Abstract:
Il existe des termes liés en didactique qui ne sont pas capables de caractériser leurs
efficacités conceptuelles lorsqu’on les emprunte dans les échelles variées des analyses linguistiques. La définition hâtive des termes à savoir, « langue maternelle », « langue étrangère », « langue native », « apprenant », etc., loin de toute politique linguistique ne se construisant pas autour de la notion de
langue, souffre d’une insuffisance interprétative. Dans les contextes linguistiques et notamment
l’appropriation des langues, ces termes ne sont pas lapidaires pour suivre la totalité d’un processus
complexe. La néoténie linguistique déclare en toute explicite que les appellations en question souffrent
d’une insuffisance conceptuelle et d’une opacité interprétative n’ayant pas un support scientifique
adéquates qui régissent la rigueur épistémologique. Dans cet article nous évoquons l’aspect
terminologique de la néoténie linguistique s’inspirant de la psychomécanique du langage de Gustave
Guillaume qui propose les termes remplaçant à des termes non adéquats (« langue maternelle », « langue étrangère », « langue native », « apprenant ») en didactique via la répartition tripartite temporelle. Nous verrons que le lien cognitif entre le locuteur et les langues s’astreint à suivre un passage opératif du temps guillaumien, de la puissance à l’existence, voire, du virtuel au réel.
در اموزش زبان، اصطلاحاتی وجود دارد که در تحلیلهای متنوع زبانشناسی قادر به توصیف کارایی مفهومی خود نیستند. تعاریف شتابزده اصطلاحاتی مانند، «زبان مادری»، «زبان خارجی»، «زبان طبیعی (یا مادری)»، «زبان اموز» و غیره، که به دور از هرگونه سیاست زبانشناسی که حول مفهوم زبان ساخته نشده باشد، نارساییهای تفسیری بسیاری را دارا هستند. در متون زبانشناسی و به ویژه در زمینه یادگیری زبانها، این اصطلاحات در پیروی از کلیت یک فرایند پیچیده خلاصه نمیشوند. نيوتنی زبانی به صراحت اعلام میکند که اصطلاحات مورد بحث از یک نقص مفهومی و ابهامات تفسیری رنج میبرند که فاقد پشتوانه علمی مناسبی برای مطرح شدن در مسايل علمی هستند. در این مقاله ما جنبههای اصطلاحات نيوتنی زبانی الهام گرفته از نظریه مکانیک زبانی گوستاو گیوم، و اصطلاحاتی را که جایگزین چهار عبارات بالا توسط سهگانه زمانی گیومی کرده است را بررسی خواهیم کرد. در این جستار خواهیم دید که پیوند شناختی بین زبان و کاربر، مجبور به گذر از روندی اوپواتیو در زمان گیوم، از قوه به وجود و از مجازی به واقعیت ظهور خواهد بود.
Reviewing the historical aspects of linguistic theories of the previous century,
we figure out that sciences of language, and precisely linguistics, are linked to a certain number of
additional disciplines which allow for the emergence of new epistemologies such as neurolinguistics,
psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, etc. Undoubtedly, this fact makes it possible to focus on the nature
of the findings which result from different linguistic activities as well as the cognitive processes which
are due to such activities. Although the overwhelming majority of linguists are more interested in the
function and the use of linguistic elements, the mental component of language conditioning utterance in
all its variety does not seem to be as important. This component which originates from all linguistic
operations performed can be described through terms like mentalism and intuition, which offer
linguistics an ontological dimension closer to the immanence of being. We must not forget that in all
languages, there are abstract properties which are not visible from the outside. According to Guillaume,
the universe in which we are in contact is an interior universe: the universe of the thinkable in which our
representations form within us.
It is obvious that the difficulty of observation, especially in the field of psycholinguistics and
sociolinguistics, becomes greater when it comes to examining facts and results. These fields study the
elements that are ignore at the end. The definitional inadequacies and the terminological achievements
of the language sciences prompt us to question the advisability of occupying a place in the field of
scientific activity that existence confers on man. The linguistic novelty devoted to the relationship
between linguistics and cognitive sciences takes us away from the simple repetition of traditional names,
both opaque and inadequate resulting in a naivety of meanings and interpretive opacity. Names which
are observed through chronological criteria are conditioned by the passage of time. They underline the
impact that the anteriority of one of the languages learnt has on the others, given the consequences that
this inequality creates for the speakers. From a didactic point of view, there are two types of speakers:
one who has knowledge of a language and one who is in the process of learning a language. The didactic
names the former the “native speaker”, that is to say, one who expresses himself via this language since
his birth. However, it turns out that it is a naive name because as long as domicile learning, or learning
due to immigration are concerned, didactics are not able to offer a suitable name.
Reading out of the Terminological Aspect of
Linguistic Neoteny in Accordance with those of
Language Teaching*
Rouhollah REZAPOUR**
How, then, do we define the term “learning” a language when only a considerable minority of bilinguals learn the language in the classroom? What can we call the mode of learning of other “learners” who appropriate a language in places other than language classrooms? How can we define motherhood of the mother tongue and the strangeness of the foreign language in the complex domain of monolingualism and bilingualism in linguistic reality? Didactics do not offer much help in dealing with terminologies that are intended to be more realistic.
The naivety of meanings and the interpretive opacity of terms such as “foreign language”, “mother tongue”, “native language”, “learner” and many other terms prompt linguistic neoteny to lean towards new terms because maternal language is the one the child acquires through contact with the familial environment where he is raised. Therefore, the acquisition of a language is not done exclusively through contact with a biological mother. On the other hand, concerning foreign languages, it must be clarified that the possession of a language is not limited to geographic boundaries. In addition, the language acquired at an early age is not necessarily the one easily spoken in adulthood.
Therefore, in this article, we try to analyse the terminological aspect of linguistic neoteny which proposes new terms to replace those in didactics, namely, “foreign language”, “mother tongue”, “native language”, and “learner” which - it seems to us - are not able to answer the questions above. To this purpose, we first analyse the guillaumian theory which continues to be the source of inspiration for linguistic neoteny. Subsequently, we schematize the approach followed by linguistic neoteny. In the end, we do not hesitate to answer the above questions with the new terminological aspects linguistic neoteny offers us.