Pocket

前記事「”pedagogical grammar”概念の整理」の補足。Swan (1994)やLeech (1994)を引用したが、同じ

所収のChalker (1994: 31-34)から引用する。

If you ask classroom teachers to define grammar, various definitions emerge. But the word ‘rules’ crops up frequently. Grammar is rules.
If you then ask where the rules come from, this is something that many teachers have not considered. But since they are in awe of grammar, they usually incline to the ‘God’s truth view – the rules are there in the language waiting to be discovered. This attitude – in essence similar to that of American structuralists from the 1930s on, who sought to discover rules objectively by scientific procedures, with little appeal to meaning – has various consequences.
(snip)

「文法」を「(諸)規則」と(のみ)結び付けることがよくあるけど、固定的なものとみなしちゃうとたくさん弊害あるね、というお話。

If the words ‘grammar’ and ‘rules’ are confusing, we might hope for greater clarity by defining grammar as pedagogical. Alas, this term too is ambiguous.
Corder (1975) writes:

Some people prefer to restrict the use of the term [pedagogical grammar] to those statements about, and exemplifications of, the language which are for the use of teachers rather than of learners, the object of which is then to guide the teacher in the way he is to present the language material to his pupils.

Pedagogical grammar, in other words, is grammar for pedagogues. Corder himself appears to take a wider view, but the word is often used in this way by linguists (who ought to know better) entirely without definition; which suggests that for some people this is the only meaning.

「だったら」というので”pedagogical”という概念に期待が集まる訳だが、アラス!悲しいかな、この用語も曖昧だという話。「教師のための文法」の意味に限定する立場があり、ろくに定義もせずにこの意味で使われてきたというお叱り。

However, a different meaning is commonly understood. Greenbaum (1986) asserts:

Pedagogical grammars [that is, grammar books] teach the language and not about the language. They are inherently prescriptive, since their purpose is to tell students what to say or write.

(snip)
In this definition Greenbaum is not alone. Crystal (1987) lists six types of grammar:

  • descriptive
  • pedagogical
  • prescriptive
  • reference
  • theoretical
  • traditional

(snip)

一方で、規範的な性質を組み込んで、a cousebookと同義で使おうとする論者もいるよという話。 実際にほんの形であるかどうかはともかく、Crystal (1987)に至っては6種類に分けてるのさ。

Some resolution of the conflicting definitions of pedagogical grammar – is it for teachers or for learners? – is offered by Dirven (1990). He defines pedagogical grammar as ‘a cover term for any learner- or teacher-oriented description or presentation of foreign language rule complexes with the aim of promoting and guiding learning processes in the acquisition of that language.’ This is a definition which would seem to accommodate both Corder and Greenbaum. Further, he says pedagogical grammar may be descriptive – or prescriptive – and may be a teaching grammar or a reference grammar, thus widening the definitions of Greenbaum and Crystal. …(太字は引用者による)

Dirven (1990)が、こういった定義のふんがふんがを解決する提案・定義をしているよ、という話。Chalkerもこの定義を採用している。

これで、”pedagogic(al) grammar”概念をめぐる議論がもう少し詳しく接続されたわけだが、Dirven (1990)−−のことはシンポの最中は完全に失念していたが−−やChaker (1994)の広い−−悪く言えば何でもありのゆるい−−定義では、Crystal (1987)が挙げたような各「文法」の関係が明確にならないということで、前記事のStern (1992)の分類・整理に基づく議論に至る。

ちなみに拙博論では、この議論、つまり外国語教育における文法教育の内容構成論から、教育方法学一般の問題として高村(1972, 1976)および高村 (編)(1987)のモデル(の解釈)に若干の修正を加えた。

文献(遺漏があったら指摘して下さい):

  • Bygate, Martin, Tonkyn, Alan and Williams, Eddie (eds.). (1994). Grammar and the Language Teacher. New York: Prentice Hall.
  • Chalker, Sylvia (1994). “Pedagogical Grammar: Principles and problems.” In Bygate, Tonkyn, and Williams (eds.). pp. 31-44.
  • Corder, S. Pit (1975). In Allen, J. P. B. and Corder, S. Pit (eds.). The Edinburgh Course in Applied Linguistics 2: 1-15. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Crystal, David (1987). The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Dirven, Rene. (1990). “Pedagogical grammar.” Language Teaching 23(1): 1-18.
  • Greenbaum, S. (1987). “Reference grammars and pedagogical grammars.” World Englishes 6(3): 191-197.
  • Stern, Hans Heinrich (1992). Issues and Options in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • 高村泰雄(1972)「教授学研究の方法論的諸問題(その1)」『北海道大学教育学部紀要』〔No.19〕,pp.1-13.
  • 高村泰雄(1976)「教授過程の基礎理論」『教育の過程と方法』〔講座・日本の教育:6〕新日本出版社,pp. 39-78.
  • 高村泰雄 (編)(1987)『物理教授法の研究:授業書方式による学習指導法の改善』北海道大学図書刊行会
  • 亘理陽一(2008)「外国語としての英語の教育における文法的能力を形成する領域の教育内容構成に関する研究:語用論的原理に基づく比較表現の指導」北海道大学博士学位論文