Learning to Read in a Constructivist Way: Chapter 11 (part one)

I find the concept of metalinguistic awareness to be a wonderful descriptor of our evolution from non-reader to reader. How aware of we of our own journey from non-reader to reader? I certainly can't remember a time of feeling illiterate. I know that before the age of 5 or 6 that I couldn't read, but I don't remember looking at words and not knowing what they meant. But then again, words aren't part of my memory back then: my metalinguistic awareness level prevented me from encoding such tidbits.

Bruning divides language into two conceptual ideas: language use and language structure. Language use or "pragmatics" describes the social and cultural contexts in which we use it. Pragmatics address the when and why of language: why do we communicate (or need to communicate) and when is it appropriate to use language. Language structure focuses on how and what: how do we structure what we say and how do we say it? Bruning focuses on the structure first, and that's what I want to focus on this post.

Of his discussion of language structures (words, syntax, and discourse), only the latter topic would anyone find any sort of controversy. Words and syntax, although fields with controversy in their own right, are given a general overview. He talks about semantics whose study of meaning is important because we need to know what words children learn and what meaning is assigned to those words: vocabulary. More than likely, they might have already formed meaning of a word from observing and modeling adult use of vocabulary. Take what a kid knows about a word and then obliquely measure a kid's awareness of the phonemes and morphemes surrounding the word, then we might be able to measure their metalinguistic ability. We normally do this by first teaching the alphabet, then convincing them that these written letters translate sounds our mouths make, and finally after we convince them, we start a dreaded process: vocabulary lists and (the next concept of Bruning's language structure) grammar/syntax. We all know how much we loved grammar! :P Actually, we had already learned grammar/syntax: but what we needed to learn was standard grammar and not mom's colloquialisms.

The really fascinating part about the first half of the chapter was the bit of discourse on....discourse. How we arrange our thoughts to best express our ideas. Bruning describes two basic discourse structures: narrative and exposition. Narratives are linear progressions on thought: A happened, then B, then C, and it was cool! Expositional discourse efficiently (well, attempts to) organizes concepts in order to explain complex ideas or situations: this organization is rarely linear like a narrative, but rather it depends upon the importance of conveying information with clarity and/or with a certain logic (doesn't have to be rational logic I suppose). I remember when I had to do some creative writing in the fourth grade: my stories were strict narratives. Unfortunately, I tried to be funny, and I failed completely because the continuous use of "and then" didn't have any the comedic impact. Oh well, and then I....