The Principles of Cultural Instruction in Vocabulary Teaching

李鑫

Abstract： Vocabulary teaching is an integral part of foreign language teaching. Its efficiency has a direct relation with the development of the learners' communicative competence. Nevertheless， vocabulary is culture-bound， it is impossible to teach vocabulary without teaching culture. The paper elaborates the relationship of teaching vocabulary and culture， and discusses the principles of teaching culture while teaching vocabulary.

Key words： language； vocabulary； culture； principle

language and culture

The relationship between language and culture has been investigated by many scholars for more than a century. According to Malinowski， "Language is essentially rooted in the reality of the culture…it cannot be explained without constant reference to" these broader contexts of verbal utterance." （1923： 79）. In Halliday's view， language is not only a tool of nation， but also a means to reflect cultural features of a nation. （1973） Similarly， B.W. Robinette states， language usage reflects the culture of a society. （1978） Furthermore， Samover and Porter （1998： 86） point out that "Language is a reflection of culture， and culture is a reflection of language." Generally speaking， these opinions now are widely accepted. However， since the three concepts of language， thought and culture are so closely related to one another that they cannot be dealt with separately， some scholars explore not only the relationship between language and culture but also the relationship between language and thought. The relationship between language and thought is exemplified in the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis， which has two major thrusts： linguistic determinism and linguistic relativity.

Linguistic determinism in essence states that language determines thought. Whorf presented his evidence from his comparison between Hopi language and English. He argues in English words are divided into two major categories： noun and verbs. This distinction of word categories forces us to think that the world is also divided into two major categories： actions and objects. So we even regard something like shapeless time which is in fact a continuum as an object which can be cut up and counted. In Hopi， however， words are not divided the same way as in English. It regards time as a continuum， which is shown from the way of their presentation. Instead of saying "4 days"， they say "Dayness the fourth time" or "the fourth dayness". Even so， linguistic determinism has met with strong opposition. It's known that words are often borrowed from one language into another， for instance the French borrowing '1e weekend' from English. This sort of borrowing would be impossible if language determined thought completely.

For linguistic relativity， it states that distinctions encoded in one language are unique to that language alone and incommensurable with those of other systems. （Hu Zhuanglin and Liu Runqing， 1987） To support it， the variety of the division of colour spectrum has been frequently cited as evidence. Indeed if one imagines the color spectrum， it is a continuum， since each colour gradually blending into the next and there are no sharp boundaries. But we impose boundaries on it； for example， the English-speaking people talk of red， orange， yellow， green， blue， indigo， and violet. However， in other languages the boundaries are different. In neither Spanish， Italian nor Russian is there a word that corresponds to the English meaning of "blue". Likewise， in Spanish there are two words 'esquina' and 'rincon'， meaning an inside and an outside corner， which necessitate the use of more than one word in English to convey the same concept. Thus， the hypothesis claims that there is no limit to the structural diversity of languages.

Although complete acceptance of Sapir-Whorf hypothesis may be controversial some consensus on this issue has been achieved during the last two or three decades in which several investigators have tested the hypothesis with conflicting results by studying different aspects of language in relation to extra-Linguistic factors in different cultures， such as kinship terms， color terms， number words， disease terminologies， or modes of address.

The major agreements are listed in the following.

1."Languages primarily reflect rather than create sociocultural regularities in values and orientations"

2. "Languages throughout the world share a far larger number of structural universals than has heretofore been recognized" （Fisherman 1972： 155）

3. "If we can put aside the issue of `what first causes what"'， we are left with fascinating processes in which languages and societal behavior are equal partners rather than one or the other of them being `boss' and `giving orders to the other.

For language pedagogy， these studies have been extremely important. They have led to the widespread conviction that the language learner that he should not only study the cultural context （`language AND culture'） but that he should be made aware of the interaction between language and culture （`language IN culture' `culture IN language'）. （Stern， 1983， 206）

To have a deep understanding of the relationship between language and culture， we can't avoid mentioning the following two thrusts： cultural and linguistic universals， cultural and linguistic peculiarities.

Cultural and linguistic universals

Human beings， whatever language they happen to speak and wherever they happen to live， have a great deal in common culturally. These common cultural features we may refer to as cultural universals （Lyons， 1977）. Moreover， all men， regardless of birth and culture， share certain perceptual dispositions. Owing to these dispositions， we can be responsive to certain stimuli. Where such stimuli are present in all cultures， the cultural universals may be expected to lead to linguistic universals. Here let's still take the color vocabulary as an example. The variety of division of the color spectrum in different languages has been mentioned above. However， according to the study made by Berlin and Kay （1969）， it is found that the distinction of black and white is lexicalized in all languages. This may be owing to the sharp contrast in luminosity between these two colors. Next to black and white， those portions of the colour spectrum which are broadly treated as red and green are almost universally lexicalized. The linguistic phenomenon has a ready explanation in the biological fact that there are particular cells in the retina that are sensitive to these hues. In both cases， it is the shared biological characteristics of human beings that influence many of the ways of in which we perceive colors， and thus such cultural universal leads to the linguistic universal in lexicalization.

Meanwhile， cultural universals may be expected to lead to linguistic universals not only in lexicalization but also in structure. （Hu Zhuanglin and Liu Runqing， 1987）. The structure of a language is shaped to a very significant extent by the functions which it performs in a particular culture and society. Though different cultures need their languages to fulfill divergent functions， there are still certain very basic functions which characterize all languages. Such basic functions may be viewed as the natural effect of cultural universals， and they in turn lead naturally to linguistic universal. For example， it is obvious that speakers in all cultures have found it necessary to use language to make descriptions， to ask questions and to give orders. The functional universal clearly motivate the linguistic universal， for it has been found that almost all languages distinguish grammatically among declarative， interrogative and imperative sentences.

Cultural and linguistic peculiarities

Just as cultural universals tend to generate linguistic universal， differences in culture will give languages their unique structures （Hu Zhuanglin and Liu Runqing， 1987）. The issue can be supported by a lot of lexical examples. For example， English has three separate words for insect， aeroplane and pilot， but Hopi has only one. English has a rich vocabulary for different kinds of companies， such as company， firm， establishment， concern， corporation， enterprise， house， whereas Chinese has only one. Aeroplane and pilot are represented by distinct words in English simply because they are an important fact of life in the English-speaking culture. Likewise， the large number of company terms has a good explanation in the important role trading plays in English culture. Besides， cultural peculiarities also give languages their unique grammatical structures. For example， in English， the subject can not be omitted. And the sentence pattern with "formal subject it" or "formal object it" is frequently used in English. While in Chinese， the subject can be omitted. The grammar difference between English and Chinese has something to do with cultural differences. In western culture， man is thought to be opposed from nature and everything is thought to stand opposed to one another. Influenced by the world outlook， western thinking pattern is characterized as analytic， logic. Accordingly， in English， form is emphasized and the elements. of sentence can seldom be omitted. In contrast to westerners， Chinese people think there is oneness between man and nature. Guided by this outlook， Chinese thinking pattern emphasize synthesis， intuition. Accordingly， in Chinese， meaning is stressed and the sentence elements can be omitted without distorting meaning. Examples like these serve to illustrate a simple principle， i.e. different cultural features produce different linguistic features.

A discussion of the principles of cultural instruction in vocabulary teaching

1 The principle of relevance

From classroom observation， it is noticed that some teachers talk about some cultural information which has nothing to do with the words which they want to teach. Such practice of emphasizing culture at a price of sacrificing the time for teaching vocabulary comes largely from the misconception about the relationship be chapters， teaching culture is a necessary part of teaching vocabulary， while it is by no means the aim or the end of vocabulary teaching. And separating culture from its main carrier to emphasize its importance is also meaningless. Then the cultural instruction in vocabulary teaching is not to teach vocabulary for the sake of culture， but to teach culture in the interest of vocabulary.

2 The principle of moderation

According to Krashen's input hypothesis， students' progress in the acquisition of the target language depends on the comprehensible input that is slightly beyond their current level of competence. Therefore， the enough input on the cultural aspect of vocabulary is quite necessary. However， it is difficult for teachers to cover all the cultural information which is relevant to vocabulary in limited class time. Then the cultural instruction should focus on those words that can be easily misunderstood without explaining its cultural connotation or those words whose unique connotation are different to detect by intuition. And the cultural input should be moderate， if the instruction has already made word clear， more explanation will not only be useless but also will be tough for students to learn at one blow.

3 The cognitive

According to the cognitive psychology and Noam Chomsky's theory on linguistics in foreign language teaching， learners must first acquire linguistic and cultural knowledge as vehicle for communicating meanings and messages， and then obtain the communicative competence. （Zhang Changdong and Huang Taiquan， 2002）.Therefore， in order to enable students to use words appropriately according to particular situation， teachers should not only make students aware of the fact that vocabulary and culture are inseparable but also should make them know what words sociocultural meaning is. Only by this way， students' vocabulary acquisition can be deepened， and their vocabulary knowledge may be possible to be transformed into the real ability of using vocabulary.

4 The students-centered principle

Since success or failure in teaching is only determined by the students' language proficiency， the pedagogy should be students-centered. As an integral part of language teaching， cultural instruction in vocabulary teaching is no exception. Therefore， teachers should not only act as an information provider， but also should make students motivated for cultural factors carried in and propel them to learn actively instead of receiving knowledge passively. After all，learning vocabulary is a lengthy process and students can't get instruction from teachers all their lives. Then， developing students' ability to learn culture in vocabulary independently is another emphasis for cultural instruction in vocabulary teaching to place on. This requires that teachers should also create opportunities for students to think， to realize， and to discover the meaning of words， thus the efficiency of cultural instruction in vocabulary teaching can be promoted.

Besides these principles discussed above， cultural instruction in vocabulary teaching should hold a developing standpoint. As society develops， culture is constantly being confronted with ideas and information from outside sources. Since culture wants to endure， it usually adopts only those elements that are compatible with their values and their beliefs or that can be modified without causing major disruption. Besides， the assimilation of what is borrowed accelerates when cultures come into regular contact with each other. Therefore， culture is subject to fluctuations， seldom remaining constant.

[參考文献]

[1]现代英语词汇学概论[M]. 北京师范大学出版社 ， 张韵斐 主编， 1986.

[2]语言与文化[M]. 外语教学与研究出版社 ， 邓炎昌，刘润清著， 1989.

[3]英语词汇学引论[M]. 武汉大学出版社 ， 林承璋编著， 1997.

[4]词汇的社会文化特征[J]. 杨平.外语教学. 1994（04）.

[5] L2 Vocabulary Knowledge Acquisition： A Cross-sectional Study on Word Meaning & Collocation[D]. Yin Jun.广东外语外贸大学 2001.

（作者单位：陕西理工大学外国语学院，陕西 汉中 723000）