THE DEVELOPMENT OF ESP
From its early beginnings in the 1960s ESP has undergone three
main phases of development. It is now in a fourth phase with a fifth phase
starting to emerge. We shall describe each of the five phases in greater detail
in later chapters, but it will provide a useful, perspective to give a brief
summery here. It should be pointed out first of all that ESP is not a
monolithic universal phenomenon. ESP has developed at different speeds in
different countries, and examples of all the approaches we shall describe can
be found operating somewhere in the world at the present time. Our summery
must, therefore, be very general in its focus.
It will be noticeable in the following overview that one area of
activity has been particularly important in the development of EST to
illustrate the development of ESP in general:
With one or two exceptions….English for science and technology has
always sat and continues to set the trend in theoretical discussion, in ways of
analyzing language, and in the variety of actual teaching materials.
We have not restricted our own illustrations to EST in this book,
but we still need to acknowledge, as Swales does, the pre-eminent position of
EST in the ESP story.
1.
The Concept of special language : register analysis
This stage took place mainly in the 1960s and early 1970s and was associated in particular with the
work of Peter Strevens (Halliday, McLntosh and strevens, 1964), Jack ewer (
Ewer and Latorrre, 1969) and John Swales (1971). Operating on the basic principle
that the English of say, Electrical Engineering constituted a specific register
different from that of, say, Biology or of General English, the aim of the
analysis.
What is ESP?
Was to
identify the grammatical and lexical features of these registers. Teaching
materials then took these linguistic features as their syllabus. A good example
of such a syllabus is that of A Course in Basic Scientific English by Ewer and
Latorre (1969)
In fact, as Ewer and latorre’s syllabus shows, register analysis
revealed that there was very little that was distinctive in the sentence
grammar of scientific English beyond a tendency to favour particular forms such
as the present simple tense, the passive voice and nominal compounds. It did
not, for example, reveal any forms that were not found in General English. But
we must be wary of making unfair criticism. Although there was an academic
interest in the nature of register of English per se, the main motive behind
register analyses such as Ewer and lattore’s was the pedagogic one of making
the ESP course more relevant to learners needs. The aim was to produce a
syllabus which gave high priority to the language forms students would meet in
their Science studies and in turn would give low priority to forms they would
not meet. Ewer and Hughes-Davies (1971), for example, compared the language of
the texts their science students had to read with the language of some widely
used school textbooks. They found that the school textbooks neglected some of
the language forms commonly found in Science texts, for example, compound
nouns, passives, conditionals, anomalous finites (i.e. modal Verbs). Their
conclusion was that the ESP course should, therefore, give precedence to these
forms.
2.
Beyond the sentence : rhetorical or discourse analysis
There were, as well shall see, serious flaws in the register
analysis-based syllabus, but, as it happened, register analysis as a research
procedure was rapidly overtaken by developments in the world of linguistics.
Whereas in the first stage of its development, ESP had focused on language at
the sentence level above the sentence, as ESP became closely involved with the
emerging field of discourse or
rhetorical analysis. The leading lights in this movement were Henry Widdowson
in Britain and the so – Called Washington School of Larry Selinker, Louis
Trimble, John Lackstrom and Mary Todd-Trimble in the United States.
The basic hypothesis of this stage is succinctly expressed by
Allen and Widdowson ( 1974):
We take the view that the difficulties which the students
encounter arise not so much from a defective knowledge of the system of
English, but from an unfamiliarity with English use, and that consequently
their needs cannot be met by a course which simply provides further practice in
the composition of sentence, but only by one which develops a knowledge of how sentences are used in the performance of
different communicative acts.
Register analysis had focused on sentence grammar, but now
attention shifted to understanding how sentences were combined in discourse to
produce meaning. The concern of research, therefore, was to identify the
organizational patterns in texts and to specify the linguistic means by which
these patterns are signaled. These patterns would them form the syllabus of the
ESP course. The Rhetorical process Chart below (from EST: A Discourse Approach
by Louis Trimble (1985) is n representative of this approach:
Leveldescription of level
A.
The objectives of the total discourse
Example :
1.
Detailing an experiment
2.
Making a recommendation
3.
Presenting new hypotheses or theory
4.
Presenting other types of EST information
B.
The general rhetorical functions that develop the objectives of
level A.
Example :
1.
Starting purpose
2.
Reporting past research
3.
Stating the problem
4.
Presenting information apparatus used in an experiment
a)
Description
b)
Operation
5.
Presenting information on experimental procedures
C.
The specific rhetorical functions that develop the general
rhetorical functions of level B
Example :
1.
Description : physical, function, and process
2.
Definition
3.
Classification
4.
Instructions
5.
Visual-verbal relationship
D.
The rhetorical techniques that provide relationship within and
between the thetorical units of level C
Example :
I.
Orders
1.
Time order
2.
Space order
3.
Causality and result
II.
Pattern
1.
Causality and result
2.
Order of importance
3.
Comparison and contrast
4.
Analogy
5.
Exemplification
6.
illustration
What is ESP?
As in stage I there was a more or less tacit assumption in this
approach that the rhetorical patterns of next organization differed
significantly between specialist are of use : the rhetorical structure of
science texts was regarded as different from that of commercial texts, for
example. However , this point was never very clearly examined ( see Swales,
1985, pp. 70-I) and indeed paradoxically, the results of the research into the
discourse of subject-specific academic texts were also used to make
observations about discourse in general ( Widdowson, 1978).
The typical teaching materials is based on the
discourse approach taught students to recognise textual patterns and discourse
markers mainly by means of text-diagramming exercises (see below p.36). the English
in Focus series (OUP) is a good example of this approach.
3. Target situation analysis
The stage that we come to consider now did not really add anything
new to the range of knowledge about ESP. What it aimed to do was to take the
existing knowledge and set it on a more scientific basis, by establishing
procedures for relating language analysis more closely to learners ‘ reasons
for learning. Give that the purpose of an ESP course is to enable learners to
function adequately in a target situation. That is, the situation in which the
learners will use the language they are learning , then the ESP course design
process should proceed by first identifying the target situation and then
carrying out a rigorous analysis of the linguistic features of the situation.
The identified features will from the syllabus of the ESP course. This process
is usually known as need analysis. However, we prefer to take Chambers’
( 1980) term of’ target situation analysis’, since it is a more accurate
description of the process concerned.
The most through explanation of target situation analysis is the
system set out by John Munhby in Communicative Syllabus Design (1980). The
Munby model produce a detailed profile of the learners’ needs in term of
communication purposes, communication setting, the means of communication,
language skills, functions, structure ect. (see below p. 55).
The target situation analysis stage marked certain ‘ coming of
age’ for ESP. What had previously benn
done very much in a piecemeal way , was now systematic and learner need was
apparently placed at the center of the course design process. It proved in the
event to be a false dawn. As we shall see in the following chapters, the
concept of needs that it was based on was far too simple.
4.
Skills and strategies
We noted that the first two stages of the development of ESP all
the analysis had been of the surface forms of the language (whether at sentence
level, as in register analysis, or, above, as in discourse analysis). The
target situation analysis approach did not really change this, because in its
analysis of learner need it still looked mainly at the surface linguistic
features of the target situation.
The fourth stage
of ESP has seen an attempt to look below the surface and to consider not the
language itself but the thinking processes that underline language use. There
is not dominant figure in this movement, although we might mention the work of
Francoise Grellet (1981), Christine
Nuttall (1982) and Charles Alderson and Sandy Urquhart (1984) as having made
significant contributions to work on reading skill. Most of the work in the area
of skills and strategies, however, has been done close to the ground in schemes
such as the national ESP project in Brazil
(see below p. 172)and the university of Malaya ESP project ( see ELT
document 107 and skills of learning published by nelson and the university of
Malaya press).
Both these
project were set up to cope with study situations where the medium of
instruction is the mother tongue but students need to read a number of
specialist texts which are available only in English. The projects have,
therefore, concentrated their efforts on reading strategies.
The principal
idea behind the skills-centered approach is that underlying all language use
there are common reasoning and interpreting processes, which, regardless of the
surface forms, enable us to extract meaning from discourse. There is, therefore
, no need to focus should rather be on the underlying interpretive strategies,
which enable the learner to cope with the surface forms, for example guessing
the meaning of words from context, using visual layout to determine the type of
text, exploiting cognates (i.e. words which are similar in the mother tongue
and target language) etc. a focus on specific subject register in unnecessary
in this approach , because the underlying processes are not specific to any
subject register.
‘it was argued that reading skills are not language –specific but
universal and that there is a core of
language ( for example, certain structures of argument and forms of
presentation ) which can be indentified as “ academic” and which is not
subject-specific.’ Chitravelu, 1980)
What is ESP ?
As has been noted, in term of materials this approach generally
puts the emphasis on reading or listening strategies. The characteristic
exercises get the learners to reflect on and analyses how meaning is produced
in and retrieved from written or spoken discourse. Talking their cue from
cognitive learning theories ( see below p-43), the language learners are
treated as thinking beings who can be asked to observe and verbalizes the interpretive processes the employ in
language use.
5. a Learning- Centred approach
In outlining the
origins of ESP (pp.6-8), we identified three focus, which we might
characteristic as need, new ideas about language and new ideas about learning.
It should have become clear that in its subsequent development, however, scant
attention has been paid to the last of these focus- learning. All of the stages
outlined so far have been fundamentally flawed, in that they are all based on
description of language use. Whether this description is of surface
forms, as in the case of register
analysis, or of underlying processes as in the skills and strategies approach,
the concern in each case is with describing what people do with
language. But our concern in ESP is not with language use-although this
will help to define the course objectives. Our concern is with language learning.
We cannot simple assume that describing and exemplifying what people do
with language will enable someone to learn it. If that were so, we would need
to do no mere than read a grammar book and a dictionary in order to learn a
language. A truly valid approach to ESP must be based on an understanding of
the processes of language learning.
This brings us to
the fifth stage of ESP development- the learning-centred approach, which will
form the subject of this book. The importance and the implications of the
distinction that we have made between language use and language learning
will hopefully became clear as we proceed through the following chapters.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar