Learning Spoken Language - Essay Example

Learning Spoken Language Name Institution Introduction The goal of language teachers is to teach the student to learn a particular language so that they can read and understand its literature or to experience the mental and intellectual development that comes from learning a language (Carter & McCarthy, 2013). The role of language teachers is to teach spoken training, provide phonetic training for good pronunciation, use conversation texts to help students learn conversational phrases, teach drama and providing associations in the target language instead of the native language (Richards & Rogers, 2014). The expectation of learners is to become active interpreters that can tolerate uncertainties in their language learning. However, one missing element from this teacher-learner association is that a successful language learner often learns language in a style that is independent of the method used by the teacher. It is the role of the teacher to understand and apply the preferred learning style of the student to ensure that the learning process is successful (Cook, 2013). Failure to consider the student’s learning style would make it difficult for the learner to understand the target language effectively. This paper identifies and describes the problems faced by students when trying to understand spoken language. The discussion will provide insight into language teaching styles and the conflict with student learning styles that lead to learning difficulties among language students. Language Teaching Language teaching refers to the use of different teaching materials and methods that draw on psychology and linguistic fields to help students learn a language (Richards & Rogers, 2014). These methods include grammar-translation method, text-based language teaching, lexical method, whole language, communicative language teaching and competency-based instruction and content and language integrated learning (CLIL). Grammar-translation method is a traditional method that facilitates language learning by teaching students to analyse the grammar rules of a particular language (Richards & Rogers, 2014). The students then use their knowledge of grammar rules to translate texts and sentences of the new language. This method vies learning as memorization of facts and rules to help students to understand the syntax and morphology of the particular language. Communicative language teaching method allows teachers to use activities that promote learning through information gap and transfer. This method allows learners to focus on activities where different information is missing (Jones & Carter, 2013; Richards & Rogers, 2014). Effective language teachers are not only concerned with applying teaching methods in their class. These teachers acknowledge that the student’s learning style has a profound impact on learning ability. Effective language teachers adopt different learning styles when teaching spoken language depending on the contextual and individual needs of the student (Richards & Rogers, 2014). The teachers customize learning styles because diverse learners have different needs in one class. Students from different cultural backgrounds would have diverse learning style needs based on the teaching they have been exposed to in the past. Learners from different cultures would have different perceptions of learning and teaching. A good teacher would take these differences into consideration when controlling and directing learning in the classroom. Further, effective language teachers combine different learning styles with teaching methods to achieve the purpose of language learning. However, the application of these different learning styles may not be clear cut because the teacher would have to consider the age, level, learning purpose and context of the learner. This consideration eliminates assumptions held by the teacher that hinder students from learning the spoken language. The next section highlights the problems faced by students when trying to understand spoken language. Problems that Learners Face when Learning Spoken Language One problem faced by students is that there is not standard variety of a single language. For instance, there is no standard on spoken English. Many varieties of the English language exist. This is because different countries have different standards for pronouncing similar English words. For instance, Canadians pronounce schedule as ‘shedule’ whereas Americans pronounce the word as ‘skedule’ (Finegan, 2008). Students that are learning English as a second language would find it difficult to understand these different standards and apply the correct pronunciation. In such a setting, the student would be quite confused because both pronunciations are correct according to the respective national standards. However, it is difficult for the student to comprehend whether there are correct or incorrect ways of speaking a target language. Students of English as a second language (ESL) would have difficulty understanding why different countries have different pronunciation preferences or expressions. The students would also find it challenging to understand the different dialects of a target language. Dialects, or linguistic variations, occur when speakers of a particular language are split due to social and/or geographical distance (Finegan, 2008). For instance, second language students may find difficult to understand the linguistic variations of English speakers from New York, London or Australia. This is because the spoken language has variations. Furthermore, some variations may be intelligible which makes it difficult to understand the speakers of a particular language. For instance, Chinese second language learners may find it difficult to distinguish between Mandarin and Cantonese language. This is because even though the speakers share a language and a writing system, the linguistic differences between the two dialects are drastically different. In addition to the problem of national standards and linguistic variations, ESL learners find it difficult to understand the arbitrary signs of second languages. This is because different languages use different arbitrary signs based on their unique language system (Finegan, 2008). The difficulty with language learning for a second language learner is that he or she may not be able to distinguish or understand the linguistic signs of the second language if the native language uses different signs. These differences are clear across cultures and are distinct cross-linguistically. For instance, a culture may find a particular joke of a person’s misadventures to be funny while another culture may find that joke appalling. The challenge for an ESL student to develop knowledge that helps them appreciate these cultural and cross-linguistic differences, and learning how to adapt their knowledge when speaking different languages (Timmis, 2012). Another challenge for the student is that society is increasingly accepting the application of language in ways that would have been ungrammatical in past generations (Williams, 2012). For instance, societies whose native language is English have evolved to accept previously ungrammatical phrases in spoken language. English speakers in the eighteenth century were guided by prescriptive rules such as not to end sentences with prepositions and not to split an infinitive (Finegan, 2008). However, these rules did not adequately describe the range of language that people use in writing and speaking. For instance, critics assert that formative rules such as the shall should be used instead of ain’t. However, the use of ungrammatical expressions is becoming increasingly common among English speakers. Consequently, expressions such as, That don’t concern me, are becoming widespread despite the fact that the speakers do not follow the formative rules. The challenge for ESL students is that once they are taught perfect grammatical English expressions, they presume that this is the speaking standard. The students would find it difficult to interact with English speakers that use ungrammatical expressions or to operate in an environment that accepts non-standard English as grammatical forms of the language. The third problem is that language learners do not receive sufficient support from their teachers. Not all non-native learners receive the support to learn an academic language. Similarly, not all native English speakers are experienced in using grammatically correct language (Ngai, 2012; Schleppegrell, 2012). The challenge for teachers is that it is difficult to talk about explicit use of the language and making expectations about language use to a child learner. Part of this difficulty is that teachers may not hear a meaning that is presented in a way that they least expected. For instance, a child could tell a story about a recent experience but the teacher fails to provide support because he/she cannot connect the story with the discussion topic. In this instance, the teacher may view the child’s story as a distraction even though the child has not learnt to state explicitly the purpose of the story from the outset (Schleppegrell, 2012). One reason for the lack of support or unexpected response from the teacher could be that the child does not know how to organize and present information in a way that is valued by the child. Alternatively, the child could have been using an informal register rather than a formal register when sharing this information. Conversely, the child could have been adding new information at that moment without grasping the context of the story. Given the three reasons for miscommunication, the teacher is expected to provide support given his/her knowledge and expertise in language use. However, some teachers are ill equipped to provide language training to children and non-native speakers (Chang, 2011; Ngai, 2012). Inadequate training could also hinder teachers from focusing on the meaning of conversation and clarifying the intentions of their students. The teacher could also lack knowledge on how to model alternative methods of using language for learning purposes (Ngai, 2012). Adequate training would help teachers to be aware of the different ways in which children use language to communicate and present information in manner that would produce the best possible results or responses. Another context is the challenge faced by pre-schoolers children with autistic disorder. Early interventions have been advocated for the treatment of children with autism. Recent studies suggest that between 20 percent and 50 percent of autistic children do not develop spoken language (Schreibman & Stahmer, 2014). The challenge for these children is that their inability to acquire speech restricts their independence and social integration (Paul, Campbell, Gilbert & Tsiouri, 2013). Some pre-school children with autism may not show any progress or their efforts may be overlooked by teachers that are unaware of the children’s condition. In cases where behavioural interventions are used, some children with children may fail to make significant gains in their communication or make slow progress compared to the curriculum’s expectations. As a result, these children are often ignored and regress if they do not receive appropriate behavioural support from healthcare practitioners, teachers and parents (Goods et al., 2013). Need for Resolution and the Proposed Strategies It is important that language teachers and linguists address the issues affecting students learning spoken language. This is because barriers to learning affect the students’ communicative competence. Communicative confidence refers to an individual’s ability to apply language correctly or appropriately (Finegan, 2008). This competence is developed when students learn the elements of a target language, patterns for use and sentence development using grammatical rules. Communicative confidence enables students to weave their speech into a narrative, direction, sermon, request, suggestion or any other use of language. Grammatical competence is also important because it enables students to apply their implicit knowledge of sentence structure, vocabulary, meaning and pronunciation. Fluency in speaking presumes that the learner possesses grammatical and communicative confidence (Finegan, 2008). This fluency can only be achieved by addressing the communicative and grammatical issues facing language students. Various strategies could be used to resolve these issues. i. Understand the student’s styles and beliefs towards language learning A good teacher would need to consider diverse cultural backgrounds of the learners when controlling and directing learning in the classroom. An effective language teacher would use this information to identify the unique learning style of the students that meets their learning needs and beliefs (Schmitt, 2010). The Beliefs about Language Learning Inventory (BALLI) would help the teacher to identify the learning beliefs of the student. Although the questionnaire is quite lengthy, its main strength is that it helps the teacher to understand the beliefs of students in four key areas: vocabulary, grammar, culture and pronunciation (Aldana, 2012). Good teachers should consider and adapt their practice to the language style preferences of their students. Even though this suggestion counters the principles of some teaching approaches, using a learner-centred approach is effective (Richards & Rodgers, 2014). The learning-centred approach encourages teachers to look for language patterns, identify new areas of practice, monitor their speech, assess how speech is received and determine whether the student’s speech complies with the standards of spoken language. ii. Expand linguistic studies to include discussions on language differences There has been debate on the extent of linguistic studies on the differences between written and spoken grammar (Timmis, 2012). According to Jones and Carter (2014), there are differences between written and spoken grammar. For instance, spoken grammar uses features such as discourse markers and ellipsis more frequently than written grammar. Discourse markers (DMs) refer to lexical terms that service multifunctional purpose and have procedural meanings rather than propositional meanings. The frequent use of discourse markers (DM) in speech is usually in opening conversations. For instance, phrases such as you know, well, alright, listen and I see are used in opening conversations quite frequently. The frequent use of DMs could be because the words are irrelevant to the listener (Jones, 2010). Despite their frequent use, language textbooks rarely use DMs. Language teachers rarely teach these DMs in the classroom (Jones & Carter, 2014). It is important to that teachers explain these differences to students to aid their language learning. Language educators can use a teaching framework that allows students to identify elements of spoken grammar in listening texts. Lesson materials would then be designed to help students to comprehend listening input before they employ methods to sensitise them to spoken grammar. Learning the differences between speaking and writing grammar would help second language learners to understand why some aspects of spoken language occur more or less frequently than writing grammar. iii. Develop form-meaning activities This solution focuses on developing meaning from language practice. The practice of teaching language needs to have meaning, support interaction and have focus (DeKeyser, 2007; Ortega, 2007). Non-native English speakers are required to learn English in English-speaking countries. They need to have the skills to use English and respond to the spoken and written language. However, ESL students often feel overwhelmed at the thought of learning to speak and write English in a new environment. This produces feelings of depression, failure and social isolation. A solution to help the students from feeling overwhelmed is to support meaningful learning. This learning involves giving students assignments that require them to interact with native speakers. ESL students could be given assignments that compel them to talk with English native-speakers so that they can overcome their concerns about the spoken language (DeKeyser, 2007). This interaction does not have to occur with native speakers. However, any form of interaction where the ESL students are compelled to speak in English would improve their grammar and conversational competencies. Teachers are recommended to develop tasks based on real-world activities to encourage interaction between non-native and native English speakers (Jones & Carter, 2014). This framework needs to allow learners to provide feedback on those tasks (such as requests for help) and encourage memorisation of sample conversations. iv. Autonomous learning Another proposed solution is to use an independent learner-centred approach. Autonomy is concerned with allowing a learner to control his learning in and outside the classroom. With regards to language learning, autonomy is concerned with giving students control over the purpose for learning language and the methods/styles of learning (Benson, 2006). Autonomy is important because it helps language students to learn in ways that are independent of the teaching methods (Richards & Rodgers, 2014). Taking charge of learning enables students to approach language based on their beliefs, attitudes and abilities towards learning. Teachers can support this autonomy by encouraging active participation of the learners and providing tools to help learners to drive the learning process (Cook, 2013). v. Encourage early interventions for children with autism Early interventions have been advocated for the treatment of children with autism (Aldred, Gren, Emsley & McConachie, 2012; Paul, 2009). Early interventions would have an impact on the child’s spoken language (Tsouri & Paul, 2012). It is therefore important that parents, physician, linguists and healthcare practitioner investigate the most appropriate methods for language development in order to promote speaking competency in children with autism. Different methods have been proposed for promoting learning development in the children such as the Pivotal Response Training (PRT) program, Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS), Responsive Education Prelinguistic Milieu Teaching (RPMT) and the Joint Attntion Symbolic Play engagement and Regulation (Goods, Ishijima, Chang & Kasari, 2013; Schreibman & Stahmer, 2014). There is no consensus on the behavioural intervention that would best target children with autism. RPMT is argued to be inferior to PECS in improving an autistic child’s spoken language. This could be because PECS combines verbal strategies with pictorial methods to promote spoken communication in children (Schreibman & Stahmer, 2014). PECS helps the children to develop nonimitative words while RPMT is most effective for children that have low ability to explore objects. Behavioural interventionists could measure the progress in the children using tests such as the Mullen Scale of Early Learning (MSEL), the Structured Play Assessment (SPA), Early Social Communication Scales (ESCS) and Classroom Observation Measures (Goods et al., 2013). Conclusion The purpose of the paper was to identify the problems faced by learners when trying to understand spoken language and to propose ways of helping the learners to overcome these problems. The problems affecting learners of second languages were lack of standard variety of a single language, linguistic variations, inability to understand the arbitrary signs of second languages, conflict in using ungrammatical language elements. Problems affecting pre-schoolers with autistic disorders were inability to develop spoken language, lack of early treatment. Lack of support was common to both learner contexts. An overview of these problems revealed areas of improvement. The paper thus proposed different strategies for addressing the learning challenges. These challenges are based on literature and have not been tested on a population. The strategies include adapting teaching to the student’s learning style, expanding linguistic studies to include discussions on language differences, developing form-meaning activities, encouraging autonomous learning among learners and encouraging early interventions for pre-school children with autistic disorder. References Aldana, M. C. (2013). Review of Becoming a language teacher: A practical guide to second language learning and teaching (2nd ed). CATESOl Journal, 25(1), 163-166. Aldred, C., Green, J., Emsley, R., & McConachie, H. (2012). Mediation of treatment effect in a communication intervention for preschool children with autism. Journal of Autism and Development Disorders, 42, 447-454. Benson, P. (2006). Autonomy in language learning. Retrieved from http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~gj7h-andr/asia2006/antonomous_learning.pdf Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (2013). Vocabulary and language teaching. New York, NY: Routledge. Chang, M. (2011). Factors affecting the implementation of communicative learning teaching in Taiwanese College English classes. English Language Teaching, 4(2), 3-12. Cook, V. (2013). Second language learning and language teaching. New York, NY: Routledge. DeKeyser, R.M. (2007). Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Finegan, E. (2008). Language: Its structure and use (5th ed). Boston, MA: Thomson Higher Education. Goods, K., Ishijima, E., Chang, Y., & Kasari, C. (2013). Preschool based JASPER intervention in minimally verbal children with Autism: Pilot RCT. Journal of Autism and Development Disorders, 43(5), 1050-1056. Jones, C., & Carter, R. (2014). Teaching spoken discourse markers explicitly: A comparison of III and PPP. International Journal of English Studies, 14(1), 37-54. Ngai, P. (2012). Crossing mountains: Native American language education in public schools. Lanham, MA: AltraMira Press. Paul, R., Campbell, D., Gilbert, K., & Tsiori, I. (2013). Comparing spoken language treatments for minimally verbal preschoolers with Autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Development Disorders, 10803(1583), 1-14. Paul, R., (2009). Talk to me: Issues in acquiring spoken language for young children with autism spectrum disorders. ASHA Leader, 14(14), 10-13. Richards, J.C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching (3rd ed) Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Schleppegrell, M. J. (2012). Academic language in teaching and learning: Introduction to the special issue. The Elementary School Journal, 112(3), 409-418. Schreibman, L. E., & Stahmer, A. C. (2014). A randomized trial comparison of the effects of verbal and pictorial naturalistic communication strategies on spoken language for young children with Autism. Journal of Autism and Development Disorders, 44(5), 1244-1251. Schmitt, N. (2010). Researching vocabulary: A vocabulary research manual. London, United Kingdom: Palgrave. Timmis, I. (2012). Spoken language research and ELT: Where are we now? ELT Journal, 66(4), 514-522. Tsouri, I., & Paul, R. (2012). Rapid motor imitation antecedent (RMIA) training manual, research edition. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishers. Williams, J. (2012). Learning English for academic purposes: LEAP reading and writing (2nd ed). Saint-Laurent, Quebec: Pearson. Read More

The discussion will provide insight into language teaching styles and the conflict with student learning styles that lead to learning difficulties among language students. Language Teaching Language teaching refers to the use of different teaching materials and methods that draw on psychology and linguistic fields to help students learn a language (Richards & Rogers, 2014). These methods include grammar-translation method, text-based language teaching, lexical method, whole language, communicative language teaching and competency-based instruction and content and language integrated learning (CLIL).

Grammar-translation method is a traditional method that facilitates language learning by teaching students to analyse the grammar rules of a particular language (Richards & Rogers, 2014). The students then use their knowledge of grammar rules to translate texts and sentences of the new language. This method vies learning as memorization of facts and rules to help students to understand the syntax and morphology of the particular language. Communicative language teaching method allows teachers to use activities that promote learning through information gap and transfer.

This method allows learners to focus on activities where different information is missing (Jones & Carter, 2013; Richards & Rogers, 2014). Effective language teachers are not only concerned with applying teaching methods in their class. These teachers acknowledge that the student’s learning style has a profound impact on learning ability. Effective language teachers adopt different learning styles when teaching spoken language depending on the contextual and individual needs of the student (Richards & Rogers, 2014).

The teachers customize learning styles because diverse learners have different needs in one class. Students from different cultural backgrounds would have diverse learning style needs based on the teaching they have been exposed to in the past. Learners from different cultures would have different perceptions of learning and teaching. A good teacher would take these differences into consideration when controlling and directing learning in the classroom. Further, effective language teachers combine different learning styles with teaching methods to achieve the purpose of language learning.

However, the application of these different learning styles may not be clear cut because the teacher would have to consider the age, level, learning purpose and context of the learner. This consideration eliminates assumptions held by the teacher that hinder students from learning the spoken language. The next section highlights the problems faced by students when trying to understand spoken language. Problems that Learners Face when Learning Spoken Language One problem faced by students is that there is not standard variety of a single language.

For instance, there is no standard on spoken English. Many varieties of the English language exist. This is because different countries have different standards for pronouncing similar English words. For instance, Canadians pronounce schedule as ‘shedule’ whereas Americans pronounce the word as ‘skedule’ (Finegan, 2008). Students that are learning English as a second language would find it difficult to understand these different standards and apply the correct pronunciation. In such a setting, the student would be quite confused because both pronunciations are correct according to the respective national standards.

However, it is difficult for the student to comprehend whether there are correct or incorrect ways of speaking a target language. Students of English as a second language (ESL) would have difficulty understanding why different countries have different pronunciation preferences or expressions. The students would also find it challenging to understand the different dialects of a target language. Dialects, or linguistic variations, occur when speakers of a particular language are split due to social and/or geographical distance (Finegan, 2008).

Read More