Stephen van Vlack

Sookmyung Women`s University

Graduate School of TESOL

Discourse Analysis

(Spring 2006)

Week 11 - PD, Chapter 9: Epilogue, pp. 305-312 & Riggenbach (1999), Chapter 1, pp. 1-35 & Bailey (2005), Chapter 1, pp. 1-28 - Questions

1. Summarize some of the main points you have learned about pragmatic development and explain how they can be used to help you be a better teacher of English speaking! (PD9)

My summary is going to take the form of selecting certain passages form the text which I find particularly useful and discussing them individually.

Highlights from Kasper and Rose (2002) Chapter 9

...research conducted from a cognitive-processing perspective as well as from different or combined social-practice approaches with an analytical focus on situational interactional engagements have demonstrated potential for explaining different facets of L2 pragmatic learning.

This is a very general idea which tells us that if we really want to focus on speaking we're going to have to rethink our entire perspective on language and language learning. This great shift is going to take place and basically three different areas. The first of these is that we are going to have to change are teaching perspective and learning perspective to one based on cognitive processing. This revolves around the familiar idea of noticing and attention focus. But this movement goes deeper. In order to focus on the noticing as a way of getting our students to learn what we need to change the types of input that we give them as well as the situations of the context in which the teaching is generally set to occur. In response to this we also need to change our views about how language works. Instead of thinking of language as some sort of mathematical computational cool which works all by itself provided we have the data we need to think of language is a holistic type of ecosystem which functions certainly with patterns but not necessarily a planned or easily controlled basis. This leads us to the second shift which relates to creating a social environment in the classroom. We talk about this in relation to sociocultural theory. Basically, we need to create a situation in the classroom which allows people to be exposed to natural input and react to natural types of input. Classrooms need to become places for engagement not places for sleeping and hiding. Lastly we need to former shift from a teacher focused classroom to a more student focused classroom and the best way that this would seem to take place would be to try to initiate an analytical focus on language for the students. This means that the students will be analyzing both native speaker produce language and their own language. Analysis and self-analysis is an extremely important aspect of trying to people to learn how to speak to the need to this on their own.

Cutting across the findings from these studies, we noticed a tendency for beginning learners to rely on pregrammticalized productions, routine formulae, and repetition, which gradually give way to an expansion of their pragmatic repertoire and overgeneralization of one form for a range of different functions.

This comment reminds us of the way in which people learn language in natural settings. This is very important at least because in more formal settings like classrooms students are rarely expected or even allowed to to do this. As a result we have students who wind up just be able to try to produce language completely from the bottom up. Is my feeling that the matter what the proficiency level or age of a student we can still go back and try to instill some routines and formulas into their systems as a way of maybe linking certain ideas and cleaning up gaps which were left in their own learning. Is important to remember that formulas provide the basis of language and that to be able to build on that you have to have the formula. Without the formula you really have very little to build on. You windup building castles in the sky which come crashing down as soon as you are confronted with something different. Formulas are for everyone, but again we need to move beyond those formulas. We don't forget them we just learn ways of extending them and personalizing them.

Particularly noteworthy are findings from studies of requests, which indicate that learners rely on pregrammaticalized utterances, direct strategies, and formulaic speech in the early stages of development, with a gradual move toward conventional indirectness, followed by the introduction of internal and external modification of requests as proficiency increases.

This passage again reiterates what we talked about above extending it from just beginning learners to all learners. From this we can see that there is some sort of general developmental sequence. As teachers this is invaluable information for us because we need to guide as best we can (and don't kid yourself into thinking that you actually have too much power in this guiding process) a process of pragmatic acquisition as it is used for producing acceptable utterances.

Putting together the evidence on early and later acquisitional periods, it appears that learners at different stages of pragmalinguistic developments face different learning tasks: Early learners have to acquire the L2 grammatical means to express already existing pragmatic categories, whereas later learners have to tease out the pragmatic meanings to which their now available L2 grammatical knowledge can be put.

There are two main points to be gleaned from this passage. The first of these is that at different stages in life people are confronted by different types of situations in which they are expected to use language. That is, children use language or are expected to use language in different situations and in different ways than adults. Different types of adults, depending on their job, age, status, are also expected to do different things and we must heed this in mind. The second major point to be derived from this passage is that within the developmental sequence defects of transfer would seem to be quite different. We talked about this in respect to the question of which proceeds the other pragmatic knowledge or grammatical knowledge. The passage tells us that in the earlier stages certainly pragmatic knowledge seems to proceed grammatical knowledge based on simple idea of transfer. Therefore, with beginning learners our focus is to try to give them the forms they need to use some of the very basic pragmatic skills which they are aware of and conceptually can deal with. As proficiency goes up than transfer has more or less exhausted itself and grammar begins to proceed or take precedence over pragmatic knowledge. In this case of what we've been need to do is try to enhance more specific aspects of pragmatic knowledge related to target language culture so that the learner can use the grammar they have more accurately and for more different purposes. It should be clear that this is the general natural acquisitional cycle as it is currently understood through the limit amout of research which has been done. In Korea, but don't really pay much attention to these different cycles. Everything is grammar focused and very little attention, if any, has been shown to pragmatic awareness. This is something which must be rectified.

....such opportunities are related to context and tasks.

This very simple passage underscores the absolute necessity of context and tasks in dealing with input as a way of creating opportunities for learning. We can't escape these two essential elements. Yet, in most teaching these days these are exactly the elements that are missing. Certainly people give lip service to them but very little has Ashley been done to deal with them effectively.

...the activities in which learners participate, and the occasions afforded learners for engagement as listeners and speakers, are relevantly related to pragmatic learning.

What this passage tells us is again that it is a type practice that we developed for our students and attentive input that we give them which basically will determine how much or how little they learn in relation to pragmatic competence. This is basically the result of studies that work until it in target language environments where people still felt learn despite the presence of input and all different kinds of input everywhere. Just having the input is simply not enough. More important is what people do with the input or if people even notice the input. Just because something is there doesn't mean people are going to actually notice it. Revert he talked about the small experiment I did this semester with some young students and which basically showed that they do not notice input that is around them. This is something which we need to change by getting students to develop habits which encourage them to engage input instead of avoiding it. Maybe the desolate doing this is to change attitudes to the English language.

....the right question to ask is not whether pragmatics can be learned in the classroom but how classrooms can be arranged to most effectively support pragmatic development.

This is a simple reaffirmation of the very energizing finding that pragmatics not only can be taught in the classroom but it actually should be in maybe must be taught in the classroom for foreign language students. If they don't learn pragmatics in the classroom where else they going to learn it? That is the basic idea which means that we as teachers need to find a way of solving this problem. Ignoring pragmatics, as we have been doing for very very long time, is certainly not the answer.

Results of these studies [studies into teachability] strongly suggest that most aspects of L2 pragmatics are indeed teachable, that instructional intervention is more beneficial than no instruction specifically targeted on pragmatics, and for the most part, explicit instruction combined with ample practice opportunities results in greatest gains.

As a conclusion to this we finally get the Golden quote, which basically tells us that we need to teach pragmatics, and that this teaching of pragmatics is going to revolve around not only the input that we give our students and but the context in which the students operate as well as the practice that we give our students. Certainly certain things must be explained overtly but this not a license for the teacher to the talk and talk and talk. Any overt teaching should be balanced by a large amount of practice and self-discovery on the part of the students. Overt teaching or mentioning certain aspects overtly help the students to focus their attention denies its main purpose. Don't kid yourself into thinking that what you teacher students overtly is actually going to be remembered. Anything you say is only going to be remembered in the practice that they engage in as they pull the new bits of information have noticed into their own internal system.

2. What are some of the major aspects of communicative competence and how do discourse activities help develop communicative competence? (Rig1)

There are four different kinds of communicative competencies.

Sociolinguistic Competence

Sociolinguistic competence is understanding how social and cultural factors interact with text and shape speech acts. For example, it is understanding surrounding environment. It is also the ability to use language appropriately in various contexts which means perceiving social appropriateness. This competence can be developed by discourse analysis activities which are based on macro level since macro level looks at social and cultural features.

Linguistic Competence

Linguistic competence focuses on accuracy. It is learners` awareness about grammatical structure, word stress, intonation and other prosodic features. This competence is the ability to recognize form-genre relationship and can be developed by discourse analysis activities which are based on micro level.

Discourse Competence

Discourse competence is about the notions of coherence and cohesion. Discourse analysis activities to improve discourse competence can target cohesive devices in reading and writing, turn-taking devices in informal conversations, discourse markers, and transition devices. In conclusion, discourse competence is the ability to connect utterances or sentences so that there is cohesion and coherence.

Strategic Competence

Strategic competence is the ability to negotiate meaning which means that students find the way to compensate and thus communicate when linguistic resources are not automatic or not adequate for ease of expression. For instance, the activities that certainly require the negotiation of meaning are the act of summarizing, inferencing, and contextualization. Strategic competence is the means of analyzing discourse because the activities such as summarizing and inferencing encourage the development of learner` awareness of the patterns and regularities of language.

Discourse analysis activities can target each of this communicative competence or sometimes can target mixed competence, so finally they help develop communicative competence

3. What are the recent trends in theory and pedagogy related to teaching speaking? (Rig1)

The recent trends in second language acquisition theory and pedagogy support the use of discourse analytic techniques in the language classroom. There are five broad categories on the following.

Communicative Movement

The communication movement supports a learner-centered approach to language teaching and the use of authentic language in the classroom. Communicative teaching approaches stress the importance of there being an actual reason to communicate. They are in support of group or pair work. Learners use collaboration as a means by which learners can help each other solve language problems.

Learner Motivation

Language learners are language researchers and discourse analysts. They develop their autonomy and build confidence. So cultivating an interest in target language is beneficial. Thus, the learners who have the motivation to learn about the language and the culture keep studying beyond the institutional setting.

Focus on the learner

Task-based activities provide opportunities for students to integrate their linguistic and cognitive competence. The student-negotiated syllabus increases learners receptivity and stimulates desire to communicate. Participation in their own learning processes can encourage learner responsibility.

Content-centered and Task-based Approaches

Content-based approaches make students learn the content of an academic discipline and improve their proficiency at the same time. On the other hand, task-based approaches make students focus not only on language but also on content and on the learning process itself.

Experiential Learning/Learner as researcher

Students learn experientially. Projects provide opportunities for learners to participate in their own learning. They research and observe interactions and involve in authentic communication.

4. What are some of the things to consider before designing speaking-focused courses? (Rig1)

There are many things that teachers should consider before designing speaking-focused courses for their own classes. Most of all, teachers should think about student populations, course/syllabus situations, and teacher style.

Student Populations

Teachers should consider their own students needs and goals to design speaking-focused courses. Not all methodologies that are successful in one context will be successful in another. Since individual students differ from each other, teachers should consider students various educational and cultural background, age, and proficiency before designing speaking-focused courses.

Course/Syllabus Situations

Teachers should consider course/syllabus situations as well before designing speaking-focused courses. Teachers may not have the opportunity to design their own courses under their teaching situations. Some teachers may have to teach multiskills at a time, in contrast, others may have to focus on discrete skill areas such as reading, listening, speaking, writing, grammar, pronunciation, and vocabulary. There is always room for discourse analysis activities in any of these course situations.

Teacher Style

Every teacher has different teaching styles and teaching preferences. It is very important that teachers know their own teaching styles and teaching preferences before designing discourse analysis activities to act as coresearcher and facilitator rather than expert.

5. What are communication strategies and which one do you think would have the most versatile effects in general speaking as well as your own speaking? (B1)

Communication strategies are the ability to compensate for lack of ability in any of the other areas. What do you do when you don't know a word that you need? How do you manage a social situation when you aren't quite sure about the rules of etiquette? In both cases, you rely on your strategic competence to help you communicate. Everyone has some degree of strategic competence in any language. If you are hungry, but cannot speak the language, you can probably still make your need known through gesture and facial expression because hunger is a universal fact of human life. Language learners who really need to communicate in their adopted language tend to develop a number of strategies for making themselves clear in spite of their incomplete knowledge. Why do we need those when we speak?

1.Communication strategies are indirect learning strategies-they help learners to remain in conversation, and so provide them with more input, more opportunities for checking and validating their hypotheses, and therefore more chances to develop their interlanguage systems. Besides, communication strategies may lead to more successful performance, and as we know, the content of successful performance gets stored more easily in memory, and thus has a positive impact on learning.

2. Communication strategies allow learners to remain in conversation- they help learners, on the productive side, to get some useful feedback on their own performance, and on the receptive side, to exercise some kind of control over their intake, for example, by enabling them to prompt their interlocutor to modify his or her utterances. In other words, strategies competence promotes learners' self-monitoring function or executive control.

3.Communication strategies train learners in the flexibility they need to cope with the unexpected and the unpredictable-they help students get used to non-exact communication, which is perhaps the real nature of all communication. In this way, they help to bridge the gap between the classroom and the outside reality, between formal and informal learning. At the same time, they help students get used to non-exact communication, which is perhaps the real nature of all communication. In this way, they help to bridge the gap between the classroom and the outside reality, between formal and informal learning.

4. Communication strategies encourage risk-taking and individual initiative they are certainly a step towards linguistic and cognitive autonomy. We said that strategic competence is the ability to cope with unexpected problems when no ready- made solutions are available.

What are "communication strategies" ?

 Paraphrase - relying on whatever target language resources the learner has

         a. Approximation: Using an alternative term which expresses the meaning of the target lexical item as closely as possible: if you don't know a word, you can fall back on general words, like thing or stuff you can use superordinates, like flower instead of daffodil you can use synonyms and antonyms, like not deep to mean shallow. Of course, generalizing implies a disregard for restrictions on word meaning and word usage, and can therefore be dangerous: this is a problem we shall soon get back to.

         b. Circumlocution: Describing characteristics or elements of the object or action

                        (i.e., the thing you open with for corkscrew).

c. Word coinage: Creating nonexisting L2 word based on a supposed rule

                               (i.e., vegetarianist for vegetarian).

 Borrowing - relying on the L1, one of the simplest things one can do when faced with a problem in a foreign language is, of course, to borrow words from the L1.: we know that monolingual classes, such as the ones that we teach in. often use this easy way out

      a. Literal translation: Translating word for word from L1

b. Language switch: Using L1 without bothering to translate

 Mime: Nonverbal Strategies

Facial expression/gesture/pointing/drawing/ making sounds indicative of what is referred

 Appeal for Assistance: Asking for aid from the interlocutor directly

             (i.e., What do you call.? what is it?) or indirectly (i.e., rising intonation, pause, eye contact, puzzled expression).

 Avoidance - Avoiding difficulties

        a. Topic Avoidance: Avoiding topics for which L2 items or structures are not known

        b. Message Abandonment: Abandoning talking about something

 Those all communications are being used according to the degree of language learners, and also somewhat they are overlapped. We may not tell which one is the most versatile effects in general speaking.

Therefore, communication strategies are extremely important to second language learners and, can be taught quite simply even to fairly low-level students. Not only giving learners the linguistic tools to effectively use, it is also important to encourage a change in attitude in the classroom.

6. Why are segmental phonemes and suprasegmental phonemes so important in teaching pronunciation and speaking English? (B1)

Among the components of speaking, phonemes are the most important level for speaking. Phoneme refers to a divisible unit of sound that distinguishes meaning. Segmental phonemes refers to the phonemes that can be segmented and moved around; they are vowels & consonants. Suprasegmental phonemes refers to the phonemes that carry meaning differences beyond the segmental phonemes in speech such as stress, rhythm, pitch, and intonation.

Segmental Phonemes and Suprasegmental Phonemes are very important for three reasons. Firstly, distinctive phonemic features are where foreign accents come from when learners are not able to distinguish the contrasts between L1 and L2 differences, thus native speaking listeners may have difficulty to understand the non native speakers sayings. Secondly, mispronunciation of distinctive features can cause misunderstanding since phonemes carry meaning. For instance, voicing is the distinctive feature that makes /b/ and /p/ separate ones. In the textbook, the author gave an example of Egyptian student saying I had green bee soup for lunch (Bailey, p. 12) when he meant he had had green pea soup. Korean EFL students tend to say things like Im a great pan of Rain.

Lastly, improper use of suprasengmental phonemes can cause miscommunication since they can convey meanings that speakers did not intend. Usually, the main idea or new information receive prominence. However, when the speaker intentionally wants to highlight some element in the utterance, the meaning changes. For instance, a simple sentence like John`s car is white. can have four different meanings. 1. John`s car is WHITE. (contrast: not some other color), 2. JOHN`S car is white. (contrast: not Albert`s car), 3. John`s CAR is white. (contrast: not his truck), 4. John`s car IS white. (emphatic assertion: Why do you say it isn`t? I`m absolutely certain it is.) (Celce-Murcia, p.178) Therefore, if speakers use incorrect rhythm or stress patterns, the native speaking listeners may not understand or misunderstand them. Intonation also performs the function of communicating an attitude or emotion. For example, the simple utterance Great can be used to express three different meanings such as neutral, enthusiasm, sarcasm or lack of enthusiasm according to intonation, thus if learners use improper intonation patterns, they can be perceived as abrupt, or even rude. (Celce-Murcia, p. 185)

7. What causes 'spoonerisms' and 'reduced speech' and what can they tell us about how people speak? (B1)

Spoonerisms refers to one typical speaking malfunction named after Dr. (William Archibald) Spooner. He is a famous British orator, who would sometimes switch his segmental phonemes. We can produce a slip of the tongue if we switch two phonemes like he often did. He says things like the queer old dean when he meant to say the dear old queen. According to the textbook, this is the linguistic evidence that phonemes are in fact segmented, independent units ( Bailey, p.11).

Examples of Spooner's Spoonerisms

l fighting a liar-lighting a fire

l you hissed my mystery lecture-you missed my history lecture

l a half-warmed fish-a half-formed wish

l tons of soil-sons of toil

l you've tasted two worms-you've wasted two terms

l is the bean dizzy?-is the Dean busy?

(www.Fun-with-words.com)

Reduced Speech refers to the tendency of sounds to blend together, especially in casual conversation. For example, because is often reduced as kuz in "I don't wanna go to the party, kuz it sounds boring." This tendency occurs when we speak fast. Such reductions are not just sloppy speech resulting from speakers laziness or carelessness. They are actually systematic, rule-governed variants that are natural in spoken English (Bailey, p.14). Bailey provides examples for this is as follows;

“Going and to blend together to form gonna. Im going to go swimming. Can be reduced as Im gonna go swimming. which is grammatical. However, when to is used in the prepositional phrases to the store, the to is not reduced. Im going to go to the store. cannot be reduced as Im gonna the store. Since it is ungrammatical. According to Bailey, this shows the sound systems of English sometimes interacts with its grammatical features (Ibid., p.15)

Another examples of reduced forms;

l Have/v/ + to -hafta

l Has/z/ + to - hasta

l Used/d// + to ? usta

These examples show that reduced forms are affected by the neighboring sounds. That is, in case of have/has to and used to, the voiceless /t/of to is the conditioning sound that causes the voiced /v/, /z/, and /d/ preceding it to assimilate and become voiceless /f/, /s/, and /t/ (Celce-Murcia, p.160). To sum up, reduced forms are not arbitrary choice of speakers but are systematic, rule-governed variants that are natural in spoken English.

Reference: Teaching Speaking, Celce-Murcia, M., 2004, Cambridge University Press.

8. What are three approaches to assessing speaking and which one is the most suitable to your teaching situation? (B1)

There are three approaches to assessing speaking which are direct test, indirect test and semi-direct test. The major difference among three different approaches depends on whether actual speaking is involved or not. A direct test of speaking involves a procedure in which the learners actually speak the target language, interacting with the test administrator or with other students and generating novel utterances. An oral proficiency interview, a group discussion, a debate or an unscripted role-play can be considered direct tests of speaking. Since a direct test directly measures an actual speaking performance in a speaking assessment, it has high validity. In a private language school where a small number of students are assigned to each teacher, a direct test is applied. However, in terms of practicality, it has a limitation. If many students are evaluated at once, it is impossible to practice a direct test.

A semi-direct test of speaking is one in which a speaker actually speak but they dont interact with human beings. In other words, a test-taker reads or listens to the directions and responds to them by talking to a recording device. The advantage of semi-direct test is they are easy to administer to several students at once so they are practical. Besides, students who have low self-esteem and high anxiety can take the test in a comfortable atmosphere. However, a semi-direct test is still far from authentic in that it doesnt call for negotiation between speakers and listeners and a test-taker feel awkward talking to tape recorder and responding to an electronic voice.

The third type of the test is an indirect test of speaking in which the test-takers do not speak unlike a direct test and an indirect test. A test-taker writes a correct response instead of actually uttering it. For example, the students may be given a conversational close test (Hughes, 1981). A cloze test is a written text about a paragraph in length in which words have been deleted and replaced by blank lines. The learners job is to fill in each blank with a word that would be appropriate in the context of that conversation. Another type of an indirect test is TOEFL test. In computer adapted TOEFL test, speaking proficiency is not directly measured but the test-taker`s proficiency level is predicted and inferred by his or her listening and structure comprehensibility. In direct tests of speaking can be very practical and reliable because they often allow one correct answers to each tasks and applied to students. Actually, indirect test is most widely used in Korea. However, students do not feel that they are taking a speaking test but a paper and pencil grammar test. Therefore, when it comes to validity, it has low validity.

There is no one best choice among direct, semi-direct, or indirect tests of speaking. Teachers must choose the best approach considering their students, time limitations, budget limitations and teaching goals. We all agree that the ideal test type is a direct test of speaking but teachers need to consider actual possibility of applying it. The focus of this discussion is that it is better to try to apply a direct test, at least semi- direct test, For instance, public school teachers can not conduct a direct speaking test frequently but can practice it once in a semester or conduct a semi-direct test if their teaching situation is unfavorable.

Reference: Teaching Speaking, Celce-Murcia, M., 2004, Cambridge University Press.