| No 14, Vol. 5, 1999 |
 |
Command of the spoken language
|
According to the executive order on Danish as a second language for general adult education (1992), one of the aims of teaching Danish as a foreign and second language is to develop the skills of course participants in using the Danish language as a means of experiencing and communicating. The emphasis here is on both receptive and productive skills. If one looks at proficiency of expression, it is further pointed out that both the spoken and the written language are to be strengthened as a tool for expressing knowledge, ideas, emotions and points of view. It is underlined that this is to take place in a varied and precise form, adapted to suit content, receiver and aim.
Ideal requirements of this nature naturally make great demands on course participants, teachers and teaching. At the same time, it is unclear what skills within, for example, the spoken language that are to be developed and strengthened so that the course participants become able to fulfil the more overall aims formulated. In the first part of this article, I therefore want to attempt to define the concept of command of the spoken language more closely and to focus on two central obvious questions:
In the second half of this article the focus is more on the actual teaching. I wish to take a closer look at the development of the language learners' conversational proficiency and vocabulary, and to discuss the use of various types of learner-controlled tasks that aim to strengthen these aspects of language proficiency.
The competent language user is in a position to act as an equal conversation partner in different communicative situations and with different aims. To be able to express oneself fluently and effortlessly, the language user draws on a number of different competences or linguistic resources which, together, make up language proficiency - or communicative competence.
Many of these competences are naturally shared by both the spoken and the written language. If one looks at a written version of a perfectly normal conversation, one is sometimes amazed at how much the spoken language diverges from the written product. Typical of the spoken language are the many incomplete sentences, the interruptions and the sudden changes of subject. There are also a great number of 'fill-in words' (the so-called conversation-regulating gambits), such as 'yes', 'mmm', 'well' and 'let's see', which on the face of it do not express any particular content, but which rather seem to have a conversation-regulating and social function in the universe of oral conversation.
It is important to emphasise that command of the spoken language is not a form of 'incorrect' or 'less precise' form of the written language; it is a linguistic skill that fulfils certain particular aims and requirements, which follows its own rules and has its own inner logic. Rules or conventions and the linguistic means of expression vary from language to language and therefore have to be learned on a par with other aspects of language proficiency.
The spoken language has various genres - monologue and dialogue. Monologue speech (e.g. a cohesive presentation of a subject of a certain length, or a personal presentation), where the aim is often primarily to pass on information, is much more reminiscent of the written language than dialogue is. There are no changes of speaker and the structure is far tighter, since the utterances are linked with the aid of conjunctions or adverbials that support the structure of the argumentation.
Dialogue speech, where a number of conversation partners communicate with each other, is characterised by shorter statements with a much freer and more unpredictable structure. This is especially due to the fact that the dialogue develops as an interaction between the participants, since the interpersonal function, i.e. taking account of the mutual relationships and opinions of the participants, plays a major role.
Since dialogue differs far more in a large number of areas from the written language than monologue does, I wish in the following to look more closely at dialogue speech. When nothing else is indicated, the 'spoken language' is thus synonymous with this genre.
In order to master the conventions needed for dialogue speech it is necessary i.a. to know the rules that determine changing speakers, i.e. one has to know when and especially how one takes over the conversation and relinquishes the role of speaker again. So as not to become a passive participant in the conversation, one has to learn to take a strong initiative, i.e. learn to introduce subjects on the basis of one's own choice and learn how to keep on talking until one has said what one wanted to say. Only in this way can one become able to influence the course of the conversation on an equal footing with the others in the conversation.
In this connection, it is important to know the conventions that apply to changing speaker in the language one is to learn. It is i.a. necessary to have a repertoire of the many small 'fill-in' words or set expressions (the so-called 'conversation-regulating gambits' mentioned above) that are used to control the course of the conversation. When we take over the conversation, we can, for example, begin by repeating some of the previous speaker's last words, or we can say 'What I think is...', 'Yes, but...', etc. If we want to indicate that we wish to keep on speaking, we can, for example, insert a 'let me see', or fill a pause in by, for example, 'er...'. Tag questions, for example, 'isn't it?' appeal to the others in the conversation, since the person speaking can thus indicate that another person can take over the conversation.
As previously mentioned, language learners also have to adapt their language according to content, receiver and aim, i.e. they must be able to express themselves suitably in relation to the communicative context. This naturally applies to all communication, but oral interaction is far more dynamic, since planning and production of language have to take place virtually simultaneously. The language user has a wide range of linguistic means, i.a. intonation, that are not available in the written language. The changes in the power balance between the two speakers as the conversation develops, the introduction of particular topics or a change of atmosphere in the conversation can mean that form of expression constantly has to be regulated and adapted. Furthermore, certain strategies of politeness (e.g. certain toning-down adverbs such as 'perhaps', 'certainly', the use of certain forms of address, etc.) are more frequent in speech. In the spoken language a particular intention is also formulated far more indirectly and a topic, or, for example, a request, perhaps introduced by degrees - as the conversation proceeds.
The written language is often characterised by a rigorous 'linear' structure, where topics are organised in clearly defined sections and with an ongoing progression dictated by the course of the argumentation or by the natural sequence of the narrative structure. The spoken language, on the other hand, has a far more disconnected, 'circular' structure, with repetitions, digressions and insertions that reflect the more spontaneous, unprepared nature of the dialogue.
The grammar is often looser and the references often less obvious (e.g. more frequent use of imprecise expressions such as 'thing', 'it', 'these') when the speakers can find help in the context or can gets the meaning or misunderstandings straightened out between themselves.
In written communication, the language user will have the opportunity to rethink and reformulate. Furthermore, dictionaries and grammar books can be consulted if language proficiency is insufficient. In oral communication (especially dialogue speech), which is far more demanding and pressurised, the language user must, however, make do with the language resources that are at his or her disposal here and now. In such situations, the language learner has to draw on his or her strategic competence and make use of various communicative strategies, e.g. use paraphrases, resort to international words, gesticulate, etc. For the language user it is important to know that the use of strategies of this kind are not be thought of as cheating, or linguistic compromise. The ability to use communicative strategies belongs more to one of the importance competences within oral interaction, making it possible for the language user to fulfil communicative needs. Even though linguistic proficiency and precision are naturally the final teaching goal, the willingness to take risks and linguistic enterprise will always be far more effective - both in terms of communication and learning - than abandoning one's communicative plan and 'keeping quiet in correct Danish'.
Just as is the case with the written language, various oral genres follow particular conventions that have to be mastered and adhered to. We have already mentioned the difference between the monologue and the dialogue. If we are dealing with a more cohesive oral presentation of a subject or a more formal conversational situation with less frequent or more regulated changers of speaker than, for example, an informal chat, there will naturally be different demands made on, for example, logical cogency.
As in written communication, various oral genres will also be characterised by particular types of language acts and particular demands regarding politeness markers. In oral presentation or in a discussion such as is typical of, say, language in the education system, considerable demands will, for example, be made to the structure of the argumentation and thus to the knowledge of particular reasoning language acts, for example, how one presents attitudes, counter-arguments, etc. In conversations between the school and the home, conversations with nursery school staff, at the doctor's or at the job centre, it is perhaps more important to be able to formulate intentions, present requests or complaints, etc. Finally, the normal, informal chatting kind of conversation between friends or colleagues will call for mastery of completely different language acts or other more informal forms of expression. These changes between genre and situations in the private sphere to much public discourse are mastered by the language learner completely unconsciously in his or her native language. However, genre conventions vary from language to language and therefore require the learning of known communicative aspects but with new rules and new linguistic codes.
According to the executive order, the overall aim of teaching is to make course participants capable of managing as citizens in Danish society. Apart from the linguistic content, teaching is to cater for a range of cultural, text-analytical and study technique related skills that enable course participants to do better in the labour market and in the education system.
According to the requirements of the executive order, a strengthening is intended of the ability to cope in situations that primarily have to do with the public sphere. In the pedagogical debate concerning the teaching of specialist language (e.g. at technical schools) there has of late been much discussion of the extent to which teaching should attempt to give course participants a very broad, general language competence that includes as many genres as possible, or whether it ought to be targeted towards more specific requirements, e.g. special service functions. I feel that the same discussion ought to take place within the teaching of Danish, both at level 1 and at level 2. If one looks more closely at the examination requirements, the ability to present a subject, argumentation and discussion are given high priority. As mentioned earlier, different oral genres call for the mastery of different conventions. The need to strengthen various skills much of necessity be crucial for what types of activity are included in the teaching.
In communicative language teaching, where emphasis is on the development of the language user's ability to fulfil his or her own communicative needs, work is included on tasks as a central pedagogical tool. Various types of pupil-centred forms of activity have been developed in which the language learner solves a task in collaboration with other learners:
Analyses of the language of these various types of task have unanimously shown that by carrying out such tasks language learners get a far greater opportunity to train their conversational skills than is the case in teacher-controlled teaching. The participants get more speaking time, and get the chance to train their own language, so that automatisation of that which has been learned takes place. They can i.a. practise the use of conversation-regulating gambits, since responsibility for conversation regulation and for introducing subjects has now shifted from the teaching to the course participants themselves.
Furthermore, various types of language acts and the use of politeness strategies can be tested and automatised. The social interaction tasks in particular make it possible to work with the entire spectrum of language acts and with various role constellations that include the training of various politeness phrases.
Finally, the task element will often mean that the course participant has his or her linguistic capacity pushed to the limits and can thus need to draw on his or her linguistic resources, e.g. via the use of communication strategies. By means of this, it is also possible to motivate the course participants to develop their language, since their personal experiences in connection with working on the tasks give them a felling of the extent to which their oral proficiency enables them to fulfil concrete communicative needs.
Analyses of various exercises have also shown that the language of the course participants in these types of task does not contain more linguistic errors than their language in teacher-controlled interaction. It turns out that learners help and support each other, e.g. via corrections, by supplementing each other in formulations, etc.
It is important to stress that these types of tasks are only templates that can be adapted to the subjects and oral genres which the individual group of course participants need to train. As mentioned, the choice of types of activity depends to a great extent on what aspects of the oral proficiency of the course participants one wishes to strengthen. If the ability to present a subject and argue for one's points of view is emphasised, it will perhaps be a good idea to give high priority to working with various types of attitude-gap tasks. If the intention is to train the ability to cooperate on solving a problem, various types of problem-solving task ought perhaps to be included as a central element in the teaching. Work on the social interaction exercises can also be targeted to practise particular situations that the learner will need to master outside the four walls of the classroom.
Only a negligible amount of the new words that language users come across become familiar enough for them also to be able to use them actively in oral communication. As mentioned earlier, language learners will often be forced in communicative types of exercise to stretch their linguistic resources optimally. Often their vocabulary is insufficient and they have to be encouraged to draw on their strategic competence. To constantly be able to develop their command of the spoken language it is, however, important for them also to get the opportunity to work on their vocabulary - both to learn new words and to automatise familiar words so that they are remembered and become accessible in concrete communicative situations.
Vocabulary learning takes place primarily through input, e.g. via the reading of texts. It is important that work is also carried out on systematically and purposefully when learning vocabulary, e.g. by the use of tasks of the types mentioned above. Many of these exercises - manipulation and categorisation, for example - provide the opportunity to work in a focused and goal-oriented way on a particular area of vocabulary. The task element in finding, for example, pairs/unequal pairs in a word list, force the pupil to focus on the word and its meaning. The various communicative exercises can also be a means of ensuring repetition of the same vocabulary material. Work on such types of task fulfil a number of the learning criteria which language researchers now agree are a prerequisite for new words being better acquired.
Once more, it is important to emphasise that the types of task are merely 'empty' templates that in terms of themes, vocabulary and degree of difficulty can be adapted to any teaching context and a broad educational aim.
It is obvious that the inclusion of these types of task will have an influence on the mutual roles and tasks of the teacher and the course participants in the actual teaching process. The course participants will be forced to take a far more active part in the learning process, which will allow them to try out the linguistic resources in more authentic communicative situations. Teacher-controlled teaching acquires a new central function, as the place where the language learner gets input, receives instructions concerning the solving of tasks and gets the necessary post-processing after the pupil-controlled work. The pupil-controlled exercises become the field where language learners work on their own developing and trying out their language. Only in linguistic interaction can learners control their own language development process. Since various types of pupil will prefer various approaches to the teaching, the inclusion of a spectrum of task types is also an important prerequisite for best satisfying the needs and learning strategies of the individual language learner.
Albrechtsen, Dorte: Fremmedsproglig produktion - at tale. i: Grundbog i
fremmedsprogspædagogik. Red af G. Kasper og J. Wagner.
Kbh.; Gyldendal, 1989.
Bekendtgørelse nr. 314 af 30. april
1992. Bekendtgørelse om prøver for almen
voksenuddannelse. Fagbilag: Dansk som andetsprog.
Henriksen, Birgit: Elevcentrerede
arbejdsformer i den kommunikative fremmedsprogsundervisning. i: Grundbog i
fremmedsprogspædagogik. Red af G. Kasper og J.
Wagner. Kbh.; Gyldendal, 1989.
Henriksen, Birgit: Hvordan husker man ord?
i: Sprogforum, årg. 1, 1995, nr. 3. S. 45-55.
Lund, Karen: Kommunikativ kompetence - hvor står vi? i: Sprogforum, årg. 2, 1996, nr. 4. S. 7-19.
Svendsen Pedersen, Michael: What does
you have in your"Task" today? i: Sprogforum,
årg. 2, 1996, nr. 4. S. 20-27.
Sprogforum's homepage |
Contents of
this number
|
Ordering
Sprogforum
|
