Russian Language Programs in the United States
| Title Page | | Authors | | Table of Contents |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55


IMAGE imgs/Printing23.jpg


If we look at the act of communication itself, we can see that each of the
five goal areas of the Standards represents a focus on a particular aspect of
communication and the knowledge and settings that attend it. Figure 2.2
attempts to capture this.

IMAGE imgs/Printing24.jpg

IMAGE imgs/Printing25.jpg

Setting = Community

Figure 2.2 Communication and its setting

In words, this simplified schema suggests that an act of communication involves
some "piece" of knowledge as it is reflected in L
2. This piece of knowledge
comes from the context of a large knowledge base which is composed of a wide
variety of information, which can only be broken down into the kind of list
presented in this figure in the most superficial terms.
13In addition to the
immediate context of a particular communication act, all communication takes
place withinbroader linguistic communities. The numbers in the figure suggest
that the goal areas of the Standards represent the most prominent components
of the communication act and its broad setting.


While both the ACTFL documents and this one are couched in strongly
non-normative terms, there is a substantial difference in the specificity of the
recommendations contained in each. Where ACTFL strives for a level of
generality that will allow it address a wide range of languages, this framework is
intended to address issues in the national language learning system of a single
foreign language. Assuming a communicative theoretical base, this framework
delineates with precision impossible in the ACTFL standards a description of


IMAGE imgs/Printing04.jpg

13We are leaving out issues of encoding and decoding the sake of simplicity, leaving
everything couched in generic terms.