English as a Second Language

English as a Second Language

English as a second language is English for nonnative speakers. Because it involves learning across the life span, it is sometimes considered to be a subfield of educational psychology. English for nonnative speakers is referred to by several acronyms: ESL (English as a second language), EFL (English as a foreign language), EAL (English as an additional language), and ELL (English language learning). There are also related acronyms, such as TESOL (teaching English to speakers of other languages).

English holds preferential status because it is studied as a second or additional language by more people than any other human language; it has become the global lingua franca—the language of commerce, science, technology, and other professional endeavors. It has been estimated that for every native speaker of English, there are four nonnative speakers who use it as a second or other language. Braj Kachru described three principal contexts in which English is learned: the inner circle, the outer circle, and the expanding circle. In inner-circle countries, such as Britain, the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, the majority of speakers use English in all aspects of their lives. In the outer circle, in countries such as India, Pakistan, Hong Kong, and Singapore, English is important for historical reasons and, in many instances, is an official language, but it is not the mother tongue of many of the citizens. The expanding circle consists of countries where English was not important historically but where it is now widely used as an additional language; for example, Japan.

The theory and pedagogy of ESL draw on many disciplines, including linguistics, education, psychology, anthropology, and sociology. In the past several decades, an amalgam of these areas has developed as applied linguistics, a field that encompasses not only language learning and teaching, but translation, lexicography, and other applied language issues.

Communicative Competence

A central concept in ESL is communicative competence, a term first coined by Dell Hymes, a linguistic anthropologist. Communicative ompetence includes the skills and knowledge necessary to successfully convey meaning through language. Applied linguists Michael Canale and Merrill Swain developed a model of communicative competence that describes the components of language that are crucial to successful communication. These components are grammatical (linguistic), sociolinguistic, strategic, and discourse competence. Grammatical competence refers to the ability to manipulate language forms according to grammatical rules; a person demonstrates grammatical competence by using grammatical forms accurately, but he or she may not be able to articulate the rules (as is the case for most native speakers). Sociolinguistic competence is demonstrated when an individual uses language appropriately in different contexts. The status of participants, the purpose of the interaction, and local norms all affect what is considered to be appropriate; for example, one would use different language when speaking to a judge in court than one would when communicating the same message to a close friend. Strategic competence is the ability to use verbal and nonverbal communication strategies to rectify or avoid communication breakdowns and to enhance communication. Several researchers have developed extensive lists of communication strategies, such as paraphrase, repetition, word coinage, clarification requests, and so forth.

Discourse competence refers to the ability to link forms and meanings coherently in both written and spoken language. This includes using discourse markers, such as first, next, then, and finally, to help the listener follow a sequence of events, for example. Several researchers have developed elaborated versions of Canale and Swain’s model, but the same skills and basic concepts are emphasized. Communicative competence is the ultimate goal of many ESL learners and teachers.

Although the teaching and learning of second languages (L2s) has been a concern of educators for many centuries (e.g., John Amos Comenius wrote about his nouvelle me´thode in the 1600s), this overview will be limited to the past 200 years. The oldest method of language teaching is grammar translation (sometimes called the classical method); this stemmed originally from the teaching of Latin in Europe but spread to other contexts. This method is still used today in some settings to teach English; in China, for example, the impact of the grammar translation method is still felt quite strongly. Grammar translation focuses on the translation of sentences and texts from the first language into the L2 and vice versa. In addition, explicit grammatical explanations are provided with examples, along with exercises that focus on each grammatical rule. Vocabulary instruction is based on the text that the students are translating; thus, vocabulary learning does not progress from simple to complex. There is no emphasis on speaking or listening, because the intent is to produce people who can read and write in the new language. An advantage of grammar translation is that it can be undertaken independently, without an instructor, or with an instructor who is not very proficient in the language to be learned. Grammar translation was favored initially by the educated classes; it was viewed not only as a method for learning to read classic works such as Shakespeare but also as a valuable mental exercise.

In 1880, Franc¸ois Gouin published a book outlining a new approach to language teaching called the series method. This method was a radical departure from grammar translation, founded on the premise that an L2 should be learned much like the first, focusing on everyday spoken language rather than literary texts. Gouin followed the language learning progress of his young nephew and developed the series method based on his observations. No translation is involved (hence, it belongs to a group of methods that are referred to as being ‘‘direct’’); students are taught a series of connected sentences accompanied by appropriate actions or behaviors. For instance, to explain how to describe a girl lighting a stove, the students would learn sentences such as ‘‘She puts down the wood in front of the stove,’’ ‘‘She crouches down in front of the stove,’’ and ‘‘She opens the door of the stove.’’ Another feature of the series method is the lack of grammatical explanation; students are expected to learn grammar implicitly through exposure in the series of sentences.

Finally, the series method emphasized the importance of accurate pronunciation. Around the same time that Gouin produced his method, Charles Berlitz and others introduced other direct methods to teach L2s. In the Berlitz approach, which is still in use today, students are taught in the L2 exclusively, and their lessons are carefully ordered from concrete, simple forms to increasingly more complex and abstract language. In the first lessons, students learn some nouns such as pencil, pen, book, chair, and so on—items that are in the immediate environment. They also learn a few questions and answers, such as ‘‘What is this?’’ and ‘‘This is a pen,’’ to help generate additional language. As students progress, they learn more nouns, adjectives, verbs, and verb tenses. Grammatical points are introduced one at a time, in an inductive manner.

In the 1920s, there were several advocates of what is known as the reading method. In this case, students’ only goal is to become proficient readers in the L2. It was argued that English learners in India, for example, would benefit more from reading than from any other linguistic skill; furthermore, reading was thought to be easier to acquire. The reading method makes use of the first language for explanations, and there is a heavy emphasis on vocabulary development. The reading method also focuses on the use of graded texts, reading strategies, and rapid reading techniques. This method was the first to introduce language instruction for a specific purpose. In some parts of the world, reading in English is still emphasized more than any other skill because university textbooks and many technical and scientific materials are often available only in English.

A major shift took place in the 1950s with the advent of the audiolingual method. This method drew on both the linguistic and psychological theories of the day: structuralism and behaviorism, respectively. Linguists used contrastive analysis, comparing the first language and English, to predict areas of difficulty for language learners; this information was then used to design lessons. A strong reliance on spoken language was a consequence of the linguistic principle that oral language is paramount and that written language is simply a byproduct of speech. Behaviorist concepts of habit formation and reinforcement resulted in a heavy emphasis on repetition, mimicry, and memorization of controlled units of language. A typical audiolingual lesson consisted of a dialogue presented to the class by the instructor, using only the L2. The dialogue was repeated by the students several times in chorus, and then in smaller groups. The emphasis was on speaking accurately, both in terms of grammar and pronunciation. Students were given positive feedback for correct productions; errors were avoided by the use of intensive drill. Students were often assigned homework in the language lab where they practiced grammatical patterns. Reading and writing were secondary in importance to the development of good speaking skills. Because of its scientific reputation, as well as heavy financial support from governments and publishers, the audiolingual method became extremely influential.

As a reaction to the behaviorist underpinnings of audiolingualism, the cognitive code approach developed in the late 1960s. The main premise of this approach is the need for the learner to explicitly understand the rules of the language at all levels, rather than simply memorizing dialogues or other chunks of language. Instructors actively teach phonological and grammatical rules, and all four skills (reading, writing, listening, and speaking) are taught together. Other alternatives to the audiolingual method were classified by H. Douglas Brown as the ‘‘designer methods’’ of the 1970s. These were idiosyncratic and largely atheoretical approaches to language teaching developed by charismatic professionals, most of which are not practiced extensively today. In the Silent Way, developed by Caleb Gattegno, students’ exposure to vocabulary is extremely limited in the first month. Words are represented on wall charts, and each letter is color-coded to provide a visual representation of sound and spelling correspondences. Students are encouraged to rely heavily on each other rather than on the teacher, who is to remain as silent as possible. The Silent Way requires considerable training on the part of the teachers.

Another method, developed by Georgi Lozanov, is Suggestopedia, which originated in Bulgaria. In this approach, students are given a new persona. Classes are small and take place in a comfortable setting with easy chairs. The teacher is required to use Baroque music for the se´ance component of the lesson, during which the students are instructed to use yogic breathing in time with the music while the teacher relays the dialogue in a whisper, a dramatic voice, and in a normal reading. Lozanov claimed that the new personas taken on by the students alleviate a fear of making errors; he also stated that the vocabulary gains with Suggestopedia are far superior to those of any other method.

Like Suggestopedia, one of the aims of community counseling learning, which is based on principles of Rogerian psychology, is to reduce anxiety. The students sit in a circle while the teacher (counselor) stands behind them. When one student chooses to say something to another, he or she utters a sentence in the first language and the counselor translates it into the L2. The student then repeats the translated utterance, and the counselor moves to the recipient to translate a reply. The students then work together on a tape recording of the lesson to work out the linguistic features of the new language. James Asher, the proponent of the total physical response (TPR) approach to language learning, maintained that physical actions reinforce the learning of vocabulary. In response to a series of the teacher’s commands, students are required to act out a sequence of events (much like Gouin’s series method). For instance, students may be shown a sequence of actions that mimes washing the dishes. Their instructor then encourages them to respond to commands such as ‘‘Put in the plug,’’ ‘‘Turn on the tap,’’ ‘‘Put soap in the water,’’ ‘‘Turn off the tap,’’ and so on. Asher argued that, by acting out the behaviors, students developed a physiological memory of their new language. Asher believed that the acquisition of a L2 was the same as the acquisition of the first language, and he encouraged a silent period in adults that parallels that observed in many children. Once learners feel comfortable with the commands, he claimed, they will start to speak on their own.

Read More: http://kambingputihblog.blogspot.com/