| Course Overview |
This course is designed to have graduate-level students discuss and explore ways that language interacts with the basic idea of culture. What is culture? How and why is culture so intertwined with language? We will discuss topics such as linguistic relativity, language and identity, and specific cross-linguistic cases where culture strongly determines linguistic choices. We will also discuss the notion of dialogicality and how that manifests itself in language.
|
Keywords : Language, culture, linguistic relativity, indexing, deixis, dialogicality
|
Prerequisites :
Required Ability :
|
| Notes |
| Remote/On-site |
Information regarding Moodle |
|
対面授業 |
|
|
リアルタイム-オンライン授業 |
|
ハイブリッド授業（対面＋オンライン） |
|
オンデマンド型授業 |
|
課題提出型授業 |
教職 : 教職（英語）
資格 :
|
| Course Objectives |
|
かなり優れている |
優れている |
及第である |
一層の努力が必要 |
ML_A-a [言語データの分析]
Students will have plenty of opportunities to explore English (or Japanese) data of his/her choice and analyze it with some aspect of language and culture discussed in class. |
EXCELLENT LEVEL: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, can be evaluated as "outstanding." |
GOOD LEVEL: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, can be evaluated as "good." |
AVERAGE/SATISFACTORY LEVEL: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, can be evaluated as "satisfactory." |
DEFICIENT: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, falls below average. More effort and application are required to pass. |
ML_B2-a [総合把握力]
Students will get a chance to read some fundamental texts of language and culture, and then apply their key concepts in their data analyses. |
EXCELLENT LEVEL: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, can be evaluated as "outstanding." |
GOOD LEVEL: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, can be evaluated as "good." |
AVERAGE/SATISFACTORY LEVEL: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, can be evaluated as "satisfactory." |
DEFICIENT: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, falls below average. More effort and application are required to pass. |
DL_A-a [言語データの分析]
Students will have plenty of opportunities to explore English (or Japanese) data of his/her choice and analyze it with some aspect of language and culture discussed in class. |
EXCELLENT LEVEL: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, can be evaluated as "outstanding." |
GOOD LEVEL: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, can be evaluated as "good." |
AVERAGE/SATISFACTORY LEVEL: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, can be evaluated as "satisfactory." |
DEFICIENT: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, falls below average. More effort and application are required to pass. |
DL_B2-a [総合把握力]
Students will get a chance to read some fundamental texts of language and culture, and then apply their key concepts in their data analyses. |
EXCELLENT LEVEL: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, can be evaluated as "outstanding." |
GOOD LEVEL: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, can be evaluated as "good." |
AVERAGE/SATISFACTORY LEVEL: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, can be evaluated as "satisfactory." |
DEFICIENT: Student achievement in this area, as measured through his/her level of class discussions and contributions in English, falls below average. More effort and application are required to pass. |
九州大学文学部ディプロマ・ポリシー 九州大学人文科学府人文基礎専攻ディプロマ・ポリシー
九州大学人文科学府歴史空間論専攻ディプロマ・ポリシー 九州大学人文科学府言語・文学専攻ディプロマ・ポリシー
九州大学文学部哲学コース・カリキュラムマップ 九州大学文学部歴史学コース・カリキュラムマップ
九州大学文学部文学コース・カリキュラムマップ 九州大学文学部人間科学コース・カリキュラムマップ
|
| Course Plan |
| 授業形態（項目） |
授業形態（内容） |
| ● |
講義 |
|
| ● |
外国語演習 |
|
原典資料演習 |
|
実習／フィールド調査 |
|
Problem-Based Learning （問題発見・解決型学習） |
|
学生のプレゼンテーション |
|
Moodle の使用 |
|
学外実習 |
|
野外実習 |
Textbooks :
Reference Books : Basso, Keith H. 1996. Wisdom sits in places: landscape and language among the Western Apache. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
Becker, Alton. 1995. Beyond translation: essays toward a modern philology. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Bowerman, Melissa. 1996. The origins of children's spatial semantic categories: cognitive versus linguistic determinants. In John J. Gumperz and Stephen C. Levinson (eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity, 145-176. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Du Bois, John W. 1992. Meaning without intention: lessons from divination. In Jane H. Hill and Judith T. Irvine (eds.), Responsibility and evidence in oral discourse, 48-71. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Du Bois, John W. 2014. Towards a dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics 25(3): 359–410.
Haviland, John B. 1996. Projections, transpositions, and relativity. In John J. Gumperz and Stephen C. Levinson (eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity, 271-323. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jakobson, Roman. 1990 [1957]. Shifters and verbal categories. In Linda Waugh and Monique Monville-Burston (eds.), On language, 386-392. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Laury, Ritva. 2012. Taking a stance and getting on with it: the form and function of the Finnish finite clausal extraposition construction. Text & Talk 4(7), 503-524.
Pinker, Steven. 1994. The language instinct: how the mind creates language. New York: William Morrow and Co.
Silverstein, Michael. 1995 [1985]. Shifters, linguistic categories and cultural description. In Ben G. Blount (ed.), Language, culture, and society: a book of readings, 2nd ed., 187-221. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc.
Slobin, Dan I. 1996. Thinking for speaking. In John J. Gumperz and Stephen C. Levinson (eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity, 271-323. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tomasello, Michael. 1999. The human adaptation for culture. Annual review of anthropology 1999 (28): 509-529.
Whorf, Benjamin Lee. 1995 [1941]. The relation of habitual thought and behavior to language. In Ben G. Blount (ed.), Language, culture, and society: a book of readings, 2nd ed., 64-84. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc.
Course Handouts :
Course Plan ()
|
Tentative Weekly Schedules |
Lecture |
Exercise, Field trip etc. |
Comments, suggestions for the course preparation, review, etc. |
| 1 |
Introduction – what is culture? Why is it important when talking about language? |
○ |
|
Bring in something and be prepared to discuss how that thing relates to culture. |
| 2 |
Linguistic relativity: the beginning with Lee and Whorf |
○ |
|
Whorf 1995 [1941] |
| 3 |
Arguments against the (too) strong version of the Lee-Whorf hypothesis |
○ |
|
Pinker 1994 |
| 4 |
“Thinking for Speaking” – Whorfism redux? |
○ |
|
Slobin 1996 |
| 5 |
Examples of how (the weak version) of Whorfism can manifest itself |
○ |
|
Bowerman 1996 |
| 6 |
What is linguistic indexicality – and how do languages deal with indexical shifting? |
○ |
|
Jakobson 1990 [1957]; Silverstein 1995 [1985] |
| 7 |
Projections and laminations |
○ |
|
Haviland 1996 |
| 8 |
Midterm Presentations |
○ |
|
|
| 9 |
How did humans come to acquire “culture”? Examining the "ratcheting effect" in culture |
○ |
|
Tomasello 1999 |
| 10 |
How do naming practices reinforce important ideas within a culture? |
○ |
|
Basso 1984 |
| 11 |
The importance meaning without “intention” |
○ |
|
Du Bois 1992 |
| 12 |
The issue of "prior text" |
○ |
|
Becker 1995 |
| 13 |
Dialogicality as a concept 1 |
○ |
|
Du Bois 2014 |
| 14 |
Dialogicality as a concept 2 - dialogicality and stance |
○ |
|
Laury 2012 |
| 15 |
Conclusions - Final Review |
○ |
|
|
|
| Evaluation |
Standpoint→
Evaluation Method
↓ |
ML_A-a
[言語データの分析] |
ML_B2-a
[総合把握力] |
DL_A-a
[言語データの分析] |
DL_B2-a
[総合把握力] |
Grading Percentage, Disqualification etc. |
| Presentation |
◎ |
○ |
◎ |
○ |
Midterm Presentation: 40% |
| Final Exam |
◎ |
○ |
◎ |
○ |
Final Exam: 50% |
| Attendance |
|
|
|
|
Attendance: 10% |
GPA Evaluation
| A |
B |
C |
D |
F |
| 授業を通じて、総じて「かなり優れている」に相当する活動を行った。 |
授業を通じて、概ね「優れている」を超える活動を行った。 |
授業を通じて、「及第する」に相当する活動を行った。 |
授業を通じて、総じて「及第する」には達しないものの、それに近い活動を行った。 |
授業を通じて、「一層の努力が必要」の活動にとどまった。 |
Additional Information regarding Evaluation Method : Midterm data presentation: 40%
Final exam: 50%
Attendance: 10%
|
| Study Consultation (Office Hours) |
Study Consultation (Office Hours) :
Suggestion for success (Specific) : Please let me know if you are having difficulties comprehending the material - I am free to talk whenever I am in my office. I can also make appointments via email.
:
|