The Difference between Written and Spoken English

The Difference between Written and Spoken English

Introduction      

There has been a surge of interest that is researching the differences between written and spoken language. The research of comparing structural characteristics vs. discourse analyst and sociolinguists concluded that the main difference between speech and written language are sounds and letters, permanency and redundancy, formality and function, vocabulary and sentences, strategies as well as the interaction between the speaker and listener. This essay will define language and will highlight the element in written English and spoken English. It will compare and contrast the listed criteria of the written and spoken language.

Definition of Language

Language is a productive complex system that is used by human being to convey their message from message from one to another individual, control another person, event or relationship, express our inner thought and emotions. According to Norquist, human utilize arbitrary signals, such as voice sounds, gestures, or written symbols. The Oxford Dictionary supports this definition as it stated that a language could be either spoken or written as long as the words are structurally and conventionally used. As Samuel Taylor Coleridge said "Language is the armory of the human mind, and at once contains the trophies of its past and the weapons of its future conquests.

Written Language

The written language usually follows and support a spoken language as supported by Aristotle’s once said that the writing is a presentation of a speech. Bloomfield, 1933 con with this as he said written language is a record of the spoken language. However, the written language evolved through morpheme writing, terminating in a combination of phonetic and semantic elements with neophenogenetic principle to be a more developed language. (Coulmas, 1997). The basic unit of written language is the sentence. Written communication needs to be learned. This is supported by the research of DeFord, 1980. He concluded that “learning to write is initiated tacitly, as in oral language”.

A language recorded is more precise as greater though, is placed in it and the words are deliberately selected. The writer can rewrite and refine the message countless time and over a longer period of time. The written language is usually permanent and once it is printed is difficult to be rectified.

As the saying goes the pen is mightier than the sword.  It’s non retractable, so be careful what you write.  Written communication can be carefully analyzed and read repeatedly.  In addition, both the writer and reader can control the pace of the interaction.  Since, written language does not receive an immediate reply except in the case of computer mediated communication. Therefore, the reader or the writer cannot ask or clarify things if additional information is needed. Hence, writing is a fairly static form of transfer.  

Furthermore, the monologist of the written communication uses less of the first and second pronoun compared to spoken language.  Written language tends to be more complex and intricate than speech with longer sentences and many subordinate clauses. The punctuation and layout of written texts also more complex informative or academic form of text which has high content words such as nouns, adjective, verbs and adverbs which are used to explain information.

 According to Schleppegrell, 2004 written language plays a major role in making meaning as the resources used in school had expanded beyond the resources which are required for daily interaction to a more technical and abstract meanings necessary for construing academic knowledge.   This because, spoken language’s syntactical properties are less formal than those of written language. Firstly, it is more organized with paragraphing; it can be deliberately styled using punctuation, headings, layout, colors and other graphical effects in their written texts.

Spoken English

Language is primarily speech. Speech is the representation of the experiences of the mind. (Aristotle, n.d.).  Lieberman supports Aristotle’s

statement be reinforcing that speech is so essential to our concept of intelligence that its possession is virtually equated with being human. Animals who talk are human, because what sets us apart from other

animals is the “gift” of speech.

The basic unit of spoken language is the tone group. Speech consists of two types of basic units: 'Phonemes' or units of sound, which are themselves meaningless, are combined into 'morphemes', which are meaningful units; so the  phonemes /b/, /e/, /l/ /t/ form the word 'belt'. Jared Diamond identifies the greatest step in language evolution as the progression from primitive, pidgin-like communication to a creole-like language with all the grammar and syntax of modern language.

 Speech is naturally picked up and write formally at school Based upon the principles of Skinnerian behaviorism, Relational Frame Theory (RFT) posits that children acquire language purely through interacting with the environment.  Most spoken language is spontaneous and rapid and usually involves thinking on the spot.  However, formal spoken language such as can be accurate, but it's a great deal of  preparation and compression.

As one speaks, the audience provides its own visual cues about whether it is finding the argument coherent, comprehensible, or interesting.  Speakers should avoid focusing on single individuals within an audience.  The spoken language utilizes first and second person in spoken language mainly expresses the speaker's desire of interaction with their participants or audience so as to get closer to them.

Based on this point the monologues of the written communication uses less of the first and second pronoun compared to spoken language. In contrast, in speech the language is more dialogues in nature as there is a dynamic interaction between two or more individuals. Spoken language is spontaneous and transient, unless recorded, and speakers can correct themselves.

Once spoken, words cannot be retracted, although one can apologize for a mistake and improvise a clarification.  Halliday said that spoken language is more complex than written language in terms of its grammatical intricacy.  Based on the example given from the LTTC Unit 1 reading materials:  Context and shared knowledge play a major role, so it is possible to leave much unsaid or indirectly implied. Spoken language can be delivered using various gestures, intonation, inflection, volume, pitch, pauses, movement, visual cues such as appearance, and a whole host of other ways to communicate meaning. Some words and constructions such as “ thingamajig” and “ whatchamecallit ”

, and phrases like“  bla bla bla” only occur in spoken language.

Spoken language contains less around 16.4% of verbs that occurs in the non finite clause while in written discourse the non finite clauses accounts for 27.5% of all the verbs.  Spoken register has a lower nominalization frequency There is a bigger grammatical deviation in spoken language due to local dialects and shortage of mental processing capacity during conversation as grammatical disfluencies were transcribed in fidelity to the original speech. Grammatical deviations from the standard grammar are more frequent in spoken language.  Such deviations are due to local dialects as well as shortage of the mental processing capacity, which seems to be excessively engaged by focus on the content or other issues.  The other factor is due to speaker’s language deficiency.

Spoken language accommodates more clauses and prepositions. The spoken language carries less lexical items, but is more complex in terms of grammatical intricacy. Normally genre analysis is conducted in written language on the grammatical and linguistic structure. The studies on grammar, linguistic structures (mainly in structuralism), and genre analysis have frequently  been based and conducted in writing language. The way spoken language differs from written language lies in their functions. We can express ourselves intimately in a speech by “I  donno-La, her bf left her ” and hug her friend to console her.

In contrast, this situation is rare in writing. Furthermore, there are some small words like discourse markers in a conversation that does not appear in written .An example of a transcript of two teenagers plating “Scruples” from Exploring English reproduced by New Zealand’s Ministry of

Education:

C: Do you put them face down - hang on

H: Oh - ha

C: Then we get one ballot card each and you put them aside until  the vote is called

V: Oh - sorry

Spoken language describes "actions" while writing, language expresses "things". Halliday, 2002 elaborates that in many written text, especially the academic genre, there is a  buildup of abstraction and this nominalization turns actions into things.  The main differences are sum up in a comparison chart Basis Written Communication Spoken Communication Form Essentially words Essentially sound Basic Unit Sentences Tone Group Formality

It is more formal  “Would you like to have lunch?”

        It is less formal unless in planned speech “You wanna have lunch?”

Interaction and Feedback

It is planned and feedback will take time.  It is spontaneous with immediate feedback Accuracy .  It is more precise as the response is carefully planned . It is less accurate in conversation and is accurate in speech Acquisition . 

The person needs to be trained and learned.  The person pick up naturally through exposure and meaningful communication Record.   It is recorded permanent.  There is no record unless effort is made to record.

Mistakes

It is hard to be rectified Once spoken, words cannot be retracted, although one can apologize for a mistake and improvise a clarification.

Legality

It can be considered as a legal document.  It cannot be admissible as a legal evidence Delivery.   It can be written on any surface or medium . It is more organized with paragraphing and can be deliberately styled using punctuation, headings, layout, colors and other graphical effect letters, words, sentences,  paragraphs etc) have the character of objects.   It is spoken and in order to stress intonation , gesture and inflection, volume, pitch, pauses, movement, visual cues is used.  

Grammar

It is lexically dense and has more verbs based phrase and predicative adjective. The sentences may have many subordinate clauses and uses less of the first and second pronoun It has fewer complex words and phrases , accommodates more clauses and  prepositions. It carries less lexical items, but is more complex in terms of grammatical intricacy

Description

The writing, language expresses "things".  Spoken language describes "actions"

READ PAPER

This evident in language acquisition of the baby that starts with the exposure of the language.  Children learn how to speak at home before learning to read    

Conclusion

Halliday (1989, 2007), Tillmann (1997), Aijmer and Stenström (2004), Wikberg (2004),  Nelson, Balass and Perfetti (2005), Biber (2006), Miller (2006), McCarthy and Slade (2007) and Wichmann (2007) emphasize the different nature and aspects of written and spoken discourse, implicationally instilling the worthiness of further research on the differences between written and spoken discourse Language is not only the vehicle of thought, it is a great and efficient instrument in thinking. Both spoken and written languages are equally important. Both spoken and written dialects are linked to the social background, age, race, and gender of the writer, speaker and

 audience.

inguisticsociety.org

What's the Difference between Speech and Writing?

William Bright

When we talk about 'language', sometimes we mean speech (spoken language), sometimes writing (written language). How are they different? Of course, speech is spoken and heard, while writing is written and read. But there are many other differences:

Age. Speech goes back to human beginnings, perhaps a million years ago. Writing is relatively recent, however; it was first invented by the Sumerians, in Mesopotamia, around 3200 B.C. Since then, the idea of writing has spread around the world and different writing systems have evolved in different parts of the world.

Universality. Humans everywhere can speak. But before the Sumerian invention, people were nonliterate. Even now there are many nonliterate groups (e.g. in New Guinea), and many nonliterate people in officially literate societies.

Acquisition. People everywhere start speaking during the first two years of life; many of the abilities involved are probably inborn rather than learned. Learning to write typically builds on learning to speak.

Levels of Structure. Speech consists of two types of basic units: 'Phonemes' or units of sound, which are themselves meaningless, are combined into 'morphemes', which are meaningful units; so the phonemes /b/, /i/, /t/ form the word 'bit'. Alphabetic scripts work the same way. In a different type of script, the syllabary, the basic unit, corresponds to a spoken syllable; Japanese and Cherokee use this system. In logographic script, e.g. Chinese, each character corresponds to an entire morpheme (usually a word). (For further information on scripts, see Daniels and Bright 1996.)

Interdependence. Most literate people can convey the same messages in either speech or writing, but speech typically conveys more explicit information than writing. Hebrew and Arabic scripts indicate consonants but often omit symbols for vowels. In Chinese, the symbols that correspond to words may give no indication of pronunciation, or only partial cues. The spoken and written forms of a given language tend to correspond on one or more levels and may influence each other—as when 'through' is spelled 'thru'. Conversely, in spelling pronunciation, people may come to pronounce the 't' in 'often' even though historically it had been lost.  Some formal literary styles, like Classical Chinese, acquire a life of their own in written form and have little direct relationship to speech.

Retrievability. Until the invention of magnetic recording, speech could not be captured or preserved, except by fallible memories and by writing.  But writing can be preserved for millennia. Its permanence has made possible such human institutions as libraries, histories, schedules, dictionaries, menus, and what we generally call 'civilization'.

Literary Use. Nonliterate societies have traditions—songs, rituals, legends, myths—composed orally and preserved by memory.  Such texts may be called oral literature. By contrast, writing permits what is more often called 'literature', i.e. bodies of text which are much larger and more codified than memory permits.  Yet even in literate societies, dramatic performance and reading aloud remain important traditions.

Prestige. Written language is associated with political and economic power, admired literature, and educational institutions, all of which lend it high prestige.  In literate societies, people often come to think of their written language as basic; they may regard speech as inferior. Nevertheless, writing can be perceived as colder or more impersonal than speech.

Standardization. Spoken languages have dialects—forms varying across geographical areas and social groups. But in complex societies that use writing, the needs of communication encourage moves toward a single written norm, codified by governmental, educational, and literary institutions. The prestige of the written standard is then likely to influence speech as well.

Formality. Communication may be formal or casual.  In literate societies, writing may be associated with formal style and speech, with casual style.  In formal circumstances (oratory, sermons), a person may 'talk like a book', adapting written style for use in speech. Formal and informal styles may be very distinct, e.g. in Arabic, and can virtually be different languages.

Change. Spoken language, everywhere and always, undergoes continual change of which speakers may be relatively unaware.  Written language, because of its permanence and standardization, shows slower and less sweeping changes; the spelling of English has changed much less than its pronunciation since Chaucer's time. This in turn is linked to the factors of formality and prestige.

Suggested Readings

Coulmas, Florian. 1996. The Blackwell encyclopedia of writing systems. Oxford: Blackwell.
Coulmas, Florian. 1989. The writings systems of the world. Oxford: Blackwell.
Daniels, Peter T., and William Bright (eds.). 1996. The world's writing systems. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sampson, Geoffrey. 1985. Writing systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

 

differencebetween.info

Difference between Language Acquisition and Language Learning

Key Difference: Language Acquisition is the manner of learning a language by immersion. It provides the student with the practical knowledge of the language. Whereas, language learning focuses on providing theoretical knowledge of a language.

Language is the primary form of communication that humans use. However, language is not something that is taught to children. A child will pick up his/her native language just by being around other people, mainly their families. This is called language acquisition. The child acquires the language without any conscious thought or study.
In fact, by the time a child is five years old, he/she can express ideas clearly and almost perfectly from the point of view of language and grammar. This is despite any formal studying of the language.
Language learning, on the other hand, is a structured learning of a language. This is the process that most people follow when trying to learn another language. Here the student is made to study lists of vocabulary, as well as sentence structure and grammar. This is the most common method used in schools and language learning centers.
Language learning is generally considered to be a slower process than language acquisition. There are people who study a language for years without mastering it. The main difference between Language Acquisition and Language Learning is that Language Acquisition is the manner of learning a language by immersion. It provides the student with the practical knowledge of the language, for example, the student might not known the grammar rule but is still able to immaculately converse with a native.

Whereas, language learning focuses on providing theoretical knowledge of a language. In this case, the student might know all the proper grammar rules and the correct ways of sentence structuring, but might still lack the confidence to have a conversation with a native.
Hence, as stated by Stephen Krashen, students who are taught in a formal, structured way will “learn” the language but never fully acquire it.
Comparison between Language Acquisition and Language Learning:

	Language Acquisition	Language Learning
Meaning	Picking up a language	Studying a language
Focus	Practical Knowledge	Theoretical Knowlegde
Method	Unconscious, implicit	Conscious, explicit
Situations	Informal situations	Formal situations
Grammar	Does not use grammatical rules	Uses grammatical rules
Dependency	Depends on attitude	Depends on aptitude
Order of learning	Stable order of learning	Simple to complex order of learning

Language Acquisition Vs Language Learning.

differencebetween.info

Difference between Language Acquisition and Language Learning

Key Difference: Language Acquisition is the manner of learning a language by immersion.  It provides the student with the practical knowledge of the language whereas, language learning focuses on providing theoretical knowledge of a language.

           Language is the primary form of communication that humans use.  However, language is not something that is taught to children.  A child will pick up his/her native language just by being around other people, mainly their families.  This is called language acquisition.  The child acquires the language without any conscious thought or study.

     In fact, by the time a child is five years old, he/she can express ideas clearly and almost perfectly from the point of view of language and grammar. This is despite any formal studying of the language.

     Language learning, on the other hand, is a structured learning of a language.  This is the process that most people follow when trying to learn another language.  Here the student is made to study lists of vocabulary, as well as sentence structure and grammar.  This is the most common method used in schools and language learning centres.

      Language learning is generally considered to be a slower process than language acquisition.  There are people who study a language for years without mastering it.  The main difference between Language Acquisition and Language Learning is that Language Acquisition is the manner of learning a language by immersion.   It provides the student with the practical knowledge of the language, for example, the student might not know the grammar rule but is still able to immaculately converse with a native whereas language learning focuses on providing theoretical knowledge of a language.  In this case, the student might know all the proper grammar rules and the correct ways of sentence structuring, but might still lack the confidence to have a conversation with a native.

        Hence, as stated by Stephen Krashen, students who are taught in a formal, structured way will “learn” the language but never fully acquire it.

Comparison between Language Acquisition and Language Learning:

Comparison between Language Acquisition and Language Learning:

	Language Acquisition	Language Learning
Meaning	Picking up a language	Studying a language
Focus	Practical Knowledge	Theoretical Knowlegde
Method	Unconscious, implicit	Conscious, explicit
Situations	Informal situations	Formal situations
Grammar	Does not use grammatical rules	Uses grammatical rules
Dependency	Depends on attitude	Depends on aptitude
Order of learning	Stable order of learning	Simple to complex order of learning

My Comments:

To be able to talk about any topic or issue, a learner must be well-informed to speak on the subject matter.  I repeat, he must have the grammar, vocabulary and knowledge of the issue to speak or write about.  Grammar is just the framework for a learner to build the materials upon it.  The vocabulary and the knowledge for any specific situation depends largely on an individual acquisition through learning in context and knowing how to transfer the learning of vocabulary and structure in the new situation.

Critiques

      Although CLT has been extremely influential in the field of language teaching, it is not universally accepted and has been subject to significant critique.^[17]
In his critique of CLT, Michael Swan addresses both the theoretical and practical problems with CLT. In his critique, he mentions that CLT is not an altogether cohesive subject, but one in which theoretical understandings (by linguists) and practical understandings (by language teachers) differ greatly.
      Critique of the theory of CLT includes that it makes broad claims regarding the usefulness of CLT while citing little data, that it uses a large amount of confusing vocabulary, and that it assumes knowledge that is predominately language non-specific (ex. the ability to make educated guesses) is language specific.^[17] Swan suggests that these theoretical issues can lead to confusion in the application of CLT techniques.^[18]
      Where confusion in the application of CLT techniques is readily apparent is in classroom settings. Swan suggests that CLT techniques often suggest prioritizing the "function" of a language (what one can do with the language knowledge one has) over the "structure" of a language (the grammatical systems of the language).^[18] This priority can leave learners with serious gaps in their knowledge of the formal aspects of their target language. Swan also suggests that, in CLT techniques, whatever languages a student might already know are not valued or employed in instructional techniques.^[18]
      Further critique of CLT techniques in classroom teaching can be attributed to Elaine Ridge. One of her critiques of CLT is that it implies that there is a generally agreed upon consensus regarding the definition of "communicative competence," which CLT claims to facilitate, when in fact there is not. Because there is not such agreement, students may be seen to be in possession of "communicative competence" without being able to make full, or even adequate, use of the language. That an individual is proficient in a language does not necessarily entail that they can make full use of that language, which can limit an individual's potential with that language, especially if that language is an endangered language.   
      This critique is largely to do with the fact that CLT is often highly praised and is popular, when it may not necessarily be the best method of language teaching.^[19]
Ridge also notes that CLT has nonspecific requirements of its teachers, as there is no completely standard definition of what CLT is; this is especially true for the teaching of grammar (the formal rules governing the standardized version of the language in question). Some critics of CLT suggest that the method does not put enough emphasis on the teaching of grammar and instead allows students to produce utterances which are grammatically incorrect as long as the interlocutor can get some meaning from them.^[19]
        Stephen Bax's critique of CLT has to do with the context of its implementation. Bax asserts that many researchers associate the use of CLT techinques with modernity and, therefore, the lack of CLT techniques as a lack of modernism. In this way, these researchers consider teachers or school systems which don't use CLT techniques as outdated and suggest that their students learn the target language "in spite of" the absence of CLT techniques, as though CLT were the only way to learn a language and everyone who fails to implement its techniques is ignorant and will not be successful in teaching the target language.<sup>[3]

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communicative_language_teaching)</sup>

Your Mother Tongue Vs the English language 26/10/2017

Your Mother Tongue  Vs the English language  26/10/2017

        Foochow, my mother tongue, is a dialect.  It is a sound-meaning version of under-developed language.  In other words, the dialect is based on sounds that associate with meanings.  Compared with the English language, it is like ABC letters to the whole version of spoken and written English.  I guess that all the dialects in this world are like Foochow.  It is your mother tongue that you stay connected round-clock to it even in your sleep if you still use it.  It has limited range of vocabulary and patterns.  You do not even know the forms nor sounds and symbols if you are illiterate to learn it.  You learn it through a lot of repetition and rehearsal of it. 

        It is idiotic to think that you do not need to learn the grammar of the English language if you learn it as a second language and you have to use the language in writing especially.  The written form of English means that you have to show it in black and white.  Grammatical errors will mar your writing even though you have many and really brilliant ideas to share. 

        Grammar is the framework of language.  A full grasp of the grammar does not guarantee you to be able to speak and write at will if you have no idea or not well-informed of the subject matter.  For example, a native English who has no idea about the story of “Magic Monkey”, can he or she speak or write about it? Does it have anything to do with his/er English proficiency?

       Similarly, not being able to speak the English language after years of learning the grammar of English in the classroom has nothing to do with the knowledge of grammar.  It is concerned with the knowledge of the specific information.  For example, I was quite at a loss about what to ask when I wanted to know how to apply for a credit card at a bank when I saw the advertisement encouraging the customers.  It was my first time asking for this specific information. 

Yes, I had the grammar framework but I did not know the right word to use though I had the word at my disposal.  Hence, I asked one of the officer there, “What are the qualifications to apply for a credit card?”  She corrected me saying, “Oh, you mean what the criteria are to apply for a credit card.”  See, I learnt the word ‘criterion / criteria’ years ago but I had never applied in a real-life situation.  I forgot about the words.  Hence, it was not impressive enough for me to retrieve it in time of need.  I was familiar with the words ‘quality, qualify, qualified and qualification’.  In the case like this, the best choice of word, of course, is ‘criteria’ not ‘qualifications’in this context.

        The right choice of words really has nothing to do with Grammar which is about the general rules of forms and functions.  The right choice of words only has something to do with language experiences knowing the right word and its meaning for any specific situation. 

        So, can I say that you are not wasting your time to learn all those grammatical rules to be reinforced with a lot of texts reading?  If learners are not familiar with the forms and functions, I really find it necessary to drill them item by item in isolation and in context.  And  is it advisable for language teachers to create such awareness of how language works in texts?  I really find it necessary to pinpoint out the Subject Verb agreement, tenses used and other word classes in phrases or clauses in a sentence for learners.  These analyses will no doubt help them understand the passage better in one way or another. 

        You may say that reading passages are meant for the understanding of the content or the subject matter.  Yes, first time reading for main ideas, second time reading for specific information and the third time is to connect main points and the details to the title.  You may perhaps analyse the sentences in the third time reading.  If you can understand the meaning and structures of the passage, what more can’t you do? 

        If you have a full grasp of English grammar, a rich stock of vocabulary and you have the ideas or well-informed of the subject matter, are you still tongue-tied or hand-tied to express yourself in English?