Keywords in Language and Literacy

Ronald Carter

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2008
• Topic: Languages & Linguistics
• eBook ISBN:
  9781134813223
• Subtopic: Linguistics
• Index: Languages & Linguistics

Just what is Standard English? Is it correct English? Should grammar be taught?
The answers to such questions invariably provoke controversy. In this handy A to Z guide to language and literacy, Ronald Carter unpicks the meaning of key terms like `proper English', `real books', `text', and `discourse', and the ways in which concepts are used - and abused - by teachers, politicians, linguists, journalists and employers.
Each concise definition is cross-referenced, and supported by extensive examples and by references to further reading. Designed as a dictionary, but possessing an encyclopedic range, Keywords in Language and Literacy, provides an invaluable guide to the debates surrounding language and literacy. An indispensible book for all teachers and students of language and education, and anyone interested in the place of language in schools.

A

accent

Glottal stops ain’t allowed no more

The latest suggestion that schoolchildren should speak Standard English – even in the playground’s rough and tumble – has generally been received as a good thing by the world of adults.

From the age of five, the nation’s children may now be encouraged to pick up their aitches and drop the ubiquitous glottal stops, ain’ts and other manifestations of non-U grammar. With regional accents allowed to remain, the result is likely to be that BBC English is once again a model for the nation.

(Times Educational Supplement, 25 September 1992)

The term ‘accent’ refers to those features of pronunciation which identify a person either geographically or socially. A geographical accent can be associated with a specific town or city (e.g. Liverpool, New York) or a particular region (e.g. Texas) or with national groups speaking the same language (e.g. Australian). It can also show whether a speaker is a native speaker of a language. For example, ‘She speaks French with an English accent.’

Social accents relate more to social and educational background. An example of this in Britain is Received Pronunciation (RP), commonly known as ‘BBC, ‘posh’, or ‘Oxford’ English. This is a geographically neutral accent in so far as speakers using it do not betray their geographical origins. It is, however, often associated with public schools and professional uses and tends to be a local accent in several parts of southern England, especially in areas surrounding London. Because of its geographical neutrality, it is popularly but wrongly thought that people speaking in RP have no accent. In terms of a linguistic description of accent, everyone has an accent, which may be geographical or social or both and vary according to the speaker’s situation.

RP is the model of pronunciation which figures prominently in courses for the teaching of English as a foreign or second language and is the preferred model in a number of countries overseas. Increasingly, however, the model is seen as simply one of many national accents, and other native-speaker accents, such as Australian and American English, are being taught in contexts where it had previously been assumed that there was only one correct form of pronunciation. The choice of pronunciation model, as well as the variety of international English taught, is also an ideological choice. Language learners in several countries pride themselves on the greater sense of national identity conferred by speaking English with an Indian or a Nigerian or a Singaporean accent.

The sociolinguistic situation in Britain regarding accent variation is not dissimilar. An RP accent may be geographically neutral but it has a marked social significance, being associated, in particular, with its normally more upper-class speakers. Much sociolinguistic research (e.g. Trudgill, 1983, 1984) has underlined the extent to which speakers either aspire or at least orient to an RP accent in most formal contexts of language use, such as answering the telephone or in interviews. The phenomenon of hypercorrection neatly illustrates this point. Hypercorrection is the tendency to over-correct low-prestige vowels with high-prestige vowels even when they are not needed. It leads to the conversion of standard English words such as plastic into ‘plarstic’. It leads to people fearful of nuclear emissions convinced that not even a gas-mask but a new kind of ‘gars-mask’ will be needed.

Advertisers are, as always, linguistically sensitive to such phenomena. For example, the accents used to overlay many current television and radio advertisements betray some fundamental British social attitudes towards accent variation. Thus, a Standard English accent (predominantly received pronunciation) is used to sell banking and insurance policies, lean cuisine ready meals, expensive liqueurs and exotic holidays; regional accents are used to market beers, especially cider, holidays in inclement British coastal resorts and wholesome foods such as ‘bootiful’ turkeys from Norfolk and wholemeal bread which is either ‘’ot from t’oven’ or ‘wi’ nowt teken out’. Given the connection between Standard English, ‘proper accents’, purity and cleanliness it may not be surprising to learn that in Britain bleach is marketed in RP accents. Dialects may coexist with the marketing of washing powders but hardly ever with the marketing of the more deeply cleansing properties of bleach.

In the teaching of National Curriculum English in British schools strong emphasis is placed on Standard English and on the clear and comprehensible use of Standard English in writing and in speech. Because of the clear connection of Standard English (as a prestige variety of English) with RP (as a prestige accent of English), it is, however, but a short step from correction of writing of pupils’ non-standard dialects to correction of pupils’ non-standard accents. Research evidence underlines that overcorrection of the speech of very young children can result in a low self-image, lack of confidence and linguistic confusion during crucial years of language development.

Even though it is widely recognised that Standard English can be spoken with any accent, for example, that standard English spoken in a Scots accent or a Lancashire accent is still Standard English, the notion that there are rules of ‘pure’ pronunciation and a single correct accent is not easily eroded. The situation is not helped by the existence, as noted above, of RP as an accent which has considerable international currency. A balanced view is one which recognises the importance of the need to preserve self-confidence and a sense of linguistic identity alongside the facilitating of clear communication. The difficulties in achieving this balance are neatly illustrated, however, by the quotation from the Times Educational Supplement which is at the head of this entry. Apart from a basic confusion between accent (matter of pronunciation such as ‘aitches’ and ‘glottal stops’) and grammar (‘ain’t’), the statement can be further confusing for teachers for whom it is written by suggesting a more rigid opposition between standard and non-standard Englishes than is either desirable or is matched by the linguistic reality of contemporary Britain.

See also dialect, proper, purism

Further reading Coggle, 1993; Honey, 1989; Trudgill, 1975

applied linguistics Applied linguistics is the application of linguistic theories, descriptions and methods to the solution of language problems which have arisen in a range of human, cultural and social contexts. One of its main uses is in the exploration of problems in language learning and teaching and, for many, the term is used with almost exclusive reference to this field. However, the term ‘applied linguistics’ is used in relation to other fields, such as: literary studies (stylistics); translation studies; lexicography; language planning; as well as being specific to other ‘applied’ branches of linguistics such as clinical linguistics and critical linguistics. Ideally, applied linguists should work alongside other professionals in the exploration of language problems or difficulties so that the applications of linguistics are the result of a genuine synthesis rather than one in which answers are found only according to an agenda provided by the linguist.

See also educational linguistics, stylistics

Further reading Carter, 1993; Hasan and Williams (eds), forthcoming; Richards et al., 1993; Widdowson, 1989

appropriate In many public discussions the term ‘appropriate’ is opposed to the term ‘correct’. Appropriateness or appropriacy is a sociolinguistic concept which stresses that language varies according to the social context in which it is used. The term is used to describe any variety or forms of language which are judged to be suitable or possible within a particular situation. Thus, contracted forms such as ‘I would’ve’ or elisions such as ‘I wanna’ are appropriate in most contexts of informal speech, in some informal written contexts and for the representation of informal speech in writing. More prescriptive accounts of language consider the notion of appropriacy to be unduly relativistic, preferring to regard particular language forms as correct or incorrect irrespective of the social situation.

See also proper

Further reading Trudgill, 1984

author(ship) The concept of authorship is central to romantic philosophies of English teaching. Within such philosophies what is imaginative and literary about language, which stems from the creative unconscious of an individual author, is also, in turn, central. Authors express personal, individual visions which are uniquely theirs. Whereas in some pre-industrial cultures creativity is collective and the production of literary works often anonymous, romantic conceptions of creativity arise in part in opposition to a perceived impersonality in industrialised cultures and assert the originality of the individual voice.

As far as literacy practices are concerned, such privileging of the individual author and of unconscious and mysterious creative processes results in high value being placed both on the study of literary texts and on creative writing. Such an emphasis can also produce assumptions that appreciation of literature is best intuited rather than too explicitly taught and that genuinely creative writing cannot be taught. Consequently, the craft of writing is not prioritised, the writing of personal narratives is preferred to impersonal reports and writers are encouraged to find their own unique ‘voice’ as writers. Correspondingly, too, the human voice is associated with speech which is in turn assumed to be a more natural, personal, spontaneous, truthful and less contrived form of language. The most successfully authored texts are then those which most closely approximate the spoken language. Such a philosophy applied to language development results in relatively restricted genres of writing and a rather limited view of writing development. For example, writing for the world of work outside school often needs to be impersonal and instrumental, with the personal voice of the individual author reduced.

Advocates of the central importance of authorship to English teaching stress, however, that learning is at its most effective, especially in processes of writing, when writing is not a blind transcription of existing forms and content but when an individual imprint is placed on the writing. Writing to learn through recording unique experience is a key element in learning to write. A number of specific examples relevant to this entry and including texts written by children can be found in the entry for genre.

See also genre, literary language, literature, narrative, personal growth, romantics and reactionaries

Further reading Gilbert, 1989,1990; Graves, 1983; Luke, 1988

B

back to basics’ The school curriculum for English in many English-speaking countries has had three main features: its diversity, its potential for development and renewal, and its being continually subject to public criticism, particularly over alleged declines in standards of language use.

In Britain, in the period prior to the 1960s, mother-tongue English teaching was characterised by an emphasis on explicit teaching about the formal properties of the language, together with an approach to texts which emphasised the importance of comprehension of words and phrases. In the 1960s and 1970s greater emphasis was placed on pupil-centred approaches to learning and on the development of the individuality and creativity of the pupil. This involved a rejection of formal language exercises and a promotion of the discovery – through writing, talk and reading – of an individual voice and of a response to texts. Responses to literary texts were judged to be central to this development of ‘personal growth’ and the curriculum became largely one in which personal expression and the appropriate use of language according to context took precedence over exercises in correct usage.

One of the most powerful statements of this commitment to a diverse and broad view of English exists in the Bullock Report (DES, 1975), a major report by a government-appointed committee on the teaching of English as a mother tongue. The Bullock Committee rejected a return to the language teaching practices of the past but, among its many recommendations, advocated a higher level of awareness of the properties and functions of language on the part of teachers, particularly in their preparation and in-service training. The report had received an enthusiastic reception from the English teaching profession but received some public criticism for not advocating a concentration on basic skills of literacy taught by formal methods of language training.

The 1980s witnessed an extended debate about education in the basic skills, particularly basic skills of literacy and numeracy. Such a debate has been by no means confined to Britain, and has been conducted in parallel ways in a number of other countries of the world. The debate has, however, been a public one, at least in Britain, and has attracted a high level of media interest, some of which is illustrated in this book.

As far as English teaching is concerned there has been a particularly public focus on language, and on basic language skills of grammar, spelling and punctuation and neatness of handwriting. At the level of public debate in Britain much government and media comment has stressed, above all, the need for a return to more formalistic approaches to English teaching with a concentration on the need to teach standard spoken and written English to all pupils, and to teach the rules of standard English grammar. Although outside professional circles the word ‘grammar’ is used as a kind of hold-all for ‘good’ or ‘correct’ English, there has been within the English teaching profession an extended parallel debate about the role of explicit knowledge about language (including grammatical organisation) and a general conclusion has been reached that there is a need for teachers and pupils to have a greater understanding of the workings of the language. ‘Back to basics’ also involves an emphasis on basic reading skills, particularly on phonics approaches to reading and on writing which prioritises accuracy in the secretarial aspects of language use.

There remain, however, disagreements among teachers concerning the most appropriate ways to respond to government requirements for a more language-centred English curriculum and for a greater concentration on ‘standards’ of English usage. There is above all strong resistance on the part of many English teachers to any return to the teaching of grammar as practised prior to the 1960s. Such teaching was characterised by analysis of clauses into component parts (mainly as analytical drills) and was often accompanied by teaching by means of decontextualised exercises. These practices were abandoned in the early 1960s. Calls against ‘back to basics’ and a return to grammar teaching regularly cite research findings by English teaching professionals which deny any connection between improved language competence a...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Halftitle
• Title
• Copyright
• CONTENTS
• PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
• Keywords
• REFERENCES