Re: balancing theory and practice; FAQ?
|From:||And Rosta <a.rosta@...>|
|Date:||Monday, February 28, 2000, 9:22|
> On Sat, 26 Feb 2000, Fredrik Ekman wrote:
> > Dirk wrote:
> > > I agree with And; phonology is best acquired by doing and practicing,
> > > rather than by trying to assimilate large chunks of expository
> > > writing.
> > While not a linguist, I am something of a pedagogist, and I do not quite
> > agree here. While practice and experience is important in all learning (or
> > should be) it is also best balanced by a healthy dose of theory.
> > Assimilation and accomodation are both important for the learning process.
> Perhaps I should clarify. My take on the matter is that
> phonology is best learned with clear examples on hand of the
> phenomenon under discussion. I assume that this discussion will
> include relevant theory. However, theory in absence of specific
> data is not much help. I think this is true for any branch of
> I assumed that And meant something similar. Of course, he may
> have meant something entirely different.
I meant the same as you. To have discussions on conlang data, though,
we need conlangs whose phonologies are comprehensively documented in
at least some interesting respects. E.g. Tepa, Tokana, Amman-iar, Boreanesian.
I will soon have available a Word file giving a completely comprehensive
description of Livagian phonology, superseding the 1997 version that some