The study of language
Yule, 2010
The general study of the characteristics of speech sounds is called
phonetics. Our main interest will be in articulatory phonetics, which is
the study of how speech sounds are made, or articulated. Other areas of
study are acoustic phonetics, which deals with the physical properties of
speech as sound waves in the air, and auditory phonetics (or perceptual
phonetics), which deals with the perception, via the ear, of speech sounds (p.
26).
Phonology is essentially the description of the systems and patterns of
speech sounds in a language. It is based on a theory of what every speaker
of a language unconsciously knows about the sound patterns of that
language. Because of this theoretical status, phonology is concerned with the
abstract or mental aspect of the sounds in language rather than with the
actual physical articulation of speech sounds. That is, phonology is
concerned with the abstract set of sounds in a language that allows us to
distinguish meaning in the actual physical sounds we say and hear (p. 42).
Morphology literally means “the study of forms”. It is the type of
investigation that analyzes all those basic “elements” used in a language.
What we have been describing as “elements” in the form of a linguistic
message are technically known as “morphemes” (p. 67).
The process of describing the structure of phrases and sentences in such a
way that it accounts for all the grammatical sequences in a language and
rules out all the ungrammatical sequences is one way of defining grammar
(p. 81).
For most of the twentieth century, a descriptive approach to language
study was adopted. Analysts collected samples of the language they were
interested in and attempted to describe the regular structures of the
language as it was used, not according to some view of how it should be
used (pp. 86-67).
One type of descriptive approach is called structural analysis, and its main
concern is to investigate the distribution of forms in a language (p. 87).
An approach with the same descriptive aims is called constituent analysis.
The technique employed in this approach is designed to show how small
constituents (or components) in sentences go together to form larger
constituents (p. 88).
When we concentrate on the structure and ordering of components within a
sentence, we are studying the syntax of a language. The word “syntax”
comes originally from Greek and literally means “a putting together” or
“arrangement” (p. 96).
One goal of syntactic analysis is to have a small and finite (i.e., limited) set
of rules that will be capable of producing a large and potentially infinite (i.e.,
unlimited) number of well-formed structures. This small and finite set of rules
is sometimes described as a generative grammar because it can be used
to “generate” or produce sentence structures and not just describe them (p.
97).
Semantics is the study of the meaning of words, phrases, and sentences. In
semantic analysis, there is always an attempt to focus on what the words
conventionally mean, rather than on what an individual speaker might want
them to mean on a particular occasion. This approach is concerned with the
objective or general meaning and avoids trying to account for subjective or
local meaning (p. 112).
There are other aspects of meaning that depend more on context and the
communicative intentions of speakers. Communication clearly depends on
not only recognizing the meaning of words in an utterance but also
recognizing what speakers mean by their utterances. The study of what
speakers mean, or “speaker meaning,” is called pragmatics. Pragmatics is
the study of “invisible” meaning, or how we recognize what is meant even
when it isn’t actually said or written (pp. 127-128).
There are different kinds of context. One kind is described as linguistic
context, also known as co-text. The co-text of a word is the set of other
words used in the same phrase or sentence. The surrounding co-text has a
strong effect on what we think the word probably means. More generally, we
know how to interpret words on the basis of physical context. The relevant
context is our mental representation of those aspects of what is physically
out there that we use in arriving at an interpretation (pp. 129-130).
A distinction is sometimes made between learning in a “foreign language”
setting (learning a language that is not generally spoken in the surrounding
community) and a “second language” setting (learning a language that is
spoken in the surrounding community).
[…] A more significant distinction is made between acquisition and learning.
The term acquisition is used to refer to the gradual development of ability
in a language by using it naturally in communicative situations with others
who know the language. The term learning, however, applies to a more
conscious process of accumulating knowledge of the features, such as
vocabulary and grammar, of a language, typically in an institutional setting.
[…] Activities associated with learning have traditionally been used in
language teaching in schools and have a tendency, when successful, to
result in more knowledge “about” the language (as demonstrated in tests)
than fluency in actually using the language (as demonstrated in social
interaction) (p. 187).
Recent approaches designed to promote L2 learning have tended to reflect
different theoretical views on how an L2 might best be learned:
The most traditional approach is to treat L2 learning in the same way as any
other academic subject. Vocabulary lists and sets of grammar rules are used
to define the target of learning, memorization is encouraged, and written
language rather than spoken language is emphasized. This method has its
roots in the traditional teaching of Latin and is described as the grammar–
translation method.
[…] A very different approach, emphasizing the spoken language, became
popular in the middle of the twentieth century. It involved a systematic
presentation of the structures of the L2, moving from the simple to the more
complex, in the form of drills that the student had to repeat. This approach,
called the audiolingual method, was strongly influenced by a belief that
the fluent use of a language was essentially a set of “habits” that could be
developed with a lot of practice.
[…] More recent revisions of the L2 learning experience can best be
described as communicative approaches. Although there are many
different versions of how to create communicative experiences for L2
learners, they are all based on a belief that the functions of language (what it
is used for) should be emphasized rather than the forms of the language
(correct grammatical or phonological structures) (pp. 189-190).
