Psycholinguistics and education: Directions and divergences

Abstract

The development of reading, foreign language competence, rhetorical and communicative skills, and symbolic thought processes differs from “pure” psycholinguistic research as horticulture differs from botany. Correspondences between educational psycholinguistics and pure psycholinguistics lie in how each views the learner on a continuum that ranges from docile to autonomous. Language can be characterized as arbitrary or derived from possible universal symbolizing processes, and curriculum in general can be characterized on a continuum ranging from opaque to emergent. Language acquisition can be viewed as the product of intentional socialization or an outgrowth of natural processes, and educators may be said to range from instructive to eductive in their approach to methods. The divergences between education and psycholinguistics in respect to their philosophical analysis of their research strategies and their views about individual variation and central tendencies seem to presage mutually supportive research programs.