Communication Strategies and Foreign Language Learning
Communication Strategies and Foreign Language Learning
43)
Abstract: This paper presents a literature-based review of communication strategies in Foreign Language Learning (FLL). The purpose is to facilitate learners communicative competence in English. The author concludes by giving suggestions of training communication strategies, creating an English-speaking environment as well as officially highlighting communicative competence. Key words: communicative strategies; compensatory strategies; communicative competence; foreign language learning
1. Introduction
For most people, the main goal of learning a foreign language is to be able to communicate. It is through communication that people send and receive messages effectively and negotiate meaning (Rubin & Thompson, 1994: 30). Nowadays, how to communicate effectively in Foreign Language Learning becomes much more important than reading and writing. As a result, communication strategies have turned into a crucial topic for all foreign language learners and teachers. Considerable research has been done on communication strategies, for example, Bialystok (1990), who comprehensively analyzes communication strategies for second language use; and Dornyei (1995 cited in Brown, 2000), who outlines an explicit classification of communication strategies. According to Bialystok (1990: 1), the familiar ease and fluency with which we sail from one idea to the next in our first language is constantly shattered by some gap in our knowledge of a second language. The forms of these gaps can be a word, a structure, a phrase, a tense marker or an idiom. The attempts to overcome these gaps are described as communication strategies (ibid). Wenden and Rubin (1987: 109) state that learners who emphasize the importance of using the language often utilize communication strategies. Besides, OMalley and Chamot (1990: 43) assert that communication strategies are particularly important in negotiating meaning where either linguistic structures or sociolinguistic rules are not shared between a second language learner and a speaker of the target language. For this reason, communication strategies, which involve both listening and speaking, can contribute greatly to FLL. As a former English teacher in a Secondary Vocational School in China, I have found quite a few problems concerning how to communicate efficiently in FLL. For most students, listening and speaking are deficiencies compared with reading and writing. Consequently, training students to communicate fluently in English becomes an urgent task for all language teachers in China. In an effort to solve these problems, the purpose of this paper is to survey the literature of communication strategies and develop some recommendations for teachers working in this context. To begin with, I will present some problems which occur among learners during communication when using English as a Foreign Language (EFL). Secondly, definitions of communication strategies are outlined. Thirdly,
ZHANG Ya-ni (1976- ), female, M.A. of University of Bath, lecturer of School of Foreign Languages, Qingdao University of Science and Technology; research field: communicative needs analysis. 43
some typologies of communication strategies are considered. Finally, recommendations regarding how to develop learners communicative competence are put forward.
All the above definitions reveal the same purpose of communication strategies, namely, to solve an emerged communication problem by applying some kinds of techniques. Among these, Corders (1977) explanation seems to be more visual and pellucid from the viewpoint of a non-native speaker of English. The definitions from Faerch and Kasper (1983a) and Stern (1983) also provide us specific and precise descriptions for communication strategies, which refer to the employed techniques when speakers have problems in expressing themselves.
44
Having considered definitions of communication strategies, I will begin this next section by examining Dornyeis (1995, see Appendix) Taxonomy of Communication Strategies, which is also cited by Brown (2000: 128) as a good example. The two branches given by Dornyei (1995) reveal two opposite directions in communication. One is avoiding and the other is compensating. Avoidance strategies can be further broken down into several subtypes, such as phonological avoidance, syntactic or lexical avoidance and topic avoidance (Brown, 2000: 128). These strategies may be an effective way but not a beneficial way for FLL students to learn a foreign language. Among these, topic avoidance may be the most frequent means that students have ever employed. When asked a specific question, the student who does not know the answer will just keep silent about it and lead to the occurrence of topic avoidance. In my experience, most students can hardly express their ideas or answers in a flexible way; that is to say, they presumably have not learned to think over a foreign language simultaneously while they are speaking it. The reason tends to be that they have not acquired basic knowledge of English and they seldom practice it. Compensatory strategies, on the other hand, involve compensation for missing knowledge (ibid: 129). Dornyei outlines eleven types of compensatory strategies in a very comprehensive way (see Appendix), which include circumlocution, word coinage, prefabricated patterns, appealing for help and stalling or time-gaining strategies, etc (Dornyei, 1995 cited in Brown, 2000: 128). Some of them happen in a high frequency, while others may seldom occur. Consider the example of foreignizing, which refers to using a L1 word by adjusting it to L2 phonology and/or morphology (ibid). Probably Chinese speakers will find it hardly to use a Chinese character to substitute the pronunciation of an English word; nor just simply add an English suffix to it, for Chinese and English are very different types of language. Whereas, many other types of compensatory strategies are perceived to be commonly applied. I will exemplify six of Dornyeis strategy types with illustrations and explanations. When students are taking an oral examination, the most popular compensatory strategy is to use fillers or hesitation devices to fill pauses and to gain time to think (ibid). By using fillers such as well or let me think, students can gain a little time to think before they speak. Thus, they will appear to be more fluent instead of stammering and as a result, a higher mark is expected to be given. Another common type is appealing for help. Dornyei states that people can ask for help directly or indirectly, such as using a rising intonation or a pause (ibid). As far as I am concerned, learners will directly ask the native speaker about an unknown word, for example, What do you call this? Cinnamon. With respect to circumlocution, it can be ranged to paraphrase strategy because it indicates describing or exemplifying the target object of action (ibid). Nonlinguistic signals apparently mean using sound imitation and postures, such as mime, gesture, and facial expression (ibid). On occasion, speakers will adopt circumlocution as well as nonlinguistic signals at the same time. For instance, when I was trying to speak the word apron to my flat mate in the kitchen, I could not think of it immediately. So I described it as I wear it when I am cooking together with gestures to show it should be worn in front of the chest. Word coinage is usually produced unwittingly. Dornyei claims that a speaker will simply create a non-existing L2 word when he does not know the exact one (ibid). One of my students once used the phrase electrical line instead of electrical wire to express his meaning. The coinage of a single word may not be as common as the invention of a phrase by the speaker. Through the combination of two possible words which can jointly create a new meaning, a non-existing phrase can be invented. Lastly, prefabricated patterns are described as the memorized stock phrases or sentences for survival purposes (ibid). They are generally adopted by those studious and diligent language learners. It is very common to notice that students rehearse typical sentences on a bus or in a park. Prefabricated patterns can assist
45
learners to reach their basis communication goal, such as asking for directions or shopping. Compared with Dornyeis, Tarones taxonomy seems to be simpler and have more categories. In the next few paragraphs, a summary of Tarones typology is proposed followed by comparison and contrast between the two.
Tarones typology of conscious communication strategies (Tarone, 1977 cited in Bialystok, 1990: 39) 1. Avoidance a Topic avoidance b Message abandonment 2. Paraphrase a Approximation b Word coinage c Circumlocution 3. Conscious transfer a Literal translation b Language switch 4. Appeal for assistance 5. Mime
From the above list and the appendix, we can generalize the similarities between Dornyeis and Tarones typologies of communication strategies. It is the seven types that they present in common, which include message abandonment, topic avoidance, circumlocution, approximation, word coinage, literal translation and appealing for help. Moreover, they explicate the application of the seven types in a similar way. To take an example, concerning approximation, Tarone (1977) explains it as the use of a single target language vocabulary item or structure, which the learner knows is not correct, but which shares enough semantic features. (cited in Bialystok, 1990: 40); and Dornyeis definition is using an alternative term which expresses the meaning of the target lexical item as closely as possible (Dornyei, 1995 cited in Brown, 2000: 128). However, there are more differences than similarities. On the basis of the differentiation, four obvious distinctions are summarized as follows: (1) Unlike Dornyei (1995), Tarone (1977) does not differentiate communication strategies into two opposite categoriesavoidance and compensatory according to the consequence of communication. Conversely, Tarone presents five major types: avoidance, paraphrase, conscious transfer, appeal for assistance and mime (Tarone, 1977 cited in Bialystok, 1990: 39). (2) Dornyei presents three more types of compensatory strategies than Tarone, which are use of all purpose words, prefabricated patterns and stalling or time-gaining strategies (Dornyei, 1995 cited in Brown, 2000: 128). The last two types, which I have exemplified above, are associated positively with the success of communication. (3) In Tarones typology, mime is a separated category which is explained as all nonverbal accompaniments (Tarone, 1977 cited in Bialystok, 1990: 42); while Dornyei ranges mime together with gesture, facial expression and sound imitation to nonlinguistic signals (Dornyei, 1995 cited in Brown, 2000: 128). In that case, nonlinguistic signals (Dornyei, 1995) provide learners a more comprehensive description than mime (Tarone, 1977). (4) Language switch (Tarone, 1977) can be assumed to be the combination of foreignizing and code-switch (Dornyei, 1995). The former is defined as the straightforward insertion of words from another language (Tarone, 1977 cited in Bialystok, 1990: 41). On the other hand, foreignizing refers to using a L1 word by adjusting it to L2 phonology and/or morphology; and code switch means using a L1 word with L1 pronunciation or a L3 word with L3 pronunciation while speaking in L2 (Dornyei, 1995 cited in Brown, 2000: 128). In brief, the classifying criterion of Dornyeis taxonomy is based on the consequence of communication, either success (compensatory strategies) or abandoned (avoidance strategies). In contrast, Tarones classification is
46
much simpler with similar sub-types placed in one category. Even though the latter seems to be typical and explicit as what Bialystok (1990: 39) states, it may not be as systematic and integrative as Dornyeis.
47
Appendix: Communication strategies (Dornyei, 1995 cited in Brown, 2000: 128) Avoidance Strategies 1. Message abandonment: Leaving a message unfinished because of language difficulties. 2. Topic avoidance: Avoiding topic areas or concepts that pose language difficulties. Compensatory Strategies 3. Circumlocution: Describing or exemplifying the target object of action (e.g. the thing you open bottles with for corkscrew). 4. Approximation: Using an alternative term which expresses the meaning of the target lexical item as closely as possible (e.g. ship for sailboat). 5. Use of all-purpose words: Extending a general, empty lexical item to contexts where specific words are lacking (e.g., the overuse of thing, stuff, what-do-you callit, thingie). 6. Word coinage: Creating a nonexisting L2 word based on a supposed rule (e.g., vegetarianist for vegetarian). 7. Prefabricated patterns: Using memorized stock phrases, usually for survival purposes (e.g., Where is the ___ or Comment allezvous?, where the morphological components are not known to the learner). 8. Nonlinguistic signals: Mime, gesture, facial expression, or sound imitation. 9. Literal translation: Translating literally a lexical item, idiom, compound word, or structure from L1 to L2. 10. Foreignizing: Using a L1 word by adjusting it to L2 phonology (i.e., with a L2 pronunciation) and/or morphology (e.g., adding to it a L2 suffix). 11. Code-switching: Using a L1 word with L1 pronunciation or a L3 word with L3 pronunciation while speaking in L2. 12. Appeal for help: Asking for aid from the interlocutor either directly (e.g., What do you call?) or indirectly (e.g., rising intonation, pause, eye contact, puzzled expression). 13. Stalling or time-gaining strategies: Using fillers or hesitation devices to fill pauses and to gain time to think (e.g., well, now, lets see, uh, as a matter of fact).
48