Summary of Discourse Analysis-Approaches

Sheila Choirul Istifa  (2201409059)

405-406

5th assignment of TAL

Approaches to Discourse

            Through this chapter, I will discuss several approaches to discourse analysis based on the seventh-meeting material available. First approach is speech act theory. This approach is developed by Austin (1955) and Searle (1969). The basic unit of analysis is speech act (SA) or illocutionary force (IF). From the basic belief that language is used to perform action, Austin and Searle state that the basic unit conversational analysis must be functionally motivated rather than formally design one. The systemic name of this approach is Speech function (SF), the central issue in discourse structure.

The second approach is Interactional Sociolinguistics and developed by Gumperz (1982) and Goffman (1959-1981). It is concerned with the interpretation of discourse and importance of context in production. The unit of analysis is grammatical and prosodic features in interaction. In other side, Schiffrin (1987) is focusing on quantitative interactive sociolinguistics analysis, especially discourse markers. His basic concern is on the accomplishment of conversational coherence and the unit’s analysis is turn.

Ethnography of communication is the third approach. It is developed by Dell Hymes (1972b, 1974). It concerns with understanding the social context of linguistics interaction: ’who says what to whom’, when, where, why, and how. The prime unit of analysis is speech event which has some components. The analysis of the speech units’ components then we called ethnography of communication or ethnography of speaking. Then the ethnography framework has led to broader notion of communicative competence.

The fourth approach is pragmatics (Grice 1975, Leech 1983, Levinson 1983). This approach formulates conversational behavior in terms of general “principles” rather than rules. The base of pragmatic approach is conversation analysis called Gricean’s cooperative principle (CP). This principle seeks to account how participants do in next conversation and how the interlocutor goes about interpreting the previous speaker has just done. This principle is divided into some maxims: quantity (say only as much as necessary), Quality (try to make your contribution one that is true), Relation (be relevant), and manner (be brief and avoid ambiguity).

The fifth approach is conversational analysis (Harold Garfinkel 1960s-1970s). It is a branch of ethnomethodology and the concern is to understand social members make sense of everyday life. There are two grossly apparent facts here, that is only one person speaks at a time, and speakers change recurs. Thus conversation is a ‘turn taking’ activity. Models conversation as infinitely generative turn-taking machine, where interactants try to avoid lapse: the possibility that no one is speaking.

The sixth approach is Variation analysis (Labov 1972a, Labov and Waletzky1967). This approach is branch of quantitative of linguistics of change and variation. Labov and Waletzky argue that fundamental narrative structures are evident in spoken narrative of personal experience. Its structures involve six stages: Abstract, orientation, complication, evaluation, resolution, coda (abstract and coda are optional). Although typically focused on social and linguistic constraints on semantically equivalent variants, the approach has also been extended to texts.

The seventh approach is structural functional approach to conversation. It refers to two major approaches of discourse analysis which relevance to the casual conversation: Birmingham School and Systemic Functional Linguistics. The conversational structure attempts to relate the description of conversational structure to that of other units, levels, and structures of language.

Discourse Analysis

Sheila Choirul Istifa

2201409059/405-406

4th assignment of Topics in Applied Linguistics

Summary

Discourse Analysis

            In his book (1983:1), Stubb argues discourse analysis as analysis of language use beyond the sentences, concern with the interrelationship between language and society, and dialogic properties of everyday communication.

Text analysis and discourse analysis are two different things. In the text analysis, it needs linguistics analysis, and the interpretation is based on the linguistic evidence. In other side, discourse analysis study the text-forming devices with reference to the purpose and function for which the discourse was produce. It relates to contexts of situation, culture, and social. The goal of discourse is to show how the linguistics elements enable language users to communicate. In other words it tells us about happenings, what people thinks, belief, how text represents ideology, etc.

Discourse analysis is defined as the study of how stretches of language used in communication assume meaning, purpose and unity for their users (coherence). Coherence itself is an interaction of text with given participant based on the context (participants’ knowledge, perception of paralanguage, other texts, the situation, the culture, the world in general and the role, intentions and relationships of participants. There are some approaches to Discourse Analysis: speech act theory (interpretation), interactional sociolinguistics, ethnography of communication, pragmatics, conversational analysis, variation analysis, and structural functional approaches.

Communicative Competence

Sheila Choirul Istifa
2201409059 / 405-406
3rd assignment of Topics in Applied Linguistic

Communicative Competence

            The term ‘performance’ and ‘competence’ are used frequently in discussing the second language. These two terms are used differently by the research, so that why Chomsky (1965) had differed those two terms. According to Chomsky (1965), the term ‘competence’ refers to the linguistics system (grammar) that an ideal native speaker of a given language has internalized whereas ‘performance’ mainly concerns the psychological factors that are involved in the perception and production of speech. Given this perspective, theory of competence is equivalent to the theory of grammar or language rule that can generate and describe the grammatical sentence of a language. In other hand, theory of performance focuses on the acceptability of sentence in perception and speech production.

            Some researchers had been defining the term communicative competence, Munby (1978) assumed that communicative competence should focus minimally on the relationship and interaction between regularities in grammatical competence and regularities in sociolinguistic competence. in other words, communicative competence can be defined as a knowledge that enables someone that enables someone to use that knowledge communicatively. It can be assumed that the rule of language will be useless if there is no grammar rule “not only knowing the grammatical rules of language, but also what to say to whom in what circumstances and how to say it, example: the rule when we greet the younger will be different with the rule when we greet the elder.

                There are some guiding principles for communicative competence in second language teaching. The first, communicative competence is composed minimally of grammatical competence, sociolinguistic competence, and communicative strategies. A communication approach must be based on and respond to the learner’s need. The second language must have the opportunity to take part in meaningful communicative interaction with highly competent speaker of the language. It is particularly at the early stages of learning (young age). The primary objective of a communication-oriented second language program must be to provide the learners with the information, practice, and much of the experience needed to meet their communicative needs in second language.

Communicative Competence

Sheila Choirul Istifa

2201409059 / 405-406

3rd assignment of Topics in Applied Linguistic

 

Communicative Competence

            The term ‘performance’ and ‘competence’ are used frequently in discussing the second language. These two terms are used differently by the research, so that why Chomsky (1965) had differed those two terms. According to Chomsky (1965), the term ‘competence’ refers to the linguistics system (grammar) that an ideal native speaker of a given language has internalized whereas ‘performance’ mainly concerns the psychological factors that are involved in the perception and production of speech. Given this perspective, theory of competence is equivalent to the theory of grammar or language rule that can generate and describe the grammatical sentence of a language. In other hand, theory of performance focuses on the acceptability of sentence in perception and speech production.

Some researchers had been defining the term “communicative competence”, Munby (1978) assumed that communicative competence should focus minimally on the relationship and interaction between regularities in grammatical competence and regularities in sociolinguistic competence. in other words, communicative competence can be defined as a knowledge that enables someone that enables someone to use that knowledge communicatively. It can be assumed that the rule of language will be useless if there is no grammar rule “not only knowing the grammatical rules of language, but also what to say to whom in what circumstances and how to say it, example: the rule when we greet the younger will be different with the rule when we greet the elder.

There are some guiding principles for communicative competence in second language teaching. The first, communicative competence is composed minimally of grammatical competence, sociolinguistic competence, and communicative strategies. A communication approach must be based on and respond to the leaner’s need. The second language must have the opportunity to take part in meaningful communicative interaction with highly competent speaker of the language. It is particularly at the early stages of learning (young age). The primary objective of a communication-oriented second language program must be to provide the learners with the information, practice, and much of the experience needed to meet their communicative needs in second language.

Communicative Language Teaching

Sheila Choirul Istifa

2201409059 /405-406

2nd assignment of Topics in Applied Linguistics

The History of Communicative Language Teaching

            Communicative Language Teaching or we usually called it CLT is a learning activity of language especially which is emphasized on communication, interaction, or problem solving as the goal of learning language (especially English). Communicative Language Teaching has some activities such as pairs work, group or team work. The learning activities using CLT try to switch the previous learning activities which are focused on grammatical only.

The history of Communicative Language Teaching is divided into three main head. Starting from the late 1960s, that is the traditional approaches. Then in 1970s till 1990s, the classic Communicative Language Teaching is appeared. The last is the late 1990s till presents, the current Communicative Language Teaching is presented.

1. Traditional Approaches (the late 1960s)

The grammatical proficiency was introduced first in language teaching. In that period of time (1960) the experts believe that grammar rule can be learnt through direct instruction. The approaches to teach grammar was deductive methodology, where the rule was presented first and then the students were asked to practice or construct their own sentences/utterances using the rule given.  It was contrasted with inductive methodology where the students were given the sentences containing the grammar rule first and then they were asked to find out the rule.

There were some methodology that was used such as memorization of dialogue, drilling, question-and-answer practice. The focus on this method was on the accurate pronunciation and accurate mastery of grammar. It was stressed from very beginning of the learning process.

Richard, Jack C. (2006) saiys that methodologies based on the assumption above include Audiolingualism in North America (known as Audio-Language method) and Structural-Situational Approach in United Kingdom (known as Situational Language Teaching). Syllabuses during this period consisted of word list and grammar list, graded across level. There was also a technique such as three-phase sequence, known as P-P-P cycle (presentation, practice, Production) often used. This technique had been widely used in language teaching materials and continues in modified today. The skill that had been focused in was speaking, or can be grammar-based lesson, for example, begin with an introductory phase in which new teaching poinys are presented and illustrated in some ways and where the focus is on comprehension and recognition.

Under the influence of CLT theory, grammar-based methodologies such as the P-P-P have given way to functional and skills-based teaching, and accuracy activities such as drill and grammar practice have been replaced by fluency activities based on interactive small-group work. This led to the emergence of a “fluency-first” pedagogy (Brumfit 1984) in which students’ grammar needs are determined on the basis of performance on fluency tasks rather than predetermined by a grammatical syllabus. We can distinguish two phases in this development, which we will call classic communicative language teaching and current communicative language teaching.

 

1. Classic Communicative Language Teaching (1970s-1990s)

In the earlier 1970s, the reaction to the old method (audio-lingual method) was spread out around the world. They thought that audio lingual wasn’t up to date anymore. While grammatical competence was needed in such interaction between people, the people attention change to the knowledge how to use the language appropriately and communicatively, such as making request, giving advice, asking something, etc. then the communicative competence was came up.

The idea of communicative competence was developed within the disciplines of linguistics who argued that communicative competence should be the goal of language teaching, not only the grammatical competence. It resulted the communicative language teaching. The CLT first appeared in 1070s and 1980s. At that time, all the teachers  in teaching language began to rethink their teaching include reconstruct their syllabus.

The syllabus of communicative language teaching should present some requirements, they are:

–          Purpose

–          Setting

–          Role

–          Communicative events

–          Language function

–          Idea

–          Discourse and rhetorical skill

–          Variety

–          Grammatical context

–          Lexical content

There were several new syllabus were proposed by advocates of CLT which was different with the traditional syllabus, such as skill-based syllabus (focus on the four skills of language), a functional syllabus (the function in which can express their feeling using English), a notional syllabus (one based around the contents and the notion a learner would need to express), and a task syllabus (specified the task and activities the students should carried out in the classroom).

Advocates of CLT also recognize that many learners needed to learn English in order to use in spesifical order or aims, such as, a nurse, she need English to communicate with the patients or doctor. It needed analysis what the learners need actually in learning language so that they can use English effectively and communicatively.

1. The Current CLT (1990s-presents)

Since the 1990s the communicative approach had been widely implemented by many teachers or participant in education because it covers the general principles in the idea of language communicative competence as the goal of the second or foreign language. Current Communicative Language Teaching draws on a number of different educational paradigm and tradition. And since it draws on a number of diverse sources, there is no single or agreed upon set of practices that characterize current communicative language teaching. Rather, communicative language teaching today refers to a set of generally agreed upon principles that can be applied in different ways, depending on the teaching context, the age of the learners, their level, their learning goals, and so on.

Richard (2006) mention that there are ten core assumption of current CLT, they are:

1. Second language learning is facilitated when learners are engaged in interaction and meaningful communication.

2. Effective classroom learning tasks and exercises provide opportunities for students to negotiate meaning, expand their language resources, notice how language is used, and take part in meaningful interpersonal exchange.

3. Meaningful communication results from students processing content that is relevant, purposeful, interesting, and engaging.

4. Communication is a holistic process that often calls upon the use of several language skills or modalities.

5. Language learning is facilitated both by activities that involve inductive or discovery learning of underlying rules of languageuse and organization, as well as by those involving language analysis and reflection.

6. Language learning is a gradual process that involves creative use of language, and trial and error. Although errors are a normal product of learning, the ultimate goal of learning is to be able to

use the new language both accurately and fluently.

7. Learners develop their own routes to language learning, progress at different rates, and have different needs and motivations for language learning.

8. Successful language learning involves the use of effective learning and communication strategies.

9. The role of the teacher in the language classroom is that of a facilitator, who creates a classroom climate conducive to language learning and provides opportunities for students to use and practice the language and to reflect on language use and language learning.

10. The classroom is a community where learners learn through collaboration and sharing.

Sources:

http://www.cambridge.org/other_files/downloads/esl/booklets/Richards-Communicative-Language.pdf

http://teflpedia.com/Communicative_language_teaching