Lakhasly

Applied Linguistics and some language Problems The term 'problem' is in itself problematic.Widdowson (2000, p. 5) presents the question in terms of linguistics applied and applied linguistics: "The difference between these modes of intervention is that in the case of linguistics applied the assumption is that the problem can be reformulated by the direct and unilateral (one-sided; independent) application of concepts and terms deriving from linguistic enquiry itself. That is to say, language problems name and method scope of subject matter Linguistics Applied = applying linguistic principles to solve FL teaching and learning problems limited to / focused on FL teaching and learning Applied Linguistics = identifying problems and finding solutions in a systematic way (problem-driven discipline) any real-world languagerelated problem As shown in Table 2, Linguistics Applied, which belongs to the old paradigm, is a dependent discipline subsumed under theoretical linguistics, whose primary task is applying linguistic principles to solve language problems, particularly those in the area of FL teaching and learning. In contrast, Applied Linguistics, which claims to have set up a new paradigm, relates to linguistics in a collaborative manner; and hence it is an autonomous (independent) problem-driven discipline. It is concerned with real world language problems and tries to offer the best possible solutions by relating them, either directly or indirectly, not only to linguistics but also to other relevant disciplines. Briefly, the paradigmatic shift from Linguistics Applied to Applied Linguistics is not only a liberating move from affiliation to autonomy, but also an exploding coverage of the subject matter: from the limited problems in the area of FL teaching and learning to a boundless scope covering practically all kinds of language problems. A cautionary note is necessary here. The term 'Applied Linguistics' (as an old paradigm) is given by present-day applied linguists to justify that Applied Linguistics is an independent discipline, going far beyond the applications of linguistics and hence no longer under its domination. Former scholars such as Fries (1945) and Lado (1964), however, never saw themselves that way, but rather conceived themselves and were admitted by other contemporary and forthcoming scholars as pioneers in the field of FL teaching. By analogy, one often considers oneself 'a good guy' by pointing a finger at (frequently dead) enemies and calls them 'bad guys'. The derogatory term Applied Linguistics is probably needed to promote the position of AL and makes it look promising academically. A Closer Look at Language Problems in Applied Linguistics This section provides an answer to the second question: What is the nature of language problems in AL? Before answering this question, it is necessary to take a look at the 'lists of possible problems' making up the scope of Applied Linguistics, as proposed by linguists identifies three headings as follows: (1) language and education; (2) language, work, and law; and (3) language information and effect (Cook , 2003, pp. 7-8); Davies and Elder,2004; McCarthy, 2001) o The first heading includes (a) first-language education; (b) second- and foreign-language education; (c) clinical linguistics; and (d) language testing. o The second heading includes (a) workplace communication; (b) language planning; and (c) forensic linguistics. o The third heading includes (a) literary stylistics; (b) critical discourse analysis; (c) translation and interpretation; (d) information design; and (e) lexicography. Some linguists present the language problems in a series of questions. They are problems in the areas of (a) language teaching; (b) speech pathology; (c) translation and interpretation; (d) language testing; (e) bilingual program; (f) literacy; (g) discourse analysis; (h) medium of instruction; (i) second language acquisition; and (j) legal language. Davies and Elder (2004, p. 1) McCarthy (2001, p. 1) gives a list of 14 problems in the following areas: (a) speech therapy; (b) foreign language teaching; (c) legal language; (d) advertising;(e) report writing; (f) historic naming; (g) language testing; (h) literary studies; (i) lexicography; (j) machine translation; (k) language planning; (l) international navigation; (m) primate/animal communication; and (n) medical sociology. Then McCarthy adds "the list could continue, and ... is quite likely to grow even bigger over the years" (p. 2).Although the word 'linguistics' stands, syntactically, as the head being modified by 'applied' in the given name 'applied linguistics', Applied Linguistics is no longer under the shadow of linguistics, let alone an offshoot of it. In fact, (theoretical or context-free) linguistics is only one of the numerous disciplines (such as sociolinguistics, pragmatics, discourse analysis, psychology, sociology, education, and many more) to which Applied Linguistics relates in a collaborative, not a dependent manner (Cook and Wei, 2009; Spolsky, 2008).In the many discussions of trends and disciplines, and subfields, and theorizing, the idea is sometimes lost that the focus of applied linguistics is on trying to resolve language-based problems that people encounter in the real world, whether they be academics, dictionary makers, employers, lawyers, learners, policy developers, service providers, supervisors, teachers, test takers, those who need social services, translators, or a whole range of business clients.Conversely, 'communicative behaviour' which represents native speakers' communicative competence 'is [often] vague, imprecise, and ambiguous.1.2.3.4.

Applied Linguistics and some language Problems The term ‘problem’ is in itself problematic. As Cook and Wei (2009) puts it, “in one sense it means a research question posed in a particular discipline; in another sense it is something that has gone wrong which can be solved” (p. 2). A more careful scrutiny should reveal that, between ‘something wrong’ and ‘research question’, there are other possible interpretations of ‘problem’. Thus ‘problem’ has multifarious (diverse) meanings, ranging from the most negative to the near-neutral. Linguists propose that the semantic range includes (a) error; (b) controversial issue; (c) difficulty; (d) challenge; and (e) curious phenomenon. ‘Error’ represents ‘something wrong’, and ‘curious phenomenon’ represents ‘research question’, which is near-neutral.3 Between them lie ‘controversial issue’, ‘difficulty’, and ‘challenge’. Each of these meanings requires some explanation. Before we proceed further, it should be noted in passing that in the field of ELT, teaching and learning are equally important. In fact, the present trend in education suggests moving from the teacher-cantered to the learner-cantered perspective (Brown, 2001), implying that learning should shape and give direction to teaching rather than the other way around (pp. 46-47). In effect, learning problems often need to be taken into account before teaching problems. Going back to the term ‘error’, for instance, most likely we are dealing with learning errors, and not teaching errors. Recall that ‘error’ lies in the extreme negative side of the semantic range presented above.

And what is error? “Errors are the flawed side of learner speech or writing” (Dulay et al., 1982, p. 138). In other words, they are target language forms produced by an L2 learner which deviate from the standard norms. Obviously, errors are learning problems, since the learner has done something wrong and needs correction. Here, errors reflect difficulty of target language learning. At the same time, however, errors are also teaching problems; they challenge the teacher with how to help the learner correct the errors. During the heyday (Zenith, peak of popularity) of audiolingualism, errors had to be avoided at all costs, or else they would become part of the new language habits (Brown, 2011, p. 23). However, since the publication of Corder’s (1967) “The Significance of Learners’ Errors”, they have been considered natural and inevitable part of FL learning. These two different opinions of errors make them a controversial issue. So errors have now come up as a curious phenomenon which needs serious investigation. This brief discussion of errors makes it clear that errors as language problems fall within all five categories in the semantic range. Errors can be something wrong and difficulty on the part of EFL learners; they can be a challenge for EFL teachers; and they may show up as a controversial issue as well as a curious phenomenon (a research problem) for L2 researchers. The learning and teaching problems can be very complex in nature; they may interrelate, mutually influence, or affect each other. In applied linguistics (AL) today the term ‘language problem’ has become a key concept. That discipline is primarily devoted to seeking a practical answer to language problems.” (Davies (2004) Applied linguistics tries to offer solutions to “real-world problems in which language is a central issue”; and hence it is appropriately called “a problem-driven discipline” (McCarthy, 2001, P 1; Brumfit, 1991, p. 46). Similarly, some linguists use the term “real world language problems”, and note that the International Association of Applied Linguistics specifies the term as “practical problems of language and Communication” (Cook and Wei (2009, p. 3). Likewise, Davies and Elder (2004) use a similar term “social problems involving language” (p. 1).

A problem arises when applied linguistics tries to encompass all kinds of real-world language problems. This huge and unlimited scope of AL may suggest, on the one hand, that AL has become a very powerful discipline, taking up everything concerning language and any of its related problems. On the other hand, it implies that AL lacks a focus; for when it deals with everything, it eventually deals with nothing (Hult, 2008, p. 12). ‘Language problems’ in Applied Linguistics thus present themselves as puzzling phenomena, which deserve serious attention and need further investigation. Accordingly, linguists raise five inter-related questions. 1. Why do language problems in Applied Linguistics seem to be limitless and endless? 2. What is the nature of language problems in Applied Linguistics? 3. What is the actual role of Applied Linguistics vis-à-vis (in relation to; with regard to) English Language Teaching and Second Language Acquisition? 4. What is the nature of Applied Linguistics relationship with theoretical linguistics? Answers to these five questions will be presented in order. Paradigmatic (classic) Shift: From Linguistics Applied to Applied Linguistics The seemingly endless ‘language problems’ making up the boundless scope of Applied Linguistics are probably the effect of paradigmatic shift in the discipline. Paradigmatic shift is an important change that happens when the usual way of thinking about or doing something is replaced by a new and different way. A paradigm shift is a fundamental change in the basic concepts and experimental practices of a scientific discipline. Applied linguists today claim that Applied Linguistics is not simply the application of linguistic theories, principles, methods, or techniques for the purpose of solving language problems at hand. On the contrary, Applied Linguistics is now an autonomous and independent discipline (Rajagopalan, 2004). Although the word ‘linguistics’ stands, syntactically, as the head being modified by ‘applied’ in the given name ‘applied linguistics’, Applied Linguistics is no longer under the shadow of linguistics, let alone an offshoot of it. In fact, (theoretical or context-free) linguistics is only one of the numerous disciplines (such as sociolinguistics, pragmatics, discourse analysis, psychology, sociology, education, and many more) to which Applied Linguistics relates in a collaborative, not a dependent manner (Cook and Wei, 2009; Spolsky, 2008). Applied Linguistics along this line of argument, Davies and Elder (2004), following Widdowson (2000), have distinguished between Linguistics Applied (LA) and Applied Linguistics (AL). The former, also termed ‘applications of linguistics’, refers to “the assumption that the [language] problem can be reformulated by the direct and unilateral (relating to, occurring on, or involving one side only) application of concepts and terms deriving from linguistic enquiry itself” (p. 9). In my opinion, one best example of Linguistics Applied can be seen in the direct application of Bloomfieldian linguistic principles in the field of Foreign Language teaching, producing the well-known Audio-lingual Method (ALM), summarized in Table 1. As shown in this table, the relationship between the linguistic principles and their application in the ALM is quite straightforward. All the three principles and their applications are self-explanatory and need no further explanation.

Table 1. Bloomfieldian Principles and their Application in the Audiolingual Method (ALM) Linguistic Principles Application in the ALM Teach speech before writing. Language is primarily speech. Language is a set of habits. Do drilling as the best way of forming FL habits. Every language is different. Do contrastive analysis as the basis for material development and predicting errors. Attempt to build the ALM reached its peak in the work of Lado (1964). Lado’s book Language Teaching bears the sub-title A Scientific Approach, which implicitly refers to the claim that linguistics is a science in the sense that physics or chemistry is a science. One important characteristic of a science is providing “high precision” in describing its objects of investigation. Thus ‘scientific approach’ means linguistics-based approach and hence provides ‘guidance of high precision’ as how to conduct FL teaching. By and large, Lado’s Language Teaching succinctly (briefly) outlines linguistic and psychological principles of language learning and language teaching. It defines ‘learning a second language’ as “acquiring the ability to use its structure within a general vocabulary under essentially the conditions of normal communication among native speakers at conversational speed” (p. 38). Overall, the book is a complete manual of FL teaching geared toward helping the learners to achieve structural and lexical mastery as the basis for communicative ability. In other words, according to the ALM, mastering a second language begins with mastering language form and moves toward proficiency in language function. The well-known instructional materials faithfully based on the ALM are English 900 series, which had world-wide circulation during the 1970s. In Indonesia, during the 1970s through the early 1980s Student Book and its Sup By contrast, while LA can be seen as direct application of linguistic principles to solve a given problem, AL requires “intervention [as] a matter of mediation”; [it] has to relate and reconcile different representations of reality, including that of linguistics without excluding others” (Davies and Elder, 2004, p. 9). An excellent example is given by Widdowson (1984, p. 14) in his critique of Chomsky’s (1957, p. 87) famous examples: (1) Flying planes can be dangerous. This sentence is syntactically ambiguous, interpretable in two different ways: (2) a. It can be dangerous to fly planes. b. Planes which fly can be dangerous. While paraphrase (2.b) is syntactically acceptable, it is, according to Widdowson, pragmatically vacuous (having or showing a lack of thought). What a plane does is of course fly; and why should it be dangerous? He further goes on providing a pragmatically acceptable interpretation. (3) a. Planes can be dangerous when they fly. b. Planes can be dangerous when flying. c. Planes can be dangerous flying. d. Flying planes can be dangerous. The series of paraphrases in (3) make up a brilliant argument. While sentence (1) by Chomsky is syntactically ambiguous but somewhat meaningless pragmatically, paraphrase (3.d) by Widdowson, which has gone through a long derivation from (3.a), is not only syntactically ambiguous but also pragmatically meaningful. This is a great example of providing ‘a different representation of reality’. Widdowson (1984, pp. 9-10) further notes the major
difference between linguistic analysis and native speaker’s intuition. In linguistic analysis, accurate description is the ultimate goal, allowing ‘no tolerance for vague notion, imprecision, and ambiguity’. Conversely, ‘communicative behaviour’ which represents native speakers’ communicative competence ‘is [often] vague, imprecise, and ambiguous. This can be seen through the difference between ‘syntactic ambiguity’ and ‘pragmatic indeterminacy’. Syntactic ambiguity can always be resolved by drawing different tree structures and providing paraphrases, revealing that a given syntactic construction (in natural language data) may be ambiguous in two or three different ways—as illustrated by Flying planes can be dangerous in (1). On the other hand, pragmatic indeterminacy, as the term suggests, may have countless interpretations depending on the given context. Consider the following utterances by A and B in dialogue (4). (4) A: Will you? B: Of course. The question and answer in elliptical (indirect) forms here imply that the ‘speaker meanings’ are determined by a previous ‘text’, that is, a previous verbal communication by both interlocutors A and B. Now the reader can imagine unlimited numbers of previous conversations which allow the generation of both utterances in (4) and at the same time determine their communicative intents. For the sake of economy, Table 2 gives a summary contrasting between Linguistics Applied and Applied Linguistics, or between the old and new paradigms pertaining to applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics or linguistics applied? Widdowson (2000, p. 5) presents the question in terms of linguistics applied and applied linguistics: “The difference between these modes of intervention is that in the case of linguistics applied the assumption is that the problem can be reformulated by the direct and unilateral (one-sided; independent) application of concepts and terms deriving from linguistic enquiry itself. That is to say, language problems name and method scope of subject matter Linguistics Applied = applying linguistic principles to solve FL teaching and learning problems limited to / focused on FL teaching and learning Applied Linguistics = identifying problems and finding solutions in a systematic way (problem-driven discipline) any real-world languagerelated problem As shown in Table 2, Linguistics Applied, which belongs to the old paradigm, is a dependent discipline subsumed under theoretical linguistics, whose primary task is applying linguistic principles to solve language problems, particularly those in the area of FL teaching and learning. In contrast, Applied Linguistics, which claims to have set up a new paradigm, relates to linguistics in a collaborative manner; and hence it is an autonomous (independent) problem-driven discipline. It is concerned with real world language problems and tries to offer the best possible solutions by relating them, either directly or indirectly, not only to linguistics but also to other relevant disciplines. Briefly, the paradigmatic shift from Linguistics Applied to Applied Linguistics is not only a liberating move from affiliation to autonomy, but also an exploding coverage of the subject matter: from the limited problems in the area of FL teaching and learning to a boundless scope covering practically all kinds of language problems. A cautionary note is necessary here. The term ‘Applied Linguistics’ (as an old paradigm) is given by present-day applied linguists to justify that Applied Linguistics is an independent discipline, going far beyond the applications of linguistics and hence no longer under its domination. Former scholars such as Fries (1945) and Lado (1964), however, never saw themselves that way, but rather conceived themselves and were admitted by other contemporary and forthcoming scholars as pioneers in the field of FL teaching. By analogy, one often considers oneself ‘a good guy’ by pointing a finger at (frequently dead) enemies and calls them ‘bad guys’. The derogatory term Applied Linguistics is probably needed to promote the position of AL and makes it look promising academically. A Closer Look at Language Problems in Applied Linguistics This section provides an answer to the second question: What is the nature of language problems in AL? Before answering this question, it is necessary to take a look at the ‘lists of possible problems’ making up the scope of Applied Linguistics, as proposed by linguists identifies three headings as follows: (1) language and education; (2) language, work, and law; and (3) language information and effect (Cook , 2003, pp. 7-8); Davies and Elder,2004; McCarthy, 2001) • The first heading includes (a) first-language education; (b) second- and foreign-language education; (c) clinical linguistics; and (d) language testing. • The second heading includes (a) workplace communication; (b) language planning; and (c) forensic linguistics. • The third heading includes (a) literary stylistics; (b) critical discourse analysis; (c) translation and interpretation; (d) information design; and (e) lexicography. Some linguists present the language problems in a series of questions. They are problems in the areas of (a) language teaching; (b) speech pathology; (c) translation and interpretation; (d) language testing; (e) bilingual program; (f) literacy; (g) discourse analysis; (h) medium of instruction; (i) second language acquisition; and (j) legal language. Davies and Elder (2004, p. 1) McCarthy (2001, p. 1) gives a list of 14 problems in the following areas: (a) speech therapy; (b) foreign language teaching; (c) legal language; (d) advertising;(e) report writing; (f) historic naming; (g) language testing; (h) literary studies; (i) lexicography; (j) machine translation; (k) language planning; (l) international navigation; (m) primate/animal communication; and (n) medical sociology. Then McCarthy adds “the list could continue, and … is quite likely to grow even bigger over the years” (p. 2). Under critical examination, the three long lists of language problems above teach us three important lessons. First, as noted earlier, Applied Linguistics has become so ambitious that it tries to claim that every language-related problem is within the confines of its subject matter. This has been criticized by Cook and Wei (2009), saying, “definitions of applied linguistics now are more like lists of the areas that make it up” (p. 1). In other words, AL has no focus of scholarly interest, making “the applied linguist a Jack of all trades”, one who “knows a little about many areas” (p. 2). If so, then AL seems to have failed to become a field of specialization. Secondly, it is doubtful that people encountering all of those language problems listed above will come and consult with applied linguists for the best possible solutions. Many areas listed above are academic disciplines of their own; discourse analysis, critical discourse analysis, lexicography, and forensic linguistics are sub-fields of linguistics. And language planning is much closer to sociolinguistics than to Applied Linguistics. Under the umbrella of ‘language education’, foreign language teaching, language testing, and second language acquisition are autonomous disciplines; and so is translation. Advertising probably needs more insight from stylistics than from AL; and stylistics is part of literary studies. Third and finally, the three lists have two things in common: foreign language teaching (FLT) and second language acquisition (SLA) 2. In fact, they constitute the home base for Applied Linguistics. Despite its claim for such a broad coverage in subject matter, it is these two areas that have been in close contact with Applied Linguistics. In the many discussions of trends and disciplines, and subfields, and theorizing, the idea is sometimes lost that the focus of applied linguistics is on trying to resolve language-based problems that people encounter in the real world, whether they be academics, dictionary makers, employers, lawyers, learners, policy developers, service providers, supervisors, teachers, test takers, those who need social services, translators, or a whole range of business clients. A list of major language-based problems that applied linguists typically address (across a wide range of settings) follow. The list is necessarily partial, but it should indicate what it is that applied linguists try to do, if not how they go about their work. Applied linguists address subsets of the following problems: • Language assessment problems (validity, reliability, usability, responsibility, fairness) • Language contact problems (bilingualism, shift, spread, loss, maintenance, social and cultural interactions) • Language inequality problems (ethnicity, class, region, gender, and age) • Language learning problems (emergence of skills, awareness, rules, use, context, automaticity, attitudes, expertise) • Language pathology problems (aphasias, dyslexias, physical disabilities) • Language policy and planning problems (status planning, corpus planning, acquisition planning, ecology of language, multilingualism, political factors) • Language teaching problems (resources, training, practice, interaction, understanding, use, contexts, inequalities, motivations, outcomes) • Language and technology problems (learning, assessment, access, use) • Language translation problems (access, effectiveness, technologies) (p. 41) Language use problems (dialects, registers, discourse communities, gatekeeping situations, limited access to services and resources) • Literacy problems (orthography development, new scripts, resource development, learning issues) These categories could be expanded further, and themes in each category could be elaborated into full articles and books in and of themselves. The key point, however, is to recognize that it is the language-based problems in the world that drive applied linguistics. These problems also lead applied linguists to use knowledge from other fields apart from linguistics, and thereby impose the interdisciplinarity that is a defining aspect of the discipline.