OPOSICIONES DE PRIMARIA. INGLS. CURSO 2006/2007.

FERNANDO YARZA GUMIEL

TEMA 1

La lengua como comunicacin: lenguaje oral y lenguaje escrito. Factores que definen
una situacin comunicativa: emisor, receptor, funcionalidad y contexto

0. Introduction
1. What is communication?
2. Language and communication
2.1 Language as a linguistic system
2.2 Language as doing things: The functional perspective
2.3 Language as self-expression
2.4 Language as culture and ideology
3. Spoken and written language
3.1 Communicative language processes
3.1.1

Planning

3.1.2

Execution

3.2. Differences between written and spoken discourse

4. Conclusions

0. Introduction
Current pedagogic approaches to modern foreign languages (MFL) teaching
focus on communicative competence, which simply means to equip the learner with the
knowledge, skills and interpersonal strategies they need effectively to be able to
communicate with speakers of the language in question.
Many different perspectives on the nature of language, a complex phenomenon
as Cunningsworth (1995) comments, can be found both in the theoretical literature and
in the coursebooks and materials we use. These perspectives may in certain cases be
stated explicitly, while in others they may remain implicit. In either case, however, they
are present and influence how the language is presented to students and which aspects
of it are selected for study.
On the other hand, communication has become a buzz word and un umbrella
term which is applied to almost any approach to MFL teaching and learning nowadays.
That is why it is important to be clear about its concept and implications.

1. What is communication?
Canale (1983) understands communication to have the following characteristics: it

is a form of social interaction, and is therefore normally acquired and used in

social interaction;

involves a high degree of unpredictability and creativity in form and

message;

takes place in discourse and sociocultural contexts which provide constraints

on appropriate language use and also clues as to correct interpretations of
utterances;

is carried out under limiting psychological and other conditions such as

memory constraints, fatigue and distractions;

always has a purpose (for example, to establish social relations, to persuade,

or to promise);

involves authentic, as opposed to textbook-contrived language; and

is judged as successful or not on the basis of actual outcomes. (For example,

communication could be judged successful in the case of a non-native
English speaker who was trying to find the train station in Toronto, uttered
2

How to go train to a passer-by, and was given directions to the train

station).
He goes on to say that communication involves the exchange and negotiation of
information between at least two individuals through the use of verbal and non-verbal
symbols, oral and written / visual modes, and production and comprehension processes.
Information is assumed to consist of conceptual, socio-cultural, affective and other
content. Furthermore, such information is never permanently worked out nor fixed but it
is constantly changing and qualified by such factors as further information, context of
communication, choice of language forms, and non-verbal behaviour.
In Halls opinion (2001), for real communication to take place, there are three
conditions

We must have something that we want to communicate.

We must have someone to communicate with.

We must have some interest in the outcome of the communication

2. Language and communication

There are rules of use without which the rules of grammar would be useless,
wrote the sociolinguist D. Hymes in 1972. This marks a before and an after in language
teaching1 . Up to then, language had been seen as made up of phonology, grammar and
vocabulary, analysed

as separate entities, without much attention being paid to the

appropriate use of the language in real everyday situations. That is one of the reasons
why the methods used produced grammatically competent students but only too often
communicatively incompetent ones.
The growth of the communicative approach in the 1970s emphasised that language
is a tool for achieving communicative goals, and not simply a linguistic system in its
own right. At the same time, language is a system, and mastering this system (or parts
of it at least) is a meaningful form of communication. A coherent approach to language
teaching therefore calls for choices to be made about all these aspects. That is why this
section centres around four main visions of the nature of language as proposed by Tudor
(2001), all of them having to do with language as communication2 :

1
2

language as a linguistic system;

language from a functional perspective:

Vid Topic 13
Vid Topic 6

language as self-expression; and

language as culture and ideology

Other perspectives exist, and this section does not claim to provide a
comprehensive overview of all theories of language, but simply to examine some of the
more frequent ways of seeing language which teachers are likely to encounter in the
daily practice of teaching.

2.1

Language as a linguistic system

The language system comprises three main elements: phonology, vocabulary and
grammar. They are part of linguistic competences, which is one of the components of
communicative language competence. Following the Common European Framework
of Reference for Languages, published by the Council of Europe in 2001, they include
lexical, phonological, syntactical knowledge and skills and other dimensions of
language as system, independently of the sociolinguistic value of its variations and the
pragmatic function of its realisations. This component relates not only to the range and
quality of knowledge (e.g. in terms of phonetic distinctions made or the extent and
precision of vocabulary) but also to cognitive organisation and the way this knowledge
is stored (e.g. the various associative networks in which the speaker places a lexical
item) and to its accessibility (activation, recall and availability). Knowledge may be
conscious and readily expressible or may not (e.g. once again in relation to mastery of a
phonetic system). Its organisation and accessibility will vary from one individual to
another and vary also within the same individual (e.g. for a plurilingual person
depending on the varieties inherent in his or her plurilingual competence). It can also be
held that the cognitive organisation of vocabulary and the storing of expressions, etc.
depend, amongst other things, on the cultural features of the community or communities
in which the individual has been socialised and where his or her learning has occurred.

2.2

Language as doing things: The functional perspective

The question Why do we use language? seems hardly to require an answer.

But, as is often the way with linguistic questions, our everyday familiarity with speech
and writing can make it difficult to appreciate the complexity of the skills we have
learned. This is particularly so when we try to define the range of functions to which
4

language can be put. Language scholars have identified many functions (macrofunctions) to which language can be put. Thus

1. Bhler (1934) distinguishes between

(a)

the symptom function, i.e. information pertaining to the speaker;

(b)

the symbol function, i.e. information pertaining to the world;

(c)

the signal function, i.e. information pertaining to the hearer.

2. Jakobson (1960) emphasizes different aspects of the speech event:

ASPECT:

FUNCTION:

addresser

emotive, expressive, affective

addressee

conative

context

referential, cognitive, denotative

message

poetic

contact

phatic, interaction management

code

metalinguistic

He filled out this model as follows:

The addresser sends a message to the addressee. To be operative the message
requires a context referred to, seizable by the addressee, and either verbal or capable
of being verbalized; a code fully, or at least partially, common to the addresser and
addressee, enabling both of them to enter and stay in communication.

3. Habermas (1976) in turn conceives of the

(a)

representative function as connected with the world;

(b)

expressive function as connected with the own world of the speaker;

(c)

interactive

function

connected

with

the

shared

world

of

the

communicants.

4. Halliday (1978) stresses three semantic functions:

(a)

the ideational function concerned with the expression of experience; to

transmit information between members of societies
5

(b)

the interpersonal function concerned with the regulation of social

relations; to establish, maintain and specify relations between members
of societies

(c)

the textual function concerned with structuring the act of speech; to

provide texture, the organization of discourse as relevant to the situation

The definition of the functions of language is elaborated at various points in Hallidays

writings. Thus, in a study of a child learning his mother tongue, he used a framework of
seven initial functions:

(a)

Instrumental (I want): satisfying material needs

(b)

Regulatory (do as I tell you): controlling the behaviour of others

(c)

Interactional (me and you): getting along with other people

(d)

Personal (here I come): identifying and expressing the self

(e)

Heuristic (tell me why): exploring the world around and inside one

(f)

Imaginative (lets pretend): creating a world of ones own

(g)

Informative (Ive got something to tell you): communicating new

information.

These are arranged in the order in which they appeared from 9 months onwards, before
the child had a recognizable linguistic system. Halliday speaks of there being several
meanings in each function. Learning the mother tongue is interpreted as progressive
mastery of a number of basic functions of language and the building up of a meaning
potential in respect of each.

5. Hymes (1962), following Jakobson, 1960) proposes seven broad types of functions
which language in use serves:

(a)

expressive / emotive

(b)

directive / conative / persuasive

(c)

poetic

(d)

contact (physical or psychological)

(e)

metalinguistic (focusing on meaning)

(f)

referential
6

(g)

contextual / situational

He argues that these seven functions correspond, in general terms, to various

factors to which speakers attend in speech situations. Appropriate language may depend
on different combinations of:

(a)

sender

(b)

receiver

(c)

message form

(d)

channel (e.g. speech versus writing)

(e)

code (e.g. dialect, language or jargon)

(f)

topic

(g)

setting or situation

Generalising over speech events, he abstracts the roles of addressor (sender)

and addressee (receiver). The addressor is the speaker or writer who produces the
utterance. The addressee is the hearer or reader who is the recipient of the utterance.
Knowledge of the addressor in a given communicative event makes it possible for the
analyst to imagine what that particular person is going to say. Knowledge of his
addressee constrains the analysts expectations even further. Thus, if you know that the
speaker is the prime minister or the departmental secretary or your family doctor or your
mother, and you know that the speaker is speaking to a colleague or his bank manager
or a small child, you will have different expectations of the sort of language which will
be produced, both with respect to form and to content. If you know, further, what is
being talked about, Hymes category of topic, your expectations will be further
constrained. If then you have information about the setting, both in terms of where the
event is situated in place and time, and in terms of the physical relations of the
interactants with respect to posture and gesture and facial expression, your expectations
will be still further limited.
The remaining features of context which Hymes discusses (in 1964) include
large-scale features like channel (how is contact between the participants in the event
being maintained by speech, writing, signing), code (what language, or dialect, or
style of language is being used), message-form (what form is intended chat, debate,
sermon, fairy-tale, etc.) and event (the nature of the communicative event within which
7

a genre may be embedded thus a sermon or prayer may be part of the larger event, a
church service). In later recensions Hymes adds other features, for example key (which
involves evaluation was it a good sermon, a pathetic explanation, etc.), and purpose
(what did the participants intend should come about as a result of the communicative
event.
Hymes theory of communicative competence (1972) played an important role
in introducing a new perspective on language into reflection on language teaching.
Hymes situates language in its social context as the medium by which members of a
speech community express concepts, perceptions, and values which have significance to
them as members of this community. Language, then, can only be understood within the
framework of the meaning structures of the relevant speech community, and the study
of language therefore needs to operate within a sociological and sociocultural
framework. This implies that the teaching of language needs to accommodate this
dimension of meaning and enable learners to operate effectively within the relevant
speech community. According to Hymes the rules of appropriacy linking forms to
contextual features were not simply to be grafted on to grammatical competence, but
were to be acquired simultaneously with it.
This perspective on language underpinned work on notional / functional
syllabuses (Wilkins, 1976; Finocchiaro and Brumfit, 1983) and the communicative
approach to language teaching (Widdowson, 1978). As a result of this line of reflection,
language came to be seen as social action and the social or functional uses which
learners were to make of the language became the starting point for the development of
learning programmes. Communicative language teaching (CLT) arose out of this
perspective on language and, on this basis, set out to develop an approach to teaching
whose goal was to enable students to use the language in one or more socially defined
contexts. In this view, language learners are social actors whose learning goals are
defined by the contexts in which they will be required to use the language and the
messages they will wish to convey in these contexts.
Wilkins (1976) proposed a notional or semantic approach which would reflect
the behavioural needs of learners, would take the communicative facts of language into
account from the beginning, without losing sight of grammatical and situational factors,
and would attempt to set out what the learner might want to do and to say through
language.

In order to set out what people might want to do and to say through language,
Wilkins drew upon Austins (1962) speech act theory. This suggested that in addition to
conceptual meaning all utterances have an illocutionary value which embodies the
speakers intention. Sometimes we express our intention directly, (for example, I
congratulate you), but more often, as Searle (1975) pointed out, we tend to do this
indirectly, for example, when we use a question about someones ability (Can you
speak a little louder) to serve as a request for action. This highlights the fact that we do
not use an interrogative form, for example, uniquely to ask for information, or a
declarative form simply for giving information. There is no simple one-to-one
relationship between particular forms and the illocutionary values that should be
attached to them. Values must be interpreted in the light of the context in which the
forms occur.
Pragmatic competences, another component of communicative competence,
refer to this knowledge and skills. As defined by the Council of Europe (2001), they are
concerned with the functional use of linguistic resources (production of language
functions, speech acts), drawing on scenarios or scripts of interactional exchanges. It
also concerns the mastery of discourse, cohesion and coherence, the identification of
text types and forms, irony, and parody. For this component even more than the
linguistic component, it is hardly necessary to stress the major impact of interactions
and cultural environments in which such abilities are constructed.

2.3

Language as self-expression

The functional perspective on language discussed in the last section emphasises

the role of language as a means of achieving pragmatic goals, e.g. reading specialised
material in the target language, performing professional or academic tasks, settling in to
another country, and so on. Language is not, however, used for only this purpose. It is
also the medium by which we build up personal relationships, express our emotions and
aspirations, end explore our interests. In other words, language is not simply a tool for
achieving specific transactional goals, it is also a means of self-expression.
A functional perspective on language portrays the learner primarily as a social
actor and language as a form of social action, which is certainly a valid perspective.
Language learners are also, however, individuals in the personal and affective sense of

the term, which means that language is also a means of personal and affective
expression.
This casts a different light on language and also, on the nature and goals of
language teaching. A view of language as a linguistic system says that the goal of
language teaching is to help students learn this system. A functional view of language
says that the goals of language teaching are defined by what the learner has to do in the
language. When language is viewed as self-expression, learning goals are defined by
what the learner wishes to express, and this means that each learner has his or her own
unique and personal learning agenda. As a consequence, this perspective on language
sets objectives which are internal to learners as individuals and relates to the concerns
and aspirations of learners as thinking and affective beings. Language in this framework
of ideas is a means of personal expression and a tool for personal fulfilment. Selfexpression is a fundamental component of language use and the opening up of a
course to at least some degree of self-expression can help learners find a sense of
personal meaningfulness in their language study. Or, to express this negatively, the
absence of any scope for self-expression can make students perceive a course as being
something out there and indifferent to them and to their individual concerns, and thus
make it difficult for them to relate to it in a personally meaningful manner.
Moon (2000) summarises some of the important abilities which our pupils are
able to make use of in learning a foreign language and which indicate the active nature
of their learning: using language creatively, going for meaning, using chunks of
language, having fun, joining in the action, talking their heads off, feeling at home.
Children will only be able to make use of these abilities if we create the right kind of
learning environment in which they can draw on them. This means we need to consider
how to:

create a real need and desire to use English

provide sufficient time for English

provide exposure to varied and meaningful input with a focus on communication

provide opportunities for children to experiment with their new language

provide plenty of opportunities to practise and use the language in different

contexts

create a friendly atmosphere in which children can take risks and enjoy their
learning

10

2.4

provide feedback on learning

help children notice the underlying pattern in language

Language as culture and ideology

The concept of a speech community reminds us that a language is not simply a

linguistic system, but the means of expression and communication used by a community
of human beings. For this reason, a language will embody and express aspects of the
culture and world view of its speakers. Full communicative competence in a language
therefore entails an understanding of and ability to interact with the culture and world
view of the speakers of this language. This is to what sociolinguistic competences
refer to. Mentioning again the definition given by the Council of Europe, they refer to
the sociocultural conditions of language use. Through its sensitivity to social
conventions (rules of politeness, norms governing relations between generations, sexes,
classes and social groups, linguistic codification of certain fundamental rituals in the
functioning

of

community),

the

sociolinguistic

component

of

communicative

competence strictly affects all language communication between representatives of

different cultures, even though participants may often be unaware of its influence.
There are aspects of language use which have a sociocultural dimension and
which play an important role in being able to function effectively in the language. In the
daily practice of teaching, this affects goal-setting and evaluation criteria, as well as the
selection of study material and topic. Learning to see the world through the eyes of a
different culture may be one of the most broadly educational advantages of learning
another language: it is a very practical means of exploring otherness in terms of the
other. We can say that learning a language involves learning a new culture, too.
The cultural aspect of language manifests itself on many levels. In part, it relates
to the representation of external realities. This includes the way in which a language
handles time relations, for example; this is generally referred to as the tense system. It
also involves the organisation of entities and phenomena in lexis, e.g. the same entities
may be organised differently in two languages, or one language may have terms for
phenomena which another does not seem to recognise. In addition, of course, the
cultural aspect of language manifests itself with respect to the way in which social
relations are encoded and expressed: in this respect, the language reflects aspects of

11

interpersonal interaction which are often deeply rooted in the sociocultural traditions of
the target language (TL) community.
No society is a single seamless entity made up of standard members. We
therefore have to question whether the image of the TL society we present to students is
a real, living one or something shallow and stereotypical. We also need to question
whether we are presenting a balanced view of this society or rather a selective and
value-loaded vision of the way in which one group may wish to see it.
These questions are generally dealt with in curricula and published materials on
two levels. One is by the choice of a given variety of English, often on the basis of
traditional regional preferences for British, American, Australian English, etc. The other
is by means of the selection of topics and of exemplificatory material which is more or
less closely linked to the culture of the relevant variety of English. None of these
choices, however, is unmarked, and they can have a significant influence on classroom
dynamics. A sanitised and decultured presentation of the language, for example, can
make it appear so lifeless that learners may experience difficulty in relating to it as a
living medium of communication, even perhaps within the framework of practice
activities. On the other hand, a culturally biased presentation of the language can give
rise to negative affective reactions. In other words, the way in which the cultural content
of teaching materials is perceived by learners is likely to be context-specific. A given
vision of the TL or the TL community will thus interact dynamically with the attitudes
and aspirations of the learners concerned, and possibly those of the broader community
to which they belong.

3. Spoken and Written Language

3.1

Communicative language processes

To act as a speaker, writer, listener or reader, the learner must be able to carry out a
sequence of skilled actions.

To speak, the learner must be able to:

12

plan and organise a message (cognitive skills);

formulate a linguistic utterance (linguistic skills);

articulate the utterance (phonetic skills).

To write, the learner must be able to:

organise and formulate the message (cognitive and linguistic skills);

hand-write or type the text (manual skills) or otherwise transfer the text to
writing.

To listen, the learner must be able to:

perceive the utterance (auditory phonetic skills);

identify the linguistic message (linguistic skills);

understand the message (semantic skills);

interpret the message (cognitive skills).

To read, the reader must be able to:

perceive the written text (visual skills);

recognise the script (orthographic skills);

identify the message (linguistic skills);

understand the message (semantic skills);

interpret the message (cognitive skills).

The observable stages of these processes are well understood. Others events in the
central nervous system are not. The following analysis is intended only to identify
some parts of the process relevant to the development of language proficiency.

13

3.1.1 Planning

The

selection,

interrelation

and

co-ordination

of

components

of

general

and

communicative language competences to be brought to bear on the communicative

event in order to accomplish the user / learners communicative intentions.

3.1.2

Execution

Production

The production process involves two components:

The formulation component takes the output from the planning component and
assembles it into linguistic form. This involves lexical, grammatical, phonological (and
in the case of writing, orthographic) processes which are distinguishable and appear to
have some degree of independence but whose exact interrelation is not fully understood.

The articulation component organises the motor innervation of the vocal apparatus to
convert the output of the phonological processes into co-ordinated movements of the
speech organs to produce a train of speech waves constituting the spoken utterance, or
alternatively the motor innervation of the musculature of the hand to produce handwritten or typewritten text.

Reception

The receptive process involves four steps which, while they take place in linear
sequence (bottom-up), are constantly updated and reinterpreted (top-down) in the light
of real world knowledge, schematic expectations and new textual understanding in a
subconscious interactive process.

the perception of speech and writing: sound / character and word recognition;

the identification of the text, complete or partial as relevant;

the semantic and cognitive understanding of the text as a linguistic entity;

the interpretation of the message in context.

14

The skills involved include:

perceptual skills;

memory;

decoding skills;

inferencing;

predicting;

imagination;

rapid scanning;

referring back and forth.

Comprehension, especially of written texts, can be assisted by the proper use of aids,
including reference materials such as:

dictionaries (monolingual and bilingual);

thesauruses;

pronunciation dictionaries;

electronic dictionaries, grammars, spell-checkers and other aids;

reference grammars.

Interaction

The processes involved in spoken interaction differ from a simple succession of

speaking and listening activities in a number of ways:

productive and receptive processes overlap. Whilst the interlocutors utterance,

still incomplete, is being processed, the planning of the users response is
initiated on the basis of hypothesis as to its nature, meaning and interpretation.

discourse is cumulative. As an interaction proceeds, the participants converge in

their readings of a situation, develop expectations and focus on relevant issues.
These processes are reflected in the form of the utterances produced.

15

In written interaction (e.g. a correspondence by letter, fax, e-mail, etc.) the processes of
reception and production remain distinct (though electronic interaction, e.g. via the
Internet, is becoming ever closer to real time interaction). The effects of cumulative
discourse are similar to those of spoken interaction.

3.2. Differences between written and spoken discourse

The two types of discourse differ in some basic characteristics. Ur (1996)

mentions the following:

Permanence. Written discourse is fixed and stable so the reading can be done at
whatever time, speed and level of thoroughness the individual reader wishes.
Spoken text in contrast is fleeting, and moves on in real time. The listener
though he or she may occasionally interrupt to request clarification must in
general follow what is said at the speed set by the speaker.

Explicitness. The written text is explicit; it has to make clear the context and all
references. In speech, however, the real-time situation and knowledge shared
between speaker and listener means that some information can be assumed and
need not be made explicit.

Density. The content is presented much more densely in writing. In speech, the
information is diluted and conveyed through many more words: there are a lot
of repetitions, glosses, fillers, producing a text that is noticeably longer and
with more redundant passages.

Detachment .The writing of a text is detached in time and space from its reading;
the writer normally works alone, and may not be acquainted with his or her
readers. Speaking usually takes place in immediate interaction with known
listeners, with the availability of immediate feedback.

Organization. A written text is usually organized and carefully formulated, since

its composer has time and opportunity to edit it before making it available for
reading. A speaker is improvising as he or she speaks: ongoing alterations, in the
shape of glosses, self-corrections and so on produce an apparently disorganized
'stream of-consciousness' kind of discourse. Thus a written text conforms more
to conventional rules of grammar, and its vocabulary is more precise and formal.

16

Slowness of production, speed of reception. Writing is much slower than

speaking. On the other hand, we can usually read a piece of text and understand
it much faster than we can take in the same text if we listen while someone reads
it aloud to us.

Standard language. Writing normally uses a generally acceptable standard

variety of the language, whereas speech may sometimes be in a regional or other
limited-context dialect. In some languages (Chinese, for example), the various
spoken dialects may even be mutually incomprehensible, while the written
language is universally understood.

A learnt skill. Most people acquire the spoken language (at least of their own
mother tongue) intuitively, whereas the written form is in most cases
deliberately taught and learned.

Sheer amount and importance Spoken texts are far longer, normally (in the
sense that they contain more words), than a representation of the same
information in writing; this is largely because of the phenomenon called
'redundancy'. It is also true to say that most people speak far more than they
write. Associated with this point is a third: that speech is more important for
survival and effective functioning in society than writing is.

She then lists some interesting features of spoken language:

Brevity of chunks. It is usually broken into short chunks. In a conversation,

for example, people take turns to speak, usually in short turns of a few
seconds each.

Pronunciation. The pronunciation of words is often slurred, and noticeably

different from the phonological representation given in a dictionary. There
are obvious examples such as cant, in English for cannot, which have
made their way even into the written language. Less obvious examples
include such changes as orright for all right or Shwe go? for Shall we
go?

Vocabulary. The vocabulary is often colloquial; in English you might, for

example, use guy where in writing you would use man, or kid for
child.

17

Grammar. Informal speech tends to be somewhat ungrammatical: utterances

do not usually divide neatly into sentences; a grammatical structure may
change in mid-utterance; unfinished clauses are common.

Noise. There will be a certain amount of noise: bits of the discourse that
are unintelligible to the hearer, and therefore as far as he or she is concerned
are meaningless noise. This may be because the words are not said clearly,
or not known to the hearer, or because the hearer is not attending any
number of reasons. We usually comprehend somewhat less than 100 per cent
of what is said to us, making up for the deficit by guessing the missing items
or simply ignoring them and gathering what we can from the rest.

Redundancy. The speaker normally says a good deal more than is strictly
necessary for the conveying of the message. Redundancy includes such
things as repetition, paraphrase, glossing with utterances in parenthesis, selfcorrection, the use of fillers such as I mean, well, er. This to some extent
compensates for the gaps created by noise.

Non-repetition. The discourse will not be repeated verbatim; normally it is

heard only once, though this may be compensated for by the redundancy of
the discourse, and by the possibility of requesting repetition or explanation.

4. Conclusions
Following Sharpes ideas (2001), because in the early and middle years of schooling
children are still in the process of learning about their world, and learning the language
through which that world can be described and talked about, all good MFL lessons at
the primary stage of education need to provide the pupil with clear and appropriate
language through which what is being learned can be expressed. It has long been a sine
qua none of primary teaching that it is better for the teacher to structure lessons in such
a way that children use the written and spoken language for real purposes rather than
simply to meet the limited demands of arid, decontextualized exercises. At the same
time it is also recognized that children need opportunities to practise skills such as
handwriting, careful pronunciation and so forth, and getting the balance right is a
professional judgement with which good primary teachers are very familiar.

18

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brown, G. and G. Yule. 1983. Discourse analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press

Canale, M. 1983. From communicative competence to communicative language

pedagogy. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (eds.) Language and Communication.
London: Longman

Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching,

assessment. 2001. Council of Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Crystal, D. 1997. the Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Cunningsworth, A. 1995. Choosing your Coursebook. Oxford: Heinemann

Hall, D. R. 2001. Materials production: theory and practice. In D. R. Hall and A.

Hewings (eds.) Innovation in English Language Teaching. London: Routledge

Halliday, M. a. K. 1978. Language as Social Semiotic. London: Arnold

Hymes, D. H. 1972. On Communicative Competence. In J. B. Pride and J. Holmes

(eds.) Sociolinguistics. London: Penguin

Kreckel, M. 1981. Communicative acts and shared knowledge in natural discourse.

London: Academic Press

Moon, J. 2000. Children Learning English. Oxford: Macmillan Heinemann

Sharpe, K. 2001. Modern Foreign Languages in the Primary School. London: Kogan
Page

Stubbs, M. 1983. Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell

19

Tudor, I. 2001. The Dynamics of the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press

Ur, P. 1996. A Course in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

20