The Place of Culture in Foreign Language Instruction: A Practical View

T. A. Sackett
{"title":"The Place of Culture in Foreign Language Instruction: A Practical View","authors":"T. A. Sackett","doi":"10.1353/RMR.1970.0021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The subject of the place of culture in college foreign language instruction continues to be discussed widely by theorists and teachers, in professional journals, and in scholarly groups. This meeting's emphasis on theory and practice offers an important opportunity to assess our problems with today's compelling realities in view. I propose to examine the following aspects of our theme: the goals of current programs, the relationship between language study and university structure, and the nature of instructional personnel. On the basis of these considerations a proposal for language programs with cultural content will be offered. I shall leave to others the task of studying what culture as related to language is, first, because we now have a considerable body of iUuminating discourse on the subject; and second, because the matter of how culture can be integrated into our programs is more critical than the precision with which we formulate definitions. Nelson Brooks' article, 'Teaching Culture in the Foreign Language Classroom,\"1 is very useful for the task of defining culture and understanding why its various components constitute important correlatives of language study. His five categories (biological growth, personal refinement, literature and the fine arts, patterns of living, and the sum total of a way of life) comprise suggestive lists of logical adjuncts to language comprehension. But no matter how valid and promising his proposals may be, they can have no practical meaning if we do not place them in the concrete context of today's university. Brooks illustrates convincingly that there are many important aspects of culture related to language besides literature. Yet we find that at least in most universities, virtually the only cultural values purposefully integrated into programs are literary. This phenomenon may be explained by considering who studies languages in college and why. Except in a few mainly private universities which require foreign language proficiency as an entrance requirement, it is a fact that the immense majority of those engaged in college language work do so at the beginning or intermediate levels. They study languages because they must do so, and very few continue beyond the minimal required levels. It is in the context of these elementary and intermediate \"required\" courses that the seemingly eternal polemic concerning \"language versus lit-","PeriodicalId":344945,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1970-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of the Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/RMR.1970.0021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The subject of the place of culture in college foreign language instruction continues to be discussed widely by theorists and teachers, in professional journals, and in scholarly groups. This meeting's emphasis on theory and practice offers an important opportunity to assess our problems with today's compelling realities in view. I propose to examine the following aspects of our theme: the goals of current programs, the relationship between language study and university structure, and the nature of instructional personnel. On the basis of these considerations a proposal for language programs with cultural content will be offered. I shall leave to others the task of studying what culture as related to language is, first, because we now have a considerable body of iUuminating discourse on the subject; and second, because the matter of how culture can be integrated into our programs is more critical than the precision with which we formulate definitions. Nelson Brooks' article, 'Teaching Culture in the Foreign Language Classroom,"1 is very useful for the task of defining culture and understanding why its various components constitute important correlatives of language study. His five categories (biological growth, personal refinement, literature and the fine arts, patterns of living, and the sum total of a way of life) comprise suggestive lists of logical adjuncts to language comprehension. But no matter how valid and promising his proposals may be, they can have no practical meaning if we do not place them in the concrete context of today's university. Brooks illustrates convincingly that there are many important aspects of culture related to language besides literature. Yet we find that at least in most universities, virtually the only cultural values purposefully integrated into programs are literary. This phenomenon may be explained by considering who studies languages in college and why. Except in a few mainly private universities which require foreign language proficiency as an entrance requirement, it is a fact that the immense majority of those engaged in college language work do so at the beginning or intermediate levels. They study languages because they must do so, and very few continue beyond the minimal required levels. It is in the context of these elementary and intermediate "required" courses that the seemingly eternal polemic concerning "language versus lit-
文化在外语教学中的地位:一个实践的观点
文化在大学外语教学中的地位这一主题一直被理论家和教师、专业期刊和学术团体广泛讨论。这次会议强调理论和实践,这为我们提供了一个重要的机会,可以根据当今令人信服的现实来评估我们的问题。我建议从以下几个方面来考察我们的主题:当前课程的目标,语言学习与大学结构的关系,以及教学人员的性质。在此基础上,提出了具有文化内容的语言课程建议。我将把研究文化与语言的关系的任务留给其他人,首先,因为我们现在有相当多的关于这个主题的启发性论述;第二,因为如何将文化融入到我们的计划中比我们精确地制定定义更为重要。尼尔森·布鲁克斯的文章《在外语课堂中教学文化》对于定义文化和理解为什么文化的各个组成部分构成语言学习的重要相关因素非常有用。他的五个分类(生物成长,个人修养,文学和美术,生活模式,以及生活方式的总和)包含了对语言理解的逻辑辅助的暗示性列表。但是,无论他的建议多么有效和有希望,如果我们不把它们放在今天大学的具体背景中,它们就不会有任何实际意义。布鲁克斯令人信服地说明,除了文学之外,文化中还有许多重要的方面与语言有关。然而,我们发现,至少在大多数大学里,实际上唯一有意融入课程的文化价值是文学。这种现象可以通过考虑谁在大学学习语言以及为什么学习语言来解释。除了少数主要是私立大学将外语能力作为入学要求外,事实上,绝大多数从事大学语言学习的人都是在初级或中级水平上学习的。他们学习语言是因为他们必须这样做,很少有人能超过最低要求的水平。正是在这些初级和中级“必修课”的背景下,关于“语言与文学”的争论似乎是永恒的
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信