Dynamic Types and the Dynamic Language Runtime

2020 ◽  
pp. 645-660
Author(s):  
Andrew Troelsen ◽  
Phil Japikse
Keyword(s):  
2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Langzhou Chen ◽  
Lori Lamel ◽  
Jean-Luc Gauvain ◽  
Gilles Adda

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Munir Georges ◽  
Stephan Kanthak ◽  
Dietrich Klakow

RELC Journal ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmar Mahboob

Currently, a growing number of teaching approaches focus on aspects of variation in language (e.g. English as a Lingua Franca (ELF), World Englishes, English for Specific Purposes (ESP), genre theories, etc.); however, each of these approaches tends to focus on particular (specific) aspects of language variation and do not fully account for the range or dynamicity of linguistic variations. This article, based on a discussion of language variation, proposes a model of language proficiency that considers the dynamic nature of language variation and is not dependent on static (native-speaker defined) norms of language. Using the Dynamic Approach to Language Proficiency as a model of language proficiency and grounded in understandings of language variation, this article introduces the concept of Teaching English as a Dynamic Language (TEDL). The article includes evidence for the need to develop such a model and also points out ways in which current and future work can contribute to further development of this approach. Finally, the article also identifies some socio-economic implications of this work and explicitly supports the need to recognize and empower local (including endangered) languages through TEDL.


2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antoine Raux ◽  
Neville Mehta ◽  
Deepak Ramachandran ◽  
Rakesh Gupta

2021 ◽  
pp. 101-112
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Mann ◽  
Joanna Hoskin ◽  
Hilary Dumbrill

In this chapter, the authors discuss the use of dynamic language assessment with signing deaf children. This is a fairly new area, and, in spite of the growing interest on behalf of researchers and practitioners, there is very limited research. Given the lack of available studies, the authors use anecdotal information that draws on observations made by two of the authors from their own work with signing deaf children, one in a hospital and the other in a school setting. Some of the questions that will guide the discussions are: What makes dynamic assessment useful for signing deaf children? And, how do we determine that dynamic assessment is appropriate for a particular child, and how do we evaluate whether it works? The authors finish with a look at possible future directions and present recommendations on how to make dynamic assessment (more) meaningful for use with signing deaf children.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document