SavedAdd your journal

Journals / The Journal of Language Learning and Teaching / 2013 / Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 1

Current perspectives on sociolinguistics and English language education

Yasemin BAYYURT
Pages
69–78
Publication Date
2016-07-14
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In the world today, no country and no culture can claim sole ownership of the English language.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The position and significance of sociolinguistics in foreign language education is examined along three dimensions: attitudes towards learning a foreign language, inclusion of culture in foreign language lessons, and the contribution of planning to foreign language education.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The status of English as an international language is examined and Kachru’s (1985) three-circle model of English speaking countries is reviewed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In the world today, no country and no culture can claim sole ownership of the English language.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:sociolinguistics · foreign language planning · language and culture

Abstract

The position and significance of sociolinguistics in foreign language education is examined along three dimensions: attitudes towards learning a foreign language, inclusion of culture in foreign language lessons, and the contribution of planning to foreign language education. Planning at the highest level must be based on data derived from research and must be conducted by foreign language educators. Curriculum and instruction can be arranged to promote positive attitudes toward the foreign language to be learned and nationalities associated with the language. Inclusion of cultural elements in the foreign language curriculum helps learners to understand new language concepts and provides a context for their use. The status of English as an international language is examined and Kachru’s (1985) three-circle model of English speaking countries is reviewed. In the world today, no country and no culture can claim sole ownership of the English language.

🔖

Cite This Article

BAYYURT, Y. (2016). Current perspectives on sociolinguistics and English language education. The Journal of Language Learning and Teaching, Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 1, 69–78. https://ajindex.com/articles/137747

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Alptekin, C. (2002). Towards intercultural communicative competence in ELT. ELT Journal, 56(1), 57–64.
  2. Baker, W. (2009). The cultures of English as a lingua franca. TESOL Quarterly, 43(4), 567–592.
  3. Bates, D. G., & Plog, F. (1991) Human adaptive strategies. New York: McGraw-Hill. Bayyurt, Y. (2012). Proposing a Model for English Language Education in the Turkish Sociocultural context. In Y. Bayyurt & Y. Bektaş-Çetinkaya (Eds.), Research Perspectives on Teaching and Learning English in Turkey: Policies and Practices (pp. 301-312). Frankfurt: Peter Lang. Bayyurt, Y. (2010).
  4. A sociolinguistic profile of Turkey, Northern Cyprus and other Turkic States in Central Asia. In M. J. Ball (Ed.), Sociolinguistics around the world: A handbook. London: Routledge. Bayyurt, Y. (2006). Non-native English language teachers‟ perspective on culture in English as a Foreign Language classrooms. Teacher Development, 10(2), 233-247.
  5. Bayyurt, Y., & Erçetin, G. (2009). İngiliz Dili Eğitiminde Kültür Kavramının Yeri ve Önemi: Pedagojik bir Yaklaşım. Yayınlanmamış araştırma raporu, TÜBİTAK, Project No: 104K085. Bektaş-Çetinkaya, Y. (2012). Teaching English as an international language and its reflections in Turkey. International Journal of Human Sciences, 9(2), 378- 391. Bektaş-Çetinkaya, Y. & Börkan, B. (2012). Intercultural Communicative Competence of Preservice Language Teachers in Turkey. In Y. Bayyurt & Y. Bektaş-Çetinkaya (Eds.), Research Perspectives on Teaching and Learning English in Turkey: Policies and Practices (pp. 107120). Frankfurt: Peter Lang. Belcher, D. (2006). English for specific purposes: Teaching to perceived needs and imagined futures in worlds of work, study, and everyday life. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 133–156.
  6. Berns, M. (2005). Expanding on the expanding circle: where do WE go from here? World Englishes, 24(1), 85–93.
  7. Bhatt, R. (2005). Expert discourses, local practices, and hybridity: The case of Indian Englishes. In A.S. Canagarajah (Ed.), Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice (pp. 25-54).
  8. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.
  9. Braine, G. (2005). Teaching English to the World: History, Curriculum and Practice. London: Routledge. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002).
  10. Veri Analizi El Kitabı. İstatistik, Araştırma Deseni ve Yorum. Ankara:
  11. Pegem Yayıncılık. Canagarajah, A. S. (2006). The Place of World Englishes in Composition: Pluralization Continued. College Composition and Communication, 57(4), 586-619.
  12. Canagarajah, A. S. (2005). Dilemmas in planning English/v