jacet sigonesp annualreport vol14
DESCRIPTION
JACET ESP Annual ReportTRANSCRIPT
-
ISSN 1346-4302
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP
Volume 14
The Japan Association of
College English Teachers
Special Interest Group on ESP
Kanto Chapter
December 2012
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP
Volume 14
The Japan Association of
College English Teachers
Special Interest Group on ESP
Kanto Chapter
December 2012
ISSN 1346-4302
-
Editors & Reviewers for Annual Report Vol. 14 (2012)
Chief Editor: Atsuko K. Yamazaki
Associate Editors: Setsu Tsuji, Mitaka Yoneda, David Rear
Reviewers: Tamao Araki, Reiko Fujita, Kayoko H. Murakami,
Hisashi Naito, Tom Orr, David Rear, Sanae Saito,
Akiko Tsuda, Setsu Tsuji, Masa Tsuneyasu,
Atsuko K. Yamazaki, Mitaka Yoneda
Annual Report of the JACET-SIG on ESP
Volume 14
ISSN 1346-4302
JACET-SIG on ESP, Kanto Chapter
Publication Contact:
Atsuko K. Yamazaki
Faculty of Engineering
Shibaura Institute of Technology
307 Fukasaku, Minuma-ku, Saitmama-shi,
Saitama 337-8570, JAPAN
Phone & Fax +81-48-687-5724
E-mail: [email protected]
Printed by PROPRINT Shoyo Co., Ltd.
3-17-2 Naka-cho, Omiya-ku, Saitama-shi, Saitama 330-0845, JAPAN
URL: http://www.proprint.co.jp/
-
Table of Contents
Foreword
Reiko Fujita, Charlie Robertson, Kayoko H. Murakami -------------------------1
Article
A Survey on the Needs of English in Performing Job-related Tasks in Japanese Companies Classified
by Various Industries
,, ------------------------------------------------2
Applying conversation analysis to English for Specific Purposes:
A single case analysis on the use of negations
Akiko Matsumoto Otsu --------------------------------------------------------------10
A Proposed Set of Can-Do Statements for Technical English
Michihiro Hirai ---------------------------------------------------------------------18
Examining Authenticity and Motivation from an International Perspective
Richard Pinner ------------------------------------------------------------------------24
Survey of Communication with Foreign Parents of Children in Nursery Schools
-----------------------------------------------------------------34
ESP 2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------42
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
1
Foreword
It is our great pleasure to present the 2012 Annual Report of the JACET-SIG on ESP,
Volume 14. This issue contains five articles. It also includes an outline of the activities of our
group, the JACET-SIG ESP Kanto chapter in 2012. We were delighted to receive many
submissions from diverse ESP fields, and the five articles chosen were successfully selected
from these submissions. All the articles reflect the rapid changes to Japanese society in this
global age and suggest a need for more systematic ESP curriculum development and
instruction at tertiary level institutions.
An article by Ito, Kawaguchi & Ohta investigates the need for English across various
industries. Their results show that needs vary from industry to industry and individual
workers sense that they will be asked to perform more required tasks in English in the near
future. Otsu focuses on the linguistic features of business conversations in a Singapore branch
of a Japanese company. Through conversation analysis, it was found that the use of negation
is quite normal, indicating that efficiency seemed to be prioritized over politeness. Hirais article proposes a set of Can-Do statements for technical English for the Japanese. Hirais carefully designed descriptors are the first to be produced for technical English for the
Japanese learner. These three articles, briefly described above, have great significance for
English instruction in Japan as they illuminate the challenges faced by students in todays globalized business world.
Pinner poses a question about the meaning of authentic materials. He proposes that authenticity should be defined according to a continuum rather than a single definition. His
insights are particularly valuable when ESP practitioners choose teaching materials.
Carreira-Matsuzaki investigates the communication between teachers and non-Japanese
parents of nursery school children. Today, more and more families from overseas are living
in Japan due to their business assignments; as a result, the need for English-speaking nursery
school teachers is becoming more important than ever.
Our hope is that ESP will be understood by more people involved in curriculum
development and that ESP approaches to English instruction can help Japanese students
efficiently prepare themselves for the globalized world. In addition, we hope that our
continuing efforts to publish the Annual Report will contribute to the promotion of research
and development of ESP education in Japan. Last but not least, we would like to express our
sincere gratitude to the members of the editorial committee and reviewers who contributed
their precious time to help prepare this issue.
Reiko A. Fujita (Chair)
Charlie Robertson (Vice Chair)
Kayoko H. Murakami (Vice Chair)
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
2
Article
A Survey on the Needs of English in Performing Job-related Tasks in
Japanese Companies Classified by Various Industries
Abstract: The aim of this paper is to identify the specific needs of English usage in Japanese companies.
The data was collected by conducting an on-line survey. A questionnaire consisting of the descriptions of
45 job-related tasks in various work settings was used. The 3,000 employees who participated were asked
1) how frequently they need to use English in their current job, 2) whether they had ever performed each
of the tasks before and 3) which tasks are performed in English now or will be in the future. The data was
classified and analysed using 28 types of industry, such as the electronics industry, the chemical industry,
wholesale distribution, and other industries. The results suggest that the needs of English in the workplace
vary depending on the type of industry. Some tasks, such as communicating through e-mail, are
common in all industries, while other tasks, such as communication with clients and colleagues,
especially in phone conferences, are limited to some industries. The results also suggest that many of the
survey respondents feel that a lot of more complicated tasks, such as those that have never been
performed before, will be needed in the future. This is part of a larger research project aiming at providing
guidelines for designing an in-house English program that meets the needs of Japanese employees with a
wide-range of background and work experiences.
I.
24 2000
, 2012, p.16
23
7
, 2012 242008
2011 5.6%, 2012
, 2011
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
3
2011
59 58
, 2011
2 2012
2013 TOEIC730 2012
80
II.
1.
Ito, Kawaguchi, & Ohta, 2005 can-do
45
E
)45 6
A. B. C. D.
E. F. 5
2
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
4
51. 2. 3. 4. 5.
TOEIC
2.
2012 6
TOEIC 2 3,000
2,906 2,739 167
2,341 565 38.8 39.8 34.6 TOEIC
587.5
III.
1.
15
TOEIC
513 338 231 221
206 3.3
3.33.23.03.0
18
2 2.4
4. 5. 53%
1TOEIC
638.0629.4709.2 TOEIC
28 26540.5
24 558.2 23 560.8 517.7
TOEIC
2.
2.1
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
5
1. TOEIC %
M SD M SD
89 3.3 1.21 638.0 158.76 18 3.3 1.33 629.4 202.38 91 3.2 1.26 709.2 155.03 206 3.0 1.15 540.5 169.75
221 3.0 1.22 603.2 164.07 129 2.9 1.23 517.7 156.10
91 2.9 1.23 558.2 175.63 231 2.9 1.29 560.8 179.50
189 2.8 1.30 617.3 169.41 6 2.8 1.17 675.0 183.06
513 2.8 1.24 552.7 168.26 101 2.8 1.25 601.0 191.73 18 2.8 1.31 660.8 182.16
98 2.7 1.37 655.2 172.08 50 2.7 1.20 583.5 183.10 19 2.7 1.16 622.7 212.94
63 2.7 1.08 597.8 163.17 50 2.6 1.31 616.5 147.34 44 2.6 1.33 534.9 164.51
10 2.6 1.43 786.0 204.47 42 2.6 1.27 598.2 169.27
79 2.6 1.30 583.3 163.15 130 2.6 1.25 646.1 164.73
17 2.5 1.07 576.8 178.33 27 2.5 1.25 561.4 149.68 12 2.5 1.24 617.5 157.44
338 2.4 1.14 588.2 175.79 24 2.4 1.14 610.0 177.34
2906 2.8 1.25 587.5 174.86
TOEIC
6%
9%
8%
12%
13%
11%
17%
17%
17%
16%
15%
17%
22%
16%
16%
13%
22%
23%
30%
21%
24%
24%
18%
22%
17%
23%
21%
28%
25%
26%
26%
24%
32%
24%
28%
17%
27%
32%
28%
29%
34%
32%
35%
28%
32%
20%
33%
30%
28%
29%
37%
50%
33%
42%
22%
26%
32%
26%
34%
26%
29%
23%
33%
27%
24%
33%
21%
22%
26%
32%
28%
20%
20%
24%
24%
25%
41%
15%
8%
26%
17%
17%
20%
21%
24%
14%
16%
15%
17%
33%
17%
17%
6%
11%
20%
21%
14%
8%
11%
20%
10%
9%
13%
6%
19%
17%
12%
17%
28%
20%
13%
13%
15%
14%
15%
14%
0%
12%
13%
17%
16%
8%
5%
6%
14%
14%
10%
12%
13%
9%
6%
7%
8%
6%
4%
9% 17% 21% 36% 17%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
1.
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
6
2 45
45
7. E
2. 45%
A. 1 L 53 482 S 45 453 S 32 394 S ) 28 355 S 25 366 S 26 34
B. 7 W E 58 528 R 50 459 R 40 47
10 R 32 4311 R 22 3512 S 24 3513 R 47 4614 R 39 4015 W 26 3516 L 32 3917 I 18 3018 W 24 3619 W E 31 3920 W 20 3021 I 15 29
C. 22 L 43 4323 L 35 4024 S 30 38
D. 25 S 11 2126 W E 16 2527 I 9 2128 W E 12 22
E. 29 S 18 33
30 S
15 29
31 S 2030 17 3132 R 21 3333 S 19 3334 I 10 25
F. 35 L CEO 19 3236 S 20 3237 I 10 2638 L 23 3639 S 24 3740 I 19 3441 I 24 4042 I 21 3943 I 17 3544 W 18 3445 R 21 36
L= R= S= W= I=
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
7
58%1. 53%8.
50%13.
47%
27. (9%)34.
(10%)37. 10%
27, 34, 37
42. 21% 39%43.
17% 35%44.
18% 34%F.
34.
10% 25%31. 2030
17% 31% E.
2.2 10
4
3
E
E
F.
E
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
8
E
14.
41.
52
23
3 10
(%)
B 7 W 58 EC 22 L 57 B 13 R 54 A 1 L 54 B 9 R 49 C 23 L 49 A 2 S 45 C 24 S 45 B 10 R 44 B 11 R 44
(%)B 7 W 57 EB 9 R 54 B 13 R 53 B 8 R 50 B 10 R 49 A 2 S 47 A 1 L 46 F 42 I 45 F 41 I 45 C 22 L 45
(%)
B 7 W 57 EB 9 R 55 B 13 R 54 B 10 R 52 A 2 S 51 A 1 L 50 B 19 W 49 EF 42 I 49 B 18 W 49 B 16 L 49
(%)
B 7 W 62 EB 13 R 56 B 10 R 55 B 9 R 55 A 2 S 55 B 8 R 53 B 14 R 52 F 41 I 52 A 3 S 51 A 1 L 50
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
9
10 4
2
4 10
IV.
28
E
TOEIC
C23520719
Ito, T., Kawaguchi, K. & Ohta, R. (2005). A study of the relationship between TOEIC scores and
functional job performance: Self-assessment of foreign language proficiency. TOEIC
Research Report, 1, 1-35.
. (2011). . Retrieved from http://www.meti.go.jp/
policy/economy/jinnzai/san_gaku_kyodo/sanko1-3.pdf
. (2012). 24.Retrieved from http://www.meti.go.jp/report/
tsuhaku2012/2012honbun_p/2012_gaiyou.pdf
.(2012). 24. Retrieved from http://www.mhlw.go.jp/wp/
hakusyo/roudou/12/dl/01-1-2.pdf
. (2012). 23.
Retrieved from http://www.jetro.go. jp/world/japan/reports/0700854
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
10
Article
Applying conversation analysis to English for Specific Purposes:
A single case analysis on the use of negations
Akiko Matsumoto Otsu
Daito Bunka University
Abstract: The present study analyzes talk-in-interaction recorded at the Singapore branch of a Japanese
construction company by adopting Conversation Analysis (CA) techniques. Special focus is on the use of
negations by participants who use English as a lingua franca for business purposes. It is found that, while
conversations in the data are as highly organized and socially ordered as those in traditional CA studies,
people in this community tend to articulate negations more strongly. The accumulation of single case
analyses like this study is expected to be a bridge between CA and English for Specific Purposes (ESP),
and to offer pedagogical implications for developing more authentic ESP courses and materials.
I. Introduction
Conversation Analysis (CA) views participants in conversation as mutually
orientating to, and collaborating in order to achieve, orderly and meaningful
communication (Hutchby & Wooffitt, 2008: 1). It pays detailed attention to the specific
sequential contexts of talk. Schegloff, Koshik, Jacoby, and Olsher (2002) argue that the
relationship between CA and applied linguistics is growing, and one of the areas of
applied linguistics that can benefit from CA is Language for Specific Purposes (LSP)
(p.17). Findings from CA of naturally-occurring talk have abundant implications for the
design of tasks and materials for English for Specific Purposes (ESP) education.
Nonetheless, the number of research articles dealing with spoken interaction in ESP is
very small (Bowels, 2006: 333; Richards, 2009: 71).
The present study aims to explore links between the CA tradition and ESP by
analyzing talk recorded at the Singapore branch of a Japanese construction company
with a CA perspective. Analyzing the single case with special focus on the use of
negations, the study attempts to examine how interactions in the workplace are
organized and ordered. Simultaneously, interactional features unique to the construction
industry are identified compared to other situations where English is used as a lingua
franca. Finally, pedagogical implications for practical ESP courses and materials are
presented.
II. CA, ESP and ELF
The most central assumption of CA, first put forward in pioneering research by
Harvey Sacks, is that ordinary talk is a highly organized, socially ordered phenomenon
(Hutchby & Wooffitt, 2008:11). Conversation analysts have investigated how
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
11
participants in naturally-occurring talk interact cooperatively with one another. For
example, Sacks (1987) explains the preference for agreement, which is elaborated by
Drew (1994) as preferred actions such as acceptances are normally produced
unhesitatingly without delay, are delivered right at the start of the response
turnDispreferred actions are normally produced in variously mitigated or attenuated
forms (p.752). In a similar vein, Pomerants (1984)s overall features of disagreement
turns are summarized that Frequently disagreements, when stated, are formed as partial
agreements/partial disagreements; they are weak forms of disagreementdisagreement
components are frequently delayed within a turn or over a series of turns (p.65).
The settings for the conventional CA research vary from a suicide prevention hotline,
court trials, broadcast media, business organizations, to informal conversations between
friends or family members, but as Schegloff et al. (2002: 12) points out, most CA
research on institutional discourse is not explicitly concerned with NNSs (non-native
speakers). It was after Firth (1996) proposed the applicability of CA methodology to
talk-data among non-native speakers that the number of researchers who analyze
talk-data in English as a lingua franca1 (ELF) increased dramatically. The majority of
data sets in CA studies on ELF show that ELF talk is overtly consensus-oriented,
cooperative and mutually supportive (Seidlhofer, 2004:218). Meierkord (2000) also
stresses the cooperative nature of lingua franca communication. However, as Ehrenreich
(2009) argues, since not all of ELF is informal and consensual, more attention should be
paid to competitive talk (p.146) as often observed in the business field.
The present study analyzes the way employees in the Singapore branch of a
Japanese company interact with other non-native speakers of English. It especially
focuses on a single case of an online meeting, where conflicts or non-understanding are
often observed. Therefore, this study investigates an area not covered extensively yet by
ESP, CA and ELF researchers.
III. Methodology
1. Sources and data
The data were recorded at an overseas office of a Japanese construction company in
Singapore. The main participant is an architect in charge of a factory construction
project in Malaysia. He has visited the construction site several times, but basically
stays in the Singapore office designing the factory building and giving instructions to
local engineers in Malaysia at weekly online meetings. Using the online meeting system,
they can see one another, share a computer screen, keyboard and mouse control, and
draw and highlight on the screen. At the meetings, the architect checks how the factory
construction is progressing. If any problems are reported, he changes the design and
gives relevant instructions to the local staff. While the architect always chairs meetings,
his supervisor, another architect, occasionally joins him.
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
12
The data for the present study consist of four short conversations recorded on the
same day. Two are from an online meeting of two hours, and the other two are
conversations between the two architects and a Singaporean subcontractor who visited
them at the Singapore branch during the meeting.
2. Conversation analysis
2.1 Unmotivated looking
In this study, the recorded data are transcribed using a slightly adapted version of the
transcription conventions developed by Gail Jefferson (see Appendix). As Hatchby and
Wooffitt (2008) emphasize, the data are not necessarily approached with a particular
question in mind, because conversation analysts avoid having preconceptions about
what may be found in some set of transcribed recordings (unmotivated looking in
Sacks (1984)s term). Instead, I followed the research procedure in CA described by
Hatchby and Wooffitt (2008) as follows:
(a) locate a potentially interesting phenomenon in the data
(b) describe one particular occurrence formally, concentrating on its sequential
context
(c) return to the data to see if other instances of the phenomenon can be described in
terms of this account. (p.90)
Additionally, each extract in the study is analyzed in contrast with relevant findings
of previous CA research in similar phenomena.
2.2 Single case analysis
The data for the present study is from talk-in-interaction during one meeting, which
has led to adopting a single case analysis. Single case analysis is to look at a single
conversation, or section of one, in order to track in detail the various conversational
strategies and devices which inform and drive its production (Hatchby & Wooffitt,
2008:114). Hatchby and Wooffitt (2008) argue that this technique can be used to
discover how the order and organization of conversation operates in particular instances.
Richards (2009) exemplifies this argument by showing how a focus on just one
interactional feature (in his case, a meeting) can identify the local professional culture
and provide raw materials for ESP materials writers. The present study also intends that
the detail of CA transcription and analysis will eventually be incorporated into
classroom materials, especially those for future expatriates who work in the
construction industry.
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
13
IV. Analysis of data extracts
1. Not to let it pass
There are two features Firth (1996) presents concerning ELF interactions: let it
pass and not let it pass. The let it pass actions of the hearer is to let the unknown
or unclear action, word or utterance pass on the (common-sense) assumption that it
will either become clear or redundant as talk progresses(p.243), and notes these are
common actions among ELF users. Following this argument, Seidlhofer (2004)
maintains that ELF users adopt the let-it-pass principle as long as a certain threshold
of understanding is obtained (p.218). On the other hand, Firth (1996) also analyzes that
ELF users do not let pass potentially problematic features to maintain interactional
robustness. Extract 1 below is categorized in the latter, not to let pass attitude.
Extract 1
A1 (a Japanese architect) and A2 (A1s supervisor) are talking with S1 (a
Singaporean subcontractor) in person over a design drawing of the factory building.
1 A1: here we have a box gutter
2 A2: um huh
3 A1: and is your system mmmmm uh::::::::m working
4 S1: YES [yes
5 A1: [if we have the box gutter here
6 S1:(0.7) um I dont understand
7 you mean you have a downpipe
8 A1: (.) yeah here [is the downpipe=
9 S1: [yeah
The architects explain the design of a water discharge system to the subcontractor,
who is trying to win the contract for the system. Although they are talking using a visual
aid (the design drawing), S1 does not follow what A1 is talking about, and says I dont
understand in line 6. While there is a long pause and hesitation marker um, which
indicates delicacy in talk (Firth, 1996: 251), this is a fairly overt expression of
non-understanding. What is more, in line 7, S1 repairs A1s utterance without waiting
for A1 to self-repair, although the other-repair is somewhat downgraded by Ymean
plus a possible understanding of prior turn as well as rising intonation (Schegloff,
Jefferson & Sacks, 1977:368). The way S1 shows his non-understanding and repairs
A1s utterance is accountable, considering he is in the middle of an important business
negotiation and A1 and A2 are potential clients. However, A1 does not make S1s
other-initiated other-repair marked. After a micro pause to understand S1s correction,
A1 accepts it unmarked and continues his talk. There seems to be a consensus that
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
14
perceived problems in understanding must be dealt with immediately, rather than being
allowed to pass (Firth, 1996: 250) between A1 and S1. This phenomena to prioritize
efficiency of communication can be called the institutional need for economy in
Bowles (2006)s words. Examples of not letting it pass are presented in Tsuchiya
(2011), who also investigates interactions at meetings of construction company
employees in the South Asian contexts.
2. Just plain no
The use of no in professional situations has been highlighted by Seedhouse (1997)
and Richards (2009) because negative expressions require considerable sensitivity.
Richards (2009) shows that no occurs only in the context of disagreement about facts,
and professional disagreement are managed without recourse to no. In the present
study, however, no does appear in a professional situation:
Extract 2
A1 (a Japanese architect) and E1 (a Malaysian engineer) are discussing where to
arrange the doors in the building at an online meeting.
1 E1: this one this one ((showing a design problem on screen)
2 (1.8)
3 A1: yeah we can move the door
4 (0.9) ((clicking sound: A1 starts to make a modification on the shared
screen)
5 E1: oh
6 (2.0) ((A1 continues to draw on screen))
7 E1:canNOT because xxxxxxxx[xxx ((talking to other members in their native
language))
8 A1: [like this
In line 1, E1 uses the shared computer screen to explain how one door is blocking
another door on the actual construction site. A1, the architect in charge of design, says
he can change the design to solve the problem in line 2, and tries to modify the design
on the shared screen. E1 is a little surprised by the idea and responds oh in line5, thinks
only for a moment while A1 continues to draw, and loudly says cannot with an
emphasis on not in line 7 before A1 finishes drawing the modified design on screen.
After turning down A1s idea in such an abrupt way, E1 starts to discuss the matter with
his colleagues. Meanwhile, A1 does not respond to E1s reactions in lines 5 and 6 and
keeps drawing to show his idea in line 8.
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
15
What E1 did in Extract 2 seems to contradict Richards (2009)s argument that the
occurrence of no is exceptional where professional issues are at stake. Nonetheless,
the way A1 treats E1s plainly negative answer as unmarked shows that it is not
accountable in this situation.
Moreover, the most conspicuous example of plain no in the data for this study is as
follows:
Extract 3
S1 (a Singaporean subcontractor) asks A2 (A1s supervisor) about the previous
construction work A2 subcontracted to another subcontractor.
1 S1: Saito-san2 Im surprised that you you you allowed the factory to flow(.)
2 thats Im very surprised that=
3 A2:=no no no no (.) Im not saying (.) we I allowed for factory to flow
4 S1: uh
5 A2: I allowed to it overflow on the ground le[vel
6 S1: [on the ground level=
7 A2:=I dont allow overflow on top
8 S1: ok
9 A2:that means I do NOT ALLOW the overflow coming inside to the building
10 even in the ground floor
11 S1: its true rightyou you dont want that yeahumm
12 because [thatll be affecting uh many factories=
13 A2: [if you
14 A2: =yes of course=
15 S1: =yeah=
16 A2:=Im not gonna allow that
17 S1: yeah
S1 asks A2 about the previous construction work that had a problem in its water
discharge. As S1s repetition of you in line 1 shows his hesitation to bring it up, it is a
delicate issue that can affect A2s professional face. As soon as A2 finds what S1 is
talking about, A2 immediately interrupts A1 saying no four times in line 3. He uses
the subject we first but self-repaired it into I and continues to use I four
consecutive times, which shows A2 takes this incident as his sole responsibility. Then
he explains specifically what he did and he didnt in lines 5 and 7, and moves on to his
resolution not to let the same thing happen. He enunciates not allow loudly in line 9
and make it extra sure in line 16. The repeated no has a strong effect for S1 to realize
how important this issue is for A2.
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
16
V. Discussion
From analyses of Extracts 1 through 3, it can be assumed that in the case of this
workplace, expressing negative answers to interlocutors remarks is not unusual.
Negations appear a number of times, but they are unmarked and freely distributed
among participants. This may seem to deviate from conventional CA principals such as
self-repair predominates over other-repair (Schegloff et.al, 1977:361) as well as
results from ELF research where the cooperative and supportive nature is conspicuous,
but is rather a matter of degree. Participants in this study do use various forms of
mitigation such as long pauses, hesitation/delay markers such as uh, um and oh
before using negative forms, but the degree of articulation in expressing no is stronger
than that observed in other CA studies that focus on non-institutional conversations.
There are several possible reasons for this stronger articulation. First of all, in the
business situation, efficiency of communication is most important. While it is preferable
to save face with one another, disagreements have to be articulated immediately by
the listener (Grssel, 1991, cited by Wolfartsberger, 2011:173), because of the danger
that superficial consensus may well hide sources of trouble at a deeper level (House
1999, 2002, cited by Seidlhofer 2004:218). It is assumed that interlocutors in this study
make their communication efficient and robust without misunderstanding by not letting
it pass and plainly using negative forms. Considering all the participants in this study
work at construction sites and offices3 where safety is a crucial concern, and where
noise levels can interfere with comprehension (Handford & Matous, 2011),
communicative effectiveness is prioritized over politeness. Other possible reasons are
the power relationship4, cultural differences and gender differences in the workplace.
These are outside the scope of this study, but additional analysis of longer recording
data and retrospective interviews with the participants will further support the findings
of the study.
As for pedagogical implications from the present study, ESP textbook designs and
classroom interactions can benefit from the present study. For example, the construction
company taken up in this study provides in-house English training for engineers.
Material writers and instructors for the course can revise commercial textbooks of
business English according to the actual talk-in-interactions in the industry. Furthermore,
instructors can introduce more competitive or contentious situations for more authentic
classroom activities.
VI. Conclusion
This study is an attempt to suggest that CA methodology can be usefully applied to
ESP studies. With close attention to the use of negations, it reveals unique features of
interactions in the construction industry: articulation of negative utterance to show
disagreement both on factual and professional issues. Efficiency and accuracy of
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
17
communication takes priority at business meetings. At the same time, however, the
participants in this study do use various means to mitigate dispreferred actions. In this
regard, the present study confirmed that professional conversations among non-native
speakers of English are as ordered and organized as seen in traditional CA studies.
The single case analysis is not intended to obtain generalized results but to offer
useful data for relevant ESP courses and materials. The present study focuses on the
construction industry in Southeast Asian contexts, but the same technique can be
adopted for other professional situations. In this way, the accumulation of single cases
like these should be a bridge (Schegloff, 2002) between the findings of CA research
and the content of ESP courses and materials.
Notes
1. ELF researchers have differing ideas about the definition of ELF on whether it
includes native speakers of English in the data. In this study, ELF means English used
only among non-native speakers.
2. A pseudonym is adopted here for the protection of personal information provided
for the study.
3. Although online meetings at the construction company are being held in the office,
people need to speak loudly because there are frequent disturbances of communication
due to noises caused by bad Internet connections.
4. In Extract 3, A2 does not use any hesitation markers or mitigation forms. This is
partly because there is a power relationship between A2 (client) and S1 (subcontractor).
At the same time, however, it should be noted that this is the case where the
interlocutors professionalism is more at stake than in Extracts 1 and 2.
References
Bowles, H. (2006). Bridging the gap between conversation analysis and ESP--- an
applied study of the opening sequences of NS and NNS service telephone calls.
English for Specific Purposes, 25, 332-357.
Drew, P. (1994). Conversation Analysis. In Asher, R.E. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of
Language and Linguistics. Oxford: Pergamon, 749-753.
Ehrenreich, S. (2009). English as a Lingua Franca in Multinational Corporations. In
Mauranen, A. and Ranta, E. (Eds.), English as a Lingua Franca: Studies and
Findings (pp.126-151). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Firth, A. (1996). The discursive accomplishment of normality: On lingua franca
English and conversation analysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 26, 237-259.
Grssel, U. (1991). Sprachverhalten und Geschlecht: eine empirische Studiezu
geschlechtsspezifischem Sprachverhalten in Fernsehdiskussionen. Pfaffenweiler:
Centaurus-Verlag.
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
18
Handford, M. & Matous, P. (2011). Lexicogrammar in the international construction
industry: A corpus-based case study of Japanese-Hong-Kongese on-site
interactions in English. English for Specific Purposes,30, 87-100.
Hatchby, I. & Wooffitt, R. (2008). Conversation Analysis.2nd
edition. Polity Press.
House, J. (1999). Misunderstanding in intercultural communication: interactions in
English as a lingua franca and the myth of mutual intelligibility. In Gnutzmann, C.
(Ed.), Teaching and learning English as a global language (pp.73-89). Tubingen:
Stauffenburg.
House, J. (2002). Pragmatic competence in lingua franca English. In Knapp, K. &
Meierkord, C. (Eds.). (pp.245-267). Lingua franca communication. Frankfurt:
Lang.
Meierkord, C. (2000). Interpreting successful lingua franca interaction. An analysis of
non-native-/non-native small talk conversation in English.
http://www.linguistik-online.de/1_00/MEIERKOR.HTM (accessed September 13,
2012)
Richards, K. (2009). Knowing When to No: Aspects of Alignment in Professional
Relationships. In Bowles, H. & Seedhouse, P. (Eds.), Conversation Analysis and
Language for Specific Purposes. 2nd
edition. Peter Lang.
Sacks, H.(1984). Notes on methodology. In Atkinson, J.M., and Heritage, J.(Eds.).
Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Sacks, H. (1987). On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in
Conversation. In Button, G. & Lee, J.R.E. (Eds.). Talk and Social Organisation.
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 54-69.
Schegloff, E.A., Koshik, I., Jacoby, S. & Olsher, D.(2002). Conversation Analysis and
Applied Linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 3-31.
Seedhouse, P. (1997). The Case of the Missing No: The Relationship between
Pedagogy and Interaction. Language Learning, 47(3), 547-583.
Seidlhofer, B. (2004). Research perspectives on teaching English as a lingua franca.
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 209-239.
Tsuchiya, K. (2011). Not 'letting it pass' in an ELF business conversation in South Asia:
A time-aligned corpus based approach. The 1st Waseda ELF International
Workshop. Tokyo.
Wolfartsberger, A. (2011). ELF Business/Business ELF: Form and Function in
Simultaneous Speech. In Archibald, A., Cogo, A. & Jenkins, J. (Eds.). Latest
Trends in ELF Research (pp.163-184). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
19
Appendix The transcription notations used in the present study are as follows: [ the point of overlap onset
= latching
(0.7) an interval between utterances
(.) a very short untimed pause
uh::: lengthening of the preceding sound
rising intonation word underlining indicates speaker emphasis
CAPITALS especially loud sounds relative to surrounding talk
utterances between degree sings are quieter than surrounding talk xxxxxx unintelligible speech ((actions)) non-verbal actions arrows in the left margin features of special interest
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
20
Article
A Proposed Set of Can-Do Statements for Technical English
Michihiro Hirai
Kanagawa University
Abstract: One of the problems facing both teachers and curriculum designers of technical English today
is the lack of a widely accepted framework for technical English with which curricula, teaching materials,
and assessment methodology for the scientific and engineering community should be aligned. As part of a
project promoted by the Institute for Professional English Communication (IPEC), the author has drafted
a preliminary set of Can-Do statements for Japanese scientists and engineers working, or expected to
work, in an international setting, in the hope that it will provide a starting point for the formation of an
engineering variant of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). While
gleaning ideas from a series of discussions held in an IPEC-sponsored forum on English education for
scientists and engineers, the author has primarily drawn upon his dual experience as a computer engineer
and a teacher of technical English.
keywords: framework of reference, CEFR, professional English, ESP, IPEC
I. Introduction
As Japan becomes increasingly integrated into the global framework of economy
and industry, English is gaining importance as the de-facto international language in
practically all aspects of our life including business, science and technology. Against
this backdrop, Japanese scientists and engineers are feeling mounting pressure to boost
their proficiency in technical English, as pointed out in various reports and articles (for
example, The Japan Times 2009, 2010). Compared with general-purpose English and
so-called Business English, however, technical English has traditionally not received
the attention it deserves from either the business community or academia, let alone the
general public.
In the fall of 2007, the Institute for Professional English Communication (IPEC), a
Tokyo-based non-profit organization which, as its name suggests, promotes professional
English communication, hosted a series of meetings focusing on the problems with
technical English education in Japan, inviting four teachers from tertiary educational
institutions, including the author. One of the most important outcomes of the meetings
was an awareness of the lack of a common framework for technical English with which
curricula, teaching materials, and assessment methodology for the scientific and
engineering community should be aligned. While this ad-hoc group suspended its
activities at the end of 2007, the author continued to work for a few more months on the
project and produced a preliminary set of Can-Do statements for technical English as a
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
21
draft proposal based on which a common framework for technical English education in
Japan could be developed in the future. (It is called preliminary in that it has not been
discussed, reviewed, or endorsed in any way at the meetings and has not been published
anywhere.)
This paper introduces the set of Can-Do statements for technical English
mentioned above, focusing on the thinking behind them and how they relate to the
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) (Council of
Europe 2001).
II. Objectives
The primary objective of this set of Can-Do statements was to propose a common
scale of skills for the English used in science and engineering (generically called
technical English in this paper) with which curricula, teaching materials and
qualification testing in technical English would be aligned. The target audience was
assumed to consist primarily of (a) Japanese teachers and students of technical English,
(b) Japanese scientists and engineers, (c) personnel who need to evaluate Japanese
scientists and engineers ability to function in English in the workplace, (d) writers and
publishers of teaching materials and self-study books on technical English, and (e)
developers and administrators of tests to assess knowledge and skills in technical
English.
III. Main Considerations
In drafting this set of Can-Do statements, the author took the following into
consideration:
(a) The statements should be user-friendly for the target audience, who may not be
familiar with specialist terms (e.g., cohesive device) often used in the language
education community, let alone those specific to skill assessment.
(b) They should represent, and effectively discriminate between, the several typical
levels of ability of Japanese people to communicate in English in a technical
context.
(c) They should focus on competence in technical English, based on the belief that it
is substantially different from, and therefore almost independent of, general
English in terms of vocabulary and context as it calls for a significant level of
technical or scientific literacy.
(d) They should represent what is generally considered to be common or fundamental
to science and engineeringin other words what can be hypothetically termed the
greatest common denominator of science and engineering, which in itself is
extremely diverse by nature.
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
22
Point (a) above reflects the voice of most people in industry, who are non-specialists
in language education and hence are not necessarily interested in theoretical skill grids
for general English but are more concerned with discrimination between skill levels in
practical, everyday terms for job-oriented contexts. They tend to measure English skills
in terms of how effectively and effortlessly individuals can communicate with
foreigners, particularly native speakers of English, which is, after all, what matters
ultimately to them on the job. Therefore, they would find Can-Do statements more
practical and easier to understand if they are worded in terms of how well each
individual can communicate with foreigners.
Point (b) reflects the authors intuition that the communication ability of the
majority of Japanese scientists and engineers may not vary greatly on an international
scale such as the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR).
Furthermore, upon studyingalbeit cursorilythe CEFR, the author found most of its
level descriptors too general to provide crisp discrimination between levels in the target
audience, i.e., the technical English community. The author is particularly concerned
that if the CEFR does not discriminate between their skill levels well enough in
practical terms, then it may be worthwhile to consider developing a separate scale that
effectively reflects the typical distribution of communication skills of Japanese
scientists and engineers. For example, if one is to focus on the practical ability to
communicate with non-Japanese in the technical contexts discussed above, the highest
level (C2) of the CEFR might not be needed.
Point (c) is particularly important in Japan, where the teaching and learning
environments, e.g., teaching materials and teaching staff, for technical English and
general English are almost completely separate from each other and should therefore be
treated as two independent spheres. This leads to the assumption that the proposed set of
Can-Do statements would be used in conjunction with those for general English, instead
of being used as a self-standing set of Can-Do statements. In this regard, it would be
advisable to employ two sets of Can-Do statements as a package, one for technical and
the other for general English, which are thought to complement each other in practice,
just as the X-axis and the Y-axis in a two-dimensional Cartesian space would. For
example, if a qualification test for technical English is to be developed based on this set
of Can-Do statements, it would be designed to measure primarily technical English
competence, leaving the measurement of general English competence to a separate,
more appropriate general English test, and its scores should be used only as an indicator
of the test-takers knowledge of, and skills in, technical English. It is further assumed
that those in a position to evaluate the test-takers technical English competence would
always consider his/her results in two tests as a package, one in technical English based
on this set of Can-Do statements and the other based on one for general English.
As for Point (d), it would be practically impossible for any single teaching material
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
23
or test to cover all the possible fields of science and engineering, which are already
overwhelmingly diverse and are by nature evolving constantly. This fact gives rise to
the all-too-familiar question of how to define the scope of science and engineering,
particularly as it relates to how to evaluate technical English competence. For this
proposed set of Can-Do statements for technical English, the author has chosen as a
reference point, or common denominator, what is commonly taught at high schools in
the U.S. and secondary schools in the U.K. In other words, the author assumed that
Japanese scientists and engineers should have, before anything else, the same basic
technical knowledge as most of their counterparts in the U.S. and the U.K. This notion
of basic technical knowledge is introduced in this set of Can-Do statements as
language knowledge, which pertains to technical English vocabulary, and scientific
literacy, which pertains to knowledge of scientific facts and principles.
IV. Proposed Set of Can-Do Statements for Technical English for Japanese
The proposed set of Can-Do Statements for Technical English for Japanese consists
of a table of level descriptors and a table of level criteria. Altogether five levels are
defined, from Level 5 (highest in practical terms) to Level 1 (lowest), with an additional
supplementary level (Level 0) appended to accommodate all those who do not reach
Level 1. Each of these tables is subdivided into seven skill/knowledge areas: reading,
listening, speaking, writing, language knowledge, technical literacy, and overall. The
table of level descriptors lists the descriptors for all the levels and all the
skill/knowledge areas, while the table of level criteria lists the criteria to be used to
discriminate between each pair of adjacent levels.
Tables 1 through 4 are excerpts of the proposed set of Can-Do Statements for
Technical English for Japanese, representing the overall, language knowledge,
scientific literacy, and speaking skill/knowledge areas. Language knowledge
refers to knowledge of technical vocabulary in both the receptive and productive senses.
The proposed set of Can-Do Statements for Technical English for Japanese thus
looks somewhat different from those in the CEFR and its Japanese versions such as
CEFR-J (Tono et al 2012). The major differences lie in the separation of technical
English from general English and the frequent reference to native speakers of English
or foreigners, which have resulted from the considerations discussed above,
particularly points (c) and (a), respectively. It should be noted further that the level
descriptors for technical English and general English should be taken together as two
independent yet complementary axes (or aspects) of technical English competence.
Another difference, which has arisen from point (b), is the absence of a level
corresponding to the CEFRs highest level (C2). Thus, Levels 5 (highest) to 1 (lowest)
in the proposed set correspond roughly to Levels C1/B2 to A1, while it remains to be
studied how closely these levels correspond between the two sets.
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
24
Table 1. Excerpt of Level Descriptors: Overall
Level 5 4 3 2
Ove
rall
In technical context, cancommunicate in English ascompetently and smoothly -with respect to all languageskills - as an educated nativespeaker of English with thesame level of technicalknowledge would.
In technical context, cancommunicate in English, withrespect to all language skills,with scientists and engineersof any nationality with nopractical problems affectingthe communication.
In technical context, cancomprehend, with few practicalproblems, what is visually oraurally communicated tohim/her.Can express in English, orallyand in writing, simple technicalcontent only to such anextent and in such a depth asforeigners with the same levelof technical knowledge wouldcomprehend at the minimumlevel.
In technical context, cancomprehend only at the basiclevel (not at the practical level)what is visually or aurallycommunicated to him/her.Can communicate in English,orally and in writing, at the dailyconversational level regardingnon-technical matters.Can express in English, orallyand in writing, simple technicalcontent only at such a limitedlevel that foreigners will find ithard to comprehend.
Table 2. Excerpt of Level Descriptors: Language Knowledge
Level 5 4 3 2
Lan
guag
ekn
ow
ledg
e
Has such a good mastery ofgeneral technical vocabularythat he/she can comprehendpractically all technical texts(except highly specializedpapers or articles) withoutconsulting a dictionary and alsocan use such vocabularyaccurately in productivecommunication.
Has a knowledge of generaltechnical vocabulary goodenough to enable him/her tocomprehend practically alltechnical texts (except highlyspecialized papers or articles),although needing occasionallyto consult a dictionary, andalso can use such vocabularyaccurately enough in practicalterms in productivecommunication.
Has an intermediate (morethan 50%) grasp of generaltechnical vocabulary that isrequired at a minimum inpractical terms.When trying to conveytechnical content to aforeigner, has some difficultyin communication because ofinadequate knowledge ofgeneral technical vocabulary.
Has a limited (more than 40%)grasp of general technicalvocabulary.When trying to conveytechnical content to aforeigner, has substantialdifficulty in communicationbecause of a lack of generaltechnical vocabulary.
Table 3. Excerpt of Level Descriptors: Scientific Literacy Level 5 4 3 2
Scie
ntific
litera
cy
Has a limited (more than 40%)grasp of the fundamentalknowledge of mathematics,science, and technology(engineering) that scientistsand engineers are supposed tohave.
Has a good (more than 60%) grasp of the fundamental knowledge of mathematics, science,and technology (engineering) that scientists and engineers are supposed to have.
Table 4. Excerpt of Level Descriptors: Speaking
Level 5 4 3 2
Spe
akin
g
Can discuss technicalmatters with native speakersof English as competently asthey do.Can deliver presentations ontechnical themes accuratelyand logically using naturalEnglish at the same speed asnative speakers of Englishwould, while employingappropriate rhetorical patternsand organizational structures.
Can discuss technicalmatters with native speakersof English practically withoutproblems (while occasionallyneeding some assistance).Can deliver presentations ontechnical themes, using Englishcorrect and concise enoughfor the audience tocomprehend.
Can orally explainunsophisticated technicalmatters without makingmistakes in English (whileoccasionally needing someassistance).
Can orally explain technicalmatters in fairly limited Englishat such a limited level thatforeigners will find it hard tocomprehend.
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
25
V. Conclusion
The author developed a proposed set of Can-Do statements for technical English for
Japanese that would be used primarily by the technical English community in Japan,
which operates practically independently of the general-purpose English community
and thus has its own objectives and priorities. One of the most significant features is the
assumption that this set of statements would serve as a scale of reference for technical
English only, which should be complemented by one for general English, since the two
should be regarded as practically independent of, yet complementary to, each other, just
like the X-axis and the Y-axis of a two-dimensional space. Another feature is that these
statements are written from the viewpoint of scientists, engineers, and their employers,
using expressions and references most relevant to them.
This proposed set of Can-Do statements for technical English, drafted in January
2008, reflects primarily the authors thinking, with some input from a small ad-hoc
committee that existed prior to that date. As it has not been critically reviewed nor
verified since then by any organizations or individuals, it should still be considered
preliminary. Future work should therefore include critical review and calibration by
stake-holders, collation with the CEFR and/or its Japanese versions, as well as trial and
evaluation in the field.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank the members of IPECs ad-hoc committee on the
education of technical English in Japan for their discussion on issues in this area, which
contributed as general input to the present project.
References
The Japan Times (2009). Engineers must have English skills to succeed, The Japan
Times, October 5, 2009, pp. 8-9.
The Japan Times (2010). English education for engineers needs new framework,
methods, The Japan Times, March 31, 2010, p. 8.
Council of Europe (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages:
Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Tono et al (2012). CEFR-J. CEFR-based framework for ELT in Japan (CEFR-J), Tokyo,
Japan. Retrieved August 10, 2012 from
http://www.tufs.ac.jp/ts/personal/tonolab/cefr-j/download.html
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
26
Article
Examining Authenticity and Motivation from an International
Perspective
Richard Pinner
Sophia University
Abstract: Authenticity is often seen as a desirable component in the content selected and adapted for
language learners. It has been shown that authentic materials are more motivating, even for low-level
learners, than inauthentic or contrived materials (Peacock, 1997). On the other hand whilst authentic
materials may potentially be more motivating for both students and teachers, these materials are not
always seen as suitable for language acquisition due to linguistic complexities. A further complication
arises when we ask exactly what constitutes the definition of authentic language learning materials. This
paper presents various definitions of authenticity and proposes that authenticity should be defined
according to a continuum rather than a single, fixed, definition. It goes on to advocate the use of authentic
materials as a way of making content more relevant and interesting to students, which is hypothesised to
lead to increased motivation, greater involvement, and hence better language acquisition overall. The
paper also discusses the value of ESP or subject-specific materials, advocating a primarily content-based
approach to language teaching.
. Introduction In the May 2012 meeting of the Kanto JACET ESP SIG, I gave a presentation
outlining current theory in the use of authentic materials to motivate students. A
definition of authenticity and of motivation was arrived at after a brief examination
of the literature, following which I gave some practical strategies for dealing with the
inevitable lexical and grammatical complications that arise from bringing
un-simplified authentic materials into the language classroom. During the presentation,
I also invited discussion and debate from the participants, which led to an interesting
number of additional questions and ideas for practical classroom tasks and management
strategies. In this paper, I will begin by addressing the problems with current definitions
of authenticity. I will then explain in greater detail the theoretical background of the
connection between authenticity and motivation, and propose that a continuum be used
in order to encompass the broadening array of contexts in which authentic materials are
used for language learning. Following which, I further elaborate the practical
implications for language teaching. First, in order to understand the interplay between
authenticity and motivation it is important establish what exactly is meant by the two
terms.
Japan Association of College English Teachers English for Specific Purposes Interest Group
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
27
II. Motivation Background and Definition
Like authenticity, motivation is a difficult term to define and yet it is used frequently
in the classroom and cited often in research literature. For some, motivation is the single
most important factor in determining the success of a learner to achieve their linguistic
goals (Drnyei, 1994; Drnyei and Ushioda, 2010; Gao and Lamb, 2011). With little
debate on the importance of motivation, it is no wonder that the research on motivation
in both educational psychology and second language acquisition enjoys a rich and
complex history. Ema Ushioda advocates a person-in-context view of motivation, which
is emergent from relations between real persons, with particular social identities, and
the unfolding cultural context of activity (2009, 215). For Ushioda, the individual
identity of the learner is essential in their motivation to learn the target language,
stressing the importance of allowing learners the autonomy required to speak as
themselves. The importance of autonomy in motivation has also been established for
many years, most notably in Deci and Ryans (1985) self-determination theory which
posits that autonomy, competence and relatedness are essential factors in the motivation
to learn a foreign language. Elsewhere, Ushioda noted that the notion of engaging our
students identities is something many experienced language teachers have intuitively
recognised as important (2011, 17) and explains that doing so is not new or surprising
but is in fact what many good teachers do instinctively. In breaking down and analysing
what it is that good teachers do to motivate their students, it might be possible to use
this information in teacher training programs and perhaps also to inform materials
design. However, I would like to point out here that this process of personal engagement
and encouraging students to use their own identities would be likely to rely heavily on
the type of materials being used or the content of the class. It is my view that by using
authentic materials it is much easier to motivate students and to encourage them to
engage with the materials, as long as students and teachers understand exactly what
constitutes as authenticity.
III. Authenticity Background and Definition
The term authenticity is used often in the and around the language classroom. It is
referred to both in practical terms as a methodologically sound component of language
learning materials and also it is frequently mentioned in the research literature, usually
in terms of its desirability and the way it can effect motivation and add value to what is
being taught. The use of authentic materials has been a relatively common place
occurrence in the language classroom for almost a hundred years (Gilmore 2007, 98).
Authenticity is also centrally important to ESP because of what Carver calls the
orientation toward purpose (1983, 133).
The learners are studying because they have actual or simulated purposes related to
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
28
the real world. Real world language performance is by definition authentic. It is
proposed that the only way in which learners can learn how to handle authentic
material is by exposure to such material. Further, it is proposed that such exposure
should be as extensive as possible, and should occur as early as possible. (Carver, 1983,
133)
However, Widdowson argues that some amount of contrivance is essential in order
to make authentic materials comprehensible to students. He advocates that [s]pecificity
is as much a matter of the process as the purpose of learning (1998, 13). Therefore,
although authenticity is desirable, indeed intrinsic to use Carvers words, to the ESP
classroom, it is nonetheless important to remember that the learners need some
assistance and moderation in order to deal with the material. Widdowson (1990, 44)
explains authenticity in terms of its relationship to learning aims and outcomes. He
refers to what he calls the means/ends equation and explains that students necessarily
need to learn authentic language because it stands to reason that they will have to
comprehend and make use of authentic language when they communicate beyond the
classroom situation, thus authentic language is a means to an ends. Widdowson defines
authenticity as natural language behaviour (45) and goes on to explain that he sees it
difficult to imagine a definition of authenticity which deviates from this. Despite
Widdowsons assertions, there are actually numerous definitions of authenticity which
have arisen over time from the research literature. Gilmore identifies eight
inter-related meanings from the literature, which are:
i. the language produced by native speakers for native speakers in a particular
language community
ii. the language produced by a real speaker/writer for a real audience, conveying a
real message
iii. the qualities bestowed on a text by the receiver, in that it is not seen as
something already in a text itself, but is how the reader/listener perceives it
iv. the interaction between students and teachers and is a personal process of
engagement
v. the types of task chosen
vi. the social situation of the classroom
vii. the relevance something has to assessment
viii. culture, and the ability to behave or think like a target language group in order
to be validated by themAdapted from Gilmore (2007, 98)
In order to visualise the interplay of these definitions I have developed a simplified
diagrammatic version.
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
29
It may be important to draw the readers attention at this point to the very first of
Gilmores definitions, which frames authenticity as deriving from the L1 or native
speaker realm. For a long time, this definition was the accepted and unchallenged norm.
Perhaps this is because it is only relatively recently, say in the past ten or twenty years,
that more precedence has been given to the voices of the international community who
speak and use English daily as their second language. Previously, the classic example
of authentic materials was to obtain a newspaper from the target-language culture and to
use that in class in some way, either for linguistic analysis or for a debate of some kind
around current affairs. Whilst newspapers certainly are authentic, they are not
necessarily the archetype of authenticity. Furthermore, newspapers force us to question
the concept which for a long time was the bedrock of authenticity, the idea of the L1
culture. In framing authenticity from the realm of the native speaker we automatically
presume that there exists some kind of target culture from which examples of authentic
language can be extracted and then presented, preserved and still with their authenticity
intact, to our learners. This falls under the definition of what Hung and Chen refer to as
extrapolation approaches, which they point out assumes similarity between abstracted
concepts and the actual phenomena (2007, 149). This foundation for the definition has
proved to be unstable now, because as it turns out we no longer reside in a world where
culture is clear cut and where samples of language can simply be picked like fruit from
the single tree of the target culture (see for example, Ushioda and Drnyei, 2009).
Pavlenko notes that cultures are increasingly homogenous in certain respects because
they "continually influence each other" (2002, 280) and therefore it can be difficult to
draw distinctions between one culture and another using such binary notions.
Gilmores definitions offer a useful opportunity to take stock of what exactly is
meant by the term authentic. Although the term is so often used in and around
language teaching and seen as important, unfortunately it is not always as
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
30
straightforward as it might initially appear. Gilmore provides a glimpse of the
frustrations involved in trying to gain a firm theoretical footing with the concept when
he asks whether the term has become too elusive to be useful (2007, 98). Fortunately,
Gilmore overcomes this difficulty by choosing to ground his enquiry based on
Morrows earlier definition, that authenticity is real language produced by a real
speaker or writer for a real audience and designed to convey a real message (1977, 13).
Gilmore, thus following Morrow, decides that this allows the criteria to be limited to
something objectifiable, therefore becoming more conceptually manageable. While it is
certainly useful to keep the definition grounded in tenable concepts, the definition of
authenticity is quickly unpinned again when the use of the word real is placed under
scrutiny. It seems to me that the term real, whilst certainly useful, is at the same time
still rather elusive. Distinctions have been drawn already between real language that
takes place outside the classroom and genuine language which is brought in from
outside and possibly adapted to suit the learning environment (Widdowson, 1990), yet
the term still seems to lack solidity.
For this reason, I prefer Tomlinson and Masuharas definition, which states that
authentic materials are designed not to transmit declarative knowledge about the target
language but rather to provide an experience of the language in use (2010, 400). In this
definition, a clearer concept is provided by explaining what is not authentic i.e.
language teaching which prioritises description over actual use. Tomlinson and
Masuharas description also adds a new term into the mix, the use of the word
experience. An experience is almost as hard to define as what is real. However, the
definition clearly places the emphasis on language as it is used and casts aside the
notion of breaking language down into compartmentalised rules. These rules of
language can be explained as declarative knowledge but they often do not reflect the
way language is actually used in its natural state. In this way, Tomlinson and
Masuharas definition places authenticity within a sociocultural context, prioritising the
use of language as a tool (to use the Vygotskyian term) through which some other
function is achieved. To put it simply, authentic language is language where something
other than language for its own sake is being discussed. Grammar drills and repetitive
explanations of the rules for forming correct sentences in the target language are not
authentic, whereas discussions about environmental issues or exchanges of other
information such as personal beliefs and opinions are authentic. This situates the use of
authentic materials in a content-based methodology, in which authenticity is gained by
authenticity of purpose (Coyle, Hood and Marsh, 2010), which bears much in
common with Carvers term orientation towards purpose (1983, 133).
In Tomlinson and Masuharas definition, authenticity is being used to refer mainly to
the materials (texts) being presented to the students. However, it may be more
illuminating to further separate the concept of authenticity so that it refers to one of
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
31
three distinct, yet overlapping and interacting areas: authentic texts, authentic tasks and
authentic language in use.
This idea builds on a distinction advocated in Pinner (2012), which explains that
authentic texts should be used in authentic ways. In order to achieve a greater
understanding of this relationship in practice, it might be helpful to consider the
following three types of task and the way they utilise authentic materials.
Example A: The teacher brings an English language newspaper to class and
has students read the text and underline every instance of the present perfect aspect or
passive tense, and then asks them to copy each sentence out into their notebooks.
Example B: The teacher uses an inauthentic text from a published course
book which was contrived specifically to practise reported speech and then discusses
other ways in which the speakers from the text could have said the same thing in a
different way.
Example C: The teacher asks students to use the internet to research about
their favourite celebrity or hero and then create a short presentation in English to the
rest of the class about that person.
During the presentation form of this paper, delegates were asked to number the
above items 1-3 depending on which they felt to be the most authentic. Two of the
twelve participants chose Example B as the most authentic, with the remaining ten
choosing Example C. Although these results are by no means conclusive and were not
carried out as formally collected empirical data, they do fall under the category of
observed or reported data and therefore may still be valuable as a preliminary indicator.
The majority of participants (83%) opted for Example C as being the most authentic
type of task and none chose Example A. Despite the fact that Example A uses the
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
32
aforementioned classic authentic text - the L1 newspaper, it was not chosen by any
participants. From this, it can be inferred that authenticity is not purely just about the
materials but rather about the task and the language production from the students. It also
should be pointed out that Example C clearly involves a greater amount of autonomy
and personal engagement with the task than the other two, because students are asked to
choose their own focus and to carry out research. It seems no great conceptual leap to
infer that the most authentic of these examples would also be the most motivating. This
is in agreement with the findings of MacDonald, Badger and White (2000), who
conducted research with ESP students and found that the authentic materials which
allowed learner interaction and related to the learners personally were more conducive
for language learning. Again, this bears similarities with Ushiodas (2009)
person-in-context view of motivation. For this reason, I would like to propose that
authenticity ought not to be defined in terms of a single target culture or the origin of
the text used.
Authenticity needs to be redefined in a way that takes into account the degrees of
involvement and levels of personal engagement that will result from the task used, in
other words us[ing] authentic materials in authentic ways (Pinner, 2012, 118). In
order to help teachers gauge the relevance of authentic materials and predict the level of
student engagement, the concept of authenticity also needs to take account of learner
contexts. Therefore I have developed an authenticity continuum which aims to take into
account the various degrees of authenticity and the contexts in which they are used. IV.
IV. The Authenticity Continuum
In order to address the difficulties of overlapping cultures, classroom contexts and
real contexts whilst at the same time accommodating the distinction between authentic
texts, tasks and language in use, I have devised a continuum which can be used to
evaluate authenticity from multiple dimensions.
Classroom
Reality
TLU Community User
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
33
The vertical lines represent relevance to the user or the Target Language Use (TLU)
community (Bachman and Palmer, 1996). The horizontal lines represent the context in
which the language is used. Using this continuum, materials, tasks and language in use
can be evaluated according to relevance and context of use without the danger of relying
on a pre-defined notion of culture or of falling back into practices that utilise
extrapolation approaches. It is hoped that this continuum will also allow further
emphasis to be placed on materials which are relevant to the students, thus allowing for
a more personal engagement and potentially leading to greater motivation and autonomy.
This is what Ushioda advocates in her person-in-context view of motivation, namely
that students should be encouraged to speak as themselves (2011).
With a working definition of authenticity in place and a further distinction between
authenticity as it relates to three separate instances where language is used in the
classroom it is hoped that the term has gained a more concrete base from which to
launch a deeper analysis of its relationship to motivation.
By approaching authenticity as it fits into a continuum, almost any classroom
material or interaction can be measured to see how it relates to the different areas of
authenticity. For example, a Graded Reader which has been abridged for a particular
level might not be seen as authentic under previous definitions of authenticity, in that it
exists specifically for language learning purposes. However, Graded Readers would
certainly count as authentic in that they provide an experience of the language and do
not focus specifically on declarative knowledge. If a student has selected the Graded
Reader themselves or it is relevant or of interest to them, Graded Readers would score
highly on the User section of the spectrum, although they might fare less well on
Community and Reality because they have been abridged and may bear only a slight
resemblance to the original text.
In ESP contexts, the continuum can be used to evaluate materials which have a
strong relevance to the specific purpose or the content of the class, even if such
materials have been necessarily adapted or modified to increase their suitability as
learning materials. This is especially useful in ESP contexts where learners have
specific requirements of the content they learn to match the context in which they intend
to use the language. Namely, the orientation towards purpose (Carver, 1983) means
that for ESP classrooms, it is vital that any definition of authenticity takes into account
the needs of the user and the context in which learning takes place.
V. Conclusion
The main point of this paper was to establish that authentic language and authentic
materials are not the sole domain of the native speaker and that by educating learners
(and indeed other teachers) that this is so, authenticity can have an empowering effect
on speakers. In addition, I intended to demonstrate that the link between authenticity
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
34
and motivation is not merely conceptual but in fact very real when authenticity is
viewed as a process of personal engagement, following Ushiodas (2009)
person-in-context definition and taking into account the learners own identity.
Authentic materials need not be a source of confusion for students or teachers if they
are defined in a way which does not place an overemphasis on the L1 community. It is
also important that teachers deal with authentic materials properly and integrate them
into the class and scheme of work effectively. Authentic materials are not the sole
domain of advanced learners and they are a useful way to motivate students and make
the classroom content more engaging and relevant for them. I would advocate the use of
authentic materials to supplement course-books and even as the basis for an entire ESP
course because of the rich opportunities and positive effects they can have on the
classroom and on the learners experience of learning the target language.
References
Bachman, L.F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language Testing in Practice. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Carver, D. (1983). Some propositions about ESP. The ESP Journal 2 (2), 131-137.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). Content and Language Integrated Learning.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behaviour. New York: Plenum.
Drnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2010). Teaching and Researching Motivation (2nd ed.).
Essex: Longman Pearson.
Drnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and Motivating in the Foreign Language Classroom.
The Modern Language Journal, 78(3), 273-284.
Gao, X., & Lamb, T. (2011). Exploring links between identity, motivation and autonomy.
In G. Murray, X. Gao, & T. Lamb (Eds.), Identity, Motivation and Autonomy in
Language Learning (pp. 1-8). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Gilmore, A. (2007). Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign language learning.
Language Teaching, 40, 97-118.
Hung, D., & Chen, D.V. (2007). Context-process authenticity in learning: implications
for identity enculturation and boundary crossing. Education Technology Research
Development, 55 (2), 147-167.
MacDonald, M., Badger, R., & White, G. (2000). The real thing?: authenticity and
academic listening. English for Specific Purposes, 19 (3), 253-267.
Morrow, K. (1977). Authentic texts and ESP. In S. Holden (Ed.), English for Specific
Purposes (pp. 13-17). London: Modern English Publications.
Pavlenko, A. (2002). Poststructuralist Approaches to the Study of Social Factors in
Second Language Learning and Use. In V. Cook (Ed.), Portraits of the L2 User
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
35
(pp. 277-302). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Peacock, M. (1997). The effect of authentic materials on the motivation of EFL learners.
ELT Journal, 5 (12), 144-156.
Pinner, R. S. (2012). Unlocking Literature through CLIL: Authentic materials and tasks
to promote cultural and historical understanding. In Y. Watanabe, M. Ikeda, & S.
Izumi (Eds.), CLIL: New Challenges in Foreign Language Education. Vol. 2 (pp.
91-129). Tokyo: Sophia University Press.
Tomlinson, B. & Masuhara, H. (2010). Research for Materials Development in
Language Learning. London: Continuum.
Ushioda, E. & Drnyei, Z. (2009). Motivation, Language Identities and the L2 Self: A
Theoretical Overview. In Z. Drnyei, & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language
identity and the L2 self (pp. 1-8). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Ushioda, E. (2009). A person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self
and identity. In Z. Drnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity
and the L2 self (pp. 215-228). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Ushioda, E. (2011). Motivating learners to speak as themselves. In G. Murray, X. Gao,
& T. Lamb (Eds.), Identity, Motivation and Autonomy in Language Learning (pp.
11-25). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Widdowson, H. G. (1990). Aspects of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
36
Article
Survey of Communication with Foreign Parents of Children in
Nursery Schools
Abstract: This questionnaire study revealed aspects of nursery school teacher communication with
foreign parents of nursery schoolchildren. More than 60% of participating nursery school teachers
responded that they had experienced difficulties in communicating with foreign parents of nursery
schoolchildren. Fewer than half of the participating nursery schools reported readiness to accept
children of foreign parents. Only eight nursery schools positively sought to accept children of foreign
parents. Results show that the more that nursery school teachers regarded English as necessary for
themselves, the more they positively sought to accept children of foreign parents.
I.
English for Specific Purposes(ESP)
(2000, p.197
1960
ESP
ESP
, 2000)
Brown, 1994; Richards, 2001ESP
3
(2000)
2005p.21
1990
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
37
6
ESP
ESP
(2006)2009b, 2011 ESP
2009a
(2012) 219,856
7,447
ESP
.
1.
2010 10 11 22
81 18
2.
2 3
4
5
6 7
8
9
10
10
3.
17
( 1)
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
38
1
17
1
0
2 2
14 618 8
2
14 1
6 1
6 1
5 1
3 1
1 1
1 1
3
1 3
3
17
1
4
12
6
4
( 4)
12 5
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
39
5 5
5
11
8
2
0
0
4
6
2
6
7 6
2
8
7
9
8
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
40
6
8
3
1
0
0
2
2
7
4
3
8
1
1
8
2
6
7
3
20
23
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
41
10 9
9
3
6
3
3
3
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
42
(2)
8 9
10
10
8 9 8 10 9 10 r
= .63 (p < .01)
10
8 9 10
8
9 .16
10 .09 .63**
**p < .01
6
-
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 14, December 2012
43
ESP
23
2012). 23
http://www.city.ota.gunma.jp/005gyosei/0020-001kikaku-kikaku/toukei23.html
(2009a). English
for Specific Purposes ESP JALT Journal, 31(2), 65-86.
(2009b).ESP
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 11, 22-30.
(2011). English for Specific Purposes(ESP)
Annual Report of JACET-SIG on ESP, Volume 13, 2-9.
(2005).ESP
(2000).ESP.
(2006). ESP
231-14.
Brown, J.D. (1994). Elements of Language Curriculum, Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Richards, J. C. (2001).Curriculum Development in Language Teaching, Cambridge: Cambridge
University P