Cover not available
Article published In:
Pedagogical Linguistics
Vol. 1:1 (2020) ► pp.8–33

Towards a pedagogical linguistics

 | University College London
Pedagogical linguistics is a two-way bridge between linguistics and education, carrying information not only from linguistics to education, but also in the other direction, where linguistics needs to explore the impact of education on language. The paper reviews the history of this bridge, and especially in the 19th and 20th centuries, arguing that the bridge worked well in the 19th but that it disintegrated in the 20th with the rise of linguistics and education as distinct research fields. The challenge for the 21st century is to rebuild it in a sustainable way.
Keywords: linguistics, education, parsing, sentence diagram, communicative teaching, grammar-translation
Article outline
  • 1.What is pedagogical linguistics?
  • 2.A brief history of linguistics and pedagogy
  • 3.The 19th century: Innovation and integration
    • 3.1Sentence analysis
    • 3.2Towards a unified syntax
    • 3.3Syntactic tables and diagrams
    • 3.4Language teaching methods
    • 3.5Organisations
  • 4.The 20th century: Disintegration
    • 4.1People
    • 4.2Institutions
    • 4.3Values
    • 4.4Research
    • 4.5Disintegration
  • 5.The 21st century: Reintegration
  • Notes
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 17 February 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pl.19011.hud
References (51)
References
Anderson, J. G. (Ed.) (1912). Modern language teaching: The official organ of the Modern Language Association 81. <[URL]>
Arnold, T. (1848). An English grammar for classical schools, with questions, and a course of exercises; being a practical introduction to English prose composition (4th ed.). London: Rivington. <[URL]>
Atkins, H. G., & Hutton, H. L. (1920). The teaching of modern foreign languages: In school and university. Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Becker, K. F. (1829). Deutsche Sprachlehre (Vol 21). Frankfurt am Main: Hermann.Google Scholar
Billroth, J. (1832). Lateinische Syntax für die obern Klassen gelehrter Schulen. Leipzig: Weidmann.Google Scholar
Board of Education (1921). The teaching of English in England (The Newbolt Report). London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Brassai, S. (1873). Paraleipomena kai diorthoumena. A mit nem mondtak s a mit roszul mondtak a commentatorok Virg. Aeneise II. könyvére [What the commentators did not say or wrongly said about Book II of Virgil’s Aeneid]. Budapest: MTA.Google Scholar
Brittain, R. C. (1973). A critical history of systems of sentence diagramming in English (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Bullock, S. A. (1975). Language for life. London: Dept for Education and Science.Google Scholar
Chambaud, L. (1750). A grammar of the French tongue: With a prefatory discourse, containing an essay on the proper method for teaching and learning that language. London: Printed for A. Miller.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logo DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, S. W. (1847). A Practical grammar: In which words, phrases, and sentences are classified according to their offices and their various relations to one another (Sixth edition 1851). <[URL]>
Daniélou, A. (1993). Virtue, success, pleasure and liberation: The four aims of life in the tradition of ancient India. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Dmitrievskij, A. (1877). Praktičeskie zametki o russkom sintaksise, I : Opredelenie predloženija [Practical remarks on Russian syntax: Definition of the proposition]. Filologičeskie zapiski (Voronež), 31, 1–15.Google Scholar
Gleason, H. (1965). Linguistics and English grammar. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Gragg, G. B. (2006). Babylonian grammatical texts. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics (2nd ed.) (pp. 639–642). Oxford: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gwosdek, H. (2013). William Lily’s grammar of Latin in English: An introduction of the Eyght Partes of Speche, and the construction of the same. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hefty, M., Ortiz, S., & Nelson, S. (2008). Sentence diagramming: A step-by-step approach to learning grammar through diagramming. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Honey, J. (1997). Language is power: The story of standard English and its enemies. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
Huddleston, R., & Pullum, G. (2002). The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hudson, R. (2004). Why education needs linguistics (and vice versa). Journal of Linguistics, 401, 105–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hult, F. (2008). The history and development of educational linguistics. In B. Spolsky & F. Hult (Eds.), The handbook of educational linguistics (pp. 10–24). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Imrényi, A., & Vladár, Z. (forthcoming). Sámuel Brassai in the history of dependency grammar. In A. Imrényi & N. Mazziotta (Eds.), Chapters of dependency grammar: A historical survey from antiquity to Tesnière. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logo
Johnson, K., Johnson, H. (1998). Encyclopedic dictionary of applied linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kahane, S. (forthcoming). How dependency syntax appeared in the French Encyclopedia: From Buffier (1709) to Beauzée (1765). In A. Imrényi & N. Mazziotta (Eds.), Chapters of dependency grammar: A historical survey from antiquity to Tesnière. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logo
Kern, F. (1884). Grundriss der Deutschen Satzlehre. Berlin: Nicolaische Verlags-Buchhandlung.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Law, V. (2003). The history of linguistics in Europe: From Plato to 1600. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Linn, A. (2006). English grammar writing. In B. Aarts & A. McMahon (Eds.), The handbook of English linguistics (pp. 72–92). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luhtala, A. (1994). Grammar, early mediaeval. In R. Asher (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (pp. 1460–1468). Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Lyons, J. (1968). Introduction to theoretical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Macaro, E. (2014). Grammar: The never-ending debate. In P. Driscoll, E. Macaro & A. Swarbrick (Eds.), Debates in modern languages education (pp. 108–120). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mazziotta, N. (2016). Drawing syntax before syntactic trees: Stephen Watkins Clark’s sentence diagrams (1847). Historiographia Linguistica, 43(3), 301–342. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mclelland, N. (2017). Teaching and learning foreign languages: A history of language education, assessment and policy in Britain. Abingdon: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morell, J. D. (1855). The analysis of sentences explained and systematised, after Beckers’ German grammar (5th ed.). London: Robert Theobald.Google Scholar
Nesfield, J. C. (1898). Outline of English grammar: In five parts. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Olson, G., Faigley, L., & Chomsky, N. (1991). Language, politics and composition: A conversation with Noam Chomsky. Journal of Advanced Composition, 111, 1–35.Google Scholar
Page, B. (1996). The Association for Language Learning (ALL). In E. Hawkins (Ed.), 30 Years of Language Teaching (pp. 294–296). London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching.Google Scholar
Percival, K. (1976). On the historical source of immediate constituent analysis. In J. McCawley (Ed.), Notes from the linguistic underground (pp. 229–242). London: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perera, K. (1984). Children’s writing and reading: Analysing classroom language (Language Library). Oxford: B. Blackwell in association with A. Deutsch.Google Scholar
Quirk, R. (1964). The English language problem. English in Education, 11, 7–12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1972). A Grammar of contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Reed, A., & Kellogg, B. (1877). Higher lessons in English. A work on English grammar and composition, in which the science of the language is made tributary to the art of expression. A course of practical lessons carefully graded, and adapted to every day use in the school-room. (1890 edition). New York, NY: Clark and Maynard.Google Scholar
Robins, R. (1967). A short history of linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Seriot, P. (2004). L’affaire du petit drame: Filiation franco-russe ou communauté de pensée? (Tesnière et Dmitrievskij). Slavica Occitania, Toulouse, 171, 93–118.Google Scholar
Spolsky, B. (1978). Educational linguistics: An introduction. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Swan, M. (1995). Practical English usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sweet, H. (1891). A new English grammar logical and historical (21 vols). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, D. (1991). Latin declensions and conjugations: From Varro to Priscian. Histoire Epistémologie Language, 131, 85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tesnière, L. (1959). Éléments de syntaxe structurale. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Cited by (15)

Cited by 15 other publications

Chen, Cong & Jinfen Xu
2024. Handbook of practical second language teaching and learning. Asia Pacific Journal of Education ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Gregov, Nicolas
2024. Délimitation des diagrammes syntaxiques dans la grammaire scolaire. Travaux de linguistique n° 87:2 ► pp. 129 ff. DOI logo
Gregov, Nicolas, Nicolas Mazziotta, F. Neveu, S. Prévost, A. Montébran, A. Steuckardt, G. Bergounioux, G. Merminod & G. Philippe
2024. Pour un diagramme raisonné en grammaire : modèle d’évaluation FCR et arbre dual. SHS Web of Conferences 191 ► pp. 07016 ff. DOI logo
Richards, Paul
2024. Project-based learning in an Eigogaku course. Pedagogical Linguistics 5:2 ► pp. 189 ff. DOI logo
Sheehan, Michelle, Anna D. Havinga, Jonathan R. Kasstan, Sascha Stollhans, Alice Corr & Peter Gillman
2024. Teacher perspectives on the introduction of linguistics in the languages classroom: Evidence from a co‐creation project on French, German and Spanish. British Educational Research Journal 50:4 ► pp. 1935 ff. DOI logo
van Rijt, Jimmy H M
2024. Formal Linguistics and Language Education. New Empirical Perspectives. Applied Linguistics 45:4 ► pp. 759 ff. DOI logo
van Rijt, Jimmy H. M.
2024. Learning how to think like a linguist: Linguistic reasoning as a focal point in L1 grammar education. Language and Linguistics Compass 18:3 DOI logo
Anderson, Jason
2023. Reimagining educational linguistics: a post-competence perspective. Educational Linguistics DOI logo
Chekili, Ferid
2023. Teaching English to Arab learners. Pedagogical Linguistics 4:1 ► pp. 98 ff. DOI logo
Corr, Alice & Anna Pineda
2023. Theoretical Linguistics in Non-University Education. In Theoretical Linguistics in the Pre-University Classroom, ► pp. 3 ff. DOI logo
Corr, Alice & Anna Pineda
2023. Theoretical Linguistics in Non-University Education. In Theoretical Linguistics in the Pre-University Classroom, DOI logo
Rothstein, Björn, Katharina Staubach, Saskia Ripp, Julia Waldeyer & Julian Roelle
2023. Is ‘more’ really more?. Pedagogical Linguistics 4:1 ► pp. 77 ff. DOI logo
Bravo, Ana
2021. Students’ errors in L1 Spanish grammar from the perspective of formal linguistics. Pedagogical Linguistics 2:2 ► pp. 153 ff. DOI logo
Elsner, Daniela
2021. Knowledge about grammar and the role of epistemological beliefs. Pedagogical Linguistics 2:2 ► pp. 107 ff. DOI logo
Trotzke, Andreas & Tanja Kupisch
2020. Formal Linguistics and Language Education: Bridging the Gap. In Formal Linguistics and Language Education [Educational Linguistics, 43], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.