Search

A "dynamic priority" theory of Chinese second language instruction is outlined and discussed. The theory focuses on five aspects of language instruction: spoken vs. written language; universality vs. particularity; cultural vs. linguistic tasks; performance vs. competence; and proficiency vs. achievement. A dynamic relationship is seen between the two components of each aspect, with instructional priority, in terms of both sequence and amount of time devoted, assigned to one component over the other. "Dynamic" suggests that the component receiving priority varies in different stages of learning. In early instruction, priority is given to spoken Chinese, with written language receiving attention later. Universality (common formal features shared by all languages) has priority over particularity (features unique to Chinese) in all stages of instruction. Linguistic tasks have priority over cultural tasks in early stages of instruction, with cultural tasks taking precedence at the advanced level. Performance (language use) is prominent on the instructional agenda from the first day, with competence (knowledge of language structure) taking a lesser role. Finally, proficiency (communication skills in the context of testing) is to be of higher priority than achievement in testing. Implications of these principles for curriculum design, teaching method, material selection, and testing procedures are examined. (MSE)

It is proposed that in the teaching and testing of Chinese as a foreign language (CFL), emphasis should be placed on features that are universal to all languages rather than particular to Chinese. Shared properties of Chinese and other languages, particularly English, are illustrated through examination of three major language components: phonology, syntax, and semantics. In the realm of phonology, all languages share the same articulatory resources and all sounds can be assigned to 12 categories according to place of articulation. Even in categories traditionally recognized as unique to Chinese, uniqueness is partially exaggerated by spelling conventions. In syntax, Chinese and English share all major syntactic categories such as subject, predicate, object, attributive, adverbial, and complement, and only the rules of assembling the parts differ. With regard to semantics, most semantic features of most languages are similar; for example, all languages possess only three verb types: state, process, and action. It is further proposed that stressing universality in CFL will require: psychological preparation of students; use of old-new information theory in learning; presenting a fair picture of each language; focusing on oral communication; and de-emphasizing the particularity characteristic of research. (MSE)

To date, principles of applied linguistics have been practiced little in the Chinese foreign language (CFL) classroom. Most students of Chinese, the majority of whom are in higher education, are not knowledgeable about linguistics. Most teachers of Chinese in the United States are hired for their interest in Chinese culture or native Chinese language skills, regardless of training in linguistic theory. Most instructional materials are market-oriented and not based on linguistic theory, unlike their recent counterparts for English second language instruction. The linguistic and traditional approaches to teaching CFL differ. Traditionally, foreign language instruction is closely linked to literature study, and classroom techniques are more influenced by individual style than by method. A serious defect of many college CFL curricula is that characters are introduced early in instruction, to the detriment of oral skill development. By contrast, a linguistic approach to teaching CFL recognizes the importance of speaking and emphasizes communicative competence, more appropriate to modern needs. A proposed CFL curriculum focuses on early learning of the system of syllables and tones, use of Romanized Chinese, and the contextual learning of words to reduce confusion about homonyms. Character study comes later. A relatively new communicative textbook is available. (MSE)

Problems in the testing of Chinese as a foreign language (CFL) are examined, focusing on proficiency testing needs and test standardization. Particular attention is paid to listening and reading assessment. The first part of the discussion looks at specific problems with five existing proficiency tests, including such aspects as inadequacy of the test's scope, the threat to validity posed by a bilingual test format, inherent difficulty in reading characters when the test is in Chinese only, and reliability problems arising from the use of authentic materials or nonstandardized texts. The second part of the discussion offers guidelines for designing a standardized CFL test. Guidelines are that: the test should be in Chinese only so that it can be used by all learners of Chinese regardless of background or native language; it should be based on the core of the language, that shared by all Chinese speakers; its content and design should be politically neutral; and close attention must be paid to the cultural loading of test content. Specific procedures for selecting phonological content and vocabulary are outlined. It is suggested that such a test will be increasingly useful as the global economy develops. (MSE)