The Language Learning Journal
The Language Learning Journal
Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
To cite this article: Colin Simpson (1997): Culture and foreign language teaching, The Language Learning Journal, 15:1, 40-43 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09571739785200091
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
INTRODUCTION
This essay considers various approaches to the teaching of culture in connection with foreign language (FL) teaching with a view to making a realistic suggestion as to how to integrate the language and culture elements. I am particularly concerned with FL students at the lower and intermediate levels, where the cultural input is often omitted on the basis that students' linguistic skills do not allow them to study authentic information sources. There are many good reasons for considering which aspects of culture can be taught in the FL classroom. These can be divided roughly under two headings: motivation and cognitive development. Many students appear dissatisfied with language courses which aim to teach either 'essential' transactional phrases or the elementary grammatical rules governing basic structures. Students often say that they feel they are not 'making progress' despite the fact that the number and complexity of structures introduced by the teacher increase as the course goes on. I think that this is due largely to the neglect of non-linguistic elements in certain courses, which fail to challenge students' preconceived attitudes to what they are studying. The emphasis is on the rehearsal of 'realistic' situations without the need to communicate thoughts and feelings. The consequent demotivation leads not only to a high drop-out rate, but also to inertia in the cognitive development of those students who persevere. Many of our students want to see more of the culture of the countries where the target language is spoken. It is crucial to use this natural curiosity to present students with alternative sets of cultural values and concepts which enable them to look critically at their native culture. There is also the desire on the part of many teachers to break down cultural barriers and undermine the dominant association of certain languages with certain economically powerful nation states and the stereotypical images many people have of foreign countries. FL learning has traditionally
been associated with the assumption of a deeper knowledge of the countries where that language is spoken. In practice, much of the knowledge which FL students gain of the target cultures is unsystematic and incidental. In addition to choosing which items of socio-political knowledge we want students to study, we need to consider the extent to which we ought to be enabling them to raise their consciousness of the process of language learning, undertake research projects, ask questions about their awareness of their own culture, etc. However, it continues to be easier to describe the benefits of FL learning which are not specific to the language than to plan a syllabus which incorporates areas of non-linguistic competence. Whilst everyone agrees that teaching a FL involves introducing their students to that culture, few agree on which parts of that culture their students would most benefit from getting to know.
A RADICAL SOLUTION
The various arguments in this debate are centred around the question of whether FL teaching should take place in an independent study field, or be attached to some other subject, in order to present language in natural communicative contexts. This is a reaction against the perceived failure of language teachers to teach real language use. Instead of this they are said to have emphasised discrete aspects of language performance Which their students have had to learn out of context through unnatural grammar drills or stiff role play exercises. The trend toward communicative language teaching techniques has not significantly altered the end result, because these tend to put students in unrealistic rehearsal situations which do not contribute to a wider awareness of the cultural parameters associated with the target language and as sucra are often demotivating. A widespread conclusion seems to be that language should not be taught as an isolated skill, but needs to be embedded in a content-based
40
LanguageLearningJournal
area of the syllabus. This begs many questions about which area would be most suitable and how language competence could be achieved at all. One of the most radical alternative approaches to this problem was put forward by Lambert (1974). It is interesting to note that his proposals were a response to 'growing dissatisfaction among students with standard programmes of FL instruction' in US Institutions of Higher Education, reflected in, among other things, a drop-off in enrolments.Lambert sees part of the problem as the rigidity of the FL teaching profession and its unwillingness to change according to the changes in the nature of the demand for FL courses. One of the reasons why standard FL courses were perceived to be anachronistic was, according to Lambert, their focus on distant countries and cultures when large numbers of citizens from those countries were living in the States. This influenced students' perception of the value of those cultures in two ways. Firstly they saw how people who came from those countries usually occupied menial jobs and suffered poverty in the States. This was unlikely to convince students of the benefits of learning the language of the target group. Secondly, the aim of inspiring students with an interest in a foreign culture was misguided, as students perceived that the character of the countries from which those people came was being systematically misrepresented in the language classroom. Having identified the main culprit as the misguided cultural focus within FL classrooms, Lambert goes on to suggest that the language teaching element should be taken out of the traditional teaching centre altogether, which would free FL teachers to get on with the business of teaching culture. Lambert suggests that 'a good part of the routine task of teaching languages in schools and universities might be shifted to training centers where native speakers of the languages could provide a more natural language learning experience'. This would allow language teaching in the schools and universities to be centred around the study of 'people and language', a discipline which would be based in the human or behavioural sciences i.e. anthropology, political science, sociology, psycholinguistics and socio-linguistics. He then gives examples of certain academics from the FL sphere who have drawn on the behavioural sciences for their work and vice versa. The examples given are a fascinating insight into areas of research where psychology and language meet in various socio-cultural settings. The examples of international exchanges and visits abroad might help teachers seeking new approaches to introducing authentic cultural elements into advanced classes. For teachers of ab initio and intermediate FL classes the problem is more complex. This is partly because the lower level of FL competence in these classes makes it difficult to exploit the authentic materials provided by such exchanges, unless care is taken to ensure careful grading of the material and provision of appropriate
~-_,
,
reference materials. The funding of such exchanges is given low priority status in most institutions and the necessary investment would probably be considered unwise for beginners, given that traditional approaches offer cheaper alternatives. Lambert's conclusion side-steps the issue when he suggests that 'the practitioners in the new field should become fully trained in the behavioral sciences so that they can have a deeper base for learning and teaching about people's ways of life, language included.' This points out yet another deficiency in the knowledge and practice of FL teachers, without showing how the suggested remedy would improve the quality of their classes. The main objection to Lambert's approach is that he seems to be encouraging FL teachers to turn away from their subject altogether and do something else. Such a radical solution is surely not called for when what we are really trying to achieve is a better understanding of how to improve the quality of a process which is already recognised as taking place, i.e. the learning of socio-cultural and other 'non-linguistic' elements in the FL classroom. A less radical approach seems to be one which analyses the corpus of cultural knowledge into its constituent elements and integrates these into the syllabus.
No 15 March 1997
C SIMPSON
students' competence in these skills will vary as does their language ability, and that they can be graded accordingly. Vallette's aims are useful for any analysis of what constitutes culture in a FL setting, but they need to be treated with caution. Apart from the relative notions of 'greater awareness' and 'broader knowledge', there is the difficulty in defining the 'target culture'. If one takes students of Spanish, for example, there is a wide range of cultures, depending on the geographical area with which the students are primarily concerned. The presence of very large German and Italian speaking minorities outside their countries of origin raises the question whether it is correct to assume that our students will be mainly interested in those countries. We need therefore to be very clear about which target culture we are teaching. Another difficulty is in the selection of the teaching objectives or non-linguistic skills which we expect our students to learn. Etiquette is an area which carries very specific details for each situation and which is subject to frequent change. It might prove quite difficult to select aspects of etiquette which are appropriate to our students' needs.
TOTAL IMMERSION
It would seem appropriate to establish clear nonlinguistic aims for our FL classes in much the same way as we select aspects of syntax or style appropriate to each level. The question is whether this area should be incorporated into the language teaching e.g. via carefully selected materials, or whether it would be advantageous to teach aspects of culture in the first language. This could be taken to the point of planning each language lesson around carefully selected items of knowledge. Widdowson (1978) calls this the adoption of 'use criteria' and contrasts these with 'usage criteria', the latter usually leading to unrealistic rehearsals of unlikely linguistic situations. Widdowson actually goes as far as suggesting that FL teaching can only be meaningful in bilingual or immersion contexts where pupils study their mainstream subjects through the medium of the FL. It is possible to imagine certain advantages of such an approach, e.g. pupils' motivation, elimination of inauthentic drills of units of FL usage etc., but this again is expecting language teachers to teach something which they may not be competent to teach. It is possible, however, to see how adopting this approach in a limited form, by carefully selecting materials in view of their cultural content, could
LanguageAwareness
Figure 1
LanguageLearning ~ t
V
Cultural Experience ~--.42 r CulturalAwareness
these advantages there is the objection of the greater amount of L1 use in the class than would be the case with a communicative approach. However, this could be seen positively in modern teaching situations where contact time is at a premium and emphasis is laid on students' use of self-access facilities to supplement their lessons. Many FL text book authors seem to be well aware of the demand for non-linguistic knowledge associated with FLs (see the Breakthrough series (Macmillan), BBC language courses, the Working With series (Stanley Thornes), which gives abundant cultural information in the target language, and numerous 'Business Language' courses which include so-called 'cultural briefing' sections). Given the impossibility of communicating this knowledge in the target language to beginners and intermediate students, they include sections in L1, which aim to increase students' stock of general knowledge. It is interesting to note that few authors include material for testing students' cultural knowledge, whereas the use of L1 in language testing material is widespread, presumably on the grounds that students might be able to understand target language text, but not necessarily the questions written with the aim of testing this comprehension.
REFERENCES
M. Byram (1989). Cultural Studies in Foreign Language Education, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. M. Byram (1992). Foreign language learning for European citizenship, Language Learning Journal, 6, September. W. E. Lambert (1974). An Alternative to the Foreign Language Teaching Profession, in Altman & Hanzeli (eds), Essays on the Teaching of Culture, Advanced Press of America. R.M. Vallette (1977). The Culture Test, in Modern Language Testing (2nd ed), London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. H. G. Widdowson (1978). Teaching Language as Communication, Oxford: OUE F. L. Jenks (1974). Conducting Socio-cultural Research in the Foreign Language Class, in Altman & Hanzeli (eds), Essays on the Teaching of Culture, Advanced Press of America.
iAnl f_, ,
No 15 March 1997
43