teaching language

INTRODUCTION: LANGUAGE
TEACHING AND LANGUAGE LEARNING
- A MODERN RELATIONSHIP
WHEN MODERN LANGUAGES were first introduced in British universities,
this was done somewhat grudgingly and with an element of institutional
disdain. Modern languages, perhaps with die exception of German, were
considered to be "easy", and it was not rare for institutions to insist on
eidier Latin or Greek as a prerequisite for a Modern Languages degree or
to award only half the number of points obtainable in traditional subjects
such as English or matiiematics if a student took a modern language
instead. Thankfully diis bias did not curtail the development of Modern
Languages in universities, and the late 20th century finds this subject area
in a different position. At British universities, the past few decades have
witnessed an impressive diversification in Modern Languages in terms of
degree structures and study modes, and also an expansion of content areas.
Cultural, socio-historical and linguistic topics are offered side by side with
literature, and there is an increasing trend towards interdisciplinary
approaches. But above all, die study and teaching of die language have
gained in status and recognition. To say mat die purpose of language
teaching is to facilitate die learning of a foreign language is to state die
obvious. Yet behind diis seemingly straightforward statement lies an intricate
relationship which has a history of its own and which is at present
characterised by divergence and dynamic explorations of new avenues. To
capture some of die liveliness of diis relationship and to take a look into
die future in language teaching and language learning, particularly in
higher education, is die purpose of this collection of articles.
Language teaching is informed by assumptions about die nature of
language, the nature of learning and die nature of language learning, and
changes in die way foreign languages are taught have, not surprisingly,
tended to coincide widi and be shaped by shifts in die premises of language
and learning dieories. The strong affinities between die grammartranslation
mediod and historical linguistics on the one hand, and an
exclusively deductive approach to learning on die odier illustrate this
relationship as much as die strong impact which behaviourist psychology
and structuralism had on the development of die audio-lingual approach
to language teaching. Similarly, to quote a more recent example, functional
and interactional models of language shifted die focus from die form of a
language to its communicative and social function and provided die dieoretical
backdrop for die communicative approach which entered die classroom
in die early 1970s, at a time when humanist approaches to learning had
already put die learners and dieir needs at die centre of die classroom. If
O Forum fir Modem Language Shuhes 1998 VoL xxxw No. 2
98 SABINE HOTHO
we look back over trends and developments in language teaching over the
past hundred years or so, it can indeed be said that the general tendency
in language teaching and its source disciplines has developed along a similar
continuum - the move from form to communicative and pragmatic function
in linguistics is mirrored in the modern languages classroom where the
emphasis on transactions and tasks redefines the traditional emphasis on
matters such as rules and rule application, or error and error correction.
In parallel, there has been a shift away from the traditional hierarchy
which put subject and teacher at die top, and the student as the recipient
of knowledge at die bottom, to a revised "power relationship" which
subordinates die transmission of knowledge to die needs and goals of die
learner. There has, in odier words, been a shift of interest from language
as product to the production and die producer of die (foreign) language,
and significandy diis shift is also supported by the increasing number of
contributions from psycholinguistic and psychological research which focus
on the mental processes going on in die learner when learning and producing
a foreign language.
The shift from form to function, from reception (of rules, of texts) to
production (of texts, of interactions, even of interlanguage rules), from
subject-centredness to learner-centredness, from product to process, has
had far-reaching implications for die content, die organisation and purposes
of, and die interactions in, die language classroom, and diese are also
evident widiin die educational context of higher education. A balance had,
and still has, to be struck between, for instance, die firm goal posts set by
die institutional framework, its norms and expectations, and die increased
recognition of divergent learner needs and die diverse spectrum of learner
differences. Subject matter and materials inescapably require ongoing
reassessment and re-evaluation while at the same time being tied to frameworks
such as degree structures and norm-referenced criteria of progression.
Methods must be adjusted to shifting needs and contexts, embracing past
experience as well as the as yet largely unexplored opportunities of new
technologies.
Challenges, balancing acts, explorations of new avenues and die revisiting
of the past are among the characteristic features of die language teachinglanguage
learning matrix today. The contributions gadiered here, which
encompass pedagogical, pragmatic and psychological tiiemes, highlight
diese. How much die process of language learning, and tiius, by implication,
of language teaching, has to be seen as embedded in a wider context which
takes die learner as a whole person into account, is, for instance, argued
in the context of learning styles and strategies (Sabine Jones) where die
concept of learning and teaching acquires a dimension which reaches well
beyond die traditional emphasis on content and die knowledge of facts. A
similar move towards an expanded framework underlies die discussion of
motivation and motivating which argues diat motivation in die language
INTRODUCTION 99
classroom needs to be understood in both its language-learning specific
and in a more general dimension (Sabine Hotho & Nicola Reimann). The
traditional view of orderly progression and of universal learning aims and
objectives has been challenged by the move towards leamer-centredness
and its aim to increase the learner's responsibility as a participant in the
teaching/learning transaction. The emergence of the concept of learner
autonomy reflects on this perspective (Marie-Jose Gremmo), providing
further evidence that the project of language learning must be seen in the
wider context of learning and its cognitive dimension in particular. It is
also pointed out, and significantly so, that any changes in the theory of
learning must of necessity entail a reconsideration of the role of the
"teacher".
Any discussion of language teaching and language learning today must
include a discussion of the role and status of grammar (Robin Adamson).
The communicative approach has not led to the death of grammar but
eventually necessitated a revision of what constitutes grammar in language
learning. Adamson points towards a process-oriented pedagogical grammar
which places the learner and die development of language awareness at
the centre of its concerns. The traditional definition of grammar as a fixed
body of knowledge to be learned is dius revised, and replaced by the
concept of a dynamic grammar constructed by the learner. The authentic
vs non-authentic dichotomy (Chloe Gallien), brought to the forefront by
the impact of the communicative approach, illustrates in an exemplary
fashion the need for a discussion of the form and function of the materials
used in the language classroom. If progression and acquisition embrace, as
is widely accepted today, more than the gradual expansion of factual
knowledge about language, the question of the right material becomes
crucial. Communicative competence and authentic materials input form a
natural, albeit multifaceted relationship, but Gallien suggests that the conventional
binary opposition of authentic vs non-authentic materials needs
to be modified.
No debate on language teaching and language learning today would be
complete without reference to the challenges of new technologies. The
opportunities for assessment, efficient testing, self-testing and performancerelated
feedback, for interinsritutional co-operation and resourcing and for
the calibration of standards are immense (Charles Alderson). Provided,
that is, that technology and pedagogical expertise can form a productive
synergy. Developments in CALL have been rapid, but technology does not
always live up to the at times unrealistically high expectations on the part
of tutors and learners alike. A balanced approach seems called for to ensure
that the possibilities of new technology can be meaningfully exploited while
not ignoring its limitations (Brian Powell). This volume concludes with the
more futuristic dimension of language learning and teaching - machines,
computers, artificial intelligence - but this is not to say that the advent of
100 SABINE HOTHO
CALL will bring about the total digitalisation of the language learning/
teaching matrix. And die opening contribution (Monika Seidl) offers perhaps
die best reassurance that diis is unlikely - language, language learning
and language teaching defy any attempts at mechanistic reductivism.
Language teaching and language learning are not only concerned with
linguistic and communicative competence but also with cultural competence
which cannot simply be learned in a prescribed way but has to be
acquired in a complex process of appropriation and reflection.
The eight articles gadiered here may not provide a complete picture of
what is going on in language teaching and learning today. Yet seen as a
whole, diey are linked by two leitmotifs which are paradigmatic for die
current debate. First, die consistency widi which die authors argue, from
widiin dieir respective fields, in favour of a more holistic, inclusive approach
to language teaching and die investigation of language learning is remarkable.
And second, the need for more empirical research in die field is
highlighted again and again. Current work in language teaching and language
learning, despite an immense diversity, seems to be intent on overcoming
traditional and normally exclusive models and approaches by a
more comprehensive perspective, and on firmly underpinning any changes
in the language classroom by research findings.
SABINE HOTHO
Division of Languages
University qfAbertay Dundee
BeU Street
Dundee
DDi iHG
United Kingdom