied linguistics and Artificial Intelligence, mainly because I would like to understand the relations between languages and their origins, as well as their implications in technology that is already revolutionizing the world we live in. My knowledge of language structures like grammar, semantics, and syntax helps in my vocabulary acquisition, as well as my comprehension skills. Furthermore, knowledge in disciplinary methodologies like applied linguistics helps acquire techniques that identify common trends in languages, thus making the process of learning multiple languages a little easier. However, this discipline might seem a little general used to learn other languages. In my particular case, I would like to incorporate Artificial Intelligence to my learning experience as I plan to have a career in technology after graduation. Focusing in Artificial Intelligence could deepen my understanding on how language processing works, as well as the ins and outs of developing programming languages with different alphabets and syntax.
Your approach to integrating applied linguistics and Artificial Intelligence for language learning is innovative and forward-thinking, especially given your career aspirations in technology. By combining these disciplines, you're not only deepening your understanding of languages but also preparing for the ever-evolving world of language technology.