東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

An historical study of the concepts ...

Tseng, Theresa Jiinling.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

An historical study of the concepts of error and standard in English language teaching.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	An historical study of the concepts of error and standard in English language teaching./
作者:	Tseng, Theresa Jiinling.
面頁冊數:	258 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-02, Section: A, page: 0543.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International67-02A.
標題:	Language, Rhetoric and Composition. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3206661
ISBN:	9780542553639

An historical study of the concepts of error and standard in English language teaching.
Tseng, Theresa Jiinling.

An historical study of the concepts of error and standard in English language teaching. - 258 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-02, Section: A, page: 0543.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Indiana University of Pennsylvania, 2006.

This study traces the development of the concepts of error and standard in English language teaching and learning. After an explanation of the study's significance and a justification of its historical methodology in Chapter 1, I trace the roots of the prescriptive paradigm in the work of the first-century rhetorician Quintilian. Quintilian believed that the standard for good speech lay in orators, speakers who were required to be both skilled and moral. This belief contributed to the conflation of language standard and morality, which was later reinforced by eighteenth-century grammarians. It ultimately manifested itself as an obsession with mechanical correctness that subsequently shaped nineteenth-century composition courses and the grammar-translation method popular in foreign language teaching.

ISBN: 9780542553639Subjects--Topical Terms:

1019205
Language, Rhetoric and Composition.

An historical study of the concepts of error and standard in English language teaching.
LDR:03429nmm 2200337 4500 001 1827218
005 20061222091125.5
008 130610s2006 eng d
020 $a 9780542553639
035 $a (UnM)AAI3206661
035 $a AAI3206661
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Tseng, Theresa Jiinling. $3 1916155
245 1 3 $a An historical study of the concepts of error and standard in English language teaching.
300 $a 258 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-02, Section: A, page: 0543.
500 $a Adviser: Dan J. Tannacito.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Indiana University of Pennsylvania, 2006.
520 $a This study traces the development of the concepts of error and standard in English language teaching and learning. After an explanation of the study's significance and a justification of its historical methodology in Chapter 1, I trace the roots of the prescriptive paradigm in the work of the first-century rhetorician Quintilian. Quintilian believed that the standard for good speech lay in orators, speakers who were required to be both skilled and moral. This belief contributed to the conflation of language standard and morality, which was later reinforced by eighteenth-century grammarians. It ultimately manifested itself as an obsession with mechanical correctness that subsequently shaped nineteenth-century composition courses and the grammar-translation method popular in foreign language teaching.
520 $a Chapter 3 describes how philologists (early modern linguists) such as Vietor, Sweet, Jespersen, and Palmer promoted the descriptive paradigm. They argued based on scientific observation that language is always changing and a fixed standard of correctness is untenable. Sweet and Palmer contended that the standard of accuracy varies according to the locality of the speech as well as the type of language the learner chooses to learn (colloquial or literary, spoken or written).
520 $a Chapter 4 depicts how descriptivism continued to develop with contributions from structuralists such as Bloomfield, Fries, and Lado, who added that the standard language is not intrinsically superior; that language has been used as an indicator of one's socio-economic class; that obsessing over correctness sacrifices larger problems of communication for trivial grammar rules; and that structural differences between an L1 and L2 may cause difficulties/errors in learning.
520 $a Chapter 5 describes the persistence of the prescriptive paradigm and the newly developed multifarious views since the 1960s. Although the prescriptive paradigm remained deeply rooted in professional and academic attitudes towards correctness, major challenges emerged with the advent of psycholinguistics and sociolinguistics, transforming error and standard from monolithic concepts to sets of multiple notions in different disciplines. This study reveals that there have been two paradigms through which we conceptualize error and standard, and the shift from the prescriptive to the descriptive paradigm has generated a variety of views on the two concepts.
590 $a School code: 0318.
650 4 $a Language, Rhetoric and Composition. $3 1019205
650 4 $a Language, Linguistics. $3 1018079
650 4 $a Language, Modern. $3 1018098
650 4 $a Education, History of. $3 599244
690 $a 0681
690 $a 0290
690 $a 0291
690 $a 0520
710 2 0 $a Indiana University of Pennsylvania. $3 1019203
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 67-02A.
790 1 0 $a Tannacito, Dan J., $e advisor
790 $a 0318
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2006
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3206661