KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies / 2018 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2

Immersion vs. construction: The portrayals of culture in Indonesian EFL learning paradigm

Pratiğe karşı kuruluş: Endonezya yabancı dil olarak İngilizce öğrenme paradigmasında kültür portreleri

Ruly MORGANNA
Sumardi SUMARDİ
Sri Samiati TARJANA
Sayfa
283–304
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

The last, the given recommendation supported the latter instead of the former perspective for Indonesian EFL learning.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:The status quo of English as the world lingua franca (Choi, 2016; Fang, 2017; Kusumaningputri & Widodo, 2018; Liu & Fang, 2017), the increasing role of English as an additional language for nowadays Indonesian generation (Lauder, 2008), and the nature of Indonesian EFL students as multicultural people (Hamied, 2012; Sukyadi, 2015) became the bases sensitizing the role of culture in Indonesian EFL learning.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Accordingly, this study focused on two objectives pertinent to how Indonesian EFL teachers defined culture and conceptualized language-culture relationship, and how the portrayals of culture were nuanced in their paradigm of EFL learning.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:The last, the given recommendation supported the latter instead of the former perspective for Indonesian EFL learning.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2016 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

The status quo of English as the world lingua franca (Choi, 2016; Fang, 2017; Kusumaningputri & Widodo, 2018; Liu & Fang, 2017), the increasing role of English as an additional language for nowadays Indonesian generation (Lauder, 2008), and the nature of Indonesian EFL students as multicultural people (Hamied, 2012; Sukyadi, 2015) became the bases sensitizing the role of culture in Indonesian EFL learning. Accordingly, this study focused on two objectives pertinent to how Indonesian EFL teachers defined culture and conceptualized language-culture relationship, and how the portrayals of culture were nuanced in their paradigm of EFL learning. Fifteen EFL teachers were engaged and interviewed. As revealed, five varieties of culture-related definitions were shared. They referred to culture as social products, social knowledge, ways of living, communicative behaviors and a communicative discourse construct. Four indicators of language-culture relationship were subsequently conceptualized into language to express culture, language as the cultural symbol, language framed by culture, and language as a cultural mediator. In turn, ten teachers holding modernist perspective and five teachers holding postmodernist perspective provided diverse portrayals of culture in Indonesian EFL learning. The last, the given recommendation supported the latter instead of the former perspective for Indonesian EFL learning.

Abstract

Dünyada lingua franca olarak İngilizce'nin statüsü (Choi, 2016; Fang, 2017; Kusumaningputri & Widodo, 2018; Liu ve Fang, 2017), günümüde Endonezyalılar için İngilizce'nin ek bir dil olarak artan rolü ve çok kültürlü insanlar olarak, İngilizceyi yabancı dil olarak öğrenen Endonezyalı öğrencilerin doğası, (Hamied, 2012; Sukyadi, 2015), Endonezya İngilizce öğreniminde kültürün rolünü hassaslaştıran üsler haline geldi. Buna göre, bu çalışmada Endonezya İngilizce öğretmenlerinin kültürü ve kavramsallaştırılmış dil-kültür ilişkisini nasıl tanımladıklarına ve kültür portrelerinin İngilizce öğrenim paradigmalarında nasıl nüansa ayrıldığına ilişkin iki amaç üzerinde durulmuştur. On beş İngilizce öğretmeni katıldı ve görüşme yapıldı. Sonuçlar, öğretmenlerin kültürle ilgili beş ortak tanım paylaştı. Dil-kültür ilişkisinin dört göstergesi daha sonra kültürü, kültür sembolü olarak dili, kültürün çerçevesini çizdiği dili ve kültür aracı olarak dili ifade etmek için kavramsallaştırıldı. Kültürü sosyal ürünler, sosyal bilgi, yaşam tar zı, iletişimsel davranışlar ve iletişimsel bir söylem yapısı olarak adlandırdılar. Buna karşılık, modernist perspektife sahip on öğretmen ve postmodernist perspektife sahip beş öğretmen, Endonezya İngilizce öğreniminde kültürün çeşitli tasvirlerini sağlamıştır. Son olarak, verilen öneri, Endonezya İngilizce öğrenimi için eski perspektif yerine ikincisini destekledi.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

MORGANNA, R., SUMARDİ, S., TARJANA, S. S. (2018). Immersion vs. construction: The portrayals of culture in Indonesian EFL learning paradigm. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2, 283–304. https://ajindex.com/articles/212671

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (9)

  1. Allen, L. Q. (2004). Implementing a culture portfolio project within a constructivist paradigm. Foreign Language Annals, 37(2), 232–239. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2004.tb02196.x
  2. Assemi, A., Saleh, S., Asayeshh, M. E., & Janfaza, E. (2012). Culture within Language. International Conference on Language, Medias and Culture, 33, 78–82.
  3. Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Frankfurt Lodge, UK: Multilingual Matters LTD. Byram, M., Gribkova, B., & Starkey, H. (2002). Developing the intercultural dimension in language teaching: A practical introduction for teachers. Strasbourg: The Council of Europe. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/1.1.1
  4. Chastain, K. (1988). Developing second-language skills. USA: HBJ Publishers.
  5. Choi, L. J. (2016). Revisiting the issue of native speakerism: “I don”t want to speak like a native speaker of English’. Language and Education, 30(1), 72–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2015.1089887
  6. Crozet, C., & Liddicoat, A. J. (1999). The challenge of intercultural language teaching: Engaging with culture in the classroom. In J. Lo Bianco, A. J. Liddicoat, & C. Crozet (Eds.), Striving for the Third Place: Intercultural Competence through Language Education (p. 113). Melbourne: Language Australia. Dervin, F., Gajardo, A., & Lavanchy, A. (2011). Politics of Interculturality (1st ed.). 12 Back Chapman Street, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2XX, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Elmes, D. (2013). The relationship between language and culture. 鹿屋体育大学学術研究紀要, 46, 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02412.x
  7. Fang, F. G. (2017). World Englishes or English as a Lingua Franca: Where does English in China stand? English Today, 33(1), 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078415000668
  8. FitzGerald, H. (1999). What culture do we teach? In J. Lo Bianco, A. J. Liddicoat, & C. Crozet (Eds.), Striving for the Third Place: Intercultural Competence through Language Education. (p. 127). Melbourne: Language Australia. Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology, 29(2), 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02766777
  9. Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic. The interpretation of Language andMeaning. London: Edward Arnold. Hamied, F. A. (2012). English in Multicultural and Multilin