Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T20:22:34.215Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genre and Literacy-Modeling Context in Educational Linguistics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2008

James R. Martin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Christie (1992), in the previous year's volume of the Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, reviewed literacy initiatives in Australia which drew on systemic functional linguistics, focusing on three themes: differences between speech and writing, written genres, and the study of spoken language. This paper is designed to complement her review, highlighting ongoing research within the same general theoretical framework, and focusing on the general question of modeling context in educational linguistics.

Type
Approaches to Second Language Teaching
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 13 , March 1992 , pp. 141 - 172
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

UNANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bakhtin, M. M. 1986. The problem of speech genres. In Speech genres and other late essays. [Trans. V. McGee.] Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.60–102.Google Scholar
Bernstein, B. 1975. Class, codes and control. Volume 3: Towards a theory of educational transmissions. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Bernstein, B. 1990. Class, codes and control 4: The structuring of pedagogic discourse. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. 1974. The school as a conservative force. In Eggleton, J. (ed.) Contemporary research in the sociology of education. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Buggy, T. 1988. The long revolution: A history of modern China. Sydney: Shakespeare Head Press.Google Scholar
Christie, F. 1992. Literacy in Australia. In Grabe, W. et al. (eds.) Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 12. Literacy. New York: Cambridge University Press. 142–155.Google Scholar
Christie, F. (ed.) 1989. Literacy for a changing world: Afresh look at the basics. Hawthorn, Victoria: The Australian Council for Educational Research. [Theme Monograph Series. Radford House, Frederick Street, Hawthorn, Vic. 3122, Australia.]Google Scholar
Christie, F. (ed.) 1991. Literacy in social processes: Papers from the inaugural Australian Systemic Linguistics Conference, held at Deakin University, January 1990. Darwin: Centre for Studies of Language in Education, Northern Territory University. [Casuarina, NT 0810, Australia.]Google Scholar
Christie, F., Martin, J. R. and Rothery, J.. 1989. Genres make meaning: Another reply to Sawyer and Watson. English in Australia. 90.43–59.Google Scholar
Christie, F. et al. , 1991. Teaching English literacy: A project of national significance on the preservice preparation of teachers for teaching English literacy. 3 Volumes. Canberra: Department of Employment, Education and Training and Darwin: Centre for Studies of Language in Education, Northern Territory University.Google Scholar
Christie, F. et al. , 1992. Exploring explanations. Sydney: Harcourt BraceJovanovich. [Levels 1–4 and Teacher's Book.]Google Scholar
Cranny-Francis, A. 1990. Feminist fiction: Feminist uses of generic fiction. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Cranny-Francis, A. 1992a. The value of ‘genre’ in English literature teaching. English in Australia. 99.27–48. [Theme issue on Contested Orthodoxies.]Google Scholar
Cranny-Francis, A. 1992b. Engendered fictions: Analysing gender in the production and reception of texts. New South Wales: University Press.Google Scholar
Cranny-Francis, A., Lee, A., Martin, J. R. and McCormack, R.. 1991. Danger -shark: Assessment and evaluation of a student text. In Christie, F. (ed.) Literacy in social processes: Papers from the inaugural Australian Systemic Linguistics Conference, held at Deakin University, January 1990. Darwin: Centre for Studies of Language in Education, Northern Territory University. 245–285.Google Scholar
Cranny-Francis, A. and Martin, J. R.. 1991. Contratextuality: The poetics of subversion. In Christie, F. (ed.) Literacy in social processes: Papers from the inaugural Australian Systemic Linguistics Conference, held at Deakin University, January 1990. Darwin: Centre for Studies of Language in Education, Northern Territory University. 286–344.Google Scholar
Derewianka, B. 1991. Exploring How Texts Work. Sydney: Primary English Teaching Association.Google Scholar
Derewianka, B. 1992. Reading secondary science textbooks. In Scott, J. (ed.) Science and language links: Classroom implications. Melbourne: Australian Reading Association. 67–80.Google Scholar
Freebody, P. 1991. Inventing cultural-capitalist distinctions in the assessment of HSC papers: Coping with inflation in an era of ‘literacy crisis.’ In Christie, F. (ed.) Literacy in social processes: Papers from the inaugural Australian Systemic Linguistics Conference, held at Deakin University, January 1990. Darwin: Centre for Studies of Language in Education, Northern Territory University. 96–108.Google Scholar
Gee, J. P. 1990. Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses. London: Falmer.Google Scholar
Gee, J. P. 1992. The social mind: Language, ideology, and social practice. New York: Bergin and Garvey.Google Scholar
Giblett, R. and O'Carroll, J. (eds.) 1990. Discipline - dialogue - difference: Proceedings of the Language in Education Conference. Murdoch University, December 1989. Perth: 4D Duration Publications, School of Humanities, Murdoch University. [Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia]Google Scholar
Gilbert, P. with Rowe, K.. 1989. Gender, literacy and the classroom. Melbourne: Australian Reading Association.Google Scholar
Gilbert, P. and Taylor, S.. 1991. Fashioning the feminine: Girls, popular culture and schooling. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Gray, B. 1985. Helping children to become language learners in the classroom. In Christie, F. (ed.) Aboriginal perspectives on experience and learning: The role of language in Aboriginal education. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press. 87–104.Google Scholar
Gray, B. 1986. Aboriginal education: Some implications of genre for literacy development. In Painter, C., and Martin, J. R. (eds.) Writing to mean: Teaching genres across the curriculum. Applied Linguistics Association of Australia. 188–208. [Occasional Papers 9.]Google Scholar
Gray, B. 1987. How natural is ‘natural’ language teaching: Employing holistic methodology in the classroom. Australian Journal of Early Childhood. 12.4.3–19.Google Scholar
Gray, B. 1990. Natural language learning in Aboriginal classrooms: Reflection son teaching and learning. In Walton, C. and Eggington, W. (eds.) Language: Maintenance, power and education in Australian Aboriginal contexts. Darwin, NT: Northern Territory University Press. 105–139.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1974. Interview with M. A. K. Halliday. In Parret, H. (ed.) Discussing language. The Hague: Mouton. 81–120. [Janua Linguarum Series Maior 93.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1975. Learning how to mean: Explorations in the development of language. London: Edward Arnold.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1978. Language as a social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1982. The de-automatization of grammar: From Priestley's ‘An Inspector Calls’. In Anderson, J. M. (ed.) Language form and linguistic variation: Papers dedicated to Angus Macintosh. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 129–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1985a. Spoken and written language. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press. [Republished by Oxford University Press 1989.]Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1985b. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1985c. Context of situation. In Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R.. Language, context and text. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press. 3–14. [Republished by Oxford University Press 1989.]Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1988. On the language of physical science. In Ghadessy, M. (ed.) Registers of written English: Situational factors and linguistic features. London: Pinter. 162–178.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1990. Some grammatical problems in scientific English. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics. 6.13–37. [Series S.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1991. Linguistic perspectives on literacy-A systemic-functional approach. In Christie, F. (ed.) Literacy in social processes: Papers from the inaugural Australian Systemic Linguistics Conference, held at Deakin University, January 1990. Darwin: Centre for Studies of Language in Education, Northern Territory University. 2–22.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. and Martin, J. R.. In press. Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: Falmer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harste, J. C. and Short, K. G.. 1988. What educational difference does your theory of language make? Paper presented at the Language in Learning Symposium. Mount Gravatt, Queensland, Australia, 1988.Google Scholar
Hasan, R. and Martin, J. R. (eds.) 1989. Language Development: Learning language, learning culture. Meaning and choice in language: Studies for Michael Halliday. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. [Advances in Discourse Processes 27.]Google Scholar
Heffernan, D. A. and Learmonth, M. S.. 1982. The world of science—Book 3. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.Google Scholar
Heffernan, D. A. and Learmonth, M. S. 1983. The world of science—Book 4. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.Google Scholar
Kress, G. 1991. Critical discourse analysis. In Grabe, W. et al. (eds.) Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 11. Discourse analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press. 84–99.Google Scholar
Kress, G. and Threadgold, T.. 1988. Towards a social theory of genre. Southern Review. 21.215–243.Google Scholar
Kress, G. and van Leeuven, T.. 1990. Reading images. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Kress, G.Forthcoming. A grammar of diagrammes, maps and charts.Google Scholar
Lemke, J. L. 1990. Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1984. Types of writing in infants and primary school. In Unsworth, L. (ed.) Reading, writing, spelling: Proceedings of the fifth Macarthur Reading/Language Symposium, Sydney: Macarthur Institute of Higher Education. 34–55. [Republished in Working with genre (Papers from the 1989 LERN Conference, University of Technology, Sydney, 25–26 11 1989). Sydney: Common Ground. 33–44. 1991.]Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1985. Factual writing: Exploring and challenging social reality. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press. [Republished by Oxford University Press 1989.]Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1986. Grammaticalising ecology: The politics of baby seals and kangaroos. In Threadgold, T., Grosz, E. A., Kress, G. and Halliday, M. A. K. (eds.) Language, semiotics, ideology. Sydney: Sydney Association for Studies in Society and Culture. 225–268. [SydneyStudies in Society and Culture 3.]Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1990. Literacy in science: Learning to handle text as technology. In Christie, F. (ed.) Fresh look at the basics: Literacy for a changing world. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research. 79–117.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1991a. Intrinsic functionality: Implications for contextual theory. Social Semiotics. 1.1.99–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1991b. Nominalisation in science and humanities: Distilling knowledge and scaffolding text. In Ventola, E. (ed.) Recent systemic and other functional views on language. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1992a. English text: System and structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1992b. Macroproposals: Meaning by degree. In Mann, W. A. and Thompson, S. A. (eds.) Discourse description: Diverse analyses of a fund raising text. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 359–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, J. R., Christie, F. and Rothery, J.. n.d. Social processes in education: A reply to Sawyer and Watson (and others). In Reid, I. (ed.) The place of genre in learning: Current debates. Geelong, Victoria: Centre for Studies in Literary Education 46–57. [Typereader Publications 1.] [More fully published in The Teaching of English: Journal of the English Teachers' Association of New South Wales. 53.]Google Scholar
Martin, J. R., Christie, F. and Rothery, J.. 1991. Literacy for a lifetime - teachers’ notes. Sydney: Film Australia.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. 1991. Language on language: The grammar of semiosis. Social Semiotics. 1.2.69–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Painter, C. 1984. Into the mother tongue: A case study of early language development. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
Painter, C. and Martin, J. R. (eds.) 1986. Writing to mean: Teaching genres across the curriculum. Applied Linguistics Association of Australia [Occasional Papers 9.] [Available from Department of Modern Languages, University of Wollongong, P.O. Box 1144, Wollongong, NSW 2500, Australia.]Google Scholar
Poynton, C. 1985. Language and gender: Making the difference. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press. [Republished by Oxford University Press. 1989.]Google Scholar
Rose, D., McInnes, D. and Korner, H. 1992. Scientific literacy (Literacy in industry research project - Stage I). Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program.Google Scholar
Rothery, J. 1986. Teaching genre in the primary school: A genre based approach to the development of writing abilities. Writing project—report 1986. Working Papers in Linguistics. 3–62. [Department of Linguistics, University of Sydney.]Google Scholar
Rothery, J. 1989. Learning about language. In Hasan, R. and Martin, J. R. (eds.) Language development: Learning language, learning culture. Meaning and choice in language: Studies for Michael Halliday. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. 199–256. [Advances in Discourse Processes 27.]Google Scholar
Rothery, J. In press. Literacy in school English. Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program.Google Scholar
Thibault, P. 1989. Genres, social action and pedagogy: Towards a critical social semiotic account. Southern Review. 22.338–362.Google Scholar
Thibault, P. 1991. Social semiotics as praxis: Text, social meaning making and Nabokov's “Ada”. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. [Theoryand History of Literature 74.]Google Scholar
Threadgold, T. 1988. The genre debate. Southern Review. 21.315–330.Google Scholar
Threadgold, T. 1989. Talking about genre: Ideologies and incompatible discourses. Cultural Studies. 3.1.101–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Threadgold, T. 1991. Postmodernism, systemic-functional linguistics as metalanguage and the practice of cultural critique. In Christie, F. (ed.) Literacy in social processes: Papers from the inaugural Australian Systemic Linguistics Conference, held at Deakin University, January 1990. Darwin: Centre for Studies of Language in Education, Northern Territory University. 60–82.Google Scholar
van Leeuven, T. 1988. Music and ideology: Notes towards a sociosemiotics of mass media music. In Threadgold, T. (ed.) Sydney Association for Studies in Society and Culture working papers. 2.1/2.19–44. Sydney: Sydney Association for Studies in Society and Culture.Google Scholar
Veel, R. 1992. Engaging with scientific language: A functional approach to the language of school science. Australian Science Teachers Journal. 38.Google Scholar
Veel, R. 1992. In press. Literacy in school science. Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program.Google Scholar
Walton, C. 1990. The process vs genre debate: An Aboriginal education perspective. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics. 13.1.100–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walton, C. and Eggington, W. (eds.) 1990. Language: Maintenance, power and education in Australian Aboriginal contexts. Darwin, NT: Northern Territory University Press. [Casuarina, NT 0810, Australia.]Google Scholar
Wignell, P., Martin, J. R. and Eggins, S.. 1990. The discourse of geography: Ordering and explaining the experiential world. Linguistics and Education. 1.359–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar