30.01.2013 Views

Untitled

Untitled

Untitled

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

saxelmwifo enis swavlebis sakiTxebi:<br />

problemebi da gamowvevebi<br />

Issues of State Language Teaching;<br />

Problems and Challenges<br />

real speech production rather than only on hypothetically implied semantic systems ratio. Real speech production<br />

is estimated in the aspect of existence/not existence of language interference and development of linguistic<br />

code. Thus, the above–mentioned typology can be viewed as a dynamic formation, where more or less autonomous<br />

functioning of language systems depends on subject’s actual condition. The psychological mechanism<br />

of this phenomenon is formation of language “set” that will activate semantic and structural peculiarities<br />

characteristic for the language (D. Uznadze)<br />

Formation the set for speaking second language implies two factors: subjective (need) and objective<br />

(situation). Subjective factor is created by existence of the relevant motivational base – integral or instrumental<br />

motives (Gardner, Lambert 1972, 2007), and the situation – by the communication with the second language<br />

bearer (e.g. teacher) or specific activities (entertainment, professional activities, etc).<br />

According to Albert and Obler ( 1978) notions of compound and coordinate may be difficult to define,<br />

but they serve to remind us that acquisition parameters may influence the way in which a second language is<br />

organized in later life. Age of acquisition and manner of acquisition must be considered as factors influencing<br />

mechanisms of bilingualism. It is likely that certain systems (e.g.phonological perception, deep semantics)<br />

will be compound for all bilinguals, while other systems (e.g. lexicon and syntax) will be coordinate to a grater<br />

or lesser extent. Ellen Bialystok (2006) proposes the model of second language learning which attempts to<br />

account for discrepancies both in individual achievement and achievement in different aspects of second language<br />

learning.<br />

Thus, formation of bilingualism is possible to understand as shifting from the compound, mixed type to<br />

the autonomous model. This depends on the quality of teaching. Teaching can accelerate formation of coordinated<br />

bilingualism, or vice versa, ineffective teaching can constantly leave a pupil in the state of a mixed type<br />

of bilingual, constantly making lexical, grammatical and phonetic errors.<br />

In the modern models of bilingualism the two types maintenance and transitional are distinguished ( C<br />

Baker, 1993). The maintenance philosophy promotes developing, enriching the second language and as such<br />

promotes additive bilingualism. This process involves adding second language skills to a persons linguistic<br />

repertoire in a context where both the second language and culture are equally used. The transitional philosophy<br />

allows the development and strengthening of the home language so that it can serve as a vehicle for<br />

learning subject mutter but the home language is deemphasized<br />

The models of bilingualism created in the recent years take into account social–psychological factors<br />

based on what LaFromboise and Colleman (1993) identified five models: assimilation, acculturation, alternation,<br />

multicultural and mixed. We consider that alternation model which supposes that an individual can alter<br />

his or her behavior to fit a particular social context, is more realistic for non-Georgians living in Georgia as<br />

it does not imply hierarchical relation of cultures. Person alters own behavior, verbal behavior among them,<br />

according to the social context. For example native language is used for communications at home and the second,<br />

state language for professional and broader social interaction. Such people are less prone to social anxiety.<br />

The data obtained by us in 2007-2008 (at Georgian schools with Armenian and Russian children) showed<br />

clear distribution according language situations, less language interference, positive emotional background<br />

and pride with the fact that they master two languages.<br />

Child’s language preference is mediated by the status of their communities and may become a valuable<br />

indicator of young people’s future well-being and sense of long-term security in their cultural identity.<br />

286

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!