Toegepaste Taalwetenschap in Artikelen - Volume 15, Issue 1, 1983

Research into the use of language in schoolbooks can be done from several angles: theory of verbal communication, teaching methodology, psychology (of education, of reading, of the reader). Being at the crossroads of so many different disciplines makes research difficult, and this is not conductive to ready application of any results in practice. In the border area between linguistics (in its wider sense) and educational science, publications with a practical dimension are few and far between, most of these resorting to generalities. The perennial problem is: should we opt for adaptation of Schoolbook texts, in other words for 'availability' , or rather for training pupils in reading comprehension (in which case texts may well be difficult)? To complicate matters, the place and function of the Schoolbook within the teaching and learning process are under discussion. The place and function of the Schoolbook are again strongly determined by the phasing of communicative situations or language learning situations. Thus the wheel has come full circle. The question remains, however, where all this leaves the use of language in schoolbooks. In this context the interplay between reader and text cou!d be declared to be the object. The text-approaching skills of the reader and any text processing could be viewed as an integrated approach to text comprehension and text 'availability'. This means that the focus is on the interaction between reader and text, on mobilising meta-cognitive skills and on the improvement of reading for comprehension at primary school level. In the Netherlands this view is represented by such people as Hennephof, Westhoff and Bol; in the Federal Republic of Germany by Groeben. A situationally determined and multilateral approach to the use of language in schoolbooks seems the only sensible one.'Availability' is here used in the sense that it is easy to get access to what is in the text. It is not synonymous with 'readability', but rather with the German "Verständlichkeit'.

Study-texts may give problems to learners because they do not present their contents clearly enough.In order to understand a text one should be able to regard it as a complex of parts, interrelated by specific links. Parts the size of simple sentences may be understood "in one go", i.e. one may grasp them in an internal representation. Larger parts may be understood in abbreviated form, in a representative statement. A complex of larger parts may be understood in their representative statements and the specific relations between them.For the recognition of parts in a text and the recognition of the specific relations between them (which very often are not formulated explicitly or specifically) one requires anticipation based on knowledge, on schemes.For a text to be clear, it must not only be formulated in such a way that the elements at sentence level may be grasped in an inter-nal representation by the reader, and in such a way that the links are easily identifiable. The text must also mark its larger parts and make the representative statements easily recognizable, for instance through frontpositioning in the unit.In addition the text must contain signals which enable the reader to anticipate on the larger parts and their links, thus promoting the identification of the markings and enabling the reader to recog-nize unmarked parts and their links as well.It is demonstrated how a history text may be made more accessible without affecting the contents. Changes in formulation have only been made in so far as they are necessary for increasing the possi-bilities for identification of the structure.

The author reports some data of the research project she is conducting at the Institute of Applied Linguistics, University of Nijmegen (on the acquisition of Dutch by Turkish children in verbal interaction with native peers). The study may be characterized as a longitudinal multiple case-study of the very first stages of second language acquisition. The data were collected within a naturalistic communication situation between five pairs of playmates, each consisting of one Dutch child and one Turkish child.Besides giving a short description of the research project itself, the author describes:- the language used at school, especially the L2-input the Turkish children received in the classroom. The data were collected during unstructured classroom observations.- the language used at home and in the street, especially the L2-input the children received at home and while playing in the street. The data were collected from the parents by means of a questionnaire. The author visited the parents accompanied by the Turkish teacher who explained the questionnaire to them.- the use or rather the non-use of Turkish during child-child interactions. Only one child used Turkish spontaneously during the first weeks. The other four children that were studied did not. Later Turkish was only used during the 'translation games' most children played spontaneously together on several occasions.

In second language acquisition two aspects may be distinguished, namely structure (or order and speed or success) of second language acquisition. The structure of second language acquisition is mainly determined by cognitive strategies and has a strong universal character. Speed, however, is for the greater part determined by the socio-economic background and socio-cultural orientation of the learners and the kind and intensity of contact with the second language.The two aspects distinguished here are object of a 4-year longitudinal research project called 'The speed and Structure of Second Language Acquisition of Turkish and Moroccan Children', which started in June 1981. After a description of the project, the first preliminary results are presented. It is stated that there are large differences between the children in the level of proficiency in Dutch and in the speed of language acquisition, and that, over all, their vocabulary is very weak.

This paper discusses two methods of reading instruction and two methods of language instruction in Friesland (the Netherlands). In this bilingual area two languages, Frisian and Dutch, are taught in elementary education.The first methods of reading instruction in Frisian were published +_ 1950. 'Stap foar Stap' was implemented in a traditional and an experimental orthography. Comparisons clearly showed the advantage of the latter.Currently a new approach is in use. This approach ('Opstap') emphasizes the simultaneous introduction of Frisian and Dutch. Achievement tests in 1981 and 1982 made clear that the results in Frisian are lower than in Dutch.Apparently teachers still pay more attention to Dutch, the national language, than to Frisian.Methods for language instruction have existed since the beginning of this century. The paper presents an analysis of 'De Foargonger' (first edition 1927) and the 'Taaltwirre' (1981).There is a significant difference in style, idiomatic expressions and vocabulary. The 'Taaltwirre' halts between two opinions: a) an old-fashioned approach and b) a new approach based on childcentered education. Through lack of clarification and consequent elaboration of its objectives and the influence of teachers this method has to be considered as a compromise.

Since August 1980 both Frisian and Dutch have been compulsory subjects in the primary schools in the province of Friesland. This article describes the present situation. It begins with a descrip-tion of the motives for bilingual education in Friesland and relates them to the typology of Fishman. This appears to clarify the position of regional languages and dialects in infant and primary education. In the beginning of the eighties the position of the Frisian language in both schooltypes was investigated. About 45% of the teachers of infant groups use Dutch as a medium of instruction in almost all activities, and about 10% does nearly everything in Frisian. The other 45% use both languages; we don't know in which way or proportion. It appears that in musical activities more than one language is used. The other regional dialects of the children are hardly ever used at all.This last statement is at this moment also true for primary schools. Frisian is a subject in almost every school (86%) and a substantial part of the schools (29%) uses it as a medium of instruction. But looking at the desirability of goals as indicated by the schools, it becomes clear that most schools still don't expect their pupils to be able to write Frisian, though most of them say that their main motive for teaching Frisian is to prepare their pupils for functioning in the bilingual culture of Friesland. Too often it seems that the schools fail in respect to at least the Frisian aspects of culture in Friesland.In other words, it may be said that partial and complete bilingu-alism are not yet found in all the infant and primary schools of Friesland. Hopefully this portrait of the state of affairs will turn out to be an instant photo: things are still developing.