Linguistic Applied vs. Applied Linguistics

[faryan]

Hi
I wonder if anyone here could help me figure out these two areas,their facets, importance, objectives and interests. Offering links or articles would be utterly helpful.
Thanks in advance!

 

[5jj]

There is only one field, Applied Linguistics, In alphabetical lists, it may appears as Linguistics, Applied.

 

[Tdol]

But not Linguistic Applied- at least, I've never seen it used.

 

[faryan]

Thanks for your attentive responses.
Actually not only both are existed but also there must be some subtle nuances of meaning and function;that's an academic dispute and seems to be intricate enough! there's only an article I found ,entitled "Applied linguistics is not linguistics applied", but is not sufficient to prove anything...here is the link. would you please have a look at it and if it's possible give me honor of knowing your ideas?
Thanks
Applied linguistics is not linguistics applied

 

[5jj]

Actually not only both are existed ...

There are not two areas called 'Applied Linguistics' and 'Linguistics applied', and the article you linked us to does not claim this.

Some had claimed that the name Applied Linguistics simply referred to Linguistics (which was) applied to a specific area of that latter subject. Others claimed that Applied Linguistics was a discipline in its own right, separate from Linguistics.

 

[BobK]

I must say I'm getting a bit tired of these 'It must be OK, I saw it on the Internet' responses.

b

 

[faryan]

Thank you all for your input. I do appreciate your kind responses but the topic was asserted by a knowledgeable man. The response of dear 5jj had been rendered but unfortunately was rejected! I haven't found the response yet but will share it with you as soon as I access it.sincerely yours Faryan

 

[Route21]

"Knowledgeable men" once believed the world was flat - and most people believed them!

No further comment.

Regards
R21

 

[Tdol]

Thank you all for your input. I do appreciate your kind responses but the topic was asserted by a knowledgeable man. The response of dear 5jj had been rendered but unfortunately was rejected! I haven't found the response yet but will share it with you as soon as I access it.sincerely yours Faryan

Good luck with that.

The link you provided offers a simple play on words- trying to turn a clumsy academic play on words into a theory will go nowhere. The knowledgeable writer was making a lame academic joke, so all the best with trying to show us up by turning a pun into a devastating theory that put us all to shame. I look forward to your proof. I don't expect to see it because it is based on a misunderstanding of what the original writer was talking about- it was a play on words and not a theory of language.

A joke or pun by a knowledgeable person is not the same as an assertion that something is the case- knowledgeable people can make jokes, even not very funny ones.

 

[emsr2d2]

Zariii, you seem to have "Reported" this thread with a question of your own. Please take care to use the "Report" button correctly. This thread is closed. If you wish to ask a question of your own, please start a new thread.