Algunas confusiones en lingüística aplicada y sus consecuencias

Abstract

At the school level is common practice to qualify as dysgraphia the following structures: nadien, argo, unifolme, calsado, bamo. This practice forces us to suspect that some experts and many teachers that when they correct the spelling they mistake oral and written codes. They correct as dysgraphia the transfer of phonological awareness to the alphabet. This problem is less complex even if we had only two codes, the traditional oral and written. But in the twenty-first century, the situation becomes more difficult, as it emerge unpublished codes, such as chat and mnsg of txt. Accordingly, we assume that the school is accumulating tasks. We conclude by suggesting that the school does not deem as monstrous enemies the emerging modes of communication, instead of that they should work on the basis of their usefulness and distinction.