‘Knowing that’, ‘knowing why’ and ‘knowing how’

AILA Review ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-78
Author(s):  
Eva-Maria Graf ◽  
Frédérick Dionne
Keyword(s):  
Executive Coaching ◽  
Interprofessional Collaboration ◽  
Applied Linguistics ◽  
Applied Psychology ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Common Cause ◽  
Knowing How ◽  
Empirical Results ◽  
Knowing That ◽  
Linguistic Research

Abstract Our contribution maps the journey towards setting up a transdisciplinary, interprofessional collaboration between coaching practitioners and coaching researchers from the fields of Applied Linguistics and Applied Psychology. The goal of such a project is to build a community of interest around a common cause, i.e., a practically relevant, language-based coaching problem (in our case, questioning practices in executive coaching), and to collaboratively solve the problem on the basis of assembling and integrating the various epistemes. The purpose of our contribution in the form of a travel report is twofold: firstly, to theoretically and conceptually discuss the challenges and affordances of aligning perspectives and assembling epistemes for such a transdisciplinary research project; Secondly, to present the available epistemic bases and offer first empirical results from our applied linguistic research and our cooperation with Applied Psychology that served as the basis for conceptualising the project Questioning Sequences in Coaching (Graf, Spranz-Fogasy, & Künzli, 2020). We end this travel report by critically assessing the transdisciplinary character of the current project and by envisioning another kind of cooperation between coaching practice and coaching research as the future destination of our research journey.

Applied Linguistics and the Psychology of Instruction – A Case for Transfusion?

1979 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 91-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. A. Sharwood Smith
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Language ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Applied Linguistics ◽  
Foreign Language Learning ◽  
Psychological Theory ◽  
Language Instruction ◽  
Second Language Instruction ◽  
Applied Psychology ◽  
Theory Of Language ◽  
Learning And Instruction

It has become increasingly evident in recent years that what is by convention termed ‘applied linguistics’, in that it has to do with foreign language learning and instruction, should be as much applied PSYCHOLOGY as applied linguistics to say nothing of other possible types of application. Still, it is by no means unfortunate that linguistics has established itself as the primary discipline since it is, after all, LANGUAGE that is being taught and learned. It is admittedly symptomatic of this, dare one say, historical bias in applied linguistics that a good theory of language applied with a minimal knowledge of psychological theory (plus, one hopes a large amount of common sense) is probably more generally regarded as acceptable than a way of working based on a sound knowledge of psychology and only a brief acquaintance with linguistics. However it would be extremely unwise to presume that by applying just linguistics to problems of second language instruction or learning one had all that one needed as far as sources (content and techniques) are concerned. This would be to ignore all past and present theorising and experimentation within the field of instructional and learning psychology. The bias needs to be corrected.

The ACTRES parallel corpus: an English–Spanish translation corpus

Corpora ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marlén Izquierdo ◽  
Knut Hofland ◽  
Øystein Reigem
Keyword(s):  
Information Technology ◽  
Research Group ◽  
Translation Studies ◽  
Contrastive Analysis ◽  
Spanish Translation ◽  
Parallel Corpus ◽  
Empirical Results ◽  
Linguistic Research ◽  
Actual Use ◽  
The University

This paper describes the compilation of the ACTRES Parallel Corpus, an English–Spanish translation corpus built at the Department of Modern Languages at the University of León (Spain) by the ACTRES research group. The computerisation of the corpus was carried out in collaboration with Knut Hofland and Øystein Reigem, from the Department of Culture, Language and Information Technology, Aksis, at the UNIFOB/University of Bergen (Norway). The corpus is conceived as a powerful tool for cross-linguistic research in the fields of Contrastive Analysis and Descriptive Translation Studies. It was the need to bridge the gap between these disciplines and to extend applications that encouraged the building of a parallel corpus as a suitable tool to achieve these goals. This paper focusses on the practical aspects of building the corpus. A brief account of the research which prompted this endeavour precedes the description of this process. 4 4 This paper is an account of the building of the ACTRES Parallel Corpus, so no empirical results from research done on the basis of the corpus are reported here. Concerning new insights drawn from the actual use of P-ACTRES in English–Spanish translation and contrastive projects, there is an extended bibliography at: http://actres.unileon.es/

Knowing-How and Knowing-That

2008 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 451-470 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Fantl
Keyword(s):  
Knowing How ◽  
Knowing That

Knowing How, Knowing That, Knowing Technology

2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 553-565 ◽  
Author(s):  
Per Norström
Keyword(s):  
Knowing How ◽  
Knowing That

scholarly journals Skill, Drill, and Intelligent Performance: Ryle and Intellectualism

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stina Bäckström ◽  
Martin Gustafsson
Keyword(s):  
Current Debate ◽  
Regress Argument ◽  
Knowing How ◽  
Know How ◽  
Dispositional Account ◽  
Knowing That ◽  
Category Distinction

In this paper, we aim to show that a study of Gilbert Ryle’s work has much to contribute to the current debate between intellectualism and anti-intellectualism with respect to skill and know-how. According to Ryle, knowing how and skill are distinctive from and do not reduce to knowing that. What is often overlooked is that for Ryle this point is connected to the idea that the distinction between skill and mere habit is a category distinction, or a distinction in form. Criticizing the reading of Ryle presented by Jason Stanley, we argue that once the formal nature of Ryle’s investigation is recognized it becomes clear that his dispositional account is not an instance of reductionist behaviorism, and that his regress argument has a broader target than Stanley appears to recognize.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document