Book Language Teaching Metodologies

Maya Pentcheva,
Todor Shopov
Whole Language, Whole Person
A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology
Edited by ilo!ena "apucho and
Peter Hanenberg
Sofia, #iseu, $%%%
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 1
"ontents
Foreword 3
Chapter 1: Principles of Teaching 6
1.1. Cognitive Principles 7
1.2. Social Principles 20
1.3. ing!istic Principles 2"
Chapter 2: #$ploring ang!age Teaching %ethods 3"
2.1. Period &: 'irect ang!age Teaching 3"
2.2. Period &&: (!dio)ling!al Teaching and the &nnovative %ethods of
the 1*70s 37
2.3. Period &&&: Co++!nicative ang!age Teaching ,1
Chapter 3: Paradig+ Shift in #d!cation ,7
3.1. Changing the Foc!s of #d!cation ,7
3.2. ( Teaching Paradig+ to %eet Ps-chosocial .eeds "0
3.3. Factors of Cooperative earning "3
3.,. Cooperative ang!age earning "6
Chapter ,: The ang!age C!rric!l!+ "*
,.1. Constr!ctivis+ 60
,.2. The /eneral vers!s Specific Co!rse Con0ect!re 63
,.3. 1ando+ (ccess &nstr!ction in Co+ple$ and &ll)str!ct!red 'o+ains
6"
,.,. ang!age C!rric!l!+ as a 2nowledge Strategic 3-perte$t 66
,.". &nstead of a Concl!sion 70
1eferences 71
ore&ord
This 4oo5 is written within the fra+ewor5 of the Exchange to Change
Proect. 6e have 4een tr-ing the find o!t what the +ethodological
i+plications of the awareness res!lting fro+ reflective +o4ilit- are. &s there
an- 7+ethodological val!e8 added in res!lt of the visiting and welco+ing
e$periences of lang!age teachers and learners in +o4ilit-9 :!r ai+ is to
offer so+e orientation into the general ed!cational concerns of the Pro0ect.
The tas5 is for+ida4le. &t is the foc!s of +an- different lines of e$ploration.
&n his poe+ 7ittle /idding8 in !our "uarters; T. S. #liot p!ts it in this wa-:
6e shall not cease fro+ e$ploration
(nd the end of all o!r e$ploring
6ill 4e to arrive where we started
(nd 5now the place for the first ti+e.
<et; this is an opti+istic 4oo5. (t so+e +o+ents in histor-; professional
spheres are s!scepti4le to i+portant change. 6e 4elieve that we want and
can cross the threshold of 7e$change to change8 and step into the real+ of
ed!cational pro+ises f!lfilled.
The title indicates o!r holistic a##roach to the anal-sis and s-nthesis of the
concepts of lang!age; personalit-; +ethodolog-; co++!nication and inter)
co+prehension; etc. This approach e+phasi=es the priorit- of the whole over
its parts. 6e hold that lang!age teaching and learning is a co$#lex
kno%ledge do$ain; characteri=ed 4- networ5 of relationships in a social and
c!lt!ral conte$t. &n addition; we 4elieve that +ethodolog- is an
interdisciplinar- field; which cannot 4e !nderstood in isolation. :!r
perspective sees it in ter+s of its relations to other 5nowledge do+ains.
6e shall loo5 into a range of iss!es; which are not onl- interesting
the+selves; 4!t also relevant to the o40ectives of the Pro0ect and; hopef!ll-;
to the 1eader. The nat!re and e$tent of the relevance is diffic!lt; if not
i+possi4le; to deter+ine a #riori. 3owever; the 4oo5 s!pple+ents the
Pro0ect %od!les and serves as a concise reference +aterial on the theor- of
the teaching and learning of +odern foreign lang!ages. %ethodological
literat!re is of co!rse e$tensive; so we shall 4e pointing o!t so+e of the
good 4oo5s on the topics presented.
6e have 0!st +entioned the ter+ 7foreign lang!age8> thro!gho!t the 4oo5
we shall !se it interchangea4l- with the ter+ 7second lang!age8. 3ere; we
shall consider the+ s-non-+o!s al4eit we reali=e that the- can 4e easil-
disting!ished. &n the literat!re; 7second lang!age8 !s!all- refers to a target
lang!age that is 4eing ta!ght in the co!ntr- where it is the do+inant
lang!age; whereas 7foreign lang!age8 !s!all- refers to a target lang!age that
is 4eing ta!ght in the co!ntr- where it is not the do+inant lang!age.
3owever; we do not find this distinction ?!ite relevant for the foc!s of this
4oo5.
( decade ago; .. S. Pra4h!; the fa+o!s &ndian +ethodologist; pointed o!t
that lang!age teaching faced three +a0or pro4le+s; 7@1A the +eas!re+ent of
lang!age co+petence involves elicitation @in so+e for+A of specific
lang!age 4ehavio!r 4!t the relationship 4etween s!ch elicited 4ehavio!r and
lang!age co+petence which +anifests itself in nat!ral !se is !nclear; @2A
given the view that the develop+ent of ling!istic co+petence is a holistic
process; there is not eno!gh 5nowledge availa4le either to identif- and
assess different inter+ediate stages of that develop+ent or to relate those
stages to so+e ta4le of nor+s which can 4e said to represent e$pectations;
and @3A there is; !lti+atel-; no wa- of attri4!ting with an- certaint- an-
specific piece of learning to an- specific teaching: lang!age learning can
ta5e place independentl- of teaching intentions and it is i+possi4le to tell
what has 4een learnt 4eca!se of so+e teaching; and what in spite of it8
@Pra4h! 1*B7; BA. %an- things have happened in the field of lang!age
teaching +ethodolog- since then. For e$a+ple; the Co$$on Euro#ean
!ra$e%ork of &eference @Co!ncil of #!rope 1**6 and 1**BA was p!4lished;
Euro#ean Language Council @http:CCwww.f!)4erlin.deCelcA was fo!nded;
Euro#ean Language Portfolio @Scharer 1***A was la!nched and so on.
.onetheless; Pra4h!Ds clai+s are still valid. 6e shall foc!s on a range of
?!estions in the light of +odern +ethodological develop+ents tr-ing to state
the scientific facts. :!r own opinion e+erges in the disc!ssion now and
then; tho!gh. 6e hope o!r fort!ito!s acade+ic 4ias will 4e !nderstood.
The 4oo5 is written in #nglish and o!r e$a+ples co+e fro+ #nglish 4!t we
do not intend to pro+ote a lingua Ada$ica restituta. 6e 4elieve in
pl!riling!alis+ and pl!ric!lt!ralis+ and o!r inade?!ac- is onl- 4eca!se of
o!r teleological pr!dence. The 4oo5 is a colla4orative effort 4!t the
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology ,
responsi4ilit- of the a!thors is individ!al. %a-a Pencheva wrote Chapter 1
and Todor Shopov prepared Chapters 2; 3 and ,.
Chapter 1 offers a theoretical orientation into the philosophical fo!ndations
of +ethodolog-. Cognitive and other principles of lang!age teaching and
learning are disc!ssed. &t is clai+ed that the Pict!re of the 6orld; which we
all 5eep in o!r +inds; deter+ines the wa- we spea5. This relativistic
perspective and other ideas have fo!nd different applications in teaching.
The- are e$plored in Chapter 2. &t is a 4rief historical overview of teaching
+ethods. The three +a0or periods of the develop+ent of +ethodolog- in the
twentieth cent!r- are presented. Chapter 3 disc!sses the +ore specific the+e
of the approach level of teaching +ethods. The a!thors arg!e that
ed!cational paradig+ shift has had a prono!nced i+pact on lang!age
+ethodolog-. Partic!lar plans for a lang!age c!rric!l!+; which constit!tes
the relativel- concrete design level of teaching +ethods; are +ade in
Chapter ,. The ?!estion of +odern c!rric!l!+ design and develop+ent is
e$a+ined in it. The 4oo5 f!nctions as a whole te$t. 6e reco++end that the
reader speed)read the 4oo5 first. Then; the appropriate readings can 4e
selected easil-. 3owever; the reader can approach it as a co+pendi!+;
4rowsing onl- thro!gh the relevant sections.
6e want to ac5nowledge the enco!rage+ent and s!pport e$tended to !s 4-
+an- people. 6e have had the good fort!ne to wor5 with Filo+ena Cap!cho
of Eniversidade Catolica Port!g!esa F Centro 1egional das Geiras Polo de
Hise!; PT; Pro0ect /eneral Coordinator; and o!r Partners fro+ 3ogs5olan
2al+ar; S#; Centro de Professores - 1ec!rsos de Sala+anca; #S; Centro de
Professores - 1ec!rsos de Hitig!dino; #S; &nstit!t Eniversaire de For+ation
des %aitres dD(!vergne; F1; S5ar!p Statsse+inari!+; '2 and Eniversitat
Sal=4!rg; (T. 6e also wish to ac5nowledge o!r deep sense of inde4tedness
to o!r colleag!es at the Fac!lt- of Classical and %odern Philolog-; Sofia
Eniversit- St. 2li+ent :hrids5i; G/. :!r wor5 wo!ld have hardl- 4een
possi4le witho!t the order introd!ced in the s-ste+ 4- (le$ Fedotoff. 6e are
especiall- gratef!l to Peter 3anen4erg of Eniversidade Catolica Port!g!esa
F Centro 1egional das Geiras Polo de Hise!; PT; who had the idea of this
4oo5 first; for his e$a+ple and help.
To all these people; +an- than5s.
Sofia; 'ece+4er 1***
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology "
"hapter $' Principles of Teaching
&n his Princi#les of Language Learning and Teaching; 3. 'o!glas Grown
notes that there are 7I4est of ti+es and worst of ti+es8 in the lang!age
teaching profession @Grown 1**,aA. 6e can safel- sa- that this is the 4est of
ti+es for the foreign lang!age teacher. Toda-; we 5now +!ch a4o!t foreign
lang!age ac?!isition; a4o!t child ac?!isition of lang!age; a4o!t cognitive
processes; etc. &t is also ver- i+portant that we have co+e to an appreciation
of the e$tre+e co+ple$it- of this field. This gives !s ca!tio!s opti+is+ to
pl!nge even deeper into the pro4le+s.
Foreign lang!age teachers and ed!cators are often confronted with the
?!estion J6hat +ethod or what s-ste+ do -o! !se in teaching a foreign
lang!age9J %ost often the answer does not co+e easil- or if one gives a
straightforward answer; he ris5s to 4e s!40ected to criticis+. Teachers
alwa-s have to $ake choices. These choices are +otivated 4- the fact that
the- rest on certain #rinci#les of lang!age learning and teaching. .ow that
we 5now +!ch +ore a4o!t h!+an lang!age and its vario!s aspects; we can
+a5e the ne$t step and for+!late at least so+e of these principles; which are
4ased on what we 5now a4o!t lang!age itself. :ften; swept 4- fashiona4le
theories or a desire to so!nd 7scholarl-8; we forget a si+ple tr!th F %e, as
hu$an beings, teach a hu$an language to hu$an beings. 7St!dents and
teachers of lang!age8; sa-s :sgood; 7will discover the principles of their
science in the !niversalities of h!+anness8 @:sgood et al. 1*"7; 301A. (
concise 4!t tr!e definition of +an will pro4a4l- incl!de three +a0or
characteristics: @iA one who can reflect and interpret the world aro!nd hi+>
@iiA one who can e$press feelings> and @iiiA one who can !se lang!age. These
characteristics !nderlie three +a0or principles of lang!age teaching and
learning. 6ell 5nown and novice teaching techni?!es can 4e s!4s!+ed
!nder these three headings. %!ltiplicit- of techni?!es can 4e 4ro!ght down
to a n!+4er of +ethods and the +ethods red!ced to a n!+4er of principles.
%astering a great n!+4er of teaching techni?!es will not save -o! in new
sit!ations; 7not predicted8 4- the theor- 4!t predicta4le. &t will not give -o!
the all)i+portant a4ilit- to rationali=e what -o! are doing and wh- are -o!
doing it. To do that one +!st 4e aware of deeper principles of lang!age
ac?!isition and !se; ste++ing fro+ the fo!ndations of h!+an lang!age as
s!ch.
$($( "ognitive Principles
6e shall call the first set of principles 7cognitive8 4eca!se the- relate to
+ental; intellect!al and ps-chological fac!lties in operating with lang!age.
&t sho!ld 4e +ade clear; however; that the three t-pes of principles descri4ed
in this chapter; cogniti'e, social and linguistic #rinci#les; do not e$ist as if in
three watertight co+part+ents 4!t rather spill across each other to +a5e !p
the +ost re+ar5a4le a4ilit- of +an F the ling!istic a4ilit-.
&t is no wonder that the achieve+ents of +odern cognitive science have
fo!nd s!ch a war+ and fast response in ling!istics. So+e of the post!lates of
cognitive science toda- are cr!cial to o!r !nderstanding of how lang!age
operates and how we ac?!ire this a4ilit-; respectivel-. Geca!se one of the
+ost diffic!lt ?!estions in foreign lang!age ac?!isition and child ac?!isition
of lang!age is; 3ow is it possi4le that children at an earl- age and ad!lts;
late in their life; can +aster a s-ste+ of s!ch i++ense co+ple$it-9 &s it onl-
a +atter of +e+or- capacit- and a!to+atic reprod!ction or is there
so+ething else that helps !s ac?!ire a lang!age9
et !s 4egin with so+e long esta4lished post!lates of foreign lang!age
ac?!isition and see what cognitive theor- has to sa- a4o!t the+.
@1A (!to+aticit- of (c?!isition
.o one can disp!te the fact that children ac?!ire a foreign lang!age ?!ic5l-
and s!ccessf!ll-. This ease is co++onl- attri4!ted to childrenDs a4ilit- to
ac?!ire lang!age str!ct!res auto$atically and subconsciously; that is;
witho!t act!all- anal-=ing the for+s of lang!age the+selves. The- appear to
learn lang!ages witho!t 7thin5ing8 a4o!t the+. This has 4een called 4- G.
%ca!ghlin 7a!to+atic processing8 @%ca!ghlin 1**0A. &n order to operate
with the incredi4le co+ple$it- of lang!age 4oth children and ad!lt learners
do not process lang!age 7!nit 4- !nit8 4!t e+plo- operations in which
lang!age str!ct!res and for+s @words; affi$es; endings; word order;
gra++atical r!les; etc.A are peripheral. The Principle of (!to+aticit-; as
stated a4ove; ai+s at an 7a!to+atic processing of a relativel- !nli+ited
n!+4er of lang!age for+s8. :veranal-=ing lang!age; thin5ing too +!ch
a4o!t its for+s tend to i+pede the ac?!isition process. This leads to the
reco++endation to teachers to foc!s on the use of lang!age and its
functional as#ects. G!t foc!s on !se and f!nctionalit- pres!pposes
+eaningf!l learning; which is in strong contradiction with a!to+aticit-.
6hat is +ore; one +a0or characteristic 4oth of child ac?!isition and ad!lt
learning of foreign lang!ages is the pheno+enon called hy#ercorrection.
(gain h-percorrection cannot e$ist witho!t +eaningf!l anal-sis of lang!age
str!ct!res and their 7classification8 into 7reg!lar patterns8 and 7e$ceptions8
with respect to a lang!age f!nction.
@2A %eaningf!l earning
%eaningf!l learning 7s!4s!+es8 new infor+ation into e$isting str!ct!res
and +e+or- s-ste+s. The res!lting associative lin5s create stronger
retention. 7Children are good +eaningf!l ac?!irers of lang!age 4eca!se the-
associateIwords; str!ct!res and disco!rse ele+ents with that %hich is
rele'ant and i$#ortant in their daily (uest for kno%ledge and sur'i'al8
@Grown 1**,4; 1BA. 6e +!st pa- special attention to this sentence of 3. '.
Grown; especiall- the last words; !nderlined here. &t will 4e relevant in o!r
arg!+ent in favor of the cognitive principles of lang!age ac?!isition. :ne of
the reco++endations for classroo+ application of %eaningf!l earning is
also of relevance to o!r f!rther arg!+ent in this direction. &t states
76henever a new topic or concept is introd!ced; atte+pt to anchor it in
st!dentsD e$isting 5nowledge and 4ac5gro!nd so that it gets associated with
so+ething the- alread- 5now8.
So+e thirt-)five -ears ago; a new science was 4orn. .ow called 7Cognitive
Science8; it co+4ines tools fro+ ps-cholog-; co+p!ter science; ling!istics;
philosoph-; child ps-cholog-; and ne!ro4iolog- to e$plain the wor5ings of
h!+an intelligence. ing!istics; in partic!lar; has seen spectac!lar advances
in the -ears since. There are +an- pheno+ena of lang!age that we are
co+ing to !nderstand.
ang!age is not a c!lt!ral artifact that we learn the wa- we learn to tell the
ti+e. &nstead; it is a distinct characteristic of o!r 4rains. ang!age is a
co+ple$; speciali=ed s5ill; which develops in the child. For that reason
cognitive scientists have descri4ed lang!age as a ps-chological and +ental
faculty. The idea that tho!ght is the sa+e thing as lang!age is an e$a+ple of
what can 4e called a conventional a4s!rdit-. .ow that cognitive scientists
5now how to thin5 a4o!t thin5ing; there is less of a te+ptation to e?!ate it
with lang!age and we are in a 4etter position to !nderstand how lang!age
wor5s.
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology B
&n essence; to reason is to ded!ce new pieces of 5nowledge fro+ old ones.
G!t 75nowledge8 is so+ething co+ple$; the prod!ct of social and c!lt!ral
e$perience fro+ living in a partic!lar 7world8. &n his Philoso#hy of
Language; 6ilhel+ von 3!+4oldt clai+s that spea5ing a lang!age +eans
living in a specific concept!al do+ain. (c?!iring a foreign lang!age +eans
entering a new concept!al do+ain. This state+ent poses a +a0or pro4le+ or
perhaps the $aor #roble$ of ac?!iring a foreign lang!age F are these
concept!al do+ains so different that the- are inco+pati4le9 :r there are
certain +echanis+s 4- which we can +a5e transitions fro+ the one into the
other9
6e shall present arg!+ents in s!pport of the second decision. The pivotal
?!estion is how we interpret 3!+4oldtDs concept!al do+ains. 6e will refer
to the+ 4- the ter+ Picture of the World; initiall- !sed in anal-=ing
+-tholog- and toda- e+plo-ed 4- cognitive science. The word 7pict!re8;
tho!gh !s!all- !sed +etaphoricall-; e$presses tr!l- the essence of the
pheno+enon F it is a #icture; not a +irror reflection; or a snapshot of the
world aro!nd !s. i5e another pict!re; it pres!pposes a definite point of
view or the attit!de of its creator. &t involves interpretation; representations
of the world fro+ vario!s angles @the so) called 7facet viewing8A. This of
co!rse i+plies the possi4ilit- to have a n!+4er of different pict!res of one
o40ect. 6hat is i+portant here is that o!r concept!ali=ation of the world is
not 7an o40ective reflection of realit-8; 4!t a s!40ective pict!re; which
reflects o!r views; 4eliefs; and attit!des. 7S!40ective8 in the sense of the
collective interpretation or point of view of a societ- or c!lt!ral and
ling!istic co++!nit-. This pict!re e$plicates the relativit- of h!+an
cognition. &n se+iotics it goes !nder the na+e of 7passive8 c!lt!ral
+e+or-. Cognitive science; however; re0ects the ?!alification 7passive8 and
clai+s that Pict!res of the 6orld are activel- and c!rrentl- str!ct!red 4-
co++on cognitive +odels. &n connection with 3!+4oldtDs state+ent; it is
possi4le to pass fro+ one pict!re of the world into another 4- +eans of a set
of !niversal cognitive +echanis+s. This is cr!cial for e$plaining foreign
lang!age ac?!isition. G!t what are those +echanis+s9 (nd what is the
nat!re of the evidence9
:!r concept!al s-ste+ or Pict!re of the 6orld is not so+ething that we are
nor+all- aware of. G!t h!+an lang!age is an i+portant so!rce of evidence
for what a pict!re of the world is li5e. :n the 4asis of ling!istic evidence we
can sa- that +ost of o!r ever-da- concept!al s-ste+ is +etaphorical in
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology *
nat!re. Cognitive science e$plains the essence of +etaphor as !nderstanding
and e$periencing one thing in ter+s of another. The first thing is called
Target 'o+ain @what we want to e$pressA and the second one is called
So!rce 'o+ain @4- +eans of which we e$press the firstA. 6e can !se; as an
e$a+ple; the wa- we conceive of ti+e in o!r ever-da- life. et !s have the
following ling!istic e$pressions:
)ou are %asting $y ti$e*
This gadget %ill sa'e you hours*
Ho% do you s#end your ti$e+
That flat tyre %ill cost $e an hour*
,-$ running out of ti$e*
The central post!late of cognitive science is that +etaphorical transfer is not
0!st a +atter of lang!age; of +ere words. 3!+an tho!ght processes are
largel- +etaphorical. %etaphor +eans +etaphorical concepts. (nd these are
specificall- str!ct!red. &f we generali=e the e$a+ples a4ove; we co+e !p
with the +etaphor CT)ME )S M*+E,C. This +etaphor entails the treat+ent
of ti+e as a li$ited resource and a 'aluable co$$odity. The e$a+ples
de+onstrate one t-pe of +etaphorical transfer F structural $eta#hor.
:n the +ore ling!istic side of the pro4le+; when +etaphorical concepts
4eco+e le$icali=ed; the- help a variet- of people !nderstand what the
concepts +ean. &n other words; the- have a certain didactic role. %etaphors
in co+p!ter ter+inolog-; for e$a+ple; aid !sers spea5ing different
lang!ages 4!t !sing #nglish to !nderstand and re+e+4er new concepts. (t
the sa+e ti+e the- allow !sers to associate !nfa+iliar concepts with old
ones; there4- helping to palliate technostress. 7Eser friendliness8 of
co+p!ter +etaphorical ter+s can 4e ill!strated 4- the n!+ero!s e$a+ples
fo!nd in the voca4!lar- of !ser interfaces F e.g. des5top; wallpaper; and
+en!; to +ention 0!st a few. &t appears that concept!al do+ains are shaped
4- several the+es. The do+ain of the &nternet feat!res several concept!al
the+es. %ost of these are 4ased on the f!nctions that the &nternet is
perceived to have: @1A helping people 7+ove8 across vast distances> @2A
facilitate co++!nication> and @3A send and store data. The following
+etaphorical do+ains can present these the+es:
.* Trans#ortation
The the+e of transportation do+inates &nternet ter+inolog-; specified
so+eti+es as $arine na'igation; high%ay trans#ortation:
to navigate-cruise-surf the )nternet .or the Web/
internaut
cybersurfer
anchor
infor!ation high&ay, data high&ay
to ride-get on the )nternet
router
ra!p-on0ra!p, access ra!p
infobahn
cyberspace
/* Mail and Postal 0er'ices
e0!ail
snail!ail
!ailbo1
virtual postcard
envelope
1* Architecture
site
gate&ay
bridge
fra!e
2* The Printed Mediu$
Web page
book!ark
White pages
to bro&se
e0!aga2ine
carbon copy
So+e +etaphorical ter+s have spawned n!+ero!s concept!all- related ones
4- +etaphorical e$tension. 3o#her; for e$a+ple; has given rise to
3o#hers#ace; 3o#her hole. The fa+o!s des5top +etaphor has given rise to
files; folders; trash cans. The +o!se +etaphor has generated $ouse trails
and so on.
( different t-pe of +etaphorical +odel is the second one; which organi=es a
whole s-ste+ of concepts with respect to one another F the so)called
orientation $eta#hor. The- rel- on 4odil- e$perience: !p)down; in)o!t;
front)4ac5; deep)shallow; center)peripher-; etc. S!ch orientation +etaphors
are gro!nded in ph-sical perception and hence !niversal. For e$a+ple:
3p vs. 4o&n
ha##y sad
,-$ feeling u#* ,-$ do%n today*
,-$ in high s#irits* My s#irits sank*
Thinking about her gi'es $e a lift* ,-$ de#ressed*
good health sickness
He is in to# sha#e* He fell ill*
He is at the #eak of health* He ca$e do%n %ith a
flue*
ha'e control o'er be subect to control
He is in a su#erior #osition* He is $y social inferior*
, ha'e control o'er the situation* He is under $y control*
high status lo% status
He-s cli$bing the social ladder fast* He is at the botto$ of the
social hierarchy*
'irtue de#ra'ity
He is an u#standing citi4en* , %ouldn-t stoo# to that*
0he is high5$inded* That-s beneath $e*
rational e$otional
His argu$ents rose abo'e e$otions* 6iscussion fell to the
e$otional le'el*
The third t-pe of +etaphor is called ontological. Cognitive science has it
that we !nderstand o!r e$perience in ter+s of o40ects and s!4stances. This
allows !s to pic5 frag+ents of o!r e$perience and treat the+ as discrete
entities or s!4stances. Th!s; we interpret the h!+an +ind as a +aterial
o40ect with specific properties ) the CM)+4 )S A MA"H)+EC +etaphor:
My $ind ust isn-t o#erating today*
,-$ a little rusty today*
The ex#erience shattered her*
He is easily crushed*
He broke under cross5exa$ination*
The conception of -M)+4 )S A MA"H)+EC also ena4les !s to view +ind
as having an off)state; a level of efficienc-; prod!ctive capacit-; internal
+echanis+s; etc. 6hat is +ore; and it is ver- i+portant; we view 4oth
concept!al do+ains @The Mind and The MachineA as internall- str!ct!red;
so that we can +a5e transfers not onl- 4etween the do+ains as a whole 4!t
also 4etween parts of these do+ains. This process is 5nown as 7+etaphorical
+apping8. &n this wa-; when we !se a +etaphorical +odel; we can also !se
ele+ents of that +odel with the sa+e effect. etDs ill!strate this with an
e$a+ple:
-L)E )S A 5*36+E,C.
The +apping 4etween the two do+ains is not si+ple. The str!ct!re of
Ko!rne- incl!des; for e$a+ple; point of depart!re; path to destination; +eans
of transportation; co)travelers; o4stacles along the wa- to destination;
crossroads; etc. &t is a+a=ing how o!r concept of life repeats all the details
of o!r concept of 0o!rne-s. 6hat is +!ch +ore a+a=ing; however; is not
that we have +an- +etaphors for life; 4!t that we have 0!st a few. The- are
a+ong the 4asic +etaphors we live 4-.
Gasic +etaphors are li+ited in n!+4er. (+ong the+ are:
-STATES A6E L*"AT)*+S-
-E#E+TS A6E A"T)*+S-
-PE*PLE A6E PLA+TS-
-PE*PLE A6E "*+TA)+E6S-
-L)E )S A 5*36+E,-
G- +eans of the+ we can interpret all e$isting +etaphorical +odels:
-L)E )S A 5*36+E,-
7 -E#E+TS A6E A"T)*+S-
-L)E )S A PLA,-
-L)E )S A P6E")*3S P*SSESS)*+-
-L)E )S A S38STA+"E-
7 -PE*PLE A6E "*+TA)+E6S-
-L)E )S A L3)4-
-L)E )S L)9HT-
7 -PE*PLE A6E PLA+TS-
-4EATH )S 4A6:+ESS-
-4EATH )S 4EPA6T36E- L CL)E )S A 5*36+E,-
C4EATH )S SLEEP-6EST- L CSTATES A6E L*"AT)*+S-.
6e !nderstand the So!rce 'o+ains of 4asic +etaphors rel-ing on o!r
ever-da- e$perience F 4odil- e$perience and social e$perience. This +eans
that the- are not independent of thin5ing and cognition.
6hat +otivates o!r a4ilit- to create and !nderstand +etaphorical str!ct!res9
(ccording to cognitive science; these are cognitive and ps-chological
characteristics; which are ele+ents of o!r species specific as h!+an 4eings.
The- are:
@1A :!r a4ilit- to create str!ct!res in concepts that do not e$ist
independent of the +etaphor; i.e. o!r a4ilit- for +odeling;
@2A :!r a4ilit- to choose and e$plicate optional ele+ents fro+
concept!al str!ct!res;
@3A :!r a4ilit- to +a5e concl!sions and inferences;
@,A :!r a4ilit- to eval!ate and transfer eval!ations of ele+ents of the
So!rce 'o+ain onto the Target 'o+ain.
:!r +ental a4ilit- for +odeling ena4les !s to operate easil- with e$tre+el-
co+ple$ concept!al str!ct!res. ( ver- good e$a+ple is the notion of
M+otherD. &t co+prises si$ s!4)+odels:
@iAGirth
Mother is the one &ho gives birth to a child(
@iiA/enetic
Mother is the one &ho carries the e!bryo(
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 1,
@iiiAGreeding
Mother is the one &ho feeds and cares for the baby(
@ivA%arriage
Mother is the one &ho is !arried to the child;s father(
@vA/enealogical
Mother is the closest fe!ale relative(
@viA 3o!sewife
Mothers stay at ho!e and care for the fa!ily(
S!4)+odels @iA; @iiiA; and @ivA for+ the core of the concept. The- 4!ild the
stereoty#e i+age of a +other. S!4)+odels @iA; @iiA; and @vA descri4e what a
+other is 7obecti'ely8 @4iologicall-A. (nd @iA; @iiA; @iiiA; and @ivA descri4e
what a +other nor+all- is; i.e. the #rototy#ical +other. This protot-pe
re+ains sta4le cross)c!lt!rall-. (ll si$ s!4)+odels descri4e the ideal +other.
This ideal changes historicall- and across c!lt!res.
Th!s; we operate with several i+ages. The +ost i+portant are the stereot-pe
and the ideal. Her- often the- have separate ling!istic e$pressions. Th!s in
#nglish we disting!ish 4etween the 4iological and the ideal father. 6e can
nor+all- as5
Who is the child-s father+
4!t not
NWho is the child-s daddy+
4eca!se the ideal i+plies caring for the fa+il- and 4eing +arried to the
childDs +other. &n the M+otherD concept the 4iological and the social are
insepara4le. (ll deviations fro+ the +odel are interpreted as highl- +ar5ed;
i.e. e$ceptions fro+ the ideal. For that reason the- are consistentl- +ar5ed
ling!isticall-:
ste#$other
surrogate $other
foster $other
ado#ti'e $other
donor $other
biological $other
6e can s!++ari=e all +etaphorical +odels into a s+all n!+4er of Gasic
%odels:
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 1"
-9E+E6AL )S SPE"))"-
-A8ST6A"T )S "*+"6ETE-
-T)ME )S SPA"E-
-S*")AL )S +AT36AL-
-ME+TAL )S PH,S)"AL-
3ow can we appl- these principles; +echanis+s and +odels in teaching a
lang!age and teaching a4o!t lang!age9 6e can do that in a n!+4er of wa-s:
&. :n the diachronic level
There is a +ar5ed parallelis+ 4etween c!rrent #nglish +etaphors and
+odels of se+antic change. iving +etaphors and se+antic change are
related and +!t!all- reinforcing. This e$plains the co++onalit- of s!ch
+etaphors in the &ndo)#!ropean lang!ages thro!gh ti+e. G- !sing cognitive
+odels we can ex#lain 4!t also teach the esta4lished one)wa- directions of
se+antic change. For e$a+ple; &ndo)#!ropean lang!ages follow consistentl-
certain +etaphorical transfers:
1. CME+TAL A"T)#)T, )S M*T)*+ )+ PH,S)"AL SPA"E-,
e.g. re#ort
L atin Mcarr- 4ac5D
refer
This direction of se+antic change is paralleled 4- the e$istence of
s-nchronic +etaphorical sche+es in which ph-sical +otion is !sed as the
So!rce 'o+ain for +ore a4stract notions li5e Mti+eD or M+ental activit-D.
Shifts in the opposite direction are !n5nown.
2. -ME+TAL STATES A6E PH,S)"AL PE6"EPT)*+-,
e.g. kno% L MseeD
re$ark L obser'e L Mloo5 closel- atD
3. -ME+TAL STATES A6E PH,S)"AL M*T)*+-,
e.g. su##ose M!nderstandD L atin sub O #onere Mp!t !nderD
,. -ME+TAL STATES A6E MA+)P3LAT)*+ * *85E"TS )+
SPA"E-,
e.g. co$#rehend L atin Msei=eD
gras#2 M!nderstandD L gras#1 M sei=e in the handD
get2 M!nderstandD L get1 Mac?!ire a ph-sical entit-D
decide L atin de O caedo Mc!t off fro+D
confuse L atin con O fundere Mpo!r together; +i$D
#refer L atin #rae O ferre Mcarr- 4eforeD
deduce L atin de O ducere Mlead o!t fro+D
infer L atin in O fere Mcarr- inD
#resu$e L atin #rae O su$ere Mta5e 4eforeD
This is the +ost prod!ctive +etaphor with M%ental stateD ver4s in #nglish.
The +anip!lation with ideas is seen as holding; to!ching; +oving; !niting;
separating; arranging; and re)ordering the+; li5e ph-sical o40ects.
". -SPEE"H "*MM3+)"AT)*+ )S SPAT)AL 6ELAT)*+-,
e.g. #ro#ose L atin #ro O #onere Mp!t forwardD
'ata de+onstrate a sta4le direction in +eaning change: aA ver4s of MPh-sical
+otionClocationD P ver4s of M%ental stateDCDSpeech actsD> 4A ver4s of M%ental
stateD P ver4s of MSpeech actsD; 4!t never in the opposite direction. Therefore
se+antic change tends to +ove towards +ore #ersonal +eanings; +eanings
closer to the Self.
6. -SPEE"H A"TS A6E MA+)P3LAT)*+ * *85E"TS )+
SPA"E-,
e.g. ad$it L atin ad O $ittere Msend toD
assert L atin ad O serere Mconnect toD
ad) e$pressing Mdirection fro+ spea5er to hearerD
re#ly L atin re O #licare Mfeed 4ac5D
refuse L atin re O futare M4eat 4ac5D
re) e$pressing Mdirection fro+ hearer to spea5erD
7. -ME+TAL A"T)#)T,-SPEE"H A"T )S T6A#EL )+
SPA"E-,
e.g. We ha'en-t got any%here in this con'ersation*
9o% %e $ust go back to the $ain issue*
.otice also the !se of spatial prepositions 4oth with MSpeech actD and
M%ental activit-D ver4s:
e.g. talk think
about o'er
%alk go
This shows that we conceive of a speech act as a distance 4etween the two
co++!nicating parties; a ro!te along which ideasQo40ects can travel or 4e
e$changed. This is a replica of the +odel of MPh-sical actionD ver4s; with
their reg!lar contrast 4etween to and at prepositions:
e.g. thro% to talk to shout to
at at at
to; e$pressing active participation on the part of the receiverQhearer; a
s!ccessf!l co+pletion of the tra0ector- of the action; and at; e$pressing an
inactive receiverQhearer.
Since MSpeech actD ver4s involve e$change 4etween two parties; i.e. action;
the- can also have a +etaphorical variant li5e CSPEE"H A"TS A6E
WA6A6E-,
e.g. concede L atin con O cedere Mgive !pD
insist L atin in O sistere Mstand inD
con'ince L atin con O 'incere Mcon?!er togetherD.
&&. :n the s-nchronic level
S-nchronicall-; we can e+plo- +etaphorical transfer +odels to teach
se+antic fields and e$plain se+antic e$tension. Th!s; M3!+an e+otionsD
can 4e e$plained thro!gh MTe+perat!reD; MCoo5ing activitiesD; or MColo!rsD;
e.g. hot te$#er cold #erson
%ar$ friendshi# our friendshi# has cooled
boil %ith indignation take it cool
burn %ith e$otion
si$$er %ith anger
be in a ste%*
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 1B
:ther spheres of lang!age teaching or ling!istic anal-sis where we can appl-
the sa+e +echanis+ of e$planation are s-non-+-; phraseolog-;
develop+ent of gra++atical categories and for+s of their e$pression;
predo+inant word order; etc. 6e shall de+onstrate the validit- of this
approach in teaching gra++ar; !sing a!$iliar- ver4s as an e$a+ple.
There is a sta4le tendenc- for a li+ited set of notional ver4s; with specific
+eaning; to t!rn; over ti+e; into a!$iliar- ver4s of anal-tical constr!ctions
@the perfect tenses; the progressive tenses; and the f!t!re tenseA. The le$ical
so!rces for a!$iliaries in s!ch constr!ctions !s!all- incl!de notions li5e:
PH,S)"AL L*"AT)*+: be : on;at;in : no$inal for$
M*#EME+T T* A 9*AL: go<to=;co$e<to= : no$inal for$
4E#EL*PME+T * A"T)*+ )+ T)ME: begin;beco$e;finish :
no$inal for$
#*L)T)*+: %ant;%ill : no$inal for$
*8L)9AT)*+: $ust : 'erbal for$
PE6M)SS)*+: let : 'erbal for$*
&n other words; there is a 7selectivit-8 with respect to the initial le$ical
+eaning of ver4s that are li5el- to evolve into a!$iliaries of anal-tical
constr!ctions across lang!ages. Th!s the initial +eaning of 117 a!$iliaries
fro+ 1" lang!ages involve 20 le$ical so!rces:
be at;on
be : adecti'e;#artici#le
ha'e
co$e
go<to=
%alk
sit
stand
lie
begin
beco$e
re$ain
finish
do
%ant
$ust
#er$it
take care, #ut
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 1*
gi'e*
There are a n!+4er of i++ediate ?!estions that arise. &s this 7r!le of
a!$iliation8 d!e to p!re coincidence> does it res!lt fro+ geographic or
genetic closeness of lang!ages> or co!ld this 4e the reflection of so+e
f!nda+ental cognitive principle that gets act!ali=ed in ling!istic str!ct!re9
6e can post!late that this process of a!$iliation is the reflection of a 4asic
principle in h!+an concept!ali=ation; na+el- that a4stract notions are
concept!ali=ed 4- +eans of a li+ited n!+4er of concrete 4asic concepts. 6e
can +a5e an even stronger clai+ that le$ical so!rces for gra++ati=ation in
general involve notions 4asic to h!+an e$perience @4odil- and socialA that
provide central reference points.
$(<( Social Principles
6e now t!rn o!r attention to those principles of lang!age ac?!isition that
are central to h!+an 4eings as social entities. 6e shall loo5 at the concept of
self and self)awareness; at relationships in a co++!nit- @of spea5ers and
learnersA; at the relationships 4etween lang!age and c!lt!re.
&n spea5ing; learning and teaching a lang!age we are ta5ing part in one of
the wonders of the world. For we all 4elong to a species with a re+ar5a4le
a4ilit-: we can shape events and ideas in each otherDs 4rains. The a4ilit- is
lang!age. ang!age is not 0!st an- c!lt!ral invention 4!t the prod!ct of
societ- and c!lt!re; and the a4ilit- of +an to cope with the+ and to create
the+. G!t it is +!ch +ore than that. There +!st 4e so+ething; then; that
+a5es lang!age accessi4le to all; +anagea4le and fle$i4le eno!gh to
acco++odate vario!s c!lt!res and societies; and to 4e the +ost widel- !sed
instr!+ent in interpersonal relations.
@1A The Self and Self)awareness
:ne of the prod!cts of social develop+ent is the for+ation of the concept
of self and awareness of the ego, which +odel a specific pattern of ling!istic
4ehavio!r and str!ct!re of ling!istic categories. &n the conte$t of the
pro4le+s disc!ssed here; this to!ches onto the old and widel- disp!ted idea
of lang!age relativit-; i.e. the idea that the str!ct!re of o!r +other tong!e
and its categories; which are a reflection of o!r wa- of life and the
environ+ent; give partic!lar shape to o!r wa- of thin5ing. That is; spea5ing
a partic!lar lang!age; -o! are also a partic!lar linguistic self. (s h!+an
4eings learn a foreign lang!age; the- also develop a new +ode of thin5ing
and acting F the- enter a new identit-. G!t this new 7lang!age ego8;
intertwined with the new lang!age itself; can create a sense of !ncertaint-;
defensiveness; even h!+iliation; and raise inhi4itions. earners can feel this
4eca!se the arsenals of their native)lang!age egos +a- 4e s!ddenl- !seless
in developing a 7second self8.
The foreign lang!age teacher is the +a0or factor in the for+ation of this
7second self8. 3is choice of techni?!es needs to 4e cognitivel- challenging
to achieve the acco++odation of the learner to his 7new world8. &f the
st!dent is learning the foreign lang!age in the +ilie! of the co!ntr- where it
is spo5en; then he is li5el- to e$perience an 7identit- crisis8. To avoid this
the teacher +!st 7create8 appropriate 7nat!ral8 sit!ations for the learner so
that he can practice his new identit-.
et !s ta5e one ordinar- e$a+ple F learning to write co+positions in
#nglish. St!dents whose teachers !rge the+ to red!ce the n!+4er of ti+es
the- !se the prono!n 7&8 in their essa-s @or; conversel-; enco!rage the !se of
7&8A +a- 4e s!rprised to discover that in so+e c!lt!res this gra++atical
choice has profo!nd c!lt!ral and even political connotations. ( Chinese
st!dent is ta!ght to !se alwa-s 7we8 instead of 7&8 lest he give the
i+pression of 4eing selfish and individ!alistic. Starting to st!d- #nglish he
re?!ired to 7i+agine loo5ing at the world with his head !pside down8 and to
invent a new 7#nglish self8 that co!ld !se the prono!n 7&8. earning to write
an essa- in #nglish is not an isolated classroo+ activit-; 4!t a social and
c!lt!ral e$perience. earning the r!les of #nglish essa- writing is; to a
certain e$tent; learning the val!es of (nglo)(+erican societ-. 6riting
essa-s in #nglish; a Chinese st!dent has to 7reprogra+8 his +ind; to
redefine so+e of the 4asic concepts and val!es that he had a4o!t hi+self;
a4o!t societ-.
1!le n!+4er one in #nglish co+position writing is: 7Ge -o!rself8. G!t
writing +an- 7&Ds8 is onl- the 4eginning of the process of redefining oneself.
G- s!ch a redefinition is +eant not onl- the change of how one envisioned
oneself; 4!t also a change in how he perceived the world. The Chinese
st!dent grad!all- creates his new 7#nglish Self8.
@2A The ang!age)C!lt!re Connection
#ver-one 5nows what is s!pposed to happen when two #nglish+en who
have never +et 4efore co+e face to face in a railwa- co+part+ent F the-
start tal5ing a4o!t the weather. G- tal5ing to the other person a4o!t so+e
ne!tral topic li5e the weather; it is possi4le to stri5e !p a relationship with
hi+ witho!t act!all- having to sa- ver- +!ch. Conversations of this 5ind
are a good e$a+ple of the sort of i+portant social f!nction that is often
f!lfilled 4- lang!age. G- tr-ing to +aster this f!nction of lang!age; the
learner is 4!ilding part of his new lang!age identit-.
&t is well 5nown; and often h!+oro!sl- e$aggerated; that the Gritish alwa-s
tal5 a4o!t the weather. &n his fa+o!s 4oo5; Ho% To >e an Alien, /eorge
%i5es @1*70A disc!sses the weather as the first and +ost i+portant topic for
a person who wants to learn #nglish. 3ere is his co++ent:
7This is the +ost i+portant topic in the land. 'o not 4e +isled 4- +e+ories
of -o!r -o!th when; on the Continent; wanting to descri4e so+eone as
e$ceptionall- d!ll; -o! re+ar5ed: M3e is the t-pe who wo!ld disc!ss the
weather with -o!.D &n #ngland; this is an ever)interesting; even thrilling
topic; and -o! +!st 4e good at disc!ssing the weather.
#R(%P#S F:1 C:.H#1S(T&:.
For /ood 6eather
Movel- da-; isnDt it9D
M&snDt it 4ea!tif!l9D
MThe s!nID
M&snDt it gorgeo!s9D
M6onderf!l; isnDt it9D
M&tDs so nice and hotID
MPersonall-; & thin5 itDs so nice when itDs hot F isnDt it9D
M& adore it F donDt -o!9D
For Gad 6eather
M.ast- da-; isnDt it9D
M&snDt it dreadf!l9D
MThe rainI& hate rainID
M& donDt li5e it at all. 'o -o!9D
MFanc- s!ch a da- in K!l-. 1ain in the +orning; then a 4it of s!nshine; and
then rain; rain; rain; all da- long.D
M& re+e+4er e$actl- the sa+e K!l- in 1*36.D
M<es; & re+e+4er too.D
M:r was it in 1*2B9D
M<es; it was.D
M:r in 1*3*9D
M<es; thatDs right.D
.ow; o4serve the last few sentences of this conversation. ( ver- i+portant
r!le e+erges fro+ it. <o! +!st never contradict an-4od- when disc!ssing
the weather in #ngland. Sho!ld it hail and snow; sho!ld h!rricanes !proot
trees; and sho!ld so+eone re+ar5 to -o!: M.ice da-; isnDt it9D F answer
witho!t hesitation: M&snDt it lovel-9D8
(nd here is %i5esD advice to the learner of #nglish:
7earn the a4ove conversations 4- heart. &f -o! are a 4it slow in pic5ing
things !p; learn at least one conversation; it wo!ld do wonderf!ll- for an-
occasion.8
(ll this is of co!rse a ver- good 0o5e 4!t it sa-s +!ch a4o!t the Gritish and
their social 4ehavio!r. 6henever -o! teach a lang!age; -o! also teach a
co+ple$ s-ste+ of c!lt!ral c!sto+s; val!es; and wa-s of thin5ing; feeling
and acting. ( teacher +!st necessaril- attract his st!dentsD attention to the
c!lt!ral connotations; especiall- of socio)ling!istic aspects of lang!age. (n
eas- wa- to do this is to disc!ss cross)c!lt!ral differences with the st!dents;
e+phasising that no c!lt!re is 74etter8 than another. 6hat is i+portant in
s!ch a disc!ssion is to +a5e the+ aware that the- will never +aster the
foreign lang!age witho!t 7entering a new world8 or 7ac?!iring a new self8.
( second aspect of the lang!age F c!lt!re connection is the e$tent to which
the st!dents will 4e affected 4- the process of acc!lt!ration; which will var-
with the conte$t and the goals of learning. &n +an- lang!age)learning
conte$ts s!ch as #S; st!dents are faced with the f!ll)4lown realities of
adapting to life in a foreign co!ntr-; co+plete with var-ing stages of
acc!lt!ration. Then; c!lt!ral adaptation; social distance; and ps-chological
ad0!st+ent are also factors to deal with. The s!ccess with which learners
adapt to a new c!lt!ral +ilie! will affect their lang!age ac?!isition s!ccess;
and vice versa; in so+e significant wa-s.
6e cannot 4e certain that all the f!nctions of lang!age descri4ed in
ling!istic literat!re are to 4e fo!nd in all c!lt!res. The relative i+portance of
these different f!nctions +a- var- fro+ c!lt!re to c!lt!re; their distri4!tion
+a- var-. For an-one to participate in the life of a co++!nit- he has to 4e
a4le to co++!nicate and 4e co++!nicated to. That is wh- the learner is
learning a lang!age. This does not +ean that the range of f!nctions ai+ed at
4- a foreign lang!age learner will 4e that at the co++and of the native
spea5er. ( lang!age learner +a- 5now e$actl- what he wants the foreign
lang!age for; or he +a- have no clear idea at all. G!t for +an- teaching
operations we need to specif- the ai+s.
:!r a4ilit- to participate as +e+4ers of social and lang!age co++!nities
depends !pon o!r control of ling!istic and other 4ehavio!r considered
appropriate. The learner of a foreign lang!age is preparing to !se that
lang!age for certain p!rposes; in certain roles and in certain sit!ations. %an-
writers spea5 of the ling!istic needs of the learner in ter+s of roles he +a-
ass!+e. The pri+ar- role ascri4ed to hi+ will 4e that of foreigner; in which
his co++!nicative needs are nor+all- going to 4e +ore restricted than those
of the native spea5er. &n preparing a teaching progra++e or choosing a
teaching strateg-; we have to ta5e into acco!nt what the learnerDs needs +a-
4e and we +!st do so in ter+s of the social sit!ations she is going to have to
participate in; perhaps not as a 7f!ll +e+4er8 4!t as a 7foreign associate8. &n
this connection; it is appropriate to re+ind again of the wonderf!l 4oo5 of
/eorge %i5es containing val!a4le advice to foreigners not to pretend to 4e
native spea5ers. 3ere is what %i5es sa-s a4o!t foreigners; tr-ing to ac?!ire
7perfect8 #nglish and so!nd li5e native spea5ers.
7&n the first wee5 after +- co+ing to #ngland & pic5ed !p a tolera4le
wor5ing 5nowledge of the lang!age and the ne$t seven -ears convinced +e
grad!all- 4!t thoro!ghl- that & wo!ld never 5now it reall- well; let alone
perfectl-. This is sad. %- onl- consolation 4eing that no4od- spea5s #nglish
perfectl-.
&f -o! live here long eno!gh -o! will find o!t to -o!r greatest
a+a=e+ent that the ad0ective nice is not the onl- ad0ective the lang!age
possesses; in spite of the fact that in the first three -ears -o! do not need to
learn or !se another ad0ective.
Then -o! have to decide on -o!r accent. <o! will have -o!r foreign
accent all right; 4!t +an- people li5e to +i$ it with so+ething else. The
easiest wa- to give the i+pression of having a good accent or no foreign
accent at all is to hold an !nlit pipe in -o!r +o!th; to +!tter 4etween -o!r
teeth and finish -o!r sentences with the ?!estion: Misn;t it=D People will not
!nderstand +!ch; 4!t the- are acc!sto+ed to that and the- will get the +ost
e$cellent i+pression.
The +ost s!ccessf!l atte+pts to p!t on a highl- c!lt!red air have 4een
on the pol-s-lla4ic line. %an- foreigners; who have learned atin and /ree5
in school; discover with a+a=e+ent and satisfaction that the #nglish
lang!age has a4sor4ed a h!ge a+o!nt of ancient /ree5 and atin
e$pressions; and the- reali=e that @aA it is +!ch easier to learn these
e$pressions than the +!ch si+pler #nglish words> @4A that these words are as
a r!le inter+ina4l- long and +a5e a si+pl- s!per4 i+pression when tal5ing
to the greengrocerI8
$(>( Linguistic Principles
The last categor- of principles of lang!age learning and teaching centres on
lang!age itself and on how learners deal with this co+ple$ and ill)for+ed
s-ste+ @see Chapter ,A.
#arlier in this cent!r-; #dward Sapir wrote: 76hen it co+es to ling!istic
for+; Plato wal5s with the %acedonian swineherd; Conf!ci!s with the head)
h!nting savage of (ssa+.8 There is a considera4le 5nowledge availa4le
a4o!t the nat!re of h!+an lang!age. ing!istics provides a growing 4od- of
scientific 5nowledge a4o!t lang!age; which can g!ide the activit- of the
lang!age teacher. ing!ists can +a5e and have +ade great contri4!tions to
the sol!tion of so+e of the pro4le+s.
ang!age is s!ch a co+ple$ pheno+enon that it cannot 4e f!ll- acco!nted
for within one consistent and co+prehensive theor-. For this reason; when
as5ed the ?!estion J6hat is lang!age9J the ling!ist is li5el- to repl- 4-
as5ing another ?!estion J6h- do -o! want to 5now9J &f we teach lang!age;
the wa- we approach the tas5 will 4e infl!enced; or even deter+ined; 4-
what we 4elieve lang!age to 4e. There is generall- a close connection
4etween the wa- we tal5 a4o!t so+ething and the wa- we regard it.
ing!ists; especiall-; often tal5 a4o!t how lang!age 7wor5s8. The ling!istic
approach to lang!age is the +ost 7o40ectivising8 approach: it is concerned
with lang!age as a s-ste+> it ai+s to el!cidate the str!ct!re of lang!age. To
do this it has set !p vario!s 7levels of description8. These levels 4ear s!ch
fa+iliar na+es as s-nta$; +orpholog-; phonolog- and phonetics; le$is and
se+antics; prag+atics; etc.
The st!d- of lang!age is 4eset 4- the diffic!lt- that it deals with so+ething
!tterl- fa+iliar. #ver-4od- 75nows8 a4o!t lang!age; 4eca!se the- !se it all
the ti+e. The pro4le+ of st!d-ing pheno+ena li5e lang!age is to separate it
fro+ o!rselves; to achieve a 7ps-chic distance8 @Cho+s5- 1*6BA.
Perhaps the +ost cogent criticis+ of traditional lang!age teaching with its
insistence on correctness; the r!les of gra++ar; and its li+ited o40ectives; is
that it lac5ed the socio)c!lt!ral di+ension. ittle tho!ght see+s to have 4een
given to the notion of appropriateness; to the wa- that lang!age 4ehavio!r is
responsive to differing social sit!ations. &t is one of the great val!es of
+odern lang!age teaching that it adopts a +ore social approach to lang!age;
and it is concerned with the pro4le+s of its co++!nicative f!nction.
The relevance of the ling!istic approach to lang!age teaching is too o4vio!s
to need +!ch disc!ssion here. :ne point +!st 4e +entioned; however.
%odern teachers of lang!age are act!all- teaching their st!dents not onl-
the language 4!t also about language. %odern ling!istics re?!ires that a
gra++ar sho!ld accord with a native spea5erDs int!itions a4o!t lang!age.
This for+!lates a new goal for ling!istic theor-. .ow ling!ists descri4e
what native spea5ers conceive to 4e the nat!re of their lang!age. The
e+phasis has shifted fro+ the nat!re of lang!age data to the nat!re of the
h!+an capacit-; which +a5es it possi4le to prod!ce the lang!age data. So+e
ling!ists; Cho+s5- a+ong the+; wo!ld clai+ that the o40ectives of the
ling!istic st!d- of lang!age have alwa-s i+plicitl- 4een the characteri=ation
of the internali=ed set of r!les 4- a spea5er)hearer @and learnerA when he
!ses lang!age. S!ch ling!ists do not st!d- what people do when the- spea5
and !nderstand lang!age; 4!t see5 to discover the r!les !nderl-ing this
perfor+ance. This is what Cho+s5- calls co$#etence @1*66a; *A: J(
distinction +!st 4e +ade 4etween what the spea5er of a lang!age 5nows
i+plicitl- @what we +a- call his co+petenceA and what he does @his
perfor+anceA. ( gra++ar; in the traditional view; is an acco!nt of
co+petenceJ.
The spea5erDs co+petence; then; can 4e characteri=ed as a set of r!les for
prod!cing and !nderstanding sentences in a lang!age. The gra++ar of a
lang!age; th!s; in its ling!istic sense; is a characteri=ation of the native
spea5erDs co+petence. (ll spea5ers of a lang!age var- slightl- in the r!les
the- follow; as well; of co!rse; as in their perfor+ance. 6hen we are
teaching a foreign lang!age; we are tr-ing to develop in the learner not 0!st
gra$$atical co$#etence; in the Cho+s5-an sense; 4!t co$$unicati'e
co$#etence. 6e are teaching hi+ or her not onl- what we call 7the
for+ation r!les8 of the lang!age; 4!t also in addition; what 3-+es has
called 7the spea5ing r!les8. The learner +!st develop the a4ilit- to
disting!ish gra++atical fro+ !ngra++atical se?!ences; 4!t he +!st also
5now when to select a partic!lar gra++atical se?!ence; appropriate to the
conte$t; 4oth ling!istic and sit!ational.
'ifferent f!nctions of lang!age can 4e associated with the factors involved
in a speech act F the spea5er; the hearer; contact 4etween the+; the ling!istic
code !sed; the topic and the for+ of the +essage. &f the orientation is
towards the spea5er; then we have the personal f!nction of lang!age. &t is
thro!gh this f!nction that the spea5er reveals his attit!de towards what he is
spea5ing a4o!t. &t is not 0!st that he e$presses his tho!ghts and e+otions
thro!gh lang!age; 4!t his e+otions and attit!des at what he is tal5ing a4o!t.
3earer)oriented speech acts involve the directive f!nction of lang!age. &t is
the f!nction of controlling the 4ehavio!r of a participant. This can 4e done
4- co++and; re?!est or warning; or 4- so+e general ad+onitor- state+ent;
4- invo5ing legal; +oral or c!sto+ar- r!les of societ-.
6here the foc!s is on the contact 4etween the participants; speech f!nctions
to esta4lish relations; +aintain the+; or pro+ote social solidarit-. These are
t-picall- rit!al; or for+!laic speech acts: leave)ta5ing; greetings; re+ar5s
a4o!t the weather; in?!iries a4o!t health; etc. This f!nction; so+eti+es
called #hatic; is also perfor+ed or s!pported 4- gest!res; facial e$pression.
The topic)oriented f!nction of speech; often called the referential function; is
that which !s!all- stands first in peopleDs +inds. &t is the f!nction that gave
rise to the traditional notion that lang!age was created solel- for the
co++!nication of tho!ght; for +a5ing state+ents a4o!t how the spea5er
perceives the wa- things in the world are.
There are two +ore f!nctions; associated with the code !sed and the
+essage. The- are the +ost diffic!lt to for+!late. 6e !s!all- test the+ 4-
as5ing the ?!estions J'o -o! hear +e9J and J'o -o! follow9J
@1A The .ative ang!age #ffect
S. Pit Corder clai+s that when people learn a second lang!age the- are not
ac?!iring lang!age; the- alread- possess it. The learning of a second
lang!age is rather a ?!estion of increasing a repertoire; or learning a set of
alternatives for so+ething the- alread- 5now. The ass!+ption then is that
so+e of the r!les the- alread- 5now are also !sed in the prod!ction and
!nderstanding of the second lang!age. This is what is +eant 4- 7transfer8.
earners transfer what the- alread- 5now. %a5ing errors in the second
lang!age can; in part; 4e e$plained 4- the notion of transfer. &t is also called
7negative transfer8 or interference. G!t this tendenc- of transfer can 4e also
positive @facilitationA. &t is 0!st as well that different lang!ages do; in fact;
have rese+4lances to each other. :n this acco!nt; it has to 4e esta4lished
what is different 4etween the +other tong!e and the foreign lang!age.
'escri4ing lang!age; or part of lang!age; is part of the process of
developing ling!istic theor- itself. G!t we +!st now o!tline the hierarch- of
applications of ling!istics to lang!age teaching. There are a n!+4er of
stages in the application of ling!istics to lang!age teaching. The first has
alread- 4een identified as that of ling!istic description. The second is
concerned with operations perfor+ed on the descriptions of lang!age. #ach
stage has the f!nction of answering so+e ?!estions or solving so+e
pro4le+s relevant to lang!age teaching. Th!s; the application of first order
answers the ver- general ?!estion: what is the nat!re of the lang!age; which
is to 4e ta!ght9 The ne$t stage answers the ?!estion: what is to 4e ta!ght and
how is it to 4e ta!ght9 The criteria for selecting +aterial for lang!age
teaching are vario!s: utility to the learner; that is; selecting what he needs to
5now; his proposed re#ertoire F those varieties of the lang!age which will 4e
!sef!l to hi+; those speech f!nctions which he will need to co++and. :r
we can invo5e the criterion of difference. &n a sense; all parts of the foreign
lang!age are different fro+ the +other tong!e. G!t difference is relative
So+e parts will 4e +ore different than others. For e$a+ple; if the learnerDs
+other tong!e has no gra++atical s-ste+ of aspect; the learning of s!ch a
s-ste+ presents a serio!s learning tas5. 6here the learnerDs +other tong!e;
however; has s!ch a s-ste+; the si=e of the learning pro4le+ will depend on
the nat!re and degree of difference. ( third criterion +ight 4e difficulty.
6hat is different in the foreign lang!age does not necessaril- in all cases
represent a diffic!lt-. For e$a+ple; at the phonological level; what is so
totall- different fro+ an-thing enco!ntered in the +other tong!e does not
see+ to 4e so diffic!lt to learn as so+ething; which is lia4le to conf!sion
with so+e si+ilar feat!re in the +other tong!e.
The proced!res and techni?!es involved in all these cases of application of
ling!istics to foreign lang!age teaching are co+parative. This is called
interlingual co$#arison; or 7contrastive8 co+parison @Contrasti'e
AnalysisA. The other t-pe of co+parison is often called Error Analysis. The
errors perfor+ed 4- the learners +a- 4e an i+portant part of the data on
which the co+parison is +ade. G!t what is 4eing co+pared in this case is
not two e$isting and alread- 5nown lang!ages; 4!t the lang!age of the
learner at so+e partic!lar point in the process of learning; with the target
lang!age. ( learnerDs so called errors are s-ste+atic; and it is precisel- this
reg!larit- which shows that the learner is following a set of r!les. These
r!les are not those of the target lang!age 4!t a 7transitional8 fro+ of
lang!age; si+ilar to the target lang!age; 4!t also si+ilar to the learnerDs
+other tong!e @what arr- Selin5er calls 7interlang!age8A.
@2A ang!age Eniversals
&n the conte$t of disc!ssing si+ilarities and differences 4etween lang!ages;
we +!st to!ch !pon the the+e of lang!age !niversals and their place in
foreign lang!age teaching. The ,;000 to 6;000 lang!ages of the world do
loo5 i+pressivel- different fro+ #nglish and fro+ one another. :n the other
hand; one can also find stri5ing !nifor+ities. &n 1*63 the ling!ist Koseph
/reen4erg e$a+ined a sa+ple of 30 far)fl!ng lang!ages fro+ five
continents. /reen4erg wanted to see if an- properties of gra++ar co!ld 4e
fo!nd in all these lang!ages. &n the first investigation; which foc!sed on the
order of words and +orphe+es; he fo!nd no fewer than fort-)five !niversal
feat!res.
Since then; +another s!rve-s have 4een cond!cted; involving scores of
lang!ages fro+ ever- part of the world; and literall- h!ndreds of !niversal
patterns have 4een doc!+ented. So+e hold a4sol!tel-. For e$a+ple; no
lang!age for+s ?!estions 4- reversing the order within a sentence; li5e
N>uilt ?ack that house the this is+ So+e !niversals are statistical: s!40ects
nor+all- precede o40ects in al+ost all lang!ages; and ver4s and their o40ects
tend to 4e ad0acent. Th!s +ost lang!ages have SH: or S:H word order>
fewer have HS:> H:S and :HS are rare @less than 1SA> and :SH +a- 4e
non)e$istent. The largest n!+4er of !niversals involve i+plications: if a
lang!age has R; it will also have <. Eniversal i+plications are fo!nd in all
aspects of lang!age; fro+ phonolog- @if a lang!age has nasal vowels; it will
have non)nasal vowelsA to word +eanings @if a lang!age has a word for
Mp!rpleD; it will also have a word for MredD> if a lang!age has a word for MlegD;
it will also have a word for Mar+DA.
The 5nowledge of the e$istence of lang!age !niversals +a- save so+e
proced!res of co+parison 4etween the +other tong!e and the foreign
lang!age ta!ght. &n the second place; it can 4e part of the teaching +aterial
@+ostl- i+plicitl-A and the +ethods of e$planation.
@3A ing!istics in Str!ct!ring the S-lla4!s
( finished s-lla4!s @cf. Chapter ,A is the overall plan for the learning
process. &t +!st specif- what co+ponents +!st 4e availa4le; or learned 4- a
certain ti+e line> what is the +ost efficient se?!ence in which the- are
learned> what ite+s can 4e learned 7si+!ltaneo!sl-8> what ite+s are alread-
5nown.
The str!ct!re of lang!age is a 7s-ste+ of s-ste+s8; or a 7networ58 of
interrelated categories; no part of which is wholl- independent or wholl-
dependent !pon another. &n lang!age; nothing is learned co+pletel- !ntil
ever-thing is learned. &f this is so; then no si+ple linear se?!ence for a
s-lla4!s is appropriate. ( logical sol!tion to this pro4le+ see+s to 4e a
c-clic; or spiral; str!ct!re; which re?!ires the learner to ret!rn ti+e and
again to so+e aspects of lang!age str!ct!re; lang!age process; or do+ain of
lang!age !se. ang!age learning is not 0!st c!+!lative; it is an integrative
process. &n Chapter ,; we shall offer a new approach to s-lla4!sCc!rric!l!+
design.
The +a0or pro4le+ that faces !s in s-lla4!s organisation is whether to ta5e
the for+al criteria as do+inant; leaving alternative wa-s of e$pressing the
sa+e idea to so+e other part of the s-lla4!s; or to 4ase o!r gro!ping on
se+antic criteria. The teaching of +odal ver4s is a perfect e$a+ple of the
dile++a. Sho!ld we 4ring all alternative wa-s of e$pressing necessit-;
o4ligation; possi4ilit- and pro4a4ilit-; etc. together into separate single
!nits9 &n other words; are we going to regard M+odal ver4sD; or alternativel-
Mthe e$pression of o4ligationD; as a s-lla4!s ite+9
There is no si+ple answer to this pro4le+. The +ore we ta5e acco!nt of
se+antic considerations; the +ore evident it 4eco+es that the relationship
4etween +eaning and s!rface for+ is a co+ple$ and indirect one. (t the
ti+e when less attention was paid to the whole pro4le+ of +eaning; and
lang!age learning was tho!ght of as a +atter of ac?!iring the a4ilit- to
prod!ce a!to+aticall- Msentence patternsD; it was logical @or was it9A to
gro!p +aterials in a s-lla4!s on the 4asis of s!perficial for+al criteria. G!t
with the increasing e+phasis on lang!age learning as training the learner in
co++!nication; the relevance of se+antic criteria in organising the
ling!istic +aterial increases. 6e are now tr-ing to classif- the ling!istic
+aterial in ter+s of +ore a4stract se+antic categories as ti+e; dei$is;
+odalit-; aspect!alit-; f!t!rit-; possession; ?!antification; ca!sation; etc.
6e have seen that the s-ste+atic interconnectedness of lang!age +a5es it
!nrealistic to thin5 of an- ite+ as teacha4le or learna4le in isolation. 6e
sho!ld consider an ite+ in a +ore general wa-; i.e. as a process; or as so+e
gra++atical categor-; s!ch as tense or nu$ber.
@aA The s-ntactic s-lla4!s
.owada-s; descriptions of lang!age give !s a relativel- satisfactor- acco!nt
of the str!ct!re of the s-ste+ to 4e learned; that is; a characterisation of the
Mfor+ation r!lesD of the lang!age. G!t we are concerned with +ore than this
in lang!age teaching F we are concerned with perfor+ance a4ilit-. There are
so+e general t-pes of s-ntactic processes; s!ch as no+inalisation;
relativisation or the+atisation; passivisation; interrogativisation; negation;
which co!ld 4e regarded as Mite+sD of perfor+ance a4ilit- in a s-lla4!s.
ing!isticall- spea5ing; all these involve perfor+ing certain operations.
@4A The +orphological s-lla4!s
The +ost fre?!ent clai+ for the appropriate application of se?!encing;
otherwise denied in principle; is +ade at the level of +orpholog-. For
e$a+ple; the ver4 Jto haveJ and Jto 4eJ are !sed as a!$iliaries in the
for+ation of perfect or progressive aspect. %ost logicall-; we +!st present
and teach these ver4s 4efore introd!cing the for+ation of these aspect!al
for+s. This see+s a good arg!+ent !ntil we specif- what we +ean 4-
TMteachingTD the ver4s to have and to 4e. earning a ver4 involves not onl-
discovering the relations in enters into with no+inals; whether it is transitive
or cop!lative; 4!t also learning the +orphological s-ste+ together with their
associated +eanings: ti+e; d!ration; co+pletion; fre?!enc-; etc. The
learning of so+ething +!st s!rel- involve the a4ilit- to !se it accepta4l-; i.e.
discover its f!nctions. The f!nction of the a!$iliar- to 4e in the progressive
aspect; or passive voice; is different fro+ that of the ver4 to 4e in cop!lative
str!ct!res. To sa- that in teaching cop!lative sentences one is teaching the
ver4 Jto 4eJ so that it can 4e availa4le for later a!$iliar- !se is a categorial
error.
@cA The le$ical s-lla4!s
&n order to present and e$e+plif- gra++atical categories and s-ntactic
str!ct!res; we have to !se le$ical words. This does not +ean that the
teaching of voca4!lar- is logicall- dependent on the teaching of gra++ar.
The teaching of voca4!lar- provides !s with another concept of s-lla4!s
gro!ping F le$ico)se+antic. (n e$a+ple of this co!ld 4e the co)occ!rrence
of adver4s of past ti+e; yesterday, last %eek, three years ago; etc.; with tense
ver4s> or co)occ!rrence of ver4s of spea5ing and 4elieving; say, tell, cry,
belie'e, ho#e, ex#ect; etc.; with no+inalised sentences of different t-pes.
6e +!st o!tline Mthe networ5 of relationsD which 4ind the voca4!lar- of a
lang!age into a str!ct!re. &t is possi4le to isolate Ms!4)fieldsD within the
le$ical str!ct!re of a lang!age. S!ch gro!pings of le$ical ite+s 4earing +ore
or less close se+antic relations to each other are !s!all- called Mse+antic
fieldsD. Se+antic fields provide gro!pings of the voca4!lar-; which co!ld
serve as Mite+s in a s-lla4!sD. The field of coo5ing will 4e !sed as an
e$a+ple. Coo5ing words provide a good so!rce of e$a+ples 4eca!se there
are clear reference relations that one can appeal to> the words do not
nor+all- carr- strong connotations; so we can concentrate on the cognitive
+eaning.
The 4asic words in the c!linar- field in #nglish are cook; bake; boil; roast;
fry; and broil @or grill for Gritish #nglishA. The set also incl!des stea$;
si$$er; ste%; #oach; braise; saut@; !rench5fry; dee#5fry; barbecue; grill and
charcoal. There are; in addition; a n!+4er of peripheral words: #arboil;
#lank; shirr; scallo#; fla$bere; rissoler and several co+po!nds: stea$5bake;
#ot5roast; o'en5#oach; #an5broil; #an5fry; o'en5fry.
&t is +ore than o4vio!s that not all of the words are widel- !sed and need to
4e incl!ded in the s-lla4!s. So+e are even !n5nown to ordinar- native
spea5ers of #nglish. Cook can 4e !sed in two wa-s F once as the
s!perordinate ter+ of the field; na+ing the activit- e$pressed @Mpreparing
foodDA; and second; as a +ore specific word opposed to bake. Cook and bake
are the +ost general ter+s; the- appear freel- intransitivel- with h!+an
s!40ects. >oil and its s!4ordinate ter+s @si$$er; #oach; ste%; braiseA differ
fro+ the others in the field in that water or li?!id +!st 4e !sed; whereas the
a4sence of li?!id is necessar- for fry; broil; roast and bake.
&t is eas- to de+onstrate the set of words of this 5ind as the- pattern in
se+antic fields. G!t we +!st also add; and it is ver- i+portant for lang!age
teaching; that this approach has a strong e$planator- val!e F it ena4les !s to
predict and e$plain so+e se+antic and cognitive processes in lang!age.
First; it ena4les !s to e$plain how is it that words co+e to have new
+eanings in certain conte$ts. Secondl-; we can predict what se+antic and
s-ntactic feat!res a totall- new word will have when added to a le$ical field.
(nd thirdl-; we can offer an e$planation as to how we are a4le to !nderstand
and even offer e$planations of o!r !nderstanding of the +eanings of totall-
!n5nown words and e$pressions.
The first ?!estion F the se+antic e$tension of words F can 4e ill!strated 4-
loo5ing at the ite+s hot5%ar$5cool5cold. These e$hi4it +ore or less the
sa+e relationships to one another: Hot and cold are grada4le anton-+s at
end points of a scale; and %ar$ and cool are anton-+s which are closer to
so+e centre point that separates hot and cold. (ll fo!r words are !sed and
have standard +eanings when tal5ing a4o!t the weather; ps-cho)ph-sical
feat!res @, feel coldA This %ater feels cold to $eA; e+otions @?ohn has a hot
te$#erA My brother is a cold #ersonA Bur for$er %ar$ friendshi# has
cooledA; g!essing ga+es li5e M& sp-D; colo!rs @)ou should #aint this roo$ a
%ar$ colour, like orangeA; etc. :ther fields of disco!rse !se onl- one or two
words fro+ the field: 6e spea5 of hot ne%s ite$s 4!t not of a Ncold or a
Ncool ne%s ite$; a cold %ar or a hot %ar; 4!t not a Ncool %ar or a N%ar$
%ar. There is hot a44 and cool a44 4!t not N%ar$ a44. :ne can get a hot
ti# on a horse; 4!t not a Ncool ti#.
Since hot; %ar$; cool; and cold 4ear a certain relationship to one another;
even when a word does not possess a certain +eaning; it can ac?!ire a new
one in a conte$t 4- virt!e of that relationship. 3ence; these new coinages are
so easil- !nderstood.
S!ch e$tensions of +eaning related to se+antic fields are !s!all- perfor+ed
4- +eans of +etaphorical transfer. Cognitive ps-chologists clai+ that
+etaphors are strongl- +e+ora4le. This is d!e to the fact that the- f!rnish
concept!all- rich; i+age)evo5ing concept!alisations. %etaphorical vehicles
facilitate +e+or- to the e$tent that the- evo5e vivid +ental i+ages. :ne
?!estion that is central to lang!age learning is whether the occ!rrence of
i+ager- with +etaphor is si+pl- epipheno+enal to its co+prehension or a
5e- ele+ent in !nderstanding and +e+orising the +eaning. Hario!s
e+pirical st!dies on the co++!nicative f!nction of +etaphor s!ggest a
n!+4er of possi4ilities a4o!t the positive infl!ence of +etaphor on learning.
&n the ne$t chapter; we shall loo5 at the develop+ent of lang!age teaching
+ethods in the twentieth cent!r-.
"hapter <' E1ploring Language Teaching
Methods
&n the twentieth cent!r-; the teaching of +odern foreign lang!ages has
progressed thro!gh three +a0or periods. &n this chapter; we shall 4riefl-
s5etch the facts and indicate the salient feat!res of the teaching +ethods;
which have 4een designed and i+ple+ented 4- several generations of
+ethodologists and teachers. :!r historical perspective is li+ited altho!gh
we reali=e that there have 4een +an- interesting theories and practices
thro!gh the ages. For e$a+ple; this is what Koseph (ic5in wrote in the -ear
16*3: 7for no Tong!e can 4e ac?!ired witho!t /ra++atical r!les> since then
all other Tong!es; and ang!ages are ta!ght 4- /ra++ar; wh- o!ght not the
#nglish Tong!e to 4e ta!ght so too. &+itation will never do it; !nder twent-
-ears> & have 5nown so+e Foreigners who have 4een longer in learning to
spea5 #nglish and -et are far fro+ it: the not learning 4- /ra++ar; is the
tr!e ca!se8 @?!oted in <!le 1*B"; 1"0A. o!is 2ell- @1*6*A in his 4oo5 2"
Cent!ries of ang!age Teaching provides an e$tensive historical anal-sis of
the develop+ent of +ethodolog- fro+ the ti+e of (ncient /reece to the
present.
%an- scholars have e$plored the develop+ent of lang!age teaching in this
cent!r-. 3ere; we shall +ention 4!t a few; whose wor5 we have 4een !sing
s!ccessf!ll- with o!r st!dents; 6illia+ Francis %ac5e- @1*6"A; 3. 3. Stern
@1*B3A; (nthon- 3owatt @1*B,A; Kac5 T. 1ichards and Theodore S. 1ogers
@1*B6A; 'iane arsen)Free+an @1*B6A; 3. 'o!glas Grown @1*B7; 1**,A.
The-; and +another colleag!es; have inspired the disc!ssion in this
chapter.
<($( Period )' 4irect Language Teaching
The first half of the cent!r- was do+inated 4- the teaching +ethod; which is
5nown as 'irect ang!age Teaching or 6irect Method @'%A. &t e+erged as
a res!lt of the lang!age ed!cation refor+ +ove+ent at the end of the
nineteenth cent!r- and was pro+inent !ntil the +iddle of the twentieth
cent!r-.
(t the 4eginning of the cent!r-; the '% 4eca+e the onl- officiall- approved
+ethod for the teaching of +odern foreign lang!ages in France thro!gh a
decree of the French %inister of P!4lic &nstr!ction @1*02A. The ter+; which
was !sed in the decree; was J+ethode directeJ. The +ethod was soon
esta4lished in +an- #!ropean co!ntries and was !sed with enth!sias+ 4- its
proponents. So+e of the co++ercial vent!res in the area were ver-
s!ccessf!l and 4eca+e ?!ite pop!lar. For e$a+ple; in 1B7B; the /er+an
4orn %a$i+ilian 'elphin!s Gerlit= opened his first lang!age school in
Providence; 1hode &sland; E.S.(. Toda-; >erlit4 Languages ,nc*
@www.4erlit=.co+CfreeA is still thriving.
'irect %ethod is of co!rse onl- a general ter+; which covers a range of
different teaching +ethods. 6e shall +ention two of the+; which have 4een
infl!encing lang!age +ethodolog- to present. &n 1*23; 3arold Pal+er
developed his Bral Method to 4e adapted so+e fift- -ears later in the
innovative approaches of the 1*70s as the Total Physical &es#onse Method
@(sher 1*77; 1*B2A. The second one; %ichael 6estDs &eading Method; was
designed in 1*26. (nd onl- two -ears ago; Stephen 2rashen revived it in the
+ethod; which he na+ed the Easy Way @1**7A.
The 4asic pre+ise of the '% is that a second lang!age sho!ld 4e ta!ght 4-
+a5ing a direct connection in the +ind of the learner 4etween what he
thin5s and what he sa-s. &n other words; no !se is +ade of the learnerTs own
lang!age. Th!s; the target lang!age 4eco+es 4oth the ai+ and the +eans of
the teaching and learning process. The following list s!+s !p eight salient
feat!res of direct lang!age teaching:
Teaching is e$ec!ted orall- thro!gh the +edi!+ of the target lang!age.
Teachers sho!ld 4e either native spea5ers or e$tre+el- fl!ent in the target
lang!age.
/ra++ar is ta!ght ind!ctivel- 4- sit!ation.
Concrete voca4!lar- is ta!ght in conte$t thro!gh ostensive definition and
pict!res.
(4stract voca4!lar- is ta!ght thro!gh association of ideas.
ang!age s5ills are ordered in a 7nat!ral wa-8: listening; spea5ing;
reading and writing.
Pron!nciation is e+phasi=ed> the first few wee5s are devoted to
pron!nciation.
(ll reading +atter is first presented orall-.
3owever; in the second ?!arter of the cent!r-; the +ethod 4egan to decline.
&ts principles were ?!estioned. ( gro!p of pro+inent (+erican e$perts
stated that Jthe a4ilit- to converse sho!ld not 4e regarded as a thing of
pri+ar- i+portance for its own sa5e 4!t as an a!$iliar- to the higher ends of
ling!istic scholarship and literar- c!lt!reJ @&e#ort of the Co$$ittee of
T%el'e, Modern Language Association of A$erica 1B*2A. %oreover; the '%
de+anded highl- co+petent teachers who have alwa-s 4een diffic!lt to
recr!it. So 4- the +iddle of the twentieth cent!r- +odern lang!ages were
4eing ta!ght 4- the +ethods; +ost of which had 4een developed 4efore the
t!rn of the cent!r-. The era of the 'irect %ethod had ended.
<(<( Period ))' Audio0lingual Teaching and the )nnovative Methods of
the $%?@s
The ne$t stage of develop+ent started with the decade of 1*,0 to 1*"0 and
contin!ed !ntil the +id)seventies. ang!age teachers and the general p!4lic
were dissatisfied with the +ethodological theor- and practice of the previo!s
era. For e$a+ple; eonard Gloo+field @1*,2A stated; 7:ften eno!gh the
st!dent; after two; three; or fo!r -ears of instr!ction; cannot reall- !se the
lang!age he has 4een st!d-ing.8 &n 1*,3; The (+erican (r+- initiated the
Ar$y 0#eciali4ed Training Progra$ @hence; J(r+- %ethodJA to teach
intensive lang!age co!rses that foc!sed on a!ralCoral s5ills. The 7revol!tion8
in lang!age teaching of that period created a new +ethodological ideolog-;
which ca+e to 4e 5nown in the late fifties as the Audio5lingual Method
@(%A. (ccording to the C*0* Ar$y Language 0chool in California; 1300
ho!rs are s!fficient for an ad!lt to attain near)native co+petence in
Hietna+ese @G!r5e; ?!oted in 1eich 1*B6A.
Two +a0or scientific theories were applied as +ethodological principles:
linguistic structuralis$ @e.g. Gloo+field 1*33A and #sychological neo5
beha'ioris$ @e.g. S5inner 1*"7A. The proponents of the (% 4elieved that
lang!age learning was a process of ha4it for+ation in which the st!dent
over)learned caref!ll- se?!enced lists of set phrases or J4ase sentencesJ. The
+ethod was e$tre+el- s!ccessf!l and en0o-ed considera4le pop!larit-.
Co!rses li5e English DE. @Strevens 1*6,A; the Gritish edition of the original
te$t4oo5 in (+erican #nglish; English DEE; and &ealistic English @(44s;
Coo5 U Enderwood 1*6BA 4eca+e widel- accepted in #!rope in the 1*60s.
&n 1*61; the (+erican ling!ist 6illia+ %o!lton proclai+ed the ling!istic
principles of (%: 7lang!age is speech; not writingI a lang!age is a set of
ha4itsI teach the lang!age; not a4o!t the lang!ageI a lang!age is what
native spea5ers sa-; not what so+eone thin5s the- o!ght to sa-I lang!ages
are different8 @?!oted in 1ichards U 1ogers 1*B6A. The following list s!+s
!p eight salient feat!res of a!dio)ling!al teaching:
ang!age inp!t is provided in dialog for+.
earning activities are 4ased on +i+icr- and +e+ori=ation and pattern
practice.
S!ccessf!l responses are i++ediatel- rewarded.
%ista5es are not tolerated.
ang!age str!ct!re is ta!ght !sing pattern drills.
Hoca4!lar- is strictl- controlled and learnt in conte$t.
Pron!nciation is e+phasi=ed.
(!dio)vis!al technolog- is !sed e$tensivel-; e.g. slide pro0ectors; tape
recorders; lang!age la4oratories.
1o4ert &an Scott invented a 7sentence generator8 @1*6*; ?!oted in 1o4erts
1*73; **A as an aid to 4e !sed in the teaching of reading. The +achine co!ld
4e progra++ed to generate ,)word sentences of the si+ple; active
declarative t-pe. 6ords of each s-ntactic f!nction co!ld 4e entered on a
separate wheel; the +achine consisting of , wheels +o!nted side 4- side on
a cran5ing device. The wheels co!ld 4e t!rned independentl- of each other
to +a5e a new sentence at each spin. 6ith 60 words on each wheel; it wo!ld
4e possi4le to generate 12*60000 sentences; which; ass!+ing that it were
possi4le to spea5 one sentence per second; wo!ld ta5e a4o!t half a -ear of
tal5ing to get thro!gh. The +achine did not gain pop!larit- tho!gh.
The co+parative +erits of the (% and the traditional gra++ar)translation
instr!ction were eval!ated in a two)-ear st!d- of 4eginning st!dents of
/er+an in (+erica @Scherer U 6erthei+er 1*6,; ?!oted in 1eich 1*B6A. (t
the end of the two -ears; the res!lts were that (% and traditional
instr!ction were e?!al on listening; reading and #nglish)to)/er+an
translation> (% was far s!perior to traditional instr!ction in spea5ing 4!t
traditional instr!ction was s!perior to (% in writing and far s!perior to
(% in /er+an)to)#nglish translation. Th!s neither +ethod is clearl-
s!perior. 6hich -o! prefer depends on what -o! dee+ +ost i+portant.
&n the late si$ties; the (% was s!40ected to criticis+ and its pop!larit-
waned. Controlled st!dies of the effectiveness of the lang!age la4oratories
as act!all- !sed in schools in the 1*60s fo!nd that the- were either a not
partic!larl- effective teaching aid or the- were act!all- detri+ental to
lang!age learning @2eating 1*63; ?!oted in 1eich 1*B6A. .oa+ Cho+s5-
openl- critici=ed a!dio)ling!al theor- and practice in his address to lang!age
teachers at the .ortheast Conference; E.S.(.; in 1*66; 7& a+; fran5l-; rather
s5eptical a4o!t the significance; for the teaching of lang!ages; of s!ch
insights and !nderstanding as have 4een attained in ling!istics and
ps-cholog-8. The pattern practice proced!re was re0ected together with the
disill!sion+ent over neo)4ehavioris+ as a ps-chological theor-. Str!ct!ral
ling!istics was also deno!nced and with it the (% gave wa- to fresher
teaching +ethods.
The inno'ati'e a##roaches of the se'enties were an atte+pt to 4ring
+ethodolog- in line with +odern scientific develop+ents in the related
areas and to discover the new orientations in the teaching of +odern foreign
lang!ages.
The theoretical 4asis of Cale4 /attegnoDs +ethod @1*72A; The 0ilent Way; is
the idea that teaching +!st 4e s!4ordinated to learning and th!s st!dents
+!st develop their own inner criteria for correctness. earning is facilitated
if the learner discovers and creates in a pro4le+)solving process involving
the +aterial to 4e learnt. (ll fo!r s5ills are ta!ght fro+ the 4eginning.
St!dentsD errors are e$pected as a nor+al part of learning. The teacherDs
silence helps foster st!dentsD self)reliance and initiative. The teacher is
active in setting !p sit!ations !sing special teaching aids; Fidel charts and
C!isenaire rods; while the st!dents do +ost of the tal5ing and interacting.
/eorgi o=anovDs 0uggesto#edia @1*72A see5s to help learners eli+inate
ps-chological 4arriers to learning. The learning environ+ent is co+forta4le
and s!4d!ed; with low lighting and soft slow +!sic in the 4ac5gro!nd.
St!dents choose a na+e and character in the target lang!age and c!lt!re and
i+agine 4eing that person. 'ialog!es are presented to the acco+pani+ent of
Garo?!e concertos. St!dents are in a rela$ed 4!t foc!sed state of 7pse!do)
passiveness8. The- listen to the dialog!es 4eing read alo!d with var-ing
intonations and a coordination of so!nd and printed word or ill!stration. The
st!dents are e$pected to read the te$ts at ho+e 7c!rsoril- once 4efore going
to 4ed and again 4efore getting !p in the +orning8 @o=anov 1*72A.
&n Charles C!rranDs +ethod @1*76A; Co$$unity Language Learning;
learners 4eco+e +e+4ers of a co++!nit- ) their fellow learners and the
teacher ) and learn thro!gh interacting with the +e+4ers of that co++!nit-.
The teacher considers learners as 7whole persons8 with intellect; feelings;
instincts and a desire to learn. The teacher also recogni=es that learning can
4e threatening. G- !nderstanding and accepting st!dentsD fears; the teacher
helps st!dents feel sec!re and overco+e their fears. The s-lla4!s !sed is
learner)generated; in that st!dents choose what the- want to learn to sa- in
the target lang!age. earning is lin5ed to a set of practices granting
7consens!al validation8 in which +!t!al war+th and a positive eval!ation
of the other personDs worth develops 4etween the teacher and the learner
@C!rran 1*76A.
Ka+es (sherDs Total Physical &es#onse @1*77A places pri+ar- i+portance on
listening co+prehension; e+!lating the earl- stages of native lang!age
ac?!isition; and then +oving to spea5ing; reading and writing. (sher @1*77A
clai+s that 7the 4rain and nervo!s s-ste+ are 4iologicall- progra++ed to
ac?!ire lang!ageI in a partic!lar se?!ence and in a partic!lar +ode. The
se?!ence is listening 4efore spea5ing and the +ode is to s-nchroni=e
lang!age with the individ!alDs 4od-8. St!dents practice their co+prehension
4- acting o!t co++ands iss!ed 4- the teacher. (ctivities; incl!ding ga+es
and s5its; are designed to 4e f!n and to allow st!dents to ass!+e active
learning roles.
<(>( Period )))' "o!!unicative Language Teaching
The -ear 1*7" constit!tes a 7watershed8 4etween the second and the third
period of develop+ent of lang!age teaching in this cent!r-. That -ear saw
the p!4lication of The Threshold Le'el doc!+ent of the Co!ncil for C!lt!ral
Cooperation of the Co!ncil of #!rope @Han #5 1*7"A. The doc!+ent is Ja
specification of an ele+entar- level in a !nitCcredit s-ste+ for individ!als
who; fro+ ti+e to ti+e; have @personal or professionalA contacts in the target
co!ntriesJ @Tri+ 1*B0; "A. &t +ar5s the appearance of a new approach; the
so)called Co++!nicative ang!age Teaching or the Co$$unicati'e
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology ,0
A##roach @C(A. Kohn Tri+ @1*B0; "A; 'irector of the %odern ang!ages
Pro0ect; writes; Jthe Threshold evel is re+ar5a4le for the s-ste+atic wa- in
which the lang!age 4ehavior appropriate to the defined target a!dience is
specified in its vario!s interrelated para+etersJ.
Since then; the Threshold evel doc!+ents for +an- #!ropean lang!ages
have 4een p!4lished; e.g.; in alpha4etical order; the threshold levels for
French; Cn 9i'eau 0euil @1*76A; for /er+an; Fontaktsch%elle* 6eutsch als
!re$ds#rache @1*B1A; for Spanish; Cn ni'el u$bral @1*B1A; for Port!g!ese;
9i'el Li$iar @1*BBA; etc. &nfor+ation on those doc!+ents is availa4le on the
we4)site: @http:CC4oo5.coe.frClangA. :n the #!ropean level; the +ost recent wor5
in this area is the doc!+ent of the Co!ncil of #!rope entitled A Co$$on
Euro#ean !ra$e%ork of &eference for Language Learning and Teaching
@p!4licl- accessi4le on the we4)site: http:CCc!lt!re.coe.frClangA. 6e shall ret!rn
to it in Section ,.,.
%an- scholars have contri4!ted to the develop+ent of the C(. For e$a+ple;
'ell 3-+es introd!ced the constr!ct of 7co++!nicative co+petence8 in his
fa+o!s paper; Bn Co$$unicati'e Co$#etence @1*71A. 3e e$plores the
infl!ence of the social conte$t in which a lang!age is learnt on the ling!istic
co+petence; which the individ!al attains. 3-+es clai+s that 7a nor+al child
ac?!ires 5nowledge of sentences; not onl- as gra++atical; 4!t also as
appropriate. 3e or she ac?!ires co+petence as to when to spea5; when not;
and as to what to tal5 a4o!t with who+; when; where; in what +anner. &n
short; a child 4eco+es a4le to acco+plish a repertoire of speech acts; to ta5e
part in speech events; and to eval!ate their acco+plish+ent 4- others8
@1*71; 26*A. &n the cited paper; he as5s his fa+o!s fo!r ?!estions of
7co++!nication c!lt!re8:
71. 6hether @and to what degreeA so+ething is for+all- #ossible>
2. 6hether @and to what degree so+ething is feasible in virt!e of the +eans
of i+ple+entation availa4le>
3.6hether @and to what degreeA so+ething is appropriate @ade?!ate; happ-;
s!ccessf!lA in relation to a conte$t in which it is !sed and eval!ated>
,. 6hether @and to what degreeA so+ething is in fact done; act!all-
#erfor$ed; and what itDs doing entails.8 @3-+es 1*71; 2B1A
The 7fo!r ?!estions8 pro+pt a new wa- of 0!dging !tterances in conte$t. &n
that sense; 3-+esD paper was progra++atic; s!ggesting a new line of
research.
&n the 1*60s; 1oger Grown st!died earl- develop+ent of the +other tong!e
of (+erican children. The ac?!isition of #nglish gra++atical +orphe+es
was tac5led thro!gh the speech sa+ples of three children; the now fa+o!s
(da+; #ve and Sarah Grown. 3e fo!nd that the- developed their lang!age
at different chronological ages and at different rates. 3owever; he also fo!nd
that the- each went thro!gh ro!ghl- the sa$e se(uence of stages. Grown
tried to find the principles !nderl-ing the order he discovered and concl!ded
that a co+4ination of ling!istic and se+antic co+ple$it- +!st ca!se it.
1esearch e$tended to other lang!age str!ct!res. Co!rtne- Ca=den and 1oger
Grown descri4e 7three +a0or progressions in first lang!age ac?!isition:
evol!tion of the 4asic operations of reference and se+antic relations in two)
word !tterances of ver- -o!ng children> the ac?!isition of 1, gra++atical
+orphe+es and the +od!lations of +eaning the- e$press> and; still later; the
ac?!isition of #nglish tag ?!estions li5e doesn-t it or can-t it8 @Ca=den U
Grown 1*7"; 2**A. The order of ac?!isition of 1, #nglish gra++atical
+orphe+es and the +eanings the- e$press is the following @Ca=den U
Grown 1*7"; 301A:
@1A Present Progressive: riding @te+porar- d!ration> process; stateA;
@2)3A in, on @contain+ent; s!pportA;
@,A Pl!ral: t%o dogs @n!+4erA;
@"A Past; irreg!lar: sa%A %ent @earliernessA;
@6A Possessive: Mo$$y-s hat @possessionA
@7A Encontracti4le cop!la: Here , a$ in response to Where are you+
@n!+4er> earliernessA;
@BA (rticles: a, the @specific)non)specificA;
@*A Past; reg!lar: %alked, %anted @earliernessA;
@10A Third person; reg!lar: goes @n!+4er; earliernessA;
@11A Third person irreg!lar: has, does @n!+4er; earliernessA;
@12A Encontracti4le a!$iliar-: , a$ in response to Who-s co$ing+
@te+porar- d!ration; n!+4er; earliernessA;
@13A Contracti4le cop!la: He-s sick* @n!+4er; earliernessA;
@1,A Contracti4le a!$iliar-: He-s running* @te+porar- d!ration; n!+4er;
earliernessA.
&n the seventies; several investigators of instr!ctional acc!rac- orders
replicated and e$tended GrownDs e$peri+ents for #nglish as a second
lang!age. &n their 7+orphe+e st!dies8; 3eidi '!la- and %arina G!rt @1*7,A
e$a+ined the nat!ral se?!ences in second lang!age ac?!isition appl-ing the
>ilingual 0yntax Measure. The- !sed 1"1 Spanish)spea5ing children
learning #nglish. The ac?!isition se?!ences o4tained fro+ their s!40ects
were stri5ingl- si+ilar. :ther lang!age str!ct!res were also investigated. For
e$a+ple; Fred #c5+an; awrence Gell and 'iane .elson @1*B6; 12A tested
the generali=ation of relative cla!se instr!ction in the develop+ent of
#nglish as a second lang!age. The- fo!nd that 7+a$i+al generali=ation of
learning will res!lt fro+ ac?!isition of relativel- +ore +ar5ed str!ct!res.
S!ch generali=ation will 4e !nidirectional and will 4e in the direction of
those str!ct!res; which are relativel- less +ar5ed8 @#c5+an; Gell U .elson
1*B6; 12A. (nd the- concl!ded that 7if onl- a single str!ct!re of a set of
i+plicationall- related str!ct!res is to 4e ta!ght; +a$i+al generali=ation will
res!lt fro+ teaching that which is +ost +ar5ed8 @op. cit.; 12A. The first
p!4lished ad!lt st!d- of ac?!isition order @Gaile-; %adden U 2rashen 1*7,A
investigated 73 ad!lt st!dents of #nglish at V!eens College; .ew <or5. The
>ilingual 0yntax Measure was applied. The st!d- showed that the conto!rs
for the ac?!isition se?!ences of children and ad!lts are ver- si+ilar. Several
other investigators have loo5ed at ac?!isition se?!ences for ad!lts fro+
different lang!age 4ac5gro!nds @2rashen et al. 1*76; Per5ins and arsen)
Free+an 1*7"; %a5ino 1*7*; ee 1*B1; Pica 1*B3; etc.A.
The general res!lt of the ac?!isition order research was that a 7nat!ral
order8 of ac?!isition of the str!ct!re of #nglish as a second lang!age
characteristic of 4oth children and ad!lts and si+ilar for 4oth spea5ing and
writing was discovered. So+e scholars consider this concl!sion one of the
+ost significant o!tco+es of second lang!age research @'!la- U G!rt 1*B0;
Coo5 1*B*A.
&n sociolog- and ed!cation; the F!t!res %ove+ent evolved. F!t!res research
7concerns itself with concept!ali=ing and inventing the f!t!re 4- e$a+ining
the conse?!ences of vario!s plans of action 4efore the- 4eco+e to+orrowDs
realit-8 @P!llia+ 1*B7; 261A. #d!cators and politicians agree on the fact that
7the changes c!rrentl- in progress have i+proved ever-oneDs access to
infor+ation and 5nowledge; 4!t have at the sa+e ti+e +ade considera4le
ad0!st+ents necessar- in the s5ills re?!ired and in wor5ing patterns8 @White
Pa#er on Education and Training; #!ropean Co++ission; 1**6; 6A. The-
!se different ter+s to refer to the period of transfor+ation thro!gh which we
are passing; 7post)ind!strial8; 7post)+odern8 7infor+ation age8; 7learning
societ-8 and the li5e. G!t the- all 4elieve in the challenges of the new
realit-. 6e shall loo5 at the ed!cational paradig+ shift in Chapter 2.
Kohn .ais4itt @1*B2A descri4es the +ost i+portant trends that shape the
world at the end of the cent!r-. 3is +egatrends incl!de shifting fro+:
an ind!strial societ- to an infor+ation 4ased societ-;
a forced technolog- to a high techChigh to!ch +ode;
a national econo+- to a tr!l- glo4al econo+-;
short range planning to long)ter+ planning;
centrali=ation to decentrali=ation;
instit!tional help to self)help in vario!s fields;
representative de+ocrac- to participator- de+ocrac-;
a!thorit- do+inated hierarchies to networ5ing;
single option choices to +!ltiple option choices.
(ll that facilitated the develop+ent of the theor- and practice of lang!age
teaching giving it a strong i+pet!s.
Toda-; n!+ero!s +ethodolog- te$t4oo5s e$po!nd on the nat!re of
co++!nicative lang!age teaching. (ll the wor5 that has 4een done on the
C( has led to the evolve+ent of two ?!ite distinct orientations: a 7wea58
version and a 7strong8 version of the +ethod. (nthon- 3owatt @1*B,; 27*A
holds that if the for+er co!ld 4e descri4ed as Mlearning to !seD the target
lang!age; the latter entails M!sing Wthe target lang!ageX to learn itD. The wea5
version advances the clai+ that co++!nicative s-lla4i and teaching
+aterials sho!ld provide the learner with opport!nities to ac?!ire
co++!nicative co+petence necessar- and s!fficient to 4e !sed in act!al
co++!nication. This idea is the 4asis for the !nfolding of a whole new field
of st!d- in lang!age teaching +ethodolog-; referred to as co$$unicati'e
syllabus design; which we shall disc!ss separatel-. 3owatt @1*B,; 2B0A
writes that lang!age teaching re?!ires 7a closer st!d- of the lang!age itself
and a ret!rn to the traditional concept that !tterances carried +eaning in
the+selves and e$pressed the +eanings and the intentions of the spea5ers
and writers who created the+8.
The strong version of the C(; on the other hand; has given rise to the
planning and i+ple+entation of realistic co++!nicative tas5s; which give
the learner a chance to ac?!ire the target lang!age itself while !sing it. The
proponents of the strong version did not go to the radical sol!tion of
7deschooling8 lang!age learning altogether 4!t the- advocated real
co++!nication within the lang!age classroo+. &f the teacher shows gen!ine
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology ,,
interest in the concerns and activities of the st!dents; and if the st!dents can
tal5 to each other and share their tho!ghts and feelings; real co++!nication
is li5el- to occ!r.
The C( stresses the need to teach co++!nicative co+petence; i.e. the
a4ilit- to !se the target lang!age effectivel- and appropriatel-; as opposed to
ling!istic co+petence. Th!s; lang!age f!nctions are e+phasi=ed over
lang!age for+s. St!dents !s!all- wor5 in s+all gro!ps on co++!nicative
activities; d!ring which the- receive practice in negotiating +eaning.
(!thentic teaching +aterials are !sed. :pport!nities are provided for the
st!dents to deal with !nrehearsed sit!ations !nder the g!idance; not control;
of the teacher. The teacherDs role changes fro+ 4eing 7the sage on the stage8
to 4eco+ing 7a g!ide on the side8 @%owrer 1**6A. 2en /ood+an
@/ood+an et al. 1**1A e$pands on this idea; s!ggesting fo!r roles for
teachers: @1A kid5%atchers; who o4serve the st!dents; watching for signs of
growth; need and potential; @2A $ediators; who offer g!idance; s!pport and
reso!rces for learning; @3A liberators; who help st!dents ta5e ownership of
their own learning; and finall-; @,A initiators; who rel- on their professional
5nowledge and creativit- to create e$citing learning environ+ents.
The following list s!+s !p eight salient feat!res of co++!nicative lang!age
teaching:
Co++!nicative co+petence is the desired goal @7learning to !se8A.
%ini+!+ general intelligi4ilit- is so!ght in the teaching of
pron!nciation.
Ese of the native lang!age and translation is accepted where feasi4le.
Fl!enc- is e+phasi=ed over acc!rac-.
St!dents cooperate in the classroo+; !sing the lang!age in !nrehearsed
conte$ts @7!sing to learn8A.
S-ste+atic attention is paid to f!nctional as well as str!ct!ral aspects of
lang!age.
'rilling occ!rs peripherall-.
'isco!rse is at the center of attention.
&n s!++ar-; the Co++!nicative (pproach and the other lang!age teaching
+ethods can 4e seen as specific teaching proposals in which learning content
is critical for the achieve+ent of the ed!cational ai+s. 6e 4elieve that the
ai+s and content of lang!age co!rses are deter+ined 4- the overall
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology ,"
ed!cational philosoph- pro+inent in the co++!nit-. That constit!tes the
relativel- a4stract a##roach le'el of teaching +ethods; which refers to the
theories a4o!t the nat!re of lang!age ed!cation and other theories. Chapter 3
presents a disc!ssion on this the+e.
Concrete plans for a lang!age c!rric!l!+; which constit!tes the relativel-
concrete design le'el of teaching +ethods; are +ade in Chapter ,. &n it; we
shall e$a+ine the ?!estion of lang!age c!rric!l!+ design and develop+ent.
"hapter >' Paradig! Shift in Education
That lang!age teaching sho!ld 4e de+ocratic has long 4eco+e a fact of life.
That it is de+ocratic has -et to 4eco+e a realit-. :!r clai+ is that; at the end
of the twentieth cent!r-; we are e$periencing an ed!cational paradig+ shift;
in which lang!age teaching has its share. First; we shall loo5 into the change
in the overall concept of the co+ple$ process of ed!cation.
>($( "hanging the ocus of Education
The +ission of ed!cational instit!tions is to ed!cate people. (s Kohn 'ewe-
@1*33A noted; 7( pri+ar- responsi4ilit- of ed!cators is that the- not onl- 4e
aware of the general principles of the shaping of act!al e$perience 4-
environing conditions 4!t that the- also recogni=e in the concrete what
s!rro!ndings are cond!ctive to having e$periences that lead to growth.
(4ove all; the- sho!ld 5now how to !tili=e the s!rro!ndings; ph-sical and
social; that e$ist so as to e$tract fro+ the+ all that the- have to contri4!te to
4!ilding !p e$periences that are worthwhile8. G!t what constit!tes an
ed!cated person9 To the 4!siness world; an well)ed!cated person is one who
has the s5ills re?!ired to s!cceed on the 0o4. The la- p!4licDs view of an
ed!cated person is one who has acc!+!lated a large 4od- of infor+ation.
.one of these views see+s reall- accepta4le tho!gh. ( sa-ing is circ!lating
in the !niversities these da-s:
/eorgie Porgie; P!ddinD and pie;
2issed the girls and +ade the+ cr-;
6hen the 4o-s ca+e o!t to pla-;
/eorgie Porgie ran awa-;
/!ess what; /eorgie Porgie;
6e have a se$!al harass+ent s!4poena for -o!; /eorgie Porgie.
The ti+es; the- are a)changing.
&ndeed; the ti+es are changing rapidl-. &n the age of the learning societ-;
ed!cation is seen as a process; not a prod!ct. '!ring the teaching and
learning process; the st!dent sho!ld learn how to thin5 and to listen; how to
participate in dialog!e; how to anal-=e iss!es and how to read criticall-.
St!dents sho!ld learn how to write so that others can follow their thin5ing.
Fifteen -ears ago; (. %ceod pointed o!t that 7Geing literate in the 1*B0s
+eans having the power to !se lang!age F writing and reading; spea5ing and
listening F for o!r own p!rposes; as well as those that the instit!tions of
societ- re?!ire of !s. The classroo+ processes 4- which that power is
achieved incl!de the first e$ercise of that power8 @1*B6; 37A. &n o!r opinion;
that is tr!e a4o!t 4oth first and second lang!age develop+ent circ!+stances.
St!dents sho!ld learn to ta5e responsi4ilit- for their own learning; to find
0o- in learning and to open their +inds to new ideas. The- sho!ld learn the
s5ills and attit!des necessar- to achieve lasting s!ccess d!ring the re+ainder
of their lives no +atter what their goals are. The learning process sho!ld
contin!e thro!gho!t their lifeti+e; not 0!st while attending for+al schooling.
#d!cators e+phasi=e that one of the +ost i+portant things st!dents sho!ld
learn is how to thin5 for the+selves. St!dents +!st learn how to choose
conscio!sl- what direction their lives sho!ld ta5e professionall- as well as
personall-. The- need to 4e a4le to sol'e #roble$s in a rational +anner; to
ex#erience co$#assion toward others and to 4e willing and a4le to
ackno%ledge conflict and contradiction and resol'e differences satisfactoril-.
Kohn P!llia+ @1*B7A s!ggests several specific characteristics of the
ed!cational paradig+ shift. 6e shall present the+ 4elow and ret!rn to the
+ost i+portant iss!es in the following section.
&e#lacing linear %ith synergetic #rocesses is the first one. inear
organi=ations can onl- +a5e linear decisions. Th!s; the school can onl-
receive infor+ation that it is designed to receive. &t tends to repress
!nfavora4le infor+ation. The teachers cannot +a5e decisions fro+ the
perspective of the st!dents. (lternativel-; a s-nergetic s-ste+ is perceived as
an 7ad)hocrac-8 @Toffler 1*B"A. &t is 4ased on the cooperation of individ!als
to co+plete te+porar- tas5s.
Education is $ore than training. This is the second feat!re of the new foc!s
of ed!cation. #d!cation is process)oriented> if st!dents are as5ed ?!estions
for which the answers are 5nown; the s-ste+ is training.
Thirdl-; st!dents need education for the unkno%n. &n the past; st!dents
attended schools to learn what the- did not 5now fro+ teachers who were
pres!+ed to 5now. .ow; foc!s sho!ld 4e on cooperative pro4le+ anal-sis
and sharing of so!rces of infor+ation. The school sho!ld +ove awa- fro+
the e$cl!sive treat+ent of what is well !nderstood towards helping st!dents
cope with the !n5nown.
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology ,B
The fo!rth characteristic is the structural 'ersus sa#iential authority
controvers-. Str!ct!ral a!thorit-; which is he do+inant pattern in schools; is
derived fro+ oneDs title or ran5 in the instit!tion. Position rather than
co+petence esta4lishes the a!thorit- of the teacher. Sapiential a!thorit-; on
the other hand; is 4ased on the possession of wisdo+ and 5nowledge which
finds s!pport a+ong others. Goth teachers and st!dents have the opport!nit-
for critical anal-sis of an- given piece of infor+ation. Sapiential a!thorit- is
considered a necessar- part of ed!cation for f!t!re s!rvival.
Fifth; lifelong learning is an i+portant characteristic of the new ed!cational
paradig+. Preparation for a life of learning sho!ld replace the idea of
ter+inal schooling.
Si$th; there sho!ld 4e an end to 4ero su$ ga$es in ed!cation. Co+petitive
teaching +odes pro+ote the 7& win F -o! lose8 str!ct!re. The winners; the
good learners; are also losers 4eca!se the- will perpet!ate co+petition in
their lives. This is a =ero s!+ ga+e in which ever-one event!all- loses.
Therefore; an ed!cational +ode of cooperation sho!ld s!4stit!te co+petition
a+ong st!dents.
Seventh; st!dents in the twent-)first cent!r- will need a well)developed skill
in e'aluation and critical thin5ing.
#ighth; the f!t!re school +!st 4eco+e a resource distribution center for
creating and spreading !n4iased infor+ation. %odern infor+ation and
co++!nication technolog- has changed the foc!s of ed!cation fro+ the
inp!t of infor+ation to the application of data to pro4le+ sit!ations in a
cooperative and action)oriented environ+ent.
&n a word; what schools sho!ld help st!dents ac?!ire is a wisdo+ that the-
will contin!e to develop for the rest of their lives @see Section 3."A. To
red!ce all the e$periences that lead to it to +astering s5ills for satisfactoril-
answering long series of test ?!estions to o4tain a certificate stating that a
re?!ired c!rric!l!+ has 4een +et is a shallow and inacc!rate representation
of ed!cation.
>(<( A Teaching Paradig! to Meet Psychosocial +eeds
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology ,*
The over!sed traditional frontal teaching paradig+ places responsi4ilit- for
the st!dent learning solel- !pon the sho!lders of the teacher. The instr!ctor
writes the c!rric!l!+ and the s-lla4!s; selects the readings; delivers the
infor+ation via lect!res and prepares eval!ative instr!+ents. She or he
presents the sa+e infor+ation; lect!res to and tests all st!dents regardless of
individ!al differences a+ong the+. ittle or no concern is given to the
individ!al ps-chosocial needs of the individ!al.
6e 5now; however; that st!dents are social individ!als each with vastl-
different needs; learning st-les; goals and a4ilities. So+e st!dents have
inade?!ate reading s5ills. So+e have co+p!ter pho4ia or 75e-4oard fright8.
So+e have diffic!lt- constr!cting si+ple sentences. %an- have 7li4rar-
an$iet-8 or have not the slightest cl!e of how to find infor+ation. ( few
contin!e to e$perience diffic!lt- with co+p!tational s5ills. &s it an- wonder
that the 7sacred8 4ell)shaped c!rve of the nor+al distri4!tion of
achieve+ent predo+inates in the teacherDs grade 4oo5 if the st!dents receive
the sa+e infor+ation via lect!res and all read the sa+e te$t4oo5s9
%ost st!dents pla- a passive role in the classroo+. (ction flows fro+ the
teacher to the st!dents and seldo+ vice versa. So+e st!dents; especiall-
+inorit- st!dents; are isolated fro+ positive social contacts with their
class+ates or their instr!ctor. :thers are sh- and seldo+ if ever spea5 in
class. For e$a+ple; 2arp and <oels @1*B7A fo!nd that in classes of less than
,0 +e+4ers; fo!r to five st!dents acco!nted for 7" percent of all interactions
and in classes of over ,0; two to three st!dents acco!nted for over "0 percent
of all interactions.
1ather than contin!e the traditional teaching strateg- that selects the 4est
st!dents and weeds o!t the poorer ones; we can !se a s-ste+ that c!ltivates
and develops the talents of ever- st!dent. 6e cannot per+it st!dents to leave
o!r classes with an inferior grasp of the s!40ect +atter. #ver- st!dent; not
0!st the elite few; +!st reach the co+petenc- levels set 4- the teacher. This
is not to s!ggest that ed!cators sho!ld prod!ce st!dent ro4ots. The point is
that we cannot 4e content with inferior teaching and inferior learning. 6e
cannot 4e content with a teaching approach that is onl- partl- effective.
&f we wish to help st!dents learn how to thin5 criticall-; to wor5
constr!ctivel- with +e+4ers of their co++!nit-; to en0o- scholarl-
activities and how to e+4ellish their learning e$periences when the- leave
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology "0
the school; we +!st foc!s o!r attention on the individ!al needs of the
st!dent. This shift fro+ si+pl- providing deco+posed lang!age and inert
co!rse content to +eeting ps-chosocial needs of the individ!al st!dent is
what the new teaching paradig+ is a4o!t.
'avid Kohnson @Kohnson et al. 1**1A lists five principal activities that sho!ld
4e incorporated in a new teaching paradig+ str!ct!red to increase st!dent
achieve+ent and; at the sa+e ti+e; +eet ps-chosocial needs of st!dents.
Firstl-; teachers +!st str!ct!re the learning environ+ent to help st!dents
constr!ct; transfor+ and e$tend 5nowledge. 2nowledge is not a static entit-.
&t is an ever)changing varia4le. This is not to infer that 7an-thing goes8; that
there is no 7right8 or 7wrong8. 1elativis+ in this conte$t refers to helping
st!dents to 5eep an open +ind; to 4e willing to listen and to learn; to disc!ss
and arg!e and to co!nteract the dog+atis+ of the +o+ent.
St!dents +!st constr!ct their own 5nowledge and !nderstanding thro!gh
active social interaction with their peers and teachers. earning occ!rs when
the st!dent activates her or his e$isting cognitive sche+ata 4- appl-ing new
5nowledge to practical sit!ations. St!dents gather infor+ation fro+ their
co!rses so the- can !tili=e it in their professional careers as well a their life
as citi=ens. Enfort!natel-; possession of 5nowledge and s5ills alone does not
g!arantee co+prehension. 6itho!t !nderstanding; rote 5nowledge and
ro!tine s5ills serves st!dents poorl-. 'avid Per5ins and his colleag!es at the
3arvard /rad!ate School of #d!cation have adopted a 7perfor+ance
perspective8 on !nderstanding that involves generative perfor+ances; where
learners 7go 4e-ond the infor+ation given8; which 7de+and so+ewhat
different 5inds of thin5ing8 and which are organi=ed in an incre+ental
fashion. 7Enderstanding is not a +atter of Meither -o! get it or -o! donDtD. &t
is open ended and a +atter of degree. <o! can !nderstand a little a4o!t
so+ething @-o! can displa- a few !nderstanding perfor+ancesA or a lot +ore
a4o!t so+ething @-o! can displa- +an- varied !nderstanding
perfor+ancesA; 4!t -o! cannot !nderstand ever-thing a4o!t so+ething
4eca!se there are alwa-s +ore e$trapolations that -o! +ight not have
e$plored and +ight not 4e a4le to +a5e8 @Per5ins 1**2; 7BA.
Enderstanding a concept involves 4eing a4le to e$ec!te a n!+4er of
7perfor+ances8 that de+onstrate the concept in new and novel wa-s. These
perfor+ances +!st consist of applications that ta5e the st!dents far 4e-ond
what the- alread- 5now. Traditional +eas!res of co+prehension s!ch as
+!ltiple)choice ?!estions; tr!eCfalse ?!i==es and conventional short essa-
?!estions; while eas- to +ar5 and assess; do not even 4egin to tap into a
st!dentDs !nderstanding of a topic or concept. :ne de+onstrates oneDs a4ilit-
to swi+ not 4- answering ?!estions a4o!t swi++ing 4!t 4- perfor+ing the
act. The teacher +!st closel- +onitor st!dent learning to ens!re that each
co+petenc- level is +et.
#d!cation is a social process that involves fre?!ent st!dent)to)st!dent and
teacher)to)st!dent interaction. earning is increased when individ!als wor5
with one another in a caring environ+ent that helps each st!dent gain
!nderstanding of the co!rse +aterial. &nteractional peer s!pport is needed to
enco!rage achieve+ent and proper orientation to learning tas5s. Shopov and
Fedotoff @in pressA concl!de; after e$a+ining st!dentsD co!rse eval!ation
reports; that gro!p d-na+ic str!ct!ring interaction 4etween learners can
provide the conditions; which have 4een tho!ght to facilitate learning.
Tho+as and Stoc5 @1*BBA in their st!d- of what +a5es people happ-
o4serve that -o!ng ad!lts associate the word 7friendship8 with heir concept
of happiness. Gonding friendships pro+ote st!dent achieve+ent while
isolation; co+petition and individ!alistic classroo+ activities de+ote
achieve+ent and lower self)estee+.
astl-; the !se of a variet- of s+all)gro!p cooperative activities is the +ost
effective proced!re to enco!rage st!dents to thin5 creativel- in divergent
wa-s that foster new and novel sol!tions to pro4le+s. Gligh @1*72A; in his
review of a4o!t 100 st!dies of college teaching +ethods; fo!nd that st!dents
who participate activel- in disc!ssions with class+ates spend +ore ti+e
s-nthesi=ing and integrating concepts than do st!dents who si+pl- listen to
lect!res. &n al+ost ever- st!d-; the cooperative learning for+at was far
s!perior to co+petitive and individ!alistic learning +odels @Kohnson;
Kohnson and S+ith 1**1A.
&+ple+enting cooperative learning is not an eas- tas5 nor is it witho!t
pro4le+s. The a!thors ca!tion that si+pl- assigning st!dents to s+all gro!ps
with the instr!ction to 4egin disc!ssing a topic or wor5 on a pro0ect +a-
res!lt in little or no st!dent learning. eft !ns!pervised within a loosel-
str!ct!red environ+ent; so+e st!dents +a- choose to 4e !ncooperative
forcing other gro!p +e+4ers to co+plete the wor5. %ore conscientio!s
st!dents +a- feel co+pelled to co+plete the wor5 on their own and act
independentl- of the gro!p. &nsec!re st!dents +a- ass!+e a 74ac5 4ench8
attit!de. :ften; ingro!p str!ggles for power develop. Feichtner and 'avis
@1*B"A concl!ded; after interviewing st!dents who reported negative
e$periences with cooperative learning; that an instr!ctorDs +is!se of and
lac5 of 5nowledge a4o!t str!ct!ring effective cooperative learning activities
is responsi4le for st!dent dissatisfaction.
>(>( actors of "ooperative Learning
( n!+4er of factors or essential ele+ents of cooperative learning; according
to 'onna Kohnson and her colleag!es at the Eniversit- of (ri=ona; T!cson
@1**1A; who have cond!cted e$tensive research concerning effective gro!p
+anage+ent; are necessar- to +a5e cooperative learning s!ccessf!l.
The first factor; #ositi'e interde#endence; +eans that each gro!p +e+4er
depends !pon ever- other gro!p +e+4er to achieve a goal. &f other +e+4ers
have little or nothing to contri4!te; then there is no reason for the gro!p to
e$ist. For e$a+ple; to score points in a 4as5et4all ga+e; each +e+4er
depends !pon the s5ills and a4ilities of the other pla-ers. :ne or two pla-ers
alone cannot win ga+es. The tea+ sin5s or swi+s together as a gro!p. &f one
+e+4er can acco+plish a tas5 satisfactoril- witho!t the aid of others; then
there is no reason to for+ a gro!p.
:ne wa- to str!ct!re an assign+ent to foster a positive interdependent
relationship is to give the st!dents +ore wor5 to do than an- single
individ!al co!ld co+plete within the ti+e li+its allotted. (nother wa- to
enco!rage interdependence is to provide specific infor+ation to two of the
gro!p +e+4ers and different infor+ation to other two +e+4ers. This; two
of the +e+4ers will depend !pon the infor+ation possessed 4- the other two
+e+4ers.
( val!a4le techni?!e to pro+ote interdependence is to assign each +e+4er a
role to perfor+ within the gro!p @see Section 3.,A. ( gro!p leader is
appointed to organi=e; +anage and direct activities. ( recorder ta5es
acc!rate notes and records data for gro!p activities. ( chec5er ass!res that
each +e+4er !nderstands the tas5s or concepts. (n enco!rager is appointed
to +a5e s!re that each +e+4er has a+ple opport!nit- to contri4!te to the
gro!p. Finall-; part of the final grade is derived fro+ the gro!pDs
perfor+ance on the tas5. Th!s; if one +e+4er of the gro!p does not
!nderstand the concepts to 4e learnt; the assess+ent scores of the other
gro!p +e+4ers will s!ffer.
The second factor needed to +a5e cooperative learning s!ccessf!l is face5
to5face #ro$oti'e interaction. Pro+otive interaction occ!rs as st!dents
enco!rage each other; reward one another; provide assistance to help each
other learn; e$change infor+ation and ideas and challenge ideas of other
gro!p +e+4ers. This +a- 4e acco+plished thro!gh tr!sting and caring
relationships for+ed within each gro!p as st!dents interact. &f one st!dent
atte+pts to i+press other st!dents with his or her 5nowledge to increase his
or her self)estee+; positive interaction does not occ!r. There +!st 4e a
caring attit!de of concern for the learning of their peers and a gen!ine
willingness to share infor+ation thro!gh a helping relationship 4efore
positive interactions can occ!r.
&ndivid!al st!dents +!st learn that the- are responsi4le for !nderstanding
the co!rse content. This third factor; referred to as indi'idual accountability;
+!st 4e assessed fre?!entl-. The teacher +a- call at rando+ !pon individ!al
st!dents to answer ?!estions. (lso; individ!al tests are given periodicall- to
eval!ate st!dentsD achieve+ent. &nevita4l-; so+e st!dents e$ploit the gro!p
str!ct!re to avoid wor5ing and let the others do the 4!l5 of the wor5. This
4ehavior is called 7social loafingJ. /ro!p +e+4ers can +onitor individ!al
acco!nta4ilit- 4- constr!cting ?!i==es to each other. 1ecords can 4e 5ept of
the fre?!enc- and ?!alit- of each gro!p +e+4erDs contri4!tion d!ring a
cooperative learning assign+ent. The i+portant point is that there +!st 4e a
s-ste+ to contin!all- assess each st!dentDs 5nowledge and contri4!tion to
ins!re that learning is occ!rring.
G!ilding social collaborati'e skills is the fo!rth i+portant factor. 6e cannot
ass!+e that each st!dent possesses well)developed interpersonal and gro!p
co++!nication s5ills. ( large proportion of st!dents has not had the
e$perience of wor5ing with other st!dents in s+all gro!p activities. So+e
st!dents distr!st others> so+e feel !nco+forta4le wor5ing with +inorit-
st!dents. :thers; to avoid ver4al interaction with peers; prefer to listen rather
than participate; especiall- when the- are a+ong aggressive peers.
The cooperative learning environ+ent; if well organi=ed; provides an
opport!nit- for st!dents to grow sociall- and learn effective gro!p
co++!nication s5ills. The i+portance of +astering these s5ills is
!ndenia4le. &f one of the +ost i+portant +issions of the school is to help
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology ",
st!dents develop wisdo+; then certainl- helping the+ to ac?!ire effective
interactive social s5ills is an i+portant activit-. Teachers sho!ld enco!rage
st!dents to develop these s5ills 4- identif-ing; e$plaining and rewarding
st!dents for engaging in effective social interaction activities. S5ills s!ch as
active listening; t!rn)ta5ing; offering constr!ctive and enco!raging criticis+;
showing concern for the feelings of others and activel- participating in
gro!p disc!ssions are 4!t a few i+portant s5ills st!dents +!st learn 4-
participating in a pro+otive interactive fra+ewor5. 'avid Kohnson and
1oger Kohnson @1*B*A report research findings showing that the co+4ination
of positive interdependence and the !se of effective social s5ills pro+otes
highest achieve+ent a+ong st!dents within a cooperative learning
environ+ent.
The last factor; grou# #rocessing; descri4es the gro!pDs self)eval!ation of
each +e+4erDs contri4!tion. &ndivid!al contri4!tions either help or hinder
achieve+ent of the desired goals. /ro!p processing also incl!des an anal-sis
of i+prove+ents that co!ld 4e +ade to help the gro!p f!nction +ore
effectivel- in the f!t!re. ( co+4ination of teacher and st!dent processing
res!lts in significant i+prove+ent and s!ccess within a cooperative learning
for+at. St!dent interactive eval!ations provide a wa- to +aintain good
wor5ing relationships a+ong gro!p +e+4ers and ens!re that individ!al
+e+4ers receive feed4ac5 a4o!t the ?!alit- of their participation. /ro!p
processing also occ!rs when the instr!ctor provides feed4ac5 to the class
4ased on o4servations of individ!al st!dent contri4!tions. This processing
serves as a +odel for st!dents who are learning how to criti?!e peers
effectivel-. Positive feed4ac5 for wor5 well done creates a feeling of
enth!sias+; of 4eing s!ccessf!l and of increased elf)estee+ a+ong st!dents.
&t is not possi4le to incorporate all these factors within each gro!p enco!nter
4!t the greater the n!+4er of feat!res !sed; the greater the learning.
Cooperative learning fosters growth in +an- areas: learning to !se
interpersonal s5ills effectivel-; !nderstanding and appl-ing the co!rse
content to life sit!ations; developing self)estee+ and a4ilit- to e$plain
concepts to others. These are onl- a few of the o!tco+es res!lting fro+
well)str!ct!red s+all gro!p cooperative activities. 3owever the- are
s!fficient to disting!ish positivel- the cooperative learning paradig+ fro+
the traditional individ!alistic and co+petitive 7lect!re onl-8 teaching.
Kohnson and Kohnson @1*B*A report that in al+ost ever- st!d- cond!cted
d!ring this cent!r- that co+pares the effectiveness of cooperative and
co+petitive learning for+ats; the cooperative +odel res!lts in higher
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology ""
achieve+ent and greater prod!ctivit-; +ore caring co++itted interpersonal
relationships; greater ps-chological health and social co+petence.
>(A( "ooperative Language Learning
&n her 4oo5 0econd Language Learning through Coo#erati'e Learning; K!lie
3igh @1**3A reports her discover- that effective lang!age learning depends
on str!ct!ring social interaction to +a$i+i=e the need to co++!nicate in the
target lang!age. 6e have alwa-s accepted this principle> for e$a+ple; it is
4ehind the theor- and practice of the i++ersion progra+s in .orth (+erica;
the 7foreign lang!age +edi!+ schools8 in G!lgaria; the 7cognitive acade+ic
lang!age learning approach8 @Cha+ot U :D%alle- 1**,A; etc. 6e have
alwa-s 4elieved that +e+ori=ing con0!gations; gra++ar str!ct!res and
voca4!lar- prod!ces at 4est so+e 5nowledge a4o!t a lang!age. 2nowledge
a4o!t a lang!age; however; is ver- different fro+ ac?!iring the lang!age.
K!lie 3igh descri4es a n!+4er of classroo+ activities; which str!ct!re social
interaction in the classroo+. The- are 4ased on a si+ple for+!la:
Str!ct!re O Content Q (ctivit-.
&n fact; K!lie 3igh adapts Spencer 2aganDs original ideas a4o!t cooperative
learning str!ct!res which he calls 7co)op str!ct!res8 in his 4oo5;
Coo#erati'e Learning @1**2A p!4lished 4- his Californian co+pan-; 2agan
Cooperative earning Co. Several s!ch participation str!ct!res; we have
4een !sing in o!r lang!age classes. :!r st!dents love the+; confiding that
achieve+ent sho!ld not 4e divorced fro+ en0o-+ent.
250 >rainstor$ing. This str!ct!re is 4ased on speed; s-nerg-; silliness and
s!pport. The class is divided into tea+s of fo!r st!dents. #ach tea+ +e+4er
has a special role to facilitate the creative potential of 4rainstor+ing and has
a phrase to sa- in the target lang!age that enco!rages her or his partners:
Speed: 7etDs h!rr-Y8
S-nerg-: 7etDs 4!ild on thatY8
Sill-: 7etDs get cra=-Y8
S!pport: 7(ll ideas helpY8
St!dents 4rainstor+ an idea for a while and then all tea+s pair !p and
interview each other.
Pairs Check. Tea+s 4rea5 into two sets of pairs each of which wor5s on a
wor5sheet. :ne st!dent is the pro4le+ solver and the other one is the coach.
The coach helps and chec5s his or her partnerDs wor5. (fter a while; the
tea+s re!nite and the pairs on the tea+ co+pare answers. &f the tea+
disagrees; the- as5 the teacher to help the+. &f the tea+ agrees on the
answer; the- do a tea+ handsha5e. Pairs Chec5 is a partic!larl- good
str!ct!re for practicing new s5ills.
9u$bered Heads Together. This is a fo!r)step cooperative str!ct!re; which
can 4e !sed with an- lang!age teaching content and at vario!s places in a
lesson:
@1A St!dents n!+4er off;
@2A Teacher as5s a ?!estion;
@3A 3eads together;
@,A Teacher calls a n!+4er.
#ach st!dent on a tea+ has a different n!+4er. 3e or she will answer to that
n!+4er when it is called. The teacher for+!lates a ?!estion as a directive;
e.g. 7%a5e s!re ever-one on -o!r tea+ canI8 The st!dents p!t their heads
together and disc!ss the ?!estion !ntil ever-one 5nows the answer. (fter a
while; the teacher will call a n!+4er at rando+ and the st!dents with that
n!+4er raise their hands to 4e called !pon; as in the traditional classroo+.
Co5o# Co5o#. The e+phasis in this str!ct!re is on 4ringing o!t and
no!rishing the nat!ral intelligence; creativeness and e$pressiveness of
st!dents. &n Co)op Co)op; the str!ct!re indicates that we val!e the interests
and a4ilities of the st!dents. This cooperative lang!age learning str!ct!re has
ten steps:
@1A St!dent)centered class disc!ssion. This disc!ssion leads to an
!nderstanding a+ong the teacher and the class a4o!t what the st!dents
want to learn and e$perience in relation to the topic or !nit to 4e covered.
@2A Selection of st!dent learning tea+s.
@3A Tea+4!ilding and cooperative s5ill develop+ent. This is an i+portant
phase in which the +e+4ers of each tea+ feel the- are a 7we8 and have
developed tr!st and co++!nication s5ills.
@,A Tea+ topic selection. The tea+ +e+4ers settle on the topic of +ost
interest to the+selves as a gro!p.
@"A %ini)topic selection. The tea+ +e+4ers divide the topic of the tea+ into
+ini)topics for each +e+4er to wor5 on.
@6A %ini)topic preparation. &ndivid!al st!dents wor5 on their own topics.
@7A %ini)topic presentations. &ndivid!al st!dents present their own topics to
their tea++ates.
@BA Preparation of tea+ presentations. The tea+ disc!sses and integrates the
+aterial presented in the previo!s step in order to prepare their tea+
presentations.
@*A Tea+ presentations.
@10A 1eflection and eval!ation. St!dents reflect on their wor5 and their
achieve+ents. The whole class eval!ates tea+ presentations. &ndivid!al
presentations are eval!ated 4- tea++ates.
1esearch on teaching has shown that whole)class disc!ssion; individ!al
seatwor5 and lect!re prevail as the favorite organi=ational str!ct!res in the
traditional classroo+. &n relation to participation str!ct!res which pro+ote
+eaningf!l interaction; Spencer 2agan +aintains that 4- participating in
planned for+ats 7st!dents 4eco+e responsi4le for learning and sharing what
the- have learnt. The str!ct!re prepares st!dents for participation in a
de+ocratic societ-8 @2agan 1**2A. (nd he goes on; 73ow we str!ct!re a
classroo+ is an i+portant; perhaps the +ost i+portant; for+ of
co++!nication we +a5e to st!dents. &f we str!ct!re the classroo+ so that
the goal of learning is a good tea+ score; we co++!nicate that the +ost
i+portant val!e is a co+petitive victor-. &f we str!ct!re so that the teacher is
in f!ll control of what and how st!dents st!d-; we co++!nicate that
st!dents are e+pt- or that their intelligence and c!riosit- are not val!ed. &f
we choose an a!tocratic a!thorit- str!ct!re; we co++!nicate a lac5 of faith
in the potential of st!dents to choose positive directions for develop+ent. G-
ta5ing f!ll responsi4ilit- for st!dentsD learning; we leave the+ none. 6e do
not leave st!dents roo+ to co+e o!t and 4eco+e f!ll- engaged in the
learning process8. Th!s; planning participation str!ct!res at the +icro)level
of lang!age teaching is seen as an aspect of 7precision teaching8.
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology "B
"hapter A' The Language "urriculu!
Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology "*
The ter+ curriculu$ has 4een in #nglish !sage for a long ti+e @see Kosef
'olch 1*"*; ?!oted in 2ansanen 1**"; 101A. &n /er+an; it was s!4stit!ted
for the ter+ Plan and later in the eighteenth cent!r-; for the ter+ Lehr#lan
@see 2ansanen 1**" for a detailed st!d- of the develop+ent of this
constr!ctA. 7C!rric!l!+8 co+es fro+ atin and +eans 7a r!nning; co!rse;
race8. The no!n is related to the ver4 7c!rrere8 which +eans; 7to r!n8. (
%odern #nglish dictionar- defines 7c!rric!l!+8 in the following wa-: 7all
of the co!rses; collectivel-; offered in a school; college; etc. or in a partic!lar
s!40ect8 @6e4sterDs .ew 6orld 'ictionar- 1*BBA. (s is seen fro+ the
definition; the ter+ is co++onl- !sed in two related senses. &t refers to @aA a
progra++e of st!d- at an ed!cational instit!tion or s-ste+ and @4A content
in a partic!lar s!40ect or co!rse of st!dies. &n the latter sense; 7c!rric!l!+8
is s-non-+o!s with the Gritish ter+ 7s-lla4!s8. &n fact; the !se of the two
ter+s in #!rope and .orth (+erica has ca!sed a great deal of conf!sion in
second lang!age teaching. 6ithin the fra+ewor5 of the Te+p!s Sche+e of
the Co++ission of the #!ropean Co++!nities; '/ RR&& F #d!cation;
Training and <o!th; the following definitions for the ter+s; curriculu$,
course and syllabus are !sed. Curriculu$ is the totalit- of an organised
learning e$perience> it provides the concept!al str!ct!re and a set ti+e fra+e
to ac?!ire a recognisa4le degree; and descri4es its overall content; e.g. the
c!rric!l!+ of a five)-ear degree progra++e in 7%echanical #ngineering8 at
a certain higher ed!cation instit!tion. Course is the totalit- of an organised
learning e$perience in a precisel- defined area; e.g. the co!rse on 7Fl!id
'-na+ics8 within the c!rric!l!+ 7%echanical #ngineering8. 0yllabus is the
prescription of details on a specific co!rse; s!ch as what will 4e learnt @and
whenA the te$ts to 4e read; the areas in which e$pertise is e$pected to 4e
de+onstrated.
6e need to esta4lish a clear distinction 4etween the ter+s. 3ere is a
definition 4- K. P. G. (llen; which is ade?!ate to o!r p!rposes: 7c!rric!l!+
is a ver- general concept which involves considerations of the whole
co+ple$ of philosophical; social and ad+inistrative factors which contri4!te
to the planning of an ed!cational progra++e> s-lla4!s; on the other hand;
refers to that s!4part of c!rric!l!+ which is concerned with a specification
of what !nits will 4e ta!ght8.
3ere; we are interested in the ed!cational aspects of c!rric!l!+ design and
develop+ent. G!t let !s consider an e$a+ple fro+ recent histor- of
ed!cation first.
3ere is an e$cerpt fro+ the so)called 0i$an Act; .e4ras5a egislat!re;
E.S.(.; (pril 1*1*; 7.o person shall I teach an- s!40ect to an- person in
an- lang!age other than the #nglish lang!age. ang!ages other than the
#nglish lang!age +a- 4e ta!ght as lang!age onl- after a p!pil shall have I
passed the eighth grade8. The case of Meyer 'ersus 0tate of 9ebraska was
4ased on the Si+an (ct. 1o4ert T. %e-er was arrested for teaching /er+an
to a ten)-ear)old 4o- in .e4ras5a on 2" %a- 1*20. 3is case reached the
E.S. S!pre+e Co!rt; which r!led on , K!ne 1*23 that anti)foreign)lang!age
laws were in violation of the 1,
th
(+end+ent of the Constit!tion. The
+a0orit- decision stated; 7.o e+ergenc- has arisen which renders
5nowledge 4- a child of so+e lang!age other than #nglish so clearl-
har+f!l as to 0!stif- its inhi4ition8.
This and +another e$a+ples indicate that +odern foreign lang!ages; and
all other disciplines for that +atter; as a school s!40ect sho!ld not 4e ta5en
for granted. &n relation to that; Kohn Clar5 @1*B7A as5s several i+portant
?!estions: 7whether to incl!de lang!ages other than the +other tong!e in the
school c!rric!l!+> which lang!ages to incl!de> to who+ to teach the+ and
for how long> what o40ectives to see5 to achieve8. The answers; according to
hi+; sho!ld 4e so!ght in the partic!lar ed!cational val!e s-ste+ of societ-
at a partic!lar +o+ent in ti+e. Gednar et al. @1**2; 1*A propose that
7&nstr!ctional design and develop+ent +!st 4e 4ased !pon so+e theor- of
learning andCor cognition> effective design is possi4le onl- if the developer
has developed refle$ive awareness of the theoretical 4asis !nderl-ing the
design8.
A($( "onstructivis!
Constructi'is$ is a theor- of leaning and instr!ction that 7e+phasi=es the
real)world co+ple$it- and ill)str!ct!redness of +an- 5nowledge do+ains8
@Spiro et al. 1**2; "7A. Constr!ctivist view of cognition contends that
learning is a process of personal interpretation of e$perience and
constr!ction of 5nowledge. Constr!ctivists adopt the notion of 6ittgenstein
that conte$t is an integral part of +eaning. 7earning is an active process in
which +eaning is developed on the 4asis of e$perience8 @Gednar et al. 1**2;
21A. Constr!ctivis+ is an alternative episte+ological perspective to
obecti'is$ @see a5off 1*B7A.
Constr!ctivis+ in lang!age ed!cation has 4een e$plored e$tensivel- 4-
Seppo Tella and his colleag!es at the %edia #d!cation Center; Eniversit- of
3elsin5i. The- relate constr!ctivis+ to the concept of dialogis+: 7dialog!e
is a cr!cial ele+ent in the creation of an- lang!age organi=ation and
especiall- in esta4lishing an open +!li+edia 4ased colla4orative and
networ5ed learning environ+ent. &t s!ggests that the learning environ+ent
in the fra+ewor5 of dialogis+ cannot 4e a ph-sical space; a classroo+; nor
an- partic!lar +edia ed!cation tool. The learning environ+ent is F dialog!e8
@Tella U %ononen)(altonen 1**B; 103A. Tella @1**B; 117A cites seven
ingredients needed to pro+ote dialogic ed!cation: <a= #resence, <b=
unantici#ated conse(uences, <c= otherness, <d= 'ulnerability, <e= $utual
i$#lication, <f= te$#oral flo%, <g= authenticity.
Theor- of constr!ctivis+ has 4een developing and new versions have 4een
e+erging. 9eo5constructi'ists of the cognitive school 4elieve that 7@aA
!nderstandings are constr!cted 4- !sing prior 5nowledge to go 4e-ond the
infor+ation given> and @4A the prior 5nowledge that is 4ro!ght to 4ear is
itself constr!cted; rather than retrieved fro+ +e+or-; on a case)4-)case
4asis8 @Spiro et al. 1**2; 6,A. 0ocial constructi'ists foc!s on social
interaction in the co++!nit- as a so!rce of 5nowledge. Social
constr!ctivis+ has 4een descri4ed 4- G!rton; %oore and %agliaro @1**6;
,BA.
Ki+ C!++ins @1**,; ,BA descri4es the pedagogical and social ass!+ptions
!nderl-ing ed!cator role definitions in lang!age teaching @Fig!re 1 and
Fig!re 2A. 3e disting!ishes the o40ectivist fro+ the constr!ctivist positions
in +ethodolog- @the trans+ission vers!s critical orientationA and in
sociolog- @the social control vers!s social transfor+ation orientationA.
C!++ins concl!des; 7#d!catorsD role definitions reflect their vision of
societ-; and i+plicated in that societal vision are their own identities and
those of the st!dents with who+ the- interact. The o!tco+e of this process
for 4oth ed!cator and st!dent can 4e descri4ed in ter+s of e$#o%er$ent.
#+power+ent can th!s 4e regarded as the colla4orative creation of power
insofar as it constit!tes the process where4- st!dents and ed!cators
colla4orativel- create 5nowledge and identit- thro!gh action foc!sed on
personal and social transfor+ation8 @C!++ins 1**,; ""A.
Trans$ission Brientation:
ang!age F 'eco+posed;
2nowledge F &nert;
earning F 3ierarchical internali=ation fro+ si+ple to co+ple$.
Critical Brientation:
ang!age F %eaningf!l;
2nowledge F Catal-tic;
earning F Koint interactive constr!ction thro!gh critical in?!ir- within the
=one of pro$i+al develop+ent.
Fig!re 1: #d!cator Pedagogical (ss!+ptions @C!++ins 1**,; ,BA
0ocial Control Brientation:
C!rric!lar Topics F .e!trali=ed with respect to societal power relations;
St!dent :!tco+es F Co+pliant and !ncritical.
0ocial Transfor$ation Brientation:
C!rric!lar Topics F Foc!ssed on iss!es relevant to societal power relations;
St!dent :!tco+es F #+powered; critical.
Fig!re 2: #d!cator Social (ss!+ptions @C!++ins 1**,; ,BA
.icholas G!r4!les @1**7; BA +aintains that teaching 7is not a process of
conversion; 4!t of translation: of +a5ing s!fficient associations 4etween the
fa+iliar and the foreign to allow the learner to +a5e f!rther associations; to
find other paths; and event!all- to 4eco+e a translator; a path)+a5er; on
their own. earning how to as5 a good ?!estion is in one sense the central
tas5; -et one that is al+ost never ta!ght e$plicitl-; and rarel- ta!ght at all.8
&n concl!sion; we clai+ that the i+plications for lang!age c!rric!l!+ design
are ?!ite straightforward. :ne is that content cannot 4e predeter+ined.
Perhaps learning o40ectives cannot 4e pre)specified either. The c!rric!l!+
developer cannot define the 4o!ndaries of what +a- 4e relevant. (ll he or
she can do is plan a!thentic; real)world tas5s; which will provide the
necessar- and s!fficient conte$ts for the learners to reali=e their o40ectives
and constr!ct their 5nowledge. This can 4e achieved 4- providing a
colla4orative learning environ+ent 4ased on co++!nicative interaction
containing s!fficient co+prehensi4le lang!age inp!t and o!tp!t.
A(<( The 9eneral versus Specific "ourses "onBecture
&n the earl- seventies; (nthon- 3owatt stated; 7Special co!rses have fairl-
specific o40ectives and are rather si+pler to disc!ss. /eneral co!rses tend to
4e diff!se in their ai+s and ta5e their overall shape +ore fro+ tradition;
conte+porar- fashion and the vag!e 4!t powerf!l infl!ences e$erted 4- the
social attit!des and econo+ic needs of the co++!nit-8 @1*7,A. &n fact; the
distinction is e+4edded in the o40ectivist tradition of lang!age teaching. &t is
4est e$pressed 4- 6illia+ %ac5e- @1*6"A in his fa+o!s clai+ that there is
no lang!age teaching witho!t 7selection; gradation; presentation and
repetition8 of the content. &n that period; techni?!es li5e fre?!enc-; coverage
and availa4ilit- were applied in the process of choosing co++on ever-da-
lang!age for 7co++!nicative s-lla4i8. &n addition; the notion of
7appropriate lang!age8 was !sed as a criterion of !sef!lness. The
organi=ation of the co!rse was 4ased on a #riori decisions on the order in
which 7new teaching points sho!ld co+e8 and on 7how +!ch to teach8. The
+ethod of needs identification was developed 4- a Swiss scholar; 1ene
1ichterich @1ichterich U Chancerel 1*77A. ( Gritish ling!ist; Kohn %!n4-
@1*7BA; ela4orated the theor- and +ethodolog- of lang!age needs anal-sis
and c!rric!l!+ design. ang!age co!rses for specific p!rposes @e.g. #nglish
for Specific P!rposes or 7#SP8A were represented 4- their proponents as an
alternative to general co!rses.
The English in !ocus series of 7specialist #nglish +aterials for st!dents who
!se #nglish as the +edi!+ of instr!ction for the s!40ect the- are st!d-ing8
was p!4lished in #ngland in the seventies @e.g. (llen U 6iddowson 1**,A.
The a!thors wrote; 7The series ass!+es that st!dents have alread-
co+pleted a 4asic co!rse in #nglish and that the- have so+e 5nowledge of
their specialist s!40ect. This co!rse is therefore intended for st!dents WIX
who alread- 5now how to handle the co++on #nglish sentence patterns and
who need to learn how these sentences are !sed in scientific writing to
conve- infor+ationI8 @op. cit.A. The co!rse had a great s!ccess 4eca!se the
approach adopted was new.
Peter Strevens o!tlined the 7new orientations in the teaching of #nglish8 and
of an- lang!age for that +atter in the +id)seventies. So+e ten -ears 4efore;
he had p!4lished one of the +ost s!ccessf!l a!dio)ling!al te$t4oo5s;
English DE. @see Section 1.2.A. The ti+es had changed tho!gh. Strevens
arg!ed; 7Groadl- defined; #SP co!rses are those in which the ai$s and the
content are deter$ined; principall- or wholl-; not 4- criteria of general
ed!cation @as when M#nglishD is a foreign lang!age s!40ect in schoolA 4!t 4-
f!nctional and practical #nglish lang!age re?!ire+ents of the learner8
@Strevens 1*77; *0A. This was certainl- new a ?!arter of a cent!r- ago 4!t
toda- we find the con0ect!re rather +isleading.
&t see+s to !s; at this 0!nction; that the +ethodological opposition of
7general p!rposes8 to 7specific p!rposes8 in lang!age teaching is inade?!ate
and inappropriate. 6e do not thin5 that 7the ai+s and the content are
deter+ined8 a #riori 4- an- criteria. The- cannot 4e preco+piled or
prepac5aged. 6e can discern two arg!+ents in the literat!re to s!pport this
strong clai+. :ne refers to the fact that lang!age teaching is a co+ple$
process characteri=ed 4- networ5 of relationships in a social and c!lt!ral
conte$t and the other to the idea that lang!age teaching is an ill)str!ct!red
5nowledge do+ain. 6e clai+ that a holistic a##roach; which e+phasi=es
the priorit- of the whole over its parts; can solve the pro4le+ of c!rric!l!+
design.
&n that respect; an i+prove+ent on the theor- of c!rric!l!+ design has 4een
offered 4- 1and Spiro and his colleag!es at the Eniversit- of &llinois in their
theor- of &ando$ Access ,nstruction @Spiro et al. 1**2A. 6e shall disc!ss
this theor- in the ne$t section.
A(>( 6ando! Access )nstruction in "o!ple1 and )ll0Structured
:no&ledge 4o!ains
&ando$ Access ,nstruction is a theor-; which acco!nts for the co+ple$it- of
the process of lang!age learning and the ill)str!ct!redness of the do+ain of
lang!age 5nowledge andCor proficienc-.
#ve Sweetser and /illes Fa!connier @1**6A +aintain that 7The initiall-
overwhel+ing co+ple$it- of ling!istic !sages is; then; not an independent
and a!tono+o!s co+ple$it-. &t is a reflection of the co+ple$ F and
econo+icall- interrelated F str!ct!re of cognition8.
#ric enne4erg sees lang!age proficienc- as a process of 7@aA e$tracting
relations fro+ @or co+p!ting relations inA the ph-sical environ+ent; and @4A
of relating these relationships8 @enne4erg 1*7"; 17A. Contin!o!s; not
discrete; cognitive and ph-siological processes prod!ce those relationships.
enne4erg arg!es pers!asivel- that 7These deeper contin!ities Wthe
contin!o!s cognitive and ph-siological processesX are reflected in the
7f!==-8 nat!re of se+antic; s-ntactic and phonological categories; +a5ing
sharp; for+al distinctions and decisions diffic!lt8 @op. cit.; 17A. 3e concl!des
that 7ever-thing in lang!age is of relational nat!re and what has to 4e learnt
in lang!age ac?!isition is ho% to relate; or how to co+p!te a relationship
!pon given ph-sical data8 @op. cit.; 32A.
Constr!ctivists hold that 7Characteristics of ill)str!ct!redness fo!nd in +ost
5nowledge do+ains @especiall- when 5nowledge application is consideredA
lead to serio!s o4stacles to the attain+ent of advanced learning goals @s!ch
as the +aster- of concept!al co+ple$it- and the a4ilit- to independentl- !se
instr!cted 5nowledge in new sit!ations that differ fro+ the conditions of
initial instr!ctionA. These o4stacles can 4e overco+e 4- shifting fro+ a
constr!ctive orientation that e+phasi=es the retrieval fro+ +e+or- of intact
pree$isting 5nowledge to an alternative constr!ctivist stance which stresses
the fle$i4le reasse+4ling of pree$isting 5nowledge to adaptivel- fit the
needs of a new sit!ation. &nstr!ction 4ased on this new constr!ctivist
orientation can pro+ote the develop+ent of cognitive fle$i4ilit- !sing
theor-)4ased h-perte$t s-ste+s that the+selves possess characteristics of
fle$i4ilit- that +irror those desired for the learner8 @Spiro et al. 1**2; "*A.
Co+ple$ and ill)str!ct!red do+ains have two properties: 7@aA each case or
e$a+ple of 5nowledge application t-picall- involves the si+!ltaneo!s
interactive involve+ent of +!ltiple; wide)application concept!al str!ct!res
@+!ltiple sche+as; perspectives; organi=ational principles and so onA; each
of which is individ!all- co+ple$ @i.e. the do+ain involves concept) and
case)co+ple$it-A> and @4A the pattern of concept!al incidence and interaction
varies s!4stantiall- across cases no+inall- of the sa+e t-pe @i.e. the do+ain
involves across)case irreg!larit-A8 @Spiro et al. 1**2; 60A. For e$a+ple; 4asic
gra++ar is well str!ct!red; while the process of appl-ing gra++ar r!les in
real)world co++!nication is ill str!ct!red.
1ando+ (ccess &nstr!ction can 4e represented 4- the +etaphor of a
rhi=o+e; spreading in all directions. &t was first !sed 4- /illes 'ele!=e and
Feli$ /!attari in the 4oo5 Bn the Line as a +ethod of organi=ing
infor+ation @?!oted in G!r4!les 1**7A. Seppo Tella !ses it to descri4e open
learning environ+ents 4ased on a co++!nal ed!cational val!e s-ste+. 3e
+aintains that 7it Wrhi=o+eX trans+its the idea of so+ething growing;
so+ething developing; -et it gives a+ple scope for individ!al action and
decision)+a5ing8 and s!ggests that 7a rhi=o+e is a rhi=o+e is a rhi=o+eI8
@Tella et al. 1**B; 132A. .icholas G!r4!les @1**7; 3A holds that 7#ach
partic!lar step or lin5 within a rhi=o+atic whole can 4e conceived as a line
4etween two points; 4!t the o'erall pattern is not linear; 4eca!se there is no
4eginning and end; no center and peripher-; to 4e traced8.
1ando+ (ccess &nstr!ction is a rhi=o+atic s-ste+. &t can 4e applied in the
design of nonlinear learning environ+ents; which we shall present in the
ne$t section.
A(A( Language "urriculu! as a :no&ledge Strategic Hyperte1t
6hat is 75nowledge8 and what does 75nowledge strateg-8 +ean9 Tella
@Tella et al. 1**B; 26A +aintains that 5nowledge is to 4e 7!nderstood as
+ental infor+ation str!ct!res +odified 4- the individ!al on the 4asis of
thin5ing and earlier 5nowledge8. Clearl-; 5nowledge is not si+pl- data and
infor+ation. Tella defines kno%ledge strategy as the 7long)ter+ +ethodical
reflection WIX; which finds concrete e$pression as operational proced!res or
tactical +eas!res; slogans; goals; for+s of operation; wor5ing +ethods
arising fro+ disc!ssion a4o!t val!es; and eval!ation +eas!res connected
with the+8. 3e e+phasi=es the view that 7instead of si+pl- refor+ing their
c!rric!l!+; we thin5 schools and +!nicipalities sho!ld progress towards
developing their 5nowledge strategic thin5ing8 @Tella et al. 1**B; 2"A.
6e define the Fno%ledge 0trategic Hy#ertext @2S3A as a nonlinear and
non5se(uential lang!age c!rric!l!+ +odel 4ased on constr!ctivist
episte+olog- and the idea of 5nowledge strateg- @Fig!re 3A. The ter+ $odel
is e+plo-ed here so+ewhat loosel-. &t is a wa- to +a5e clear how o!r
h-pothesis hangs together to +a5e a coherent e$planation. (s far as the
co+ponents of the 2S3 are concerned; their n!+4er is !nli+ited. That
reflects the co+ple$it- and ill)str!ct!redness of the lang!age proficienc-
do+ain. &n s!ch a nonlinear and non)se?!ential learning environ+ent; each
ele+ent is related to all other ele+ents. The 2S3 is a net%ork $odel; which
allows the !ser to +ove fro+ node to node following the lin5s 4etween
the+. .odes store ling!istic; etc.; infor+ation and lin5s represent se+antic
associations 4etween the nodes. earning is seen as a process that +odifies
the infor+ation str!ct!res in specified wa-s !nder specified conditions.
The se+antic nat!re of the lin5s in the 2S3 for+s the 4asis of the +odel.
This is s!pported 4- scientific research; which has shown that the +ind
holds +e+ories se+anticall-; according to +eaning @Fa!connier U
SweetserA.
The +odel acco++odates two conditions for learning; which are necessar-
and s!fficient. The first is the auto$atic #rocessing passivel- invo5ed 4- the
inco+ing data. (nd the second is the acti'e control of the inco+ing data.
Th!s; the 2S3 can predict what parts of the inp!t wo!ld 4e accepted and
what wo!ld 4e t!ned o!t. The constr!ctive process leads the !ser 74e-ond
the infor+ation given8 @Per5ins 1**2A 4- reconstr!cting infor+ation itself.
&n Fig!re 3; we present o!r 2S3 lang!age c!rric!l!+ +odel incl!ding
co++!nicative lang!age co+petence; lang!age activities; do+ains; etc. &t
has 4een developed !nder the LAC /EEE Proect @Shopov 1***A. The +odel
contains co+ponents derived fro+ the definition of lang!age 4ehavio!r in
Modern Languages: Learning, Teaching, and Assess$ent: A Co$$on
Euro#ean !ra$e%ork of &eference @C#FA. &t is p!4licl- accessi4le on the
we4)site http:CCc!lt!re.coe.frClang.
The C#F provides:
7@aA ( descriptive sche+e; presenting and e$e+plif-ing the para+eters and
categories needed to descri4e; first; what a lang!age !ser has to do in order
to co++!nicate in its sit!ational conte$t; then the role of the texts; which
carr- the +essage fro+ prod!cer to receiver; then the !nderl-ing
co$#etences, which ena4le a lang!age !ser to perfor+ acts of
co++!nication; and finall- the strategies, which ena4le the lang!age !ser to
4ring those co+petences to 4ear in action>
@4A ( s!rve- of the approaches to lang!age learning and teaching; providing
options for !sers to consider in relation to their e$isting practice>
@cA ( set of scales for descri4ing proficienc- in lang!age !se; 4oth glo4all-
and in relation to the categories of the descriptive sche+e at a series of
le'els>
@dA ( disc!ssion of the iss!es raised for curricular design in different
ed!cational conte$ts; with partic!lar reference to the develop+ent of
#lurilingualis$ in the learner8 @Tri+ 1***; *A.
&n the C#F; the general co$#etences of the individ!al are defined 4- 7the
5nowledge; s5ills and e$istential co+petence @savoir)etreA he or she
possesses; and the a4ilit- to learn8.
Three co+ponents constit!te co$$unicati'e language co$#etence. The- are
the ling!istic co+ponent; the socio)ling!istic co+ponent and the prag+atic
co+ponent.
Language acti'ities are the act!al 4ehaviors in which lang!age is !sed. The-
are reception; prod!ction; interaction or +ediation @in partic!lar interpreting
or translatingA in oral or written for+; or 4oth.
The do$ains, in which activities are conte$t!ali=ed; are the p!4lic do+ain;
the personal do+ain; the ed!cational do+ain and the occ!pational do+ain.
Tasks, strategies and texts co+plete this +odel of lang!age !se and learning.
(ll these constr!cts are defined in Chapter 3 of the C#F.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ Starting level of 2 proficienc- ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Personal
do+ain
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ Starting level of 2 proficienc- ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Fig!re 3: The 2S3 c!rric!l!+ +odel; incl!ding the nodes and lin5s of
co++!nicative lang!age co+petence; lang!age activities; do+ains; etc.
This is o4vio!sl- a co+prehensive and e$ha!stive +odel. 3owever; with its
1B ele+ents in 7 categories; it is a co+ple$ one. Stochastic theor- esti+ates
the possi4le co+4inations of the ele+ents at 163 @1B ti+es 17; divided 4- 1
Sociolin
g!istic
co+pon
ent
ing!isti
c
co+pon
ent
Prag+ati
c
co+pon
ent
#+pt-
4eca!se
+odel is
open
Prod!cti
on
&nteracti
on
%ediatio
n
P!4lic
do+ain
:cc!pati
onal
do+ain
#d!catio
nal
do+ain
1eceptio
n
ti+e 2A. These 163 co+4inations prod!ce an infinite n!+4er of concrete
instances of lang!age !se. Therefore; in o!r opinion; onl- a 2S3 approach
to c!rric!l!+ design can g!arantee ?!alit- in second lang!age develop+ent.
The +odel proposed is 4ased on the idea of %hole language develop+ent.
The 2S3 incl!des lang!age st-les and registers incorporating the+ into 7a
for+ of +etaling!istic; interling!istic or so to spea5 Mh-perling!isticD
awareness8 @C#F; *7A. This leads to a 4etter perception of what is general
and what is s#ecific concerning the ling!istic organi=ation of the target
lang!age. So each co+ponent of the +odel +a- 4eco+e the starting point
for the !se of the 2S3.
A(C( )nstead of a "onclusion
76hatever the st-le; there are a+ple opport!nities to orient instr!ction
toward higher levels of !nderstanding; introd!ce and e$ercise lang!ages of
thin5ing; c!ltivate intellect!al passions; see5 o!t integrative +ental i+ages;
foster learning to learn and teach for transfer. The s+art school +a5es the
+ost of these opport!nities. &t infor+s and energi=es teaching 4- giving
teachers ti+e and s!pport to learn a4o!t the opport!nities and 4- arranging
c!rric!l!+; assess+ent and sched!ling to enco!rage tapping the+.8 @Per5ins
1**2; 130A
6eferences
(44s; Grian; Hivian Coo5 and %ar- Enderwood; 1*6B; 1ealistic #nglish; ondon:
:$ford Eniversit- Press.
(latis; Ka+es #.; 3oward G. (lt+an and Penelope %. (latis; 1*B1; The Second
ang!age Classroo+: 'irections for the 1*B0s; .ew <or5: :$ford Eniversit- Press.
(llen; K. P. G. and S. Pit Corder @#ds.A; 1*73 ) 1*77; The #din4!rgh Co!rse in (pplied
ing!istics; Hol!+e 1 F ,; :$ford: :$ford Eniversit- Press.
(llen; K. P. G. and 3. /. 6iddowson @#ds.A; 1*73 ) 1*77; #nglish in Foc!s; :$ford:
:$ford Eniversit- Press.
(sher; Ka+es; 1*77 @Second #dition 1*B2A; earning (nother ang!age thro!gh (ctions:
The Co+plete TeacherDs /!ide4oo5. California: S5- :a5 Prod!ctions.
Gednar; (nne; '. C!nningha+; T. %. '!ff- and K. '. Perr-; 1**2; Theor- into Practice:
3ow 'o 6e in59 &n '!ff- and Konassen 1**2.
Glair; 1. 6. @#d.A; 1*B2; &nnovative (pproaches to ang!age Teaching; %assach!setts:
.ew4!r- 3o!se.
Gligh; '.; 1*72; 6hatDs the Ese of ect!res. %iddlese$: Peng!in Goo5s td.
Gloo+field; eonard; 1*33; ang!age; .ew <or5: 3olt; 1inehart U 6inston.
Gloo+field; eonard; 1*,2; :!tline /!ide for the Practical St!d- of Foreign ang!ages;
Galti+ore: ing!istic Societ- of (+erica.
Grown; 1oger; 1*7,; ( First ang!age: The #arl- Stages; Ca+4ridge; %assach!setts:
3advard Eniversit- Press.
Grown; 3. 'o!glas; 1**,a; Principles of ang!age earning and Teaching; Third
#dition; .ew Kerse-: Prentice 3all 1egents.
Grown; 3. 'o!glas; 1**,4; Teaching 4- Principles: (n &nteractive (pproach to ang!age
Pedagog-; .ew Kerse-: Prentice 3all 1egents.
G!r4!les; .icholas; 1**7; (poria: 6e4s; Passages; /etting ost; and earning to /o :n;
6e4)site http:CCwww.ed.!i!c.ed!CP#SC*7[docsC4!r4!les.ht+l.
G!rton; K; '. %oore and S. %agliaro; 1**6; Gehavioris+ and &nstr!ctional Technolog-;
&n '. 3. Konassen 1**6.
Ca=den; C. G. and 1. Grown; 1*7"; The #arl- 'evelop+ent of the %other Tong!e; &n
enne4erg and enne4erg 1*7".
Cha+ot; (nna Ehl and K. %ichael :D%alle-; 1**,; The C(( 3and4oo5.
&+ple+enting the Cognitive (cade+ic ang!age earning (pproach; %assach!setts:
(ddison)6esle- P!4lishing Co+pan-.
Cho+s5-; ..; 1*66; Topics in the Theor- of /enerative /ra++ar; The 3ag!e: %o!ton.
Cho+s5-; ..; 1*6B; anga!ge and %ind; .ew <or5: 3arco!rt; Grace and 6orld.
Clar5; Kohn .; 1*B7; C!rric!l!+ 1enewal in School Foreign ang!age earning;
:$ford: :$ford Eniversit- Press.
Coo5; Hivian; 1*B*; Eniversit- of #sse$; Personal Co++!nication.
Corder; S. Pit; 1*B2; &ntrod!cing (pplied ing!istics; 3ar+ondsworth: Peng!in Goo5s.
C!++ins; Ki+; 1**,; 2nowledge; Power and &dentit- in Teaching #nglish as a Second
ang!age; &n /enesee 1**,.
C!rran; Charles; 1*76; Co!ncelling)earning in Second ang!ages; (pple 1iver; &llinois:
(pple 1iver Press.
'ewe-; Kohn; 1*3B; #$perience and #d!cation; .ew <or5: %ac+illan.
'!ff-; Tho+as %. and 'avid 3. Konassen @#ds.A; 1**2; Constr!ctivis+ and the
Technolog- of &nstr!ction: ( Conversation; .ew Kerse-: awrence #rl4a!+ (ssociates;
P!4lishers.
'!la-; 3eidi and %arina G!rt; 1*7,; .at!ral Se?!ences in Child Second ang!age
(c?!isition; ang!age earning 2,; 37)"3.
#c5+an; F. 1.; . Gell and '. .elson; 1*BB; :n the /enerali=ation of 1elative Cla!se
&nstr!ction in the (c?!isition of #nglish as a Second ang!age; (pplied ing!istics; Hol.
*; .o. 1; :$ford: :$ford Eniversit- Press; 1)20.
Sweetser; #ve and /illes Fa!connier @#ds.A; 1**6; Spaces; 6orlds; and /ra++ar;
Chicago: The Eniversit- of Chicago Press.
Fries; C.; 1*,"; Teaching and earning #nglish as a Foreign ang!age; (nn (r4or;
%ichigan: Eniversit- of %ichigan Press.
/ardner; 3oward; 1**1; The Enschooled %ind; .ew <or5: Gasic Goo5s.
/attegno; Cale4; 1*72; Teaching Foreign ang!ages in Schools: The Silent 6a-. Second
#dition; .ew <or5: #d!cational Sol!tions.
/enesee; Fred @#d.A; 1**,; #d!cating Second ang!age Children; Ca+4ridge:
Ca+4ridge Eniversit- Press.
/oodlad; Kohn &. and Pa+ela 2eating @#ds.A; 1**0; (ccess to 2nowledge; .ew <or5: The
College Goard.
/ood+an; 2.; . Gird and <. /ood+an; 1**1; The 6hole ang!age Catalog; Santa 1osa;
California: (+erican School P!4lishers.
3igh; K!lie; 1**3; Second ang!age earning thro!gh Cooperative earning; California:
2agan Cooperative earning.
3owatt; (nthon-; 1*B,; ( 3istor- of #nglish ang!age Teaching; :$ford: :$ford
Eniversit- Press.
3-+es; '.; 1*71; :n Co++!nicative Co+petence; &n Pride and 3ol+es 1*72.
Kohnson; '. 6. and 1. Kohnson; 1*B*; Cooperation and Co+petition. Theor- and
1esearch; %innesota: &nteraction Goo5 Co.
Kohnson; '. 6.; 1. Kohnson and 2. S+ith; 1**1; (ctive earning; %innesota: &nteraction
Goo5 Co.
Konassen; '. 3. @#d.A; 1**6; 3and4oo5 of 1esearch for #d!cational Co++!nications and
Technolog-; .ew <or5: Si+on and Sch!ster %ac+illan.
2agan; Spencer; 1**2; Cooperative earning; California: 2agan Cooperative earning.
2ansanen; Pertti; 1**"; The 6eutsche 6idaktik and the (+erican 1esearch on Teaching;
&n 2ansanen @#d.A 1**".
2ansanen; Pertti; @#d.A; 1**"; 'isc!ssions on So+e #d!cational &ss!es H&; 1esearch
1eport 1,"; 3elsin5i: Eniversit- of 3elsin5i.
2arp; '. and 6. <oels; 1*B7; The College Classroo+; Sociolog- and Social 1esearch;
60.
2ell-; o!is; 1*6*; 2" Cent!ries of ang!age Teaching; 1owle-; %assach!setts:
.ew4!r- 3o!se.
2rashen; Stephen; 1**7; Foreign ang!age #d!cation. The #as- 6a-; California:
ang!age #d!cation (ssociates.
2rashen; S.; H. Sferla==a; . Feld+an and (. Fath+an; 1*76; (d!lt Perfor+ance on the
S:P# Test; ang!age earning; 26; 1; 1," F 1"1.
2rashen; Stephen and Trac- Terrell; 1*B3; The .at!ral (pproach; .ew Kerse-: (le+an-
Press 1egentsCPrentice 3all.
a5off; /eorge; 1*B7; 6o+en; Fire and 'angero!s Things: 6hat The- 1eveal a4o!t the
%ind; Chicago: The Eniversit- of Chicago Press.
arsen)Free+an; 'ianne; 1*B6; Techni?!es and Principles in ang!age Teaching;
:$ford: :$ford Eniversit- Press.
arsen)Free+an; '. and %. 3. ong; 1**1; (n &ntrod!ction to Second ang!age
(c?!isition 1esearch; ondon: ong+an.
enne4erg; #.; 1*7"; The Concept of ang!age 'ifferentiation; &n enne4erg and
enne4erg 1*7".
enne4erg; #ric 3. and #li=a4eth enne4erg @#ds.A; 1*7"; Fo!ndations of ang!age
'evelop+ent: ( %!ltidisciplinar- (pproach; Hol!+e 1; Paris: The E.#SC: Press.
o=anov; /eorgi; 1*7B; S!ggestolog- and :!tlines of S!ggestoped-; .ew <or5: /ordon
and Greach.
%ac5e-; 6illia+ F.; 1*6"; ang!age Teaching (nal-sis; ondon: ong+an.
%ca!ghlin; G.; 1**0; TConscio!sT vers!s TEnconscio!sT earning; T#S: V!arterl-; 2,.
%ceod; (.; 1*B6; Critical iterac-: Ta5ing Control of :!r :wn ives; ang!age (rts;
63; 37)"0.
%i5es; /.; 1*70; 3ow To Ge an (lien; 3ar+ondsworth: Peng!in Goo5s.
%owrer; 'on; 1**6; (ri=ona State Eniversit-; Te+pe; Personal Co++!nication.
%!n4-; Kohn; 1*7B; Co++!nicative S-lla4!s 'esign; ondon: Ca+4ridge Eniversit-
Press.
.ais4itt; Kohn; 1*B2; %egatrends; .ew <or5: 6arner Goo5s.
:sgood; C. #.; /. K. S!ci and P. 3. Tannen4a!+; 1*"7; The %eas!re+ent of %eaning;
Er4ana: Eniversit- of &llinois Press.
Per5ins; 'avid; 1**2; S+art Schools; .ew <or5: The Free Press.
Per5ins; 2. and '. arsen)Free+an; 1*7"; The #ffect of For+al ang!age &nstr!ction on
the :rder of %orphee (c?!isition; ang!age earning; 2".
Pica; T.; 1*B3; The 1ole of ang!age Conte$t in Second ang!age (c?!isition; 1eview
(rticle; &nterlang!age St!dies G!lletin; 7.
Pra4h!; .. S.; 1*B7; Second ang!age Pedagog-; :$ford: :$ford Eniversit- Pres.
Pride; K. and K. 3ol+es @#ds.A; 1*72; Socioling!istics. Selected 1eadings; %iddlese$:
Peng!in Goo5s td.
P!llia+; Kohn '.; 1*B7; 3istor- of #d!cation in (+erica; Fo!rth #dition; Col!+4!s;
:hio: %errill; ( Gell U 3owell &nfor+ation Co+pan-.
1eich; Peter (.; 1*B6; ang!age 'evelop+ent; .ew Kerse-: Prentice)3all.
1ichard)(+ato; Patricia (.; 1*BB; %a5ing &t 3appen; .ew <or5: ong+an.
1ichards; Kac5 C. and Theodore S. 1ogers; 1*B6; (pproaches and %ethods in ang!age
Teaching; Ca+4ridge: Ca+4ridge Eniversit- Press.
1ichterich; 1. and K.. Chancerel; 1*77; &dentif-ing the .eeds of (d!lts earning a
Foreign ang!age; Stras4o!rg: CCCCCo!ncil of #!rope.
1o4erts; Kohn; 1*73; The (' 3-pothesis and 2 (c?!isition; (!dio)His!al ang!age
Ko!rnal; Hol. R&; 2.
Selin5er; .; 1*6*; ang!age Transfer; /eneral ing!istics; Hol. &R; 67 ) *2.
Sharer; 1olf @1esponsa4ile di reda=ione per il te+aA; 1***; #!ropean ang!age Portfolio;
Ga4-lonia; 1; Co!ncil of #!rope.
Shopov; T. and (. Fedotoff; 2000; (n (nal-sis of St!dent Co!rse #val!ation 1eports;
Sofia: 2oreana.
Shopov; T.; 1***; The (C 2000 Pro0ect; Te+p!s Phare K#P 13"33)*B; Torino: #!ropean
Training Fo!ndation.
S5inner; G. F.; 1*"7; Her4al Gehavior; .ew <or5: (ppleton)Cent!r-)Crofts.
Spiro; 1. K.; P. K. Feltovich; %. K. Kaco4son and 1. . Co!lson; 1**2; Cognitive
Fle$i4ilit-; Constr!ctivis+ and 3-perte$t> 1ando+ (ccess &nstr!ction for (dvanced
2nowledge (c?!isition in &ll)Str!ct!red 'o+ains; &n '!ff- and Konassen 1**2.
Stern; 3. 3.; 1*B3; F!nda+ental Concepts of ang!age Teaching; :$ford: :$ford
Eniversit- Press.
Strevens; Peter; 1*6,; #nglish *01; .ew <or5: The %ac+illan Co+pan-.
Strevens; Peter; 1*77; .ew :rientations in the Teaching of #nglish; :$ford: :$ford
Eniversit- Press.
Tella; Seppo @#d.A; 1**B; (spects of %edia #d!cation. Strategic &+peratives in the
&nfor+ation (ge; %edia #d!cation P!4lication B; 3elsin5i: Eniversit- of 3elsin5i.
Tella; Seppo and %ar0a %ononen)(altonen; 1**B; 'eveloping 'ialogic Co++!nication
C!lt!re in %edia #d!cation: &ntegrating 'ialogis+ and Technolog-; %# P!4lications 7;
3elsin5i: Eniversit- of 3elsin5i.
Tho+as; K. and 6. Stoc5; 1*BB; The Concept of 3appiness; &nternational Ko!rnal of
(ging and 3!+an 'evelop+ent 27.
Toffler; (lvin; 1*B"; The (daptive Corporation; .ew <or5: %c/raw)3ill.
Tri+; Kohn . %.; 1*B0; &n Han #5 1*B0.
Tri+; Kohn . %.; 1***; Co++on tools to pro+ote ling!istic and c!lt!ral diversit-;
respect; tolerance and !nderstanding in #!rope; Ga4-lonia; 1; Co!ncil of #!rope.
Han #5; K.; 1*7"; The Threshold evel in a #!ropean EnitCCredit S-ste+ for %odern
ang!age Teaching 4- (d!lts; Stras4o!rg: Co!ncil of #!rope.
Han #5; K. and . /. (le$ander; 1*B0; Threshold evel #nglish; :$ford: The Perga+on
Press.
6e4sterDs .ew 6orld 'ictionar-; Third College #dition; 1*BB; .ew <or5: Si+on and
Sch!ster; &nc.
6est; %ichael; 1*"3; The Teaching of #nglish: ( /!ide to the .ew %ethod Series.
ondon: ong+an.
6hite Paper on #d!cation and Training; 1**6; #!ropean Co++ission; !$e+4o!rg:
:ffice for :fficial P!4lications of the #!ropean Co++!nities.
6iddowson; 3enr- /.; 1*7*; #$plorations in (pplied ing!istics; :$ford: :$ford
Eniversit- Press.
6iddowson 3enr- /. and Christopher K. Gr!+fit; 1*B1; &ss!es in Second ang!age
S-lla4!s 'esign; &n (latis; (lt+an and (latis 1*B1.
6ittgenstein; .; 1*"3; Philosophical &nvestigations; .ew <or5: %ac+illan.
<!le; /eorge; 1*B"; The St!d- of ang!age; Ca+4ridge: Ca+4ridge Eniversit- Press.

Book Language Teaching Metodologies

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Book Language Teaching Metodologies

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Maya Pentcheva,

Potrebbero piacerti anche