Nội dung

AGU International Journal of Sciences – 2019, Vol. 7 (1), 60 – 67 SOME PERTINENT ORAL COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES FOR EFL LEARNING AND TEACHING Truong Thi Thanh Nga1 1 An Giang University, VNU - HCM Information: Received: 16/01/2019 Accepted: 02/05/2019 Published: 11/2019 Keywords: Communication strategies (CSs), avoidance, compensation, time gaining, interlocutors ABSTRACT To communicate successfully in study and everyday conversations is very important. Speakers or participants all want to be successful in exchanging ideas and getting an end result after the dialogue finishes. There are several popular ways to maintain progress or end a conversation. In this paper, some relevant strategies are addressed so that thestudents or users of English as a foreign language (EFL) know what they have done intentionally or unintentionally through time. The main purpose of this article is to suggest to educators three strategies used in the field of EFL teaching and learning such as avoidance, compensation and time gaining. Then, there is a recommendation to teach or not teach these strategies, or what strategies should be focused upon and what strategies should be introduced for discussion only. 1. INTRODUCTION Communication success is required in both verbal and written activities in English in Vietnam, but emphasis is mostly on speaking. Language students are considered to reach the communicative threshold of proficiency when they can keep the conversation going and maintain their position in communicating contexts. When people study a new language all they need to acquire is that they can express what they want to say and can be understood by others and get back the information from someone’s speeches or writing. To obtain communicative skills in foreign languages, there are some gifted people who can make use of their restricted language resources in combining with their own skills like body language, gestures, and facial expressions to achieve their communicative purposes. In the context of learning English in Vietnam in recent times, especially students in remote areasstudents of English nowadays usually start learning it at a very early age, but it takes them a long time to use the language successfully. In addition, they find it very hard to express themselves in actual communication. Therefore, some relevant communication strategies (CSs) should be considered to help learners communicate their ideas effectively. As Maleki (2007) mentions, though learners of English are equipped with enough language knowledge, they need to reach a threshold to come to a real communicative stage when they can speak out naturally; thus communication strategy support for learners is necessary. 60 AGU International Journal of Sciences – 2019, Vol. 7 (1), 60 – 67 However, there are also strategies that most EFL learners can apply through their life experience or by practising and following some communicative tactics. This paper first reviews definitions of communication strategies, then presents three key communication strategies and finally suggests that communications strategies should be taught. Three pertinent strategies are avoidance, compensation and time gaining. These strategies accompany some tactics which occur at the time of speaking such as topic divergence, circumlocution and using fillers and hesitation devices. The paper first reviews definitions of Communication Strategies and then leads to a discussion about whether communication strategies can be taught or not and their role in EFL teaching. handling difficulties or breakdowns in communications. Corder (1986) also views CSs as speakers’ systematic techniques to express meaning when facing difficulty. However, the broadest definition of CSs is Canale’s (1983) extended concept when he points out that CSs help improve communicative efficiency with various patterns of speech. Therefore, definitions about CSs have been improved through time from problem-solving to meaning negotiation between interlocutors and finally come to enhancing the effectiveness of communication. Among these linguists’ definitions, Corder’s idea about CSs as strategies at the time of the conversation to retain the interaction between the speakers, and then to make the conversation end smoothly, is the basic support of the article. 2. DEFINITION 3. STRATEGIES Definitions about communication strategies (CSs) have concerned many linguists. In fact, most linguists in the 1970s and 1980s have concentrated on problem – solving when talking about CSs. For example, Tarone, Cohen and Dumas (1976, p. 5) see “CSs as learners’ systematic attempt to express or decode meaning in the target language”. In a different perspective, Canale and Swain (1980) see CSs as verbal and nonverbal strategies which compensate for breakdowns in communication due to performance variables or insufficient competence in conversations. Tarone (1977) explains that conscious communication strategies are used by an individual to overcome the crisis which occurs when language structures are insufficient to convey the individual’s thought. 3.1 Avoidance strategy Avoidance strategy is mostly used either consciously or unintentionally by non-native speakers when they encounter linguistic problems although its accompanied tactics might not be taught or language learners encouraged to use them. Indeed, people never want to hinder, to hide or avoid direct and active communication, but in some cases they have to because of “a mismatch between communicative intention and linguistic resources” (Varadi, 1992, p. 437), and they want to survive and maintain the conversations. According to Dornyei (1995, p. 66) “Language learners should say what they can and not what they want to”. However, he also complicatedly adds one more variation on the slogan “Language learners should be encouraged to say what they can, rather than retreat silently from what they can’t”. Therefore, topic avoidance and replacement skills are indispensable because they could improve learners’ fluency. Many linguists believe that avoidance strategy can be seen in some of its According to Tarone’s new concept, CSs have been seen as “relate to a mutual attempt of two interlocutors to agree on the meaning in situations where requisite meaning structures do not seem to be shared” (1980, p. 420). It is an interaction perspective rather than meaningnegotiation and repair mechanisms that involve 61 AGU International Journal of Sciences – 2019, Vol. 7 (1), 60 – 67 subcategories or tactics such as topic avoidance, message abandonment, or meaning replacement (Brown, 2000; Corder, 1983; Dornyei & Scott, 1997; Færch & Kasper, 1983; Tarone, 1997; Willems, 1987). For example, with message abandonment, according to Dornyei (1997, p.188) speakers ‘leaving a message unfinished because of some language difficulty’ like in the following monologue ‘It is a person er … who is responsible for a house, for the block of houses … I don’t know … [laughter].’ Moreover, sometimes learners have to reduce the message intention or avoid the intended topic because of their lack of linguistic resources about the topic. Brown (2000) also contributes to this field with his example which describes the attempts of learners when they are in a shortage of grammatical or lexical knowledge within a semantic category as in the following conversation excerpt: paraphrasing, explanation or description is necessary. These linguists further give many instances to demonstrate what they state, as for some words EFL learners require but they do not know them exactly, they can express themselves in another way by describing or explaining in groups of words such as ‘figure with three sides’ or ‘three angles’ for triangle, or ‘ball with air in it’ or ‘ball in the air’ for balloon. The critics also emphasise the description of the function of things that learners do not know the precise words forsuch as the words moon and knife with the former can be described in terms of location involved like ‘ it’s in the sky’ and the functional use for the later ‘you use it for cutting.’ Dornyei (1995), Dornyei and Scott (1997) consider circumlocution as exemplifying, illustrating or describing the properties of the target object or action. For instance, Dornyei and Scott (1997, p. 188) provide an example in which a learner says “the thing you open wine bottles with” to refer to a corkscrew. Abdesslem (2004, p.3) contributes to the field with the explanation for the words ‘liquid paper’ by the phrase “white stuff for correcting words.” (p. 3) In short, paraphrasing is used in most situations by language learners for the purpose of being mutually understood between interlocutors in communication, and for the purpose of verbal conversational achievement. L: I lost my road. NS: You lost your road? L: Uh … I lost. I lost. I got lost. (p. 128) Therefore, avoidance strategy is also considered a skill in communication that sometimes helps EFL learners to survive and maintain their position in conversations, and they do not give up just as Corder (1983, p. 19) concludes “These strategies must not be regarded as admission of failure,” but just maybe a way to ta take advantage for time gain in communication. 3.2 3.3 Time gaining strategy To maintain and avoid communication breakdown, time gaining devices are also preferred tactics of many EFL learners. In fact, some language academics believe that pause fillers do not belong to communication strategies. For example, Tarone (1980) considers stalling under production or Færch and Kasper (1983) looked at time gaining as ‘temporal variables’. Whereas, many other researchers have appreciated the use of fillers and hesitation devices that consciously help Compensatory strategy Compensation strategy is one of the popular ways that language users even the native speakers use in most situations to meet conversational aims. In fact, both speakers and their interlocutors usually use this communicative skill to get into understanding each other or negotiation in meaning. For example, Kellerman, Ammerlaan, Bongaerts and Poulisse (1990) see circumlocution just as 62 AGU International Journal of Sciences – 2019, Vol. 7 (1), 60 – 67 learners participating in conversations become more fluent, or at least help prevent breakdowns and keep the communication channel open in the face of difficulties (Canale, 1983; Canale & Swain, 1980; Dornyei and Scott, 1997; Ellis, 1985; Haastrup & Phillipson, 1983). Dornyei and Scott (1997) provide a list of common words and phrases for filled pauses and hesitations so that learners can consciously use to gain time to keep conversations going on in difficulties. These fillers include “well, actually, as a matter of fact, the thing is, you know, okay, this is rather difficult to explain, it’s a good question, or let me think, etc.,” (p. 190). Therefore, pause fillers are also used by speakers as a tactic to gain time to think of the missing words or what to say next. This time gaining strategy by using pause fillers will help learners retrieve their language resource available in their head but do not appear spontaneously. the strategies themselves emerge automatically through the process of practising the language. Canale and Swain (1980) are also the proponents on this side; they think that CSs would be acquired through real-life communications but not through the constraints of language classroom practice. However, many other researchers support the need to teach communication strategies for the EFL learners so that they can apply these strategies in real life communication (Brooks, 1992; Chen, 1990; Færch & Kasper, 1983, 1986; Haastrup & Phillipson, 1983; Paribakht, 1986; Rost, 1994; Rost & Ross, 1991; Savignon, 1972, 1983, 1990; Tarone, 1984; Tarone and Yule, 1989; Willems, 1987). Therefore, communication strategies that are provided widely and facilitated by the teachers in language classrooms would give students more opportunities to succeed in communication. Tarone (1984) and Willems (1987) cited in Dornyei (1995, p. 62) state ‘There is also some evidence that students in classroom settings which offer more natural input (such as immersion classes) tend to develop a higher level of strategic competence than students in ordinary classrooms, who tend to use only a limited number of mostly unsophisticated CSs.” Therefore, though in any context of learning and teaching EFL, learners should be equipped with enough language, especially useful languages from the stage learners need specific guided and control to free conversations. 4. TEACHING COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES The issue of whether communication strategies can be taught must be taken into account to see the role that they have in the second language classroom. Indeed, it is a controversial issue that poses a disagreement among researchers. Most linguists believe that these strategies have already developed in learners’ first language (L1) and now are naturally transferred to the second language (L2) (Bongaerts & Poulisse, 1989; Bongaerts, Kellerman, & Bentlage, 1987; Kellerman, Ammerlaan, Bongaerts, & Poulisse, 1990; Paribakht, 1985). Bialystok and Kellerman (1987) point out that adult language learners’ cognitive competence is already developed including ‘repertoire of applicable CSs at any of their levels of proficiency in L2. Kellerman (1991) also opposes teaching compensatory strategies in the classroom. According to him, EFL students need only be given just as much language as necessary, and 4.1 The role of communication in efl language classroom It cannot be denied that most language teachers now want to directly address communication strategies in classrooms although this trend is still debated. This proves that many people perceive that communicative competence is indispensable in language teaching. If teachers 63 AGU International Journal of Sciences – 2019, Vol. 7 (1), 60 – 67 in classroom follow six procedures provided in Dornyei, including: She means that learning strategy training should be direct and informed so that students can apply them in conversations in class as well as in real-life communication. For example, Tarone and Yule (1989, cited in Dornyei, 1995, p.64) suggest giving cues or lists of words or phrases that learners can use for specific strategies such as, circumlocution with “certain basic core vocabulary and sentence structures to describe properties (e.g., shape, size, colour, textile) and function: top side, bowl-shaped, triangular, on the rim, circular, square.” Dornyei and Scott (1997) also provide a list of phrases to mark for explanation or clarification such as it is a kind/sort of, the thing you use for …, it’s what/ when you …, it’s something you do/ say when…, or ways used in cooperation with interlocutors to appeal for help (what do you call it/ someone who …, What is the word for…). If teachers insist on their communicative techniques and let the students have opportunities to practise, use and reinforce all communicative knowledge they provided to them so that the students can reach the automatic stage, then both the teachers and students may gain the goal of communication. A case study is in English for specific purposes (ESP), such as English for Tourism or Business English; for instance, Nina and Fiona (2010) provide useful language from one part of the lesson and then many situation exercises such as role play or conversation buildings to practise in class so that students can learn and use the languages in context then apply later on in their real working life, and teachers also feel satisfied with their role in class in helping learners acquire language skills. Many other educators such as David, Jane & Shausn (2008); Cotton, Falvey & Simon (2010) also have the same ideas and approach as Nina and Fiona that language teachers should provide time for students practising communicative strategies found from each lesson during the whole course. Learners can apply what they Raising learner awareness about the nature and communicative potential of CSs, encouraging students to be willing to take risks and use CSs, providing L2 models of the use of certain CSs, highlighting cross-cultural differences in CSs use, teaching CSs directly and providing opportunities for practice in strategy use. (1995, pp. 63-64) then the communication strategies seem to be advanced and promoted to enhance learners’ competence in communication. Furthermore, teachers can provide as many strategies as possible during their teaching time or interweave these strategies with their teaching methods so that the students have a chance to get used to communicative approaches. For instance, according to Dornyei (1995, pp. 6364) by “Raising learner awareness about the nature and communicative potential of CSs”, teachers help students feel more confidentwith their available strategic repertoire, and they would be willing to be risk-takers in most cases when facing difficulties that may lead to communicative breakdowns. 4.2 Communication strategy application Being equipped with communication strategies, students can apply them flexibly in appropriate situations as Oxford (1990, p. 207) concludes: Research shows that strategy training which fully informs the learners (by indicating why the strategy is useful, how it can be transferred to different tasks, and how learners can evaluate the success of this strategy) is more successful than training that does not. 64 AGU International Journal of Sciences – 2019, Vol. 7 (1), 60 – 67 learn following guideline formats, and then spontaneously produce the language when they get to their language threshold. Therefore, communication strategies should be taught. introduced in this paper such as using word coinage or asking for help from interlocutors, etc. This is the learners’ duty to select or combine these strategies that can best enhance the effectiveness of their communicative capacity in real life through what they have already known or been equipped from language learning classroom, or learn from communicating with peers, or native interlocutors. 5. CONCLUSION Success in communication is the aspiration of teachers, most learners and users of a new language. Except those who are very advanced like ‘near native’ speakers, EFL learners usually have to struggle by, using all their effort and time for their L2 deficiency to survive and maintain conversations. In fact, people use various strategies depending on their preference, capacity and situational contexts. In some unexpected cases, they have to apply avoidance strategy at the expense of changing their initial intended meanings or even abandon the topic to keep the communication channel open. In other circumstances, learners make use of their available language resources to get into the point by going around the topic with paraphrasing, description, or explanation. Furthermore, during conversation, if some key words have been missed or forgotten, pause fillers would be a good technique to get back the information needed. The first strategy of topic avoidance may not be encouraged to include in language classroom curricula but just as an optional or a sub category because learners may take advantage of using this strategy to diverge to another topic to prolong the communication time, and this may delay their progress process/ procedure because it promotes learners to change the intended topics to get communicative success at the expense of content purpose failure. Otherwise, it can be used as a supplement in combination with the last two, compensatory and time gaining strategies. They are what the teachers should mention in most of the teaching time even as they can go along with content language teaching. There are of course more than three communication strategies that have been REFERENCES Bialystok, E. & Kellerman, E. (1987). Language strategies in the classroom. In B. K. Das (Ed.), Communication and learning in the classroom community (pp. 160-175). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre. Bongaerts, T., & Poulisse, N. (1989). Communication strategies in L1 and L2: Same or different? Applied Linguistics, 10, 253-268. Bongaerts, T., Kellerman, E., & Bentlage, A. (1987). Perspectives and proficiency in L2 referential communication. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9, 171-200. Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of Language Teaching and Learning (4th ed.). New York: Longman. Brooks, F. B. (1992). Can we talk? Foreign Language Annals, 25, 59-71. Chen, S. Q. (1990). A study of communication strategies in interlanguage production by Chinese EFL learners. Language Learning, 40, 155-187. Canale, M., & Swain, M (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied linguistics, 1, 1-47. Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. C Richards & R. W. 65 AGU International Journal of Sciences – 2019, Vol. 7 (1), 60 – 67 Schmidt (Eds.). Language and communication (pp. 2-27). Harlow, UK: Longman. Haastrup, K., & Phillipson, R. (1983). Achievement strategies in learner/native speaker interaction. In C. Færch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in interlanguage communication (pp. 140-158). Harlow, UK: Longman. Cotton, D., Falvey, D., & Simon, K. (2010). Intermediate Marlet Leader (3nd ed.). Pearson Education Limited. Kellerman, E. (1991). Compensatory strategies in second language research: A critique, a revision, and some (non-) implications for the classroom. In R. Phillipson, E. Kellerman, L. Selinker, M. Sharwood Smith, & M. Swain (Eds.), Foreign/ second language pedagogy research: A commemorative volume for Claus Færch (pp. 142-161). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. Corder, S.P. (1983). Strategies of communication. In C. Færch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in interlanguage communication (pp. 15-19). New York: Longman. David. G, Jane, H & Shausn, W.(2008). Business Results, Pre- Intermediate. Oxford university Press. Dornyei, Z. (1995). On the teachability of communication strategies. TESOL Quarterly, 29 (1), 55-85. Dornyei, Z., & Scott, M. L. (1997). Communication strategies in a second language: definition and taxonomies. Review article. Language Learning, 47 (1), 173-210. Kellerman, E., Ammerlaan, T., Bongaerts, T., & Poulisse, N. (1990). System and hierarchy in L2 compensatory strategies. In R. Scarcella, E. Andersen, & S. Krashen (Eds.), Developing communicative competence in a second language (pp. 163-178). New York: Newbury House. Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding language acquisition. Oxford: University press. second Oxford Maleki, A. (2007). Teachability of communication strategies: An Iranian experience. System 35 (4), 583 -594. Færch, C., & Kasper, G. (1983). Plans and strategies in foreign language communication. In C. Færch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in interlanguage communication (pp. 20-60). Harlow, UK: Longman. Nina, O. & Fiona, S.C.(2010). BEC Vantage Masterclass, Upper- Intermediate. Oxford university Press. Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House. Færch, C., & Kasper, G. (1984). Two ways of defining communications strategies. Language Learning, 34, 45-63. Paribakht, T. (1985). Strategic competence and language proficiency. Applied Linguistics, 6, 132-146. Færch, C., & Kasper, G. (1986). Strategic competence in foreign language teaching. In G. Kasper (Ed.), Learning, teaching and communication in the foreign language classroom (pp. 179-193). Aarhus: Aarhus University Press. Paribakht, T. (1986). On the pedagogical relevance of strategic competence. TESL Canada Journal, 3, 53-56. Rost, M. (1994, March). Communication strategies: Are they teachable? Paper 66 AGU International Journal of Sciences – 2019, Vol. 7 (1), 60 – 67 presented at the 28th Annual TESOL Convention, Baltimore, Maryland. Tarone, E. (1977). Conscious communication strategies in interlanguage: A progress report. In H. D. Brown, C. A. Yorio & R. C. Crymes (Eds.), On TESOL ’77 (pp. 194203). Washington: TESOL. Rost, M. & Ross, S. (1991). Learners use of strategies in interaction: Typology and teachability. Language Learning, 41, 235273. Tarone, E. (1980). Communication strategies, foreign talk and repair in interlanguage. Language Learning, 30, 417-431. Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies: Theoretical assumption, research history and typology. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learners strategies in language learning (pp. 15-30). Hemel Hemstead, England: Prentice Hall. Tarone, E. (1984). Teaching strategic competence in the foreign language classroom. In S. J Savignon& M. S. Berns (Eds.), Initiatives in communicative language teaching (pp. 127-136). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Savignon, S. J. (1972). Communicative competence: An experiment in foreign language teaching. Philadelphia, PA: The Center for Curriculum Development. Tarone, E., & Yule, G. (1989). Focus on the language learners. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Savignon, S. J. (1983). Communicative competence: Theory and classroom practice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Varadi, T. (1992). Review of the books Communication Strategies: A psychological analysis of second language use, by E. Bialystok and The use of compensatory strategies by Dutch learners of English by N. Poulisse, T. Bongaerts, & E. Kellerman. Applied Linguistics, 13, 434-440. Savignon, S. J. (1990). Communicative language teaching: Definition and directions. In: J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown University Round Table on Language and Linguistics (pp. 207-217). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Willems, G. (1987). Communication strategies and their significance in foreign language teaching. System, 15, 351-364. Tarone, E, Cohen, A. D., & Dumas, G. (1976). A closer look at some interlanguage terminology: A framework for communication strategies. Working papers on Bilingualism, 9, 76-90. 67