Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Theoretical is more of the study of linguistics and applied is the use. Thats
how I read it anyway.
Linguistics is a comparatively new science, or new, at least, in the form it has taken in
recent years. The science seeks to answer the following questions: (a) what exactly do
we know when we know a language (b) how is this knowledge acquired and (c) how
is such knowledge used? Linguistics examines language as a part of human behaviour
from a psychological and a social and cultural aspect and attempts to determine which
characteristics are unique to a language and which are universal (found in all the
world's languages), how individual languages differ, how and why they change, "die"
or "are born". Like all sciences, linguistics is divided into theoretical and applied.
Linguistics is the study of language in all its aspects including its structure, its
diversity, how it changes and evolves, how people learn and make use of it to
communicate, and how it is implicated in relations of power. It provides students with
an insight into the most fundamental of all human faculties, develops strong analytical
skills and a foundation for work in many diverse areas. Linguistics and Applied
Linguistics in the School of Languages and Linguistics has strengths in many
significant areas of research. It has an outstanding record in attracting nationally
competitive publication and research grants and has established extensive
collaborative networks with local and international scholars in the field.
Anyone can study Linguistics and Applied Linguistics. It is not necessary to know a
language other than English, or to be good at learning languages, to do well in
Linguistics and Applied Linguistics. The field offers rigorous intellectual training
which stands one in good stead wherever clear, independent, creative thinking is
valued. Applied Linguistics will be of particular interest to those studying second or
foreign languages, and to anybody seriously interested in practical issues to do with
communication in social contexts. It is also a useful general preparation for a career in
second or foreign language teaching, including teaching English as a Foreign
Language (TEFL) or as a Second Language (TESL).
Linguistics
Applied Linguistics
Applied Linguistics is concerned with practical issues involving language in the life
of the community. The most important of these is the learning of second or foreign
languages. Others include language policy, multilingualism, language education, the
preservation and revival of endangered languages, and the assessment and treatment
of language difficulties.
Skinner
Weaknesses. Behaviorism examines human and nonhuman beings from the point of
view of the behavior they demonstrate. The base of behaviorism lies in understanding
the behavior of people and animals as a combination of movements, verbal and
emotional answers (reaction) to the influences (stimulus) of external ambience
corresponding to these movements. In other words it is the simple scheme S > R. The
main weakness of behaviorism lies in its attempt to explain all the actions of a person
only through visible phenomena, claiming the impossibility to directly observe the
phenomenon of consciousness. So the main opposition that behaviorists face from the
psychological world is that behavior of a person cannot by any means be interpreted
leaving aside the mental activity. So behavior remains a learned association that was
once supported or punished. Seems rather hard to explain all of the behavioral acts of
a person in terms of his past experienced. At this point behaviorist starts neglecting
the innate abilities of every person. Sometimes the reactions people demonstrate have
nothing to do with their experience therefore they have another source mental
activity. Enviroment certainly plays a great role in the life of people, but nevertheless
it is very hard to interpret the behavior of people only focusing on the environmental
factor. Behaviorism in some way neglects the individualism of every person making
general behavioral patterns for everybody. Behaviorists assume that people are not
responsible for what they do and how they act and are similar to machines
reproducing old records. Behaviorists need to realize the importance of inner
processes and start asking the question: Do we cry because we feel sad, or do we feel
sad because we cry? And may be convert the weakness of their theory into its
strength. Another very important thing is the impossibility to explain creative activity
from the point of view of behaviorism, thought these achievements do not fit the
general scheme presented by behaviorism. It is possible to manipulate people through
behaviorism and the responses one needs from them which can be viewed as the
violation of human rights.
Strengths. Of course all these statements above can be argued but nevertheless it
would be unfair not to mention the strength of behaviorism. Behaviorism tends to
predict the behavior in certain circumstances. The possibility to predict gives the key
to controlling the behavior and therefore to avoid unnecessary reactions. Behaviorism
has changed, understanding the impossibility to neglect the cognitive processes. So
nowadays the scheme S > R is complemented with an "intermediate variable"
between them which represents collection of different cognitive and stimulating
factors. This changed makes behaviorism more suitable for the contemporary
psychology. Another strength to mention is the orientation on positivism presented so
strongly in behaviorism. The idea of rewards and punishment of behaviorism can be
sometimes useful in order to shape the required behavior, especially with kids in
order to make their reactions socially acceptable. Therefore if used professionally
right it may help to help a person adjust in the society.
Since both applied and theoretical linguistic are large fields that collaborate with
many other disciplines, it can be hard to highlight all of the similarities and
differences.
First off, there are some major differences in terms of the questions asked and the
problems researched.
Theoretical linguistics looks more at what language is, and many researchers spend
time examining the structures of languages at various levels such as phonology,
morphology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics of a language. Other sub-fields of
linguistics are concerned with broader questions of how language is acquired by
infants/children, and how language is produced by the brain. Some researchers look at
how language intersects with social categories like race, and class (sociolinguistics).
Others might look at how language is constructed and situated in the brain
(neurolinguistics).
Applied linguistics borrows many elements from those of knowledge but is more
concerned with real-world practical problems of language use. One of the most well-
known is second language acquisition and language education. What are the best ways
to teach languages? While some might assume applied linguistics only borrows
theoretical frameworks from theoretical linguistics, that isn't the case at all. Applied
Linguistics has all sorts of theoretical frameworks to describe certain aspects of
language learning. One prominent one is the theory of interlanguage - the idea that the
language a learner produces isn't some aberration from the perfect native system, but
rather a system in its own right. Applied linguistics isn't just limited to education
though, but is also concerned with issues of language planning and policy. I will admit
I know much less about language policy, since my background is more in education
and acquisition.
As for similarities, they naturally both deal with language and what it is. Applied
Linguistics often borrows and relies on theories from linguistics, but unfortunately, its
rare that theoretical linguists will borrow concepts from Applied Linguistics, which is
a shame cause I think many of the insights gleaned from second language learners can
tell us a lot about what language is.
Just as behaviourists had felt constricted by the position of psychology during the
early 20th century so too did psychologists during the 1960s feel unhappy with the
narrow viewpoint of the behaviourists. Psychologists began to think that it was
impossible to explain human behaviour based purely on observable events. They
believed it was vital to include the human mind to be able to understand how humans
perceived the world around them (Rathus, 2001). This desire to studying the mind
brought about the cognitive revolution in the 1960s when scientists in other fields
began investigating mental processes (Hunt, 2001).
A black box model can be used to illustrate the key difference between behavioural
and cognitive psychology. The black box is viewed as the human being or the mind,
which receives inputs (stimuli) and emits outputs (responses). Behaviourists believe
that the black box cannot be opened and should be ignored, and that objectively
observing the inputs and outputs outside of the box is far more important. Cognitive
psychology, on the other hand, is concerned with both looking inside the black box as
and observing the inputs and outputs.
However, research by Garcia and Koelling (1966) on taste aversion challenges this
behaviourist view. Garcia et al conditioned two groups of rats with three stimuli
sweetened water, a light and a clicker. One group was then presented with an
unconditioned stimulus of nausea caused by poison or radiation while the other group
was presented with an unconditioned stimulus of an electric shock. Following this
conditioning, the rats that had been nauseated showed aversion to the sweetened water
but showed no aversion to the light or the clicker. The other group of rats who had
been shocked showed an aversion to the light and the clicker but not to the sweetened
water (Rosenzweig, Breedlove & Leiman, 2002). Although both groups of rats had
been exposed to all three stimuli and each one could have been thought of as the cause
of the painful shock or the nausea, the rats associated the pain or the nausea with the
most appropriate source. This finding shows some kind of logical thought process
behind the aversion not simply a behaviour following a stimulus. The rats paired the
nausea or the pain with the most obvious cause not just because it was contiguous.
The difference between behaviourism and cognitive schools of thought can also be
shown in operant conditioning. Skinner provides the well-known example of operant
conditioning. He set up an animal cage where a rat was placed inside and deprived of
food until eventually it learned by accident that pressing a lever released a food pellet
into the cage. The food was termed a positive reinforcer and encouraged the rat to
press the lever again. If pressing the lever had led to something bad such as a shock
the rat would avoid pressing it again because the effect would have been negative
hence the term negative reinforcer.
During the time when behaviourism was the key concept in psychology Tolman was
conducting experiments showing how complex cognitive processes were taking place
even in the minds of rats. His study involving rats looking for food in a maze made
him conclude that the animals were developing a set of spatial relationships
cognitive maps rather than just learning a chain of responses (Hock, 2002). Tolman
believed that far more could be understood about the nature of learning through
examining internal mental process as well as the observable stimuli and responses.
In conclusion, both behaviourist and cognitive schools of thought have played a major
part in our understanding of how organisms learn. However, both have their
limitations. Behaviourism, through concentrating solely on observable behaviour, lost
much of its relevance to human problems and is sometimes condemned for its
triviality. Cognitive psychology has been criticised for neglecting the role of emotions
in human learning and behaviour but at least cognitive psychology recognises the
need to look inside the black box in order to be able to understand how organisms
function and learn.
Avram Noam Chomsky (1928-present) is known as the father of modern linguistics,
and is one of the most staunch defenders of cognitive theory as it applies to second
language acquisition and overall learning.
A life-long follower of the cognitive school of thought, Chomsky supports the claim
that neural processes taking place in specific parts of the brain are responsible for the
development of skills. These acquired skills can range from Math, to Writing, to
Second language learning. In theory, learning is acquired once patterns are perceived
and information is processed.
For example, a behaviorist would agree in that a student cannot fully learn unless he
repeats the information over and over and then regurgitates it right back. To a
cognitive theorist, a student can learn casually and without specific habits via the
natural processes that take place in our brains.
In his article "A Review of B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior", Chomsky sets the record
straight: he is highly opposed to behaviorist theory for many reasons.
The first of Chomsky's arguments is that behavioral testing, such as it is shown in the
studies of Skinner, has been mainly used to test animals. Moreover, behavioral theory
does not consider the variables that exist in the behavior of humans, who are much
more complex creatures. As a result, Chomsky argues that behaviorism attempts to
study activity
involving higher mental faculties within a strict behaviorist schema