Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Grammar Rules, OK? What works when teaching a highly endangered Aboriginal language versus a stronger language?|
|Citation:||Proceedings of the 42nd Australian Linguistic Society Conference – 2011, Australian National University, Canberra ACT, 2-4 December 2011 / M. Ponsonnet, L. Dao & M. Bowler (eds.): pp.75-96|
|Publisher:||Australian Linguistic Society|
|Conference Name:||Australian Linguistic Society Conference (42nd : 2011 : Canberra, A.C.T.)|
|School/Discipline:||School of Humanities : Linguistics|
|Abstract:||This paper examines the pedagogy of teaching an Aboriginal language under revival such as Ngarrindjeri, versus a stronger language, such as Pitjantjatjara—both languages of South Australia. It challenges the current recommended methodologies based on theory inspired by teaching European and Asian languages, which are invariably spoken fluently by language teachers. These communicative and/or functional approaches are often not possible for the revival situation, particularly if there are no fluent speakers or teachers, and the main source of language texts are written. For this reason, the use of the traditional Grammar Translation Method, once used successfully to teach text-based languages such as Latin and Classical Greek, is arguably a very useful approach for the revival situation. The paper explores the different approaches to teaching languages, and challenges teachers’ fears of criticism from advisers driven by theory that sees ‘eclectic’ as a dirty word.|
|Keywords:||language revival; grammar translation method; Ngarrindjeri; Pitjantjatjara; language teaching methodology; language pedagogy|
|Rights:||Copyright remains with the author.|
|Appears in Collections:||Linguistics publications|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.