INTRODUCTION TO THE DIDACTICS OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE

A socio-critical approach
Armando López Valero
Eduardo Encabo Fernández
Chapter I
Language as a transversal element that articulates all human action
In this chapter that begins this production, we could only address the topic around which everything revolves.
the theme of the work, that is, the language. Before addressing Language and Literature, or their teaching,
we must refer to that abstract entity called language that has occurred since the beginning of the
times. Since humanity chooses to impose a cultural element that acts as a norm and as
A repressor of the instincts requires a vehicle of action within that outlined cultural society. Thus, if
we conduct a visual sweep of our closest environment, and even further away, we will observe that everything is
language, in any of its manifestations. Such samples can well be spoken (when
we interact with a person interlocutor), written (the contact with books, with the posters that we
things are announced in written form...), iconic (those cultural signs that we have already internalized as
they can be the little men that indicate if a traffic light is red or green to cross), proxemics (in the
sentido of body language and our signs toward others), paralinguistic (rhythm, intonation...). With
we grant the rest of the people who live with us information for later
vital actions, and all of this is made effective through language. We are in a position to agree - such
as Marina (1999) indicates to us - that the most effective way with the rest of the world that transcends us is the
language; the way in which language intervenes in the complex relationships produced gives us the key to
understand the constitution of the commonwealth world in which we live. But, what is language really?
Are we in a position to say that it is an activity, as Leontev indicated? Or will we say as
What is a faculty according to Chomsky? Likewise, we could ask ourselves if it is a formal system, as mentioned.
Hjelmslev; and what if it were an operative module - Fodor's opinion? Will it be - in Lévi-Strauss's opinion - a
structure that does not need a subject? Or a set of speech acts (Austin and Searle)? In any case, no
we cannot disregard any of the contributions we have just mentioned, since all, if analyzed well, are
certainly. If we can draw the conclusion that all of them will form a complex framework that
It should help us get an idea of the magnitude of the linguistic object within our existence.
We must strengthen the belief in the transversal nature of language within people's lives and the
social functioning that occurs. We insist that all social actions are imbued with the
linguistic distinction, since they would not have that character without language bathing their development. Later,
we will see what the real object of the area of knowledge is in which the Didactics of Language becomes
Literature, but as a preliminary step we believe it is important to define the importance of the instrument.
linguistic included in the study of the human being or of the society that the latter has created. Let us refer to
terms of the anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss when he indicated that any problem that could be posed is
language. It manifests as the quintessential cultural fact, and that is due to the fact that it is part of the
culture is the privileged medium, the essential instrument through which we assimilate customs,
traditions, knowledge, norms... of our reference group. We know that language is an act
directed, reversible and self-regulated, which is a system, which is significant and also elastic (Buxó,
1983), which brings us back to the conclusion we had previously reached: the great
complexity of the study of the linguistic object. This complex nature results in a great disparity in what
it refers to the visions that are held of it. Thus, Ferdinand de Saussure - considered the father of the
modern linguistics conceives language as a system of signs that are connected through
actions, which translate mutual relationships. Bloomfield - representative of the American school - it
design as a set of uses each of which consists of observable vocal traits and of the
stimulus-response. For his part, Chomsky conceives of language as a set of phrases or sentences
abstracts whose underlying organization must reconstruct the grammar. Thus, we must attribute to this author
the whole syntagmatic organization constituted by an objective and exhaustive structural composition.
Sapir is the one who approaches a conception that is governed by seeing language as a method of
communication through a system of symbols. Its definition translates to: "a method
exclusively human, and not instinct, to communicate ideas, emotions, and desires through a system of
symbols produced deliberately. These symbols are primarily auditory, and they are produced by the
called speech organs (Sapir, 1986, 14). Let's proceed to analyze the elements that make up such
Definition: the appearance of the word 'method' denotes that language is a means, an instrument for
achieving goals, its importance reaches its peak when we talk about interactions between
equal; when we approach another person to talk, or when we situate ourselves in a physical place and
we take another person as a reference for our position, we are always using language. It
It emerges from the definition that language is something multifaceted and heterogeneous, in addition to being something familiar for
all human beings. It is important to highlight from that definition the fact that language is the means
to communicate ideas, emotions, and desires through a series of symbols, which are included in what
we call it code. This last one, according to Rondal (1980), is a linguistic subsystem that refers to the
transmission of deep structures of meaning of a subculture. In this way, each code
Linguistic will be defined by: a set of grammatical characteristics; and will also maintain a
direct correspondence with a specific way of seeing reality. The codes we use denote those
ideas, yearnings, and beliefs that we apprehend from the social, with which, once again, we are delving into the
circular situation that refers us to the binomial language-social facts.
Once the transversal nature of language has been delimited, it is pertinent to proceed in the following subsection to
check how language is a fact of social nature, something we have already pointed out previously.
Language is a social fact
The title of this subsection is a response to a statement by Ferdinand de Saussure.
When he expressed: language is a social fact. And it is a reality too obvious not to be recognized.
as such. What is true is that perhaps due to that everydayness of language we do not confer it the
importance that it acquires in our lives, and at the beginning of this millennium, the early 21st century, we are
disdaining the powerful social weapon it becomes. The fact of having a conception based on that
everything is language, or likewise, that reality is made up of various languages which the
people we are interpreting, motivates that -from our perspective- any social event
have an underlying explanation supported by the linguistic-communicative. Thus, depending on the prism
interpretive that we rely on the daily informative reception that we carry out, we will be able to interpret
in a more accurate way the reality that happens to us; depending on the resources and backgrounds
linguistic-communicative tools that we possess will allow us to provide coverage for the necessary hermeneutic action on
those signs of the external and internal reality that are habitually presented to us.
The human being, due to the course of circumstances, has built a social and cultural framework necessary for its
subsistence, and language has become a fundamental part of the vital development of individuals. Therefore,
we can adhere to the expression of Román Jakobson (1976, 83) when he indicates that 'for all beings
Humans, and only for human beings, language is the vehicle of mental life and communication.
It is important to highlight the fact of mental life and reasoning, as it influences intelligence and
adaptation to the different situations that arise throughout the various stages of mental life
presenting. As we have been highlighting, language is a tool that helps us see more clearly.
situations we have to face. In a way, it serves as a decoder for the
external signals with which we are bombarded throughout the day. The more linguistically trained and
communicatively we are, the better we can assimilate all the information we are receiving. Just as
Chomsky (1980) says that humans possess a linguistic competence that we must develop.
developing. Such competence is at the basis of behavior and the fundamental, that is, all
a person is endowed with innate linguistic abilities, the degree of which will depend on their
social interactions and their degree of learning. Therefore, this author tells us that the fact of possessing that
Linguistic competence implies that it is carried out in a direct and simple manner in behavior.
human.
Within all this theoretical outline about the importance of language in our lives and in our
access to the cultural heritage that precedes us before we make our appearance in this world, we must indicate
to complete an adequate contextual framework that supports our idea related to that
Language is the fundamental element of human life, it will be necessary to indicate what functions are.
develop the same. Thus, based on Halliday, we will say that the aforementioned functions are: function
instrumental (the language will be used to achieve objectives: to ask for something, to mark distance)
between people); regulatory function (language indicates our linguistic situation in relation to
the others); personal function (we express our emotions, ideas, feelings, beliefs); function
heuristics (through language we will be able to build our particular vision of reality
in contrast to its collective vision. We are exploring reality, interpreting all the
aspects of it that we are discovering. Making a very simple analogy, language could
becomes a machete that helps us cut through the prolonged plants that prevent us from seeing knowledge
and reality); imaginative function (closely linked to the previous one, since through language we can
make our imaginations come true and start creating new realities); information function (is implicit
in all of the above, since the use of language to approach reality requires the gathering of
information about the surrounding reality and the people with whom interacting.
Once the functions of language are defined, it is pertinent to refer to the division made by
Saussure in his Course in General Linguistics regarding Language and Speech. The two are found within the
language perotene has a different definition. Thus, the first of them, the Language, refers to the form
particular that acquires language in a specific social community, that is to say, that this form remains
agreed upon by the members of a society through consensus. On the other hand, when we make
Allusion to speech, we are referring to the behavior of the individual who puts their Language into practice. With
a simple comparison could be explained more precisely as follows: let's imagine a sheet of
paper, thought (Language) will correspond to the front and sound (Speech) will be the reverse. If before
we referred to the functions of language, now we can specify that language will fulfill three functions:
communication function, in the sense of relating people for linguistic exchange;
representation function, that is, representation of reality to access it; and finally, representation
regulator, which as we have already said, will give us information about what we know and what
thinks or knows the interlocutor. These three functions occur in an interrelated and simultaneous manner.