UNIT 40 COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES. DEFINITION AND TYPOLOGY. TYPOLOGY. OUTLINE
1. INTRODUCTION. 1.1. Aims of the unit. 1.2. Notes Notes on bibliog bibliograph raphy. y.
2. A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR COMMUNICATION STRA 2.1. The origins and nature of the communication process. 2.2. Communication and language teaching. 2.3. A theory of communicative communicative competence.
3. COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES: DEFINITION AND TYPOLOGY. 3.1. The concept of strategy. strategy. 3.2. Languag Languagee learni learning ng strategies. strategies. 3.2.1.
Definition. Definition.
3.2.2.
Main factors on the choice of L2 learning strategies.
3.2.3.
Main problems problems in classifying classifying strategie strategie s.
3.2.4.
Typology.
3.3. Communication strategies. strategies . 3.3.1.
Definition. Definition.
3.3.2.
Typology.
4. EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS IN LANGUAGE TEACHING.
5. CONCLUSION.
6. BIBLIOGRAPHY.
1/21
1. INTRODUCTION. INTRODUCTION.
1.1. Aims of the unit.
The main aim of Unit 40 is to define and establish a typology of communication communication strategies, strategies, that is, the main the main strategies that come into force in the communication process. Our aim then is to link the notions of strategies strategie s and communication and show their importance in society, and especially, in the language teaching community within the framework of the Communicative Approach from its origins to present-day studies. So, we shall divide our presentation presentation in five main chapters.
Chapter 2 will 2 will offer a theoretical background for the notions of ‘communication’ and ‘strategies’ and in order to do so, we shall trace back to (1) the origins of the communication process and (2) its relationship with language teaching, which will establish a basis for (3) a theory of communicative competence. It is at this point that we shall introduce the concept of communicative strategies since they are included in the concept of ‘language learning strategies’ as part of the notion of communicative competence in foreign language learning and teaching.
With this background in mind, Chapter 3 is 3 is divided into three main sections so as to analyse first, the concept of ‘strategy’, then the concept of ‘language learning strategies’ and finally, the concept of ‘communication strategies’ in terms of definition and typology. So, this section provides (1) a definition definition of the term ‘strategy’ in terms of origins within a language learning background; (2) an approach to language learning strategies strategies in terms of (a) definition, by means of which we shall review (i) the main factors influencing the choice of L2 learning strategies; and (ii) the main problems problems in classifying classifying strategies strategies and (b) (b) typology, typology, based based on the contribut contributions ions of the most most relevant relevant researchers in the field. Next, it is at this point that we shall meet (3) the concept of communication strategies and strategies and we shall examine it in terms of (a) definition and (b) a typology, following again the main figures in this field.
Chapter 4 will be devoted to present the main educational implications in language teaching regarding communicative strategies, and Chapter 5 will 5 will offer a conclusion to broadly overview o verview our present present study study.. Finally, Finally, Chapter 6 will 6 will include all the bibliographical references used to develop this account of communicati communicative ve strategies str ategies..
2/21
1.2. Notes on bibliography.
An influential introduction to the notion of communication is based on relevant works of Crystal, Linguistics (1985) and Halliday, Explorations in the Functions of Language (1975). Moreover, notes on the relationship between communication and language teaching are namely taken from Howatt, A history of English Language teaching (1984); Widdowson, Teaching Language as Communication (1978); and Larsen-Freeman & Long, An introduction to second language acquisition research (1991). Comments on a theory of communicative competence so as to introduce communicative strategies are namely drawn from Ellis, Understanding Second Language Acquisition (1985); Richards, J., & Rodgers, Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (1992): and Hymes, On communicative competence (1972).
Classic works on communicative strategies’ definition and typology, include Lessard-Clouston, Michael, Language Learning Strategies: An Overview for L2 Teachers (1997); Hismanoglu, Language Learning Strategies in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching (2000); Faerch & Kasper, Strategies in Interlanguage Communication (1983); Fedderholdt, Using Diaries to Develop Language Learning Strategies (1997); Murphy, On Teaching Communicative Strategies in the Classroom (2003); O’Malley & Chamot , Learning strategies in second language acquisition (1990); Oxford, Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know (1990); Wenden & Rubin, Learner Strategies in Language Learning (1987); and still indispensable on this issue, Tarone, Conscious Communication Strategies in Interlanguage: a Progress Report (1977) and Tarone, Some thoughts on the notion of communication strategy (1983).
The background for educational implications is based on the theory of communicative competence and communicative approaches to language teaching are provided by Cana le, From Communicative Competence to Communicative Language Pedagogy (1983); Canale and Swain, Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing (1980); Hymes, On communicative competence (1972); Hedge Tricia, Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom (2000); Bachman, Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing (1990); Krashen, Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning (1981); Krashen & Terrell, The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom (1983); Richards & Platt, Longman
3/21
Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (1992); and Stern, Issues and Options in Language Teaching (1992).
In addition, the most complete record of current publications within the educational framework is provided by the guidelines in B.O.E. (2002); the Council of Europe, Modern Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. A Common European Framework of reference (1998); Hedge Tricia, Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom (2000); and Stern, Issues and Options in Language Teaching (1992). Moreover, we can find more information on The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. VI, No. 8, August 2000.
2. A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES.
Chapter 2 will offer a theoretical background for the notions of ‘communication’ and ‘strategies’ and in order to do so, we shall trace back to (1) the origins of the communication process and (2) its relationship with language teaching, which will establish a basis for (3) a theory of communicative competence. It is at this point that we shall introduce the concept of communicative strategies since they are included in the concept of ‘language learning strategies’ as are part of the notion of communicative competence in foreign language learning and teaching.
2.1. The origins and nature of the communication process.
From an anthropological perspective, the origins of communication are to be found in the very early stages of life when there was a need for animals and humans to communicate basic structures of the world and everyday life. Before language was developed, non-verbal codes were used by humans to convey information by means of symbols, body gestures, and sounds, as it is represented in pictorial art and burial sites. However, since prehistoric times the way of improving communication preoccupied human beings as they had a need to express their thoughts with words. This non-verbal code was to be developed into a highly elaborated signaling system, both spoken and written, which became an essential tool of communication for human beings (Crystal, 1985).
4/21
Historically speaking, various attempts have been made to conceptualize the nature of communication and to explore its relationship to human language regarding types, elements and purposes. For several millennia many linguists and philosophers have approached the concept of language from different domains of knowledge, such as philosophy, psychology, anthropology, and sociology among others, in order to offer an account of the prominent features of human language in opposition to other systems of communication. According to Halliday (1975), language may be defined as an instrument of social interaction with a clear communicative purpose. Among the most prominent design features of human language, an auditory-vocal channel is to be highlighted in opposition to tactile, visual or other means of communication. This feature allows human beings to be able to reproduce and produce an infinite number of messages in any context of space and time thanks to the arbitrariness of language (to combine sounds with no intrinsic meaning so as to form elements with meaning). Moreover, due to a traditional transmission, language is transmitted from one generation to the next by a process of teaching and learning. This feature is the aim of our next section which links communication and language teaching in order to provide a meaningful framework to the notion of communicative competence.
2.2. Communication and language teaching.
From a historical perspective, Howatt (1984) has demonstrated that many current issues in language teaching are not particularly new. For instance, in the seventeenth century, the theologian Jan Amos Komensky (1592-1670), Comenius, who was said to be the founder of didactics (the art of teaching), already stated the reasons for learning a foreign language. He claims “that through language, we come to a closer understanding of the world since language refers to things in the world ”. Upon this basis, he claims that “for men to retrieve something of their old collective wisdom, it is necessary for them to learn each other’s languages”. In the words of Widdowson (1978), these opportunities Comenius mentions to communicate with others, have to do with the ability to communicate in a foreign language and the ability to interpret and produce meaning. This is an important goal for language learners, especially for those who need to fulfill roles as family members, community members, students, teachers, employers or employees in an foreign language speaking environment. While there are many influential factors in
5/21
second language learning, as the learner characteristics such as age, personality, and intelligence, the critical dimension in language learning is interaction with other speakers. Similarly, in the words of Larsen-Freeman (1991), one learns to do by doing, since people learn to walk by walking and they learn to drive by driving. Therefore, it makes sense, then, that people learn to communicate by communicating, and similarly, those learners who engage in the regular use of their second language and receive the greater quantity of input will most likely demonstrate a greater ability to use their second language. Learners must actively work and practice extensively on communicating to develop skills in communication. It follows, then, that learners should be provided with as much speaking time as possible, both in and out of the classroom. However, we should not forget that communicating successfully implies not only a correct use of structure and form, but also to communicate intelligibly and appropriately for students to achieve a successful interaction. This ability to communicate is the aim of our next section where we will provide an approach to the notion of communicative competence within the framework of language teaching.
2.3. A theory of communicative competence.
In this section, it is relevant to conceptualize first some key issues related to the concept of communicative competence in order to fully understand the term and its relevance in foreign language teaching. Therefore, the concepts of ‘proficiency’, ‘competence’ and ‘performance’ will be under revision as follows. Within a language teaching theory, many approaches and theories stem from a fundamental question which addresses the way of helping students who are learning a second language in a classroom setting, become proficient in that language. Another question arises, then, in relation to what it means to be ‘proficient’ in a language, and to what a learner has to know in terms of grammar, vocabulary, sociolinguistic appropriateness, conventions of discourse, and cultural understanding in order to use a language well enough for real world purpose.
Following Ellis (1985), we may define proficiency as the learner’s knowledge of the target language viewed as linguistic competence or communicative competence. Common synonyms for the term are expertise, ability, or competence within implications at a high level of skill, well-developed
6/21
knowledge, and polished performance. As we have seen, the term proficiency brings about the notions of competence and performance which must be also reviewed. These two notions of competence and performance are one of the main tenets in Chomsky’s theory of transformational grammar (Richards & Rodgers, 2001). This distinc tion addresses competence as the idealized native speaker’s underlying competence, referring to one’s implicit or explicit knowledge of the system of the language whereas performance addresses to an individual performance, referring to one’s actual production and comprehension of language in specific instances of language use. This fundamental distinction has been at the centre of discussions of many other researchers, and in fact, it has been reviewed and evaluated since then from various theoretical perspectives. However, in his work On communicative competence (1972), the American anthropologist Dell Hymes felt that there are rules of language use that are neglected in Chomsky’s approach, as native speakers know more than just grammatical competence. Hymes, with a tradition on sociolinguistics, had a broader view of the term which included not only grammatical competence, but also sociolinguistic and contextual competence. For Hymes, the notion of communicative competence is the underlying knowledge a speaker has of the rules of grammar including phonology, orthography, syntax, lexicon, and semantics, and the rules for their use in socially appropriate circumstances. Therefore, we understand competence as the knowledge of rules of grammar, and performance, they way the rules are used. The verbal part of communicative competence comprises all the so-called four skills: listening, reading, speaking and writing. It is important to highlight this, since there is a very common misunderstanding that communicative competence only refers to the ability to speak. It is both productive and receptive. All of us have developed communicative competence in our native language, oral proficiency and later, possibly, written proficiency, since the acquisition of communicative competence in a foreign or second language takes place on the basis of the fact that we already have a native language. So we are dealing with the development of two systems that interact. The question of how learners process new information and what kind of strategies they employ to understand, learn or remember the information has been the primary concern in research for over the last twenty years, with greater emphasis being put on learners and learning rather than on teachers and teaching. Research has repeatedly shown that the conscious, tailored use of such strategies is related to language achievement and proficiency. These strategies are called ‘language
7/21
learning strategies’ whose typology will shed light on the concept of ‘communication strategies’, since it is one of the three main types of language learning strategies. 3. COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES: DEFINITION AND TYPOLOGY.
With this background in mind, Chapter 3 aims at emphasizing the relevance of language learning strategies in foreign language learning and teaching and, in particular, of communication strategies. Then this section is divided into three sections so as to analyse first, the concept of ‘strategy’, then the concept of ‘language learning strategies’ and finally, the concept of ‘communication strategies’ in terms of definition and typology.
So, this section provides (1) a definition of the term ‘strategy’ in terms of origins within a language learning background; (2) an approach to language learning strategies in terms of (a) definition, by means of which we shall review (i) the main factors influencing the choice of L2 learning strategies; and (ii) the main problems in classifying strategies and (b) typology, based on the contributions of the most relevant researchers in the field. Next, it is at this point that we shall meet (3) the concept of communication strategies and we shall examine it in terms of (a) definition and (b) a typology, following again the main figures in this field.
3.1. The concept of strategy.
As stated above, the interest, and therefore research, into the concept of ‘strategies’ began in the 1960s when developments in cognitive pshychology stressed the importance of communication strategies for foreign language learning and the teacher’s role in strategy training. The primary concern was on “identifying what good language learners report they do to learn a second or foreign language, or, in some cases, are observed doing while learning a second or foreign language” (Rubin & Wenden, 1987:19).
In his study The Method of Inference in Foreign Language Study (1966), Aaron Carton made the first attempt on learner strategies. After Carton, in 1971, other linguists such as Rubin (1975) started doing research focussing on the strategies of successful learners and stated that, once identified, such strategies could be made available to less successful learners. Rubin (1975) classified strategies in terms of processes contributing directly or indirectly to language learning. Yet, how do we define the concept of ‘strategies’?
8/21
Actually, the description of the term ‘strategies’ must be linked to that of the ‘communicative approach’ and ‘language learning strategies’ in the classroom setting. Communicative Language Teaching theory holds that negotiating meaning is a key element in learning a foreign language and hence, the ability to negotiate meaning is dependent upon one’s ability to use communicative strategies effectively.
In fact learning strategies are defined as “specific actions, behaviors, steps, or techniques students use, often consciously, to improve their progress in apprehending, internalizing, and using the foreign or second language (L2).” They may refer to conversation patterns, the use of gestures to communicate when the words do not come to mind, the learning of words by breaking them down into their components, using guesses when reading, and so on. So, strategies prove essential as “the tools for active, self-directed involvement needed for developing L2 communicative ability” (O’Malley & Chamot, 1990). Here we are some other definitions of the term.
3.2. Language learning strategies.
3.2.1. Definition.
The term language learning strategy has been also defined as ‘any sets of operations, steps, plans, routines used by the learner to facilitate the obtaining sotrage, retrieval, and use of information’ (Wenden & Rubin, 1987:19); ‘intentional behavior and thoughts used by learners during learning so as to better help them understand, learn, or remember new information’ (Richards & Platt, 1992:209); and also as ‘an attempt to develop linguistic and sociolinguistic competence in the target language’ (Faerch & Kasper, 1983:67).
According to Stern (1992:261), “the concept of learning strategy is dependent on the assumption that learners consciously engage in activities to achieve certain goals and learning strategies can be regarded as broadly conceived intentional directions and learning techniques.” Moreover, according to Hismanoglu (2000), “a ll language learners use language learning strategies either consciously or unconsciously when processing new information and performing tasks in the language classroom.”
9/21
3.2.2. Main factors on the choice of L2 learning strategies.
According to Oxford (1990), the choice of strategies used among students learning a second language is influenced by several factors, such as motivation, gender, cultural background, attitudes and beliefs, type of task, age and stage, learning style and finally, tolerance of ambiguity.
•
Regarding motivation, those students who are more motivated tend to use more strategies than less motivated students. Also, the particular reason for studying, such as the motivational orientation related to career field , is important in the choice of strategies.
•
Regarding gender , females are reported to use greater overall strategies than males in many studies although sometimes surpassed females in the use of a particular strategy.
•
Regarding cultural background , certain cultures use special forms of memorization which seem to be more prevalent among other cultures.
•
Attitudes and beliefs are reported to have a profound effect on the strategies learners choose, with negative attitudes and beliefs often causing poor strategy use of lack of strategies.
•
Regarding the type of task , their nature help determine the strategies naturally employed to carry out the task.
•
With respect to age and stage , students of different ages and stages of L2 learning are said to use different strategies, with some of them often being employed by older or more advanced students.
•
Concerning the learning style , that is, the general approach to language learning, it often determines the choice of L2 learning strategies. For instance, analytic -style students prefer strategies such as contrastive analysis, rule- learning, and separating words and phrases, while global students tend to use strategies to find meaning (guessing, scanning, predicting) and to converse without knowing all the words (paraphrasing, gesturing).
•
Finally, regarding tolerance of ambiguity, students who are more tolerant are said to use significantly different learning strategies in some instances than did students who are less tolerant.
3.2.3. Main problems in classifying strategies.
10/ 21
Before offering a typology of language learning strategies, it is crucial to take into account the main problems in classifying strategies since there are a wide range of typologies, almost two dozens strategy classification systems. The existence of these distinct strategy typologies indicates a major problem in the research area and therefore, a lack of a coherent, well accepted system for describing these strategies. So, these systems have been divided into five main groups depending the variables they are related to:
(1) successful language learners (Rubin, 1975); (2) psychological functions (O’Malley & Chamot, 1990); (3) linguistically based systems dealing with guessing, language monitoring, formal and functional practice or with communication strategies like paraphrasing or borrowing (Tarone, 1983); (4) separate language skills (Cohen, 1990); (5) and finally, different styles or types of learners (Ellis, 1985).
3.2.4. Typology.
Since language classroom is like a problem-solving environment in which language learners are likely to face new input and difficult tasks given by their instructors, learners’ attempts to find que quickest or easiest way to do what is required, that is, using language learning strategies is inescapable. Language learning strategies language learners use during the act of processing the new information and performing tasks have been identified and described by researchers, but still, there is no generally agreed typology to follow.
The classification of Language Learning Strategies goes back to the figure of Selinker, who coined the term ‘communication strategy’ in 1972 in his account of the processes responsible for interlanguage. Shortly after, in 1975 and later on in 1987, Joan Rubin classified the strategies of language learning into direct and indirect (the former contribute directly to learning whereas the latter contribute indirectly to the learning process).
Of course, this classification is not the only one and others followed. Thus, O’Malley (1985) divided learning strategies into three main categories: metacognitive, cognitive and socioaffective; Oxford (1990) distinguished two main classes, direct and indirect, which were subdivided into six
11/ 21
groups: direct (memory, cognitive, compensation strategies) and indirect (metacognitive, affective and social strategies); Stern (1992) also introduced his own classification (management and planning, cognitive, communicative, interpersonal and affective strategies) but in the end, they all reflect the same categorization of language learning strategies.
In fact, most of the attempts to classify language learning strategies reflect more or less the same categorizations of language learning strategies without any radical changes. In what follows, we shall shortly summarize how various researchers have categorized language learning strategies, thus Rubin (1987), Oxford (1990), O’Malley (1985) and Stern (1992). So, for our purposes, we shall establish Rubin’s classification since he pionered much of the work in this field and also makes direct reference to the concept of ‘communication strategies’.
Then, according to him (1987), there are three main types of strategies used by learners that contribute directly or indirectly to language learning: learning strategies, social strategies and communication strategies.
(1) Regarding learning strategies, there are two main types: cognitive le arning strategies and metacognitive learning strategies.
•
The former refer to the the steps or operations used in learning or problem-solving that require direct analysis, transformation, or synthesis of learning materials. Rubin identified six main cognitive learning strategies contributing directly to language learning (clarification, guessing, deductive reasoning, practice, memorization and monitoring).
•
The latter are used to oversee, regulate or self-direct language learning and involve various processes as planning, prioritising, setting goals, and self- management.
(2) Social strategies are “those activities learners engage in which afford them opportunities to be exposed to and practise their knowledge. Although this kind of strategies provide exposure to the target language, they contribute indirectly to learning since they do no lead directly to the obtaining storing, retrieving, and using of language” (Rubin & Wenden, 1987: 23-27).
12/ 21
(3) Finally, communication strategies are less directly related to language learning since they focus on the process of participating in a conversation and getting meaning across what the speaker intends to say. Communication strategies are used by speakers when faced with some difficulty due to the fact that their communication ends outrun, their communication means or when confronted with misunderstanding by a co-speaker (Rubin & Wenden, 1987). But how do other relevant figures define and classify communication strategies?
3.3. Communication strategies.
3.3.1. Definition.
As seen, communication strategies have been defined as ‘strategies employed when people encounter a communication problem during conversation’ (Murphy, 2003). In addition, according to Ellis (1985:164), communicative strategies are related to the cognitive component of procedural knowledge, “which comprises the various mental processes involved in internalizing and automatizing new L2 knowledge” (second language learning) and in using this knowledge in conjunction with other knowledge sources to communicate in the L2. Communication strategies, then, are the result of an initial failure to implement a production plan. Language use, therefore, is characterized by both production and reception strategies, which operate when the learner utilizes available resources easily and subconsciously” (Ellis, 1985).
A mention to language learning strategies in our educational curricula is to be found within the framework of the ‘communicative approach’ to language teaching. So, since communication strategies are components of communicative competence, it is necessary to define what communicative competence is. The most well-known definition is Canale and Swain’s (1980) and later Canale’s (1983) definition. According to these scholars, four different components make up communicative competence: grammatical, discourse, sociolinguistic and strategic competence.
1. Grammatical competence. Grammatical competence subsumes all knowledge of lexical items and of rules of morphology, syntax, sentence-grammar semantics and phonology (Canale and
13/ 21
Swain,1980). It therefore refers to having control over the purely linguistic aspects of the language code itself, regarding verbal and non-verbal codes. This corresponds to Hymes’ grammatical aspect and includes knowledge of the lexicon, syntax, morphology, phonology and semantics. Thus, it involves rules of formulations and constraints for students to match sound and meaning; to form words and sentences using vocabulary; to use language through spelling and pronunciation; and to handle linguistic semantics. 2. Discourse competence. For our purposes, discourse analysis is primarily concerned with the ways in which individual sentences connect together to form a communicative message. One of its main figures, Widdowson (1978) proposed a distinction between the concepts of use and usage, where usage refers to the manifestation of the knowledge of a language system and use means the realization of the language system as meaningful communicative behavior. This competence addresses directly to the mastery of how to combine grammatical forms and meanings to achieve a unified spoken or written text in different genres (Canale and Swain 1980). By genre is meant the type of text to be unified, thus, a scientific paper, an argumentative essay, and oral and written narrative among others. For them, the unity of a text is achieved through cohesion in form and coherence in meaning. 3. Sociolinguistic competence. Sociolinguistic competence refers to the knowledge which the learner has to acquire of the sociocultural rules of language. This type of knowledge requires an understanding of the social context in which language is used: the roles of the participants, the information they share, and the function of the interaction (Savignon 1983). Other relevant figures in this field, such as Canale and Swain (1980) defined this competence in terms of sociocultural rules of use, and rules of discourse. Regarding the rules of discourse, it is defined in terms of the mastery of how to combine grammatical forms and meanings (1980). When we deal with appropriateness of form, we refer to the extent to which a given meaning is represented in both verbal and non-verbal form that is proper in a given sociolinguistic context . 4. Strategic competence.
14/ 21
Finally we come to the fourth area of Communicative Competence. In the words of Canale (1983), strategic competence is the verbal and nonverbal communication strategies that may be called into action to compensate for breakdowns in communication due to performance variables or due to insuffic ient competence.This is quite a complex area but in a simplified way we can describe it as the type of knowledge which we need to sustain communication with someone. This may be achieved by paraphrase, circumlocution, repetition, hesistation, avoidance, guessing as well as shifts in register and style. According to Canale and Swain (1980), strategic competence is useful in various circumstances as for instance, the early stages of second language learning where communicative competence can be present with just strategic and socio-linguistic competence.
As we can see, the first two components reflect the use of the linguistic system whereas the last two define the functional aspects of communication. Focusing on communication strategies, and therefore, the strategic competence, this is seen as “the capacity that relates language competence, or knowledge of language, to the language user’s knowledge structures and the features of context in which communication takes place. Strategic competence performs assessment, planning, and execution functions in determining the most effective means of achieving a communicative goal” (Bachman, 1990). So, as speakers compensate for breakdowns in communication using strategic competence, we shall offer a typology of these communication strategies following that of Tarone (1977) and later on, Tarone (1983).
3.3.2. Typology. We may establish a common typology half-way between the contributions of Tarone (1983) and Celce-Murcia et al. (1995:28). So the classification of communication strategies would be done into five main subtypes: (1) achievement or compensatory strategies, (2) stalling or time-gaining strategies, (3) avoidance, (4) self -monitoring strategies, and (5) interactional strategies. Thus: 1. Achivemen t or compensatory strategies, paraphrasing according to Tarone (1983), are subdivided into
15/ 21
•
Approximation, as the use of a single target language vocabulary item or structure, which the learners knows is not correct, but which shares enough semantic features in common with the desired item to satisfy the speaker (i.e. ‘scarf’ for ‘a piece of clothing you wear around your neck in winter’, ‘fish’ for ‘carp’).
•
Circumlocution, where the learner describes the characteristics or elemtns of the objects or action instead of using the appropriate target language item or structure (i.e. She is smoking something. I don’t know what its name is).
•
Word coinage, where the learner makes up a new word in order to communicate a desired concept (i.e. ‘airball’ for ‘balloon’ , ‘vegetarianist’).
•
Literal translation, by means of which the learner translates word for word from the native language (i.e. I have eight years old).
•
Language switch, by means of which the learner uses the native language term without bothering to translate (i.e. He sent the ball from the corner in the last minute).
•
Appeal for assistance, by means of which the learnerasks for the correct form (i.e. The bus was very ... -What is it? What called?).
•
Finally, mime, by means of which the learner uses non-verbal strategies in place of a lexical item or action (i.e. frowning = angry).
2. Avoidance is subdivided into •
Topic avoidance, in which the learner simply tries not to talk about concepts for which the target language item or structure is not known.
•
Message abandonment, in which the learner begins to talk about a concept but is unable to continue and stops in mid-utterance.
3.
4.
Time-gaining strategies are subdivided into •
Fillers, hesitation devices and gambits (i.e. Well, actually, er, where was I?)
•
Self and other-repetition.
Self-monitoring strategies:
16/ 21
•
Self-initiated repair (i.e. Well, I mean...; that is, ...; that is to say...).
•
Self-rephrasing with over-elaboration (i.e. This is for students and pupils when you are free at school).
5. Interactional strategies, which are subdivided into •
Appeal for help, which can be direct (i.e. What do you call this?) or indirect (i.e. I don’t know the word in English).
•
Meaning negotiation strategies.
•
Indicators of misunderstanding requests, indicating repetition (i.e. Pardon? Or Could you say that again, please?), clarification (i.e. What do you mean by...?), confirmation (i.e. Did you say...?).
•
Expressions of non-understanding, such as verbal ones (i.e. Sorry, I’m not sure I understand) or non-verbal (i.e. raised eyebrows, blank look).
•
Interpretive summary (i.e. You mean this? / So what you are saying is this?).
•
Reponses (i.e. repetition, rephrasing, expansion, reduction, confirmation, rejection, repair).
•
Comprehension check whether the interlocutor can follow you (i.e. Am I making sense?), what you said was correct or grammatical (i.e. I said that?), the interlocutor is listening (i.e. on the phone: ‘Are you still there?’) or whether the interlocutor can hear you (i.e. Are you listening to me?/Can you hear me?).
4. EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS IN LANGUAGE TEACHING.
According to Hismanoglu (2000), “since the amount of information to be processed by language learners is high in language classroom, learners use different language learning strategies in performing the tasks and processing the new input they face. Language learning strategies are good indicators of how learners approach tasks or problems encountered during the process of language learning. In other words, language learning strategies, while nonobservable or unconsciously used in some cases, give language teachers valuable clues about how their students assess the situation,
17/ 21
plan, select appropriate skills so as to understand, learn, or remember new input presented in the language classroom”.
In addition, according to Fedderholdt (1997), “the language learner capable of using a wide variety of language learning strategies appropriately can improve his language skills in a better way. Metacognitive strategies improve organization of learning time, self -monitoring, and selfevaluation. Cognitive strategies include using previous knowledge to help solve new problems. Socioaffective strategies include asking native speakers to correct their pronunciation, or asking a classmate to work together on a particular language problem”. So, as we can see, developing skills in these three areas, such as metacognitive, cognitive, and socioaffective can help the language learner build up learner independence and autonomy whereby he can take control of his own learning.
It is a fact that language learning strategie s contribute to the development of the communicative competence of the students. In this study, we have seen how, being a broad concept, language learning strategies are used to refer to all strategies foreign language learners use in learning the target language and communication strategies are one type of language learning strategies. It follows from this that language teachers aiming at developing the communicative competence of the students and language learning should be familiar with language learning strategies. As Oxford (1990) states, language learning strategies “are especially important for language learning because they are tools for active, self-directed movement, which is essential for developing communicative competence.”
Besides, adds Himanoglu (2000), “developing the communicative competence of the students, teachers who train students to use language learning strategies can help them become better language learners. Helping students understand good language learning strategies and training them to develop and use such good language learning strategies can be considered to be the appreciated characteristics of a good language teacher.”
“Research into the good language learning strategies revealed a number of positive strategies so that such strategies could also be used by bad language learners trying to become more successful in language learning. However, there is always the possibility that bad language learners can also use the same good language learning strategies while becoming unsuccessful owing to some other reasons. At this point, it should be strongly stressed that using the same good language learning
18/ 21
strategies does not guarantee that bad learners will also become successful in language learning since other factors may also play role in success” (Hismanoglu, 2000).
5. CONCLUSION.
As Hismanoglu (2000), claims language learning strategies, “being specific actions, behaviors, tactics, or techniques, facilitate the learning of the target language by the language learner. All language learners, needless to say, use language learning strategies in the learning process. Since the factors like age, gender, personality, motivation, self-concept, life-experience, learning style, excitement, and anxiety, among others, affect the way in which language learners learn the target language, it is not reasonable to support the idea that all language learners use the same good language learning strategies or should be trained in using and developing the same strategies to become successful learners.”
As Lessard-Clouston (1997) mentions, studies to be done on language learning strategies and strategy training should move beyond descriptive taxonomies of language learning strategies and attempt to seek for answers to a wide range of questions, such as: “What types of language learning strategies appear to work best with what learners in which contexts? Does language learning strategies or language learning strategies training transfer easily between L2 and FL contexts? What is the role of language proficiency in language learning strategies use and training? How long does it take to train specific learners in certain language learning strategies? How can one best assess and measure success in language learning strategies use or training? Are certa in language learning strategies learned more easily in classroom and non-classroom contexts? What language learning strategies should be taught at different proficiency levels?
It can be expected that answers to the above mentioned and many other questions from research in a variety of settings will pave the way for building the theory that seems necessary for more language learning strategies work to be relevant to current L2 / FL teaching practice.
19/ 21
6. BIBLIOGRAPHY.
Bachman, L.F. 1990. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. New York: Oxford University Press. B.O.E. 2002. Consejería de Educación y Cultura. Decreto N.º 112/2002, de 13 de septiembre. Currículo de la Educación Secundaria Obligatoria en la Comunidad Autónoma de la Región de Mur cia. B.O.E. 2002. Consejería de Educación y Cultura. Decreto N.º 113/2002, de 13 de septiembre. Currículo de Bachillerato en la Comunidad Autónoma de la Región de Murcia. Brown, G. and G. Yule. 1983. Discourse Analysis. Cambridge University Press. Canale, M., and M. Swain, 1980. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing . Applied Linguistics 1 (1). Canale, M. 1983. From Communicative Competence to Communicative Language Pedagogy, in J. Richards and R. Schmidt (eds.). Language and Communication. London, Longman.Hymes, D. 1972. On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride and J. Holmes (eds.), Sociolinguistics, pp. 269-93. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Council of Europe (1998) Modern Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. A Common European Framework of reference. Crystal, D. 1985. Linguistics. Harmondsworth, England. Penguin Books. Ellis, R. 1985. Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford University Press. Faerch, C. and G. Kasper.1983. Strategies in Interlanguage Communication. London: Longman. Fedderholdt, Karen. 1997. “Using Diaries to Develop Language Learning Strategies”. On The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. VI, No. 8, August 2000. Halliday, M.A.K. 1975. Explorations in the Functions of Language. London: Edward Arnold. Halliday, M.A. K. and R. Hasan. 1976 . Cohesion in English. Longman. Hedge, T. 2000. Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom(OUP). Hismanoglu, M. 2000. Language Learning Strategies in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching . H acettepe University, Turkey. Howatt, A. 1984. A history of English Language teaching . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hymes, D. 1972. On communicative competence. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Krashen, S. D. 1981. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning . Oxford: Pergamon. Krashen, S. D., and T. D., Terrell. 1983. The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom. Oxford: Pergamon. Larsen-Freeman, D. and M.H. Long. 1991. An introduction to second language acquisition research. Ne w York: Longman.
Lessard-Clouston, Michael. 1997. “ Language Learning Strategies: An Overview for L2 Teachers” on The Internet TESL Journal, 2000. Murphy, R. 2003. On Teaching Communicative Strategies in the Classroom. Paper for the Association for Language Teaching. Matsuyama JALT Chapter.
O’Malley, J.M., and A.U. Chamot. 1990. Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20/ 21
Oxford, R. 1990. Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. New York: Newbury House Publishers. Richards, J. and J. Platt. 1992. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. Essex: Longman. Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. 1992. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Stern, H.H. 1992. Issues and Options in Language Teaching . Oxford: OUP. Tarone, E. 1977. ‘Conscious Communication Strategies in Interlanguage: a Progress Report’ in H.D. Brown, A. Yorio, and R.C. Crymes (eds.). in TESOL ’77, Teaching and Learning ESL. Washington D.C.: TESOL, 194-203. Tarone, E. 1983. ‘Some thoughts on the notion of communication strategy’ in C. Faerch, and G. Kasper (eds.). Strategies in Interlanguage Communication. New York: Longman. Wenden, A. and J. Rubin.1987. Learner Strategies in Language Learning . New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Widdowson, H. G. 1978. Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21/ 21
