I think it is true to saying that, in general, language teachers (26)
, e* v1 K2 n8 T( W have paid little attention to the way sentences are used in combination to form stretches of disconnected discourse. They have tended to take (27)) ?* h ]7 r2 a
their cue from the grammarian and have concentrated to the teaching (28)
" Q1 r3 \8 A/ j. S" u% h! y of sentences as self-contained units. It is true that these are often represented in "contexts" and strung together in dialogues and (29)
& [% E4 x7 l* ^7 s+ X# ^- a reading passages, but these are essentially setting to make the formal properties of the sentences stand out more clearly, properties which are then established in the learners brain(30)
k4 u( A P* W by means of practice drill and exercises. Basically, the language teaching unit is the (31); W1 i! q x5 y4 C" j$ k
sentence as a formal linguistic object. The language teachers view of what that constitutes knowledge of a language is essentially the same (32)( ~/ F ?1 r% W5 [+ h1 p) c8 p- J
as Chomskys knowledge of a syntactic structure of sentences, (33)
6 r8 G9 M: X1 a1 v! ^ and of the transformational relations which hold them. Sentences are seen as paradigmatically rather than syntagmatically related. Such a knowledge "provides the basis for the actual use of language by the speaker-hearer".; u! O4 w1 ]! M7 r
The assumption that the language appears to make (34)
0 T1 R7 ?! Q# {) N is that once this basis is provided, then the learner will have no difficulty in the dealing with the actual use of language. (35)! z+ s7 F: a; p9 v& N$ X
26.saying改为say% B$ V" B: [9 c, ^* ]! `
27.disconnected改为connected* P# x1 q7 C$ [4 \1 b
28.to改为on) N, `' w8 P! Z4 @
29.represented改为presented1 R6 [ Q5 e% E# o& N" x0 r( A1 E
30.brain改为mind" A/ B0 n% B+ K3 P/ v
31.drill改为drills
1 E+ |7 Q: A7 z; l9 @6 D r! G 32.去掉what后面的that( y% C" i4 q) B
33.去掉knowledge后的a0 d# k, }. q# i, v
34.language后加teacher
3 A6 C& s- [- K1 P 35. 去掉dealing前面的the |
发表于 2012-8-14 11:29:10
