Language as an Error: A Study on School Literacy and Language Correction in Lithuania

Q3 Social Sciences
Loreta Vaicekauskienė, Vuk Vukotić, Ramunė Čičirkaitė, L. Nevinskaitė
{"title":"Language as an Error: A Study on School Literacy and Language Correction in Lithuania","authors":"Loreta Vaicekauskienė, Vuk Vukotić, Ramunė Čičirkaitė, L. Nevinskaitė","doi":"10.15388/taikalbot.2022.spec18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This special issue documents the history of formal writing education in Lithuania in the second half of the 20th and early 21st centuries by taking a (socio)linguistically informed approach to school literacy. The study consists of four contributions, one theoretical and three empirical. The authors explore authentic pupils’ written language practices by focusing on variation in spelling, morphology and syntax, word choice as well as stylistic expression, as corrected by teachers, and critically contrast the data with the dominant normativist (or prescriptivist) approach to school literacy in Lithuania. The data for the empirical contributions were retrieved from an anonymised database “Rašinėliai” (‘School Essays’) which some of the authors of the study have been collecting since 2014 for the purpose of investigation of school writing in Lithuania. At the time the study was conducted, the researchers could choose among more than 7,500 PDF files documenting writing by almost 950 different pupils between 1st and 12th grades, of which almost 80% were teacher-corrected. The results of the study can be interpreted as revealing the cognitive and social diversity of the literacy phenomenon. There were virtually no cases in the data of the pupils’ written essays that could not be explained by natural cognitive or social causes. Among the main causes of linguistic variation, the findings identified (1) the influence of spoken language with its own phonetic and grammatical rules; (2) the cognitive mechanism called analogy, whereby pupils internalise a certain spelling convention and then generalise it; and (3) the potentially interconnected factors as the genre, the motivation of the pupils and pedagogical practice. The authors hope that the study will show both the originality and productiveness of the sociolinguistic approach when applied to data from Lithuanian schools, as well as its theoretical potential of developing sociolinguistics of school literacy. Besides that, there is an expectation that the research will have important implications for local educational policies and pedagogical practice.","PeriodicalId":34080,"journal":{"name":"Taikomoji kalbotyra","volume":"22 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Taikomoji kalbotyra","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15388/taikalbot.2022.spec18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This special issue documents the history of formal writing education in Lithuania in the second half of the 20th and early 21st centuries by taking a (socio)linguistically informed approach to school literacy. The study consists of four contributions, one theoretical and three empirical. The authors explore authentic pupils’ written language practices by focusing on variation in spelling, morphology and syntax, word choice as well as stylistic expression, as corrected by teachers, and critically contrast the data with the dominant normativist (or prescriptivist) approach to school literacy in Lithuania. The data for the empirical contributions were retrieved from an anonymised database “Rašinėliai” (‘School Essays’) which some of the authors of the study have been collecting since 2014 for the purpose of investigation of school writing in Lithuania. At the time the study was conducted, the researchers could choose among more than 7,500 PDF files documenting writing by almost 950 different pupils between 1st and 12th grades, of which almost 80% were teacher-corrected. The results of the study can be interpreted as revealing the cognitive and social diversity of the literacy phenomenon. There were virtually no cases in the data of the pupils’ written essays that could not be explained by natural cognitive or social causes. Among the main causes of linguistic variation, the findings identified (1) the influence of spoken language with its own phonetic and grammatical rules; (2) the cognitive mechanism called analogy, whereby pupils internalise a certain spelling convention and then generalise it; and (3) the potentially interconnected factors as the genre, the motivation of the pupils and pedagogical practice. The authors hope that the study will show both the originality and productiveness of the sociolinguistic approach when applied to data from Lithuanian schools, as well as its theoretical potential of developing sociolinguistics of school literacy. Besides that, there is an expectation that the research will have important implications for local educational policies and pedagogical practice.
语言是一种错误:立陶宛学校扫盲和语言矫正研究
本特刊通过从(社会)语言学角度研究学校扫盲,记录了 20 世纪下半叶和 21 世纪初立陶宛正规写作教育的历史。本研究由四篇论文组成,其中一篇为理论研究,三篇为实证研究。作者们通过关注拼写、词法和句法、词语选择以及文体表达方面的变化,探讨了真实的学生书面语言实践,并将这些数据与立陶宛学校扫盲中占主导地位的规范主义(或规定主义)方法进行了批判性对比。实证研究的数据取自一个匿名数据库 "Rašinėliai"("学校作文"),该数据库是本研究的一些作者自 2014 年以来为调查立陶宛学校作文而收集的。在进行研究时,研究人员可以从 7,500 多个 PDF 文件中进行选择,这些文件记录了一至十二年级近 950 名不同学生的作文,其中近 80% 经过教师批改。研究结果可以解释为揭示了识字现象在认知和社会方面的多样性。在学生的作文数据中,几乎没有不能用自然认知或社会原因来解释的情况。在语言变异的主要原因中,研究结果发现:(1) 口语的影响,它有自己的语音和语法规则;(2) 认知机制,即类比,学生将某种拼写习惯内化,然后加以推广;(3) 潜在的相互关联因素,如体裁、学生的动机和教学实践。作者希望,这项研究将显示社会语言学方法在应用于立陶宛学校数据时的原创性和有效性,以及其发展学校扫盲社会语言学的理论潜力。此外,作者还期望该研究能对当地的教育政策和教学实践产生重要影响。
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
Taikomoji kalbotyra
Taikomoji kalbotyra Social Sciences-Linguistics and Language
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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