论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】The concept functional syllabus and its outline was first put forward by Wilkinson （1976）. It is based on the needs of learners to use language to communicate as a starting point， based on communication. The purpose of this paper is to analyze functional syllabus simply and to arouse readers’ thinking of functional syllabus.
【Key words】functional syllabus； syllabus； language teaching
【作者簡介】沈美序（1994- ），女，辽宁铁岭人，沈阳师范大学大学外语教学部，硕士在读，研究方向：课程与教学论（英语）。
Syllabus is fundamental to language teaching. It doesn’t only reflect the aim of language teaching， but also the view of the language， because language knowledge is implicit in syllabuses and teaching materials. Different syllabuses have different teaching aims and teaching methods. Functional syllabus is a kind of syllabus developed under a new historical background.
1.The Background， Characteristics of Functional Syllabus
With the passage of time， structural syllabus which has ruled language teaching for a long time cannot meet the diversity of learners’ needs. In the 1970s， psycholinguistics， sociolinguistics， and pragmatics continued to develop， especially Austin’s speech act theory and Hallidy’s three macro-functions of language. They influenced the development of language teaching and the forming of new syllabus. From Austin’s theory we know that a sentence structure can express different speech acts. On the contrary， the same speech act can be expressed by different structures. Language has a number of different functions， which inspired people whether we can organize teaching contents in terms of language function and the use in real life. Then in 1971， the first functional syllabus Threshold Level came out. In 1976 Wilkins published Notional Syllabus which theoretically described such a functional-oriented syllabus we can also call it notional/functional syllabus. It is based on language functions like ordering， advising， suggesting and notions to arrange teaching content.
Functional syllabus regards language function as the core of language teaching. The aim of functional syllabus is to require learners to use language in communication， language form is only a means. Its purpose scope is also wider than structural syllabus， because what it teaches is communicative competence， not just linguistic competence. It regards language as a specific communication system rather than an abstract system of language rules and adopts a large number of daily used words. So it is easier for learners to use the language knowledge they have learned in practice. Therefore this syllabus usually adopted by functional language teaching and communicative language teaching as programmatic document. 2.Merits and Demerits of Functional Syllabus
Functional syllabus is designed based on the actual use of language， unlike what old syllabus does is just to list grammatical forms. What’s more， functional syllabus stresses that language teaching should be learner-centred. Learners are allowed to participate in the formulation of syllabus. Syllabus is designed after analyzing learners’ needs in advance， which makes functional syllabus more targeted than structural syllabus.
But functional syllabus also has its demerits. The most obvious is that it breaks the systematic grammar teaching. Based on functions of language， different sentences whose structures are completely different are listed together， but the same or similar grammatical structures appear in units far from each other. Too much emphasis on language function ignores the accuracy of linguistic form， therefore the arrangement of textbook is lack of regularity and systematicness. Learners often find it difficult to organize their language knowledge.
Functional syllabus highlight communicative competence in language teaching， but it is only confined to the one-to-one relationship between form and function， not conducive to the development of learners’ discourse communicative competence. In addition， functional syllabus has its limitations. Not all the language items can deliver functions. The number of language functions are not determined yet either. These weaknesses remain to be perfected and improved.
Overall， functional syllabus pays more attention to the feature of communication in language teaching. On the other hand， notions and functions learned by the learner actually only reflects the limited scope of language use， because they can not cover all the grammatical knowledge. So the most important is to combine different syllabuses properly.
References：
[1]Janice Yalden，Principles of course design for language teaching [M].Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2000.
【Key words】functional syllabus； syllabus； language teaching
【作者簡介】沈美序（1994- ），女，辽宁铁岭人，沈阳师范大学大学外语教学部，硕士在读，研究方向：课程与教学论（英语）。
I. Introduction
Syllabus is fundamental to language teaching. It doesn’t only reflect the aim of language teaching， but also the view of the language， because language knowledge is implicit in syllabuses and teaching materials. Different syllabuses have different teaching aims and teaching methods. Functional syllabus is a kind of syllabus developed under a new historical background.
II. Functional Syllabus
1.The Background， Characteristics of Functional Syllabus
With the passage of time， structural syllabus which has ruled language teaching for a long time cannot meet the diversity of learners’ needs. In the 1970s， psycholinguistics， sociolinguistics， and pragmatics continued to develop， especially Austin’s speech act theory and Hallidy’s three macro-functions of language. They influenced the development of language teaching and the forming of new syllabus. From Austin’s theory we know that a sentence structure can express different speech acts. On the contrary， the same speech act can be expressed by different structures. Language has a number of different functions， which inspired people whether we can organize teaching contents in terms of language function and the use in real life. Then in 1971， the first functional syllabus Threshold Level came out. In 1976 Wilkins published Notional Syllabus which theoretically described such a functional-oriented syllabus we can also call it notional/functional syllabus. It is based on language functions like ordering， advising， suggesting and notions to arrange teaching content.
Functional syllabus regards language function as the core of language teaching. The aim of functional syllabus is to require learners to use language in communication， language form is only a means. Its purpose scope is also wider than structural syllabus， because what it teaches is communicative competence， not just linguistic competence. It regards language as a specific communication system rather than an abstract system of language rules and adopts a large number of daily used words. So it is easier for learners to use the language knowledge they have learned in practice. Therefore this syllabus usually adopted by functional language teaching and communicative language teaching as programmatic document. 2.Merits and Demerits of Functional Syllabus
Functional syllabus is designed based on the actual use of language， unlike what old syllabus does is just to list grammatical forms. What’s more， functional syllabus stresses that language teaching should be learner-centred. Learners are allowed to participate in the formulation of syllabus. Syllabus is designed after analyzing learners’ needs in advance， which makes functional syllabus more targeted than structural syllabus.
But functional syllabus also has its demerits. The most obvious is that it breaks the systematic grammar teaching. Based on functions of language， different sentences whose structures are completely different are listed together， but the same or similar grammatical structures appear in units far from each other. Too much emphasis on language function ignores the accuracy of linguistic form， therefore the arrangement of textbook is lack of regularity and systematicness. Learners often find it difficult to organize their language knowledge.
Functional syllabus highlight communicative competence in language teaching， but it is only confined to the one-to-one relationship between form and function， not conducive to the development of learners’ discourse communicative competence. In addition， functional syllabus has its limitations. Not all the language items can deliver functions. The number of language functions are not determined yet either. These weaknesses remain to be perfected and improved.
III. Conclusion
Overall， functional syllabus pays more attention to the feature of communication in language teaching. On the other hand， notions and functions learned by the learner actually only reflects the limited scope of language use， because they can not cover all the grammatical knowledge. So the most important is to combine different syllabuses properly.
References：
[1]Janice Yalden，Principles of course design for language teaching [M].Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2000.