What is the role of literature in ELT?
Hi everyone
If you came to the Literature forum is very likely that you believe that literature has a role to play in ELT. However, what is this role??
Is it language development? Is it reading and writing skills? Or is it something else?
Can it be used with all kinds of students? In all types of courses?
If you are not particularly convinced that literature has a role to play at all and came here just because you were curious about my question - welcome!! I really would like to hear from you.
Looking forward to everyone's replies :)
Cheers - Chris
Hi Tony
Welcome! And thanks a lot for sharing your experience with us. This is a fascinating story indeed! It seems that your student has somehow absorbed some of Austen's language :)
But you see, many times I have realised that it frequently happens to me as well. While reading a book you sort of 'naturally' start using some vocabulary items that clearly come from it. Reading Austen, for instance, makes me start saying things like, I think our new neighbour is a very 'agreeable' person :) The other day my son was writing an essay on Renaissance drama and I just asked him what he wanted for dinner. He was so concentrated that he didn't even bother to look at me and simply said, 'It's up to thee mum' . We had a very good laugh after that! :D
I suppose it does happen with contemporary literature as well - it is just more difficult to detect such lexical influences because they do not call the listener or reader's attention as much as a word that usually people do not use anymore.
Cheers - Chris
Hi Everyone
There is quite hot debate going on in the EAP forum about using literature with students doing English for academic purposes. Perhaps you would like to take a look there. Link below
Cheers - Chris
Hi all/Chris
Now I'm beginning to see, if my seeing is correct, why there's a distinct lack of 'science' at the conference this year. ;)
A quick wisecrack about something you said. When you comment on the experience of Tony's student experience saying 'your student somehow absorbed some of Austen's language', and on your own experience, 'I have realized that it frequently happens to me as well ... while reading a book you sort of 'naturally' start using vocabulary items that clearly come from it,' it seems like you (and Tony) are implying that the way the language got into your head (the student’s head) from the page of the book while you were reading it was by osmosis, by some magical event. I hope that isn't the case. ;)
By way the way, out of curiosity, are you the kind of person who is interested in knowing how the inscribed (i.e. vocabulary) gets into your head, or are you the kind of person who isn’t interested in knowing how it gets into to your head? Are you more comfortable thinking that it 'just sort of naturally happens'?
The reason why I ask is because how language and language learning are viewed by a teacher directly affects their pedagogical stance. And pedagogical stance affects how teaching is conducted. And how teaching is conducted in turn affects the learner.
If a teacher thinks for instance that language learning 'just happens', 'it's a mystery really', then s/he will be inclined to use whatever method or methods she thinks will work, or one prescribed by the institute she works for, at least, and then waits and hopes for the best. Because if s/he doesn't know how vocabulary learning actually happens then s/he won't be able to predict with any certainty and/or even accuracy the quantity of vocabulary that will be learned from the reading of a single book. That’s a subtle indictment on materials writers.
What has this got to do with your question: What is the role of literature in ELT? Everything. Teaching happens within a prescribed timeframe, does it not? Therefore learning is expected to happen within that prescribed timeframe. If the teacher's expectations are synonymous with the curriculum/syllabus expectations that the curriculum or syllabus or teacher syllabus will be meet within that timeframe by all students and by all students equally - even within a culturally homogenous group -, then there is a problem. Her expectations as well as the curriculum/syllabus are too high. In fact, they are extreme.
Don't get me wrong, I believe literature has a role to play in ELT. And it is a substantial one. It's a learner's primary source of vocabulary, for one. However, and this is where those who are trying to find ways to help learner's be more autonomous learners should take note - I won't say 'make' because of what the verb entails -, we're not tyrants, we don't make people learn language, nothing makes people learn another language, not even technology. The question is how do you help a language learner in the early stages or even the middle stages of developing an additional language get into literature?
What the role of literature is in ELT is a much easier question to answer than the other question. Words on a page sit still long enough to be scrutinized and analysed, in fact, they never move – unless you erase them. But a learner's brain doesn't allow us the same privileged place, though some jokers think they know without actually knowing. Hence the need for science, and another question: what is the role of science in ELT? (Thought I’d slip that one in. ;)) The question that isn't easy to answer is how you get an additional language learner into literature; especially when s/he is an individual with an individual learning style and the rest of it. And the answer isn't, 'just put a book under his nose ... and let nature do the rest.' Along that path lies mysticism and all the vileness that religion can invent.
To be frank, I'm not so much interested in the question of the role of literature in ELT. That question has fairly much been answered – but it won’t hurt to hear what others think. ;) What I am much more interested in is how to get additional language learners interested in literature i.e. Jane Eyre (in spite of what Tony might say), when they are in early or mid-term EFL language development. When the only material they can actually process at this stage is a graded reader. Even holistic learners will still consciously learn an individual word not learned as they figure out the meaning of an unknown word in a sentence in a passage in a book. Note: literature in all its glory is defined as an unedited version of the original book. When they are older learners, not 6 or 7 and haven't developed a conscience and still allow people, well meaning people - well meaning interventionists, I might add - to intervene in their language development because it’s not proceeding as planned. Well, not according to the interventionist, despite the fact that the learner seems to be struggling.
My suspicion is that the answer lies somewhere in a learner's individuality (not individualism). For instance, in his or her learning style and the thing that, well, interests them. Perhaps the secret is as simple as getting them interested in something that interests them, or at least in something that interests them at that particular moment. I'm sure their interests may change over time. Yet even in that simple process of choosing a text that may interest by its title alone the learner reader at that moment is not unambiguous in the details. Just because it sounds interesting doesn’t mean the learner will get past the first few sentences before giving up because they cannot process enough of the language to enjoy it. I doubt it even works for the more experienced reader with more knowledge and more skill. Interest alone won't always bridge the gap between a lack of vocabulary and a lack of experience (and background knowledge). What is the role of science in ELT is still a pertinent question.
Regards
Robert
Dear Robert et al
I think that a lot of what your saying boils down to what we mean by 'literature', and as the admirable John McRae wrote there is 'Literature' - the canon , from Beowulf to Virginia Woolf, and there is 'literature with a small 'l'' . I think our job as general EL teachers is to expose students to a wide variety of texts. The problem is that mostly they get exposed to 'textbook texts' ... which, even if they're pretending to be an authentic newspaper or magazine article, have generally been doctored by the author (I can say this as the author of over 50 sets of textbook materials for many countries around the world).
What we need is Brian Tomlinson's 'let the text set the syllabus' approach, and in this way we can incorporate all kinds of texts, including 'Literature' and 'literature'.
And it goes without saying that there is a huge difference in bringing 'literature' into the EL classroom and teaching literature per se.
very best
David A. Hill
Coordinator
LMCS SIG
Dear David
No, I don't think that is what I am talking about at all. What I am talking about isn't about which piece of 'literature' to let 'set the syllabus'. What I am talking about is how do EFL learners get 'access' to the literature in the first place. What I mean is how do EFL learners actually cognitively get access to the literature if they do not know enough of the language of the literature.
What I read implied in what Chris and Tony(?) said was that it didn't matter whether the EFL learner had enough of the language of the literature to access it meaningfully. What mattered was whether or not they simply 'interacted' with the text. I might have misread them or read more into what they said, of course. My question was, which I'll spell more clearly now, how does the EFL learner 'interact' with Shakespeare's Hamlet if they do not know the language?
In answer to my query, Chris simply directed me to a well worn social theory. That wasn't in my view an acceptable answer to how the EFL learner gets access to the literature by doing simple things like 'read' the literature regradless of how much of the literature's language they actually know. It implies that the learner can 'read' the literature despite not having enough of the language of the literature. That the learner will 'magically' access the literature and its hidden meanings with a limited vocabulary of even 50 English words, or no English vocabulary. From whose perspective is this activity being viewed from??
Material writers are notorious for writing textbooks and texts, as you've hinted at with the word 'doctored', 'as if the learner had enough language to access it'. Or that the learner will somehow be able to access the secret meanings in the literature with only a limited vocabulary. The textbook or materials writer writes from their persepctive, I think, and not from the persepctive of the 'reader' as additional language learner. Or, that they assume that the 'reader', the learner, will be someone who possess enough of the language of the literature to enjoy reading it. If that is the case then I guess that's fine, but the former cannot be.
So my questions still stand about how the EFL learner gets access to the 'literature' if they do not possess enough of the language of the literature.
Cheers
Robert
Hi Robert (& All)
You mentioned 'lack of science' and then wrote: 'it seems like you (and Tony) are implying that the way the language got into your head (the student’s head) from the page of the book while you were reading it was by osmosis, by some magical event.'
Well, I hope you feel a little bit more reassured when I tell you that I only believe in magic when I am playing World of Warcraft - I'm a Lv 78 Blood Elf Fire Mage :))
Apart from that, my understanding about how people incorporate words and expressions from what we read into our own language has nothing to do with magic, but with some cognitive processes of interaction, transformation and appropriation.
My answer for how these processes come to be and how language is shared and lexical knowledge constructed does not come from my 'impressions' and 'suppositions'; on the contrary, it comes from my firm belief that Bakhtin got it absolutely right when he conceived the concepts of dialogism and heteroglossia. These are the theoretical notions that underpin my understanding and have also guided me in my academic research and teaching activities.
If more people would like to go deeper into epistemological understandings of different approaches to literature, I can easily open a new thread for that.
Otherwise, here is some basic bibliography for those interested in reading a bit about the Bakhtinian theoretical framework that I mentioned above:
Bakhtin, M.M. and M. Holquist (1981) The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Houston, TX: University of Texas Press.
Coulter, D. (1999) The epic and the novel: dialogism and teacher research. Educational Researcher, 28/3, pp. 4-13.
Holquist, M. (2002) Dialogism. Bakhtin and His World. London: Routledge.
Georgakopoulou, A. (2005) Bakhtin in sociolinguistics/discourse studies: readings and open issues. UK Linguistics Ethnography Forum.
Maybin, J. (2001) Language, struggle and voice: the Bakhtin/Volosinov writings. In Wetherell, M., S. Taylor and S. J.Yates (Eds) Discourse Theory and Practice. London: Sage.
Cheers - Chris
Thanks for the reply, Chris
I understand the 'dialogic' and it is about the social exchanges of people who share the same language, it is not about the social exchanges of two people who don't know each others language. So it doesn't say anything about how the words get from the page into the mental lexicon of the EFL learner, and that is the issue I was addressing; I wasn't talking about a social theory of language use.
If I talk to someone who doesn't know my language they will not understand me; they will not understand the words I speak. And it doesn't matter how long I yap to that person, they will never understand me until they learn the words that the I am speaking. Bhaktin doesn't talk about that.
You implied that all the an EFL learner had to do was look at the words on the page of a book written in English and the words would not only magical enter the learners head but the learner would also learn the meaning of the words they simply looked at but didn't know or understand.
What happens between two speakers of the same language when they speak to each other has nothing to do with what happens when an EFL learner looks at the pages of Shakespeare's Hamlet and sees symbols s/he has never seen before and doesn't understand, or has very little experience of - may know 50 English words and recognises 2 of the written words on the page, if he's lucky.
So you still need to answer my question rather than point to Bhaktin's social theory that doesn't talk about the language learning process, it only talks about the social processes two speakers of the same language go through when they exchange information. How does social theory explain how English words get into the head of a person who doesn't know English?? Is it simply by listening to words they don't understand, or simply by looking at words written on a page they've never seen before??
Cheers
Robert
Hi Robert
Thanks for your reply. Well, I'm not sure that the theory is so 'well-worn' when some people still cannot understand its basic concepts and broader implications.
Anyway, I would suggest a little bit more of reading and reflection on the issue and perhaps you can send me your address, I'll be glad to send you some material and perhaps a copy of my research paper when is out :)
Cheers - Chris
Hi Chris
I studied Bhaktin and others when I studied sociology and media studies in my BA, it is how I got into studying language and language learning in the first place. I also understand very well how people apply social theory to second language acquisition. And I understand very well how they inappropriately apply it to second language acquisition. Not that I subscribe to 'second language acquisition theory' so much.
It cannot and never will explain how an additional language is learned. Interaction theory will never explain how an additional language is learned. It can only talk about aspects of interaction but not address the issue of how the language actually gets stored in the learner's brain. To explain that you need to use a different theory, socio-cognition.
However, I am more than happy to read your research when it is out.
Cheers
Robert
I use Shakespeare in my classes sometimes and it often works very well.
Shakespeare always provides opportunities for debate. For example the 'All the world's a stage and men and women merely players' is a great quote and always gets people talking.
The sonnets are also great because they are short, compact and obviously rich in meaning.
Thanks, Robert. Bakhtin's dialogic vision especially illuminates this topic. The role of literature in ELT can be found somewhere in the debates and discussions it sparks, but can never really be pinned down. It seems the moment it is (here I disagree though with the notion that literature is an easier subject to boil down than science) its value and meaning somehow gets lost. Widdowson's (1975) Stylistics is a classic because he attempts to "mediate" linguistic (i.e. scientific) and literary (i.e. culturally interpretive) approaches to the use of lit. in ELT, without compromising or inauthenticating literature itself. Nor does he define literature in terms of pretentious ideals (c.f. F.R. Leavis or Matthew Arnold's "Sweetness and Light"). In many philosophical respects (I'm thinking of phenomenological thought traditions and work by Paul Ricoeur), literature and science are complimetary, if not radically of the same origins: both rely on metaphoric ways of knowing and both demand close, systematic, self-reflexive scrunity of the world. That's cool that Thomas uses Shakespeare in his classes. Whenever I use the Bard in my classes the learners' attention immediately lights up. I'm sure language students always seem to value its "cultural capital" and the aesthetic truck of Shakespeare never seems to overwhelm--particularly if lines are presented gradually, as Thomas suggests. Thanks for your comments and I look forward to reading more.
--Richard.
Hi Richard
Thanks for commenting. But once again, no one seems capable of answering the question or addressing the issue I raised as part of the discussion of the role of literature in ELT.
It seems that people are however more than willing to throw a theory at me rather than discuss the issue. This shows the lack of insight generally into additional language learning by those leading the discussions here on the forum, who would much prefer to address the issue in a Krashenian sense: there is no need for the language learner to consciously engage in the language learning process because the language acquisition device will do all the hard work of learning the additional language.
Such a theory is firstly, the mystics approach to additional language learning, and secondly, unprovable. Yet ELT practicioners are more than willing to accept this theory as true because it allows them to work as ELT practitioners and justify their methods and techniques. It doesn't matter what you do, so the theory goes, additional language learning will happen. It isn't a mystery and therefore doesn't need to be researched.
For example, toss a copy of Shakespeare under the nose of an additional language learner and let him/her read it. You claim that the learner can actually read it. And not only read it in the true sense of read, but also understand what the Bard is talking about.
Either the claim is a lie or the claimant is totally sincere in the belief that the ELF learner is actually reading the text. Hence my claim that there is a lack of 'science' at the conference, not just because I can't see a forum for it, or the lame excuse that a forum manager couldn't be found.
I am very interested in the use of literature in ELT. Its role can be justified. But what I am also very interested in is how the EFL learner learns how to read it as their English develops. The simplistic and/or overgeneralized views presented so far do not answer the question. To throw Bhaktin at me as the only answer is unacceptable. Yes, Bhaktin's ideas have a place in global issue of reading literature in ELT, but Bhaktin's ideas do not answer the question of how the additional language being learned gets into the brain of the additional language learner. To say it is simply a matter of the EFL learner interacting with the text, which doesn't say anything about how the learner was able to read it in the first place, and then discussing the contents with someone else, which also doesn't say anything about how the contents got into the brain of the EFL learner so the learner could actually use it in any conversation, does not provide a clear explanation the language learning process.
To use Richard's words, "it can never really be pinned down" by Bhaktin's theory. So, when you talk about using literature in ELT there must be some mitigating circumstances which allow it to be used in the classroom in the first place. What are they? And if there is a barrier to using it, what can we do as ELT practitioners to help the EFL learner get passed the barrier(s) to using and enjoying Shakespearean texts in the EFL classroom.
Have I made my point overly complicated for this forum??
Cheers
Robert
Thanks, Robert. Bakhtin's dialogic vision especially illuminates this topic. The role of literature in ELT can be found somewhere in the debates and discussions it sparks, but can never really be pinned down. It seems the moment it is (here I disagree though with the notion that literature is an easier subject to boil down than science) its value and meaning somehow gets lost. Widdowson's (1975) Stylistics is a classic because he attempts to "mediate" linguistic (i.e. scientific) and literary (i.e. culturally interpretive) approaches to the use of lit. in ELT, without compromising or inauthenticating literature itself. Nor does he define literature in terms of pretentious ideals (c.f. F.R. Leavis or Matthew Arnold's "Sweetness and Light"). In many philosophical respects (I'm thinking of phenomenological thought traditions and work by Paul Ricoeur), literature and science are complimetary, if not radically of the same origins: both rely on metaphoric ways of knowing and both demand close, systematic, self-reflexive scrunity of the world. That's cool that Thomas uses Shakespeare in his classes. Whenever I use the Bard in my classes the learners' attention immediately lights up. I'm sure language students always seem to value its "cultural capital" and the aesthetic truck of Shakespeare never seems to overwhelm--particularly if lines are presented gradually, as Thomas suggests. Thanks for your comments and I look forward to reading more.
--Richard.
Hi Robert & All,
In my humble view, and just drawing from practical experience in the ELT field, I believe an additional language learner manages to "absorb" language through being regularly exposed to literary reads. It can happen both at the vocabulary and sentence structure levels, and at the cultural one. How can we, ELT practitioners, help our students to get into it?
Firstly, I think, through the cognitive process of interaction. We should interact with learners eliciting on their personal likes/dislikes, interests, main concerns, aspirations in life, reasons for an additional language learning. Simultaneously, the teacher should show enthusiasm and open the way for learners to feel confident in the process of language learning. We can facilitate it through learner-centered practical communicative tasks.
Seeds have always to be sown with care if we want to get a rich harvest, regardless of some eventual natural catastrophes... This doesn' only apply to the agricultural science, we believe. That's why I'm using the metaphor here. It also fits into linguistic science, in my opinion. We, teachers, have the duty to instill in the students' heart confidence so as they feel they "can process enough of the language to enjoy it."
It usually ticks if we let them choose some favourite reads for a start, and talk to them about what they could grasp. Listening to their reading experience, even in their L1, can motivate them to make their own discoveries about language and culture in the L2 reads. Then, gradually, the teacher might suggest further reads taking into consideration their language improvement.
Sometimes, being a little less scientific and a little more artistic it can help us overcome barriers, even the linguistic ones. This is my conviction.
Thanks for your attention.
Maria
Dear all,
Literature and culture in English Language Teaching (ELT) at an
undergraduate level can be seen as the bridge between the target language and its
soul. They provide students with a closer interaction with English-Speaking countries
in the sense that both portray the world in a contextualized situation and open the door
to the perception that there is a complex and immanent relationship between grammar
and a humanistic interactive field that mutates constantly, since it adapts to the needs
of its speakers and changes according to their context.
Literature enhances ELT through elements such as authentic material,
language in use and aesthetic representation of the spoken language, as well as
language and cultural enrichment. It is with this last element that literature opens the
door that leads to a wider and closer look on the culture (or cultures) where the target
language is spoken.
Hi Nastya and Everyone
Indeed, and some of your points can also be applied to ELT teacher education. It reminds me of the workshop I attended by Briony Beaven where she advocated for the use of storytelling for the professional development of teachers. She mentioned how teachers' narratives can 'capture the complex and specific nature of teachers' knowledge'.
Link to the session below
http://iatefl.britishcouncil.org/2011/sessions/2011-04-17/storytelling-r...
Posted on Marija's behalf.
Hello, Chris!
Thank you for your message and the questions. I think I can say something about the role of literature in ELT, but I couldn't log in on the LMCSSig site - my password was not recognised.
This is what I should like to say.
Literature is an enormous help to learners of a foreign language. But the learner has to strain his memory for a few texts - at least some two or three poems he/she likes or a passage of a play, etc. It depends what the person likes. When that little is memorised, these texts start functioning like ready contexts for his/her reference. These contexts may accompany his/her learning of the vocabulary of a foreign language or major expressions or anything else. For example, you have to memorise a difficult verb form from the verb s'en aller for the first person - m'en vais. It is so fragmented and impossible to commit to memory. But you suddenly remember a verse of Verlaine's poem - "Et je m'en vais de vent mauvais" - the form suddenly becomes manageable and full of sense. I couldn't, for one, commit conjunctions to memory. It was poems by Oscar Milosz (a French poet of Lithuanian-Polish descent), and I have never forgot that mais means 'but', ou - if, and so on. I have even written an article after a presentation at the Conference commemorating the 50th anniversary of my former Department of English Philology at the University of Vilnius - "How literature fulfils the function of the native environment?" The answer has been - it does because it realises all the three contexts in which man lives and communicates: the context of culture, the context of situation, and the co-text or the immediate linguistic context of his (or author's) message.
The more literature man internalises, the richer his verbal life becomes. The simplest phrases echo literary contexts in quotations for him and help communicate as well enrich his thought and emotions. I have lived through a period when my memory worked like a running text (of literary quotations) for me. It was an extraordinary experience. Finally my conclusion, in another article on competence achievement, was that literary background committed to memory helps a foreigner like nothing else to achieve competence. The point is this: the native speaker's competence is based on his linguistic instinct which is semi-conscious and refers to the extralinguistic contexts of his experience. The foreigner has no linguistic instinct of this kind. But the foreigner's instantaneous reference through quotations approximates his ability to the native's linguistic instinct.
If we admit that there is such a thing as the linguistic instinct and as competence is using language (whether native or foreign), we will find no way to this level of knowledge but through literature. I am absolutely convinced that this is so.
Please forgive me if I have said too much in too poor English.
I hope to hear from you when you can spare a minute of your time.
Sincerely,
Marija
Hi Chris,
I very rarely get to use literature in my classes, but recently I've started looking at Jane Eyre with an advanced student of mine. Initially I'd tried The Girl With The Pearl Earring, but she read that quickly and found it rather simple. However, Jane Eyre is a real challenge for her and she adores it.
What I've found quite electrifying about it has been the effect it's had on her English. She now sounds extremely well-educated and uses turns of phrase and expressions in her speech and writing that you just never meet in your average course book.
As a result, she is very happy because it allows her to express herself in the kind of manner she is used to in her L1.
Cheers,
Tony