Interdisciplinary
N. Fazeli; F. Koushki
Abstract
The fundamental change in language research, which started with Saussure in the early twentieth century and led to the establishment of modern linguistics, restricted the said research within the so-called central part of language, i. e., the language system, without taking into consideration anything ...
Read More
The fundamental change in language research, which started with Saussure in the early twentieth century and led to the establishment of modern linguistics, restricted the said research within the so-called central part of language, i. e., the language system, without taking into consideration anything that was conceived as external to language as an autonomous system. In terms of its clearly-defined theoretical structure and subject, modern linguistics once again became an influential leading discipline in the humanities and social sciences. It achieved a great deal, but its achievements took place at the cost of isolating language from its environment and excluding the user of language and the context in which language is used from the scope of linguistic analysis. Although this stance has long been criticized by scholars who prefer to see language within a more extended context, it has generally been ignored by mainstream linguists who dominate linguistic circles. However, in the last few decades of the twentieth century, significant changes have taken place in linguistic studies. These changes have brought about a new era, the era of ″post-modern linguistics″, in which the theoretical foundations of modern linguistics are problematized and the way language is viewed and investigated is profoundly renewed. This article is written in a narrative form describing the linguistic change from modernism to postmodernism and in the course of this review it will become clear in which research perspective the two main linguistics directions (theoretical and applied) are located: disciplinary interdisciplinary and transdisiplinary? In other words what is the object of linguistics research?
Reza Mahoozi
Abstract
In Al Farabi and Avicenna point of view, Knowledge is synonymous with philosophy. This root divided to theoretical and practical branches. From these two derived different types of specialized sciences. In this cluster diagram come together two pictures of unity and plurality of specialized disciplines. ...
Read More
In Al Farabi and Avicenna point of view, Knowledge is synonymous with philosophy. This root divided to theoretical and practical branches. From these two derived different types of specialized sciences. In this cluster diagram come together two pictures of unity and plurality of specialized disciplines. However, this position is not the equivalent of modern disciplinary and interdisciplinary approach. It's not even equivalent of unity of these two together. This kind of Science is different of Science in modern period. This paper wants to show the Al Farabi and Avicenna point of view about Sciences is not the disciplinary and interdisciplinary approach. At the end, I use the word of Predisciplinary for Al Farabi and Avicenna's view.
Hedayat-Ollah Etemadizadeh; Ahmadreza Nasr; Mohamadjavad Liaghatdar
Abstract
Interdisciplinarity, interdisciplinary education and interdisciplinary curricula are increasingly used in Higher Education field. These terms are used with or interchangeably with similar terms such as multi-disciplinarity, pluridisciplinarity crossdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity. Although interdisciplinary ...
Read More
Interdisciplinarity, interdisciplinary education and interdisciplinary curricula are increasingly used in Higher Education field. These terms are used with or interchangeably with similar terms such as multi-disciplinarity, pluridisciplinarity crossdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity. Although interdisciplinary approach to curriculum lost its significance in last decades and disciplinary approached was focused for about two decades, but the ideas of interdisciplinary and integrated curricula are not new ones and are rooted in the thoughts of the previous scholars who were famous for their concerns about unity of knowledge, forming coherence, general and all-inclusive knowledge. In this paper while offering theoric and historical views on interdaisciplinarity, interdisciplinary approach to curriculum, academic disciplines, a variety of possible combinations of disciplines across curricula, a sociological criticism about disciplinary curriculum, a biological explanation for interdisciplinary curriculum, models, strategies, advantages, and pitfalls of interdisciplinary curriculum are discussed.
