(1-3)2011Applied Linguistics

Applied Linguistics (1-3) Course description Applied linguistics (AL) addresses real-world problems in which language is a central issue by mediating['mi:dieit] 调解;斡旋between theory and practice. As language pervades real-world events and activities, the field has an extensive coverage. Any single course has to be selective in topics to be included. The focus of the course is conceived with special consideration of China‘s language education needs in her modernization process and against a world-wide congenial[k?n'd?i:nj?l] 一致的research climate in the field. Starting with a brief overview of the field, the course focuses on key issues in second language education, drawing on (利用) theoretical perspectives观点and research findings in language and linguistics, cognitive psychology and psycholinguistics studies, and education. To accommodate 适应possible broad needs, the course may also touch upon selected topics of current concern. The objectives of the course include 1) to familiarize the participants with the nature, scope, principles and practice in applied linguistic research; 2) to develop a critical stance 批判立场to discussions concerned in selected literature, especially against English language education in China; 3) to help the participants lay a foundation in conducting research in applied linguistics. 1 Topics to deal with in this course Part one: An overview of applied linguistics 1. Introduction--The basic conceptions of applied linguistics 2. The fields of applied linguistics 3. The development of applied linguistics Part two: description of language and language use 4. Grammar 5. V ocabulary 6. Discourse analysis 7. Corpus linguistics Part three: The relationship between applied linguistics and other studies 8. Applied linguistics and language 9. Applied linguistics and linguistics 10. Applied linguistics and second language acquisition 11.Applied linguistics and psycholinguistics Part four: Essential areas of enquiry ([in'kwai?ri] a search for knowledge)in applied linguistics (主要研究领域) 12. Second language acquisition 13. Psycholinguistics 14. Sociolinguistics 15. Focus on the language learner: Motivation, style and strategies Part five: Language skills and assessment 16. Second language pedagogy: A post method perspective 17. The teaching of the four skills 18. The history of language testing development—the approaches to language testing 19. The classification and features of good language tests 20. Drawing up test specifications 21. The testing of grammar and vocabulary 22. The testing of listening and reading skills 23. The testing of speaking and writing skills 24.Interpreting and using test results 25.Formative assessment References 1.Bell, Roger T. 1981. An Introduction to Applied Linguistics (Approaches and methods in Language Teaching). London: Batsford Academic and Educational Ltd. 2.Davies, A. & Elder, C (eds). 2005. The handbook of applied linguistics. London: Blackwell. 3.Els, van Theo. 198 4. Applied Linguistics and the Learning and Teaching of Foreign Languages. London: Edward Arnold Ltd 4.McCarthy, Michael. 2001. Issues in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 5.Jia Guanjie (贾冠杰). Applied Linguistics: An Advanced Course. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press 6.蔡金亭,何英玉. 2004. Applied Linguistics. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press 7.Heaton, J.B. 2000. Writing English Language Tests. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press 8.Hughes, A. 2000. Testing for Language Teachers. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press 9.韩美竹. 2007. An Introduction to English Language Testing. 北 京:中国书籍出版社 10.Schmitt, N. (ed). 2002/2008. An introduction to applied linguistics. London: Edward Arnold/世界图书出版公司。(An accessible introduction to the field by a team of leading specialists in respective areas covered) Journals: Applied Linguistics International Journal of Applied linguistics Annual Review of Applied linguistics Modern Language Journal TESOL Quarterly Language Learning 外语教学与研究 中国外语、中国外语教育 现代外语、外语界 外语教学理论与实践 外语与外语教学、外语研究等 Part one: An overview of applied linguistics 1.Introduction: The basic conceptions of applied linguistics What is Applied Linguistics? ?Applied linguistics‘ is using what we know about a) language, b) how it is learned and c) how it is used, in order to achieve some purpose or solve some problem in the real world. Those purposes are many and varied, as is evident in a definition given by Wilkins (1999:7): In a broad sense, applied linguistics is concerned with increasing understanding of the role of language in human affairs and thereby(在那方面)with providing the knowledge necessary for those who are responsible for taking language-related decisions whether the need for these arises in the classroom, the workplace, the law court, or the laboratory. Applied linguistics is a new, independent and interdisciplinary science with its own theories, principles and research methods. An agreement has emerged regarding some aspects of applied linguistics, to the degree that the term applied linguistics can be applied both in narrow, technical sense and in a broad, general sense. But linguists disagree about many other aspects of the field, including the theories of applied linguistics: some say that applied linguistics is only the application of the existing discipline of linguistics, while others say that applied linguistics does have its own theoretical approaches. Therefore, the first issue this course will examine in the 1st part is to discuss the definition and the fields of applied linguistics. It is very difficult for linguists and applied linguists to be in agreement about the exact definition of applied linguistics, some definitions focusing on both theory and practice, while others only on practice. Defining ―applied linguistics‘ has always been difficult (Cook and Seidlhofer, 1995). Many researchers have written at length on what the term ?applied linguistics‘ means. This fact along could be taken to demonstrate that a purely semantic definition of the field will fail; if the fields indeed were what the combination of the words ?applied‘ and ?linguistics‘ means, then the terminological problem would have been solved a long time ago. In all applied sciences the aim is to achieve or help to achieve goals which are outside the actual realm of the sciences themselves. Applied linguistics is, therefore, not the same as linguistics; neither is it a subsection of linguistics. In this section some researchers‘ definitions are discussed. J. Baudouin de Courtenay proposed the term ―applied linguistics‘ in 1970. According to the ― Recommendation for Good Practice‖ published by the British Association of Applied Linguistics in 1994, ―Applied linguistics is both an approach to understanding language issues in the real world, drawing on (use) theory and empirical analysis实证分析, and an interdisciplinary area of study, in which linguistics is combined with issues, methods and perspectives drawn (gained) from other disciplines. In the course of their work, which includes teaching, research, administration, and consultancy[k?n's?lt?nsi] 顾问工作, applied linguists often face a variety of conflicting interests and competing obligations (duty). This section aims to assist applied linguists in their awareness and response to these dilemmas and the choices they need to make. The term can also be seen from the following definition by Corder (1974:5): Applied linguistics is the utilization of the knowledge about the nature of language achieved by linguistic research for the improvement of the efficiency of some practical task in which language is a central component. In contrast, another description defines the field as simply the practical extension of pure linguistics to various applications: ―Applied linguistics is the discipline of applying linguistic theory to practical fields. The findings of pure linguists, sociolinguists and psycholinguists can be practically applied to, among other things, speech therapy语言障碍矫正;言语治疗, literary criticism, computer technology, lexicograph y词典编纂and the teaching of languages‖ (Huang cidong, 1988). Simil arly, the University of Melbourne‘s definition stresses practical functions rather than scholarship(学术) or theory: Applied linguistics is concerned with practical issues involving language in the life of the community. The most important of these is the learning of second or foreign languages. Others include language policy, multilingualism多语制,官方多语言主义, language education, the preservation and revival of endangered languages, and the assessment and treatment of language difficulties. When asked the question why to study applied linguistics, some linguists give the answer: Applied linguistics is an interdisciplinary field of research and instruction which integrates ideas from linguistics, psychology, sociology, anthropology, education, and languages into a distinct独特的field focusing on the learning and teaching of second languages. Applied linguists examine and work on the issues involved in the teaching and learning of a second/foreign language. Dai Weid ong, et al. (2002) claim that ―in a narrow sense applied linguistics refers to the application of linguistic theories and principles to language teaching, especially the teaching of foreign language‖. ―Applied linguistics, in a narrow sense, has its own specific meaning, which refers to language teaching, especially, to second language teaching or foreign language teaching.‖ (Gui, 1985). Professor Gui offers several different definitions of applied linguistics in his lecture notes (Gui ―Homepage‖, 2001) as follows: ―Macro-applied linguistics: The study of language and linguistics in relation to practical problems.‖ ―Micro-applied linguistics: The study of second and foreign language learning and teaching (Richards, et al, 1985).‖ Applied linguistics is the study of second and foreign language learning and teaching; and the study of language and linguistics in relation to practical problems. Applied linguistics uses information from sociology, psychology, anthropology, and information theory as well as from linguistics in order to develop its own theoretical models of language and language use, and then uses this information and theory in practical areas such as syllabus design, speech therapy, language planning, stylistics, etc. 冯志伟(Applied Linguistics by 何英玉,蔡金亭):应用语言学是一门综合性的学科,具有跨学科性质,因场合和任务的不同,可以采用不同学科的知识理论去解决语言应用的各个方面问题。如它在解决机器翻译,外语教学,语言障碍与规划等问题时,除了应用一般的语言理论和语言描述的成果之外,还分别应用了计算机,翻译,教学法,解剖学,心理学,病理学,社会学,民族学等学科的理论。应用语言学正是在语言学与其他学科的交接点上发展起来的,决不只是把现成的语言知识或语言理论拿来应用一番。有广义应用语言学和狭义应用语言学之分: 广义:指语言学知识和研究成果所应用的一切领域和方面,即语言学与其他学科相互交叉渗透所产生的一切边缘学科。 狭义:指语言学知识和研究成果所应用的某一领域或方面,即语言学与其他学科相互交叉渗透所产生的某一边缘学科。各国有所不同。英美通常指语言教学,尤其是第二语言教学或外语教学。应用语言学的独立性,综合性,应用性和实验性是它区别于理论 语言学和描述语言学的四个重要性质。(55――65)… 应用语言学是研究语言在各个领域中实际应用的学科,是语言学的一个分支部门。语言学中,应用语言学与理论语言学和描写语言学鼎足,它们分属语言研究的三个方面并有所分工:理论语言学着重探讨语言的一般理论问题,描写语言学着重描述语言的具体结构方式和组合规律,应用语言学研究语言在各个领域中实际应用的规律和功能。但从研究对象看,前两者一般谈的都是语言本身的问题,因而属于内部语言学的范畴;而应用语言学所谈的却不限于语言自身,它与自然学科和社会学科产生交叉和结合,并别的学科的理论和 方法 快递客服问题件处理详细方法山木方法pdf计算方法pdf华与华方法下载八字理论方法下载 来研究语言,所以属于外部语言学的范畴。 2. The fields of applied linguistics What are the fields of applied linguistics? It is a challenging question to answer, for applied linguistics cover very large areas of linguistics. In a word, all the sub-branches of linguistics could be called applied linguistics except the theoretical linguistics. The scope of the 13th World Congress of Applied Linguistics in 2002 (AILA Association Internationale de Linguistique Appliquee ) conference lists 47 areas in applied linguistics. These areas both reflected and constituted the variety of possible areas of study within the discipline. The organizing committee of the Congress requires that all the papers should aim to provide new perspectives in the following areas (47): 1.Adolescent language learning 2.Adult language learning 3.Artificial Intelligence 4.Bilingualism and Multilingualism 5.Child Language and Early Child Education 6.Computational Linguistics 7.Contrastive Linguistics and Error Analysis 8.Corpus Linguistics 9.Intercultural Communication 10.Interpreting and Translation 11.IT, Internet, and Language Learning 12.Language and Mind 13.Language and the Media 14.Language for Special Purposes 15.Language Planning and Language policy 16.Language Teaching Methodology and Teacher Education 17.Learner Autonomy in Language Learning 18.Lexicography and Lexicology 19.Mother Tongue Education 20.Pragmatics 21.Psycholinguistics 22.Rhetoric and Stylistics 23.Second Language Acquisition 24.Sign Language 25.Sociolinguistics 26.Writing of Grammars The call for papers for the American Association o f Applied Linguistics (AAAL) 2002 conference, which lists 18 topic areas:·language and its acquisition ·language and assessment ·language and the brain ·language and culture ·language and ideology ·language and instruction ·language and interaction ·language and listening ·language and media ·language and policy ·language and reading ·language and research methodology ·language and society ·language and speaking ·language and technology ·language and translation/interpretation ·language and writing Concerning the fields of applied linguistics, Guy Cook and Barbara Seidlhofer‘s work also can provide some useful information: Principles & Practice in Applied Linguistics (应用语言学的原理与实践,上外社) 1.An applied linguist in principle and practice 2.Teacher professionalism and research 3.The applied linguist and the foreign language teacher: can they talk to each other? 4.Concept and conduct in language pedagogy 5.Appraising second language acquisition theory in relation to language pedagogy 6.Analysability ['?n?,laiz?'bil?ti], accessibility [?k,ses?'bil?ti], and ability for use 7.Situational context, variation, and second language acquisition theory 8.Three functions of output in second language learning 9.Proficiency of the native speaker: what we are trying to achieve in ELT? 10.Grammar and lexis in communicative competence 11.Cultural meaning and the rhetorical styles: toward a framework for contrastive rhetoric 12.The paralinguistics of reference: representation in reported discourse 13.Grammar in discourse: attitude and deniability Out of these numerous areas, the dominant application has always been the teaching and learning of second or foreign languages. Around the world, a large percentage of people, and a majority in some areas, speak more than one language. Also, in some countries, a second language is a necessary ?common denominator [di'n?mineit?]‘公分母/共同特征(lingua franca通用语) when the population speaks a variety of different L1. English is the main second language being studied in the world today with an estimated 235 million L2 learners. Traditionally, the primary concern of applied linguistics has been second language acquisition theory, second language pedagogy and the interface between the two, and it is these areas which this course will mainly cover. It is also useful to consider briefly some of the areas of applied linguistics in order to further give some sense of the breadth of issues in the field. Conclusion In this introductory chapter, some general issues of applied linguistics are discussed. As for the definition of applied linguistics, researchers have not reached an agreement. Some definitions are very general, others more specific. As for the fields of applied linguistics, it is very difficult for people to list all that are concerned, for it covers very large areas. We can only discuss part of it in this chapter. 3. The Development of Applied Linguistics 3.1 In a narrow sense—study of languages and language teaching 3.1.1 Early History Since the primary concern of applied linguistics has been second language acquisition theory, second language pedagogy and the interface between the two, we can discuss the development of applied linguistics from the history of studying language and language teaching. Interest in languages and language teaching has a long history, and we can trace this back at least as far as the ancient Hreeks. If focus on English, major attempts at linguistic description began to occur in the second half of the 18th century. In 1755, Samuel Johnson published his Dictionary of the English Language, which quickly became the unquestioned authority on the meanings of English words. It also had the effect of standardizing English spelling, which until that time had been relatively free (for example, the printer William Caxton complained in 1490 that eggs could be spelled as eggys or egges or even eyren depending on the pronunciation). About the same time, Robert Lowth published an influential grammar, Short Introduction to English Grammar (1762), but whereas Johnson sought to describe English vocabulary by collecting thousands of examples of how English words were actually used, Lowth prescribed what ?correct‘ grammar should be. He had no specialized linguistic background to do this, and unfortunately based his English grammar on a classical Latin model, even though the two languages are organized in quite different ways. The result was that English, which is Germanic language, was described by a linguistic system (parts of speech) which is borrowed from Latin, which had previously borrowed from Greek. The process of prescribing, rather than describing, has left us with English grammar rules which are mush too rigid to describe actual language usage: ·no multiple negatives (I don‘t need no help from nobody) ·no split infinitive (So we need to really think about all this from scratch.) ·no ending a sentence with a preposition (I don‘t know what it is made of.) These rules made little sense even when Lowth wrote them, but through the ages both teachers and students have generally disliked ambiguity, and so Lowth‘s notions of grammar were quickly adopted once in print as the rules of ?correct‘ English. 3.1.2 Applied Linguistics during the 20th Century An Overview of the Century The real acceleration of change in linguistic description and pedagogy occurred during 20th century, in which a number of movements influenced the field only to be replaced or modified by subsequent developments. At the beginning of the century, second languages were usually taught by the grammar-translation method, which had been in use since the late 18th century, but was fully codified in the 19th century by Larl Plotz(1819-1881), cited in Kelly(1969:53, 220). A lesson would typically have one or two new grammar rules, a list of vocabulary items, and some practice examples to translate from L1 into L2 or vice versa. The approach was originally reformist in nature, attempting to make language learning easier, through the use of example sentences instead of whole texts. However, the method grew into a very controlled system, with a heavy emphasis on accuracy and explicit grammar rules, many of which were quite obscure. The content focused on reading and writing literary materials, which highlighted the archaic vocabulary found in the classics. As the method became increasingly pedantic, a new pedagogical direction was needed. One of the main problems with Grammar-translation was that it focused on the ability to ?analyze‘language, and not the ability to ?use‘ it. In addition, the emphasis on reading and writing did little to promote an ability to communicate orally in the target language. By the beginning of the 20th century, new use-based ideas had grown together into what became known as ?Direct method‘. This emphasized exposure to orally language, with listening and speaking as the primary skills. Meaning was related directly to the target language, without the step of translation, while explicit grammar teaching was also downplayed. It imitated how a mother tongue is learnt naturally, with listening first, then speaking and only later reading and writing. The focus was squarely on use of the second language, with stronger proponents banishing all use of the L1 in the classroom. The Direct method has its own problems, however. It required teachers to be highly proficient in the target language, which was not always possible. Also it mimicked L1 learning, but did not take into account the differences between L1 and L2 acquisition. One key difference is that L1 language learners have abundant exposure to the target language, which the ?Direct method‘ could not hope to match. In the UK, Michael West was interested in creasing learner‘s exposure to language through reading. His ?Reading method‘attempted to make this possible by promoting reading skills through vocabulary management. To improve the readability of his textbooks, he ?substituted low-frequency ―literary‖words with more frequent items. He also controlled the number of new words which could appear in any text. These steps had the effect of significantly reducing the lexical load for readers. This focus on vocabulary management was part of a greater approach called the ?V ocabulary Control Movement‘, which eventually resulted in a book called the General Service List of English Words (West, 1953), which listed the most useful 2000 words in English. The three methods, Grammar-translation, the Direct Method and the Reading Method, continued to hold sway until World War II. During the war, the weaknesses of all the above approaches became obvious, as the American military found itself short of people who were conversationally fluent in foreign languages. It needed a way of training soldiers in oral and aural skills quickly. American structural linguistics stepped into the gap and developed a program which borrowed from the ?Direct method‘, especially its emphasis on listening and speaking. It drew its rationale from the dominant psychological theory of the time, ?Behaviorism‘, that essentially said that language learning was a result of habit formation. Thus the method included activities which were believed to reinforce ?goo d‘language habits, such as close attention to pronunciation, intensive oral drilling, a focus on sentence patterns and memorization. In short, students were expected to learn through drills rather than through an analysis of the target language. The students who went through this ?Army method‘ were mostly mature and highly motivated, and their success was dramatic. This success meant that the method naturally continued on after the war, and it came to be known as ?Audiolingualism‘. Chomsky‘s (1959) attack on the behaviorist underpinnings (基础,支柱) of structural linguistics in the late 1950s proved decisive, and its associated pedagogical approach—?audiolingualism‘—began to fall out of favor. Supplanting the behaviorist idea of habit-formation, language was now seen as governed by cognitive factors, in particular a set of abstract rules which were assumed to be innate. Chomsky (1959) suggested that children form hypotheses about their language that they tested out in practice. Some would naturally be incorrect, but Chomsky and his followers argued that children do not receive enough negative feedback from other people about these inappropriate language forms (negative evidence) to be able to discard them. Thus, some other mechanism must constrain the type of hypotheses generated. Chomsky (1959) posited that children are born with an understanding of the way languages work, which was referred to as ?Universal Grammar‘. They would know the underlying principles of language (for example, languages usually have pronouns) and their parameters (some languages allow these pronouns to be dropped when in the subject position). Thus, children would need only enough exposure to a language to determine whether their L1 allowed the deletion of pronouns or not. This parameter-setting would require much less exposure than a habit-formation route, and so appeared a more convincing argument for how children learned language so quickly. In the early 1970s, Hymes (1972) added the concept of ?communicative competence‘, which emphasized that language competence consists of more than just being able to ?form grammatically correct sentences but also to know when and where to use these sentences and to whom‘(Richards, Platt and Weber, 1985:49). This helped to swing the focus from language ?correctness‘ (accuracy) to how suitable any use of language was for a particular context (appropriacy). At the same Halliday‘s (1973) systemic-functional grammar was offering an alternative to Chomsky‘s approach, in which language was seen not as something exclusively internal to a learner, but rather as a means of functioning in society. Halliday (1973) identified three types of function: ●ideational (概念的telling people facts or experience) ●interpersonal (maintaining personal relationships with people) ●textual (expressing the connections and organization within a text, for example, clarifying, summarizing, signaling the beginning and end of an argument). This approach to language highlighted its communicative and dynamic nature. These and other factors pushed the field towards a more communicative type of pedagogy. In the mid-1970s, a Council of Europe project (van EK, 1976) attempted to create a Europe-wide language teaching system which was based on a survey of L2 learners‘needs (needs analysis) and was ―based on semantic categories related to those needs, including the relevant concepts (notions) and use of languages (functions). The revised version 1998 lists six broad categories of language functions. ●imparting (传递) and seeking functional information ●expressing and finding out attitudes ●getting things done (suasion劝告) ●socializing ●structuring discourse ●communication repair In addition, eight general categories of notions were listed, which are shown here with representative examples of their sub-classes: ●existential (existence, presence, availability) ●spatial (location, motion, size) ●temporal (indications of time, duration, sequence) ●quantitative (number, quantity, degree) ●qualitative, color, age, physical condition) ●mental (reflection, expression of ideas) ●relational (logical relations, effect) ●deixis['daiksis]直示(系统);(定冠词、指示代词等的)指 示功能(anaphoric[,?n?'f?rik] 前照应的and non-anaphoric proforms['pr?uf?:m]【语法学】[转换语法用 语]代词形式(如I can't understand, Latin but she does. 中的does) articles). The materials from this project were influential (for example, Threshold Level), and textbooks based on a national-functional syllabus became widespread. In the early 1980s, a theory of acquisition promoted by Krashen (1982) focused attention on the role of input. Krashen‘s ?Monitor theory‘ posited假定that a second language was mainly unconsciously acquired through exposure to ?comprehensible input‘rather than being learnt through explicit exercises, that it required a focus on meaning rather than on form and that a learner‘s emotional state can affect this acquisition (affective filter). The pedagogical implications of this theory were that classrooms should supply a rich source of language exposure that was meaning-based and understandable, always including some elements just beyond the current level of learners‘ ability(i+1). The methodology which developed from these factors emphasized the use of language for meaningful communication—communicative language teaching (CLT) (Littlewood, 1981). The focus was on learners‘ message and fluency rather than their grammatical accuracy. It was often taught through problem-solving activities and tasks which required students to transact information, such as information gap exercises. In these, on student is given information, the other does not have, with the two having to negotiate the exchange of that information. Taken further, students could be taught some non-language related subject, such as history or politics, in the L2 language. The assumption was that the learners would acquire the L2 simply by using it to learn the subject matter content, without the L2 being the focus of explicit instruction. Taking the communicative approach to its logical extreme, students could be enrolled in ?immersion‘programs where they attended primary or secondary schools which taught subject matter only in the L2. Results from this kind of immersion program, such as learners could indeed become quite fluent in a L2 through exposure without explicit instruction, and that they developed excellent receptive skills. However, they also showed that the learners continued to make certain persistent grammatical errors, even after many years of instruction. In other words, a communicative approach helped learners to become fluent, but was insufficient to ensure comparable levels of accuracy. It seems as if a certain amount of explicit instruction focusing on language form may be necessary as well. The current focus-on-form movement (for example, Doughty and Williams, 1998) is an attempt to inject well-considered explicit instruction back into language lessons without abandoning the positive features and results of the communicative approach. Just as language pedagogy developed and advanced during this time, so did the field of language assessment. Until 1980s, tests were evaluated according to three principal criteria: ●?Validity (did the test really measure what it was supposed to measure?) ●Reliability (did the test perform consistently from one administration to the next?) ●Practicality (was the test practical to give and mark in a particular setting?) These criteria focused very much on the test itself, and took little notice of the effects it might have on the people (stakeholders利益相关者) involved with it. Messick (1989) changed this with a seminal (开创性的) paper which argued that tests could not be considered ?valid‘or ?not valid‘in a black and white manner by focusing only on test-internal factors; rather, one needed to argue for the validity of a test by considering a variety of factors: for what kind of examinee was the test suitable; what reasonable inferences could be derived from the scores?; how did the test method affect the scores?; what kind of positive or negative effect (?washback‘) might the test have on stakeholders? And many others. Now tests are seen in the context of a complete assessment environment, which includes stakeholders (for example, examinees, raters, administrators, government officials), test conditions (for example, can everyone hear the tape recorders clearly), the intended use of the scores (for example, will they be used for relatively ?high-stakes‘purposes (university admission) versus relatively ?low-stake‘purposes (a classroom quiz) and characteristics of the test itself (Are the instruction clear? What kind of tasks does the test employ?) Within this framework, tests are generally seen as being suitable for particular purposes and particular sets of learners, rather than ?one size fits all‘. Since every class and group of learners is somewhat different, there has been a move towards exploring the value of alternative types of assessment which can be individualized to suit particular situations. These include structured observation, progress grids, portfolios, learning journals, project work, peer assessment and self-assessment. Technology was advancing throughout the century, but the advent ['?dv?nt] 到来;出现of powerful and affordable personal computers probably has had the greatest impact on applied linguistics. Of course, language labs had utilized technology since mid-1940s, but the relatively recent development of very capable personal computers made quite sophisticated language programs available to the individual user, whether learner, teacher, or researcher. Pedagogically, this opened the door to ?computer-assisted language learner (CALL), where learners could work on individual computers truly at their own pace. Computer technology has also facilitated the incorporation of audio and video input into learning programs on a scale previously unimaginable. The best of the current programs are starting to become interactive, tailoring their input and tasks to individual learners‘ progress, although it must be said that much remains to be done in this area. With new learning programs arriving regularly, today CALL is one of the more dynamic areas in applied linguistics. Computing technology also made it possible to analyze large databases of language, called ?corpora‘. Evidence from corpora has provided numerous insights into the workings of language. Perhaps the most important revelation is the vast amount of lexical pattering which exists; in fact, it is so great that some scholars have suggested that it is more important than grammar in contributing to the organization of language. Corpora are now a key tool in lexicography, and have been consulted in the development of most current learner dictionaries. Evidence from corpora of spoken discourse has also highlighted使显著the differences between spoken and written discourse. Happily, corpora have now made truly descriptive grammars possible, with writers having numerous authentic examples of many grammatical structures at their fingertips. The best studies in this area can even distinguish varying language usage between different registers, for example written fiction versus academic prose (Biber, Johanssion, Leech, Conrad and Finegan, 1999). It is likely that evidence from corpus linguistics will continue to have a major influence on applied linguistic thinking well into the new millennium. 3.1.3 Applied linguistics in China The study of applied linguistics started in Western countries in the late 1940s; however, it developed in the 1980s in China. Most notably, Guangd ong University of Foreign Studies has achieved some ―firsts‖ in this area (p47). Gui Shichun wrote the 1st book on applied Linguistics, Applied Linguistics (1988); The 1st conference of applied linguistics was held in Guangzhou; The 1st program of applied linguistics for doctor-degree graduates was set up in GUFS in 1986. 3.1.4 The future of applied linguistics Kaplan and Grabe (2000) predicted four trends of the future of applied linguistics: Firstly, in the future, the field of AP will be defined by greater uses of technology and computer applications. Computer literacy will become an essential component of training for new applied linguists. These computer uses will be seen in new statistical approaches, computer-based testing and language learning, connectionist research on learning, technology and literacy development, corpus linguistics research and lexicography, and translation research. Tied to computer uses and technology applications will be changes in testing that better reflect recent views on validity and performance assessment. Secondly, a more powerful version of descriptive linguistics (描写语言学) will be treated as the central linguistic resource for research. The development of corpus linguistics is now revealing facts about language use and language variation across registers that are essential for addressing practical issues but that may be largely incompatible with many current theoretical models in linguistics. Goals will centre around understanding new facts about language rather than having language facts forced to fit preconceived theory. The return to descriptively powerful research will be enhanced by computer applications; by studies of language uses in legal, medical, scientific, and business contexts; by research at the discourse level; and by the power of descriptive analysis to provide relatively theory-neutral data for future linguistic theorizing. Thirdly, the increasing importance of evaluation and assessment practices will be another trend. The centrality of construct validity as driving force in language testing is already spreading beyond the boundaries of testing and into other areas of applied linguistics. In second language acquisition, there is a growing recognition that validity of task and test data is a central concern—researchers need to collect and interpret responsible evidence in support of theoretical claims. Evaluation and assessment issues are no longer only the concern of language testers; a sophisticated evaluation and assessment practices will be a key concern for all future applied linguistics researches. Fourthly, student learning is the final trend changing applied linguistics in new ways. This trend will manifest itself both for all students learning languages and for undergraduate and post-graduate students studying applied linguistics. Language students will become familiar with new technologies for learning. They will become more engaged in autonomous learning while also working collaboratively within groups. They will have greater access to resources to support their learning, and they will receive more rapid feedback on their learning progress. All of these features of language learning will be even more prominent among programs that train applied linguists. Students of AP will need to master a wide range of technological skills as central components of their training. They will need to work collaboratively on research projects, as inter-disciplinary cooperation and the common use of research teams become essential to deal with larger problems implication a broader range of disciplines and human resources. Of course, these students of applied linguistics will also need correct and broad knowledge of linguistics and, in all likelihood, of at least one related field. 3.2 In a broad sense—as an independent discipline When was applied linguistics established? Many scholars agree that it was done in 1940s. One milestone was the appearance of the journal Language Learning (1948), for the subtitle is ―Journal of Applied Linguistics‖. It was the first one named applied linguistics. ―During the 40s, a new linguistic discipline—applied linguistics –was introduced. For some time it catered only to the application of the results of language study in foreign language teaching and all the related tasks, such as course planning and the preparation of teaching materials…(Olga Miseska, et al, 1987). Considering that applied linguistics as a unified field of study came into being only in the late 1950s. It has blossomed and diversified in a remarkably rapid way. The term ―applied linguistics‖ has being in use at least since the founding of the University of Edinburgh School of Applied Linguistics in 1956, and of the Centre for Applied Linguistics in Washington, DC., in 1957 (Strievens, 1992). The multiplication of sub-fields was gradual in the first several decades of the emergence of applied linguistics. When the Association Internationale de Linguistique Appliquee (AILA) was founded in 1964, they considered two areas: FLT (foreign language teaching) and automatic translation to be the main interests of applied linguistics. By the 8th World Congress of Applied Linguistics (1987), there had been 31 groups and 19 scientific commissions. And the 13th World Congress of Applied Linguistics (2002) has covered 47 areas of applied linguistics. 1) World Congresses of Applied Linguistics (p27) 2) Some main associations of applied linguistics in the world AILA/IAAL(Association Internationale de Linguistique Appliquee/ International Association of Applied Linguistics) AAAL (American Association of Applied Linguistics) BAAL (British Association of Applied Linguistics) ACLA/CAAL (Association Canadienne de Linguistique Appliquee/ Canadian Association of Applied Linguistics) ALAA (Applied Linguistics Association of Australia) ALANZ (Applied Linguistics Association of New Zealand) 3) Some journals of applied linguistics Applied Linguistics (OUP) Annual Review of Applied Linguistics International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching International Journal of Applied Linguistics TESOL Quarterly Studies in Second Language Acquisition Second Language Research 3.3 The theories of applied linguistics Does applied linguistics have unique theories? Some people say YES, others, NO. With the development of applied linguistics, more and more researchers focus on the theories of applied linguistics. Yu Genyuan (1999), an applied linguist discusses the following seven theories of applied linguistics: vague theory of language; interlanguage; the dynamic theory of language; levels of language; humanist theory of language; hidden and displaying theory of language; functional and explanation grammar (function grammar, system and function grammar, cognitive grammar, etc.) The search for a theory of applied linguistics is surely misconceived. Applied linguistics does not need a unitary theory; what it requires is openness to influences and theories from elsewhere, so that professional applied linguists can adopt a theorizing approach to language problems.‖ Conclusion In this part we have discussed the development of AP both home and abroad. As we have seen, it is an independent field, with its own object of study, and has its own theories. It plays an important role not only in the language teaching and learning, but also in society. More and more people are interested in it and many researchers and applied linguists are doing further research and experiments to boost its development. 36