Applying linguistics in English

language teacher training for

speakers of other languages
Julian Edge

Knowledge about language and language learning ought to form a bridge

between trainee roles as language learner and language teacher, The challenge is to develop language study in such a way that it supports both
language learning and decision-making
in language teaching, while also
making accessible to teachers an expanding field of study into which they
can travel just as far as they decide to. This article describes a framework
which has been used for the development
of such procedures.

Introduction

Three

roles

for EFL
teachers

Most of all, this article is addressed

to colleagues
in EFL/ESL
teacher
training
who have had unhappy
experiences
either as trainees or trainers
with the Linguistics
or Applied
Linguistics
components
of pre-service
training courses. In my experience,
the waste involved in these courses can
be prodigious:
the wasted time and effort of the lecturers,
who complain
of
the apathy or stupidity
of their students;
the wasted time and effort of the
students,
who complain
of the irrelevance
and jargonized
complexity
of the
subject, as well as of the indifference
to language teaching of their lecturers.
Worst of all is the waste of potential -the
continuing
alienation
of generations of language
teachers
from an area of knowledge
which should be a
source of constant
support
to them.
My position on this may seem over-conservative
in some circles (Corder
1986), but I want to argue that knowledge
about language
and language
learning still has a central role to play in English language
teacher training
for speakers
of other languages.
What is needed is the development
of a
wealth of methodological
procedures
in which the resolution
of learning
and teaching
problems
can be shown to draw on the growing
lingustic
knowledge
and skills of the trainees. These procedures
need to be developed
in the institutions
where training takes place, by the people involved, as the
balance to be found may well differ in different instances.
My aim here is to
present
an integrative
framework
which
I have used towards
these
purposes.
EFL teachers in their own country can expect to be called upon to take on a
variety of social roles which relate to their language ability. They might, for
example,
be asked to show foreign visitors around their school, to help a
colleague
with an application
overseas,
or to explain to a neighbour
the
instructions
for installing
a new washing
machine.
In simple terms, the
teacher will have to be able to function
socially as a user of English.
In equally
simple terms,
trainees
must learn how to focus learners
ELT Journal

Volume 42/1 January

1988

Oxford University Press 1988

articles

welcome

attention
on to specific features of English
form and function,
how to model
the language,
motivate and organize its practice and its use, and explain its
workings.
In other words, they must become teachers of the language,
with a
full range of TEFL
procedures
at their command,
and the theoretical
knowledge
necessary
to make decisions
about the use of those procedures.
As far as the above characteristics
are concerned,
the TEFL trainee is
like any other tertiary
level student
of English
for whom professional
purposes
can be specified. The trainee is, however, unique among tertiary
students,
in that all other students
can define their goals in terms of ends
and objectives
towards
which the language
plays only an enabling
role.
Doctors, for example,
may use English in order to diagnose
their patients
illnesses and to prescribe
treatment;
engineers
may use English in order to
build bridges. Both groups may need to speak English, but neither needs to
speak about English. TEFL trainees, however, need in addition to be able to
talk about the language itself, to analyse it, to understand
how it works and
to make judgements
about acceptability
in doubtful cases. In simple terms,
again, they need to be able to function
as analysts of the language.
Three

components of
TEFL courses

Applied linguistics
and the TEFL trainee

10

We have, then, three major roles for the trainee to take on: language
user,
language analyst, and language teacher. With reference to these three roles
respectively,
we can suggest
three major course components
for TEFL
training
courses:
language
improvement,
applied
linguistics,
and
methodology.
All three components
and the multiple interactions
between
them deserve comment,
but my purpose in this article is to concentrate
on
the specifically
integrative
role of applied
linguistics.
This is the course
component
which I have related directly to the trainee role unique to the
TEFL trainee, the role of language
analyst.
I am using the term applied linguistics to refer to two types of language study.
Firstly, there is the type of work that aims to improve
the trainees
own
command
and use of English,
for example,
explicit
grammar
study in
support
of weaknesses
diagnosed
in written work. It is usually considered
that some kind of explicit study of language,
suitably pedagogically
organized, can be useful for intermediate
and advanced
language learners
(Allen
1973, Bolitho and Tomlinson
1980, Shepherd
et al. 1984, Rinvolucri
1985).
Of course, this is not to suggest that every learner will have a cognitive/
grammatical
learning style. But it is true that, specifically
in the case of the
TEFL trainee, the experience
of language
learning and language
improvement must proceed in parallel with a growing conscious
awareness
of how
the language
is structured
and organized.
Explicit
work on language
awareness
will directly support the learning styles of some trainees. Where
this is not the case, trainees will have an extra but necessary
learning load.
The fact that individual
trainees benefit differently
from this type of work
must become a topic of discussion
in method-awareness
sessions which I do
not have the space to go into here. Further, this awareness-raising
aspect of
language
study and the discussion
of it provides
the experiential
base for
the learning
of descriptive
terminology
which trainees
will need in their
more advanced
studies
and professional
lives. Beyond
the objective
of
relating
specific
areas of language
description
to specific
problems
of
language
use, this work aims to give trainees
practice
in the skills of
grammar
reference,
interpretation,
and application.
The second type of work that I subsume
under the head applied linguistics
is the explicit study of language
and language learning
that is necessary
to
Julian

Edge

articles

welcome

support
the making
of decisions
as a language
teacher.
For example,
trainees
need to be able to recognize,
for purposes
of presenting
new
language items in dialogue, when the same language structure
is being used
to realize different speech functions;
they need to understand
lexical relationships
in text in order to decide which words in a reading passage to preteach; they need some information
about error analysis in order to decide
which mistakes to correct (Shaw 1979, Bolitho and Tomlinson
1980, Davis
1980, Edge 1984). The purpose of such work is not only to show particular
links between some areas of language description
and some decisions
that
have to be made in teaching,
but to establish
in principle
the way in which
teaching
decisions
are made, and to demonstrate
how helpful data drawn
from linguists
descriptions
can be.
This does not mean that every problem raised in the morning must have
a quick, practical answer by the afternoon.
It means that professional
issues
are consistently
referred to a theoretical
base for consideration
of evidence.
In this way, trainees
are introduced
to the process of reference
out to
theory as a mode of operation.
The amount of linguistic
theory that can be
covered in any course is limited,
and application
can be made only to a
limited number
of problems.
The time constraints
operate equally whichever orientation
is taken, of course, but teachers
will continually
come up
against
language
or methodological
problems
in their careers,
and the
possibility
for theoretical
study extends infinitely.
For this reason, it seems
preferable
to orient ones mode of operation
towards
reference
out to
theory, rather than application
in to practice.
According
to Olsen (1977/
79/87), such choices may well be crucial:

Means are not optional

routes to the same goal; they are optimal routes
to different goals. . . . Hence, the choice of a means of instruction,
like the
choice of a content,
must be based upon a consideration
of its social and
personal
consequences.

The essential
point is to prepare
the way for future, independent
professional behaviour.
This type of work is more advanced
than the first aspect of
the applied
linguistics
component
which I describe,
the former activities
playing a preparatory
role (in terms of concepts,
skills, and terminology)
for the latter.
Applied linguistics,
then, as I am using the term, is to be understood
as
that explicit study of language
and language
learning which facilitates,
on
the one hand, language
learning
for the user and, on the other hand,
pedagogical
decisions
for the teacher. The function of the applied linguistics component
is to support
the other two components.
The content and
methodology
of the applied linguistics
component
is defined by reference to
the other two. One is not attempting
here to teach vast areas of linguistic
knowledge,
but rather awareness
of when linguistic
knowledge
is what is
needed, and the ability to locate, interpret,
and apply that knowledge.
In
this sense, linguistics
in the context of TEFL training
should be regarded
less as a content
area than as a skill area; trainees
awareness
and knowledge of the content of linguistics
develop as they become more skilled in the
location,
interpretation,
and application
of the information
that
is
available.
Applying linguistics in teacher training

11

articles

welcome

Three principles of
course design

Underlying
the approach
so far described
are three principles.
First, the
principle
of specifying
a TEFL training programme
in terms of three major
components.
Second,
the principle
of interaction
between
the three components.
And third, the principle
of their integration throughout
the programme.
Let us look briefly
at an example
of a four-year
training
programme.
The overall emphasis
of the programme
moves from language
improvement
to methodology.
The crude visual summary
of this given in
Figure 1 exaggerates
the distinction
between Years 1 and 2 and Years 3 and
4. The shift should be seen as a gradual development.
That is to say, in the
early stages of the programme
the function
of applied
linguistics
is to
provide
support
for the language
improvement
component.
At the same
time, data from the language improvement
component
are used to build up
a familiarity
with the concepts
and terminology
of language
description.
Similarly,
the language
improvement
component
provides
almost all the
data necessary
for an introduction
to the study of TEFL methods,
extrapolated from the trainees
experiences
as learners.
The coherence
of the
applied linguistics
and methodology
components
is provided
by the needs
and experiences
of the trainees as language
learners.
Roles

Components

Years 1 and 2

Years 3 and 4

Figure I: Interaction of course components

In the later stages of the programme,

the coherence
of the applied
linguistics
and language
improvement
components
is drawn mainly from
the methodology
component.
It is at this stage that methodology
is treated
as a coherent
field in its own right, drawing
on the trainees earlier observations and experiences.
Methodology
includes everything
that teachers do
which relates to learners,
as well as the reasons for doing it. In terms of the
effect on the language
improvement
component,
for example,
necessary
work will include the ability to use English not only to model and explain
English,
but also to organize
learners
and, ideally, to establish
a small
English-using
community
in the classroom.
To take an example from what
I have termed the applied linguistics
component,
teachers can help to make
spoken language
in the classroom
sound more natural if they have some
systematic
knowledge
of the ways in which intonation
functions
(for
example
Brazil et al. 1980, Sinclair and Brazil 1982).
By the end of the programme,
our aim must be to see teachers who are
able to refer to the knowledge
and skills of language study, confident of their
ability to discover what they need in support of their private, professional,
or academic
interests.
Conclusion

12

I should like to conclude this article by returning

to my title and saying that
I understand
applying
linguistics,
in the context of TEFL training,
to be a
matter of raising awareness
of the language,
by a variety of procedures,
towards the purposes
of language
learning and language
teaching.
I prefer
the active connotations
of applying to the passive ones of applied, because
Julian

Edge

articles

welcome

this emphasizes
the idea of an activity rather than a content area. It also
acknowledges
the reality that teacher trainees are mostly concerned
with
applying
the linguistic
discoveries
of others to pedagogic
problems
of their
own.
What is essential
for TEFL training purposes,
then, is the development
and sharing of methodological
procedures
which will integrate
an individuals growing language awareness
into its doubly supportive
role in TEFL
training.
This article remains theoretical,
in that I do not present any of the
procedures
which I have attempted
to develop
towards
the ends I have
described,
although
two have appeared
previously
in ELT Journal (Edge
1985, 1986). However,
if the position
which I have taken up is found
acceptable,
perhaps
others will reflect on how procedures
of their own are
compatible
with these purposes
and how other procedures
could be
evolved.
In the exchanging
of such ideas, we might hope to improve
both
our theory and our practice in the training of speakers of other languages
as
English language
teachers.
Received April 1987

References

Allen, J. P. B. 1973. Applied grammatical models in a

remedial English syllabus in S. P. Corder and E.
Roulet (eds.): Theoretical Linguistic Models in Applied
Linguistics. Brussels: AIMAC (1973).
Bolitho, R. and B. Tomlinson. 1980. Discover English.
London: Heinemann.
Brazil, D. C., R. M. Coulthard and C. M. Johns.
1980. Discourse Intonation and Language Teaching.
Harlow: Longman.
Corder, S. P. 1986. Talking shop: language teaching
and applied linguistics. ELT Journal 40/3:185-90.
Davis, R. L. (ed.) 1980. Teacher Training Techniques and
Problem Areas (RSA Conference
Report). Broadstairs: Hilderstone International.
Edge, J. 1984. Error cards: peer teaching in EFL
teacher training. System 12/2: 117-21.
Edge, J. 1985. Do TEFL articles solve problems?
ELT Journal

39/3:153-7.

Edge, J. 1986. Acquisition disappears

in adultery.
ELT Journal 40/2: 121-4.
Olsen, D. R. 1977. The languages of instruction in

R. C. Anderson, R. J. Spiro and W. E. Montague

(eds.): Schooling and the Acquisition of Knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum (1977).
Rinvolucri, M. 1985. Grammar Games. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Shaw, P. 1979. Handling a language component in a
teacher training course in S. Holden (ed.): Teacher
Training. Oxford:
Modern
English Publications
(1979).
Shepherd, J., R. Rossner and J. Taylor. 1984.Ways to
Grammar: A Modern English Practice Book. London:
Macmillan.
Sinclair, J. and D. C. Brazil. 1982. Teacher Talk.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
The author

Julian Edge is a lecturer in applied linguistics at the

University of Durham. His background
in English
language teacher training consists of four years in
Egypt, two in Singapore, three in Turkey, two years
occasional work with Namibian teachers in Britain,
and various short courses in other countries.

Applying linguistics in teacher training

13

articles

welcome