Linguistics

Linguistics is the scientific[1][2] study of natural language.[3][4] Linguistics encompasses a number of sub-fields. An important topical division is between the study of language structure (grammar) and the study of meaning (semantics). Grammar encompasses morphology (the formation and composition of words), syntax (the rules that determine how words combine into phrases and sentences) and phonology (the study of sound systems and abstract sound units). Phonetics is a related branch of linguistics concerned with the actual properties of speech sounds (phones), non-speech sounds, and how they are produced and perceived.

Other sub-disciplines of linguistics include: evolutionary linguistics which considers the origins of language; historical linguistics which explores language change; sociolinguistics which looks at the relation between linguistic variation and social structures; psycholinguistics which explores the representation and functioning of language in the mind; neurolinguistics which looks at the representation of language in the brain; language acquisition which considers how children acquire their first language and how children and adults acquire and learn their second and subsequent languages; in addition, discourse analysis is concerned with the structure of texts and conversations, and pragmatics with how meaning is transmitted based on a combination of linguistic competence, non-linguistic knowledge, and the context of the speech act.

Linguistics is narrowly defined as the scientific approach to the study of language, but language can, of course, be approached from a variety of directions, and a number of other intellectual disciplines are relevant to it and influence its study. Semiotics, for example, is a related field concerned with the general study of signs and symbols both in language and outside of it. Literary theorists study the use of language in artistic literature. Linguistics additionally draws on work from such diverse fields as psychology, speech-language pathology, informatics, computer science, philosophy, biology, human anatomy, neuroscience, sociology, anthropology, and acoustics.

Someone who engages in linguistics is called a linguist, although this term is also commonly used, outside linguistics, to refer to people who speak many languages.

Names for the discipline

Before the twentieth century, the term "philology", first attested in 1716,[5] was commonly used to refer to the science of language, which was then predominantly historical in focus.[6] Since Ferdinand de Saussure's insistence on the importance of synchronic analysis, however, this focus has shifted[7] and the term "philology" is now generally used for the "study of a language's grammar, history and literary tradition," especially in the United States,[8] where it was never as popular as elsewhere in the sense of "science of language".[5]

Although the term "linguist" in the sense of "a student of language" dates from 1641,[9] the term "linguistics" is first attested in 1847.[9] It is now the usual academic term in English for the scientific study of language.

[edit] Fundamental concerns and divisions

Linguistics concerns itself with describing and explaining the nature of human language. Relevant to this are the questions of what is universal to language, how language can vary, and how human beings come to know languages. All humans (setting aside extremely pathological cases) achieve competence in whatever language is spoken (or signed, in the case of signed languages) around them when growing up, with apparently little need for explicit conscious instruction. While non-humans acquire their own communication systems, they do not acquire human language in this way (although many non-human animals can learn to respond to language, or can even be trained to use it to a degree).[10] Therefore, linguists assume, the ability to acquire and use language is an innate, biologically-based potential of modern human beings, similar to the ability to walk. There is no consensus, however, as to the extent of this innate potential, or its domain-specificity (the degree to which such innate abilities are specific to language), with some theorists claiming that there is a very large set of highly abstract and specific binary settings coded into the human brain, while others claim that the ability to learn language is a product of general human cognition. It is, however, generally agreed that there are no strong genetic differences underlying the differences between languages: an individual will acquire whatever language(s) he or she is exposed to as a child, regardless of parentage or ethnic origin.[11]

Linguistic structures are pairings of meaning and form; such pairings are known as Saussurean signs. In this sense, form may consist of sound patterns, movements of the hands, written symbols, and so on. There are many sub-fields concerned with particular aspects of linguistic structure, ranging from those focused primarily on form to those focused primarily on meaning:

* Phonetics, the study of the physical properties of speech (or signed) production and perception
* Phonology, the study of sounds (or signs) as discrete, abstract elements in the speaker's mind that distinguish meaning
* Morphology, the study of internal structures of words and how they can be modified
* Syntax, the study of how words combine to form grammatical sentences
* Semantics, the study of the meaning of words (lexical semantics) and fixed word combinations (phraseology), and how these combine to form the meanings of sentences
* Pragmatics, the study of how utterances are used in communicative acts, and the role played by context and non-linguistic knowledge in the transmission of meaning
* Discourse analysis, the analysis of language use in texts (spoken, written, or signed)

Many linguists would agree that these divisions overlap considerably, and the independent significance of each of these areas is not universally acknowledged. Regardless of any particular linguist's position, each area has core concepts that foster significant scholarly inquiry and research.

Alongside these structurally-motivated domains of study are other fields of linguistics, distinguished by the kinds of non-linguistic factors that they consider:

* Applied linguistics, the study of language-related issues applied in everyday life, notably language policies, planning, and education. (Constructed language fits under Applied linguistics.)
* Biolinguistics, the study of natural as well as human-taught communication systems in animals, compared to human language.
* Clinical linguistics, the application of linguistic theory to the field of Speech-Language Pathology.
* Computational linguistics, the study of computational implementations of linguistic structures.
* Developmental linguistics, the study of the development of linguistic ability in individuals, particularly the acquisition of language in childhood.
* Evolutionary linguistics, the study of the origin and subsequent development of language by the human species.
* Historical linguistics or diachronic linguistics, the study of language change over time.
* Language geography, the study of the geographical distribution of languages and linguistic features.
* Linguistic typology, the study of the common properties of diverse unrelated languages, properties that may, given sufficient attestation, be assumed to be innate to human language capacity.
* Neurolinguistics, the study of the structures in the human brain that underlie grammar and communication.
* Psycholinguistics, the study of the cognitive processes and representations underlying language use.
* Sociolinguistics, the study of variation in language and its relationship with social factors.
* Stylistics, the study of linguistic factors that place a discourse in context.

The related discipline of semiotics investigates the relationship between signs and what they signify. From the perspective of semiotics, language can be seen as a sign or symbol, with the world as its representation.[citation needed]

[edit] Variation and universality

Much modern linguistic research, particularly within the paradigm of generative grammar, has concerned itself with trying to account for differences between languages of the world. This has worked on the assumption that if human linguistic ability is narrowly constrained by human biology, then all languages must share certain fundamental properties.

In generativist theory, the collection of fundamental properties all languages share are referred to as universal grammar (UG). The specific characteristics of this universal grammar are a much debated topic. Typologists and non-generativist linguists usually refer simply to language universals, or universals of language.

Similarities between languages can have a number of different origins. In the simplest case, universal properties may be due to universal aspects of human experience. For example, all humans experience water, and all human languages have a word for water. Other similarities may be due to common descent: the Latin language spoken by the Ancient Romans developed into Spanish in Spain and Italian in Italy; similarities between Spanish and Italian are thus in many cases due to both being descended from Latin. In other cases, contact between languages — particularly where many speakers are bilingual — can lead to much borrowing of structures, as well as words. Similarity may also, of course, be due to coincidence. English much and Spanish mucho are not descended from the same form or borrowed from one language to the other;[12] nor is the similarity due to innate linguistic knowledge (see False cognate).

Arguments in favor of language universals have also come from documented cases of sign languages (such as Al-Sayyid Bedouin Sign Language) developing in communities of congenitally deaf people, independently of spoken language. The properties of these sign languages conform generally to many of the properties of spoken languages. Other known and suspected sign language isolates include Kata Kolok, Nicaraguan Sign Language, and Providence Island Sign Language.

[edit] Structures
Ferdinand de Saussure

It has been perceived that languages tend to be organized around grammatical categories such as noun and verb, nominative and accusative, or present and past, though, importantly, not exclusively so. The grammar of a language is organized around such fundamental categories, though many languages express the relationships between words and syntax in other discrete ways (cf. some Bantu languages for noun/verb relations, ergative-absolutive systems for case relations, several Native American languages for tense/aspect relations).

In addition to making substantial use of discrete categories, language has the important property that it organizes elements into recursive structures; this allows, for example, a noun phrase to contain another noun phrase (as in "the chimpanzee's lips") or a clause to contain a clause (as in "I think that it's raining"). Though recursion in grammar was implicitly recognized much earlier (for example by Jespersen), the importance of this aspect of language became more popular after the 1957 publication of Noam Chomsky's book Syntactic Structures,[13] which presented a formal grammar of a fragment of English. Prior to this, the most detailed descriptions of linguistic systems were of phonological or morphological systems.

Chomsky used a context-free grammar augmented with transformations. Since then, following the trend of Chomskyan linguistics, context-free grammars have been written for substantial fragments of various languages (for example GPSG, for English). It has been demonstrated, however, that human languages (most notably Dutch and Swiss German) include cross-serial dependencies, which cannot be handled adequately by context-free grammars.[14]

[edit] Some selected sub-fields

[edit] Diachronic linguistics

Studying languages at a particular point in time (usually the present) is "synchronic", while diachronic linguistics examines how language changes through time, sometimes over centuries. It enjoys both a rich history and a strong theoretical foundation for the study of language change.

In universities in the United States, the historic perspective is often out of fashion. The shift in focus to a non-historic perspective started with Saussure and became predominant with Noam Chomsky.

Explicitly historical perspectives include historical-comparative linguistics and etymology.

[edit] Contextual linguistics

Contextual linguistics may include the study of linguistics in interaction with other academic disciplines. The interdisciplinary areas of linguistics consider how language interacts with the rest of the world.

Sociolinguistics, anthropological linguistics, and linguistic anthropology are seen as areas that bridge the gap between linguistics and society as a whole.

Psycholinguistics and neurolinguistics relate linguistics to the medical sciences.

Other cross-disciplinary areas of linguistics include evolutionary linguistics, computational linguistics and cognitive science.

[edit] Applied linguistics

Linguists are largely concerned with finding and describing the generalities and varieties both within particular languages and among all language. Applied linguistics takes the result of those findings and "applies" them to other areas. The term "applied linguistics" is often used to refer to the use of linguistic research in language teaching only[citation needed], but results of linguistic research are used in many other areas as well, such as lexicography and translation. "Applied linguistics" has been argued to be something of a misnomer[who?], since applied linguists focus on making sense of and engineering solutions for real-world linguistic problems, not simply "applying" existing technical knowledge from linguistics; moreover, they commonly apply technical knowledge from multiple sources, such as sociology (e.g. conversation analysis) and anthropology.

Today, computers are widely used in many areas of applied linguistics. Speech synthesis and speech recognition use phonetic and phonemic knowledge to provide voice interfaces to computers. Applications of computational linguistics in machine translation, computer-assisted translation, and natural language processing are areas of applied linguistics which have come to the forefront. Their influence has had an effect on theories of syntax and semantics, as modeling syntactic and semantic theories on computers constraints.

[edit] Linguistic analysis

Linguistic analysis is used by many governments to verify the claimed nationality of people seeking asylum who do not hold the necessary documentation to prove their claim.[15] This often takes the form of an interview by personnel in an immigration department. Depending on the country, this interview is conducted in either the asylum seeker's native language through an interpreter, or in an international langua franca like English.[15] Australia uses the former method, while Germany employs the latter; the Netherlands uses either method depending on the languages involved.[15] Tape recordings of the interview then undergo language analysis, which can be done by either private contractors or within a department of the government. In this analysis, linguistic features of the asylum seeker are used by analysts to make a determination about the speaker's nationality. The reported findings of the linguistic analysis can play a critical role in the government's decision on the refugee status of the asylum seeker.[15]

[edit] Description and prescription

Main articles: Descriptive linguistics, Linguistic prescription

Linguistics is descriptive; linguists describe and explain features of language without making subjective judgments on whether a particular feature is "right" or "wrong". This is analogous to practice in other sciences: a zoologist studies the animal kingdom without making subjective judgments on whether a particular animal is better or worse than another.

Prescription, on the other hand, is an attempt to promote particular linguistic usages over others, often favouring a particular dialect or "acrolect". This may have the aim of establishing a linguistic standard, which can aid communication over large geographical areas. It may also, however, be an attempt by speakers of one language or dialect to exert influence over speakers of other languages or dialects (see Linguistic imperialism). An extreme version of prescriptivism can be found among censors, who attempt to eradicate words and structures which they consider to be destructive to society.

[edit] Speech and writing

Most contemporary linguists work under the assumption that spoken (or signed) language is more fundamental than written language. This is because:

* Speech appears to be universal to all human beings capable of producing and hearing it, while there have been many cultures and speech communities that lack written communication;
* Speech evolved before human beings invented writing;
* People learn to speak and process spoken languages more easily and much earlier than writing;

Linguists nonetheless agree that the study of written language can be worthwhile and valuable. For research that relies on corpus linguistics and computational linguistics, written language is often much more convenient for processing large amounts of linguistic data. Large corpora of spoken language are difficult to create and hard to find, and are typically transcribed and written. Additionally, linguists have turned to text-based discourse occurring in various formats of computer-mediated communication as a viable site for linguistic inquiry.

The study of writing systems themselves is in any case considered a branch of linguistics.

[edit] History
Main article: History of linguistics

Some of the earliest linguistic activities can be recalled from Iron Age India with the analysis of Sanskrit. The Pratishakhyas (from ca. the 8th century BC) constitute as it were a proto-linguistic ad hoc collection of observations about mutations to a given corpus particular to a given Vedic school. Systematic study of these texts gives rise to the Vedanga discipline of Vyakarana, the earliest surviving account of which is the work of Pānini (c. 520 – 460 BC), who, however, looks back on what are probably several generations of grammarians, whose opinions he occasionally refers to. Pānini formulates close to 4,000 rules which together form a compact generative grammar of Sanskrit. Inherent in his analytic approach are the concepts of the phoneme, the morpheme and the root. Due to its focus on brevity, his grammar has a highly unintuitive structure, reminiscent of contemporary "machine language" (as opposed to "human readable" programming languages).

Indian linguistics maintained a high level for several centuries; Patanjali in the 2nd century BC still actively criticizes Panini. In the later centuries BC, however, Panini's grammar came to be seen as prescriptive, and commentators came to be fully dependent on it. Bhartrihari (c. 450 – 510) theorized the act of speech as being made up of four stages: first, conceptualization of an idea, second, its verbalization and sequencing (articulation) and third, delivery of speech into atmospheric air, the interpretation of speech by the listener, the interpreter.

Western linguistics begins in Classical Antiquity with grammatical speculation such as Plato's Cratylus. The first important advancement of the Greeks was the creation of the alphabet. As a result of the introduction of writing, poetry such as the Homeric poems became written and several editions were created and commented, forming the basis of philology and critic. The sophists and Socrates introduced dialectics as a new text genre. Aristotle defined the logic of speech and the argument. Furthermore Aristotle works on rhetoric and poetics were of utmost importance for the understating of tragedy, poetry, public discussions etc. as text genres.

One of the greatest of the Greek grammarians was Apollonius Dyscolus.[16] Apollonius wrote more than thirty treatises on questions of syntax, semantics, morphology, prosody, orthography, dialectology, and more. In the 4th c., Aelius Donatus compiled the Latin grammar Ars Grammatica that was to be the defining school text through the Middle Ages.[17] In De vulgari eloquentia ("On the Eloquence of Vernacular"), Dante Alighieri expanded the scope of linguistic enquiry from the traditional languages of antiquity to include the language of the day.[citation needed]

In the Middle East, the Persian linguist Sibawayh made a detailed and professional description of Arabic in 760, in his monumental work, Al-kitab fi al-nahw (الكتاب في النحو, The Book on Grammar), bringing many linguistic aspects of language to light. In his book he distinguished phonetics from phonology.[citation needed]

Sir William Jones noted that Sanskrit shared many common features with classical Latin and Greek, notably verb roots and grammatical structures, such as the case system. This led to the theory that all languages sprung from a common source and to the discovery of the Indo-European language family. He began the study of comparative linguistics, which would uncover more language families and branches.

In 19th century Europe the study of linguistics was largely from the perspective of philology (or historical linguistics). Some early-19th-century linguists were Jakob Grimm, who devised a principle of consonantal shifts in pronunciation – known as Grimm's Law – in 1822; Karl Verner, who formulated Verner's Law; August Schleicher, who created the "Stammbaumtheorie" ("family tree"); and Johannes Schmidt, who developed the "Wellentheorie" ("wave model") in 1872.

Ferdinand de Saussure was the founder of modern structural linguistics, with an emphasis on synchronic (i.e. non-historical) explanations for language form.

In North America, the structuralist tradition grew out of a combination of missionary linguistics (whose goal was to translate the bible) and Anthropology. While originally regarded as a sub-field of anthropology in the United States[18][19], linguistics is now considered a separate scientific discipline in the US, Australia and much of Europe.

Edward Sapir, a leader in American structural linguistics, was one of the first who explored the relations between language studies and anthropology. His methodology had strong influence on all his successors. Noam Chomsky's formal model of language, transformational-generative grammar, developed under the influence of his teacher Zellig Harris, who was in turn strongly influenced by Leonard Bloomfield, has been the dominant model since the 1960s.

The structural linguistics period was largely superseded in North America by generative grammar in the 1950s and 60s. This paradigm views language as a mental object, and emphasizes the role of the formal modeling of universal and language specific rules. Noam Chomsky remains an important but controversial linguistic figure. Generative grammar gave rise to such frameworks such as Transformational grammar, Generative Semantics, Relational Grammar, Generalized Phrase-structure Grammar, Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG) and Lexical Functional Grammar (LFG). Other linguists working in Optimality Theory state generalizations in terms of violable constraints that interact with each other, and abandon the traditional rule-based formalism first pioneered by early work in generativist linguistics.

Functionalist linguists working in functional grammar and Cognitive Linguistics tend to stress the non-autonomy of linguistic knowledge and the non-universality of linguistic structures, thus differing significantly from the Chomskyan school. They reject Chomskyan intuitive introspection as a scientific method, relying instead on typological evidence.

[edit] Schools of study

There are a wide variety of approaches to linguistic study. These can be loosely divided (although not without controversy) into formalist and functionalist approaches. Formalist approaches stress the importance of linguistic forms, and seek explanations for the structure of language from within the linguistic system itself. For example, the fact that language shows recursion might be attributed to recursive rules. Functionalist linguists by contrast view the structure of language as being driven by its function. For example, the fact that languages often put topical information first in the sentence, may be due to a communicative need to pair old information with new information in discourse.

[edit] Generative grammar
Main article: Generative grammar

During the last half of the twentieth century, following the work of Noam Chomsky, linguistics was dominated by the generativist school. While formulated by Chomsky as a way to explain how human beings acquire language and the biological constraints on this acquisition, its application to natural languages rarely explores that aspect of the theory. Generative theory is modularist and formalist in character. While generative grammar remains the dominant paradigm for studying linguistics,[20] Chomsky's writings have also gathered much criticism.

[edit] Cognitive linguistics
Main article: Cognitive linguistics

In the 1970s and 1980s, a new school of thought known as cognitive linguistics emerged as a reaction to generativist theory. Led by theorists such as Ronald Langacker and George Lakoff, linguists working within the realm of cognitive linguistics posit that language is an emergent property of basic, general-purpose cognitive processes. In contrast to the generativist school of linguistics, cognitive linguistics is non-modularist and functionalist in character. Important developments in cognitive linguistics include cognitive grammar, frame semantics, and conceptual metaphor, all of which are based on the idea that form-function correspondences based on representations derived from embodied experience constitute the basic units of language.
Diposkan oleh CALL ASSIGMENT di 23:24 0 komentar
Label: Linguistics Articles
Practical accessibility: Core concepts
One of the defining principles of the Web is that it should provide all people, regardless of physical or technological readiness, with access to information. Since the Web took off as a visual medium, the goals of design have been at odds with the goals of accessibility. When designers began to use large images, proprietary media formats, and complex page layouts to produce well-designed documents, the Web became a better-looking place, but those users who require clean HTML for access were shut out from many pages. Today, the course of Web design is shifting back to its original purpose. HTML has matured to offer more visual controls, so designers have more tools at hand to create structured and navigable Web sites without resorting to hacks and workarounds. Around the world, initiatives are under way to mandate that disabled users have equal access to Internet resources, including the guidelines issued by the Web Accessibility Initiative of the World Wide Web Consortium and, in the United States, the amendments to Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The result is that Web interface design is intricately tied to accessibility design. It is the responsibility of Web designers to understand and support the needs of disabled users.

In this article we will review some of the basic requirements for accessible design, with a focus on the overarching concepts and techniques that constitute an accessible Web page. For specific details at the code level, download the Accessible Design Guidelines from the Resources area of the site.
Accommodate assistive technologies

Blind users are most likely the people most affected by your Web design choices. Most blind users use screen reader software, a speech-enabled browser, or a braille display, and designing pages that are understandable when "read" by these devices is the biggest challenge for Web developers. Users with cognitive or learning disabilities also use screen reader software; having the text read aloud while reading along visually greatly enhances their ability to understand the materials. Assistive technologies transform text into something that is accessible. But the Web is not only about text, and any non-text item on a Web page presents a potential barrier for visually disabled users. Accessible design means supplying alternative text for any non-text element.
Design flexible pages

Many disabilities can be accommodated by standard browser software as long as the Web pages are flexible and can transform to meet the viewer's needs. For example, color-blind users can apply their own text and background color to a page to increase legibility, or low-vision users can scale type to a size they can read comfortably. Some low-vision users read better with white text on a black background. Accessible design means designing pages that hold up to these transformations - that remain legible and navigable under different viewing conditions.
Provide alternatives

Sometimes designing accessible pages is simply a matter of telling the same story different ways. For example, users with cognitive or learning disabilities benefit from having audio descriptions available as well as text, so you might include "audio notes" to accompany your text content. You might also use images for navigation and page content, which would make your pages more accessible to these users. Deaf or hearing-impaired users, as well as others, benefit from captions with video content. Accessible design means providing an equivalent version whenever you include content in a modality that may not be accessible to users.
How to design accessible Web pages

You can read guidelines until you're blue in the face, but until you experience Web pages as a disabled user would it's hard to put guidelines into practice. Most of the available guidelines make pronouncements about what you should and should not do, but don't explain why, what the gain is when you follow the guidelines, and what is lost when you do not: What does it mean to "Clarify natural language usage" and how do I do that? The best way to answer such questions is to work with screen reader software like IBM's Home Page Reader (HPR), and hear the glitches and bang up against the barriers on your pages. Most developers check their pages for consistency on different browsers and platforms. For an accessibility check, view your pages with different preference settings, and also using HPR. While there are likely even more non-standardized assistive devices out there than there are non-standardized Web browsers, you can establish a baseline: if the pages make sense in HPR then hopefully they will transfer with at least a measure of grace to other devices.
Designing accessible layout tables

Most people think that accessible design means giving up layout tables, which is currently the only way to really design Web pages. Indeed, the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines discourage the use of layout tables, but in the same breath they acknowledge that style sheet positioning - the only real option to layout tables for positioning elements on a page - is not adequately supported by browser software. So it appears that layout tables are still the only way to go, and the good news is that, when they are carefully designed, the newer screen reader software reads tables quite handily. As long as Web authoring tools like Dreamweaver and GoLive use layout tables as their underlying page formatting device, tables will not go away anytime soon. Assistive technologies will just get better at understanding them.
Design tables that make sense when linearized

Some screen reader software literally reads the screen, meaning it starts in the upper left-hand corner and reads from left to right. This turns Web pages with multi-column layouts - in other words, most Web pages - into complete gibberish. However, newer software actually looks at the underlying page code and reads that instead. Indeed, tests with HPR have been encouraging since the software is not reading the rendered screen but instead the parsed HTML code. With this software the table cells are linearized, or read cell-by-cell. To design a table that makes sense when read aloud in this fashion, make sure to group related content. For example, put all your navigation links in one cell and your main content in another. A good way to check your tables is to save a page as "text only" from the browser and see if the text flow makes sense in a single-column format.
Use flexible layout tables

A flexible layout table is fluid - it scales to fill the browser window, it resizes to accommodate its contents. Explaining the how-tos of designing flexible layout tables is beyond the scope of this article. For the purposes of accessible design, page layouts must be flexible to accommodate adjustments such as enlarged type.
Use logical markup

There are many good reasons for using logical markup. Machines cannot read pages that are formatted with presentation-style markup as effectively as with logical tags. For example, if you include italicized text in your body text is it for emphasis? Is it a foreign word? Is it a citation? If you mark it as a machine cannot know what it means. If you mark is as then the machine knows it's for emphasis. If a screen reader reads the page it can convey emphasis to a blind user. If the text is italicized with physical markup the blind user will miss the emphasis entirely. For accessible pages, use logical markup to describe the structure of your document - to describe what you mean - and use CSS to control presentation - to describe how you want things to look.
Related links

* Accessible Design Guidelines
Guidelines for Web developers
* Tips and tutorials
o Flash Accessibility
o IBM Accessibility Center
Excellent resource: go here first!
o Microsoft Accessibility
o Rich Media Resource Center
Help with making media accessible
o WebABLE
o Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
The "official" accessibility site
* Verifying pages
o Vischeck
Color-blindness simulator
o Bobby
Accessibility checker
o Lynx Viewer
Lynx simulator
o W3C HTML Validation Service
o W3C CSS Validation Service
o UsableNet
LIFT Web site testing service
o The Wave
See a page as it might be read
* Assistive technologies
o IBM Home Page Reader
30-day free trial
o JAWS
Windows screen reader
o OutSpoken
Macintosh screen reader
* Articles
o Accessibility on the Mac
Clark, Joe
o Distance Learning - Boon or Bane?
Blaser, Art
Excellent article on how distance learning affects people with disabilities
o How People with Disabilities Use the Web
Brewer, Judy, ed.
* Policies and Guidelines
o Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards
Federal IT Accessibility Initiative
o Accessibility Guidelines and Standards
U.S. Access Board
o Web Accessibility Initiative
W3C
Diposkan oleh CALL ASSIGMENT di 23:18 0 komentar
Label: Teaching Articles
Posting Lama
Langgan: Entri (Atom)