A course of english in agriculture

rns that 
nutrient to the soil or draws a different ratio of nutrients, for example, rices followed by cottons. 
By crop rotation farmers can keep their fields under continuous production, without the need to 
let them lie fallow, and reducing the need for artificial fertilizers, both of which can be expensive. 
Legumes, plants of the family Fabaceae, for instance, have nodules on their roots which 
contain nitrogen-fixing bacteria. It therefore makes good sense agriculturally to alternate them 
with cereals (family Poaceae) and other plants that require nitrates. A common modern crop 
rotation is alternating soybeans and maize (corn). In subsistence farming, it also makes good 
nutritional sense to grow beans and grain at the same time in different fields. 
Crop rotation is also used to control pests and diseases that can become established in the 
soil over time. Plants within the same taxonomic family tend to have similar pests and pathogens. 
By regularly changing the planting location, the pest cycles can be broken or limited. For 
example, root-knot nematode is a serious problem for some plants in warm climates and sandy 
soils, where it slowly builds up to high levels in the soil, and can severely damage plant 
productivity by cutting off circulation from the plant roots. Growing a crop that is not a host for 
root-knot nematode for one season greatly reduces the level of the nematode in the soil, thus 
making it possible to grow a susceptible crop the following season without needing soil 
fumigation. 
It is also difficult to control weeds similar to the crop which may contaminate the final 
produce. For instance, ergot in weed grasses is difficult to separate from harvested grain. A 
different crop allows the weeds to be eliminated, breaking the ergot cycle. 
This principle is of particular use in organic farming, where pest control may be achieved 
without synthetic pesticides. 
A general effect of crop rotation is that there is a geographic mixing of crops, which can 
slow the spread of pests and diseases during the growing season. The different crops can also 
reduce the effects of adverse weather for the individual farmer and, by requiring planting and 
harvest at different times, allow more land to be farmed with the same amount of machinery and 
labor. 
 125 
The choice and sequence of rotation crops depends on the nature of the soil, the climate, 
and precipitation which together determine the type of plants that may be cultivated. Other 
important aspects of farming such as crop marketing and economic variables must also be 
considered when choosing a crop rotation. 
History 
Crop rotation was already mentioned in the Roman literature, and referred to by great 
civilizations in Africa and Asia. From the end of the Middle Ages until the 20th century, the 
three-year rotation was practiced by farmers in Europe with a rotation of rye or winter wheat, 
followed by spring oats or barley, then letting the soil rest (fallowomen) during the third stage. 
The fact that suitable rotations made it possible to restore or to maintain a productive soil has 
long been recognized by planting spring crops for livestock in place of grains for human 
consumption. 
A four-field rotation was pioneered by farmers, namely in the region Waasland in the 
early 16th century and popularised by the British agriculturist Charles Townshend in the 18th 
century. The system (wheat, barley, turnips and clover), opened up a fodder crop and grazing 
crop allowing livestock to be bred year-round. The four-field crop rotation was a key 
development in the British Agricultural Revolution. 
Contrary to the widespread myth, crop rotation was not pioneered in the United States by 
George Washington Carver. Carver merely taught the standard technique to poor black farmers as 
part of his extension education program. In the Green revolution, the practice of crop rotation 
gave way in some parts of the world to the practice of simply adding the necessary chemical 
inputs to the depleted soil, e.g., replacing organic nitrogen with ammonium nitrate or urea and 
restoring soil pH with lime. However, disadvantages of monoculture from the standpoint of 
sustainable agriculture have since become apparent. 
----  ---- 
 126 
REFERENCES 
[1] Allen, J.P.B. & Windowson, H.G. (1974), English in Focus: English in Agriculture, 
OUP, Oxford. 
[2] Bates, M. & Dudley-Evans, A. (1976), Nucleus: General Science, Longman. 
[3] Barden, H. & Parrish (1987), Plant Science, McGraw-Hill. 
[4] Buckett (1980), Introduction to Livestock Husbandry, Pergamon Press. 
[5] Candlin, C.N. (1984), “Syllabus Design as a Critical Process” in Language Learning 
and Education, C.J.Brumfit (ed.), 1984a. 
[6] Carroll, B.J. (1980), Testing Communicative Performance, Pergamon. 
[7] Chitravelu, N. (1980), “English for Special Purposes Project” in ELT Documents 107, 
British Council. 
[8] Close, R.A. (1965), The English We Use for Science, Longman. 
[9] Coffey, B. (1980), “English for Academic Purposes”, Paper presented at the Regional 
Language Centre (R.E.L.C), Singapore, Seminar, March 1980. 
[10] Coffey, B. (1984), “ESP-English for Specific Purposes” in Language Teaching Vol.17, 
No.I, January 1984, Cambridge University Press. 
[11] Crymes, R.H. (1978), The Developing Art of TESOL: Theory and Practice in C.H. 
Blatchford and J. Schachter, Washington D.C. 
[12] Denny, S. ,Kerr, L., Phillips, M., Shettlesworth, C. (1985), Agriculture, Nucleus, 
Longman. 
[13] Ewer, J.R & Latorre, G. (1967), “Preparing an English Course for Students of Science” 
in English Language Teaching Journal, Vol. 21, 3, 1967, pp.221 - 229. 
[14] Ewer, J.R. & Latorre, G. (1969), A Course in Scientific English, Longman. 
[15] Ewer, J.R. (1971), “Further Notes on Developing an English Programme for Students 
of Science and Technology” in English Language Teaching, Vol. 15, No. I, 1971, pp. 
65 - 70. 
[16] Ewer, J.R. & Hughes-Davies, E. (1972), “Further Notes on Preparing an English 
Programme for Students of Science and Technology” in English Teaching Journal, 
Vol. 26, 3, 1972, pp. 269 - 273. 
[17] Halliday, M.A.K., McIntosh, A. & Strevens, P. (1964), The Linguistic Sciences and 
language Teaching, London, Longman, pp. 190. 
[18] Halliday, M.A.K. (1969), “Existing Research and Future Work” in Language for 
Special Purposes, CILT Reports and Papers No. I, CILT, 1969. 
[19] Herbert, A.J. (1965), The Structure of Technical English, Longman. 
[20] Holliday, A. & Cooke, T. (1988), “An Ecological Approach to ESP”, ELT Journal, 
Vol. 42/2, April 1988, Oxford University Press. 
 127 
[21] Hutchinson, T. & Waters, A. (1989), English for Specific Purposes: A Learning-
Centred Approach, CUP, Cambridge. 
[22] Huxley, P. & Van Housten, H. (1997), Glossary for Agroforestry, International Centre 
for Research in Agroforestry, English Press, Nairobi, Kenya. 
[23] James, C.V. (1972), “A Note On Language Skills”, in CILT Reports and Papers No.8, 
September 1972. 
[24] Jordan, R.R. (1977), Identification of Problems and Needs: a Student Profile, in Cowie 
and Heaton, pp. 12 - 20. 
[25] Joy & Wibberley (1979), A Tropical Agriculture Handbook, Cassel 
[26] Lassoie, J.P., Buck, E. & Fernandes, E.C.M. (1999), Agroforestry in Sustainable 
Agricultural System, CRC Press LLC, Lewis Publishers. 
[27] Lockhart & Wiseman (1988), Introduction to Crop Husbandry, 6
th
 ed., Pergamon 
Press. 
[28] Mackay, R. & Mountford, A. (1978), English for Specific Purposes, Longman. 
[29] Mackay, R. (1978), “Identifying the Nature of the Learner‟s Needs” in Mackay, R. and 
Mountford, A. (eds.) (q.v), pp.21 - 37. 
[30] Mackay, R. & Palmer, J.D. (1981), Language for Specific Purposes: Program Design 
and Evaluation, Newburry House. 
[31] Mackay, R. (1983), “The Need for Close Integration of Components in ESP Programs” 
in The ESP Journal, Vol.2, No.11983, pp. 58 - 59. 
[32] Mc Donough, J. (1984), ESP in Perspectives - A Practical Guide, Collins ELT: 
London and Glasgow. 
[33] Morrow, K. (1977), “Authentic tests and ESP”, in Holden (ed.) (q.v. 1977), pp. 13 - 15. 
[34] Munby, J.L. (1977), “Processing Profiles of Communicative Needs” in the British 
Council, Bogota, pp. 15 - 22. 
[35] Munby, J.L. (1978), Communicative Syllabus Design, Cambridge: Cambridge 
University Press. 
[36] Phillips, M., Shettesworth, C., Kerr, L., & Denny, S. (1974), “Some Linguistics and 
Functional Aspects of an English Course for Students in Agriculture”, Paper Delivered 
at the 4
th
 Annual Seminar of Association of Professors of English in Iran, 14
th
 - 17
th
March 1974, British Council. 
[37] Robinson, P. (1980), ESP: The Current Position, Pergamon Press. 
[38] Robinson, W. (1981), “The Helpful EST Teacher” in ELT Documents 112, British 
Council. pp. 28 - 32. 
[39] Rudebject, P.G. & Del Castillo, R.A. (1998), How Agroforestry is Taught in Southeast 
Asia,ICRA. 
[40] Rudebject, P. (1999), Guiding Learning Agroforestry, ICRA. 
 128 
[41] Smith, F. (1984), “The Promise and Perils of Computerized Instruction”, Paper 
presented at Dartmouth House, June 1984, London. 
[42] Van Ek, J. (1975), Threshold Level English, Oxford: Pergamon. 
[43] Waters, A. (1982), Issues in ESP, Pergamon Press. 
[44] Widdoson, H.G. (1976), “The Authenticity of Language Data”, in Fanselow, J.F. and 
Grymes, R.H. (eds) on TESOL’ 76 TESOL, Washington D.C. 
[45] Widdowson, H.G. (1981), “English for Specific Purposes: Criteria for Course Design", 
in English for Academic and Technical Purposes: Studies in Honor of Louis Trimble, 
Selinker, L. , Tarone, E. & Hanzel, V. (eds.), Newburry House. 
[46] Yalden, J. (1984), Syllabus Design in General Education, in C.J.Brumfit, 1984a. 
[47] Yalden, J. (1987), Principles of Course Design for Language Teaching, Canbridge, 
UK: Cambridge University Press. 
[48] Yates, C.St.J. (1987), Agricuture, Pergamon Press. 
  