Формирование навыков письменной речи в английском языке
CHAPTER 1 THEORETICAL BASE OF THE PROBLEM
1.1 Teaching Techniques in Studying English Language
1.1.1. Communicative Approach
1.1.2. Blended Learning
1.1.3. Reading Approach
1.1.4 Other approaches to teaching writing
1.2. Difficulties of Studying English Language Associated with Writing Skills and the Ways to Overcome Them
220.127.116.11. Phrasal Verbs
18.104.22.168. Word Derivation
1.2.2. Differences between Spoken and Written English: Spelling
1.2.3. Expressing Thoughts in a Foreign Language
1.3. Improvement of Writing Skills in Their Correlation with the Age and Language Level
1.3.1. Different Age Groups in Studying English
22.214.171.124. Teaching Children at the Early Age
126.96.36.199. Teaching Senior Students
188.8.131.52. Teaching Adults
1.3.2. Different L
Показать всеevels of English
184.108.40.206. Studying English with the Beginners
220.127.116.11. Intermediate Level
18.104.22.168. Upper-Intermediate and Advanced Levels
CHAPTER 2 PRACTICAL APPROACH IN WRITING ABILITY AND COMPOSING STRATEGIES
2.1 Stages and Levels of the Development of Writing Skills
2.1.1. Effective Ways and Tools of Improving Writing Skills with the Beginners
2.1.2. Effective Ways and Tools of Improving Writing Skills with Intermediate Students
2.1.3. Effective Ways and Tools of Improving Writing Skills with Upper-Intermediate and Advanced Students
2.2. System of Exercises Directed to the Formation of the Written Skills Competence
2.2.1. Exercises and Their Correlation with Age Group
22.214.171.124. System of Exercises Created for Younger Learners
126.96.36.199. System of Exercises Created for Adults
2.2.2. Exercises and Their Correlation with Level of English
188.8.131.52. System of Exercises Designed for Beginners
184.108.40.206. System of Exercises Designed for Intermediates
220.127.116.11. System of Exercises Designed for Upper-Intermediates and Advanced Learners
2.2.3. Special Types of Exercises
18.104.22.168. Creative Exercises
22.214.171.124. Individual and Group Exercises
1.Амирова Т. А. К истории и теории графемики. - М., 1977.
2.Баранова Л.Л. Онтология английской письменной речи. Москва. МГУ, 1998.
3.Бергельсон М.Б. Языковые аспекты виртуальной коммуникации // Вестник Московского университета. Серия 19. Лингвистика и межкультурная коммуникация, № 1. 2002, с.55–67.
4.Бодуэн де Куртенэ И.А. Избранные труды по общему языкознанию. т. 2, М, 1963, с. 209–234.
5.Елухина Н.В. Роль дискурса в межкультурной коммуникации и методика формирования дискурсивной компетенции // Иностранные языки в школе.- 2002.- №3.- С.9-12.
6.Зиндер Л.Р. Очерк общей теории письма. - Л.: Наука, 1987.
7.Каплич Лариса Викторовна. Начало обучения продуктивной письменной речи в лингвистическом вузе: Дис. ... канд. пед. наук: 13.00.02 : Москва, 1996 232 c
Показать всеПисьменная речь и специфика ее изучения Вопросы языкознания. 1963, № 3.
9.Шатилов С.Ф. Методика обучения немецкому языку в средней школе. Л., 1977. -295 с.
10.Anderson Richard and others. Developing writing skills: http://www.sil.org/lingualinks/Literacy/ImplementALiteracyProgram/DevelopingWritingSkills.htm
11.Ann Raimes Techniques in Teaching Writing New York, Oxford University Press, 1983.
12.Beverly Alsleben. Thirty Minutes with Mikal. http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/print/resource/1285
13.Bolinger, Dwight. The Phrasal Verb in English. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971. – P. xii.
14.Crystal David. Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995. – P.118.
15.Crystal David. The Penguin Dictionary of Language. - Penguin Books - England – 1999.
16.Danesco B. How To Develop Your Writing Skills: http://www.howtodothings.com/hobbies/a2705-how-to-develop-your-writing-skills.html
17.Description of levels . British Council: http://www.britishcouncil.org/ru/colombia-english-learn-english-in-colombia-courses-for-adults-description-of-levels.htm
18.Dr. Wayne D. Lance. Teaching Writing: Preschool, Kindergarten, and First Grade: http://www.iched.org/cms/scripts/page.php?site_id=iched&item_id=teach_writing_prek-1
19.Eric S. Nelson. Suggestions for Helping Non-Native Writers: http://writing.umn.edu/tww/nonnative/nn_helping.html
20.Gail Tompkins. Teaching Writing: Balancing Process and Product. Person Education. 2003.
21.Gudschinsky Sarah C. A manual of literacy for preliterate peoples: http://www.pnglanguages.org/lingualinks/literacy/ReferenceMaterials/AMnlOfLtrcyFrPrltrtPpls/contents.htm
22.How to Improve Your Writing Skills: http://www.wikihow.com/Improve-Your-Writing-Skills
23.James D. Williams. Preparing To Teach Writing: Research, Theory, and Practice. Lawrence Erlbaum. 2003. – 403 p.
24.Kimberly L. Keith “Help Your Child Learn Writing Skills” http://childparenting.about.com/od/learningenrichment/a/writingskills.htm
25.Kimberly Steele. Teaching Writing: http://www.kimskorner4teachertalk.com/writing/menu.html
26.Kolln, Martha and Robert Funk. Understanding English Grammar. 5th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1998. – P.35.
27.McArthur, Tom, ed. The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 1992. – P.772.
28.Rackham J., Bertagnalli O. From Sight to Insight.-The Dryden Press, 1988.
29.Sebranek P.,Meyer V., Kemper D. A Student Handbook for Writing and Learning.-D.C. Heath and Company, 1996.
30.Sellin R., Winters E. Cross-Cultural Communication. Internationalization of Documentation.Internet Communucation. http: //www.bena.com/ewinters/sect7. html, 1999.
31.Shawna Shapiro. Working with multilingual (esl) students tutor training workshop: http://staff.washington.edu/shapis/WCtutors_ESLWorkshop_Fall07.doc
32.Sheryl Holt. Responding to Non-Native Speakers of English: http://writing.umn.edu/tww/nonnative/nn_speakers.html
33.Susan B. Neuman PhD. Adventures in Writing: http://content.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=629
34.Susan Jindrich. Help your children learn to write: http://www.meddybemps.com/7.22.html
35.Teacher's corner: Writing. http://www.hio.ft.hanze.nl/thar/essay.htm. http://ivash.by.ru/writing.htm
36.Troyka L.Q., Nudelman J. Steps in Composition. - Prentice-Hall, 1989. Скрыть
Dwight Bolinger, in The Phrasal Verb in English, answers the question of why there are so many of these formations in English. He states, "They are words. The everyday inventor is not required to reach for elements such as roots and affixes that have no reality for him. It takes only a rough familiarity with other uses of head and off to make them available for head off, virtually self-suggesting when the occasion for them comes up, which is not true of learned formations like intercept".1
In addition, he notes that phrasal verbs are more expressive than the synonyms they replace. He contrasts insult with to jump on; exult with to jump up and down with joy; and assault with to jump at).2
Another aspect of phrasal verbs that is often overlooked is the number of new nouns derived from them
Показать все. According to Bolinger, the phrasal verb is "next to the noun+noun combinations, probably the most prolific source of new nouns in English". Here are some examples:
runaway from run away,
makeup from make up,
breakout or outbreak from break out
break-up from break up
get-together from get together
blackout from black out
sit-in from sit in
upkeep from keep up.1
126.96.36.199. Word Derivation
In linguistics, derivation is "Used to form new words, as with "happi-ness" and "un-happy" from "happy", or "determination" from "determine". A contrast is intended with the process of inflection, which uses another kind of affix in order to form variants of the same word, as with "determine/determine-s/determin-ing/determin-ed".2
A derivational suffix usually applies to words of one syntactic category and changes them into words of another syntactic category. For example, the English derivational suffix "-ly" changes adjectives into adverbs ("slow" → "slowly").
Derivation may occur without any change of form, for example "telephone" (noun) and "to telephone". This is known as conversion. Some linguists consider that when a word's syntactic category is changed without any change of form, a null morpheme is being affixed.
Although derivational affixes do not necessarily modify the syntactic category, they modify the meaning of the base. In many cases, derivational affixes change both the syntactic category and the meaning: "modern" → "modernize" ("to make modern"). The modification of meaning is sometimes predictable: "Adjective + ness" → "the state of being (Adjective)"; ("white"→ "whiteness").
Not to make mistakes in using derived words students should know the main affixes of English.
1.2.2. Differences between Spoken and Written English: Spelling
Always one must remember that English is not "phonetic". That means that we do not always say a word the same way that we spell it. The teacher should explain this to the pupils. And some words can have the same spelling but different pronunciation, for example:
I like to read [ri:d].
I have read [red] that book.
Some words have different spelling but the same pronunciation, for example:
I have read [red] that book.
My favourite colour is red [red].
English has such difficult sounds as diphthongs, homophones and so on.
Homophones are words that have exactly the same sound (pronunciation) but different meanings and (usually) spelling.
For example, the following two words have the same sound, but different meanings and spelling:
In the next example, the two words have the same sound and spelling, but different meanings:
bear (the animal)
bear (to carry)
Usually homophones are in groups of two (our, hour), but very occasionally they can be in groups of three (to, too, two) or even four. If we take our "bear" example, we can add another word to the group"
bear (the animal)
bear (to tolerate)
In a few cases, a third homophone, although possible, has not been included for simplicity. Different varieties and accents of English may produce variations in some of these pronunciations. The homophones listed here are based on British English.
The problems with the English spelling system came about as the language developed over a period of 1,000 years. Some complications arose early on, when the Romans tried to write down Old English using the 23 letter Latin alphabet. Old English contained nearly 40 vowels and consonants.
English, according to its history, and taking into account its wide spreading all over the world, has been forming its spelling system during a long time and has been influenced by many languages. English spelling system now has formed into the alphabet from 26 letters. Now for spelling English has 24 consonants, 20 vowels; 22 monographs, 12 digraphs, 4 trigraphs, while some digraphs and trigraphs can often ne changed by geminates (doubled consonants – ss, gg, nn, and so on).
Since around the ninth century, English has been written using the Latin alphabet, which replaced Anglo-Saxon runes. The spelling system, or orthography, is multilayered, with elements of French, Latin and Greek spelling on top of the native Germanic system; it has grown to vary significantly from the phonology of the language. The spelling of words often diverges considerably from how they are spoken.
Though letters and sounds may not correspond in isolation, spelling rules that take into account syllable structure, phonetics, and accents are 75% or more reliable. Some phonics spelling advocates claim that English is more than 80% phonetic.
In general, the English language, being the product of many other languages and having only been codified orthographically in the 16th century, has fewer consistent relationships between sounds and letters than many other languages; for example, the sound sequence ough can be pronounced in not less than seven different ways. The consequence of this complex orthographic history is that reading can be challenging. It takes longer for students to become completely fluent readers of English than of many other languages, including French, Greek, and Spanish.
Unlike most other Germanic languages, English has almost no diacritics except in foreign loanwords (like the acute accent in café), and in the uncommon use of a diaeresis mark (often in formal writing) to indicate that two vowels are pronounced separately, rather than as one sound (e.g. naïve, Zoë). Words such as décor, café, résumé/resumé, entrée, fiancée and naïve are frequently spelled both ways. Diacritical marks are often added to words to make them have a more "upscale" commercial appeal. Recently, in the advent of computer keyboards, caf'e or cafe' (for example) have begun to become prevalent in computer-generated signs due to the lack of effective diacritical keys on many computer keyboards in English-speaking countries.
Some English words retain diacritics to distinguish them from others, such as animé, exposé, lamé, öre, øre, pâté, piqué, and rosé, though these are sometimes also dropped (for example, résumé/resumé is often spelt resume in the United States). To clarify pronunciation, a small number of loanwords may employ a diacritic that does not appear in the original word, such as maté, from Spanish yerba mate, following the French usage.
In the past, only a small number of people could write, but almost everybody could speak. Because their words were not widely recorded, there were many variations in the way they spoke, with different vocabulary and dialects in different regions. Today, almost everybody can speak and write. Because writing is recorded and more permanent, this has influenced the way that people speak, so that many regional dialects and words have disappeared. (It may seem that there are already too many differences that have to be learned, but without writing there would be far more differences, even between, for example, British and American English.) So writing has had an important influence on speaking. But speaking can also influence writing. For example, most new words enter a language through speaking. Some of them do not live long. If you begin to see these words in writing it usually means that they have become "real words" within the language and have a certain amount of permanence.
Let’s consider the main factors permitting to speak about certain difficulties generated by changes in English orthographical system particularly in spelling.
Now we can not ignore the fact that English-speaking world has been using two ways of words writing – traditional English and simplified American – since in 70s with the approval of the President and scientific community there were accepted orthographical innovations that Webster proposed in the beginning of the century.
The reform of orthographical system in the USA has always had opponents as the integrated system of spelling with British English considered as a condition of standardization and unification of English but the traditional spelling - as a comfortable means of prediction of word sounding and preserving its morphological structure.
The first and destructive hit on the traditional English spelling was made by trading business. It was stated that the appearance of so called “commercial spelling” was mentioned in English after the World War I, but their intensive distribution began in the second half of the ХХ century and still is going on. As the base of such tendencies to the modified spelling in producing advertisements, brands and so on we can name realized aspiration for breaking the limits in search of expressive and explicit means of language. Among “commercial spelling” in advertisements one can name the most distributed and fixed in national scale ones, such as shu, lite, kleen, Kleenex, Bref, nite (life), California sunkist oranges, hy-top, Soft and Dri (марка дезодоранта); Squeezit (natural orange juice), stic pens, Kwik Kash, etc ,that is some products, drinks, medicine, sanitary means and so on.
It is worth noting that in advertisements we can meet not only the simplification of word spelling but its complication due to monographs and digraphs changing (expl. phabulous phood, phantastic).
1.2.3. Expressing Thoughts in a Foreign Language
Human language appears to be biologically isolated in its essential properties, and a rather recent development from an evolutionary perspective. There is no serious reason today to challenge the Cartesian view that the ability to use linguistic signs to express freely-formed thoughts marks "the true distinction between man and animal" or machine, whether by "machine" we mean the automata that captured the imagination of the 17th and 18th century, or those that are providing a stimulus to thought and imagination today.
Furthermore, the faculty of language enters crucially into every aspect of human life, thought, and interaction. It is largely responsible for the fact that alone in the biological world; humans have a history, cultural evolution and diversity of any complexity and richness, even biological success in the technical sense that their numbers are huge.
Human language is based on an elementary property that also seems to be biologically isolated: the property of discrete infinity, which is exhibited in its purest form by the natural numbers 1, 2, 3,... Children do not learn this property of the number system. Unless the mind already possesses the basic principles, no amount of evidence could provide them; and they are completely beyond the intellectual range of other organisms. Similarly, no child has to learn that there are three word sentences and four word sentences, but no three-and-a half word sentences, and that it is always possible to construct a more complex one, with a definite form and meaning. Such knowledge must come to us from "the original hand of nature", in David Hume's phrase, as part of our biological endowment.
This property intrigued Galileo, who regarded the discovery of a means to communicate our "most secret thoughts to any other person with 24 little characters" as the greatest of all human inventions. The invention succeeds because it reflects the discrete infinity of the language that these characters are used to represent. Shortly after, the authors of the Port Royal Grammar were struck by the "marvellous invention" of a means to construct from a few dozen sounds an infinity of expressions that enable us to reveal to others what we think and imagine and feel - from a contemporary standpoint, not an "invention" but no less "marvellous" as a product of biological evolution, about which virtually nothing is known, in this case.
The faculty of language can reasonably be regarded as a "language organ" in the sense in which scientists speak of the visual system, or immune system, or circulatory system, as organs of the body. Understood in this way, an organ is not something that can be removed from the body, leaving the rest intact. It is a subsystem of a more complex structure. We hope to understand the full complexity by investigating parts that have distinctive characteristics, and their interactions. Study of the faculty of language proceeds in the same way.
We assume further that the language organ is like others in that its basic character is an expression of the genes. How that happens remains a distant prospect for inquiry, but we can investigate the genetically-determined "initial state" of the language faculty in other ways. Evidently, each language is the result of the interplay of two factors; the initial state and the course of experience. We can think of the initial state as a "language acquisition device" that takes experience as "input" and gives the language as an "output" - an "output" that is internally represented in the mind/brain. The input and the output are both open to examination: we can study the course of experience and the properties of the languages that are acquired.
What is learned in this way can tell us quite a lot about the initial state that mediates between them. Furthermore, there is strong reason to believe that the initial state is common to the species: if some children had grown up in Tokyo, they would speak Japanese. That means that evidence about Japanese bears directly on the assumptions concerning the initial state for English. The shared initial state must be rich enough to yield each language, given appropriate experience; but not so rich as to exclude any language that humans can attain. We can establish strong empirical conditions that the theory of the initial state must satisfy, and pose several problems for the biology of language: How do the genes determine the initial state, and what are the brain mechanisms involved in the states that the language organ assumes? These are hard problems, even for much simpler systems where direct experiment is possible, but some may be at the horizons of inquiry.
To proceed, we should be more clear about what we mean by "a language." There has been much impassioned controversy about the right answer to this question, and more generally, to the question of how languages should be studied. The controversy is pointless, because there is no right answer. If we are interested in how bees communicate, we will try to learn something about their internal nature, social arrangements, and physical environment. These approaches are not in conflict; they are mutually supportive. The same is true of the study of human language: it can be investigated from the biological point of view, and from numerous others. Each approach defines the object of its inquiry in the light of its special concerns; and each should try to learn what it can from other approaches. Why such matters arouse great emotion in the study of humans is perhaps an interesting question.
Generative grammar arose in the context of what is often called "the cognitive revolution" of the 1950s, and was an important factor in its development. Whether the term "revolution" is appropriate or not can be questioned, but there was an important change of perspective: from the study of behavior and its products (such as texts), to the inner mechanisms that enter into human thought and action. The cognitive perspective regards behavior and its products not as the object of inquiry, but as data that may provide evidence about the inner mechanisms of mind and the ways these mechanisms operate in executing actions and interpreting experience. The properties and patterns that were the focus of attention in structural linguistics find their place, but as phenomena to be explained along with innumerable others, in terms of the inner mechanisms that generate expressions.
The "cognitive revolution" renewed and reshaped many of the insights, achievements, and quandaries of what we might call "the first cognitive revolution" of the 17th and 18th century, which was part of the scientific revolution that so radically modified our understanding of the world. It was recognized at the time that language involves "the infinite use of finite means", in von Humboldt's phrase; but the insight could be developed only in limited ways, because the basic ideas remained vague and obscure. By mid-20th century, advances in the formal sciences had provided appropriate concepts in a very sharp and clear form, making it possible to give a precise account of the computational principles that generate the expressions of a language. Other advances also opened the way to investigation of traditional questions with greater hope of success. The study of language change had registered major achievements. Anthropological linguistics provided a far richer understanding of the nature and variety of languages, also undermining many stereotypes. And certain topics, notably the study of sound systems, had been much advanced by the structural linguistics of the 20th century.
Investigating language use, we find that words are interpreted in terms of such factors as material constitution, design, intended and characteristic use, institutional role, and so on. The notions can be traced to Aristotelian origin, philosopher Julius Moravcsik has pointed out in very interesting work. Things are identified and assigned to categories in terms of such properties, which we are taking to be semantic features, on a par with phonetic features that determine its sound. The use of language can attend in various ways to these semantic features.
Suppose the library has two copies of Tolstoy's WAR AND PEACE, Peter takes out one, and John the other. Did Peter and John take out the same book, or different books? If we attend to the material factor of the lexical item, they took out different books; if we focus on its abstract component, they took out the same book. We can attend to both material and abstract factors simultaneously, as when we say that his book is in every store in the country, or that the book he is planning will weigh at least five pounds if he ever writes it. Similarly, we can paint the door white and walk through it, using the pronoun "it" to refer ambiguously to figure and ground. We can report that the bank was blown up after it raised the interest rate, or that it raised the rate to keep from being blown up. Here the pronoun "it", and the "empty category" that is the subject of "being blown up", simultaneously adopt both the material and institutional factors.
The same is true if my house is destroyed and I re-build it, perhaps somewhere else; it is not the same house, even if I use the same materials, though I re-built it. The referential terms "re" and "it" cross the boundary. Cities are still different. London could be destroyed by fire and IT could be rebuilt somewhere else, from completely different materials and looking quite different, but still London. Carthage could be rebuilt today, and still be Carthage.
Consider the city that is regarded as holy by the faiths that trace to the Old Testament. The Islamic world calls it "AI-Quds", Israel uses a different name, as does the Christian world: in English, it is pronounced "Jerusalem." There is a good deal of conflict over this city. Скрыть
за 10 минут
Эта работа вам не подошла?
У наших авторов вы можете заказать любую учебную работу от 200 руб.
Оформите заказ и авторы начнут откликаться уже через 10 минут!
Заказать дипломную работу