[FREE PDF sample] The routledge handbook of language learning and teaching beyond the classroom 1st
Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://textbookfull.com/product/the-routledge-handbook-of-language-learning-and-tea ching-beyond-the-classroom-1st-edition-hayo-reinders/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant download maybe you interests ...
Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching: The Case of China 1st Edition Hayo Reinders
Spanish Heritage Learners Emerging Literacy Empirical Research and Classroom Practice Routledge Advances in Spanish Language Teaching 1st Edition Belpoliti Flavia Bermejo Encarna
‘The changing landscape of language teaching and learning that we have witnessed recently has emphasized the need for a greater understanding of nature and significance of out-ofclass learning opportunities in second language learning. This handbook provides a valuable account of the nature of LBC; illustrates the diversity of affordances learners make use of; describes the cognitive, affective, linguistic, social and individual dimensions involved; and provides examples of the research methods that can be used in investigating LBC. And in addition the handbook demonstrates how learners’ use of out of class learning opportunities are changing our understanding of the nature of second language learning.’
– Jack C. Richards, Honorary Professor, University of Sydney
‘Starting with the recognition that technology has opened a new world for language teachers and learners, this handbook provides an up-to-date and comprehensive look at learning beyond the classroom. Editors Reinders, Lai, and Sundqvist are leading authorities in this domain, and have put together an impressive ensemble of knowledgeable contributors across a broad range of relevant sub-areas. Language teachers, teacher educators, and researchers will find this an invaluable and timely resource.’
– Phil Hubbard, Senior Lecturer Emeritus, Stanford University
THE ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING BEYOND THE CLASSROOM
Informal language learning beyond the classroom plays an important and growing role in language learning and teaching. This Handbook brings together the existing body of research and unites the various disciplines that have explored this area, in order to present the current state of knowledge in one accessible resource.
Much of adult learning takes place outside of formal education and for language learning, it is likely that out-of-class experiences play an equally important role. It is therefore surprising that the role of informal language learning has received little attention over the years, with the vast majority of research instead focusing on the classroom. Researchers from a range of backgrounds, however, have started to realise the important contribution of informal language learning, both in its own right, and in its relationship with classroom learning. Studies in the areas of learner autonomy, learning strategies, study abroad, language support, learners’ voices, computer-mediated communication, mobile-assisted language learning, digital gaming, and many others, all add to our understanding of the complex and intersecting ways in which learners construct their own language learning experiences, drawing from a wide range of resources, including materials, teachers, self-study, technology, other learners and native speakers.
This Handbook provides a sound and comprehensive basis for researchers and graduate students to build upon in their own research of language learning and teaching beyond the classroom.
Hayo Reinders (www.innovationinteaching.org) is TESOL Professor and Director of Research at Anaheim University, USA, and Professor of Applied Linguistics at KMUTT in Thailand. He is founder of the global Institute for Teacher Leadership and editor of Innovation in Language Learning & Teaching
Chun Lai is an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Education, the University of Hong Kong. Her research interests include self-directed language learning with technology beyond the classroom, technology-enhanced language learning and teacher technology integration.
Pia Sundqvist is Associate Professor of English Language Education at the University of Oslo, Norway. Her main research interests are in the field of applied English linguistics, with a focus on informal language learning, especially Extramural English and gaming, the assessment of L2 oral proficiency and English language teaching.
ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOKS IN APPLIED LINGUISTICS
Routledge Handbooks in Applied Linguistics provide comprehensive overviews of the key topics in applied linguistics. All entries for the handbooks are specially commissioned and written by leading scholars in the field. Clear, accessible and carefully edited Routledge Handbooks in Applied Linguistics are the ideal resource for both advanced undergraduates and postgraduate students.
THE ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF THE PSYCHOLOGY OF LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING
Edited by Tammy Gregersen and Sarah Mercer
THE ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF LANGUAGE TESTING
Second Edition
Edited by Glenn Fulcher and Luke Harding
THE ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF CORPUS LINGUISTICS
Second Edition
Edited by Anne O’Keeffe and Michael J. McCarthy
THE ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF MATERIALS DEVELOPMENT FOR LANGUAGE TEACHING
Edited by Julie Norton and Heather Buchanan
THE ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF CORPORA AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING AND LEARNING
Edited by Reka R. Jablonkai and Eniko Csomay
THE ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF LANGUAGE AND THE GLOBAL SOUTH
Edited by Sinfree Makoni, Anna Kaiper-Marquez and Lorato Mokwena
For a full list of titles in this series, please visit www.routledge.com/series/RHAL
THE ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF LANGUAGE
LEARNING AND TEACHING BEYOND THE CLASSROOM
Edited by Hayo Reinders, Chun Lai and Pia Sundqvist
Cover image: Gettys
First published 2022 by Routledge
4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge
The right of Hayo Reinders, Chun Lai and Pia Sundqvist to be identified as the authors of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice : Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A catalog record has been requested for this book
ISBN: 9780367499389 (hbk)
ISBN: 9780367499396 (pbk)
ISBN: 9781003048169 (ebk)
DOI: 10.4324/9781003048169
Typeset in Bembo by codeMantra
6 CALL in the Wild: A Voyage of Independent Self-directed Learning
Liam Murray, Marta Giralt, Martin A. Mullen and Silvia Benini
7 English Language Learning Beyond the Classroom: Do Learner Factors Matter?
Cynthia Lee
8 T he Golden Age of Foreign Language Learning: Age and Language Learning Beyond the Classroom
Elke Peters
9 Digital Game-Based Language Learning in Extramural Settings
Kyle W. Scholz
10 Fostering Learners’ Self-regulation and Collaboration Skills and Strategies for Mobile Language Learning Beyond the Classroom
Olga Viberg and Agnes Kukulska-Hulme
11 Enhancing Language and Culture Learning Through Social Network Technologies
Lina Lee
12 Enhancing Language and Culture Learning in the Case of Study Abroad
Martin Howard
13 Enhancing Language and Culture Learning in Migration Contexts
Silvia Kunitz
14 L earning to Act in the Social World: Building Interactional Competence through Everyday Language Use Experiences
Arja Piirainen-Marsh and Niina Lilja
15 Enhancing Language Learning in Private Tutoring
Kevin Wai Ho Yung
16 Enhancing the Quality of Out-of-Class Learning in Flipped Learning
Jun Chen Hsieh, Michael W. Marek and Wen-Chi Vivian Wu
17 Enhancing Language Learning Beyond the Classroom through Advising
Jo Mynard and Satoko Kato
29.6
29.7
TABLES
6.1 E xamples from student essays and blog quotations about self-directed learning, self-awareness, self-motivation and agency
2 2.1 D istribution of commonly used research tools in LBC studies from 2010 to 2020
86
313
24.1 L BC studies using a mixed methods design 3 47
CONTRIBUTORS
Kathleen M. Bailey is a Professor of Applied Linguistics at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey (MIIS). She served as the president of TESOL and the American Association for Applied Linguistics. In 2009 she became the President of TIRF, The international Research Foundation for English Language Education. Dr Bailey has been interested in the diary studies since the late 1970s.
Silvia Benini (PhD, University of Limerick, Ireland) is a researcher in the School of Modern Languages and Applied Linguistics, University of Limerick, Ireland. She is an executive committee member of IRAAL (Irish Association for Applied Linguistics) and member of CALS (Centre for Applied Language Studies). Areas of research interest include CALL, games-based learning, computer-mediated communication and language learning, intercultural communication. Her work has been published in CALICO and ReCALL, among others.
Phil Benson is a Professor in Applied Linguistics and Director of the Multilingualism Research Centre at Macquarie University. He has published extensively on autonomous and informal language learning beyond the classroom. His recent research has focused on the roles of space and language learning environments in second language acquisition.
Lisbeth M. Brevik , PhD, is an award-winning teacher educator and researcher. As a Professor of English didactics at the University of Oslo, Norway, she has developed and taught mixed methods courses, she supervises doctoral and master’s students, and is the author of articles, chapters and anthologies. Over the years, she has gained expertise in game-based mixed methods research, in particular the relation between playing online games and reading comprehension.
Nils F. Buchholtz is a Professor of mathematics education at the University of Hamburg (Germany). He studied mathematics and religious education for teaching and got his PhD in mathematics education on teachers’ professional knowledge of mathematics in 2014. Buchholtz researches the development of teacher competencies and instructional quality in mathematics both qualitatively and quantitatively, as well as the use of digital tools in doing mathematics in out-of-school learning settings.
Tony Burner is a Professor of English Education at the University of South-Eastern Norway. His research interests are assessment, teacher mentoring, diversity, multilingualism, and teacher professional development. He has written the country introductory (Norway) to assessment in secondary education in Bloomsbury Education and Childhood Studies (2019). His most recent publication from concerns a minority language teacher’s perspectives on language teaching and citizenship (co-authored with Professor Audrey Osler, published in London Review of Education).
Søren W. Eskildsen is Associate Professor of second language (L2) learning at the Department of Design and Communication, University of Southern Denmark. His primary research interest concerns the usage-based processes and practices in second language learning over time as seen through the lenses of usage-based models of language and conversation analysis. He works with both in- and out-of-class L2 data.
David Gardner teaches English for Academic Purposes and Applied Linguistics at the Centre for Applied English Studies at the University of Hong Kong. His research interests are in self-access learning and the student learning experience in EMI institutions. He is co-author of Establishing Self-Access (CUP) and Managing Self-Access Language Learning (City University Press), and has written numerous articles and book chapters.
Marta Giralt is a Lecturer in Applied Linguistics and Spanish in the School of Modern Languages and Applied Linguistics, University of Limerick, Ireland. Her research interests are in CALL, Computer-Mediated Communication, Second Language Acquisition and Intercultural Communication. She is involved in various European projects: Erasmus + Dice.Lang (Digital Citizenship Education for Foreign Languages learning) 2019-1-DE01-KA203-005712 and Erasmus + Frames (Fostering resilience through Accredited Mobility for European Sustainable Higher Education innovation) 2020-1-IT02KA226-HE-095196. For her recent list of publications in various journals and books: https:// ulsites.ul.ie/mlal/dr-marta-giralt-0
Signe Hannibal Jensen is an Assistant Professor at the University of Southern Denmark. She holds an MA in English and linguistics and a PhD in second language acquisition. Her research is within the field of second language learning where she is particularly interested in language learning beyond the classroom with focus on young learners (6–11 years of age).
John Hellermann is a Professor in Applied Linguistics at Portland State University, Portland, Oregon (USA). Using methods from conversation analysis, he has investigated the sequential actions and semiotic practices involved in language learning. He also does research on the prosodic organization of language and the linguistic landscapes of urban areas.
Martin Howard is currently Associate Dean in the College of Arts, Celtic Studies and Social Sciences at University College Cork. His research focuses on study abroad and second language acquisition. He is founding co-editor of the journal, Study Abroad Research in Second Language Acquisition, and has previously led a European COST Action, Study Abroad Research in European Perspective. He is currently President of the Association for French Language Studies. Recent publications include Study Abroad and the Second Language Learner (Bloomsbury) and Study Abroad, Second Language Acquisition and Interculturality (Multilingual Matters).
Jun (Scott) Chen Hsieh is currently an Assistant Professor of the Department of Foreign Languages and Literature at Asia University in Taiwan. His research has a strong interdisciplinary focus that combines theory and practice in areas of digital technologies, language learning, cognitive psychology, and affective domains, specifically centering on technological innovations for learning (such as robot, virtual reality, artificial intelligence, intercultural telecollaboration, and mobile devices) and affective aspects of learning (such as emotion, grit, demotivation, and willingness to communicate).
Satoko Kato is a Senior Education Coordinator/Lecturer at Research Institute for Learner Autonomy Education (RILAE), Kanda University of International Studies (KUIS) in Japan. She is also a lecturer at the Graduate School of Language Sciences, KUIS, teaching ‘learner autonomy’ and ‘teacher autonomy’ in the MA TESOL program. She holds a PhD degree in Education from Hiroshima University, Japan, and a Master’s degree in TESOL from Teachers College, Columbia University, NY.
Agnes Kukulska-Hulme i s Professor of Learning Technology and Communication in the Institute of Educational Technology at The Open University, UK, where she leads the Future Learning Research and Innovation Programme. Her work encompasses online distance education, mobile learning and language learning. Her publications include over 200 articles, papers, books, and policy and practice reports. She is on the Editorial Boards of ReCALL , RPTEL , International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning and Waikato Journal of Education .
Silvia Kunitz completed her PhD at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (USA) in 2013. In her conversation-analytic research she explores how language learning environments are organized and how students and teachers do learning/teaching/testing as socially situated activities in and through embodied talk-in-interaction. In 2018–2021 she worked on a project funded by the Swedish Research Council on language cafés as social arenas where migrants can practice their L2 Swedish.
Chun Lai is an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Education, University of Hong Kong. Her research interests include self-directed language learning with technology beyond the classroom, technology-enhanced language learning and teacher technology integration. She is the author of Autonomous Language Learning with Technology Beyond the Classroom (Bloomsbury).
Cynthia Lee is Professor cum Head of Education at the School of Education and Languages, Hong Kong Metropolitan University. Her research interests include second language pragmatics, English language learning and teaching, second language acquisition, English teacher education and computer-assisted writing.
Lina Lee is a Professor of Spanish in the Department of Languages, Literatures and Cultures at the University of New Hampshire where she teaches all levels of Spanish, Spanish linguistics, second language acquisition, and language teaching methods. She has conducted research and published articles on language pedagogy, computer-mediated communication, online intercultural learning and discourse analysis. Her articles have appeared in refereed journals including Foreign Language Annals, Hispania, Language Learning & Technology, Language Awareness, CALICO, CALL, ReCALL, System, and among others.
Ju Seong Lee (PhD, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) is Assistant Professor and Associate Head of the Department of English Language Education at the Education University of Hong Kong, specializing in Computer Assisted Language Learning (particularly in Extramural CALL contexts), emotions and motivation in language learning, and English as an International Language. He is the author of Informal Digital Learning of English: Research to Practice (Routledge).
Niina Lilja is a Lecturer of Finnish at the University of Tampere. Her areas of expertise include Conversation Analysis, learning in interaction (CA-SLA, Finnish as a second language and learning in the wild.
Qing Ma is an associate professor at the Department of Linguistics and Modern Language Studies, The Education University of Hong Kong. Her main research interests include second language vocabulary acquisition, corpus linguistics, corpus-based language pedagogy, computer-assisted language learning (CALL) and mobile-assisted language learning (MALL).
Michael W. Marek is an emeritus full professor of mass communication at Wayne State College, Wayne, Nebraska, USA, having taught a wide range of media and communication courses. He continues to publish, with research interests focusing on the intersection of instructional technology, language learning and meta-cultural communication; as well as marketing communication and media criticism. Dr. Marek was among the first scholars to publish quantitative research about the worldwide impact of COVID-19 restrictions on teaching and learning.
Martin A. Mullen is a lecturer in the School of Education and Social Sciences at the University of the West of Scotland. His research interests include CALL, MALL and in particular, learner and teacher uses of and attitudes to smartphones. He is currently the Co-chair of the EUROCALL MALL SIG.
Liam Murray is a senior lecturer in French and language technologies and Head of the School of Modern Languages and Applied Linguistics, University of Limerick, Ireland. His research interests range from the exploitation of social media and blog writing for SLA to digital games-based language learning. Recent publications list: https://ulsites.ul.i/ la/od/101
Jo Mynard is a Professor in the Faculty of Global Liberal Arts, Director of the Self-Access Learning Center and Director of the Research Institute for Learner Autonomy Education at Kanda University of International Studies in Chiba, Japan. She has an MPhil in Applied Linguistics (Trinity College Dublin, Ireland) and an EdD in TEFL (University of Exeter, UK). Her research interests include advising in language learning, the psychology of language learning and learning beyond the classroom.
Marie Nilsberth is associate professor of Educational Work at Karlstad University, specializing in interactional and ethnographic approaches to learning and the digitalization of teaching. She is currently working on research projects concerning connected classrooms as spaces for teaching and learning, with a special focus on literacy practices and classroom discourse in relation to new technologies in education.
Elke Peters is an associate professor at the KU Leuven. Her main research interests involve deliberate and incidental FL vocabulary learning inside and outside the classroom and how different types of input can contribute to vocabulary learning (single words and multiword units). She has published her research in Language Learning, Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Language Teaching Research and TESOL Quarterly.
Arja Piirainen-Marsh is Professor of English at the Department of Language and Communication Studies, University of Jyväskylä. Her research focuses on social interaction in multilingual and second language interaction. In her recent work, she has investigated the coordination of verbal and bodily resources in classroom interaction, everyday social activities in the wild and technologically mediated work settings.
Hayo Reinders (www.innovationinteaching.org) is TESOL Professor and Director of Research at Anaheim University, USA, and Professor of Applied Linguistics at KMUTT in Thailand. He is founder of the global Institute for Teacher Leadership and editor of Innovation in Language Learning & Teaching. His interests are in out-of-class learning, technology and language teacher leadership.
Jonathon Reinhardt (PhD, Penn State) is Professor of English Applied Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition and Teaching at the University of Arizona, USA. His research interests focus on technology-enhanced second and foreign language pedagogy and learning, especially with emergent technologies like social media and digital gaming, as well as the history of CALL and educational technology.
Anastasia Rothoni holds a PhD in Applied Linguistics from the English Department of the University of Athens. She has taught workshops for undergraduate students and has participated in programs organized for training English teachers. Her research interests lie in the area of literacy practices while she is also interested in ethnography, visual methods, pop culture. Currently, she is working on a project examining the digital literacy practices of Greek neomigrants in Germany and Australia.
Shannon Sauro (PhD, University of Pennsylvania; Docent, Malmö University) is an associate professor in the Department of Education at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, USA. She has taught at universities in the United States and Sweden. Her areas of research include the intersection of online fan practices and language learning and teaching as well as the role of virtual exchange/telecollaboration in language teacher education.
Kyle W. Scholz holds a PhD in German Applied Linguistics from the University of Waterloo (CAN). He is an Educational Developer in the University of Waterloo’s Centre for Teaching Excellence where he supports instructors conduct research on their teaching and student learning. His work focuses on digital game-based language learning, computer a ssisted language learning and the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL).
Howard Scott is a Senior Lecturer in Post-Compulsory Teacher Education and a Researcher at the Education Observatory, University of Wolverhampton, UK.
Geoff Sockett is Professor of language sciences at the Université de Paris, where he currently serves as head of the language sciences department. He obtained his PhD at the Université
Nancy 2 under the direction of Henri Holec. He has published and spoken widely in the topic of online informal language learning and has a particular interest in how young people acquire communicative skills in English through informal online sources.
Matt Smith is a Senior Lecturer in Primary Teacher Education and a Researcher at the Education Observatory, University of Wolverhampton, UK.
Pia Sundqvist is Associate Professor of English Language Education at the University of Oslo, Norway. Her main research interests are in the field of applied English linguistics, with a focus on informal language learning, especially Extramural English and gaming, the assessment of L2 oral proficiency and English language teaching. She is the author of Extramural English in Teaching and Learning (with Sylvén, Palgrave Macmillan, 2016) and Motivational Practice: Insights from the Classroom (with Henry and Thorsen, Studentlitteratur, 2019).
Liss Kerstin Sylvén is Professor of Language Education at the University of Gothenburg. With a PhD in English linguistics, her research interests include various perspectives of computer-assisted language learning (CALL), content and language integrated learning (CLIL), second language vocabulary acquisition, motivation, individual differences and extramural English. Apart from publishing in a variety of journals, LK has co-authored a book about extramural English (Palgrave MacMillan, 2016), and edited a volume about CLIL (Multilingual Matters, 2019).
Michael Thomas is Professor of Education and Social Justice and Director of the Centre for Educational Research at Liverpool John Moores University. He is the founder of four book series, including Global Policy and Critical Futures in Education, author of three research monographs and editor of over 20 edited volumes. He has worked in Germany, the United Kingdom and Japan and is currently coordinating research projects on UN SDGs in Botswana, Ghana, Nigeria and South Africa.
Steven L. Thorne is Professor of Second Language Acquisition in the Department of World Languages and Literatures at Portland State University (USA), with a secondary appointment in the Department of Applied Linguistics at the University of Groningen (the Netherlands). His professional interests include formative interventions in world languages education contexts, intercultural communication, new media and mobile technologies, Indigenous language revitalization and research that draws upon contextual and sequential traditions of language analysis and usage-based approaches to language development.
John Traxler is Professor of Digital Learning at the Education Observatory, University of Wolverhampton, UK.
Olga Viberg is Associate Professor in Media Technology with specialization in TechnologyEnhanced Learning, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden. Her fields of expertise include technology-enhanced learning, self-regulated learning, learning analytics, mobile-assisted language learning, and learning design. Her current research includes a focus on learning analytics, the design and application of mobile technology in language education, the integration of formal and informal learning environments, and design for learning. Her work has been published in many high-ranked referred journals and conferences.
Peter Wikström is associate senior lecturer in English Linguistics at Karlstad University, Sweden, specializing in social media discourse analysis and digital communication. He is currently working on projects concerning informal digital language activities, the reception of public apologies in social media settings, and uses and negotiations of the concepts of “race” and “racism” in Swedish public discourse, as well as teaching in the areas of English and applied linguistics.
Wen-Chi Vivian Wu is a distinguished professor of the Department of Foreign Languages and Literature at Asia University and a consultant of the Department of Medical Research in China Medical University in Taiwan. She has published extensively on CALL and educational technology-related SSCI journals, with research interests focusing on VR, flipped classrooms, PBL, MALL, cross-cultural communication and robotics learning. She has several highly cited SSCI articles on topics, including flipped instruction and learner motivation.
Wenli Wu is currently a lecturer of bilingual communication. She received her PhD in Education from the Institute of Education, University of Warwick, England. Her current research interests include cross-cultural and intercultural communication, English for academic studies and using new technology in teaching and learning.
Kevin Wai Ho Yung is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Curriculum and Instruction, The Education University of Hong Kong. He teaches teacher education courses in pedagogy, curriculum and assessment. His research interests include shadow education, language learning motivation, English for academic purposes and students’ learning experiences.
INTRODUCTION
Language Learning and Teaching Beyond the Classroom
Hayo Reinders, Chun Lai and Pia Sundqvist
An estimated 80% of adult learning takes place outside of formal education (Cross, 2007). For additional/foreign/second language (L2) learning, it is likely that out-of-class experiences play an equally important role. The vast amount of time and the diversified experiences essential to language development makes in-class learning insufficient in meeting the language development need. Out-of-class language learning not only constitutes an important context for personally meaningful and authentic language exposure and use, but also plays essential roles in maintaining motivation in learning (Reinders, Dudeney & Lamb, 2022). Language learning beyond the classroom is a common phenomenon among language learners, and is part and parcel in language development (Cole & Vanderplank, 2016; Dressman & Sadler, 2020). It is therefore surprising that the role of informal language learning outside the classroom is not given its due attention in the second language education field, with the vast majority of research instead focusing on classroom methods, materials, and interaction. In effect, language learning beyond the classroom is not a new phenomenon, and has existed in one form or another since the emergence of ‘schooled’ second language education. However, its scale has exponentially accelerated with the development of technology, in particular the arrival of the internet in the 90s, as technology makes learning beyond the classroom much more accessible. The increased scale of language learning beyond the classroom raises its importance for language education, and has started to draw researchers’ attention. Studies from a range of backgrounds have started to explore the important contribution of informal language learning, both in its own right, and in its relationship with classroom learning and teaching. The rise of research attention aligns with the surge of interest in informal learning in education in general in the early 2000s (Ito et al., 2020; Malcolm, Hodkinson & Colley, 2003), and intertwines with the development in language pedagogy and the use of technology in teaching and learning. Studies in the areas of learner autonomy, learning strategies, study abroad, work-based learning, language support, learners’ voices, self-regulated learning, computer-mediated communication (CMC), computer-assisted language learning (CALL), mobile-assisted language learning (MALL), education for migrants, digital gaming, and many others, all add to our understanding of the complex and intersecting ways in which learners construct their own L2 learning experiences, drawing from a wide range of resources, including materials, teachers, self-study, technology, other learners, and native speakers (see, e.g.,
Benson & Reinders, 2011). The existing body of research has generated a rich understanding about informal language learning, which calls for and forms the basis of efforts to solidify and bring together the insights from various disciplines to present the current state of knowledge in one accessible Handbook , to provide a sound and comprehensive basis for researchers and graduate students in all languages to build their own research on. This Handbook of Language Learning and Teaching Beyond the Classroom provides a comprehensive overview of the existing body of literature related to language learning and teaching beyond the walls of the classroom, presenting current conceptualizations, research findings, and methodological issues on informal L2 learning and teaching in various contexts. While the scope of this Handbook is broad, a clear focus on learning beyond the classroom (LBC) runs through its three parts and all included chapters.
What do we mean by language learning and teaching beyond the classroom?
As is common in all young fields of research, a plethora of closely related terms tends to emerge, denoting more or less similar concepts. We would like to take this opportunity to position language learning and teaching beyond the classroom (LLTBC) in relation to some of these frequently used terms and concepts that have been proposed over the last two decades or so.
Some of these terms highlight the real-life and situated nature of LLTBC. Take one of the most recent concepts, language learning in the digital wild (or wilds), as an example. Sauro and Zourou (2017) define this as “informal language learning that takes places in digital spaces, communities, and networks that are independent of formal instructional contexts” (Sauro & Zourou, 2017, p. 186). Their definition first appeared in a call for papers for a special issue on ‘CALL in the digital wilds’ with the journal Language Learning & Technology. In the published issue (Sauro & Zourou, 2019) they described learning in the digital wilds as not determined or controlled by educational institutions and as occurring in digital contexts or communities where the main aim is not necessarily L2 teaching or learning. Another feature they highlighted is that learning is driven or initiated by the learner, and not directly mediated by matters such as educational policy and evaluation. We may add that the core term the wild was originally coined by Hutchins (1995), to refer to real-life, situated cognition.
Others underscore the informal nature of LLTBC. Examples are Sockett’s (2014) online informal learning of English (OILE) as well as Lee and Dressman’s (2018) informal digital learning of English (IDLE). So is Sundqvist’s (2009) earlier term extramural English (EE), which she coined to refer to “the English [that] learners come in contact with or are involved in outside the walls of the classroom” (p. 1). In stark contrast to OILE and IDLE, extramural English encompasses both digital and non-digital activities and incidental as well as intentional learning, and EE is therefore more clearly unrelated to schooling or educational institutions, which makes that term broader in comparison – and possibly closer in meaning to the recently suggested learning in the (digital) wild(s). The concept of extramural English is explored in more depth in Sundqvist and Sylvén (2016), where they further emphasize the fact that EE always is initiated by the learner. Further, they propose a quadrant model of language learning (and to a certain extent also of teaching). According to their model, L2 learning can be explained with the help of two dimensions: the learner’s driving force for learning the target language (which is connected to the level of formality in learning), and the learner’s physical location when carrying out (or being exposed to) an activity using the target language (in this case, English). The driving force is illustrated as a horizontal axis (from 100% other-initiated to 100% learner-initiated) and the location as a vertical axis (from the learner
sitting at the desk in a classroom in the home country to a place as far away as possible). The symbolic center, then, would correspond to language learning that is partially initiated by the learner and partially by the teacher, and it would take place right at the wall of the classroom in the home country. Learners who step beyond that wall and, for example, put their headphones on and start listening to music in English engage in a prototypical extramural activity. Sundqvist (2019) has later proposed the term extramural L n in reference to any L2, because the principles at play in extramural English apply also to other target languages, such as learning Japanese extramurally in Saudi Arabia (Al-Nofaie, 2018).
In addition, a vast number of other terms have also been used in studies from different parts of the world to describe the phenomenon of L2 learning beyond the classroom, such as after-school, autonomous, extracurricular, independent , informal , naturalistic , non-formal , out-of-class, out-of-school , self-directed, self-instructed, and unintentional language learning. By proposing a general theoretical framework that highlights four distinct dimensions of L2 learning beyond the classroom – location , formality, pedagogy, and locus of control – Benson (2011) attempts not only to explain the scope of L2 learning that actually takes place beyond classroom walls, but also teaching beyond those walls. While beyond teaching may sound like a contradiction in terms, Benson’s framework offers guidance. For example, with regard to the first dimension (location), at least in some parts of the world, it is common with tutorial lessons in learners’ homes. Benson exemplifies this with reference to Hong Kong, where older students attending the university or secondary school offer tutorial lessons (one-to-one) in the homes of younger students, often as a way of financing their own studies (Benson, 2011). Thus, tutoring is one clear example of teaching beyond the classroom, which can be explained theoretically by considering the location of L2 learning/teaching.
Whether learning/teaching is formal or informal is connected with Benson’s (2011) second dimension: formality. In essence, formality refers to “the degree to which learning is independent of organized courses leading to formal qualifications” (p. 10). Whereas LLTBC typically is informal, some learners may perceive that they are also being taught (cf. formal). For instance, in a young learner study from Denmark, one of the participants, Antonio, described how he often searched on the internet to find information related to the digital games he played, letting YouTube teach him (Hannibal Jensen, 2019).
The third dimension (pedagogy) concerns the role of pedagogy as well as types of pedagogy involved in L2 learning beyond the classroom, and especially when learning has an element of instruction to it. Only to give two examples, self-instructed and naturalistic learning (mentioned above) can be explained by this third dimension of LLTBC. These two examples “lie at two ends of a continuum,” according to Benson (2011, p. 11), as he explains how L2 learners in self-instructed learning can choose to read certain books or watch certain programs designed for the purpose of learning, while in comparison, in naturalistic learning, regular books or programs can be chosen but without any intent to learn. More precisely, Benson (p. 12) suggests there will be a shift of focus, the moment a learner becomes engaged in the latter activity, from paying attention to the language to focusing on “communication, enjoyment or learning something other than the language itself.”
The final dimension is locus of control. He argues that “the underlying conditions for locus of control in language learning are (…) highly variable” (p. 12), but what is clear is that out-of-school settings tend to demand that learners make their own decisions about their own learning. Thus, in language learning beyond the classroom, learners are in control.
With this discussion on closely related terms as a backdrop, we would suggest that LLTBC is the broadest term of them all, and thus the broadest currently used in this field of research. LLTBC distinguishes itself from each of the other terms accounted for, in different ways.
Its closest ‘relative’ (very similar conceptualization) would be learning through extramural L n engagement, but LLTBC still differs in that the teaching component is much more pronounced in LLTBC.
What are the aims of this handbook?
As this is an emerging research field, and despite the accumulating empirical evidence, the theoretical basis of LLTBC is still quite weak. As the previous section suggests, the field is quite indeterminate with a wide range of terminologies used. What does the theoretical concept of LLTBC entail? What are its different dimensions? How does it relate to associated terms such as autonomy, motivation, and identity? As LLTBC has its theoretical basis in a variety of fields, reaching a clear theoretical demarcation of LLTBC and its constitutive elements might be a daunting task. However, the answers to these questions may provide the initial steps toward achieving conceptual clarity, and will hopefully enable scholars in this field to work from a shared starting point and continue to chart out the field to enrich our understanding.
As LLTBC highlights both language learning and teaching beyond the classroom, we highlight the roles of external parties, other than the learners, in shaping their learning experience, and the interaction of the formal and informal components of language education. Although we have witnessed an increase in research on LLTBC in recent years, the majority of this body of literature has focused on observing and profiling the nature and effects of language learners’ self-directed incidental learning beyond the classroom. This handbook aims to accumulate the insights from the field on how learners’ experiences beyond the classroom may be shaped by external forces, and hence be better supported. By solidifying these insights, we hope to draw greater attention to the field, in order to facilitate a dialog between researchers in the areas of both formal and informal learning, so as to coordinate the affordances of both in language education.
Researching LLTBC is a difficult task since it is not easy to keep records of learners’ behaviors in informal contexts. Thus, many existing studies rely on self-report data, which suffers from a number of methodological challenges. Thus, more innovative approaches are needed in this field to provide more objective, in-depth insights into learners’ out-of-class behaviors. This handbook aims to provide a collection of innovative methods and related methodological issues in researching LLTBC so that researchers in this field can have a repertoire of methodological tools to rely on.
What did we ask our contributors to do?
To ensure uniformity in terms of chapter structure, we asked all our contributors to follow a similar outline for their chapter. That is, we instructed them to provide a brief overview of the chapter topic and its importance in an introduction. We then asked for a section on key constructs, which should offer readers an overview of how those constructs have been defined, operationalized, and developed over time. Next we asked our authors to discuss key issues that researchers and practitioners are currently facing related to the specific chapter topic. We also wanted everybody to include a section on the implications of the current state of the field for theory and practice, and to offer some ideas about future directions. In short, where is the field moving to? Each chapter then ends with three reflective questions as well as three annotated Recommended Readings tips. Altogether, we hope the chapter closings will be welcome to those readers who wish to learn more about specific chapter topics.
The scope and outline of this volume
This Handbook consists of three major sections: Part I – Mapping LLTBC, Part II – Supporting LLTBC, and Part III – Researching LLTBC. This type of division is slightly different from other Handbooks in the series but given the relatively emergent status of the field, we feel that this tripartite division will be the most useful to our readers.
Part I, Mapping LLTBC , provides an overview of the broad and emerging field of learning, but also teaching, beyond the classroom. It covers the key concepts, theoretical underpinnings, and historical developments that have contributed to our current understanding of what LLTBC is (and what it is not), its core components, and its manifestations across different learner and environmental characteristics. There are eight chapters in Part I.
Part II, Supporting LLTBC , presents an overview of learners’ engagement in various informal learning contexts, and reviews the factors that shape these contexts, ranging from teacher instructional practices inside the classroom to learner beliefs and capacities outside the classroom, and to the design of learning experiences and resources across both spheres. This section also discusses how these factors could be facilitated, ranging from explicit preparatory programs (e.g., learner training), to the provision of resources and support that aim to bridge informal and formal education (e.g., self-access and language advising), as well as the design and implementation of resources and environments to be used by learners themselves (e.g., digital games and language exchange). There are 12 chapters in Part II.
Part III, Researching LLTBC , includes chapters that target different topics relating to researching LLTBC. This includes overviews and critical evaluations of tools and instruments that have previously been used in LLTBC research, discussions on how to gather and utilize data about both young and adult learners’ LLTBC, discussions on learning analytics and data mining, and central methodological issues, such as questions about validity, reliability, and not least ethical issues in LLTBC research. This section also includes empirical papers that address pedagogy and technology in relation to researching LLTBC. There are ten chapters in Part III.
Conclusion
The call for papers and invitations to this Handbook were sent out in January of 2020. Little did we know then about the challenges a pandemic would pose on the work of actually completing this Handbook, not only for us as editors, but of course also for our authors. Finalizing this volume has been a huge joint effort and there are numerous people to whom we owe a debt of gratitude. First of all we would like to thank the authors themselves. We sent invitations to authoritative as well as upcoming scholars in the field, and they all went to great lengths in order to meet our different deadlines and help us with other requests throughout the whole process of completing the volume. We recognize how difficult the process has been and are immensely grateful for all their efforts – and proud of the results. Second, we would like to thank Katie Peace from Routledge whose support and assistance have been much appreciated, from day one when we first proposed the idea of this Handbook. We also appreciate that Routledge was patient when we had to change the time line somewhat because of the unforeseen circumstances. And finally, producing a volume with a total of 30 chapters demands time and we are forever grateful to our families, and particularly to Aylina (Hayo), Jun (Chun), and Martin (Pia).
Acknowledgements
Pia Sundqvist is deeply grateful for funding from the Research Council of Norway [project number 314229].
References
Al-Nofaie, H. (2018). The attitudes and motivation of children towards learning rarely spoken foreign languages: a case study from Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(4), 451–464. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1184612
Benson, P. (2011). Language learning and teaching beyond the classroom: An introduction to the field. In P. Benson & H. Reinders (Eds.), Beyond the language classroom (pp. 7–16). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Benson, P., & Reinders, H. (Eds.). (2011). Beyond the language classroom. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Cole, J., & Vanderplank, R. (2016). Comparing autonomous and class-based learners in Brazil: Evidence for the present-day advantages of informal out-of-class learning. System, 61, 31–42. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.07.007
Dressman, M., & Sadler, R. (Eds.). (2020). The handbook of informal language learning. John Wiley & Sons.
Hannibal Jensen, S. (2019). Language learning in the wild: A young user perspective. Language Learning & Technology, 23(1), 72–86. https://doi.org/10125/44673
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ito, M., Arum, R., Conley, D., Gutiérrez, K., Kirshner, B., Livingstone, S., Michalchik, V., Penuel, W., Peppler, K., Pinkard, N., Rhodes, J., Tekinba ş, K. S., Schor, J., Sefton-Green, J., & Watkins, S. C. (2020). The connected learning research network: Reflections on a decade of engaged scholarship. Irvine, CA: Connected Learning Alliance.
Lee, J. S., & Dressman, M. (2018). When IDLE hands make an English workshop: Informal digital learning of English and language proficiency. TESOL Quarterly, 52(2), 435–445. https://doi. org/10.1002/tesq.422
Malcolm, J., Hodkinson, P., & Colley, H. (2003). The interrelationships between informal and formal learning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(7/8), 313–318.
Reinders, H., Dudeney, G., & Lamb, M. (2022). Using technology to motivate language learners. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sauro, S., & Zourou, K. (2017). Call for Papers for CALL in the Digital Wilds Special Issue, Language Learning & Technology. http://llt.msu.edu/issues/february2017/call.pdf
Sauro, S., & Zourou, K. (2019). What are the digital wilds? Language Learning & Technology, 23(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10125/44666
Sockett, G. (2014). The online informal learning of English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sundqvist, P. (2009). Extramural English matters – out-of-school English and its impact on Swedish ninth graders’ oral proficiency and vocabulary. (Diss.), Karlstad University, Karlstad.
Sundqvist, P. (2019). Commercial-off-the-shelf games in the digital wild and L2 learner vocabulary. Language Learning & Technology, 23(1), 87–113. https://doi.org/10125/44674
Sundqvist, P., & Sylvén, L. K. (2016). Extramural English in teaching and learning: From theory and research to practice. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
PART I Mapping LLTBC
Another random document with no related content on Scribd:
The Project Gutenberg eBook of The religion of Plutarch
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
Title: The religion of Plutarch
A pagan creed of apostolic times
Author: John Oakesmith
Release date: January 15, 2024 [eBook #72730]
Language: English
Original publication: London: Longmans, Green, and co, 1902
Credits: Turgut Dincer and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive) *** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE RELIGION OF PLUTARCH ***
THE RELIGION OF PLUTARCH
THE RELIGION OF PLUTARCH
A PAGAN CREED OF APOSTOLIC TIMES
AN ESSAY
BY JOHN OAKESMITH, D.L ., M.A.
INTRODUCTORY NOTE
The following pages are practically a reprint of a volume which was issued for private circulation some twelve months ago, under the title “The Religion of Plutarch as expounded in his ‘Ethics.’” The main difference between the present volume and its predecessor consists in the translation or removal of various quotations from Greek and Latin sources which were given in full in the first edition of the book. The references to these sources have, of course, been retained. Verbal corrections have been made here and there, and a few pages of new matter have been introduced into the “Preface.” In other respects the two impressions are substantially the same.
I cannot allow this opportunity to pass without expressing my gratitude to J. E. Sandys, Esq., Litt.D., Public Orator in the University of Cambridge, and Examiner in Greek at the University of London, who kindly placed at my disposal his own copy of the original essay, in which he had made numerous suggestions on points of style, and on questions of scholarship in general. These suggestions have, for the most part, been adopted in the preparation of the present edition. My thanks are also owing to my colleagues in the Civil Service, especially to those in the General Post Office, London, to whose encouragement it is largely due that this essay, in its present form, is able to see the light.
As the Athenæum, in reviewing the original edition (Athenæum, 2nd of August, 1902), suggested that “the present essay is probably the forerunner of a larger and more elaborate book,” it may be desirable to explain that the following pages do not constitute “the larger and more elaborate book” which the Athenæum is right in forecasting.
JOHN OAKESMITH.
PREFACE
When the student of Plutarch leaves the familiar ground of the “Parallel Lives,” and turns, for the first time, to the less thoroughly explored region of the “Ethics,” he is struck with wonder at the manysided excellence of the writer whose special gift he has been accustomed to regard as consisting in the composition of biographies more remarkable for the presentation of moral truths than for the accurate narration of historical facts. He learns with surprise that Plutarch has bequeathed to posterity a mine of information respecting the period in which he himself lived, as valuable and as interesting as the view presented in his “Lives” of that higher antiquity in which his classic heroes moved and worked. Even the actual bulk of Plutarch’s contribution to what may be called “general literature” is noteworthy. Apart from the “Lives,” the socalled “Catalogue of Lamprias” contains the titles of nearly two hundred works attributed, ostensibly by his son, to Plutarch,[1] and some fourscore of these have been handed down to our time under the general, but somewhat misleading, title of “Ethica” or “Moralia.”
Among these surviving essays are to be found contributions, of a surprising vitality and freshness, to the discussion of Education, Politics, Art, Literature, Music, Hygiene; serious and studied criticisms and appreciations of the great philosophic schools of Greece and their founders; short sermons on minor morals, illustrated by vivid sketches of character both typical and individual; conversations on Love and Marriage, and on other topics perpetually interesting to civilized societies. The longest work of all, the “Symposiacs,” or “Table Talk,” besides containing a wealth of material used by Plutarch and his friends in the discussion of current problems of scientific, literary, and social interest, gives a picture of Græco-Roman Society in the first Christian century, which, both from its general character and from the multitude of details it contains on matters of fact, is of the utmost importance for the accurate study of
the period and its complicated problems. All these various works are interpenetrated with the character of the writer to such a vivid degree of personality that their study, from this point of view alone, would probably cast more light upon Plutarch’s methods as a writer of history than innumerable minute and difficult inquiries into his “sources,” and the manner in which he used them in writing his “Lives.”
Fascinating, however, as is the study of the “Ethics” in these various aspects, it soon becomes evident that the point of paramount importance for a proper appreciation of Plutarch’s attitude towards life and its problems in general, is to be found in the position which he assumed in face of the religious questions which perplexed the thinking men of his time and country. What was Plutarch’s view of that ancient and hereditary faith which was not only the official creed of the Empire, but which was still accepted as a sufficient spiritual satisfaction by many millions of the Empire’s subjects? Was it possible that a man so steeped in the best literature, so keen a student of the greatest philosophies, could be a believer, to any serious extent, in those traditions which appear so crude and impossible in the light of our higher modern ideals? And if he could think them worthy of credit, by what method of interpretation was this consummation facilitated? How could he persuade himself and others to find in them at once the sanction and the inspiration of virtuous conduct? These are some of the questions which are constantly before the mind of the reader as he turns the pages of the “Ethics,” and they are constantly before the mind of the reader because the author is constantly supplying materials for answering them. The most important of Plutarch’s general writings are devoted to the full discussion, from a variety of standpoints, of religious questions, not only those handed down by the popular tradition, or embodied in ceremonial observances and legalized worships, but also those more purely theological conceptions presented in the various systems of Greek Philosophy. Around Plutarch’s Religion revolves his conception of life; his numerous contributions to the discussion of other subjects of human interest unfold their full significance only when regarded in the light supplied by a knowledge of his religious beliefs.
Such, at any rate, is the experience of the present writer after a close study of the “Ethics” during several years; and it is with the hope of contributing in some degree to the clearer appreciation of Plutarch’s manifold activities in other directions, that an investigation into his religious views has been made the special object of the following pages.
The text which has been used for the purposes of this essay is that issued at intervals between the years 1888 and 1896 by Mr. G. N. Bernardakis, the director of the Gymnasium at Mytilene.[2] The editor has postponed, for discussion in a subsequent work, many questions bearing upon the authority of his MSS., and the principles which he has applied to them in the choice of his readings; his efforts in the editio minor having been almost wholly confined to presenting the results of his labours in the shape of a complete and coherent text. Although, as Dr. Holden has said, “until the appearance of the promised editio major it is premature to pronounce an opinion on the editor’s qualifications as a textual critic,”[3] yet Mr. Bernardakis has exhibited so much combined accuracy and acumen in the preliminary discussion of various questions connected with his collation of MSS., and has disposed so completely, as Dr. Holden admits, of the charges of inaccuracy brought against him by Professor von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff of Berlin,[4] that the more general student of Classical Literature may, perhaps, feel some amount of confidence that in this edition he sees the actual work of Plutarch himself, and not the ingenious and daring conjectures of some too brilliant critic. This feeling of confidence will not be diminished by the evident anxiety displayed by Mr. W. R. Paton, an English scholar working in the same field, “to induce Mr. Bernardakis to assist and correct” him in editing a text of the “De Cupiditate Divitiarum,”[5] and it will be increased by the discovery that, greatly different as the text of Bernardakis is from that of any other previous edition, the difference frequently consists in the substitution of plain sense for undiluted absurdity, or total want of meaning.
Indebtedness to other sources of criticism and information is, the writer hopes, fully acknowledged in the footnotes as occasion arises. There has yet been published no work in English dealing with
Plutarch’s “Ethics” at all similar in scope and character either to Volkmann’s “Leben, Schriften und Philosophie des Plutarch von Chæronea,”[6] or to Gréard’s “La Morale de Plutarque.”[7] Archbishop Trench, who speaks slightingly of Gréard’s interesting study, has himself contributed one or two “Lectures” to some general observations on this sphere of Plutarch’s activity,[8] while the Rev. J. P. Mahaffy has given two chapters to the subject in his “Greek World under Roman Sway.”[9] Chap. xiii., which is headed “Plutarch and His Times—Public Life,” is devoted partly to Apuleius, and partly to Plutarch himself, and exhibits, in continuous form, a number of that author’s best-known and most frequently quoted statements and opinions on the subjects of Politics and Religion, some ten pages being set apart for the presentation and criticism of his views on the latter topic. Chap. xiv. is entitled “Plutarch and His Times—Private Life,” and intersperses with comments a number of extracts from the evidence furnished by Plutarch on various matters appertaining to the social and domestic life of his epoch, giving the gist of passages selected from the “Table Talk,” from various essays on Education, and from several tracts on Minor Morals and other themes of general interest.
Although Professor Mahaffy’s prolonged and extensive researches into every available sphere of Greek life and thought occasionally enable him to help out his author’s descriptions by aptly chosen illustrations from other sources, yet, in dealing with a writer at once so voluminous and so full of interest as Plutarch, the historian is hampered by the necessary limits of his appointed task, no less than by his own diffusive and gossiping style. Mr. Mahaffy’s Clio has always appeared to us in the light of an amiable and cultured hostess presiding at Afternoon Tea, gliding graciously hither and thither among her guests, and introducing topics of conversation which have only a superficial interest, or which she presents only in their superficial aspects; while, perhaps unconsciously, conveying the impression that she reserves for discussion among a few chosen intimates the more profound and sacred issues of human life. These two chapters on Plutarch furnish an excellent example of Professor Mahaffy’s method. They are entertaining in the sense that all well-
conducted gossip is entertaining. A trait of character is chosen here; a smart saying, or a foolish one, is selected there; a piquant anecdote is retold elsewhere: but the searchlight is never stationary, and the earnest student who trusts solely to its assistance will vainly attempt to see Plutarch steadily and see him whole.
It is, of course, the fact, as already suggested, that, in these chapters, Professor Mahaffy is dealing with Plutarch only so far as he furnishes material illustrative of the conception which the historian has formed as to the character of the age in which his subject lived. This fact is conspicuously evident in the brief account of Plutarch’s Religion given in the ten pages from page 311 onwards, where Professor Mahaffy accepts the belief of so many of his predecessors, that the age was an age of religious decadence, and not an age of religious revival; and that, moreover, it was blameworthy in Plutarch that “he never took pains to understand” Christianity [10] Further, it must be added, that the historian’s natural desire to illustrate Plutarch’s times, rather than to display Plutarch himself, has led him to commit serious injustice by his uncritical acceptance of certain spurious tracts as the genuine workmanship of Plutarch.
The conclusion at which Professor Mahaffy arrives, that Plutarch was “a narrow and bigoted Hellene,”[11] is intelligible enough to those who accept the view which we have endeavoured to combat in Chapter III. of the following essay, a view which is simply a belated survival of the ancient prejudice which consigns to eternal perdition the followers of other Religions, because they are wilfully blind to the light with which our own special Belief has been blessed in such splendour. But the man who, after even the most casual study of Plutarch’s utterances on Religion, can seriously describe him as “narrow and bigoted” will maintain, with equal serenity, that it is the practice of the sun to shine at midnight. Professor Mahaffy, indeed, in using such expressions, is at variance with his own better judgment, inasmuch as he elsewhere concedes that, “had Plutarch been at Athens when St. Paul came there, he would have been the first to give the Apostle a respectful hearing.”[12]
The subject of Plutarch’s “Moralia” has also been touched in a few contributions to the current Literature of the Reviews. The article on “Plutarch” appearing over Paley’s initials in the “Encyclopædia Britannica,” and giving a brief statement of the subjects dealt with in the different tracts in the “Moralia,” almost entirely exhausts the short list of English literary contributions to the treatment of this portion of Plutarch’s work. Paley declared in the article in question that the “Moralia” were “practically almost unknown to most persons in Britain, even to those who call themselves scholars.” This sweeping assertion is not by any means true to-day, although it is still the case that, so far as the literary presentment of results is concerned, the “Ethics” of Plutarch are a neglected field of research.
Volkmann, in the “Leben und Schriften” part of his work, carefully discusses the authenticity of each tract in the generally recognized list of Plutarch’s writings, while in the volume dealing with the “Philosophie” he gives an exhaustive analysis of the greater portion of them. Recognizing that Plutarch had no special philosophical system of his own, Volkmann endeavours to remedy this deficiency by the application of a systematic method of treatment with regular branches of “synthetic” and “analytic” investigation. The “synthetic” branch of Volkmann’s method is devoted to a discussion of Plutarch’s philosophic standpoint; to an examination of his polemic against the Stoics and Epicureans; and to the consideration of his relation to Plato, which Volkmann regards as the foundation of Plutarch’s Philosophy. The function of Volkmann’s “analytic” method is to discover how, on the philosophic basis thus laid down by the “synthetic” method, Plutarch arranges his positive conclusions in a coherent relationship with his negative polemic. It is, according to Volkmann, a natural result of the successful operation of this twofold system, that the circumstances of Plutarch’s life lose their external character, and attain to an essential connexion with his philosophical conceptions. This last assertion is made by way of criticism directed against Gréard’s “natural and simple” method of arranging Plutarch’s philosophical utterances under headings descriptive of the various spheres of life to which they seem appropriate—“la vie domestique,” “la cité,” “le temple,” &c. Volkmann thinks that under this arrangement the sense of internal unity is lost; that Plutarch’s views
are presented in it as goodnatured and benevolent, but somewhat rambling, reflections on the separate aspects of human life, instead of being treated as the outcome of a consistent philosophy taking ethical phenomena into systematic consideration.[13] This criticism has considerable force, though it does not detract from the truth and charm of M. Gréard’s book. Volkmann himself undoubtedly errs in the opposite direction. Gréard was quite justified in retorting on his critic, “Il arrive même qu’en voulant établir trop rationellement la philosophie de Plutarque, M. Volkmann se trouve conduit à lui prêter une sorte de système, bien qu’il sache comme personne que nul moins que le sage de Chéronée n’a porté dans ses écrits une pensée systématique.”[14] Volkmann, in our opinion, attaches far too much importance both to Plutarch’s discipular relation to Plato, and to his polemic against the Stoics and Epicureans. Plutarch’s opposition to Plato is frequently as strongly marked as his opposition to Stoics and Epicureans; and his indebtedness to Stoics and Epicureans is frequently as strongly marked as his indebtedness to Plato.
Volkmann’s work had been preceded in 1854 by an interesting and well-written Thesis, entitled “De Apologetica Plutarchi Chæronensis
Theologia.”[15] The author, C. G. Seibert, gives a brief review of Greek Philosophy, with the object of showing the attitude assumed by each of the great schools to the gods of the national tradition. He demonstrates conclusively, and Volkmann follows in his steps, that Plutarch owed something to all the Schools, to Stoics, to Peripatetics, and to Epicureans. Yet he, too, insists that Plutarch’s attitude towards the popular religion was identical with that assumed by Plato—eadem ratione (qua Plato) Platonis discipuli theologiam tractarunt, e quibus præ cœteris Plutarchus magistri divini vestigia secutus est. This, indeed, is the orthodox tendency in the appreciation of Plutarch, and it has been carried to the extent of claiming Plutarch as the founder of that special kind of Platonism distinguished by the epithet “New.” “Plutarch,” says Archbishop Trench, “was a Platonist with an oriental tinge, and thus a forerunner of the New Platonists.”—“He might be described with greater truth than Ammonius as the Founder of Neo-Platonism,” wrote Dr. H. W.
J. Thiersch, who, however, had not freed himself from the idea (the truth of which even so early a writer as Dacier had doubted, and the legendary character of which M. Gréard has proved beyond a doubt) that Plutarch received consular honours at the hands of Trajan.[16] —“In this essay” (the De Oraculorum Defectu), thinks Mr. W. J. Brodribb, “Plutarch largely uses the Neo-Platonic Philosophy.”[17] Even those who do not insist that Plutarch is a Neo-Platonist, or a “forerunner” of Neo-Platonism, are so anxious to label him with some designation, that they will hardly allow him to speak for himself. It may, perhaps, argue presumption on the part of an homo incognitus nulliusque auctoritatis to suggest that Plutarch faces the teaching of his predecessors with an independent mind; that he is nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri; that he tries Plato’s teachings, not from Plato’s point of view, but from his own.[18]
Such, however, is the view maintained in the pages of the following essay. It seems to us that, in order to discover the principle which gives coherence and internal unity to Plutarch’s innumerable philosophic utterances, it is not necessary to start with the assumption that he belongs to any particular school. Philosophy is to him one of the recognized sources of Religion and Morality. Tradition is another source, and Law or recognized custom another. Plutarch assumes that these three sources conjointly supply solid sanctions for belief and conduct. They are the three great records of human experience, and Plutarch will examine all their contributions to the criticism of life with a view to selecting those parts from each which will best aid him and his fellow citizens to lead lives of virtue and happiness. The great philosophical schools of Greece are regarded from this point of view—from the point of view of a moralist and a philosopher, not from the point of view of a Platonist, an anti-Stoic, or an anti-Epicurean. Plutarch is indebted, as even Volkmann himself shows, to all the Schools alike. Then why call him a Platonist, or a Neo-Pythagorizing Platonist, as Zeller has done? Plutarch’s teaching is too full of logical inconsistencies to be formalized into a system of Philosophy. But the dominating principle of his teaching, the paramount necessity of finding a sanction and an inspiration for conduct in what the wisdom of the past had already discovered, is so
strikingly conspicuous in all his writings that his logical inconsistencies appear, and are, unimportant. It is this desire of making the wisdom and traditions of the past available for ethical usefulness which actuates his attempt to reconcile the contradictions, and remove the crudities and inconsistencies, in the three sources of religious knowledge. This is the principle which gives his teaching unity, and not any external circumstances of his life, or his attitude in favour of or in opposition to the tenets of any particular school.
There is no English translation of Plutarch’s “Ethics” which can claim anything approaching the character of an authorized version. Almost every editor of Plutarch has felt it necessary to find fault with his predecessors’ attempts to express Plutarch’s meaning through the medium of another language. Amyot’s translation is, in the opinion of the Comte Joseph de Maistre, repellent to “ladies and foreigners.” Wyttenbach, who makes numerous alterations of Xylander’s Latin version, also says of Ricard’s French translation, that “it skips over the difficulties and corruptions in such a manner as to suggest that the translator was content merely to produce a version which should be intelligible to French readers.”[19] Wyttenbach himself is reprehended in the following terms by the editor of the Didot text of the “Moralia”—“Of the Latin version, in which we have made numerous corrections, it must be admitted that Xylander and Wyttenbach, in dealing with corrupt passages, not infrequently translated conjectures of their own, or suggested by other scholars, which we have been unable to adopt into the Greek Text.” In the preface to his English translation of the “De Iside et Osiride,” the Rev. Samuel Squire, Archdeacon of Bath in 1744, has some excellent critical remarks on the style of previous translators of Plutarch, and he somewhat pathetically describes the difficulties awaiting the author who endeavours to translate that writer—“To enter into another man’s Soul as it were, who lived several hundred years since, to go along with his thoughts, to trace, pursue, and connect his several ideas, to express them with propriety in a language different from that they were conceived in, and lastly to give the copy the air and spirit of an original, is not so easy a task as
it may be perhaps deemed by those who have never made the attempt. The very few good translations of the learned authors into our own language, will sufficiently justify the truth of the observation —but if any one still doubts it, let him take the first section of the book before him, and make the experiment himself.” M. Gréard is briefer but equally emphatic—“Toute traduction est une œuvre délicate, celle de Plutarque plus que toute autre peut-être.”
Whatever may be the cause of the perpetuation of this ungracious tradition of fault-finding, whether the general difficulty specified by Archdeacon Squire, or the more particular obstacle of a corrupt text described by other commentators, we do not feel that we are called upon to make any departure from so long-established a custom. The quaint charm of most of the translations forming the basis of Dr. Goodwin’s revision no one will be inclined to deny, although the reviser’s own remarks make it clear that little dependence is to be placed upon their accuracy in any instance of difficulty [20] The two volumes contained in the well-known “Bohn” series of translations are utterly misleading, not only as regards the colour which they infuse into Plutarch’s style, but also as regards their conspicuous incorrectness in many particular instances.[21] To other translations of individual tracts reference has been occasionally made in the notes.
In view of the fact that no dependence was to be placed upon the accuracy of any translation yet furnished of that portion of our author’s work with which we were dealing, it was necessary, before undertaking this essay, to make full translations of considerable portions of the “Ethics” from the text of Bernardakis; and these translations, or paraphrases based upon them, are largely employed in the following pages. Mere references to the text in support of positions assumed, or statements made, would have been useless and misleading in the absence of clear indications as to the exact interpretation placed upon the words of the text. The writer cannot hope to have succeeded where, in the opinion of competent judges, there have been so many failures. But he has, at any rate, made a conscientious attempt to understand his author, and to give expression to his view of his author’s meaning, without any prejudice
born of the assumption that Plutarch belonged to a particular school, or devoted his great powers of criticism and research to the exposition and illustration of the doctrines of any single philosopher.
JOHN OAKESMITH.
B , September, 1902.
CONTENTS
CHAPTER I.
General character of Modern European Religions: their cardinal appeal to Emotion—Roman Religion: its sanctions chiefly rational: the causes of its failure: its place as a factor in Morality taken by Greek Philosophy —Early Greek Morality based partly on Religion, partly on Reason, which, in the form of Philosophy, eventually supplies the main inspiration to Goodness—Gradual limitation of Philosophy to Ethics 1
CHAPTER II.
Importance of the ethical tendency in pre-Socratic Philosophy generally under-estimated—Development of this tendency from Thales to the Sophists, and from the Sophists to the Stoics and Epicureans—Special influence of these two Schools, aided by the failure of political interest, in establishing a practicable ideal of virtue—This ideal, conspicuous in Plutarch’s “Ethics,” and inculcated by the philosophers of the early Græco-Roman Empire generally 20
CHAPTER III.
Ethical aspect of Græco-Roman Society in the period of Plutarch: difficulty of obtaining an impartial view of it— Revival of moral earnestness concurrent with the establishment of the Empire: the reforms of Augustus a formal expression of actual tendencies—Evidences of this in philosophical and general literature—The differences between various Schools modified by the 43
importance of the ethical end to which all their efforts were directed—Endeavour made to base morality on sanctions already consecrated by the philosophies and religious traditions of the Past—Plutarch’s “Ethics” the result of such an endeavour
CHAPTER IV.
Plutarch’s attitude towards Pagan beliefs marked by a spirit of reverent rationalism—The three recognized sources of Religion: Poetry, Philosophy, and Law or Custom—The contribution of each to be examined by Reason with the object of avoiding both Superstition and Atheism: Reason the “Mystagogue” of Religion—Provisional examples of Plutarch’s method in the three spheres—His reluctance to press rationalism too far—His piety partly explained by his recognition of the divine mission of Rome—Absence of dogmatism in his teaching 62
CHAPTER V.
Plutarch’s Theology—His conception of God not a pure metaphysical abstraction, his presentment of it not dogmatic—General acceptance of the attributes recognized by Greek philosophy as essential to the idea of God—God as U , A B , E — God as I : P of Plutarch’s God intimately associated with his Intelligence—God’s Intelligence brings him into contact with humanity: by it he knows the events of the Future and the secrets of the human heart—From his knowledge springs his Providence—God as Father and Judge—the D S N V —Immortality of the Soul
CHAPTER VI.
87
Plutarch’s Dæmonology—Dæmonology as a means of reconciliation between the traditional Polytheism and Philosophic Monotheism—Dæmonlore in Greek philosophers and in the popular faith—Growth of a 120
natural tendency to identify the gods of the polytheistic tradition with the Dæmons—Emphasis thus given to the philosophic conception of the Deity—Dæmons responsible for all the crude and cruel superstitions attaching to the popular gods—Function of the Dæmons as mediators between God and man
CHAPTER VII.
Necessity for a Mediator between God and Man partly met by Oracular Inspiration—General failure of Oracles in the age of Plutarch—Plutarch’s “Delphian Essays”—The D P O : nature of Inspiration: oracles not verbally inspired—The D D O Various explanations of Inspiration—Plutarch inclines to accept that which assumes an original Divine afflatus placed under the superintendence of Dæmons, whose activities are subject to the operation of natural causes 138
CHAPTER VIII.
Sincerity of Plutarch’s belief in Dæmons—Function of the Dæmons as Mediators not confined to oracular inspiration—Dæmons in their personal relationship with the human soul—The D D S —This tract not a formal treatise on Dæmonology—Various explanations of the Socratic “Dæmon”—Ethical value of the conception of Dæmons as spiritual guardians of individual men—“Men may rise on stepping-stones of their dead selves to higher things”—Dangers of the conception—Superstition: Plutarch’s general attitude towards that Vice 163
CHAPTER IX.
Relation between Superstition and Atheism: Atheism an intellectual error: Superstition an error involving the passions: the D S —Moral fervour of Plutarch’s attack on Superstition—His comparative tolerance of Atheism—The greatest safeguard against
