<b>English: One language, different cultures.</b> Ed. by Eddie Ronowicz and Colin Yallop. London & New York: Cassell, 1999. Pp. 269.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviewed by: English: One language, different cultures ed. by Eddie Ronowicz, Colin Yallop Iman Makeba Laversuch English: One language, different cultures. By Eddie Ronowicz and Colin Yallop. London & New York: Cassell, 1999. Pp. 269. In the past there has been some reticence to include cultural studies in foreign language instruction, the rationale being that it was too far outside the traditional scope of language instruction and would therefore constitute too great a distraction. Today, however, it is generally understood by the modern language instructor that cultural knowledge may also serve as a powerful motivator for improving student linguistic competence, particularly on the advanced levels when students are no longer hampered by linguistic barriers. The book under review is meant as a tool for integrating cross-cultural instruction into advanced classes for English as a foreign or second language. The demand for high quality English instruction has increased exponentially all over the world as English continues to spread as a world language. Nevertheless, as the authors are careful to remind, the prevalence of English does not mean that all Englishes are alike. This book focuses on presenting some of the major linguistic and cultural differences among some of the world’s major varieties of English today—Great Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States. Each chapter begins with a general history of the sociocultural development of the country in question. The second section is devoted to a discussion of some of the more important distinguishing linguistic features. The third and final section presents useful suggestions for student tasks and exercises. There is a great deal of variety in the quality and accuracy of the information presented. As far as the historical presentations are concerned, for example, the historical review of Great Britain was sometimes in danger of bordering on the nationalistic, while the chapter on the sociocultural development of the United States was at times surprisingly ill-informed, inaccurate, and contradictory. For example, it is regrettable that at the same time the author stressed the need to confront sexism in language, this chapter in particular contained so many blatant instances of sexist writing. This having been said, the historical presentations for the chapters dealing with Australia, Canada, and New Zealand were very well-written, filled with interesting and pertinent information for the advanced English student. The same variation was to be found in the exploration of linguistic features. Again, the introductory chapter started out somewhat disappointingly with the well-worn topics such as spelling differences between the UK and the US; but it went on to completely redeem itself with humorous and informative discussions of pragmatic differences found around the world. Here again, the chapter entitled ‘British shibboleths’ was exemplary. The contrastive presentations on Canadian English and the dialectal features of the United States were also similarly helpful for the advanced student. It is unfortunate, however, that not more was done in these areas. Indeed, the sociolinguistic focus of the book would have lent itself rather well to discussing major linguistic issues confronting the particular countries examined. For example, it would have been useful to have discussions of the following topics: the struggle between French and English in Canada, the ongoing debate over making English the official language of the United States, and the fight to preserve minority languages in Great Britain (e.g. Welsh, Scots, Gaelic vs. English in Great Britain). However, for whatever reason, the authors seemed to generally shy away from tackling such issues. [End Page 620] The tasks and exercises presented in each chapter also showed considerable variation in quality. While some chapters focused almost exclusively on simple retention, other chapters, such as the two on Australia and Great Britain, succeeded in providing refreshingly effective exercises and activities to encourage critical thought and lively discussion. Overall, then, this reference was found to be a potentially useful aid for instructing advanced level English students. Indeed, given a creative and energetic teacher who is in the position to supplement information with their own materials, the book could be a helpful supplement to classroom instruction. Iman Makeba Laversuch Freiburg University Copyright © 2001 Linguistic Society of America
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it