2.

3 The interactional view of language

This theory of language was developed around the 1980s and is derived from
Vygotsky’s theory of education (see Extra Reading for more on Vygotsky’s theory
and sociocultural theories). The interactional view sees language as a tool for
communication, primarily for interaction between people. Language is thus a
vehicle for establishing and maintaining relationships and performing social
transactions.

Interactional theories focus on the “pattern of moves, acts, negotiation, and

interaction found in conversational exchanges” (Richards & Rodgers, 2001:21) and
learning is seen as involving both social and cognitive processes. Personality,
motivation, learning styles and attitudes towards the target language and users of
the target language may all play a role in a learner’s openness and willingness to
take risks. This view of language draws on research from areas such as
interactional analysis, conversational analysis and ethnomethodology.

According to sociocultural theories, students must be provided with:

 Comprehensible input
 Opportunities to negotiate meaning, with assistance from the teacher and one
another
 Opportunities to interact communicatively with one another
 Conversations and tasks that are meaningful
 A non-threatening environment that encourages self-expression.

In terms of language learning, it is believed that students achieve mastery in using

a language when their attention is focused on conveying and receiving authentic
messages, i.e. messages that contain information of interest to both speaker
and listener. Thus, language entails much more than grammatical
(linguistic) competence and it is easy to see how the notion of communicative
competence developed (see below). Learners not only need to know the
grammar and vocabulary of the language, but equally importantly they need to
know the rules for using them in a whole range of communicative contexts.

Communicative competence
Communicative competence is defined as the ability to interpret and enact
appropriate social behaviours, and it requires the active involvement of the learner
in the production of the target language (Canale and Swain 1980). Such a notion
encompasses a wide range of abilities:

1. Linguistic competence - knowledge of grammar and vocabulary; knowing

how to use language for a range of different purposes and functions.
2. Sociolinguistic competence - the ability to say the appropriate thing in a
certain social situation; knowing how to vary use of language according to the
setting and the participants (e.g. when to use formal/informal speech and
the norms for written communication).
3. Discourse competence - the ability to start, enter, contribute to, and end a
conversation, and the ability to do this in a consistent and coherent manner
(e.g. how to signal the end of a conversation when you bump into someone
in the street, how to begin a phone conversation etc.).
4. Strategic competence - the ability to communicate effectively and repair
problems caused by communication breakdowns; knowing how to maintain
communication despite limitations in language knowledge (e.g. by
using different strategies to get one’s meaning across – mime, gesture,
facial expression).

Several new syllabus types were proposed during the 80s and 90s that were
related to both functional and interactional views of language. Amongst these were:

5. Skills-based syllabus
This focuses on the four skills of reading, writing, listening, and speaking, and
breaks each skill down into its component microskills. For example, the skill of
listening might be further described in terms of the following microskills:

 Recognising key words in conversations

 Recognising the topic of a conversation
 Recognising speakers’ attitudes toward a topic
 Identifying key information in a passage etc.

However, advocates of CLT stressed an integrated-skills approach to the teaching

of the skills. Since in real life the skills often occur together, it was argued they
should also be linked in teaching.

1. Task-based syllabus
Task-based instruction (TBI) developed from focusing on classroom processes
and interaction. Rather than employ a conventional syllabus, particularly a
grammar-based one, advocates of TBI argue that grammar and other dimensions
of communicative competence can be developed as a by-product of engaging
learners in interactive tasks. Proponents of TBI believe that a syllabus can be
arranged around the careful sequencing of pedagogical and real-world tasks.
See Extra Reading for more information about TBI, as proposed by Prabhu (1987)
and Willis (1996). See also below in Part 4 for more information about
communicative Tasks

2. Content-based syllabus
Content-based instruction (CBI) also focuses on classroom processes and sees
“content” as being the driving force of classroom activities. CBI is defined as “the
teaching of content or information in the target language with little or no explicit
effort to teach the language itself separately from the content being taught”. A
relatively new development of this type of instruction is CLIL (content and language
integrated learning) which is being increasingly adopted in schools, based on
intercurricular subjects being taught through the medium of English. (See Module 9
– CLIL teaching for more information).

However, none of the three proposed syllabuses above have been widely adopted
into mainstream textbooks and there is still relatively little research to prove that
any of these approaches are uniformly effective. The search for an alternative to a
grammar-based syllabus continues, and indeed many textbooks to this day, while
ostensibly organised around topics, notions, or content, tend to have a strong
grammar focus.