LINGUIST List 18.581|
Wed Feb 21 2007
Disc: Effects of Technology on Communication; Bialystok's Model
Editor for this issue: Ann Sawyer
To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at
New: Effects of Technology on Communication
New: Alternative to Bialystok's Model of Lang Learning
Message 1: New: Effects of Technology on Communication
From: Susan Ervin-Tripp <ervintrippberkeley.edu>
Subject: New: Effects of Technology on Communication
Having just had an unpleasant exchange with a university administrator, in which I
wrote a complex letter on a computer, and he replied with a very brief answer on
a Blackberry, I am wondering if anyone has studied the effects of Blackberries.
The basic questions are these:
1. What is the effect of communication when one party can write extensively, but
the other one can only give short replies, and cannot interlard questions and
replies because of space limits.
2. What is the effect on complexity of communication of a medium designed for
use while in motion or doing other things?
Linguistic Field(s): General Linguistics
Message 2: New: Alternative to Bialystok's Model of Lang Learning
From: maite correa <maiteemail.arizona.edu>
Subject: New: Alternative to Bialystok's Model of Lang Learning
I am using Bialystok's Model of Second Language Learning (1978) and I was
wondering if there is any other model by her or anyone else that is newer.
I like that model (http://www.melta.org.my/ET/1991/img/10.jpg) because it
gathers explicit, implicit and ''other'' knowledge in the learning process,
and it gives room for ''monitoring'' with two types of response...but
still, it is almost 30 years old. I do not seem to find anything newer than
that, but I do not seem to finds lots of references to this model, either.
Anyone can help me? Thanks.
Linguistic Field(s): Applied Linguistics
Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Please report any bad links or misclassified data
LINGUIST Homepage | Read
LINGUIST | Contact us
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.