Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T13:35:32.051Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Simple Codes’ and the Source of the Second Language Learner's Initial Heuristic Hypothesis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

S. P. Corder
S. P. Corder
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Linguistic theory must be sufficiently rich and comprehensive to be able to account for the structure of the most complex or elaborate manifestation of language. In consequence any structurally less complex verbal behaviour is typically explained as a use of some ‘reduced’ or ‘simplified’ code or register. Many languages, if not all, are said to possess such reduced registers and it is said to be part of a native speaker's competence to be able to use such ‘reduced registers’ where appropriate. It is part of his total communicative competence to know when it is appropriate to use such registers. These reduced or simplified registers are associated with more or less well defined situations of language use or types of discourse. Telegraphese is obviously restricted by the medium of transmission as well as the restricted range of communicative functions it is used for, e.g. orders, reports and announcements of plans. Technical description in botanical and ornithological reference books have a purely referential function, while the so-called language of instructions has clearly restricted rhetorical functions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , Fall 1978 , pp. 1 - 10
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Burt, M. and Dulay, H.. 1974a. “Natural Sequences in Child Second Language Acquisition.” Language Learning 24. 37–53.Google Scholar
Burt, M. and Dulay, H.. 1974b. “A New Perspective on the Creative Construction Process in Child Second Language Acquisition.” OISE Working Papers in Bilingualism 4, 10, 1974.Google Scholar
Cave, G. N. 1970. “Some Sociolinguistic Factors in the Production of Standard Language in Guyana.” Language Learning 20, 2. 249–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clyne, M. 1968. “Zum Pidgin-Deutsch der Gastarbeiter.” Zeitschrift für Mundartforschung 35. 130–9.Google Scholar
Entwhistle, W. I. 1936. The Spanish Language. London: Faber & Faber.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. A. 1964. “Baby-talk in Six Languages.” in Gumperz, and Hymes, (eds.) The Ethnography of Communication, 103–4. (American Anthropologist 66,6, pt.2. Washington: American Anthropological Association.)Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. A. 1965. “Towards a Characterisation of English Foreigner-talk.” Anthropological Linguistics 17. 1–14.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. A. 1971 “Absence of the Copula and the Notion of Simplicity.’ in Hymes (ed.) Pidginization and Creolization of Languages.Google Scholar
Jacobson, R. 1968. Child Language, Aphasia and Phonological Universals. New York: Humanities Press. pp. 16–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, R. A. 1966. Pidgin and Creole Languages. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hymes, D. 1971. “Introduction to Section III.” in Hymes, (ed.) Pidginization and Creolization of Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 63–90.Google Scholar
Kay, P., and Sankoff, G. 1972. “A Language Universal Approach to Pidgins and Creoles.” 23rd Georgetown Roundtable on Languages and Linguistics. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Lyons, J. 1973. “Deixis as the Source of Reference.” Work in Progress 6. Department of Linguistics, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Nemser, W. 1971. “Approximative Systems of Foreign Language Learners.” IRAL 9.2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samarin, W. J. 1971. “Salient and Substantive Pidginization,” in Hymes (ed.) Pidginization and Creolization of Languages.Google Scholar
Schumann, J. H. 1975. “Implications of Pidginization and Creolisation for the Study of Adult Second Language Acquisition.” in Schumann, J. H., and Stenson, Nancy (eds.) New Frontiers in Second Language Learning. Rowley: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Tsuzaki, S. M. 1971 “Coexistent Systems in Language Variation.” in Hymes (ed.) Pidginization and Creolization of Languages.Google Scholar
Whinnom, K. 1971 “Linguistic Hybridization.” in Hymes (ed.) Pidginization and Creolization of Languages.Google Scholar