Inside Out Advanced: Workbook with Key by Ceri Jones, Russell Stannard

Show description

As Bartsch (1987) notes, "Norms count as reason for certain behavior and as reason for criticism and correction of other behavior" (p. 173). Linguists use norm in a neutral sense to describe the most frequently used language form, but, as used by members of the public, the term norms includes an element of positive valuation as well, and the tension between linguists' use of the term and public understanding of language norms affects both educational discourse and pedagogical techniques. Coulmas (1989) notes that professional linguists have, particularly in this century, taken a position of "prescriptive abstinence" (p.

In schools, emphasis on propriety in writing, interpreted once more as adherence to the most formal registers of the language, is often even greater than in other institutional settings. 4 This, too, is neither a novel nor a fading theme of public opinion; Farr and Daniels (1986) observe that "the idea of propriety in speech is still firmly rooted 4 Many teachers have experienced the power of such public attitudes regarding the appropriate role of language teachers when, upon first telling another person of their occupation, they are met with a grimace and the half-kidding but telling remark, "Oh!

496), which includes four stages: selection of a norm, elaboration for different uses, restriction of diversity, and codification in grammar or dictionaries (see Wiley, this volume). A standard language is thus the end result of this historical process. Public discussions of language standards, heard mainly in the context of laments about declines in school-related skills or achievement measures, nearly always present the linguistic uniformity embodied in a standard as evidence of felicity and appropriateness in expression, threatened by incorrect use, or as evidence of moral superiority and accurate thinking, which has been, presumably, threatened by changes or by variant forms.