by Jonathan Robie » March 13th, 2012, 4:59 am
Stephen Carlson wrote:
Jonathan Robie wrote:Could anyone give an equally good answer without meta-language? Or with meta-language in Greek?
I'd say it's impossible because your question included the meta-language term "antecedent."
But that's a characteristic of language and discourse, not just a characteristic of my question.
It's hard for me to discuss the relationships among these clauses without some meta-language, because the fundamental confusion involves "cases" and "agreement" and identifying the antecedent", where everything in quotes is a term from the meta-language. Somehow, we need a way to discuss the relationship between these things to see "how" the text says something.
First, Jonathan's first question was easy,
τίς ἐστιν τὸ ὅς; ὁ ἐγείρας τὸν κύριον παρεδόθη; οὐχί. ἆρα οὖν ὀ Ἰησούς παρεδόθη; ναί, βεβαίως.
Secondly, metalanguage becomes more valuable at higher levels, and at higher levels it is less distracting. Adults want it at lower levels and they usually assume that they will learn a language thru the metalanguage. That is a false step and a deadend, and SLA has been aware of that for half a century.
Finally, FTR, I am not 100% direct method. In a classroom with one shared language a person can often speed things up by using the shared language up to about 10% of the time. If the other language grows to much more than 10%, then the teachers need to ask themselves what they are teaching, because they are slowing down the language learning. (NB: linguistics is normally conducted in a major language, like English, and often on English, but it is not the way that any ESL theorist recommends learning English. Linguistics is good, but it is not pedagogy.)