In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

184 LANGUAGE, VOLUME 66. NUMBER 1 (1990) torical development of classroom observation from 1968 to 1980; it certainly is important as a review of major issues and problems in classroom -based research. Ch. I (1-43) presents classroom observation in assessments of the effectiveness of various foreign language methods and teaching techniques . Classroom observation as an instrument for feedback in teacher training is covered in Ch. 2 (44-108), while criticisms of interaction analysis constitute Ch. 3 (109-24). Ch. 4 (125-96) presents alternatives to the Flanders approach, with a focus on the language learner interacting with the teacher. The articles quoted at length (and in small type) come from readily-available journals (e.g. Modern Language Journal, Language Learning, Hispania, Foreign Language Annals, TESOL Quarterly) ana conference proceedings (i.e. TESOL, AILA), and include contributions by John L. D. Clark, Frank M. Grittner , Gilbert A. Jarvis, Robert L. Politzer, Sylvia H. Rothfarb, Gertrude Moskowitz, Hans-Jurgen Krumm, Leona G. Bailey, John F. Fanselow . Michael H. Long, and Allwright himself. There is a certain frustration in these four chapters. As Allwright points out, 'classroom observation was a procedure looking for a purpose ' ( 197). That purpose seemed to come only in the mid to late 1970s when issues in second (and first) language acquisition were addressed through observation of learners' errors, teachers ' talk as input, and discourse between student and teacher (Ch. 5, 197-241). These pre1980 studies, however (by Allwright, Stephen J. Gaies, and Herbert W. Seliger), are largely preliminary research reports, interesting pilot studies with calls for further research. Yet the book stops here. A concluding chapter (Ch. 6., 242-59) is largely retrospective, with occasional briefmention of more recent work from the first half of the 1980s. In the final section, 'Further reading' (260-67), Allwright says: 'it seems more appropriate to attempt to fill in the gaps left in the coverage of early papers, rather than to try to bring the reader up-to-date with the newest ones' (260). He gives no reason. [Julia S. Falk, Michigan State University.] Mal og medvit: Heidersskrift til Kjell Venâs pâ 60-ârsdagen 30. November 1987, frâ vener og laeresveinar. Ed. by Tove Bull, Ernst Hâkon Jahr, and Geirr Wiggen. Oslo: Novus, 1987. Pp. 265. NKr. 183.00. This collection of essays honors Kjell Venas, since 1971 holder of the University of Oslo chair in New Norwegian (nynorsk) linguistics. All of the articles are written on nynorsk. and most have nynorsk as a principal focus (obvious exceptions are the articles on historical linguistics ). A poem by Olav Beito, Venâs' predecessor in the nynorsk chair, opens the collection; this is followed by a bibliography of Venâs' work compiled by Tove Bull. In addition to his six books (dealing with topics in morphology , dialectology, sociolinguistics, and toponymy ) and numerous articles, the bibliography registers an active and continued involvement on Venâs' part with his own native dialect and with nynorsk language politics. The papers in the book are divided into five categories. The first set of three articles deals with topics in historical linguistics. Oddvar Nes, in 'Etymologiske blandingar', presents new etymologies for eight Old Norse, Old Irish, Middle Irish, and Modern Norwegian words. Jan Ragnar Hagland, in 'Om eit tilnamn og tid som renn', presents a piece of Sherlock Holmesian detective work in a discussion of the use of the word klepsedre 'waterglass (a kind of hourglass)' as a surname, and in so doing gives a lively picture of clerical life in Norway in the Middle Ages. Jan Terje Faarlund's 'Grammatiske funksjonar i eldre og yngre mal' compares the nominative case in Old Norse with the syntactic category 'subject' in the modern Scandinavian languages (including Icelandic). He argues that the conventional view, wherein nominative case is seen as a morphological means of realizing the subject function (which in the modern languages is replaced by a positional means for the realization of the same function), is misleading , since by most criteria the Old Norse nominative had little in common with the syntactic relation of subject. The second section. 'Nyare sprâkhistorie', contains two articles, Tove Bull's 'To nordnorske ordsamling i grunnlaget for Ivar Aasens Norsk...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 184-185
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.