| 000 | 00000nab a2200000 a 4500 |
|---|
| 001 | 40781 |
|---|
| 002 | 2 |
|---|
| 004 | 51337 |
|---|
| 005 | 202007220904 |
|---|
| 008 | 160819s2011 | a 000 0 eng d |
|---|
| 009 | 1 0 |
|---|
| 035 | [ ] |a 1456366127 |
|---|
| 039 | [ ] |a 20241125193727 |b idtocn |c 20200722090408 |d huongnt |y 20160819103322 |z khiembt |
|---|
| 041 | [ 0] |a eng |
|---|
| 100 | [ 1] |a Penfield, Susan D. |
|---|
| 245 | [1 0] |a From documenting to revitalizing an endangered language: where do applied linguists fit? / |c Susan D. Penfield and Benjamin V. Tucker |
|---|
| 260 | [ ] |c 2011 |
|---|
| 300 | [ ] |a p. 291-305 |
|---|
| 520 | [ ] |a This paper explores the distance between documenting and revitalizing endangered languages and indicates critical points at which applied linguistics can play a role. We look at language documentation, language revitalization and their relationship. We then provide some examples from our own work. We see the lack of applied linguistics as a potential missing link in endangered language work. We call for more applied linguistic training and research focused on endangered languages, more attention to endangered languages within second language pedagogy programmes and a heightened awareness of the need for teamwork across all stakeholders in endangered language contexts |
|---|
| 650 | [1 7] |a Ngôn ngữ |2 TVĐHHN. |
|---|
| 653 | [ ] |a Endangered languages. |
|---|
| 653 | [ ] |a Applied linguistics. |
|---|
| 653 | [ 0] |a Language revitalization. |
|---|
| 653 | [0 ] |a Language documentation. |
|---|
| 700 | [ 1] |a Tucker, Benjamin V. |
|---|
| 773 | [ 0] |t Language and education |g 2011, Vol. 25, N.3 |
|---|
| 890 | [ ] |a 0 |b 0 |c 0 |d 0 |
|---|