Angela, there seems to be a bit
of a shift occurring at the
moment in terms of how we
understand the nature and
purpose of language teaching
and learning.
Can you give us a sense of how
you understand that?
I think that
we would have to say that
there's been, and we're
in the middle of a paradigm
shift.
Every now and then we get,
we make, changes regularly
and all the time, but
every now and then, there comes
a moment when the change
is much more marked.
And, the situation in our
world is such now
that we really
do need to rethink
our ways and means of
communicating, and
understanding the processes of
communicating.
The big shift is
that we are moving from
seeing language
learning as
a monolingual endeavour.
A monolingual approach is the
traditional approach that
we have normally had.
We have treated the teaching
of
a language as if it
were the only language
that existed in the world, and
as if it were
the only language that the
students actually had.
And so, it is a world ...
I remember when I started
teaching German as a beginning
teacher,
the teacher's manual told
me to speak
only in German, not
to use any writing,
but just to speak, speak,
speak German.
I spent a whole
lesson
drawing stick figures on
the board, drawing you
name it, you know.
I would have turned
myself inside out
because I was going to do
as I was told and I was
told to just
speak German
for the first six units
of that book.
I will never forget it.
And that day, I understood
that I could have simply
said,
"This German word
means X
in English" and we would
have done it in two minutes,
had I permitted myself
to use, or had I been
permitted to use, English.
But because I was dead
set on doing what
this method required
of me, I did it all
in German and wasted a lesson
when I could have had a very
simple strategy.
For whichever language
learner we might be talking
about, we're actually, we
have to recognise that there
are multiple languages at play.
The learner comes with
his or her own language,
English,
other languages, and is
learning an additional
language.
In learning that additional
language, at every moment
for that student, there
are at least two languages
at play:
the language of their home
and the language
being learnt.
From the learning point
of view, we
also need to appreciate
that, at any
point in the learning
process, we say that
students
need to connect
their new learning to
their prior learning.
When a student
is learning Chinese,
and let us say that that
student is an English-speaking
student, the
only thing
that, the prior learning
that that student can connect
the new Chinese
language to,
new for him or
her, is
the language that they already
have.
So, it is the home
language, let us
say for an English-speaking
student, it's connecting
to their English.
And so the very process
of actually learning
the language is a multilingual
process.
The student is,
in his or her mind, forever
moving between
the languages, singular
or plural that they have,
and the language
that is being learnt.
And it's in that sense that it
is quintessentially a
multilingual
process.
And I think that that has to be
understood because
it's just so
liberating.
I was a student like that
myself.
I used the Italian that
I had
in order to access
French that I was learning,
and it was liberating - I never
had to learn the vocab.
I could look at the word and I
knew the meaning because
of my Italian.
But, my teacher
did not actually
encourage me
to do that.
It was a movement that came
spontaneously.
I think it's a
movement between the languages
in learning that needs
to be absolutely
nurtured and fostered,
promoted.
But, I mean, you've used the
example of Italian and French,
which some people may say,
"Well they're romance languages
and therefore, you know,
there's a lot of similarity,
but, you know, it's a different
proposition for someone
English to Chinese or ..."
Of course.
You know, similar examples.
Of course, but that's where
the metalanguage comes in.
And, if we have the
metalanguage, a noun,
a verb, in its most simple
forms, but then, you know,
expressiveness through
use of adjectives, relating
episodes in time
through the use of tenses,
we do that in English
and we can transfer
those notions to
Chinese or
whatever the language happens
to be.
And so we find, for
example, with tenses
that they certainly operate
differently in Chinese
from the way they operate in
French.
It's absolutely liberating
to know that in Chinese
you can just mark
time by the use
of the time
marker itself, 'yesterday',
'tomorrow', and so on.
In French, it's the whole
verb system
that needs to be
learnt and invoked in
order to achieve the same
thing.
But you see, we're not teaching
about
tenses as such, but we're
teaching students about how
to relate events,
episodes, experiences
in time and so
they come to appreciate that
this can be done in different
ways, in different languages.
So they're drawing their
understanding of tenses in
English to appreciate
how and why it works
as it does in Chinese.
That makes for much deeper
learning.
Students have to
appreciate that
even saying "hello"
to someone, you've got to
decide, in relation
to greetings, which
one is going to be appropriate.
Because it's not just a
question of having the
vocabulary, but
it's also a question of
marking the relationship
that we have.
So, if you are
an elder or a person
that demands,
you know, some distance,
you would then
use, in French, you would
address them with 'vous'.
If it's a person that you know
really well, you would address
them with 'tu'.
In English we just have the
word 'you'
and that's it.
In French, we mark
that distinction.
If we go to Japanese,
it's a language that really
marks
the hierarchy
of relationships.
That's contained within
the language itself.
But the phenomenon is, at the
same time, cultural.
And so, you know,
we are moving between
language and
the cultural
envelope of that phenomenon
that we happen to be talking
about simultaneously.
So, in order for me to teach
you greetings or
how to address a person
in French, I would
have to talk about
how we do that in English,
we simply do it in one way.
In French, we
have to make a distinction
between whether
it's a child to an
adult, whether it is
a familiar person
or not.
And so, we need to explain
all of that.
That's also part of the meta
conversation.
And it happens in
the greetings
and addressing
people is a very
simple example.
At every level, whatever
phenomenon we talk about,
what I've just described there
actually is in place.
It's linguistic and
it's cultural.
And, we come
from the languages
and cultures that we
know, entering
into the space of an additional
language which is a world
that we don't know
and we are trying to
navigate that movement.
And, as we navigate,
we are also
inviting students to stand
back from that process
and think: "Okay,
what was going on there?"
Such that they develop
this meta understanding
of what's involved
in that exchange.
I was just thinking of an
example in Indonesian,
which is the language I teach.
One of the hardest things for
students to learn in Indonesian
is the passive voice.
Oh, yes.
Because, for,
particularly English speakers,
we tend to put the
subject first.
And so there is a strong focus
on 'I' or 'we' or,
you know, the agents, the
actors. So, a lot of our
sentences are constructed with
that subject
focus.
But, and it's a bit
of a cliché, but
there is some truth to it, that
very often, in Indonesian, it'd
be the case that the object or
what is affected comes first.
And so students find it very
hard to swing
around their thinking about
who is doing what to whom.
And so you have to actually
engage in, you know, who
are the doers, who are the
those affected by the
actions and so on.
So you need to actually go to
that more abstract
level so that they can actually
begin to feel,
they actually have to
get inside that way of
thinking in order
to do the language
in an appropriate way.
Is that what they call the
'object focus'?
Object focus or passive voice,
it's called both.
Yes, it's the same. Okay.
Yes.
And to actually shift
from
'I' as the centre
to having to really
turn yourself virtually
inside out
to say, it's not me,
it's the object
that's the focus ...
That's right.
... is monumental.
And what we've tended to do is
say, "Well, this is the rule
and follow the rule and learn
the rule." But if you don't
have the feeling or the
insight into, you know,
the relationship of
objects and actions and so on,
if you don't have that world
view, really, then
you can learn the grammar all
you like, but you'll never
actually be able to generate it
in a sort of a natural sense.
And that cultural dimension
that this way
of being in
relation to another
is
as much cultural
as it is linguistic.
And we tended to highlight
the linguistic, not
the cultural.
Now, as Michelle says, you can
teach that as a rule,
which is what we've done,
but there's more to it than
that. And that's why we're
saying that, with
the kind
of paradigm that we're in now,
the students need
to be performers,
users of the language,
but also stand back
and become analysers
of the language.
You know, if the student
did
not quite understand
the object focus construction
and began, you know, lunged
forth with the 'I',
how would that be received
by an Indonesian person?
So, we've been good at
grammatical analysis
in language learning.
We've actually also been good
at the analysis
of ideas in text,
but we're not as ...
we
haven't foregrounded as
strongly, this notion
of, what are the consequences
in cultural terms
if you actually
use one construction
rather than another?
Teaching in some or one
of my schools with different
students in a multicultural
context has been really good.
I'm a teacher Indonesian and I
have students that speak Hindi
and other Southeast Asian
languages. And Sanskrit is
something that kind of leads
through to other languages, and
they've been able to discover
words and understand languages
from their own perspectives and bring
their own languages into the classroom.
Fabulous!
More of it is all that we
can say.
Now, of course, I want to
be very clear, it's not as
though you're not still
teaching Indonesian.
Indonesian is prime.
And yes, English is
all around your Indonesian
classroom.
But being attentive
to those languages,
and just a sentence
to say, "and how does that
happen in Hindi?"
opens up that conversation.
It's not
stopping what we do in
Indonesian, but it is showing
and being open to all
the rest.
Any other manifestations
of how you yourselves
are dealing with this kind of
diversity?
But often I'm really
enjoying at the moment of
discussing with
kids the origin
of the English language
in the context of the
Chinese language
and the philosophic backgrounds
of how in Latin and in
Chinese the concept
of the universe and unity
and one.
And you ask the kids, "how many
words do you know of that
have 'uni' in them?" and
that brings in a total
different discussion.
I found the reflection
of an ethnic schools
teacher on Saturday when we
were running a conference for
ethnic schools, and she was
a Greek teacher, and she said,
"Angela, how many words
in the English language
come from Greek?
At least 50 per cent.
And the other 50 percent come
from Latin." She said, "That's
what I'm teaching my students."
And it's a little bit connected
to the example that we have
here of etymologies and
whatever.
Students find
some of that
kind of information
and reflection absolutely
fascinating.
And those are two
really strong examples.
If we had time to
rush across the whole room,
we would find many,
many more.
That's exactly what we're
talking about here.
We also have to think
that each one of us
is also situated
in our own language and
culture.
I cannot stop
thinking in French,
in German, in Italian
as I speak English.
My whole world,
my stance,
my reality
is punctuated, is
influenced, is
enmeshed with all
of those languages - in
everything that we do, in
everything that I do, no matter
which one I happen to be
speaking.
And so we, ourselves,
as teachers, are
situated.
Every single one of
our students is
situated in his
or her language
and culture, and
that language and culture,
or those languages and
cultures, provide
us with our
cultural home.
We are at home in
those languages.
And so, coupled
with the languages that we
bring, is all of the
trajectory of our own
experiences
over a long period of time.
That's also enmeshed,
it's embodied in us.
That's who we are as
language teachers.
That's how we present
ourselves to our students.
Our affiliations, our
associations with
particular languages and
cultures are precisely
what we can't help but
communicate to our students.
And so there's an invitation
here for a reflective moment
as we think globally,
to also come
very, very personal
to yourself
and say, "What's my
personal stance?
How much of me
and my linguistic and cultural
repertoire do I share
with my students?
How does it come in to
my teaching?"