适用语言学与应用语言学.ppt

Widdowson (2000:4): Although the scope of linguistic enquiry has extended to take in the data of externalized language, the mode of its enquiry is such as to give only a restricted account of experienced language. Widdowson (2000:5): No matter how extended the scope of linguistics into the real world its unmediated application can never ‘become’ applied linguistics because it will always represent that reality linguistically, on its own terms and in its own terms. Widdowson (2000:7): Corpus linguistics cannot produce ethnographic descriptions of language use; it deals with the textually attested, but not with the encoded possible, nor the contextually appropriate. The linguistics of the attested is just the linguistics of the possible. Widdowson (2000:7): Whether you are dealing with the possible or the attested, you still have to make them appropriate for learning. And it is just such conditions that applied linguistics has somehow to take cognizance of. Widdowson (2000:23): Corpus linguistics assumes the appropriate can be derived from the attested, and critical linguistics assumes that the appropriate can be derived from the possible. Both claim that they reveal the reality of experienced language… But neither of them does in fact engage with the reality of language as experienced by users and learners: Indeed they distance themselves from it and produce an analytic construct which then effectively project reality in its own image. In both cases we get linguistics applied. Their findings are partial and conditional on a particular perspective. Such a perspective has its own validity but this is relative and not absolute, and it is of value because it provokes us to consider how it relates to others. Widdowson (2000:23): If applied linguistics is to have any occupation it must avoid and indeed resist the deterministic practices of linguistics applied. Its only claim to existence as a field of enquiry must rest on its readiness to enquire critically into