1.4.1. Features diskursivnoj persons of the teacher-language and literature teacher

The teacher-language and literature teacher is considered in linguistics and pedagogical rhetoric as the language, speech and communicative person, and representations about the given phenomena quite often coincide.

Concept «the language person» as set of abilities and the characteristics of the person causing creation and perception by it of texts, has entered into V.V. Vinogradov's scientific use (30th years of the XX-th century), and then it have presented in the form of JU.N.sentr, G.I.Bogin, JU.V.Christmas, O.B.Sirotinina's certain system model, etc.

So, JU.N.sentr named 3 levels of the language person: 1) verbally-semantic, assuming for the carrier normal possession of a natural language, and for the researcher – the traditional description of formal means of expression of certain values; 2) kognitivno-tezaurusnyj which units are concepts, ideas, kontsepty, developing at each language individuality in more or less ordered, more or less systematised «a world picture», reflecting hierarchy of values; 3) pragmatical (motivational), including the purposes, motives, interests. Installations and intentsionalnosti [Sentries 1987]. In the end of 1995 at conference «Ethnic and language consciousness» he has offered some results of generalisation and judgement various ponimany considered concept and has presented three-private structure (a kernel – updating ‑ periphery) the given conceptual field:

1) the language person: a niche in a subject (linguistics); the subject

(The comprehended world and reflected it in the speech); the individual; the author of the text; the native speaker; an informant; an active informant; a passive informant; the speaking; a speech portrait …;

2) the language person of the expert-philologist (the philological person);

The character (work of art); the concrete historic figure; the national language person …;

3) a scientific paradigm «the person – language»; communication «language – the person»; anthropological linguistics; national culture; It is scarlet-model language; language Sl-model; knowledge of language; knowledge of language; a language picture of the world; knowledge of the world; the thesaurus of the language person; language consciousness; (national) consciousness; mentality of the people; mental space (native speaker); associative communications; an associative field; a lexicon internal; a lexicon individual; a lexicon of the language person; psycholinguistic experiment; the case text »[Sentries 1995: 63-65].

In our case it is a question of the language person of the founder of the textbook and the teacher-philologist, proving in the speech activity possessing certain set of knowledge and representations.

The language person of the scientist-methodologist (the founder of the textbook) is «set creative (linguistic ‑ and pedagogical A.G.) abilities and sotsiopsiholingvisticheskih the characteristics of the individual causing creation and perception by it of speech products, persons displaying corresponding line and consequently possessing defined kognitivnoj depth, a communicatively-pragmatical orientation, structurally-language integrity» [the Titmouse 2006: 41].

The developed language person of the teacher is characterised by following skills: 1) possession of language system, its grammatical and lexical norms; 2) possession of speech system at text and stylistic level; 3) possession of social norms of the use of speech products at level of sphere of dialogue, a theme, style, a genre; 4) possession of construction and perception of difficult texts; 5) possession of roles speaking and listening, social and psychological roles of partnership in dialogue; 6) possession of pragmatical laws of dialogue in different co-operative and disputed communicative episodes (for an exit from the last); 7) possession ethical and etiketnymi norms of status and role positions [Kochetkova 1998: 8].

I.V.Sentenberg names following functions of the language person of the teacher-philologist:

· instrumentalno-cultural urological (mastering by the person of language assumes mastering by its units and associative communications, rules of construction of the statement, culture and socio-historical experience of the people, reflected in language);

· reproductive (reproduction in speech activity of language units, rules of their formation and a combination);

· creative (updating of language units in speeches and formation of new units, types of combinations for the decision of communicative problems);

· adaptive (adaptation of language units to mechanisms of a communicative situation for expression of the set sense);

· pragmatical (orientation to the addressee, its social status) [Sentenberg 1993: 11-12].

All listed make language competence (competence is the sum of knowledge and abilities which allow the person to carry out certain actions). Language competence consists from actually linguistic, sotsiolingvisticheskogo and pragmalingvisticheskogo components. Linguistic competence contains phonetic, lexical and grammatical knowledge and abilities, and also other parametres of language as systems irrespective of sotsiolingvisticheskogo values of their variants and from pragmatical features of functioning. Sotsiolingvistichesky competence concerns sotsiokulturnyh conditions of use of language. Pragmatical competence is connected with realisation of language means depending on intentsii speaking [Onkovich 2003: 15]. As we see, the language person in many works of linguists and methodologists is considered from the point of view of communicatively-dejatelnostnogo foreshortening, and as components of the language person such components, as «style of a life», «style of behaviour» along with «language taste», "linguistic feeling", «language kompetetnostju», «language ability» act.

According to authors of the dictionary «Pedagogical rechevedenie», the teacher possesses language, subject, linguistic and pragmatical kompetentsijami. The language competence includes knowledge of units of language and rules of their connection, communication. The linguistic competence has character of the knowledge concerning linguistics as a science. Subject reflects relations between subjects of world around and language. The pragmatical competence is possibility of realisation of the speech activity, caused by the communicative purposes; she assumes selection of a language material, ability to use variativnymi forms to choose speech type, to consider is functional-style versions [Pedagogical rechevedenie 1998: 81-82]. V.F.Rusetsky adheres to the Same point of view, characterising language, subject and pragmatical versions of the communicative competence of the teacher-philologist [Rusetsky 2002: 9].

L.P.Klobukova considers a phenomenon of the language person through a prism of dichotomy F de Sossjura. It enters concept of the speech person which realises itself in communications, chooses and carries out this or that strategy and dialogue tactics, uses this or that repertoire of means (both actually linguistic, and extralinguistic). Thus the language person and the speech person an essence phenomena paradigmatic and if the language person is a paradigm the speech person represents an element of such paradigm: « … any language person represents a multilayered and multicomponent paradigm of speech persons which are differentiated, on the one hand, taking into account various levels of language, on the other hand – taking into account principal views of speech activity, and with the third – taking into account those that, spheres and situations in which frameworks there is a speech dialogue »[Klobukova 1997: 29]. According to L.P.Klobukovoj,« for the methodologist three-level representation of structure of the language person, focused on the theoretical description of the given phenomenon will be obviously insufficient. The methodologist has not enough, for example, instructions, that at level In (motivation level) as elements of levels dialogue spheres, communicative situations, roles, t.e are considered. «A communicative network». The methodologist should describe in details sections of this network, and not in its horizontal execution. For lingvodidaktiki dialogue at level «how to pass?», «how to pass?» In the same degree it is spiritualised by motivational aspect, as well as communications on a motivation level In – level of case texts »[in the same place: 30].

Let's result the concrete example characterising the teacher as the language person.

Fragment of a lesson of Russian (a speech genre «an explanation)
1. We will begin a new theme. Today you will get acquainted with spelling of alternating vowels E/I in roots ber / bir, per / a feast, measures / the world, der / dir, rubbed / a shooting gallery, stel / stil. Your problem ‑ to learn to distinguish words with these roots in the text and correctly to write public in a root.

2. As well as in roots kas / plaits which we have already studied, spelling of alternating vowels e / and depends on certain conditions. What? Let's look at the table.

3. On a board in 2 columns words with these roots are written down. Sasha, read words from the first column. – I will collect, has wiped, gauging. ‑ what it is parts of speech? ‑ verbs. ‑ it is correct, verbs. What kind? – (Silence) ‑ I do not hear! Ask a question. – what to make? ‑ so, «what to make?». What kind? – Whisper from several school desks: «Made, made …». The pupil uncertainly: "Perfective aspect". ‑ Made, correctly. Name a root of these words. – Ber, rubbed, measures. ‑ thanks! Igor, please, verbs from the second column. ‑ Bir, the world, a shooting gallery. – yes not roots, and words. – I take away, to die out, wiped. – so. What they of a kind? ‑ imperfect. ‑ imperfect, yes. Ask a question. – what to do? ‑ yes, «what to do?» . It is good! How you think, why in a root of words from the first column the letter e, and in the second column is written – and? ‑ Because a verbal aspect different. – yes. And still why. Look attentively at a suffix. – after «bir, a shooting gallery, the world» a suffix and. ‑ it is correct, Ira, after a root in words of the second column there is a suffix and: it is not casually allocated in words.

4. Who will try to formulate a rule of spelling alternating e/i in a root? Sasha, please. – If there is a suffix and, is written And, there is no suffix, is written E ‑ All agree with formulation Sashi? Think properly. – Lena has not resulted examples. – it is good.

5. Now we will generalise told, having added other roots with alternating vowels: «In verbs made and an imperfective aspect with alternating vowels E/I in roots ber / bir, per / a feast, measures / the world, der / dir, rubbed / a shooting gallery, stel / stil is written public And if A.Pri's suffix absence of a suffix further follows public E.Naprimer is written: to collect – I will collect».

6. And now open textbooks on page … and read a rule. Tanja, where your textbook? – I have forgotten. ‑ has forgotten? Oksana, put the textbook on the middle of a school desk and work together with Tanej. Oleg, you are long dug in a portfolio – the textbook should lay on a school desk prior to the beginning of a lesson.

7. Nadja, read aloud a rule from the textbook. – (The schoolgirl reads a rule). ‑ Thanks! Yes, about verbal aspects here it is told nothing, but should know about it for the general development.

8. Oleg, repeat a rule. – (The pupil repeats).

9. Well. So, we have learnt a new rule, and time has come to fix the studied.

Before us a fragment of a lesson of studying of a new material. Diskursivnyj a genre ‑ «heuristic conversation». It tseleustanovka – formation of knowledge, abilities. Informing function – in the course of an explanation of a new material main, however specificity of J «heuristic conversation» in maintenance of mastering of the information, reception of new representation about a speech subject, transformation of the maintenance initial, reflected in the pupil as the subject and object of training of the most different parties of the validity in the new maintenance set by the program. With the information the whole series of actions is made: 1) the new, earlier unknown knowledge of investigated object is informed; 2) to the pupil it is given the chance to feel reliability of this knowledge, is shown a course, process of its reception, information acceptance is provided; 3) representing process of a logic conclusion, the teacher opens a method of knowledge which can be used for reception of new knowledge further. Thus, statement of the communicative purpose causes certain speech behaviour of the teacher as diskursivnoj persons.

In the course of an explanation of a new material there is a translation of knowledge which has a dual purpose: to give subject knowledge and to make such transposition of a material which would work on development of this material since. The translation certificate exists and as the purpose of training assuming the means, ways and having the nature. On kognitivno-tezaurusnom level of the language person all kinds of scientific knowledge are presented: ontologic, gnoseological, aksiologicheskoe and pragmatical. The ontologic party of knowledge is expressed in texts uchebno-scientific podstilja by means of 1) terminosistemy school courses of bases of sciences (alternating vowels, a verb, a perfective aspect, an imperfective aspect, a suffix, a root of a word, a part of speech and so forth); 2) methodically organised system of general scientific lexicon (to formulate a rule to allocate a suffix, etc.) ; 3) the language facts; 4) means of expression of a mental field of knowledge; 5) the text fragments fixing various kinds of knowledge. The gnoseological party of knowledge is transferred: 1) by means of text structure in which the knowledge is presented in system: uncertain-problematic – rather authentic – authentic; 2) with the help argumentativnyh statements; 3) by means of acknowledgement of conclusions by the teacher or the textbook text. In the course of expansion of a discourse character of knowledge is exposed to change from problematic to rather authentic. It occurs in case of creation of a problem situation which defines a direction, aspect of a substantiation and interpretation of the basic concepts. In the example resulted above the knowledge is presented as essentially incomplete. The teacher trains schoolboys during the decision of an informative problem. Problematical character and uncertainty of knowledge are reflected as in construction of separate statements of a fragment of a discourse (It not absolutely full definition. Let's specify … And how it is possible to prove …?), and at level of dictionary selection (add, specify, prove, result examples, name, etc.). The Aksiologichesky party of knowledge is connected in our fragment with modelling behavioural stetereotipov: the "behavioural" instructions which are carrying out reguljativnuju function (straight lines ‑ Put the textbook on the school desk middle ‑ and indirect – you are long dug in a portfolio – the textbook should lay on a school desk … ‑ ‘ More likely get the textbook ’;) aksiologicheskie statements (it is good! Correctly! Good fellows!); etiquette formulas (Thanks!) . As means of expression of a pragmatical field of knowledge the metastatements which purpose is the description of current speech dialogue serve. In our fragment of a lesson of the metastatement is instructions on the beginning of the speech block: we Will begin a new theme, the instructions on a thought course: And now we will generalise the told; instructions on end of the speech block: So, we have learnt a new rule ….

On a motivation level the teacher chooses the optimal model of an explanation. It is heuristic conversation when schoolboys under the guidance of the teacher observe over the language facts and generalise them, deducing a necessary rule. Such method of training is usually used in a case when the material and ways of its analysis are familiar to pupils. The explanation ‑ this nonrigid argumentativnoe the statement which structural model consists of two obligatory and one facultative components is composite: the thesis – the argument – acknowledgement – a conclusion. The thesis acts in the form of judgement (Spelling depends on certain conditions …); the argument is carried out in the form of the analysis, i.e. Analysis, consideration of the facts (the table with an illustrative material). The conclusion represents the compressed condensate of a rheme part of J (argument-analysis).

The concept «the speech person» is synonymous, in our opinion, to concept «the communicative person». The communicative person, from the point of view of V.B.Kashkina, the most important component of the person in general, after all communications occupies 80 % of all human existence: audition ‑ 45 %, govorenie ‑ 30 %, reading ‑ 16 %, the letter ‑ 9 % »[Kashkin 2000: 134].« The communicative person »is treated in linguistic and pedagogical researches as the concrete participant of the concrete communicative certificate really operating in real communications.« The communicative person »includes such parametres, as set of individual communicative strategy and tactics, kognitivnyh, the semiotics, motivational preferences generated in processes of communications as the communicative competence of the individual, it« the communicative passport »(I.A.Sternin), the card (I.N.Gorelov). Concept« the communicative person »assumes rules and receptions of speech influence, subjects of dialogue, the characteristics connected with a choice not only verbal, but also a nonverbal code of communications and other, purely communicative (not language) parametres.

O.V.Filippova names following levels of the communicative person:

· valuable – representation about a speech ideal, the aspiration to it, ideas which bears (professes) the person, communicating with others; the basic qualities of the person of the teacher conviction, persistence, clarity, a pedagogical step, sociability, an emotionality, and the basic characteristics of speech behaviour – doveritelnost, sincerity, warmth, goodwill, patience, vivacity, individual style admit;

· motivational – dominating motive in the dialogue, reflected in selected strategy and dialogue tactics; it is directed on preservation of cultural dialogue, harmonisation of dialogue or on discharge, or even destruction of the settled norms of dialogue etc.;

· pragmatical level of abilities to the dialogue, including system of knowledge of rhetorical character [Filippova 2001: 98].

Teachers differentiate two aspects of the characteristic of communicative abilities of the teacher: that is called in social psychology "self-giving", i.e. Ability to use personal abilities for achievement of the communicative purpose; possession of "technology" of dialogue and contact – both verbal, and nonverbal [Leontev 1996: 56]. In the first case it is a question of such qualities of the teacher, as charm, virtuosity, confidence, friendliness, sincerity, objectivity, interest, enthusiasm. The second aspect assumes certain suggestive and pertseptivnye properties of the teacher as communicative person [Smelkova 1999: 75]. These abilities should be peculiar to any teacher-predmetniku. Century And. Kochetova considers, that communicative abilities of the teacher-language and literature teacher «are presented as the general (necessary in any kind of professional dialogue of the individual with group and mezhindividnom dialogue), pedagogical (necessary for the teacher in any pedagogical system and any speciality) and special pedagogical (necessary for language teaching at school) [Kochetova 2000: 10].

The teacher is professional kommunikator, working in the educational field of activity, owning technics of pedagogical communications, pedagogical competence. The pedagogical competence – a circle of the questions, which decision is included into duties of any teacher. Pedagogical competence (competence – ‘ possession the competence; possession the knowledge, allowing to judge about something ’) reflects possession level necessary knowledge and abilities of the separate participant of pedagogical process. Thus, the competence is the set norm, competence – personal qualities (set of qualities) subject in relation to its activity, the characteristic of its person. With reference to diskursivnoj we will speak persons of the teacher about its communicative competence.

The communicative competence of the teacher as diskursivnoj persons is a part pedagogical. M.Sevill-Truak allocates three blocks in the communicative competence: 1) linguistic knowledge: verbal elements; nonverbal elements; patterns, or elements in certain speech events; areas of admissible variants for all elements and for their organisation; value of variants in certain situations; 2) abilities to co-operate: allocation of essential elements in communicative situations; a choice and interpretation of the forms corresponding to features of a situation, to roles and relations (a rule of use of speech); norms of interaction and interpretation; strategy of achievement of the purposes; 3) cultural knowledge: social structure; valuable estimations; kognitivnye cards and schemes; occurrence processes in culture (transfer of knowledge and abilities) [Saville-Troike 1982].

Communicative it is possible to consider as a part and the genre competence (possession of norms of construction and functioning diskursivnyh and speech genres). According to V.I.Karasika, the genre competence is a non-uniform formation in which structure the various components which original combination is defined by requirements of communicative situations can be allocated, on the one hand, and features of the language person, with another. Modelling of the language person in three aspects can be one of possible approaches to allocation of types of the genre competence, in its opinion: reguljativnom, informative and fastsinativnom. Reguljativnyj the aspect of the language person assumes ability to establish and keep in touch with the partner in dialogue in various types of a discourse. The informative aspect opens sphere of knowledge (the general and special) and abilities adequately to use this knowledge in concrete dialogue. Fastsinativnyj the aspect represents the tsennostno-emotional complex characteristic of the person in dialogue and is expressed in ability to support a dialogue tonality in various kinds of a discourse. Other approach to modelling of types of the genre competence can be, according to V.I.Karasika, is connected with allocation of the general types of situations of dialogue, for example, opposition lichnostno-focused (personal) and statusno-focused (institutsionalnogo) discourses and their versions. Essentially important the scientist considers allocation of primary and secondary genres with reference to not household dialogue [Karasik 1998: 42].

Hence, practical possession of a set of speech genres is essential aspect of the professional competence diskursivnoj persons of the teacher-language and literature teacher.

So, in the scientific literature system and functional approaches to the person «the person speaking», in our case ‑ the teacher-philologist are allocated. Similar differentiation is rather conditional, as it is carried out with a view of theoretical judgement of the given phenomenon. The teacher during each moment of the speech activity acts in 2 ipostasjah: the language and communicative person. And their individual character is especially underlined. However, applying for language and communicative exclusiveness, «people in similar communicative situations often behave amazingly equally. It is connected by that speaking during each moment of the speech biography features of group speech behaviour show. The native speaker as though focuses in itself lines of" collective language persons ». It can simultaneously act, for example, as the language person of townspeople, the language person of the student-language and literature teacher, the language person of the twenty years' young man etc.« The person speaking »appears in the form of many-sided, multiplane object of the research which originality is defined by a unique combination of socially-psychological characteristics» [Sedov 2004: 120-121].

In our opinion, the concept which would reflect behaviour of the person in a typical communicative situation is necessary. It is «diskursivnaja the person», assuming ability kommunikantov as representatives of certain social institute to generate and interpret texts in typical conditions of a communicative situation. Within the limits of a certain discourse, by M.Fuko's recognition, the subject is insignificant, he is subordinated to a discourse and plays by its rules, i.e. It is secondary. Thus, if the language/communicative person is defined as communicative individuality of the person diskursivnaja the person represents set of integrated and differential language characteristics of the person as the representative of certain social group.

Each social institute as «the cultural-specific is standard organised conventional system of forms of activity» [Makarov 2003: 206] has own rules of functioning, norm and the requirement to functional-diskursivnoj activity of its subjects. The essence of social institute is shown also in obligatory division into social roles and statuses which in a general view are designated as "agent" of institute and the "client" using given institute (V.I.Karasik, M.A.Makarov, etc.).

Let's notice thereupon, that the role and the status of the person in a certain situation of communications can not coincide. The status includes set of social positions: an age, sex, professional work, the marital status, associative groups (a circle of the friends familiar), prestige positions, religious creed, political interests of the person and so forth the Role as set of the cultural models correlated with the certain status, includes relations, values, ways of behaviour which the society orders persons. It means characteristic repertoire of speech actions which the agent of institute should carry out under certain circumstances. The central characteristic of a role are expectations (espektatsii) associates concerning its executor. First of all, the social role is defined by professional and social activity of the person. The general sphere for the social status and a role is professional work. Hence, the status expresses characteristics of social institute and includes corresponding knowledge of the rights and duties of subjects of the given institute, of its purposes and functioning as a whole, that, in turn, are reflected in the course of social interaction. That is the person, uniting in itself status and role characteristics, builds the verbal and nonverbal behaviour according to expectations of the clients using social institute. From this follows, that each social institute possesses own strategic way of the organisation of a discourse and certain type diskursivnogo behaviour that explains a variety of types and discourse genres.

Diskursivnaja the person of the teacher-philologist has the difficult structure including a number of integrated and differential signs. Integrated signs unite diskursivnuju the person of the teacher with diskursivnymi persons of other types (for example, lawyers and teachers ‑ good ritory). Differential signs distinguish given diskursivnuju the person from other types diskursivnyh persons.

The authority of the teacher-philologist as carrier of norms of a literary language and speech behaviour proves to be true in community traditions of culture and formation. High requirements to level of the communicative competence of the teacher are caused by its status role. From it free possession of language resources, norms statusno the focused dialogue is required, following which constantly is a subject of an estimation from the addressee. For associates the teacher-philologist ‑ is the elite language person. However, according to J.N.Karaulova, the majority of language and literature teachers is the carrier «sredneliteraturnogo type of speech culture». In it the contradiction between diskursivnoj and the real language/communicative person of the teacher of Russian.

<< | >>
A source: Gabidullina Alla Rashatovna. TRAINING AND PEDAGOGICAL DISCOURSE: CATEGORIAL STRUCTURE AND GENRE PERSONALITY. Thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philology. Donetsk 2009. 2009

More on topic 1.4.1. Features diskursivnoj persons of the teacher-language and literature teacher:

  1. 1.4. The teacher and the pupil as diskursivnye persons
  2. the teacher and the psychologist as experts. Features of pedagogical and psychological knowledge as versions of special knowledge
  3. Self-educational activity of the teacher of an elementary school and its feature
  4. Didactic principles of preparation of the officer-teacher of military chair
  5. problems of development of a legal regulation of activity of the teacher (psychologist) in investigatory actions with participation of minors
  6. theoretical bases of formation of pedagogical culture of the teacher of military chair
  7. 3.1. A role of the teacher (psychologist) by manufacture of investigatory actions with participation of the minor
  9. the APPENDIX 7 Working program of a subject matter «Professional self-organising of the teacher»
  10. 2.2 Pedagogical technology of formation of creative competence of the teacher of an elementary school in self-educational activity
  11. a legal regulation of participation of the teacher (psychologist) in criminal trial of the CIS countries
  12. a problem of definition of the remedial status and remedial function of the teacher (psychologist)