The Communicative Approach was founded by Robert Langs.
Psychoanalysis has turned reality on its head: We are taught to think of ourselves as distorters and misperceivers, unreliable slaves to our inner fantasies - especially when we are patients in therapy. But the communicative approach has shown that it is more accurate and compelling to see ourselves as highly reliable perceivers, with the understanding that our most valid perceptions are experienced unconsciously and encoded in the stories we tell to ourselves and others. Knowing how to decode these stories is the key to a truly accurate view of the human emotion-processing mind and emotional life.
The full name of the Communicative Approach (CA) is \"The Communicative-Adaptive approach.\" This highlights the two most distinctive features of the CA: first, that it is a new way to understand human emotionally-laden communications and second, that it has shown that the primary function of the emotion-processing mind is to cope with - adapt to - immediate emotionally-charged triggering events.
What is the communicative approach?
The communicative approach (CA) was developed by Robert Langs MD, In the early 1970's. It is a new theory or paradigm of emotional life and psychoanalysis that is centered on human adaptations to emotionally-charged events--with full appreciation that such adaptations take place both within awareness (consciously) and outside of awareness (unconsciously). The approach gives full credence to the unconscious side of emotional life and has rendered it highly sensible and incontrovertible by discovering a new, validated, and deeply meaningful way of decoding unconscious messages. This procedure-called trigger decoding--has brought forth new and highly illuminating revisions of our understanding of both emotional life and psychotherapy, and it calls for significant changes in presently accepted psychoanalytic thinking and practice.
The CA has exposed and offered correctives for much of what's wrong with our current picture of the emotional mind and today's psychotherapies-critical errors in thinking and practice that have cause untold suffering throughout the world. In essence, the approach has shown that emotional problems do not arise first and foremost from disturbing inner memories and fantasies or daydreams; nor do they arise primarily from consciously known thoughts and patterns of behavior. Instead, emotional disturbances arise primarily from failed efforts at coping with current emotionally-charged traumas. The present-day focus by mainstream psychoanalysts (MP) on the past and on inner fantasies and memories has been replaced in this CA with a focus on the present, as experienced and reacted to consciously and unconsciously-in brief, the primacy afforded by MP to fantasy and imagination has been replaced by the primacy afforded by the CA to reality, trauma, and perception (especially unconscious perception).
Perhaps the best way to appreciate the key feature of the CA is to contrast it with mainstream psychoanalysis (MP):
MP: Emotional problems arise from our inner conflicts, especially distorting memories and fantasies.
CA: Emotional problems arise because an emotionally-traumatic current event has gone unmastered. This failure to cope is secondarily affected by a person's past life history and current inner mental life.
MP: The central problem in emotional life involves resolving past conflicts that have become inner-mental conflicts in the present.
CA: The key problem in emotional life involves coping with a contemporaneous emotional trauma and its ramifications.
MP: Unconscious messages are conveyed in every conceivable way, in everything we do and say.
CA: Deeply meaningful unconscious messages are conveyed exclusively by narratives--the stories we tell ourselves and others, including dreams, daydreams, and other types of tales. There is little in the way of deep unconscious meaning in our analyses, speculations, explanations and other intellectual-reasoning activities-unconscious meaning is expressed in stories.
MP: \"The unconscious\" can be inferred directly from what people say and do. It is to be formulated in terms of patterns of behavior and unrealized memories and fantasies. Images can be explored at face value for their implications and symbolic meanings. CA: The critical unconscious meanings disguised in our stories cannot be inferred directly-they can be discovered only through a decoding effort. This decoding method - trigger decoding - is initiated with a search for the decoding key, the current event that has provoked the encoded message (note the role played by coping or adapting). These traumatic incidents take the form of emotionally-charged experiences -- triggering events or triggers, for short. In order to properly decode an unconscious (encoded) message, you must know the incident to which it is a response. This enables you to decode a story in light of its evocative trigger-unconscious messages are never conveyed directly or manifestly, but always in disguise.
Brief example: A patient tells her therapist a story about her butcher having his finger on the scale and cheating her. The therapist mistakenly tells the patient that her problem is that she sees men as trying to exploit her (an MP intervention-the problem is in the mind of the patient). But there is a trigger for the story the patient just told: The therapist had just handed the patient her bill. Consciously, the patient looked at the bill and accepted it as such. But she then thought of this story, which conveys an unconscious perception that her therapist has over-charged her-which he has. As always, the unconscious mind knows what's really going on (it's incisively in touch with reality), while the conscious mind misses a lot (it's inclined toward defensive obliterations and denials-all conscious-system therapies self-explorations and therapies suffer from this deficit). The trigger of the therapist's over-charge evoked this encoded story in which the butcher is used to allude in disguise to the therapist (displacement is involved). Notice too that even though this error was not recognized consciously, it was registered unconsciously via unconscious perception and processed with a deep unconscious intelligence.
In general, we tell stories about another time, place and person (displaced tales) in order to convey in disguise our unconscious experience of an immediate situation with someone who is upsetting us. Direct readings of images and symbolic interpretations cannot uncover these critical disguised messages-they are revealed solely through trigger decoding.
MP: The emotion-processing mind has many functions and tasks-perception, memory, defense, adaptation, self-observation, etc.--all of relatively equal importance. CA: The single most important function of the emotion-processing mind is to cope with (adapt to) emotionally-charged triggering events.
MP: The emotional mind is a single system with conscious and unconscious components.
CA: The emotion-processing mind is a two system entity. There is a conscious system that is linked to awareness and it serves as the system with which we cope directly. The system is, however, extremely defensive and inclined toward obliteration and denial-much of it, at bottom, in the service of the denial of the unbearable prospect of personal death (death-related issues are connected to every trauma a person suffers). As a result of this defensiveness, our conscious view of the emotional world is extremely restricted and often in error-conscious perception and thinking are an unreliable basis for making emotionally-charged decisions.
The second system, the deep unconscious system, takes in information and meaning through unconscious (subliminal) perception and processes these inputs unconsciously as well. Once the processing has been completed (and it's very rapid), the system emits encoded messages that reflect the nature of these adaptive efforts. Operating outside of awareness, the deep unconscious system is relatively non-defensive and quite in touch with the true nature of events and their implications-it seldom misperceives. It therefore serves as a highly reliable system for making emotionally-charged decisions-but doing so requires the use of trigger decoding in order to ascertain the nature of unconscious experience.
MP: In psychotherapy, the critical search is for transferences-patients' distortions of what their therapists are saying and doing.
CA: In psychotherapy, the search is for patients' valid unconscious perceptions of the real or actual implications of what the therapist is saying and doing.
The CA replaces MP's largely incorrect formulations of patients' unconscious distortions with formulations of their accurate unconscious perceptions. On the whole, the critical role played by unconscious adaptations and perceptions in emotional life and psychotherapy are missed in MP, while they are placed center-stage in the CA. All in all, MP and CA have very different conceptions of the unconscious domain. The CA sees the interventions of therapists as the key triggers for patients' unconscious experiences in therapy, while MP ignores most of the implications of what therapists actually do and say in sessions, especially their unconscious meanings. Furthermore, the CA has discovered that patients' unconscious experiences in therapy are focused almost entirely on the therapist's management of the setting and ground rules of therapy, while MP has a naïve and uninformed understanding of the unconscious ramifications of the frame-related and other activities (interventions) of therapists. Essential Features
As a new theory of how we cope with emotionally-charged incidents and events-a theory of emotional life-the main features of the CA are:
*Humans have evolved and are designed mentally to cope with immediate emotionally-charged experiences-triggering situations.
*These adaptive thoughts and behaviors have both conscious and unconscious sources and features. We cope emotionally on two levels: first, directly and with undisguised awareness of what we are reacting to and how we are reacting (conscious system activities), and second, indirectly (reacting to one person when the response belongs to someone else) and without awareness of what we are reacting to unconsciously-this information is never directly recognized, but always is encoded in our stories (deep unconscious system activities).
*Because we are so terrified and disturbed by traumatic emotional experiences-much of it through their connection to harm and death-we use a lot of denial consciously. This denial-ultimately a denial of death-is self-protective, but very costly in self-harm and harm to others. Unconscious death anxiety unwittingly motivates many destructive decisions, choices and actions. All in all, the most powerful influences in our emotional lives are perceived outside of awareness (subliminally or unconsciously) and responded to similarly--without our knowing the deeper reasons for what we are doing.
*Perception has primacy over fantasy and memory-what we perceive at the moment is what we adapt to first and foremost. Past experiences and our memories and inner state affect how we cope, but our prime devotion is coping in the present.
*Unconscious perception is a basic human resource. Unconscious experiences are reflected in unconscious messages-messages that are disguised or encoded in the stories we tell to ourselves (daydreams), dream about, and tell to others.
*Many of the most frightening things we perceive, and their most disturbing implications, are perceived unconsciously and conveyed through encoded stories. *These unrealized events/inputs strongly affect every aspect of our emotional lives. *Decoding disguised messages in light of their triggers is critical to developing a sound picture of what you are reacting to unconsciously and the deeper reasons for why you do what you do and say what you say.
*By design, the emotional mind is made up of two systems: First, a conscious system connected directly to awareness. This system creates manifest or surface messages and is responsible for daily coping efforts. It is a system of 'What you say is what you mean.' The sequence is: conscious perception, conscious processing, conscious response. It also is system that screens out and denies many important emotionally-charged meanings and experiences because their implications are unbearable to behold.
Second, a deep unconscious system that is connected to awareness solely through encoded messages. It is a highly perceptive system-we know the truths of our emotional lives unconsciously rather than consciously. This system creates encoded messages that must be decoded in light of the triggers that set them off. It is a system of 'What you say is not what you mean; what you mean is disguised/encoded.' Suggested Reading:
1. Unconscious Communication in Everyday Life. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, 1983.
2. Decoding Your Dreams. New York: Henry Holt, 1988 (Ballantine Books paperback).
3. Rating Your Psychotherapist: The Search for Effective Cure. New York: Henry Holt, 1989 (Ballantine Books paperback).
4. Take Charge of Your Emotional Life. New York: Henry Holt, 1991.
5. The Evolution of the Emotion-processing Mind: With an Introduction to Mental Darwinism. London: Karnac Books, 1996.
6. Death Anxiety and Clinical Practice. London: Karnac Books, 1997.
7. Rules, Frames and Boundaries in Psychotherapy and Counselling. London: Karnac Books, 1998.
8. Dreams and Emotional Adaptation. Phoenix, AZ: Zeig, Tucker, 1999. His evolution of the Approach is described below.
This is a brief history of the creation and evolution of the communicative approach discussing its main accomplishments and current challenges. It also includes information about Langs' current clinical research and other relevant interests. The communicative approach arose after Langs had completed his classical psychoanalytic training. It was a reaction to unfinished aspects of his personal analysis and to nagging doubts that he had about psychoanalytic theory. His observations of gross lapses by therapists and the recognition of disguised or encoded responses to these therapist-errors by their patients convinced him that the primary view of the emotion-processing mind - as he came to call it - should not be as a projector of fantasies and memories as suggested in psychoanalytic theory, nor as a distorter based on past experiences, but something totally different. Langs discovered that within the patient/therapist relationship there appeared to be an unconscious perceiver within the patient (and therapist临床医学家) whose primary function was to cope with environmental inputs, namely, the behaviors and communications from each other.
This immediate adaptation in the emotional realm is the key to communicative theory; and unconscious perception is the key to understanding the emotion-processing mind and its deep unconscious experiences as reflected in the encoded communications from patients.
It emerged that for the deep unconscious system, as it came to be called, the therapist's management of the setting and ground rules of therapy are most critical. The clinical method of trigger decoding was set in place and unconscious validation via positively cast stories in response to interventions became the criterion by which the validity of an intervention and its theoretical rationale were established.
On this basis it was possible to forge a formal science of psychoanalysis and psychotherapy in which measurement and mathematical models were used to discover deep laws of human communication and the emotion-processing mind. These evidently are the first predictive biological laws to have been unearthed and their many ramifications have barely been developed.
This pioneering work by Langs led him to study the architecture of the mental module that has evolved to adapt to emotionally-charged triggering events. It became evident that the emotion-processing mind is a two system entity. There is a conscious system that is prone to defense and obliteration in the emotional domain, and it is motivated by various forms of death anxiety, of which existential death anxiety is the most dreaded.
The second system of the emotion-processing mind is called the deep unconscious system. It receives information and meaning via unconscious perception, is relatively nondefensive, has a strong and capable intelligence of its own that processes incoming messages and their meanings, and encodes health-giving directives that can serve the healing process when they are properly trigger decoded by a therapist. In contrast to the conscious system, the deep unconscious system strongly prefers secured rather than modified frames and reveals a deep appreciation of the therapeutic value of such frames.
Langs' current studies involve the search for ways to help patients deal with the secured frame, and the existential death anxieties that drive them away from meaningful forms of therapy and insight - the difficulty being that severe death-related experiences intensify the use by the conscious system of denial-based mechanisms that favour knowledge reduction in lieu of knowledge acquisition. These psychobiologically evolved and personally developed tendencies wreak havoc for the lives of patients and therapists alike.
The oddities of the emotion-processing mind - its dread of meaning and secured frames; its excessive vulnerability to death anxieties; and its inability naturally (without trigger decoding) to make use of its resourceful deep unconscious wisdom - led Langs to the studies of the design of the emotion-processing mind and its evolutionary history. He found that language acquisition was critical to the development and inherent dysfunctions of this mental module - it played a role in the human awareness of self and death, be it of loved ones in the present, past, or future, or of oneself in the future.
Langs' evolutionary studies led to a view of the emotion-processing mind as a Darwin machine - a huge resource whose adaptive preferences are selected by environmental events and then sustained. Selectionism prevails most strongly in the immune system and this realization led to a study of that bodily system for several reasons: It is a model of selectionism; it has evolved to defend against microscopic predators and the emotion-processing mind has evolved to deal with macroscopic predators (mainly other humans) - the two systems protect humans from external disasters; and it shares design features with the emotion-processing mind. As the older and more evolved entity, the immune system can shed a great deal of light on the design and operations of the emotion-processing mind.
Currently Langs is studying and writing about the emotion-processing mind and the immune system -- and the broader need for therapists to immerse themselves in science. Langs continues to write and publish books for psychotherapists and the general public. But he is mindful that by design, most human minds dread the invaluable truths of the communicative approach and that the approach therefore has an unusual and almost daunting problem in convincing therapists of the wisdom and value of its postulates and clinical methods. He, therefore, has been developing special means of bringing attention to the approach. Chief among them are his recent playscripts which act as a way of both representing the approach's ideas through drama and of attracting interest in this work.
His play, \"Freud's Bird of Prey,\" with its themes of death and frames - and power, life's romances and struggles, and such - has had well received staged readings and will be published this autumn by Zeig, Tucker & Co. His one-woman play, tentatively titled: \"In the Mirror of My Life: Lou Andreas-Salome,\" which is a vast panoramic tale concerning a most unusual woman and her life, deals with many strong themes and events, but mainly with violated frames and the triumph of life over death. Lou was involved with men like Nietzsche, Rilke, and Freud (she was a psychoanalyst in her later years) and so the play has a special aura to it. It recently received a staged reading in Hanover, Germany (which is near Gottingen, where Lou lived out the
many years of her later life) at a meeting of the European Society for Communicative Psychotherapy.(Producers, directors, and actors please take note - these are works well worth staging.)
Langs is, as you might expect, planning still more. Robert Langs,
Founder of Communicative Psychotherapy心理疗法
M.D.
Robert Langs, M.D. is the creator of the communicative approach (CA). He is an American psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, analytically trained in a classical Freudian psychoanalytic institute in New York City, who is known today as an important psychoanalytic revolutionary and revisionist.
Dr. Langs is a graduate of The Chicago Medical School and he received his psychiatric training at The Albert Einstein Medical Center in the Bronx, New York. He was Research Fellow at that institution and then did research at The Research Center for Mental Health at New York University. He also has served as a clinical researcher at The Nathan Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research in Orangeburg, NY, Visiting Professor of Psychiatry at The Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City, and Visiting Scholar at Regents College, London.
He is the author of some 130 scientific papers and forty books on psychoanalysis, psychotherapy, and related subjects like dreams, the architecture and evolution of the emotion-processing mind, death anxiety, the ground rules of therapy-and more. His books have been written for both the general public and the profession; sales exceed one million books. Among his accomplishments are a new and validated understanding of the unconscious realm and its profound effects on emotional life; a practical way of decoding unconscious messages; a mapping of the design of the emotion-processing (adaptive) mind; a presentation of the evolution of this mental module or coping structure; the development, with Anthony Badalamenti, Ph.D., of a formal, mathematically-based (true) science of human communication and psychoanalysis; a deep understanding of the forms of human death anxiety and their pervasive influence on human emotional life; and a view of the emotion-processing mind as a primarily defensive and denial-based coping structure whose design and functions are remarkably similar to those of the immune system-the discovery that the two systems are our means of protecting ourselves from microscopic predators (the immune system) and macroscopic predators like other humans and natural disasters and death (the emotion-processing mind).
Dr. Langs presently practices, teaches, and writes about communicative psychotherapy. His most recent devotion is to creating dramas-one and two act plays-that are effective art forms, while conveying through narrative tales the insights of the CA into the nature of emotional life.
1. The Communicative Approach is an approach to foreign or second LT which emphasizes that the goal of language teaching is communication competence. The Communication Approach is also called Communication Language Teaching.
2. The Communication Approach has been developed particularly by British applied linguists as a reaction away from grammar-based approaches such as the Audiolingual Method.
3. Teaching materials used with a Communication Approach often teach the language needed to express and understand different kinds of functions, such as requesting, describing, expressing likes and dislikes.
4. The Communication Approach follow a Notional Syllabus or some other communicatively organized syllabus and emphasizes the processes of communication, such as using language appropriately in different kinds of tasks, e. g, to solve puzzles, to get information, and using language for social interaction
with other people.
Background of the Communication Approach
1. Towards the end of the 1960s there went on a growing dissatisfaction among FL teachers and applied linguists with the dominating LT method of the time.㈠First, the criticism was that this kind of teaching produced structurally competent students who were often communicatively incompetent. ②nother reason for this dissatisfaction was undoubtedly for international communication, professional cooperation and travel. ③eanwhile, some theoretical linguists had become conscious of the fact that in linguistic research meaning and context were neglected. By the late 1960s, people began to consider semantics to be basic to any theoretical model of language. Meaning was seen to depend to a large degree on the sociocultural contexts in which speech acts occurred. Sociocultural aspects of language in use had been particularly stressed by the functionalists, who considered the purposes language serves in normal interaction to be basic to the determination of syntactic functions.
2. All this was reflected in some proposals to reconstruct the language syllabus so that learning communicative conventions would become as important as learning grammatical conventions.
3. D.A. Wilkins was the main figure in setting out the fundamental considerations for a ― functional-notional ― approach to syllabus design based on communicative criteria.
4. The distinguishing characteristics of the Notional-Functional Syllabus (NFS) were its attention to function as the organizing elements of English language curriculum, and its contrast with a structural syllabus in which sequenced grammatical structures served as the organizers. Reacting to methods that attended too strongly to grammatical forms, the NFS sought to focus on the pragmatic purposes to which we put language.
5. Wilkin’s book Notional Syllabuses had a significant impact on the development of Communicative Language Teaching. Courses for different languages were then developed based on his semantic / communicative analysis. The NFS did not necessarily develop communicative competence in learners. First of all, it is not a method. It was a syllabus. However, by attending to the functional purposes of language, and by providing contextual (notional) settings for the realization of those purposes, it provides a link between a dynasty of methods that was now perishing and a new era of language teaching------Communicative Language Teaching.
6. The Communicative Approach is essentially a manifestation of the 1970sm, in the sense that this was the decade when the most explicit debate took place, especially in the U.K. The subsequent period has been characterized by explorations of other, related possibilities for the design of materials and methods. More importantly, teachers in many parts of the world are finding that they need to come to terms with changes in their role, as communicative principles in language teaching become central goals of their educational systems. These educational perspectives evolved alongside, and to some extent were derived from, significant developments in linguistics, sociolinguistics and psychology.
7. What are the two categories of meaning of language proposed by Wilkins? What is the distinction between the two terms?
The two categories of meaning proposed by Wilkins are ―notions‖ and ―functions‖. ―Notions‖ are domains in which we use language to express thought and feeling. They are both general and specific. General notions are abstract concepts such as existence, space, time, quantity and quality. Within the general notion of space and time, for example, are the concepts of location, motion, dimension, speed and length of time, and frequency. Specific notions correspond more closely to what we have become accustomed to calling ―contexts‖ or ―situations‖. Personal identification, for example, is a specific notion under which name, address, phone numbers, and other personal information is subsumed. ―Functions‖ refer to the purposes for which utterances or units of language are used. In language learning, language functions are often described as categories of behavior; e.g. requests, apologies, complaints, offers, and
compliments.
8. According to Wilkins, language has two categories of meaning :structural meaning and functional meaning.
9. Wilkins analyzed the communicative meaning that a language learner needs to understand and express, and he insists that the structural component cannot be ignored.
Theories of language underlying the Communicative Approach
1. The Communicative Approach in language teaching starts from a theory of language as communication. When we communicate, we use the language to accomplish some functions, such as arguing, persuading, or promising. Moreover, we carry out these functions within a social context.
2. The Communicative Approach has a theory of language rooted in the functional school. Functional linguistics is concerned with language as an instrument of social interaction rather than a system that is viewed in isolation. In addition to talking about language function and language form, there are other dimensions of communication to be considered if we are to be offered a more complete picture. They are, at least, topics (e.g. health, transport ); context and setting ( both physical and social ); and roles of people involved .
3. According to Halliday, a British linguist, social context of language use can be analyzed in terms of three factors:
①he field of discourse: what is happening, including what is being talked about;
②he tenor of discourse: the participants who are taking part in this exchange of meaning, who they are and what kind of relationship they have to each other;
③he mode of discourse: what part the language is playing in this particular situation, for example, in what way the language is organized to convey the meaning, and what channel is used---written or spoken or a combination of the two.
4. This analysis leads to a new branch, discourse analysis, the study of how sentences in spoken and written language form larger meaningful units such as paragraphs, conversations, and interviews. Therefore, discourse analysis becomes an indispensable part of Communicative Language Teaching.
5. Closely related to Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) is pragmatics, the study of the use of language in communication. Pragmatics is particularly interested in the relationships between sentences and the contexts and situations in which they are used.
6. How do you understand the relationship between the grammatical forms of a language and their communicative functions?
The relationship between the grammatical forms of a language and their communicative functions is not a one-to-one correspondence. Whereas the sentence structure is stable and straightforward, its communicative function is variable and depends on specific situational and social factors. The fact is that a single linguistic form can express a number of functions, so also can a single communicative function be expressed by a number of linguistic forms. In a communicative perspective, this relationship is explored more carefully, and as a result our views on the properties of language have seen expanded and enriched.
7. In talking about CLT, on cannot avoid talking about ― communicative competence‖, a term coined by Hymes (1972) in order to contrast a communicative view of language with Chomsky’s (1965) theory of competence. 8. How do your teaching materials handle the relationship between grammar and communicative function? For instance, is a ―function‖ taught together with several grammatical forms, or just one? Alternatively, is a ―function‖ just used as an example where the main focus is on teaching grammar?
Do this point according to what your teaching materials are used. You may refer to the key to No. 2 point above, and analyse the factors using a communicative perspective. 9. Chomsky claimed that every normal human being was born with a language acquisition device (LAD). The LAD is a sort of mechanism or device which contains the capacity to acquire one’s first language. The LAD includes basic knowledge about the nature and structure of human language. For Chomsky, the focus of linguistic theory was to characterize the abstract abilities speakers
possess that enable them to produce grammatically correct sentences in a language.
10. In Hymes’s view, ― communicative competence‖ (proposed by Hymes) refers to the ability not only to apply the grammatical rules of a language in order to form grammatically correct sentences but also to know when and where to use these sentences and to whom. ymes’s emphasis on the importance of context in determining appropriate patterns of behaviour, both linguistic and extralinguistic, appealed to teachers who found an overemphasis on accurate use of language structures to be confining and unrealistic.
11. Another linguistic theory of communication favoured in CLT is Halliday’s functional account of language use. Halliday (1975) described seven basic functions that language performs for children learning their first language:①Language can be used to get things;②to control the behaviour of others;③to create interaction with others;④to express personal feelings;⑤to learn and to discover;⑥to create a world of the imagination;⑦to communicate information. 12. Another source of a communicative view of language can be found in Henry Widdowson, (1978) who presented a view of the relationship between linguistic system and their communicative values in text and discourse.
13. Henry Widdowson focused on the communicative acts underlying the ability to use language for different purposes. His distinction between appropriacy and accuracy, communicative competence and grammatical competence, use and usage threw much light on CLT.
14. According to Canale and Swain (1980), communicative competence entails four dimensions: grammatical competence; sociolinguistic competence; discourse competence and strategic competence.
① rammatical competence refers to what Chomsky calls ― linguistic
competence.‖②Sociolinguistics competence refers to an understanding of the social context in which communication takes place, including role relationships, the shared information of the participants, and the communicative purpose for the interaction.③Discourse competence refers to the interpretation of individual message elements in terms of their interconnectedness and of how meaning is represented in relationship to the entire discourse or text.④Strategic competence refers to the coping strategies that communicators employ to start, end, keep, repair and redirect communication.
15. A communicative view of language has the following four characteristics by Richards and Rodgers: ①Language is a system for the expression of meaning; ②The primary function of language is for interaction and communication is one of the Communicative Approach characteristics;③According to the Communicative Approach, the structure of language reflects its functional and communicative uses; ④The primary units of language are not merely its grammatical and structural features, but categories of functional and communicative meaning as exemplified in discourse.
Theory of learning underlying the Communicative Approach
1. Communicative Approach attempts to follow the natural acquisition process in the classroom. According to Krashen, language learning comes about through using target language communicatively. Some contemporary researchers and language educators believe that fully successful language acquisition is a by-product of communication, of negotiating meaning, so that the traditional attitude to language learning and teaching has to be completely reversed. Traditional attitude can be described as the belief that we learn and teach language in order to be able to communicate, while the new approach assumes that in order to learn a language we have to try to communicate in it.
2. Most contributors to the Communicative Approach share the view that language is used for communication and are more concerned with meaning than with structure. They tend to argue that language is best learned through use in social context. John Firth, a linguist, stressed that language needs to be studied in the broader, sociocultural context of its use, which include participants, their
behaviour and beliefs, the objects of linguistic discussion, and word choice.
3. Yalden thinks that more effective FLT will take place if the emphasis is on getting one’s meaning across or understanding the speaker rather than on formal accuracy. Obviously, Yalden is more concerned with getting meaning across in a given context.
4. Candlin believes that communicative language learning is ―a highly socialized activities where learners are engaged in a negotiative process, with themselves in terms of what they already know, with others in terms of sharing and refining knowledge and with the curriculum content in terms of what has to be learned.‖ For Candlin, the meaning negotiation involved in making choices and decisions lies at the heart of the language learning process. Main features of the Communicative Approach
1. David Nunan (1991) offers five points to characterize the Communicative Approach:①According to the Communicative Approach, an emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target language. ②The introduction of authentic texts into the learning situation. ③The provision of opportunities for learners to focus, not only on language but also on the learning process itself. ④An enhancement of the learner’s own personal experiences as important contributing elements to classroom learning. ⑤An attempt to link classroom language learning with language activation outside the classroom.
2. The most obvious characteristics of the Communication Approach is that almost everything that is done is done with a Communicative intent. The teacher is concerned with the learners themselves, their feelings and ideas. The classroom activities are learner-centered because learning is more effective when the learners are actively involved in the learning process.
3. Students use the language a great deal through communicative activities such as games, role-plays, and problem-solving tasks. In this process, the focus is on meaning, rather than on language form. The teacher would correct for content. She has to take advantage of all situation in which real communication occurs naturally. She should be more concerned with creating many more suitable situations in which students can practice their communicative skills.
4. For learners who are studying in a non-English-speaking setting, it is very important to experience real communicative situations in which they learn to express their own views and attitudes, and in which they are taken seriously as people. Meaningful activities on a personal level improve performance and generate interest. And talking about something which effects them personally is eminently motivating for students.
5. Another characteristic of the teaching / learning process of the CA is the use of authentic materials.
6. The degree of learner-centered activity depends, among other things, on the type of material they are working on. Unlike some contemporary methodologies such as Community Language Learning, practitioners of Communicative Approach view materials as a way of influencing the quality of classroom interaction and language use. Materials thus have the primary role of promoting communicative language use.
7. There are three kinds of materials currently used in the Communicative Approach will be introduced and they are labeled ― text-based‖, ―task-based‖, and ―realia‖. (Richards & Rodgers,1986)
(1). Text-based materials--------Morrow and Johnson’s Communicate (1979) has none of the usual dialogues, drills, or sentence patterns but uses visual cues, taped cues, pictures, and sentence fragments to initiate conversation.
(2). Task-based materials-------A variety of games, role-plays, simulations, and task-based communication activities have been prepared to support Communicative Language Teaching. They typically consist of exercise handbooks, cue cards, activity cards, pair-communication practice materials, and student-interaction practice booklets.
(3). Realia-------Many proponents of the Communicative Approach have advocated the use of ―authentic‖ materials in the classroom. These might include language-based
realia, such as signs, magazines, advertisements, and newspapers or graphic and visual sources around which communicative activities can be built.
8. Learner-centred activities provide opportunities for learners to focus, not only on language, but also on the learning process itself. This type of activities involve students in doing and making things. This practice agrees with one of the basic assumptions of the Communicative Approach‖ students will be more motivated to learn a foreign language if they feel they are learning to do something with the language the study.
9. The role of the teacher:① a facilitator of students’ learning; ②a manager of classroom activities;③ an advisor of students’ questions;④ a co-communicator in the communicative activity. In a communicative classroom, the teacher is a facilitator of her students’ learning. As such, she has many roles to fulfill. She is a manager of classroom activities. During the activities she acts as an advisor, answering students’ questions and monitoring their performance. At other times she might be a ―co-communicator‖ --engaging in the communicative activity along with the students.
10. The teacher’s level of proficiency in the target language and her stamina have some bearing on the effectiveness of a given teaching strategy.
11. The teacher has to possess a very high level of language competence, because she is the main source of input, at least in the beginning stage and, especially, in the foreign language context.
12. In a Communicative Approach classroom, lessons tend to be less predictable; the teacher has to be ready to what the learners say and not just how they say it, and to interact with them in as ―natural‖ a way as possible; she has to use a wider range of management skills than in the traditional teacher-dominated classroom. 13. The role of the learner: a negotiator; a communicator; a contributor; an independent learner.
The learner’s role is that of a negotiator between the self, the learning process, and the subject of learning. This role interacts with the role of joint-negotiator with the group and within the classroom procedures and activities which group undertakes. Learners are, above all, communicators. They are actively engaged in negotiating meaning------ in trying to make themselves understood—-even when their knowledge of the target language is incomplete. They learn to communicate by communicating. Students are seen as more responsible contributors or managers of their own learning, and they are independent learners.
14. Truly communicative have three features (Morrow,1979) : information gap, choice of form and content and feedback. An information gap exists when one person in the exchange knows something that the other person doesn’t know and he wants to know. Feedback refers to any information which provides a report on the result of communication which takes place not only between the listener and the speaker.
15. Activities in the Communicative Approach are often carried out by students in small groups.
16. Grammatical structure does not require explicit analysis or attention, and by the necessary grammatical structure are automatically provided in the input.
17. Classroom environment in the Communication Approach: ①cooperation and empathy;② learner-centred; ③tolerance of errors; ④working in small groups. Objectives of the Communicative Approach
1. The general aim of the Communicative Approach is to develop the student’s communicative competence. It includes: ①Knowledge of the grammar and vocabulary of the language;② Knowledge of rules of speaking, e.g. knowing how to begin and end conversations, knowing which address forms should be used with different person one speak to and in different situations;③ Knowing how to use and respond to different types of speech acts, such as requests, apologies, thanks, and invitations; ④knowing how to use language appropriately.
The objectives of a course of language instruction cannot be defined until the learner’s needs have been identified. Therefore, objectives can vary greatly due to the variety of learner’ purposes of learning the language, materials available and so on.
2. In order to identify students’ needs, it is necessary to carry out a needs analysis. This needs analysis should first consider why the learners are learning the second language, what topics they will need to find themselves using the language on, and what roles they may need to play within those situations. Next, it is necessary to decide what vocabulary, language structures and functions they will need to know, to what level of accuracy, in order to achieve their purposes. The ability to use these structures and perform these functions quickly, accurately and appropriately for their own purposes will become the objectives of the course. Techniques of the Communicative Approach
1. The Communicative Approach advocates ways of the integration of skills in the classroom. It holds that the skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing are rarely used in isolation outside the classroom in a real sense.
2. There are a variety of ways of integration language skills in the classroom, for example, suggestions for developing listening and note-taking skills, giving oral presentations, project and work, role play and simulation.
3. Developing listening and note-taking using audio-video materials. In this way, they achieved natural integration of skills---primarily listening, note-taking (writing ), and speaking, but also reading (through note to reconstruct the text). 4. Giving oral presentation and project work.
5. Role play / simulation------role play /simulation activities are often thought to be one of the most effective ways of integrating language skills in the language classroom..
6. The following are some suggestions for developing separated skills:
(1). Listening: ①putting pictures in a correct sequence; following directions on a map; ②checking off items in a photograph; ③completing a grid, timetable, or chart of information, etc. can be used to develop listening skills.
(2). Speaking: to promote speaking skills, the teacher could use communication games, problem solving activities, simulation/ role play, personal responses, rules /patterns of conversation and so on to engage the students in language interaction. (3).Reading: Reading skills could be through skimming, scanning, text unscrambling, information transfer activities, and so on.
(4).Writing: The classroom can also provide an environment for writing at each of the following three main stages: ①gathering ideas: prewriting and planning; ②working on drafts; ③preparing the final version.
7. The Communicative Approach usually uses the following procedures in teaching: ①Presentation and comprehension (Students listen, then answer questions.); ②Demonstration of functional patterns (The teacher exemplifies each functional patterns.);③ Practicing functional patterns (Students practice the dialogue in pairs.);④ Free production (Students make minidialogues of their own.); ⑤Creative production (Students work in groups.); ⑥Checking students’ work; ⑦Reading new materials (integrating reading and writing);⑧ Writing based on reading.
8. Advantages of the Communicative Approach
The Communicative Approach is now accepted by many applied linguists and classroom teachers as the most effective approach among those in general use. ①It can first include wider considerations of what is appropriate as well as what is accurate; ②it can handle a wider range of language, covering texts and conversations as well as sentences; ③the communicative Approach can provide realistic and motivating language practice;④ it uses what learners ―know‖ about the functions of language from their experience with their with own mother tongue.
9. If we briefly summarize the Communicative Approach we find that it views language as a means of conveying meaning.
10. At the level of classroom teaching, the Communicative Approach holds that activities should provide opportunities for learners to use the language. Teacher should try to match at least some activities to learner’s interests, thereby maintaining learner’s motivation.
11. The disadvantages of the Communicative Approach
With regard to syllabus design, the Communicative Approach emphasizes learner’s
needs. But how to identify those needs quickly and cheaply, and to what extent all learners can be said to have a common need is still a matter of disagreement.
(1). It remains vague about how close it is practically to tailor a syllabus to learners’ needs and about the relative importance of accuracy and fluency. (2). People seem to realize the possible pedagogical risks connected with CLT. The most obvious risk is the fossilization of learner’s errors. (3). CLT is unclear about how the rules of use can be taught though it emphasizes the importance of teaching the rules of use. After all, classroom setting is different from real-life situation.
12. How do you understand the statement ―form and function operate as part of a wider network of factors?‖
The statement ―form and function operate as a part of a wider network of factors‖ means when we communicate, we use the language to accomplish some functions, such as arguing, personalizing, or promising. Moreover, we carry out these functions within a social context. A speaker will chose a particular way to express his thought not only basked on his intent and level of emotion but also on whom he is addressing and what his relationship with that person is. For example, he may be more direct in arguing with his friend than with his employer. In other words, real-world language in use does not operate in a vacuum. When we give advice, we do so to someone about something, for a particular reason. So in addition to talking about language function and language form, there are other dimensions of communication to be considered if we are to be offered a more complete picture. There are, at least, topic, context and setting, and roles of people involved. So, the orientations of the teaching is essentially toward the purposes and social uses of communications, rather than the understanding of language form.
13. Appropriacy of languages use has to be considered alongside accuracy. What implications does this have for attitudes to errors?
This has some implications for attitudes to errors. Since both appropriacy and accuracy are important in language use, we should pay the same attention to these two aspects. If one’s language production is appropriate, but dotted with a lot of grammar errors, communication would be affected. On the other hand, if one’s language production is correct in grammar, but not appropriate in use, e.g. the wrong address form, communication would not be as effective as expected either. Therefore, we should be tolerant to the students’ errors which do not affect communication, and be strict to those which interfere with communication and cause ill effects or ill feeling in the other communicators.
14. How do you interpret the idea of ―communicating in English‖ in your case, as a learner of English?
For a learner of English who am studying in a non-English-speaking setting, ―communicating in English‖ means to experience real communicative situations in which I learn to express my own ideas, views and attitudes, and in which I am taken seriously as people. Meaningful communicative activities on my English level will improve my language performance and generate my interest.
15. Is the Communicative Approach is a useful one for all proficiency levels, particularly for beginners?
General speaking, the Communicative Approach can be a useful teaching method for all proficiency levels. The Communicative Approach emphasizes that the goal of language learning is communicative competence. We can make use of whatever learning and teaching techniques which help the learners develop their communicative competence. On condition that we follow the basic principles of the Communicative Approach, such as information gap activities, meaning-based communication, authentic materials, our language learners would achieve the goal of mastering a foreign language. Even if with beginners, we can still use the approach.
16. Does it always matter if the ―real world‖ is not being practiced in the classroom? Why or why not?
The ideal language learning setting is to practice language as it is used in the real world. Since learners will have to use the foreign language in real communication outside the classroom. However, it is not always possible to do so because classroom setting is after all different from the outside world no matter how hard we try to
simulate the real-world situation. And it is not always necessary to do so. Language learning and language teaching are considered at several stages. At the drilling stage, when the focus is on language form, the ―real world‖ situation does not have to be practiced. But when the focus is on language communication and learners are engaged in communicative activities, the ―real-world‖ situation does matter much. It is where learners learn to use the foreign language for real communication, and to use it appropriately and accurately. Basic Principles for Teachers
A teacher’s main role is a facilitator and monitor rather than leading the class. In other words, ―the guide by the side‖ and not ―the sage on the stage‖.
Lessons are usually topic or theme based, with the target grammar ―hidden‖ in the context e.g. a job interview (using the Present Perfect tense.)
Lessons are built round situations/functions practical and authentic in the real world e.g. asking for information, complaining, apologizing, job interviews, telephoning.
Activities set by the teacher have relevance and purpose to real life situations – students can see the direct benefit of learning
Dialogues are used that centre around communicative functions, such as socializing, giving directions, making telephone calls
Emphasis on engaging learners in more useful and authentic language rather than repetitive phrases or grammar patterns
Emphasis on communication and meaning rather than accuracy. Being understood takes precedence over correct grammar. The fine tuning of grammar comes later.
Emphasis is put on the ―appropriacy‖ of language. What is the most appropriate language and tone for a particular situation?
Communicative competence is the desired goal. i.e. being able to survive, converse and be understood in the language.
Emphasis is put on correct pronunciation and choral (group) and individual drilling is used
Authentic listening and reading texts are used more often, rather than artificial texts simply produced to feature the target language
Use of songs and games are encouraged and provide a natural environment to promote language and enhance correct pronunciation
Feedback and correction is usually given by the teacher after tasks have been completed, rather than at the point of error, thus interrupting the flow
Basic Principles for Learners
Learners are often more motivated with this approach as they have an interesting what is being communicated, as the lesson is topic or theme based. Learners are encouraged to speak and communicate from day one, rather than just barking out repetitive phrases
Learners practice the target language a number of times, slowly building on accuracy
Language is created by the individual, often through trial and error
Learners interact with each other in pairs or groups, to encourage a flow of language and maximize the percentage of talking time, rather than just teacher to student and vice versa
Unless the focus is on the accuracy stage of the lesson, learners are corrected at the end of an activity so as not to interrupt their thought process
Summary
Out of the many approaches and methodologies available to the language teacher, the Communicative Approach has proven one of the most successful in providing confident learners who are able to make themselves effectively understood in the shortest possible time. It is therefore the teacher’s responsibility to create situations which are likely to promote communication, and provide an authentic background for language learning.
The Communicative Approach initially prioritizes communicative competence over accurate grammar. Grammar is hidden within the body of a lesson and highlighted and focused upon once the context has been set.
Let your students communicate first – build on their accuracy after. For example, do not start by frightening your adult students off with ―Today we are going to learn about the Present Perfect Simple‖, instead authentisize your lesson with ―Today we are going to learn how to do a job interview in English‖.
It is important to remember that as individuals most of us do not learn a language in order to communicate. First we try to communicate, and in doing so, we learn!
What Influenced Teachers Adoption of the Communicative Approach in China? by Xiao Qing Liao
In the history of EFL teaching, China saw its first movement toward communicative language teaching (CLT) in secondary schools in the early 1990s. In 1992 the State Education Development Commission (SEDC) introduced a functional syllabus that set the goal of communicative teaching and listed the communicative functions to be taught. In the same year, in cooperation with the publisher Longman, the SEDC published a new textbook series for communicative teaching. The syllabus and the textbooks required teachers to teach communicatively in classrooms.
The movement toward CLT was not accidental. It came from an educational problem that needed to be solved: the widespread use of the traditional grammar-oriented method. Because teachers focused on grammar and structure, the traditional method produced unsatisfactory teaching results. Students became almost \"structurally competent but communicatively incompetent\" (Johnson & Morrow, 1981, p. 1). Faced with this backward situation, the SEDC felt an urgent need to change.
The SEDC is the official authority for setting educational policy. It is the representative of the highly centralized Chinese system of education. Because the SEDC has so much power, it may seem that every teacher would have switched to CLT. However, because CLT was new in every way, it met with considerable resistance from the start. Many teachers tried to change the dominant teaching procedures but quickly got frustrated, lost their initial enthusiasm, and returned to tradition. As a result, CLT did not gain popularity in the early 1990s.
The key word underlying the use of CLT was feasibility: Was the use of CLT feasible? Opponents of CLT held that CLT was neither possible nor feasible in China because of specific conditions there. Proponents argued that CLT was indeed feasible if there was a sweeping change of curriculum. The SEDC authorities supported this favorable view and took some measures to ensure that CLT was used effectively.
First, the SEDC authorities suggested using an eclectic method that includes various elements of many methods according to the teachers' actual situation. Teachers were required to use CLT as a main method while accepting elements of other methods.
The authorities pointed out that in the mid-1980s some key schools in Beijing and Shanghai had already shown some tendency toward eclecticism, so teachers should follow this trend. An advantage of using an eclectic method was that it could help teach students knowledge of both the language's usage and its use and meet students' differing needs.
Second, in the late 1990s the Matriculation English Test (MET), one of the National College Entrance Exams developed by the SEDC, began to include the Language Use Section so that teachers could teach to the test. This section was added to measure the four language skills used for communication and included such elements such as role plays, reading comprehension, and communicative writing. Passing the MET in order to be able to attend colleges and universities is secondary students' most important consideration while learning English. The test has been identified as the single most powerful influence in the resistance to innovation in educational practice in China. Third, teacher training was conducted. One reason to reject reform was the inability of the teachers to do their jobs well. Most Chinese teachers, especially those in rural schools, lack a sufficient level of English proficiency. Many teachers attended in-service training in teachers' colleges and normal universities. Apart from learning the English language, teachers also learned about the principles of CLT. Before CLT was introduced into China, not many teachers were familiar with the trends in teaching methodology. As a result of this training, many teachers came to realize that teaching English does not consist only of teaching grammar but that the true mastery of a language involves communicative competence.
Fourth, the authorities publicized the advantages of using CLT. For example, CLT views language as a tool for communication, insists that interactional speaking activities in classrooms be instances of real communication, and ensures that students have sufficient exposure to the target language. All these would develop in students an ability to use English for communication. Li (1984), one of the first defenders of CLT in China, argued that using CLT would be of great benefit to students. Her arguments in favor of CLT had a big influence on Chinese teachers' attitudes toward CLT.
As a result of these measures, more teachers accepted CLT. In the mid-1990s, \"there [was] widespread awareness of more communicative approaches\" (Cortazzi & Jin, 1996). The efforts of the educational authorities in China thus had a big influence on EFL teaching, causing CLT to be accepted as the main teaching method in China. 《What Influenced Teachers Adoption of the Communicative Approach in China?》 Communicative language teaching (CLT) is an approach to the teaching of second and foreign languages that emphasizes interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of learning a language. It is also referred to as ―communicative approach to the teaching of foreign languages‖ or simply the ―communicative approach‖. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search
Main article: Methods of teaching foreign languages
Communicative language teaching (CLT) is an approach to the teaching of second and foreign languages that emphasizes interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of learning a language. It is also referred to as ―communicative approach to the teaching of foreign languages‖ or simply the ―communicative approach‖. Relationship with other methods and approaches
Historically, CLT has been seen as a response to the audio-lingual method (ALM), and as an extension or development of the notional-functional syllabus. Task-based language learning, a more recent refinement of CLT, has gained considerably in popularity.
The audio-lingual method
The audio-lingual method (ALM) arose as a direct result of the need for foreign language proficiency in listening and speaking skills during and after World War II. It is closely tied to behaviorism, and thus made drilling, repetition, and habit-formation central elements of instruction. Proponents of ALM felt that this emphasis on repetition needed a corollary emphasis on accuracy, claiming that continual repetition of errors would lead to the fixed acquisition of incorrect structures and non-standard pronunciation.
In the classroom, lessons were often organized by grammatical structure and presented through short dialogues. Often, students listened repeatedly to recordings of conversations (for example, in the language lab) and focused on accurately mimicking the pronunciation and grammatical structures in these dialogs.
Critics of ALM asserted that this over-emphasis on repetition and accuracy ultimately did not help students achieve communicative competence in the target language. Noam Chomsky argued \"Language is not a habit structure. Ordinary linguistic behaviour characteristically involves innovation, formation of new sentences and patterns in accordance with rules of great abstractness and intricacy\". They looked for new ways to present and organize language instruction, and advocated the notional functional syllabus, and eventually CLT as the most effective way to teach second and foreign languages. However, audio-lingual methodology is still prevalent in many text books and teaching materials. Moreover, advocates of audio-lingual methods point to their success in improving aspects of language that are habit driven, most notably pronunciation.
The notional-functional syllabus Main article: Notional-functional syllabus
A notional-functional syllabus is more a way of organizing a language learning curriculum than a method or an approach to teaching. In a notional-functional syllabus, instruction is organized not in terms of grammatical structure as had often been done with the ALM, but in terms of ―notions‖ and ―functions.‖ In this model, a ―notion‖ is a particular context in which people communicate, and a ―function‖ is a specific purpose for a speaker in a given context. As an example, the ―notion‖ or context shopping requires numerous language functions including asking about prices or features of a product and bargaining. Similarly, the notion party would require numerous functions like introductions and greetings and discussing interests and hobbies. Proponents of the notional-functional syllabus claimed that it addressed the deficiencies they found in the ALM by helping students develop their ability to effectively communicate in a variety of real-life contexts. Learning by teaching (LdL)
Learning by teaching is a widespread method in Germany (Jean-Pol Martin). The students take the teacher's role and teach their peers.
CLT is usually characterized as a broad approach to teaching, rather than as a
teaching method with a clearly defined set of classroom practices. As such, it is most often defined as a list of general principles or features. One of the most recognized of these lists is David Nunan’s (1991) five features of CLT:
1. An emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target language.
2. The introduction of authentic texts into the learning situation.
3. The provision of opportunities for learners to focus, not only on language but also on the Learning Management process.
4. An enhancement of the learner’s own personal experiences as important contributing elements to classroom learning.
5. An attempt to link classroom language learning with language activities outside the classroom. These five features are claimed by practitioners of CLT to show that they are very interested in the needs and desires of their learners as well as the connection between the language as it is taught in their class and as it used outside the classroom. Under this broad umbrella definition, any teaching practice that helps students develop their communicative competence in an authentic context is deemed an acceptable and beneficial form of instruction. Thus, in the classroom CLT often takes the form of pair and group work requiring negotiation and cooperation between learners, fluency-based activities that encourage learners to develop their confidence, role-plays in which students practice and develop language functions, as well as judicious use of grammar and pronunciation focused activities.
In the mid 1990s the Dogma 95 manifesto influenced language teaching through the Dogme language teaching movement, who proposed that published materials can stifle the communicative approach. As such the aim of the Dogme approach to language teaching is to focus on real conversations about real subjects so that communication is the engine of learning. This communication may lead to explanation, but that this in turn will lead to further communication.[1] Classroom activities used in CLT Example Activities Role Play Interviews Information Gap Games
Language Exchanges Surveys Pair Work
Learning by teaching
However, not all courses that utilize the Communicative Language approach will restrict their activities solely to these. Some courses will have the students take
occasional grammar quizzes, or prepare at home using non-communicative drills, for instance.
Critiques of CLT
One of the most famous attacks on communicative language teaching was offered by Michael Swan in the English Language Teaching Journal in 1985[2]. Henry Widdowson responded in defense of CLT, also in the ELT Journal (1985 39(3):158-161). More recently other writers (e.g. Bax[3]) have critiqued CLT for paying insufficient attention to the context in which teaching and learning take place, though CLT has also been defended against this charge (e.g. Harmer 2003[4]). Often, the communicative approach is deemed a success if the teacher understands the student. But, if the teacher is from the same region as the student, the teacher will understand errors resulting from an influence from their first language. Native speakers of the target language may still have difficulty understanding them. This observation may call for new thinking on and adaptation of the communicative approach. The adapted communicative approach should be a simulation where the teacher pretends to understand only what any regular speaker of the target language would and reacts accordingly (Hattum 2006[5]).
This article refers to the way teachers can focus the teaching of the foreign language in the classroom in such a way that students can communicate in a conscious way, taking into account their real experiences. Here, the origin of the Communicative Approach as a combination of different methods is clearly explained, as such as the role of the teacher and the students in a communicative English as a Second Language class. The article also gives some examples of communicative activities that can be developed in a class from the communicative point of view.
This digest will take a look at the communicative approach to the teaching of foreign languages. It is intended as an introduction to the communicative approach for teachers and teachers-in-training who want to provide opportunities in the classroom for their students to engage in real-life communication in the target language. Questions to be dealt with include what the communicative approach is, where it came from, and how teachers' and students' roles differ from the roles they play in other teaching approaches. Examples of exercises that can be used with a communicative approach are described, and sources of appropriate materials are provided.
WHERE DOES COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING COME FROM?
Its origins are many, insofar as one teaching methodology tends to influence the next. The communicative approach could be said to be the product of educators and linguists who had grown dissatisfied with the audiolingual (听说教学法)and grammar-translation methods of foreign language instruction.
They felt that students were not learning enough realistic, whole language. They did not know how to communicate using appropriate social language, gestures, or expressions; in brief, they were at a loss to communicate in the culture of the language studied. Interest in and development of communicative-style teaching mushroomed in the 1970s; authentic language use and classroom exchanges where students engaged in real communication with one another became quite popular.
In the intervening years, the communicative approach has been adapted to the elementary, middle, secondary, and post-secondary levels, and the underlying philosophy has spawned different teaching methods known under a variety of names, including notional-functional, teaching for proficiency, proficiency-based instruction,
and communicative language teaching.
WHAT 'S COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING?
Communicative language teaching makes use of real-life situations that necessitate communication. The teacher sets up a situation that students are likely to encounter in real life. Unlike the audiolingual method of language teaching, which relies on repetition and drills, the communicative approach can leave students in suspense as to the outcome of a class exercise, which will vary according to their reactions and responses. The real-life simulations change from day to day. Students' motivation to learn comes from their desire to communicate in meaningful ways about meaningful topics.
Margie S. Berns, an expert in the field of communicative language teaching, writes in explaining Firth's view that \"language is interaction; it is interpersonal activity and has a clear relationship with society. In this light, language study has to look at the use (function) of language in context, both its linguistic context (what is uttered before and after a given piece of discourse) and its social, or situational, context (who is speaking, what their social roles are, why they have come together to speak)\" (Berns, 1984, p. 5).
WHAT ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF COMMUNICATIVE EXERCISES? In a communicative classroom for beginners, the teacher might begin by passing out cards, each with a different name printed on it. The teacher then proceeds to model an exchange of introductions in the target language: \"Guten Tag. Wieheissen Sie?\" Reply: \"Icheisse Wolfie,\" for example. Using a combination of the target language and gestures, the teacher conveys the task at hand, and gets the students to introduce themselves and ask their classmates for information. They are responding in German to a question in German. They do not know the answers beforehand, as they are each holding cards with their new identities written on them; hence, there is an authentic exchange of information.
Later during the class, as a reinforcement listening exercise, the students might hear a recorded exchange between two German freshmen meeting each other for the first time at the gymnasium doors. Then the teacher might explain, in English, the differences among German greetings in various social situations. Finally, the teacher will explain some of the grammar points and structures used.
The following exercise is taken from a 1987 workshop on communicative foreign language teaching, given for Delaware language teachers by Karen Willetts and Lynn Thompson of the Center for Applied Linguistics. The exercise, called \"Eavesdropping,\" is aimed at advanced students.
\"Instructions to students\" Listen to a conversation somewhere in a public place and be prepared to answer, in the target language, some general questions about what was said.
1. Who was talking? 2. About how old were they?
3. Where were they when you eavesdropped? 4. What were they talking about? 5. What did they say?
6. Did they become aware that you were listening to them?
The exercise puts students in a real-world listening situation where they must report information overheard. Most likely they have an opinion of the topic, and a class discussion could follow, in the target language, about their experiences and viewpoints.
Communicative exercises such as this motivate the students by treating topics of their choice, at an appropriately challenging level.
Another exercise taken from the same source is for beginning students of Spanish. In \"Listening for the Gist,\" students are placed in an everyday situation where they must listen to an authentic text.
\"Objective.\" Students listen to a passage to get general understanding of the topic or message.
\"Directions.\" Have students listen to the following announcement to decide what the speaker is promoting.
\"Passage\" \"Situacion ideal...Servicio de transporte al Aeropuerto Internacional...Cuarenta y dos habitaciones de lujo, con aire acondicionado...Elegante restaurante...de fama internacional.\"
(The announcement can be read by the teacher or played on tape.) Then ask students to circle the letter of the most appropriate answer on their copy, which consists of the following multiple-choice options:
a taxi service b. a hotel c. an airport d. a restaurant
(Source: Adapted from Ontario Assessment Instrument Pool, 1980, Item No. 13019)
Gunter Gerngross, an English teacher in Austria, gives an example of how he makes his lessons more communicative. He cites a widely used textbook that shows English children having a pet show. \"Even when learners act out this scene creatively and enthusiastically, they do not reach the depth of involvement that is almost tangible when they act out a short text that presents a family conflict revolving round the question of whether the children should be allowed to have a pet or not\" (Gerngross & Puchta, 1984, p. 92). He continues to say that the communicative approach \"puts great emphasis on listening, which implies an active will to try to understand others. [This is] one of the hardest tasks to achieve because the children are used to listening to the teacher but not to their peers. There are no quick, set recipes. That the teacher be a patient listener is the basic requirement\" (p. 98).
The observation by Gerngross on the role of the teacher as one of listener rather than speaker brings up several points to be discussed in the next portion of this digest. HOW DO THE ROLES OF THE TEACHER AND STUDENT CHANGE IN COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING?
Teachers in communicative classrooms will find themselves talking less and listening more--becoming active facilitators of their students' learning (Larsen-Freeman, 1986). The teacher sets up the exercise, but because the students' performance is the goal, the teacher must step back and observe, sometimes acting as referee or monitor. A classroom during a communicative activity is far from quiet, however. The students do most of the speaking, and frequently the scene of a classroom during a communicative exercise is active, with students leaving their seats to complete a task. Because of the increased responsibility to participate, students may find they gain confidence in using the target language in general. Students are more responsible managers of their own learning (Larsen-Freeman, 1986). BIBLIOGRAPHY文献
BC. [1982]. \"In search of a language teaching framework: An adaptation of a communicative approach to functional practice.\" (EDRS No. ED 239 507, 26 pages) Das, B. K. (Ed.) (1984). \"Communicative language teaching.\" Selected papers from the RELC seminar (Singapore). \"Anthology Series 14.\" (EDRS No. ED 266 661, 234 pages)
Littlewood, W. T. (1983). \"Communicative approach to language teaching methodology (CLCS Occasional Paper No. 7).\" Dublin: Dublin University, Trinity College, Centre for Language and Communication Studies. (EDRS No. ED 235 690, 23 pages)
Pattison, P. (1987). \"The communicative approach and classroom realities.\" (EDRS No. ED 288 407, 17 pages)
Riley, P. (1982). \"Topics in communicative methodology: Including a preliminary and selective bibliography on the communicative approach.\" (EDRS No. ED 231 213, 31 pages)
Savignon, S. J., & Berns, M. S. (Eds.). (1983). \"Communicative language teaching: Where are we going? Studies in Language Learning,\" 4(2). (EDRS No. ED 278 226, 210 pages)
Sheils, J. (1986). \"Implications of the communicative approach for the role of the teacher.\" (EDRS No. ED 268 831, 7 pages)
Swain, M., & Canale, M. (1982). \"The role of grammar in a communicative approach to second language teaching and testing.\" (EDRS No. ED 221 026, 8 pages) (not available separately; available from EDRS as part of ED 221 023, 138 pages) Willems, G., & Riley, P. (Eds.). (1984). \"Communicative foreign language teaching and the training of foreign language teachers.\" (EDRS No. ED 273 102, 219 pages) Readers may also wish to consult the following journal articles for additional information on communicative language teaching.
Clark, J. L. (1987). Classroom assessment in a communicative approach. \"British Journal of Language Teaching,\" 25(1), 9-19.
Dolle, D., & Willems, G. M. (1984). The communicative approach to foreign language teaching: The teacher's case. \"European Journal of Teacher Education,\" 7(2), 145-54. Morrow, K., & Schocker, M. (1987). Using texts in a communicative approach. \"ELT Journal,\" 41(4), 248-56.
Oxford, R. L., et al. (1989). Language learning strategies, the communicative approach, and their classroom implications. \"Foreign Language Annals,\" 22(1), 29-39. Pica, T. P. (1988). Communicative language teaching: An aid to second language acquisition? Some insights from classroom research. \"English Quarterly,\" 21(2), 70-80.
Rosenthal, A. S., & Sloane, R. A. (1987). A communicative approach to foreign language instruction: The UMBC project. \"Foreign Language Annals,\" 20(3), 245-53. Swan, M. (1985). A critical look at the communicative approach (1). \"ELT Journal,\" 39(1), 2-12.
Swan, M. (1985). A critical look at the communicative approach (2). \"ELT Journal,\" 39(2), 76-87.
Terrell, T. D. (1991). The role of grammar instruction in a communicative approach. \"Modern Language Journal,\" 75(1), 52-63. REFERENCES AND RESOURCES
Berns, M. S. (1984). Functional approaches to language and language teaching: Another look. In S. Savignon & M. S. Berns (Eds.), \"Initiatives in communicative language teaching. A book of readings\" (pp. 3-21). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Gerngross, G., & Puchta, H. (1984). Beyond notions and functions: Language teaching or the art of letting go. In S. Savignon & M. S. Berns (Eds.), \"Initiatives in communicative language teaching. A book of readings\" (pp. 89-107). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986). \"Techniques and principles in language teaching.\" Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Littlewood, W. (1981). \"Language teaching. An introduction.\" Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Savignon, S., & Berns, M. S. (Eds.). (1984). \"Initiatives in communicative language teaching.\" Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
因篇幅问题不能全部显示，请点此查看更多更全内容