Bakhtin-1 (1) on language development and discourse in english language teaching.ppt
Download as PPT, PDF0 likes69 views
Mikhail Bakhtin was a Russian philosopher and literary critic known for his contributions to literary theory and the philosophy of language, particularly through concepts like heteroglossia, dialogism, and the utterance. His work emphasized the social nature of language and the complex interactions between speakers, listeners, and their contexts, challenging traditional notions of language as a neutral medium. Bakhtin's ideas have influenced various disciplines, leading to a modern understanding of language as a dynamic process shaped by multiple voices and intentions.
![Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin
Born 16 November [O.S. 4 November] 1895,Oryol, Russian
Empire
Died 7 March 1975 (aged 79),Moscow, Russian SFSR
Alma mater Odessa University (no degree),Petrograd
Imperial University
Era 20th-century philosophy
Region Russian philosophy
School Dialogic criticism
Institutions Mordovian Pedagogical Institute
Main interests Semiotics, literary criticism
Notable ideas Heteroglossia, dialogism, chronotope,
carnivalesque, polyphony](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/bakhtin-11-241118161542-a8294379/85/Bakhtin-1-1-on-language-development-and-discourse-in-english-language-teaching-ppt-2-320.jpg)
![Where do the words we learn
come from?
“The word in language is half someone else’s. It
becomes ‘one’s own’ only when the speaker populates
it with his [sic] own intention, his own accent, when he
appropriates the word, adapting it to his own
semantic and expressive intention. Prior to this
moment of appropriation, the word does not exist in
a neutral and impersonal language (it is not, after all,
out of a dictionary that the speaker gets his words!),
but rather it exists in other people’s mouths, in other
people’s contexts, serving other people’s intentions: it
is from there that one must take the word, and make
it one’s own” (Bakhtin, 1981, p ).](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/bakhtin-11-241118161542-a8294379/85/Bakhtin-1-1-on-language-development-and-discourse-in-english-language-teaching-ppt-14-320.jpg)
![Bakhtin’s concept of the
utterance
“
“[l]anguage is realized in the form of
[l]anguage is realized in the form of
individual concrete utterances (oral and
individual concrete utterances (oral and
written) by participants in the various areas of
written) by participants in the various areas of
human activity” (1986, p. 60).The utterance,
human activity” (1986, p. 60).The utterance,
not the sentence, is the unit of analysis.The
not the sentence, is the unit of analysis.The
utterance ties thinking and speech together,
utterance ties thinking and speech together,
places language in the mouths of people
places language in the mouths of people
talking to each other, within particular
talking to each other, within particular
situations. Every utterance is “a link in the
situations. Every utterance is “a link in the
chain of speech communion” (1986, p. 84).
chain of speech communion” (1986, p. 84).](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/bakhtin-11-241118161542-a8294379/85/Bakhtin-1-1-on-language-development-and-discourse-in-english-language-teaching-ppt-16-320.jpg)
Bakhtin-1 (1) on language development and discourse in english language teaching.ppt
- 2. Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin Born 16 November [O.S. 4 November] 1895,Oryol, Russian Empire Died 7 March 1975 (aged 79),Moscow, Russian SFSR Alma mater Odessa University (no degree),Petrograd Imperial University Era 20th-century philosophy Region Russian philosophy School Dialogic criticism Institutions Mordovian Pedagogical Institute Main interests Semiotics, literary criticism Notable ideas Heteroglossia, dialogism, chronotope, carnivalesque, polyphony
- 3. Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin was a Russian philosopher, literary critic, semiotician and scholar who worked on literary theory, ethics, and the philosophy of language. His writings, on a variety of subjects, inspired scholars working in a number of different traditions (Marxism, semiotics, structuralism, religious criticism) and in disciplines as diverse as literary criticism, history, philosophy, sociology, anthropology and psychology.
- 4. Bakhtin Bakhtin Mikhail Bakhtin worked in the early-to-mid Mikhail Bakhtin worked in the early-to-mid 20 20th th century, but developed many ideas that century, but developed many ideas that are very modern. are very modern. Today he is one of the most popular literary theorists. Today he is one of the most popular literary theorists. He initiated study of language in context, He initiated study of language in context, “ “the the utterance utterance” ” which was very modern for its time. In which was very modern for its time. In Saussure Saussure’ ’s terminology, he was the first to seriously s terminology, he was the first to seriously study study “ “parole parole” ” rather than rather than “ “langue langue” ”. .
- 5. “ “not a neutral medium” Language, not a neutral medium” Language, Bakhtin (1981) says, Bakhtin (1981) says, “is not a neutral medium that passes freely and easily into the private property of the speaker’s intentions; it is populated—overpopulated—with the intentions of others. Expropriating it, forcing it to submit to one’s own intentions and accents, is a difficult and complicated process” (p. 294).
- 6. Bakhtin Bakhtin Bakhtin Bakhtin’ ’s emphasis on utterance foreshadowed the s emphasis on utterance foreshadowed the evolution of semiotics in the late 20 evolution of semiotics in the late 20th th century. century. The Structuralists took this idea part-way: meaning is The Structuralists took this idea part-way: meaning is determined by the language and certain Diachronic determined by the language and certain Diachronic “ “structures structures” ” (e.g. social relationships). (e.g. social relationships). Since words usually stand for concepts rather than Since words usually stand for concepts rather than concrete objects in the world, language strongly shapes concrete objects in the world, language strongly shapes thought. But still, the primary structuralist role for signs is thought. But still, the primary structuralist role for signs is to to “ “stand for stand for” ” concepts or things at some level: concepts or things at some level: “ “modality modality” ”. .
- 7. Voloshinov and Bakhtin, Word “A word is a bridge thrown between myself and another. If one end of the bridge depends on me, then the other depends on my addressee. A word is a territory shared by both addresser and addressee, by the speaker and his interlocutor” Voloshinov and Bakhtin, Marxism and the Philosophy of Language
- 8. The utterance The utterance Bakhtin emphasized the uniqueness Bakhtin emphasized the uniqueness of meaning of the utterance from an of meaning of the utterance from an individual speaker in a specific context. individual speaker in a specific context. He proposed a subject called He proposed a subject called “ “trans-linguistics trans-linguistics” ” intended to study all language-related phenomena that intended to study all language-related phenomena that occur in other disciplines. It includes linguistics, literary occur in other disciplines. It includes linguistics, literary theory, learning science, anthropology, sociology, etc. theory, learning science, anthropology, sociology, etc. We are using the term We are using the term “ “the linguistic approach the linguistic approach” ” to to invoke this idea. invoke this idea.
- 9. Multi-vocality Multi-vocality There are always several voices in an There are always several voices in an utterance: at least the listeners and the utterance: at least the listeners and the hearers. hearers. This applies to verbal utterances and also to texts. This applies to verbal utterances and also to texts. We understand language by supplying We understand language by supplying “ “answering answering words words” ” to what we hear. to what we hear.
- 10. Dialogicality Dialogicality Bakhtin Bakhtin’ ’s approach is also called s approach is also called “ “dialogical dialogical” ” because the most universal form of because the most universal form of multi-vocality is human dialogue. multi-vocality is human dialogue. Other communication (including written) resembles Other communication (including written) resembles dialogue since there is always at least a listener and hearer. dialogue since there is always at least a listener and hearer. Speakers orient their dialogue to the listener, so the listener Speakers orient their dialogue to the listener, so the listener shapes the words that are spoken as well as their meaning. shapes the words that are spoken as well as their meaning.
- 11. Social Languages Social Languages Spoken by particular social groups with National Spoken by particular social groups with National groups. groups. Not a hard or syntactic category, but a representation Not a hard or syntactic category, but a representation of typical or conventional speech. of typical or conventional speech. A mirror of social groups (Vygotsky A mirror of social groups (Vygotsky’ ’s cultural s cultural categories) on the inter-personal plane. i.e. you can categories) on the inter-personal plane. i.e. you can learn about an individual learn about an individual’ ’s likely membership in a s likely membership in a social stratum from their language. social stratum from their language.
- 12. Speech Genres Speech Genres Conventions for appropriate speech in particular Conventions for appropriate speech in particular contexts. contexts. We We “ “invoke invoke” ” such genres whenever we speak. such genres whenever we speak. i.e. There are conventions for i.e. There are conventions for “ “university lecture university lecture speech, speech,” ” parent-child speech etc. parent-child speech etc.
- 13. Bakhtin Bakhtin’ ’s units of analysis s units of analysis Bakhtin Bakhtin’ ’s ideas, and those of the post-structuralists s ideas, and those of the post-structuralists generally, have been regarded as generally, have been regarded as “ “outside the realm outside the realm of scientific analysis of scientific analysis” ” Utterances, and Utterances, and “ “national languages national languages” ” or or “ “genres genres” ” have traditionally been very difficult to study because have traditionally been very difficult to study because of size and complexity. But these days we can literally of size and complexity. But these days we can literally “ “capture capture” ” and analyze them in many ways. and analyze them in many ways.
- 14. Where do the words we learn come from? “The word in language is half someone else’s. It becomes ‘one’s own’ only when the speaker populates it with his [sic] own intention, his own accent, when he appropriates the word, adapting it to his own semantic and expressive intention. Prior to this moment of appropriation, the word does not exist in a neutral and impersonal language (it is not, after all, out of a dictionary that the speaker gets his words!), but rather it exists in other people’s mouths, in other people’s contexts, serving other people’s intentions: it is from there that one must take the word, and make it one’s own” (Bakhtin, 1981, p ).
- 15. taking others’ words and making them our own’ Speakers appropriate words from ‘other people’s mouths’ and other people’s contexts. Speakers struggle to ‘accent’ these words with their own intentions. But every word is “furrowed from within” with the speech of others. Each word carries the history of its use
- 16. Bakhtin’s concept of the utterance “ “[l]anguage is realized in the form of [l]anguage is realized in the form of individual concrete utterances (oral and individual concrete utterances (oral and written) by participants in the various areas of written) by participants in the various areas of human activity” (1986, p. 60).The utterance, human activity” (1986, p. 60).The utterance, not the sentence, is the unit of analysis.The not the sentence, is the unit of analysis.The utterance ties thinking and speech together, utterance ties thinking and speech together, places language in the mouths of people places language in the mouths of people talking to each other, within particular talking to each other, within particular situations. Every utterance is “a link in the situations. Every utterance is “a link in the chain of speech communion” (1986, p. 84). chain of speech communion” (1986, p. 84).
- 17. Dialogic nature of language use Every utterance “must be regarded primarily as a response to preceding utterances … (we understand ‘response’ here in the broadest sense)” (Bakhtin 1986, p. 91, italics in original).The utterance is by its nature dialogic. The utterance is filled with “dialogic overtones,” with “echoes and reverberations of other utterances” (Bakhtin, 1986, p. 92).
- 18. Dialogism In the concrete instance of utterance: traces and echoes of previous uses,the speaker’s plan as she anticipates response,the particular conditions of production all intersect.
- 19. Addressivity The understanding that all language is addressed (to someone, for an occasion …)Within an utterance (written or spoken):“traces of addressivity and the influence of the anticipated response, dialogical echoes from others’ preceding utterances, faint traces of changes of speech subjects that have furrowed the utterance from within” (Bakhtin, 1986, p. 99).
- 20. heteroglossia This ‘overpopulation’ of the utterance with the voices of others is described in Bakhtin’s concept of heteroglossia. The speaker actively participates in the “living heteroglossia” by imprinting her utterance with her situated intent, and by appropriating and ventriloquating words from others’ mouths (Bakhtin, 1981, p. 272).
- 21. Language Is not a “neutral medium” (Bakhtin!) Is not an isolated system, but a dynamic, social activity. Is a site of struggle over meanings.Is dialogic (filled with previous meanings; anticipating response; influenced by contexts of use)
- 22. Baktin’s ideas about language In your own words, describe Bakhtin’s view of language and/or define one of his ideas. How might these ideas about language change the way we think about teaching languages?