Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Grammatical Concepts for Pedagogical Grammar

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Formal Linguistics and Language Education

Part of the book series: Educational Linguistics ((EDUL,volume 43))

Abstract

This paper develops an approach to pedagogical grammar based on the notion of grammatical concepts. Grammatical concepts are based on the sort of properties that are used to explain grammatical patterns and the acquisition of grammar in formal linguistics. It is proposed that these properties can be exploited for language pedagogy as they provide teachers with a deeper understanding of issues of learnability with respect to grammar. The concepts are illustrated on the basis of the pronoun system of English, demonstrating how a range of different underlying grammatical concepts can coincide to regulate syntactic and semantic patterns in a particular morphosyntactic paradigm.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    We draw on European Union (EU) language education policies as an instance of a well-documented, readily accessible approach. Policies and recommendations in other jurisdictions will obviously vary. It is hoped that readers can relate the European instantiation to local concerns, which are likely to be variations on similar societal themes connected to multilingualism, linguistic diversity, (super)diversity, etc. (see Blommaert and Rampton 2011).

  2. 2.

    Language awareness is a rather nebulous concept that is used in different ways by different scholars. It may encompass approaches which are diametrically opposed to one another, ideologically and methodologically (Van Lier 1996: 81). Our working definition comes from the Association of Language Awareness (2018) (emphasis in the original): “We define Language Awareness as explicit knowledge about language, and conscious perception and sensitivity in language learning, language teaching and language use. It covers a wide spectrum of fields. For example, Language Awareness issues include exploring the benefits that can be derived from developing a good knowledge about language, a conscious understanding of how languages work, of how people learn them and use them.”

  3. 3.

    We concentrate on personal pronouns for purposes of a manageable presentation. There are clearly many other interesting facets that could be explored (distribution of reflexive pronouns, use of demonstrative pronouns, strong vs. weak paradigms, etc.)

  4. 4.

    Of course, much the same applies to any similar communicative situation, the rather unfair naming convention is derived from similar examples discussed in the literature involving this particular sort of interaction.

References

  • Association of Language Awareness. (2018). About. http://www.languageawareness.org/?page_id=48. Accessed on 14 Aug 2018.

  • Beacco, J. -C., & Byram, M. (2007). Guide for the development of language education policies in Europe. From linguistic diversity to plurilingual education. Language Policy Division, Council of Europe. https://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/FullGuide_EN.pdf

  • Block, D. (2003). The social turn in second language acquisition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blommaert, J., & Rampton, B. (2011). Language and superdiversity. Diversities, 13(2), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brumfit, C. (2001). Individual freedom in language teaching: Helping learners to develop a dialect of their own. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butzkamm, W. (2003). We only learn language once. The role of the mother tongue in FL classrooms: Death of a dogma. The Language Learning Journal, 28(1), 29–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butzkamm, W., & Caldwell, J. (2009). The bilingual reform: A paradigm shift in foreign language teaching. Tübingen: Narr-Studienbücher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, M.-H., & Lardiere, D. (2006). The interpretation of wh-in-situ in Korean second language acquisition. In A. Belletti, E. Bennati, C. Chesi, E. DiDomenico, & I. Ferrari (Eds.), Language acquisition and development: Proceedings of GALA 2005 (pp. 125–135). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, C., & Postal, P. (2012). Imposters: A study of pronominal agreement. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, G. (2000). Number. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, J. (2008). Teaching for Transfer: Challenging the Two Solitudes Assumption in Bilingual Education. In J. Cummins & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education, Volume 5: Bilingual education (pp. 65–75). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, R. M. W. (2016). Are some languages better than others? Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gil, K.-H., & Marsden, H. (2013). Existential quantifiers in second language acquisition: A feature reassembly account. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 3(2), 117–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harley, H., & Ritter, E. (2002). Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis. Language, 78(3), 482–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, E. W. (1984). Awareness of language: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helmbrecht, J. (2013). Politeness distinctions in pronouns. In M. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (Eds.), The World Atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (Available online at http://wals.info/chapter/45. Accessed on 2018-08-20).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hickey, R. (2014). A dictionary of varieties of English. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopp, H. (2013). Grammatical gender in adult L2 acquisition: Relations between lexical and syntactic variability. Second Language Research, 29(1), 33–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, R. (2004). Why education needs linguistics (and vice versa). Journal of Linguistics, 40(1), 105–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, R. (2008). Linguistic theory. In B. Spolsky & F. Hult (Eds.), The handbook of educational linguistics (pp. 53–65). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics: Selected readings (pp. 269–293). Middlesex: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joseph, B. (1979). On the agreement of reflexive forms in English. Linguistics, 17, 519–523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramsch, C. (2008). Applied linguistic theory and second/foreign language education. In N. Van Deusen-Scholl & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Language and Education, Volume 4: Second and Foreign Language Education (pp. 3–15). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lardiere, D. (2008). Feature-assembly in second language acquisition. In J. Liceras, H. Zobl, & H. Goodluck (Eds.), The role of formal features in second language acquisition (pp. 106–140). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lardiere, D. (2009). Some thoughts on a contrastive analysis of features in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 25, 173–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, I., & Ramsey, R. S. (2000). The Korean language. New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Long, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. De Bot, R. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39–52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Marsden, H., & Slabakova, R. (2018). Grammatical meaning and the second language classroom: Introduction. Language Teaching Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817752718. Electronic publication ahead of print version.

  • McCarthy, C. (2008). Morphological variability in the comprehension of agreement: An argument for representation over computation. Second Language Research, 24(4), 459–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNally, F. (2013). The correct Youse of English. The Irish Times, December 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, M. (1992). Pronominal disagreements. Language in Society, 21, 447–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, M. (1996). Epicene pronouns: The linguistics of a prescriptive problem. New York: Garland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunan, D. (1995). Language teaching methodology. A textbook for teachers. New York: Phoenix ELT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabourin, L., & Stowe, L. A. (2008). Second language processing: When are first and second languages processed similarly? Second Language Research, 24(3), 397–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, B., & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12(1), 40–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding English as a lingua Franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slabakova, R. (2008). Meaning in the second language. Berlin: DeGruyter Mouton.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sohn, H.-M. (1999). The Korean language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turnbull, M., & Dailey-O’Cain, J. (2009). Introduction. In M. Turnbull & J. Dailey-O’Cain (Eds.), First language use in second and foreign language learning (pp. 1–14). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy, and authenticity. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Rijt, J., & Coppen, P.-A. (2017). Bridging the gap between linguistic theory and L1 grammar education – experts’ views on essential linguistic concepts. Language Awareness, 26(4), 360–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, S. (2004). ‘Gendered’ pronouns in English dialects: A typological perspective. In B. Kortmann (Ed.), Dialectology meets typology: Dialect grammar from a cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 479–496). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, L. (2006). Universal grammar and second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whong, M., Gil, K.-H., & Marsden, H. (Eds.). (2013). Universal grammar and the second language classroom. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Widdowson, H. G. (2000a). On the limitations of linguistics applied. Applied Linguistics, 21(1), 3–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Widdowson, H. G. (2000b). Object language and the language subject: On the mediating role of applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 20, 21–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Widdowson, H. G. (2003). Defining issues in English language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Widdowson, H. G. (2016). ELF, adaptive variability and virtual language. In M. L. Pitzl & R. Osimk-Teasdale (Eds.), English as a lingua Franca: Perspectives and prospects (pp. 31–38). Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmer, B. (2010). We. New York Times Magazine. October 1, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Johannes-Kepler University, Linz, Austria

    Tom Rankin

  2. Center for Language Education, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR

    Melinda Whong

Authors
  1. Tom Rankin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Melinda Whong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tom Rankin .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

    Andreas Trotzke

  2. University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany, UiT The Arctic University of Norway (Tromsø), Tromsø, Norway

    Tanja Kupisch

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Rankin, T., Whong, M. (2020). Grammatical Concepts for Pedagogical Grammar. In: Trotzke, A., Kupisch, T. (eds) Formal Linguistics and Language Education. Educational Linguistics, vol 43. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39257-4_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39257-4_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-39256-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-39257-4

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation