W/ re to the study of applied linguistics, what are its postve&negtve implications to the lang teacher & the?

Answer 1

Linguistics is excellent as a choice. For English, half of our words are rooted in Latin, and then about a fourth are rooted in Greek. Having word root background is fastinating. Language study is vital around the world. A lot of people here don't realize that in China, the government has mandated that every child learn English starting in primary grades (it used to be Junior High School age). In Europe, most people study and know more than one language.

Answer 2

Applied linguistics is the branch of linguistics concerned with using linguistic theory to address real-world problems. [Wikipedia]

It is important for us to learn how language is being used to control the public, particularly with regard to politics and advertising, and it is important that such matters be open for analysis in public schools. Otherwise, the United States is not likely to develop the enlightened citizenship that the Founding Fathers, particularly Thomas Jefferson, had in mind when they instituted our constitutional democracy. If voters are not critical thinkers but instead rely on 30-second sound bites, name-calling, "swift boating," spinmeisters, and the like, this very constitutional democracy is in peril.

The work of such applied linguists as George and Robin Lakoff of the University of California in Berkeley is critical to the education of the next generation. See, for example, George Lakoff's books Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think (2002) and Metaphors We Live By (1980) and Robin Lakoff's book, The Language War. From a review of the latter book, here is an example of the sorts of data such applied linguists collect and analyze:

"In the chapter on the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill hearings, Lakoff uncovers some linguistic tricks for holding that [politically controlling] power. Cowed by Thomas' brilliant (ab)use of the term 'lynching,' the Judiciary Committee subtly bullied Anita Hill toward their foregone conclusion. They allowed Thomas an average of 1.386 seconds of 'gap length' after the end of his answer and their next question; they gave Hill 1.046 seconds. 'Temporal space is metaphorically equivalent to physical space: You 'give space' to those you respect; you crowd in on people ... you wish to intimidate.' Lakoff also notes that questions addressed to Hill more often included 'tags,' ending in 'is that correct?' or 'didn't you?' Among its other uses, 'a tag emphasizes the power of the questioner to force a response.'" [Salon.com]