CHAPER 4 THE THREE DIMENSIONS

The three dimensions applied to language in communication

Form: Phonology/Graphology/Semiology, Morphology, Syntax
The first dimension, the forms of a language, consists of the visible or audible units: the
sounds (or signs, in the case of sign language), written symbols, inflectional morphemes,
function words (e.g., of), and syntactic structures. The sounds or phonemes of the language
are accounted for by the study of phonology. Graphology is the study of graphemes, the
minimal contrastive units in the writing system of a language. Semiology is the science that
deals with signs or sign language. Morphology is the study of morphemes, the minimal
meaningful units of grammar; in the form category, morphology is limited to inflectional
morphemes (e.g., the -ing of the present participle) and to function words (e.g., the). A study
of syntax determines what combinations of word and morpheme sequences are permitted and
how they are sequenced in sentences.
Meaning: Semantics
The second dimension is meaning. Semantics is the study of meaning encoded in language;
we will think of it here as the essential denotation of a decontextualized form, what we would
learn about a particular form if we were to consult a dictionary
It may be more helpful to think of semantics as the study of meaning potential, because we
are well aware that the meaning of a word or lexicogrammatical string that is actually realized
in communication may be quite different from its dictionary definition. For instance, Good
morning is typically a pleasant and appropriate greeting in the morning when extended to
family members and others. If, on a given occasion, I were to use Good morning to greet
someone in the afternoon, you might point out that I had inadvertently committed a semantic
error: I should have said Good afternoon. However, as I have just claimed, the meaning in a
word or lexicogrammatical string is only a potential meaning. I could have deliberately used
the same greeting of Good morning in the afternoon, fully aware of the time, but using it
nonetheless to teasingly greet my teenage son, who had just arisen. Using the greeting as mild
sarcasm illustrates the third dimension of language, pragmatics.
Use: Pragmatics
Pragmatics is not the meaning encoded in language, but what people mean by the language
they use. The units of this dimension are social functions (such as promising, inviting,
agreeing, disagreeing, and apologizing) and discourse patterns (such as those that contribute
to the cohesion of texts).
Different Levels of Scale
One of the things that I find remarkable about this tripartite scheme is that although there are
prototypical units that can be associated with each of the three dimensions, in order to arrive
at a complete understanding of any one of the units, it must be described from all three
perspectives, not just its “prototypical home.” Thus, being able to use grammar structures
does not only mean using the forms accurately; it means using them meaningfully (semantics)
and appropriately (pragmatics) as well. With the pie chart, and the following three questions,
we can easily map the form, meaning, and use of any language unit:
Form: How is the unit formed?
Meaning: What does it mean (its essential meaning)?
Use: When and why is it used?
Meaning Units
Take, for instance, a vocabulary item—the noun house. An analysis of its form would include
its pronunciation or sign, knowing that it has a diphthong vowel (/aw/), for instance. Part of
knowing its form is also knowing its spelling. In the case of house, the silent e is noteworthy.
Then, too, knowing that it is a common count noun would be necessary form information so
that house could be used accurately in syntax.
Consulting a dictionary for its meaning, we would learn that house means a “construction
intended to be used for human habitation” (Webster’s Third International). This definition
might have to be adjusted for students, especially those for whom no cognates exist, perhaps
to something like “a place where people live.”
But although knowing its form and meaning are important, having this knowledge is not
sufficient for someone to be able to use house appropriately. In order to do so, the person must
be able to distinguish house from home.
to say that someone “knows a word” entails a great deal more than simply knowing its
meaning.
Use Units
I’m (terribly, very) sorry.
Pardon me.
(Please) Excuse me.
The essential meaning of these forms is to apologize for something we did or did or did not do
or will or will not do when we were/are supposed to. Specifically, excuse me is a formula to
remedy a past or immediately forthcoming breach of etiquette or other minor offense on the
part of the speaker. I'm sorry is an expression of dismay or regret at an unpleasantness
suffered by the addressee.
Borkin and Reinhart (1978) have discussed how ESL students have to learn to use them
appropriately. The following was elicited from a nonnative speaker of English, declining an
invitation to the movies
Excuse me. I’d like to go but I don’t have time.
Native speakers whom Borkin and Reinhart consulted agreed that declining an invitation
would be better accomplished with I ’m sorry, and thus the use of excuse me is a pragmatic
error.
The teachers would often say of course to indicate agreement. Of course is a perfectly proper
way to show agreement when one is responding to a request. If you answer of course to my
request to help me move this table, your response shows your willingness to cooperate.
However, saying of course to a statement of fact (“The square root of 144 is 12.” “Of
course.”) implies that the speaker is not saying anything that the listener does not already
know. There were other such responses that were interpreted by native speakers of English as
a sign of rudeness.
Form Units
Using an example will help ground the following analysis:
There are Canada geese on the river.
There is an invariant form, occupying the subject position in the sentence. It is followed by a
verb, usually a form of be, whose form in turn governs the form of the noun phrase that
follows, or the logical subject. The logical subject is also typically indefinite—here, for
instance, it is Canada geese, not the Canada geese. A prepositional phrase—here, on the river
—often follows the logical subject.
The name of the structure, the existential there, gives us a clue about its meaning. It fits into
the semantic category of asserting the existence of something or showing the location of
something. It is used to introduce new information. The preferred position for new
information is in end-focus position toward the end of the clause, and by using there to fill the
subject position, the new information—in this case the whole proposition, Canada geese and
their location—can be postponed until further in the sentence, in the preferred end-focus
position.
Distinguishing Meaning from Use
There are two types of modals: logical probability modals and socialinteractional modals.
Many modal verbs belong to both types. For instance, “may” can be used as a logical
probability modal:
It may rain tomorrow.

Or it can be used in its social interactional sense:

You may leave now.
In the first example, “may” is being used to make a prediction, in the second to grant
permission. Choosing among the logical probability modals for the right degree of certainty
regarding one’s prediction is a meaning dimension challenge. Choosing the right way to
request and grant permission depends not so much on meaning as it does on who is being
asked and who is asking and what is being asked for. This represents a challenge in the Use
dimension.
The Three Dimensions are Learned Differently
I believe that the three dimensions are learned differently and that therefore they have to be taught
differently

Learning use requires that learners develop a sensitivity to context, which is different from
associative learning.
As for pedagogical practice, again, it makes sense to me that certain techniques lend
themselves more to teaching one dimension rather than the others. Take role plays, for
instance. Role plays are ideal for working on pragmatics because the variables in role plays
can be altered to help learners see and practice how context and interlocutor variables affect
choice of form. Conversely, I do not think role plays would be especially suited for teaching
the meaning or form of grammatical structures. Of course, it should always be acknowledged
that the motivation for our choosing a particular pedagogical activity does not guarantee that
students will use it for the same purpose.
Before concluding, we should remember that a great deal of our ability to control form
consists of controlling unanalyzed multiword strings or formulas. These, too, can be—and for
now I will say, should be—analyzed with the pie chart. For instance, earlier I made the point
that knowing the phrase of course requires knowing its form, its meaning, and its use.
The Importance of All Three Dimensions
In Linguistics
Knowledge that there are three dimensions, not one, enriches our understanding of language
in communication. the primary concern of many linguists until recently has been form. The
growing interest in cognitive linguistics, which sees forms as meaning-motivated, and
functional linguistics, which sees forms as socially-functionally motivated, is testament to the
broader view of language entertained by linguists these days. While clearly much remains to
be discovered concerning linguistic form, knowing everything there is to know about how to
form a grammar structure will not satisfy language teaching needs.
In Language Teaching
Of course, applied linguists are not immune to showing preference, either. It is the case that
methods of language teaching commonly emphasize one or the other of these three
dimensions.
A LINGUISTIC HEURISTIC PRINCIPLE
It is time to be explicit about an important heuristic principle in linguistics that I have been
putting into practice: A difference in form always spells a difference in meaning or use.
Therefore, if the form wedge of the pie chart is changed in some way in real-time use or over-
time change, it will have the effect of changing one or the other of the remaining two wedges.
Conversely, if the meaning or use wedges change, this will affect the form wedge. The system
is holistic. This is what the double-headed arrows connecting the wedges in the pie are meant
to depict. If grammar is a dynamical system—a view that I entertain in this book— the parts
of a system mutually interact. Mutual interaction implies that they influence and co-determine
each other’s changes over time (van Geert, 1994). For example, consider these two sentences
with different forms of Nan:
I can’t imagine Nan’s doing such a thing.
I can’t imagine Nan doing such a thing.
In the first sentence, th e ’s marks Nan as the subject of a gerund doing such a thing. In the
second sentence, without th e ’s marker, Nan is simply the object of the sentence, being
modified by the present participial phrase doing such a thing. Some prescriptivist
grammarians consider the second sentence to be erroneous— a malformed gerund. However^
many English speakers these days consider such forms perfectly acceptable.
As our principle tells us, with the difference of form comes a difference in meaning. The
gerund in the first sentence invites us to imagine the episode as a whole, whereas in the
second sentence, with the object followed by a participle, the focus is primarily on Nan, not
on the entire episode. The difference between the two is admittedly subtle, but it illustrates the
fact that grammar is a tool of exquisite precision, allowing us to create forms in order to
express delicate shades of meaning.
Defining the learning challenge
An important responsibility of teachers is to be selective about what they wish to present to
students. It is impossible to present everything, and even if teachers had unlimited time and all
was known about a given language, they still could not teach it all, because as we saw in the
last chapter, language keeps changing. Instead, we must be judicious about what we choose to
work on with our students. Let me offer an important principle in this regard, one that should
be applied in tandem with use of the pie chart. I call this the challenge principle
The challenge principle says that one of the three dimensions almost always affords the
greatest long-term challenge to language students. It is important to remember that, with any
given piece of language, all three dimensions of language are present. It is impossible to
separate form from meaning from use. However, for pedagogical reasons, it is possible to
focus student attention on one of these dimensions within the whole. Of course, for a given
group of students, the immediate challenge may differ from the overall long-term challenge,
depending on the characteristics of the students, such as their native language and their level
of target language proficiency. However, it is possible to anticipate which dimension is likely
to afford the greatest long-term challenge for all students, and it is important to do so, for
being clear about the overall challenge will give you a starting point and suggest an approach
that is consistent with the long-term challenge.
To illustrate this principle and its significance, consider the passive voice in English. First, we
shall need to do a pie-chart analysis of the passive voice. Here is what one would look like.
Students will have to learn how to form the passive voice, as I have said, but this should not
create too much difficulty, since the passive is formed in English with the ubiquitous be and
get verbs, which students have probably learned to conjugate correctly by the time the passive
is introduced. Similarly, forming the passive requires that students use a structure they will
have encountered before, namely, the past participle. This is not to say that students will not
struggle with the various tense and aspect combinations for the passive voice; however, the
problems should not be insurmountable because the combinations are regular.
The meaning of the passive should also not be difficult to learn. All languages have ways to
shift the focus in an utterance, and the passive exists to do just this in English, shifting the
focus from the agent of the action to the receiver.
This leaves us with the use dimension. Indeed, my experience has been that the greatest
challenge is usually learning to use the passive voice appropriately. Learning when to use the
passive voice versus the active voice for a sentence with more or less the same meaning is a
formidable challenge. For example, which is the better way to complete this mini-text, with
the active voice (a) or passive voice (b)?
Some of the Olympic athletes from the smaller countries, such as Korea and Romania, were
truly remarkable. In fact,
(a) the Romanians won three gold medals in gymnastics.
(b) three gold medals in gymnastics were won by Romanians.
1. Form (Biçim):

 Sesbilim/Grafemoloji/Semiyoloji, Morfoloji, Sözdizimi gibi dilin görsel veya

işitsel birimleri.
 Sesler, yazılı semboller, ek morfemler, işlevsel kelimeler ve sözdizimi yapıları
gibi dilin görsel veya işitsel birimleri.

2. Anlam:

 Semantik olarak, dilde kodlanmış anlamın incelenmesi.

 Semantik, dekontekstüalize edilmiş bir formun temel gösterimini düşünelim.

3. Kullanım:

 Pragmatik olarak, dilin kullanımı ve insanların dil kullanarak ne demek

istedikleri.
 Sosyal fonksiyonlar ve metinlerin tutarlılığına katkıda bulunan dil kullanımı gibi.

Farklı Ölçek Seviyeleri:

 Her üç boyutun da prototipik birimlere sahip olmasına rağmen, tam bir

anlayışa ulaşmak için her bir birimin üç perspektiften açıklanması gerekiyor.
 Bir dil birimi (örneğin bir kelime) için form, anlam ve kullanım sorularını sormak
önemli.

Anlam Birimleri:

 Bir kelimenin (örneğin "ev") formu (sesbilim, yazım), anlamı (temel anlam) ve
kullanımı (bağlam içinde doğru kullanım) bilinmelidir.

Kullanım Birimleri:

 Özür dileme ifadeleri (örneğin, "Üzgünüm" veya "Affedersiniz") kullanım

boyutunda incelenir.
 ESL öğrencilerinin bu ifadeleri doğru bir şekilde kullanmayı öğrenmeleri
gerekebilir.

Form Birimleri:

 Varlık olan bir yapı (örneğin, "Nehirde Kanada kazları var") form, anlam ve
kullanım açısından incelenir.

Anlam ve Kullanım Arasındaki Farkı Ayırt Etme:

  Modalların iki türü vardır: mantıksal olasılık ve sosyal etkileşim modalleri. Aynı
modal hem anlam hem de kullanım açısından farklı bağlamlarda kullanılabilir.

Üç Boyutun Farklı Öğrenme Yöntemleri:

 Formun öğrenilmesi, sadece doğru şekilde kullanmak anlamına gelmez; aynı

zamanda anlamlı (semantik) ve uygun (pragmatik) bir şekilde kullanmayı da
içerir.

Zorlukların Tanımlanması:

 Dil öğrencilerinin karşılaştığı en büyük uzun vadeli zorluk genellikle kullanım

boyutunda ortaya çıkar.
 Örneğin, İngilizce'deki pasif sesin uygun bir şekilde kullanılmasını öğrenmek,
form ve anlam öğrenmeye kıyasla genellikle daha büyük bir zorluktur.