Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Applied Linguistics Nature and Scope PDF
Applied Linguistics Nature and Scope PDF
Applied Linguistics Nature and Scope PDF
Carl James
Linguistics Department
University of Wales
1. Definitions
There are three sorts of definitions, the dictionary, the ostensive and [he ex·
pository I shaJilook at these in turn. The tirst sort is the least satisfactory
since AL is t oo complex a nOlion [0 define in th i s way H. Douglas Brown
(1980: 231) offers th e most lucid dictionary definition I know'
2 JURNAL BAHASA MODEN
"a set of on-going activities and interactions among birders [applied lin
guists: eJ] in certain places and at certain times ...ways of talking, acting.
watching, interacting, reading. writing , with associated meetings. written
materials, ... associations, and physical settings for meetings and materi
als." (Gee, ibid.).
All this, Gee claims, will fail to give the observer a true insight into the nature
of AL. it will merely reveal to that observer what the Folk Theory of the
Discourse is. Gee's view of the nonrepresentativeness of academic confer
ence-goers' activities does appear unduly skeptical however. While confer
ences, especially those that also double as job-markets, might encourage a
certain amount of participatory display, they do have a more serious side too:
people read papers, which, irrespective of their conventionalised rhetorical
formats, have been conceived and penned in private, away from all the razzle
and "outward flourishes" of the conference hall. These papers, what they say
and how they say it, must surely be representative of "doing" the discipline in
question. Should any would-be applied linguist feel skeptical abeut the true
value of attending "professional" gatherings as a result of reading Gee. they
should also read as an antidote the novel Small World. David Lodge's amus
ing account of academics' conference-season socialising.
To avoid any danger of being distracted and deluded as to the true nature
of AL, the best compromise is to extract the applied linguist from his or her
4 JURNAL BAHASA MODEN
social environment and consider instead what Gee calls the expert's "mental'
networks" This refers to his expertise. Now the AList is an individual with
expertise in two disciplines: he knows his linguistics and he knows his didac
tics. He has credibility in the company of peers from either of these disci
plines. The two disciplines linguistics and didactics can be said to differ in
that the former is theory-oriented while the latter is p ractice -based In some
.
Corder's way of resolving the tension between the fields of AL and didactics
which we have referred to above.
Asmah (1993), in her graphic account of field linguistics, sees the need
to draw a distinction between "upstream" linguistics, which involves describ
ing hitherto unknown languages and "downstream" linguistics, which is done
with languages already described. The question is. where does applied linguis
tics belong in Asmah's scheme? Is it inclusive of description, or does it presup
pose description? After all, there are people who call themselves descriptive
linguists who would not regard their work as AL. Does the applied linguist
take over upstream, when the descriptive linguist'S job is done? There is no
denying that to teach a language you first have to describe it, and therefore TL
description is an act of application. On the other hand, as Rosen (1991: 107)
points OUl, description is not enough:
''The best descriptions of Standard English in the world culled from the
most impressive linguistic aUlhorities. do not enable one (0 read off a cur
riculum and pedagogy from them."
the process of scrutinising and raising to awareness of the intuitions that one
holds about language, whether this be the insights to be gained by knowers or
by learners of a language. I refer to Language Awareness (James and Garrett,
1991; James 1995). We shall return to this concept presently
The force of the epithet "applied" is crucial in this paradigm. The sugges
tion has never been made by any responsible applied linguist that AL
should be taught in L2 classes. There have been occasional misunder
standings however, and most applied linguists can recall at least one
instance of observing a teacher holding a qualification in AL actually
lecturing her class on AL in the hope that they would become more suc
cessful L2 learners!
Another skeptic is Widdowson, who wrote in 1984 that "It is not always
obvious that the way linguists conceive of language is the most appropri
ate for teaching purposes." So what is "the most appropriate" way to
conceive of language? This takes us on to the next possible relationship
between linguistics and application.
(iii) Only some specific types of hnguistics are relevant. There is a feeling in
AL circles that Chomskyan Government and Binding Theory has been
patently irrelevant to language teachers. On the other hand, Hallidayan
Systemic theory has yielded some valuable insights, suggestions, even at
8 JURNAL BAHASA MODEN
LA work in its two forms (A-R and C-R) can be done autonomously by
the learner, but is best and most efficiently practised under the guidance of a
skilled mentor. I suggest that decisions about what, when and how to do LA
work would constitute an exemplary instance of applied linguistics.
"When ordinary people (as opposed to linguists) discuss language. the is
sues that predominate are questions of bad language and Hnguistic atti
tudes in generaL"
The divide is not merely one of language however. There has been much
soul-searching in Britain of late concerning the absence of moral precepts in
the schools. with the result that pupils seem no longer to know the difference
between right and wrong behaviour. The reason why teachers are failing to
provide moral precepts is that they have heen educated in a system of Higher
Education that rejects absolutes and always takes the relativist attil\Jde. Where
though do we draw the line between tolerance and negligence?
APPE!'II1)IX
11 Language P l ann in g
15. Psycholinguistics
18. Sociolinguistics
19 Literacy
21 Minority Languages
27 Models of Bilingualism
REFERENCES
Asmah Haji Omar. 1993. "Linguistic Field Research in Malaysia. The State of
the Art" In Proceedings of the XlV. Scandinavian and Vfll. Conference
of Nordic and Genera/linguistics. Vol. I, pp. 1-16.
Benfer, R. D., Brent, E. E., and Furbee, L. 1991 Expert Systems. Sage: Lon
don and New York.
Corder, S.P 1977 Si mple Codes and the Source ofSecond Language learn
"
Gee, J.P. 1991 "What i s Applied Linguistics"" Paper to the Second Language
Research Forum, Univ ersity ofSotlthcrn California, Los Angele,. March
199i.
Honey, J 1983. The Language Trap. Race, Class and the Slandard English
Issue in Brilish Schools. National Council for Educational Standards,
Kenton, Middlesex.
Lennon. P. 1988. "The Linguist and the Language Teacher' Love at first Sight
or the End of the Honeymoon?" English Teaching Forum, Vol. 26 No.4;
2-5.
Politzer, R.L. 1972. Linguistics and Applied Linguistics. Aims and Methods.
Philadelphia; The Centre for Curriculum Development.
Richards, J.C., Platt, J., and Weber, H. 1985. Longman Dictionary ofApplied
Linguistics. Harlow' Longman.
Strevens, P.D. 1980. "Who are applied linguists and what do they do? A Brit
ish point of view" In R.B. Kaplan (ed.): On the Scope of Applied Lin
guistics. Rowley, Mass.. Newbury House, pp. 28-36.