balancing theory and practice; FAQ?
|From:||dirk elzinga <dirk.elzinga@...>|
|Date:||Saturday, February 26, 2000, 21:13|
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.
> Of course, it would never occur to me to demand that anyone write a
> general tutorial for me. I am only speaking from a theoretical point of
> view here.
No, I didn't understand you to be demanding that anyone write
you a personal phonology tutorial. We used to have a FAQ around
here where lots of these more general interest topics were
discussed--Jack Durst used to host it, IIRC. Is it still around?
> Sorry about the off-topic post.
Not at all! If the Conlang FAQ is now defunct, I think it would
be worthwhile to try to start a new one. There seems to be a bit
of interest in at least a phonology FAQ, and I would be happy to
contribute a short essay or two ...