Annual Review of Applied Linguistics (1998) 18, 102-123. Printed in the USA.

Copyright ® 1998 Cambridge University Press 0267-1905/98 $9.50

TEACHING SPEAKING*

Anne Burns

INTRODUCTION

Much recent work on optimal conditions for the teaching of speaking in

second and foreign language classrooms has been grounded in educational
psycholinguistics or in cognitive and social psychology. Theoretical constructs for
language pedagogy have been drawn extensively from empirical studies, under-
pinned by the central notions of second language acquisition: communicative
competence (Canale and Swain 1980); comprehensible input (Krashen 1985),
negotiated interaction (Ellis 1990, Gass and Varonis 1994, Long 1983, Pica, et al.
1989), input processing (VanPatten and Cadierno 1993), developmental sequences
and routes of acquisition (Meisel, Clahsen and Pienemann 1981), and communi-
cation strategies (Faerch and Kasper 1983). Such constructs are widely taught in
teacher preparation programs in second and foreign language teaching and clearly
have relevance to oral language instructional practice.

It is not the intention of this paper, however, to review in any detail the
large body of literature that is available on this topic in the traditions of educational
psycholinguistics and second language acquisition. Instead, within the limitations
of space allowed for this review, three dimensions of the teaching of speaking are
considered: First, methodological issues focusing on the form/function (and
accuracy/fluency) dichotomy are reviewed and their implications for teacher and
learner interactional roles are considered; second, the nature and scope of current
teaching materials are considered with respect to the kinds of representations of
spoken interaction they portray; and third, drawing on classroom-based research
and ethnographic studies undertaken in the Australian context, the implications of
teaching speaking from a social and discourse analytical perspective are briefly
discussed.

102
 TEACHING SPEAKING 103

METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES IN THE TEACHING OF SPEAKING

Two major currents of thinking have informed contemporary debates on

the teaching of oral communication. The first current focuses upon the devel-
opment of skills for the accurate production of speech forms (phonological
patterns, lexis/vocabulary, grammatical form and structure), while the second
centers upon enhancing fluency through communicative tasks (Nunan 1989) which,
in turn, enable opportunities for developing functional language use through non-
controlled activities.

Running parallel to and interrelated with these elements is the question of

what teaching approaches and activities best support the processes involved in the
development of oral communication. Current approaches are broadly categorized
as 'direct' or 'indirect' (Richards 1990). Direct or controlled approaches are those
that include 'skill-getting' (Rivers and Temperley 1978), 'pedagogic' (Nunan
1989), 'pre-communicative' (Littlewood 1981), and 'part-skill' practice
(Littlewood 1992) where learners focus on specific elements of communicative
ability which are isolated and practiced. These activities, drills, pattern practice,
structure manipulation, and so on, serve to develop enabling skills that can be
further facilitated through 'language awareness' (Carter 1996, van Lier 1995) and
'consciousness-raising' practice (Ellis 1993, Fotos 1994, Rutherford 1987,
Rutherford and Sharwood Smith 1985). Such activities might involve analyses of
the typical structures of spoken genres, the learning of formulaic lexical phrases
and institutionalized routines (Lewis 1993, Nattinger and DeCarrico 1992),
discussions of the use of feedback devices and backchannelling in conversation,
learning activities where learners construct their own grammatical awareness
inductively, and the development of metalinguistic knowledge.

Indirect or transfer approaches, on the other hand, presuppose increased

learner autonomy with a focus on the production of more 'authentic' and functional
language use. The essential focus is on tasks mediated through language, negoti-
ation, and the sharing of information. Theoretical concepts that underpin indirect
approaches are related to 'skill-using' (Rivers and Temperley 1978), 'real-life'
(Nunan 1989), 'communicative' (Littlewood 1981), and 'whole-task' (Littlewood
1992) practice. There are a range of activities proposed in the second language
teaching literature to promote oral communication, including discussions (Ur
1981), information gaps (Yorkey 1985), project work (Fried-Booth 1986), role
plays (Ladousse 1989), simulations (Crookall and Oxford 1990), and talking
circles involving discussion of personal experiences based on narratives, anecdotes,
news personal events, and so on (Ernst 1994). These activities are typically
conducted through varieties of dyadic, small-group, and whole-class interaction
patterns (see Byrne 1987, Golebiowska 1990, Klippel 1987 for grouping
distributions in oral communication tasks). Such tasks can be utilized to enhance
learners' abilities to anticipate strategically the kinds of oral communication needs
that may arise in conversational management (cf. Bialystok 1990, Bremer, et al.
104 ANNE BURNS

1996); these tasks would include, for example, identifying the purpose of the
communication, controlling and understanding its generic shape, clarifying key
words and concepts through rephrasing or questioning strategies, initiating topics,
expressing opinions, and agreeing or disagreeing.

Proponents of these two methodological positions note that the relationship

between them is complex. Pedagogical processes pertaining to the development of
form and function—accuracy and fluency—will depend on differential contextual
factors such as learner level and proficiency, teachers' knowledge and perception
of learner need and progression, and the nature of the interactional responses
produced within the context of the task, rather than on the general application of
specific methods (cf. Pennycook 1989, Prabhu 1990, for a critique of the notion of
method). As such, these two broad approaches most effectively constitute a
conceptual map rather than a prescriptive framework, where analytical tasks are
embedded within communication tasks with a view to learners deriving
communicative goals from linguistic data (Aston 1995).

These proposals for the teaching of oral-skills forms and functions also
have implications for the differential role of the teacher in instructional encounters.
In much of the applied linguistics literature on communicative language teaching,
this area remains underexplored. An orthodoxy of communicative approaches is
the notion of learner-centeredness with corresponding assumptions of student
responsibility for learning. However, attention to Vygotskian theory (Lantolf and
Appel 1994, Vygotsky 1978), particularly the concept of the zone of proximal
development, and Bruner's related notion of scaffolding (Bruner 1983), signals the
place of more complex and dynamic shifts between teacher-centered and learner-
centered interactional processes. Such shifts are dependent on the differential
extent of input and guidance required of the teacher during form-focused or
communicative tasks respectively. Hammond (1990) provides an account of an
Australian classroom where explicit instruction, involving interactional structure,
direct input, and teacher guidance in die initial stages of gaining new knowledge of
generic and linguistic patterns, enhanced learners' autonomy and their ability to
communicate effectively during less controlled activities. Van Lier (1996)
describes a multilayered, micro to macro movement of scaffolded pedagogy within
which a dual perspective on both long- and short-term goals for learning are
constructed. Based on his own experimentation with action research, he identifies
interactional classroom elements composed of episodes (longer-term goals for
particular forms or functions of language use), sequences of action (activity
'scripts'), and interactions (moment-to-moment decision-making). These elements
are integrated in such a way as to be partly planned and partly improvised,
depending on die scrutinizing by the teacher of the learner's progress.

Given the relative paucity of classroom-based research in this area, it is

perhaps too simplistic to propose that direct and more analytically focused
activities will inevitably attract greater interactional structuring on the part of the
 TEACHING SPEAKING 105

teacher, whereas more communicatively focused activities will lead to increased

learner fluency and autonomy. Nevertheless, the kinds of differential interactional
roles adopted by teachers in the effective teaching of oral communication are likely
to be poised between teacher intervention and guidance in more complex ways than
current models of communicative methodology might suggest. More extensive
research is needed to identify the relationships between explicit instruction and
increasing learner independence and autonomy in the development of oral language
skills.

MATERIALS FOR TEACHING SPEAKING

Communicative language teaching over the last fifteen years has

emphasized the importance of 'real communication' and 'authentic' teaching
materials (cf. McDonough and Shaw 1993, Nunan 1987; 1991, Richards 1990),
and course materials focusing on oral language development have increasingly
promoted themselves as offering 'real-life communication' skills (see Seedhouse
1996 for a critique of the concept of 'genuine' classroom communication).
Examples include Speaking naturally (Tillett and Bruder 1985), Verbal strategies
for authentic communication (Wall 1987), Headway (Soars and Soars 1989), and
Atlas (Nunan 1995). However, representations of authentic spoken interaction in
teaching materials are generally hard to find, even in such ostensibly commu-
nicatively-oriented publications (Cathcart 1989, Slade and Gardner 1993), since the
majority of currently available materials draw extensively on models of grammar
which are rooted in descriptions of written English (Carter and McCarthy 1995).

In addition, studies have highlighted a number of problematic areas

involving ELT materials in functional language uses: 1) speech acts such as
refusal/denial (Rubin 1983), compliments/commiserations (Holmes and Brown
1987), and complaints (Boxer and Pickering 1995); 2) expressions of doubt and
uncertainty through epistemic devices of modality (Holmes 1988); 3) conver-
sational closings (Bardovi-Harlig, et al. 1991); and 4) politeness rules (Meier
1997). Other studies have indicated that the transference of speech acts, both in
their content and in their form, is not easily accomplished from one language to
another; such difficulties have been discussed, for example, in requests (Blum-
Kulka, Danet and Gherson 1985), apologies (Cohen and Olshtain 1981),
expressions of gratitude (Eisenstein and Bodman 1986), compliments (Wolfson
1981), invitations (Wolfson, D'Amico-Reisner and Huber 1983), and complaints
(Boxer 1993). Yet other studies demonstrate the need to focus more compre-
hensively on communication strategies in oral language teaching (Bialystok 1990,
Bongaerts and Poulisse 1989, Dornyei 1995, Dornyei and Thurrell 1991, Tarone
and Yule 1989).

Slade (1986; 1990) states that most commercially produced materials rely
on introspected versions of the (usually native speaker) writer's intuitions and thus
'deauthenticate' speech. Similarly, Wolfson (1986) has pointed out that native
106 ANNE BURNS

speakers are not necessarily good judges of the forms used in natural speech.
Consequently, many of the essential linguistic elements, forms, and strategies
through which spoken discourse is jointly constructed in natural discourse are
omitted. Because functional categories (e.g., speech acts of apologizing,
requesting etc.) or grammatical structures (e.g., use of future tense) are typically
the motivation for representations of spoken interaction in dialogues, the natural
order of spoken discourse, from meaning to form, is reversed. The situational
context of natural discourse is reduced in many ELT materials to being the vehicle
for the target function or structure. As Carthcart puts it, "The dialogues in most
current "survival" texts, even after years of so-called communicative language
teaching, still tend to be thinly veiled excuses for the presentation of a grammar
point (1989:105)."

Scripted dialogues differ in significant ways from naturalistic samples

(Carter 1997, Porter and Roberts 1981). Specific structures and functions occur
with unnatural frequency and are likely to be enunciated in accompanying listening
materials with great precision at a relatively slow and deliberate pace. Utterances
are often short and overly well-formed, while turn-taking is discrete and of
approximately equal duration, each speaker generally withholding the response
until another has completed his or her turn. Backchannelling strategies and
discourse markers are typically absent, and there is a bias towards standardized and
contextually restricted language, where colloquial expressions, or references to real
world entities and events, are rare. Excessive explicit references are made to
participants, processes, and experiences, as the contextual redundancy typical of
shared knowledge is not assumed.

Many classroom materials designed for the teaching of speaking are, at the
least, less than appropriate, and often misleading and disempowering—they fail to
provide second language speakers with depictions of conversational data or with
effective strategies for facilitating spoken communication in English. However,
calls for materials that utilize authentic spoken language data for the teaching of
speaking and listening are becoming more insistent (e.g., Carter and McCarthy
1995, Scotton and Bernstein 1988), and an increasing number of publications are
attempting to exploit natural data: Examples include Coffee break (Economou
1985), Teaching casual conversation (Slade and Norris 1986), Conversation
gambits (Keller and Warner 1988), Conversation and dialogues in action (Dornyei
and Thurrell 1992), and Practical English usage (Swan 1995). These materials
reflect the growing interest in using empirical analyses of speech behavior for the
teaching of contextually and interpersonally appropriate spoken communication.
 TEACHING SPEAKING 107

DISCOURSE ANALYSIS AND THE TEACHING OF SPEAKING

Despite the 'communicative' orientations that now widely inform language

teaching, it is paradoxical that materials and techniques for teaching the use of
spoken language still tend towards the study of decontextualized units of language
based on the grammar of written language. Yule has most recently described this
paradox:

Despite the fact that more than two decades have passed since
Henry Widdowson pointed out that 'there is a need to take
discourse into account in our teaching of language' (1972), there
continues to be a substantial mismatch between what tends to be
presented to learners as classroom experiences of the target
language and the actual use of that language as discourse outside
the classroom (1995:185).

The teaching of speaking from a discourse perspective implies taking a

pedagogical shift from regarding the constituent forms of language as primary, to
thinking about language from the perspective of larger textual units. This
proposition falls within newer, emerging directions for the teaching of spoken
interactions which foreground the analysis of naturalistic native speaker data and
the further development of spoken as well as written grammars (e.g., Carter and
McCarthy 1995, Ochs, Schegloff and Thompson 1996).

A number of discourse analytical approaches have been drawn upon in

recent Australian studies (e.g., Burns, Joyce and Gollin 1996, Gardner 1994, Slade
1996) for application to the TESOL classroom, including the following five: 1)
functional perspectives such as systemic-functional linguistics (Eggins 1994,
Halliday 1994, Martin 1992); 2) exchange structure analysis (Berry 1981, Martin
1992); 3) ethnomethodological perspectives, such as conversation analysis
(Atkinson and Heritage 1984, Goffman 1967, Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson
1974); 4) logico-philosophical perspectives, such as pragmatics and speech act
meory (Brown and Levinson 1978, Leech 1983, Levinson 1983, Schiffrin 1994,
Thomas 1983); and 5) social-semiotic perspectives, such as critical discourse
analysis (Fairclough 1989; 1995, Kress 1989; 1991, Kress and Hodge 1979). This
section describes briefly the key elements of each of these approaches and suggests
practical applications to oral language teaching.

1. Systemic functional linguistics

Systemic functional linguistics highlights both die functional uses of

language and the socially and culturally constructed nature of language; it also
emphasizes relationships between text and the register variables of field (ideational
meaning), tenor (interpersonal meaning) and mode (textual meaning) that motivate
lexicogrammatical choice and the differences between, for example, conversational
108 ANNE BURNS

and written language. Recent research suggests that, at an overall structural level,
generically analyzable 'chunks' of language within stretches of talk—narrative,
anecdote, recount, exemplar, observation—are distinguishable from the generically
unanalyzable 'chat' segments of highly interactive sequences (Slade 1996).
Typologies of talk derived from work in systemic functional linguistics can also
inform, according to learners' needs and the program type, the selection of spoken
genres for instructional purposes.

In regard to the register variable of tenor, Poynton (1985:77) identifies

three different dimensions in the social role relationships played by interactants in
spoken exchanges:

1. a social distance or intimacy dimension called CONTACT,

2. an attitudinal dimension concerned with attitude or emotion towards
addressee (or towards field of discourse) called AFFECT, and
3. an authority dimension, which involves force, status, or expertise, called
POWER.

These dimensions, Poynton argues, should be seen as representing clines or

continua rather than discrete choices. Eggins (1990a) brings together these tenor
dimensions within the notion of two broad categories of 'interpersonal' and
'pragmatic' functional motivation, equating respectively widi what others have
referred to as interactional and transactional (Brown and Yule 1983, McCarthy
1991).

Figure 1: A typology of spoken interactions (after Eggins 1990a)

Spoken Interactions

Conversations Encounters
(interpersonally (pragmatically
motivated) motivated)

Casual Formal Factual Transactional

(equal (unequal (information (goods &
power) power) oriented) services
oriented)
Polite Confirming
(-contact) (+contact)
(-affect) (+affect)

For teaching purposes, the typology can be elaborated to facilitate

identification of spoken text types that may have relevance for activity selections in
the classroom. Below, examples of genres collected for teaching purposes in an
 TEACHING SPEAKING 109

Australian research project are provided for each category of such a typology
(Burns, Joyce and GoUin 1996).

Figure 2: Instructional genres based on typology of spoken interactions

Category Subcategory Subclassification Example from

Project

Interpersonal: 1. Casual la. Polite

Conversation Conversations where Interactions where Mother chatting for

the participants have little previous and/or the first time to her
equal power in the future contact is adult son's new
interaction likely and therefore friend
affective feelings
between the
participants are not
well developed

lb. Confirming

Interactions where the Two long term

participants are in friends chatting at a
close or continual book club meeting
contact and therefore
have developed
affective attitudes
towards each other

2. Formal

Conversations where Lecturer and

there is unequal undergraduate
power between the student talking at an
participants in the end of course party
interaction

Pragmatic: 1. Factual

Encounters Interactions which are Woman enquiring on

predominantly behalf of her partner
oriented towards how to apply for
giving or seeking membership of a
information professional
organization

2. Transactional

Interactions which Woman telephoning

involve obtaining or a dental receptionist
supplying goods and to arrange an
services appointment
110 ANNE BURNS

Commonly occurring categories and sub-categories of spoken genres can

be presented in the classroom and their predictable, as well as less predictable,
generic stages can be analyzed and discussed. Classroom strategies for teaching
generic structure, as well as more delicate elements of text structure and
lexicogrammar, could include the following:
• presenting and analyzing the genre through unscripted or semiscripted
recordings and transcripts;
• discussing the cultural and social purpose of different spoken genres;
• discussing the schematic staging of spoken texts in the first language and in
English, and making cross-cultural comparisons;
• analyzing and teaching lexico-grammatical forms such as tense patterns or
vocabulary appropriate to different stages of the genre; and
• practicing specific language patterns for particular speech functions (e.g.,
giving opinions, providing observations and comments).
Action research in Australian adult ESL classrooms, which involved teachers in the
collection and adaptation of unscripted native speaker discourse for classroom use,
has tentatively suggested that, given task modification, both pragmatic and
interpersonal genres are amenable to analysis with learners at a range of
proficiency levels (Burns, Joyce and Gollin 1996).

2. Exchange structure analysis

Exchange structure analysis, a product originally of the Birmingham School,

has been used in conjunction with systemic functional linguistics (Eggins 1990b,
Martin 1992). It allows for the identification of basic patterns of conversational
exchange, the functional 'slots' that are constituted by turns at talk. Also
illuminated are the roles taken up by speakers in relation to knowledge or action as
the conversation shift from move to move. In the Australian action research,
exchange structure analysis has been used at the micro-level of individual
utterances to draw learners' attention to how interactants negotiate their positions
in talk in relation to, for example, opening, initiating, responding, sustaining,
reinitiating, and closing moves, and how these negotiations are contextually
motivated by surrounding utterances. Learners and teachers can also identify and
practice the lexico-grammatical structures required to produce various discourse
strategies for making follow-up, tracking, challenging, or closing moves.
Although not categorized as falling within exchange structure analysis, practical
classroom strategies for raising learners' awareness of conversational moves are
also suggested in Dornyei and Thurrell (1992).
 TEACHING SPEAKING 111

3. Conversation analysis

Key concepts in conversation analysis allow for the micro-level analysis of

turn-taking management, adjacency pairs, and the expectations of turn transfer, as
realized by preferred and dispreferred responses. Classroom activities deriving
from conversational analysis highlight the micro-interactional level of talk, and
teachers are able to explore language performance in the following ways:

• discussing speakers' roles and rights to turns in spoken interactions in different

contexts;
• observing and discussing how interactants get to keep and retain turns;
• practicing the language that signals one's wish to speak;
• noting, predicting, and practicing the different types of turns that are likely to
follow one another;
• comparing norms for getting, taking, and keeping turns cross-culturally;
• analyzing the roles of backchannelling and feedback tokens in turn allocation
and maintenance; and
• recognizing signals that others wish to speak.

Gardner (1994) reports on the use of unscripted dialogue, such as an explanation of

how a tape recorder works, by an Australian teacher of adult intermediate students
to highlight the distinctive functions of minimal feedback tokens (right, okay, uh
huh, mm hm, oh, and yeah) and evaluating assessments (really, great).

4. Pragmatics and speech act theory

Based primarily on Grice's cooperative principle, pragmatics concerns itself

with analyzing utterances in order to infer the speaker's meanings in relation to
both linguistic interpretations and contexts. Pragmatic analysis offers the
classroom teacher the opportunity to explore the purposes of utterances cross-
culturally, examining learners choices made during spoken interaction. Such
analyses can explore a range of issues: the appropriateness of utterances within
various situational contexts, interpretations of what is meant by particular speech
acts, the sorts of schematic knowledge that are necessary for successful commu-
nication, the ways that speakers go about conforming to or resisting conversational
contributions, and cross-cultural differences in the realization of various speech
acts. Hogarth and Burnett (1995) have developed, from Willing's (1992) data-base
of dyadic and small group problem-solving encounters in the professional
workplace, sets of listening materials for developing language awareness. These
materials focus on interactional strategies including clarification strategies,
strategies for indicating pragmatic intention, politeness and hypothesis testing
strategies, and strategies for signalling agreement with, refinements on, or
objections to intentions. A particular emphasis, based on Willing's findings, is on
die use of modality in problem-solving, task-oriented situations.
112 ANNE BURNS

5. Critical discourse analysis

Critical discourse perspectives focus on the relationships between language,

ideology, and power, holding that the interactions of daily life construct micro
realizations of macro (and dominant) social structures. Structures, functions, and
forms of language are analyzed from the perspective of how they contribute to or
uphold particular ideological positions, or serve to maintain differences in power
created by social history or status. Classroom discussion drawing on critical
discourse perspectives can identify problematic situations experienced by students
and teachers that have constituted 'gate-keeping' incidents or barriers to obtaining
goods and services or information (cf. Auerbach and Wallerstein 1987). Teaching
students to deal with such situations may include several communicative strategies:

• bringing to learners' attention the relationships between verbal interactions and

more global social conventions;
• providing linguistic structures and functions which enable interactants to avoid
unwanted and premature conversational closure and to extend the interaction;
• discussing strategies for summarizing or reformulating previous utterances (so
what you're saying is...) or hypothesizing (but what if..) in order to strengthen
one's position in the interaction;
• using hesitation devices such as fillers or pauses to stall or to gain time (Burns
1992/1993).

A multiple discourse-analytical approach has much to offer the teaching of oral

communication. Learners can explore language structure and production both
from the macro (discourse/genre) level as well as from the micro (grammatical/
lexical) level. These elements are also relevant to current methodological debates
in language teaching on the relative emphases which should be placed on form or
function.

INTEGRATING THE TEACHING OF SPOKEN AND WRITTEN SKILLS

As space is limited, only one proposal will be made for the integrated teaching
of language skills. Research based on the traditions of the ethnography of
communication (Gumperz 1982, Hymes 1972, Roberts, Jupp and Davies 1992)
draws attention to the way language is used in everyday social contexts and focuses
on the speech event. Similarly, the study of literacy events (Heath 1983) has
highlighted the interrelatedness of discursive contexts. Elements of this inter-
relatedness are captured by the concept of intertextuality. Briefly explained, inter-
textuality denotes the relationship of texts to other texts, discourses, or genres,
both in the way texts are differentially drawn upon and in the way interpretations
are constructed with reference to one's social or historical knowledge of other texts
or discourses (Clark 1995). The Australian action research referred to earlier
 TEACHING SPEAKING 113

utilized the notions of speech events and intertextuality to develop a pedagogical

framework for the integration of 'macroskills' instruction and for the selection and
sequencing of spoken and written texts in language programming.

Initially, teachers can capture this integration in program planning by

identifying with their learners, according to their learning needs, a spoken text or
genre that is central to the program or unit of work, for example, a doctor's
consultation. Other spoken and written texts that potentially cohere with this genre
can become the focus of class discussion, identifying a realistic intertextual
progression such as the following:

Spoken Spoken Spoken Spoken and Written Written

written

Make Report to Engage in Obtain Complete Read

appointment receptionist consultation medication medical instructions
by tele- on arrival at phar- insurance on medi-
phone and respond macist and claim for cation
to questions fill in pre- government
scription refiind
information

This type of sequencing allows teachers and learners to explore their

sociolinguistic knowledge of the cultural and social environment. Such a language-
sequence event provides teachers with a heuristic for selecting spoken texts
relevant to their learners' needs in a logical progression, one that reflects the
natural order of their occurrence and inter-relationship outside the classroom.
Specific skills development can be built into the sequence at different points, again
according to learners' needs. For example, learners can be engaged in listening
prediction activities that require them to anticipate discourse structures, vocab-
ulary, and functional forms and to draw on their knowledge of target socio-cultural
practices in preparation for the production of spoken texts. Similarly, reading
skills can be developed at the discourse level by considering the schematic
structuring of related written texts, or at the cognitive level, by skimming or
scanning for specific forms of information.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The teaching of oral language from descriptions that rest on decontextualized

written grammars cannot be expected to continue to serve second or foreign
language learners well, and in much of the recent applied linguistics literature, this
proposition is becoming increasingly persistent. The current state of affairs,
however, in relation to pedagogically useable spoken grammars and accessible
corpora of spoken data is amorphous. Nevertheless, new courses of action in
applied linguistic research and pedagogical practice would suggest an urgent need
114 ANNE BURNS

for greater exposure to natural data (cf. Nunan 1996). At present, these changes
can perhaps be best accomplished through data and tasks where teachers and
learners become ethnographic observers of language in use (Carter and McCarthy
1995, Riggenbach 1991) with a consequent lessening of reliance on decon-
textualized, linearly organized, and pre-packaged data. A methodological
approach drawing on authentic discourse would also place learners in a less passive
role, giving them greater independence to analyze and critique ways in which
speakers may be socially constructed and positioned within spoken exchanges (cf.
Bremer, et al. 1996) and to challenge many of the dominant and culturally
uncritical representations that stereotypically characterize ELT teaching materials
and tasks (Crookes 1997, Pennycook 1990).

NOTES

* I am grateful to Jennifer Hammond, University of Technology, Sydney; and

Gillian Wiggles worth, Macquarie University, for their comments during the
preparation of this paper.

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Burns, A. and R. Gardner (eds.) 1997. Teaching spoken discourse. [Special issue
of Prospect. 12.2.]

The collection of papers in this special issue of Prospect emerged from a

workshop on the teaching of spoken discourse held at the National Centre for
English Language Teaching and Research at Macquarie University, Sydney.
While written from different discourse analytical perspectives, the papers share
a view that the teaching of speaking and listening should be rethought to take
account of recent research on the nature of talk. The general argument that
unites the papers is that a principled pedagogical contribution should be
derived from analysis of the micro and macro structures of spoken interaction.

Burns, A. and H. Joyce. 1997. Focus on speaking. Sydney: National Centre for
English Language Teaching and Research, Macquarie University.

This is an introductory text whose goal is to familiarize teachers with the

theory and practice of teaching speaking from a discourse perspective. It
begins by placing current communicative orientations to spoken language
teaching within their historical context and continues by providing a theoretical
 TEACHING SPEAKING 115

overview of both the processing and product aspects of spoken language.

Readers are then taken through various processes of course design and syllabus
planning for spoken language teaching—including analysis of learners' needs;
goal and objective setting; selection and sequencing of tasks, texts, and
materials; and learner assessment. Teachers are invited to reflect on their own
experiences and practices through pre-reading questions, reflective tasks, and
questions commonly asked in relation to the teaching of speaking.

Bygate, M. 1987. Speaking. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Language

Teaching: A scheme for teacher education.]

Although published ten years ago, this book is still a useful resource,
providing teachers with an accessible introduction to key theoretical and
practical developments in the teaching of speaking. Aimed at increasing
teachers' awareness of the nature of speaking and the methodological
implications of teaching speaking, the volume is divided into three subsections
covering the areas of language knowledge, modes of behavior, and modes of
action, and is designed to integrate theory with practice. Spoken production
and interaction skills and their relationships, together with a discussion of the
differences between speech and writing, are outlined in the first part, while
methodological parameters and materials and tasks for the learning and
teaching of oral skills are discussed in part two. The third part sets out tasks
for small-scale classroom projects to be conducted by teachers in relation to
their own learners' spoken language development.

Carter, R. and M. McCarthy. 1997. Exploring spoken English. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

This book is one of the few, to date, to provide for an audience of teachers and
learners a collection of extended samples of natural spoken data from authentic
contexts. The volume brings together 20 spoken samples, accompanied by
recordings of the original interactions, drawn from the Cambridge Nottingham
Corpus of Discourse in English (CANCODE). Each sample is set out in a unit
which identifies the setting and the speakers, presents the transcribed record-
ings, and provides a detailed commentary on significant linguistic features.
Thus, the book is valuable in guiding teachers and advanced learners in spoken
language analysis and in providing naturalistic data for the development of
pedagogical awareness-raising activities.

Cook, G. 1989. Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Language

Teaching: A scheme for teacher education.]

A further volume in the Oxford Teacher Education Scheme, this publication is

an excellent complementary resource to the Bygate publication. Its discussion
focuses on both the social and psychological contexts of spoken and written
116 ANNE BURNS

language. Following the general format for this series, the first part constitutes
a theoretical overview of various aspects of discourse analysis including
explanatory theories, formal and functional links, conversational principles,
and perspectives on discourse as both process and product. Part two discusses
pedagogical approaches and tasks for teaching a range of both 'top-down' and
'bottom-up' discourse skills. The third, and exploratory, part of the book
suggests practical tasks, activities, and exercises that teachers can investigate
with their own learners.

Eggins, S. and D. Slade. 1997. Analysing casual conversation. London: Cassell.

A central thesis of this publication is that casual talk is "a highly structured,
functionally motivated, semantic activity" (page 6) which constitutes critical
sites for the negotiation of social realities such as gender, social class,
ethnicity, sexuality, and group affiliation. It analyzes casual conversations
within two different contexts: a dinner party involving close friends, immediate
family members (parents and an adult child), and extended family members
(grandparents and an adult grandchild); and workplace conversations involving
all male, all female, and mixed gender groups. These interactions provide the
database for an extensive description and illustration of discourse analytical
tools and techniques which can be used to analyze casual conversation from
micro to macro levels. Implications for the teaching of casual conversation to
second language learners are set out briefly in the final chapter of the book.

Littlewood, W. 1992. Teaching oral communication: A methodological framework.

Oxford: Blackwell.

This is one of the few recent resources on methodology that focuses

specifically on oral communication. Littlewood's aim is to unite what have
been seen as two divergent accounts—language learning as the acquisition of
skills and language learning as a natural process—into a single methodological
framework to inform the teaching of oral communication. He argues that
orientations to the teaching of oral communication must incorporate oppor-
tunities for 'part-skill' practice which focus on individual components of
communicative ability, as well as 'whole-task' practice in which these
components are integrated in communication. The final part of the book
describes the kinds of classroom tasks that fall into each of these categories
and considers four principles which should underpin learner involvement
within the proposed methodological framework.

McCarthy, M. 1991. Discourse analysis for language teachers. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Amply illustrated with extracts of natural spoken and written data, this book
provides teachers with an excellent introduction to the field of discourse
 TEACHING SPEAKING 117

analysis. Its two-part structure divides the book in an accessible way, the first
part dealing with textual, grammatical, and lexical language description and
the second part reviewing the skills of speaking and writing. While teaching
implications are suggested rather than elaborated, the volume represents a
substantial foundational resource for teachers who wish to adopt discourse-
based teaching perspectives. The reader activities and extensive suggestions
for further reading also make this a valuable reference for teacher educators.

McCarthy, M. and R. Carter. 1994. Language as discourse: Perspectives for

language teachers. London: Longman.

This book aims to challenge some of the central orthodoxies of communicative

language teaching. In adopting a discoursal view of language in its social and
cultural context, the authors shift the landscape of second language teaching
from one that is essentially sentence and form based to one that takes text as a
starting point. Two major assumptions are questioned: that language teachers
know enough about language and that discontinuities between first and second
language learning exist, which assumes that different learning and teaching
processes apply. A major aim of the book is to provide language teachers with
insights into how the discoursal and grammatical properties of language work
in naturally occurring contexts and to encourage them to use these insights as
the basis for assisting learners in using the second language appropriately.

There are a number of other publications that present useful and accessible
chapters on teaching the spoken language, notably:

McDonough, J. and C. Shaw. 1993. Materials and methods in ELT. Oxford:

Blackwell. [Chapter 8:151-173.]

The authors present a reader-friendly discussion of four issues: spoken

language in social contexts, evolving concepts of speaking within commu-
nicative language theory, characteristics of spoken language, and classroom
activities to promote speaking skills.

Nunan, D. 1991. Language teaching methodology. London: Prentice Hall.

[Chapter 3:39-62.]

This chapter takes a dual focus in its discussion of second language speaking
pedagogy: first, what it means to speak and interact orally in a second
language; and second, how oral interaction can be taught through task-based
activities. It also presents a number of interesting investigative tasks that
teachers can conduct in their own classrooms.

Richards, J. C. 1990. The language teaching matrix. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press. [Chapter 4:67-86].
118 ANNE BURNS

In this chapter, Richards addresses a number of questions concerning 1) the

nature of conversation; 2) what is involved in producing fluent, appropriate,
and intelligible conversation; and 3) methodological principles for planning a
conversation program and developing classroom materials and activities.

UNANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aston, G. 1995. Corpora in language pedagogy: Matching theory and practice. In
G. Cook and B. Seidlhofer (eds.) Principle and practice in applied linguistics.
Oxford: Oxford University Press. 257-270.
Atkinson, J. M. and J. H. Heritage (eds.) 1984. Structures of social action: Studies
in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Auerbach, E. and N. Wallerstein. 1987. ESL for action: Problem-posing at work.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Bardovi-Harlig, K., et al. 1991. Developing pragmatic awareness: Closing the
conversation. ELT Journal. 45.4-15.
Berry, M. 1981. Systemic linguistic and discourse analysis: A multilayered
approach to exchange structure. Mimeo. [Abridged version published in 1981
in M. Coulthard and M. Montgomery (eds.) Studies in discourse analysis.
London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 120-145.]
Bialystok, E. 1990. Communication strategies. Oxford: Blackwell.
Blum-Kulka, S., B. Danet and R. Gherson. 1985. The language of requesting in
Israeli society. In F. Forgas (ed.) Language and social situation. New York:
Springer-Verlag. 113-136.
Bongaerts, T. and N. Poulisse. 1989. Communication strategies in LI and L2:
Same or different? Applied Linguistics. 10.253-268.
Boxer, D. 1993. Complaints as positive strategies: What the learner needs to
know. TESOL Quarterly. 27.277-299.
and L. Pickering. 1995. Problems in the presentation of speech acts in
ELT materials: The case of complaints. ELT Journal. 49.44-58.
Bremer, K., et al. 1996. Achieving understanding: Discourse in intercultural
encounters. London: Longman.
Brown, G. and G. Yule. 1983. Teaching the spoken language: An approach based
on the analysis of conversational English. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Brown, P. and S. Levinson. 1978. Universals in language usage: Politeness
phenomena. In E. Goody (ed.) Questions and politeness: Strategies in social
interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 256-289.
Bruner, J. 1983. Child's talk: Learning to use language. New York: Norton.
Burns, A. 1992/1993. Spoken discourse and power. Prospect. 8.1/2.61-76.
 TEACHING SPEAKING 119

Burns, A., H. Joyce and S. Gollin. 1996. 'I see what you mean': Using spoken
discourse in the classroom: A handbook for teachers. Sydney: National Centre
for English Language Teaching and Research, Macquarie University.
Byrne, O. 1987. Techniques for classroom interaction. New York: Longman.
Canale, M. and M. Swain. 1980. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches
to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics. 1.1-47.
Carter, R. 1996. Politics and knowledge about language. In R. Hasan and G.
Williams (eds.) Literacy in society. London: Longman. 1-28.
1997. Speaking Englishes, speaking cultures, using CANCODE. In A.
Burns and R. Gordner (eds.) Teaching spoken discourse. 4-11. [Special issue
of Prospect 12.2.]
and M. McCarthy. 1995. Grammar and the spoken language. Applied
Linguistics. 16.141-158.
Cathcart, R. 1989. Authentic discourse and the survival English curriculum.
TESOL Quarterly. 23.105-126.
Clark, R. 1995. Developing critical reading practices. Prospect. 10.2.65-75.
Cohen, A. and E. Olshtain. 1981. Developing a measure of sociolinguistic
competence: The case of apology. Language Learning. 31.113-134.
Crookall, D. and R. Oxford. 1990. Simulation, gaming and language learning.
New York: Newbury House.
Crookes, G. 1997. What influences how and what second and foreign language
teachers teach? The Modern Language Journal. 81.67-79.
Dornyei, Z. 1995. On the teachability of communication strategies. TESOL
Quarterly. 29.55-85.
and S. Thurrell. 1991. Strategic competence and how to teach it. ELT
Journal. 45.16-23.
1992. Conversation and dialogues in action. Hemel
Hempstead: Prentice Hall.
Economou, D. 1985. Coffee break. Sydney: NSW Adult Migrant Education
Service.
Eggins, S. 1990a. The analysis of spoken data. Paper presented at the National
Centre for English Language Teaching and Research Spoken Discourse Project
Workshop. Macquarie University, Sydney, September 1990.
1990b. Keeping the conversation going: A systemic-functional analysis
of conversational structure in casual sustained talk. Sydney: University of
Sydney. Ph.D. diss.
1994. An introduction to systemic functional linguistics. London: Pinter.
Eisenstein, M. and J. Bodman. 1986. "I very appreciate": Expressions of gratitude
by native and non-native speakers of American English. Applied Linguistics.
7.167-185.
Ellis, R. 1990. Instructed second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell.
1993. Talking shop: Second language acquisition research: How does it
help teachers? ELT Journal. 47.3-11.
Ernst, G. 1994. "Talking circle": Conversation and negotiation in the ESL
classroom. TESOL Quarterly. 28.293-322.
120 ANNE BURNS

Faerch, C. and G. Kasper. (eds.) 1983. Strategies for interlanguage communi-

cation. London: Longman.
Fairclough, N. 1989. Language and power. London: Longman.
1995. Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language.
London: Longman.
Fotos, S. 1994. Integrating grammar instruction and communicative language use
through grammar consciousness-raising tasks. TESOL Quarterly. 28.323-351.
Fried-Booth, D. L. 1986. Project work: Resource book for teachers. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Gardner, R. 1994. Conversation analysis: Some thoughts on its applicability to
applied linguistics. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics. Series S.
11.97-118.
Gass, S. and E. Varonis. 1994. Input, interaction and second language production.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 16.283-302.
Goffman, E. 1967. Forms of talk. Oxford: Blackwell.
Golebiowska, A. 1990. Getting students to talk. New York: Prentice Hall.
Gumperz, J. 1982. Language and social identity. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. An introduction to functional grammar. 2nd ed. London:
Edward Arnold.
Hammond, J. 1990. Teacher expertise and learner responsibility in literacy
development. Prospect. 5.3.39-51.
Heath, S. B. 1983. Ways with words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hogarth, W. and L. Burnett. 1995. Talking it through: Teachers' guide and
classroom materials. Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching
and Research, Macquarie University.
Holmes, J. 1988. Doubt and uncertainty in ESL textbooks. Applied Linguistics.
9.21-44.
and D. Brown. 1987. Teachers and students learning about compli-
ments. TESOL Quarterly. 21.523-546.
Hymes, D. 1972. Towards ethnographies of communication: The analysis of
communicative events. In P. Gigioli (ed.) Language and social context.
Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. 21-33.
Keller, E. and S. Townsend Warner. 1988. Conversational gambits. Hove, UK:
Language Teaching Publications.
Klippel, F. 1987. Keep talking: Communicative fluency activities for language
teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Krashen, S. 1985. The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York:
Longman.
Kress, G. 1989. Linguistic processes in sociocultural practice. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
1991. Critical discourse analysis. In W. Grabe, et al. (eds.) Annual
Review of Applied Linguistics, 11. Discourse analysis. New York: Cambridge
University Press. 84-100.
 TEACHING SPEAKING 121

Kress, G. and R. Hodge. 1979. Language as ideology. London: Routledge and

Kegan Paul.
Ladousse, G. P. 1989. Role play: Resource books for teachers. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Lantolf, J. and G. Appel (eds.) 1994. Vygotskian approaches to second language
research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Leech, G. 1983. Principles ofpragmatics. London: Longman.
Levinson, S. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lewis, M. 1993. The lexical approach: The state ofELTand a way forward.
Hove, UK: Language Teaching Publications.
Littlewood, W. 1981. Communicative language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Long, M. 1983. Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the nego-
tiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics. 4.126-141.
Martin, J. R. 1992. English text: System and structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Meier, A. 1997. Teaching the universals of politeness. ELT Journal. 51.21-28.
Meisel, J., H. Clahsen and M. Pienemann. 1981. On determining developmental
stages in natural second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition. 3.109-135.
Nattinger, J. R. and J. S. DeCarrico. 1992. Lexical phrases and language
teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nunan, D. 1987. Communicative language teaching: Making it work. ELT
Journal. 42.136-145.
1989. Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
1995. ATLAS: Learning-centred communication. Boston: Heinle and
Heinle.
1996. An organic approach to the teaching of grammar. Hong Kong
Journal of Applied Linguistics. 1.1.65-86.
Ochs, E., E. Schegloff and S. Thompson (eds.) 1996. Interaction and grammar.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Pennycook, A. 1989. The concept of method, interested knowledge, and the
politics of language teaching. TESOL Quarterly. 23.589-618.
1990. Toward a critical applied linguistics for the 1990s. Issues in
Applied Linguistics. 1.8-28.
Pica, T., et al. 1989. Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands
on the learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 11.63-90.
Porter, D. and J. Roberts. 1981. Authentic listening activities. ELT Journal.
36.37-47.
Poynton, C. 1985. Language and gender: Making the difference. Deakin, Victoria:
Deakin University Press.
Prabhu, N. S. 1990. There is no best method—Why? TESOL Quarterly.
24.161-176.
122 ANNE BURNS

Riggenbach, H. 1991. Discourse analysis and spoken language instruction. In W.

Grabe, et al. (eds.) Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 11. Discourse
analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press. 152-163.
Rivers, W. and R. S. Temperley. 1978. A practical guide to the teaching of
English. New York: Oxford University Press.
Roberts, C , T. Jupp and E. Davies. 1992. Language and discrimination: A study
of communication in multi-ethnic workplaces. London: Longman.
Rubin, J. 1983. How to tell when someone is saying "no" revisited. In N. Wolfson
and E. Judd (eds.) Sociolinguistics and language acquisition. Rowley, MA:
Newbury House. 116-128.
Rutherford, W. E. 1987. Second language grammar: Learning and teaching.
London: Longman.
and M. Sharwood Smith. 1985. Consciousness-raising and
universal grammar. Applied Linguistics. 6.274-82.
Sacks, H., E. Schegloff and G. Jefferson. 1974. A simplest systematic for the
organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language. 50.696-735.
Schiffrin, D. 1994. Approaches to discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.
Scotton, C. and J. Bernstein. 1988. Natural conversations as a model for textbook
dialogue. Applied Linguistics. 9.372-384.
Seedhouse, P. 1996. Classroom interaction: Possibilities and impossibilities. ELT
Journal. 50.16-24.
Slade, D. 1986. Teaching casual conversation to adult ESL learners. Prospect.
2.1.68-88.
1990. Teaching casual conversation. Paper presented at the National
Centre for English Language Teaching and Research Spoken Discourse Project
Workshop. Macquarie University, Sydney, September 1990.
1996. The texture of casual conversation: A multidimensional
interpretation. Sydney: University of Sydney. Ph.D. diss.
and R. Gardner. 1993. Teaching casual conversation: The issue of
simplification. In M. Tickoo (ed.) Simplification: Theory and application.
Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre. 82-100. [Anthology Series
31.]
and L. Norris. 1986. Teaching casual conversation. Adelaide: National
Curriculum Resource Centre.
Soars, J. and L. Soars. 1989. Headway. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. 1985. Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input
in its development. In S. Gass and C. Madden (eds.) Input in second language
acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. 235-256.
1995. Three functions of output in second language learning. In G.
Cook and B. Seidlhofer (eds.) Principle and practice in applied linguistics.
Oxford: Oxford University Press. 125-144.
Swan, M. 1995. Practical English usage. New edition. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Tarone, E. and G. Yule. 1989. Focus on the language learner. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
 TEACHING SPEAKING 123

Thomas, J. 1983. Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics. 4.92-112.

Tillit, B. and M. N. Bruder. 1985. Speaking naturally. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Ur, P. 1981. Discussions that work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
van Lier, L. 1995. Introducing language awareness. London: Penguin Books.
1996. Interaction in the language curriculum. London: Longman.
VanPatten, B. and T. Cadierno 1993. Input processing and second language
acquisition: A role for instruction. Modem Language Journal. 77.45-57.
Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Wall, A. P. 1987. Say it naturally! Verbal strategies for authentic communication.
New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston.
Willing, K. 1992. Talking it through: Clarification and problem-solving in
professional work. Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching
and Research, Macquarie University.
Wolfson, N. 1981. Compliments in cross-cultural perspective. TESOL Quarterly.
15.117-124.
1986. Research methodology and the question of validity. TESOL
Quarterly. 20.689-699.
, L. D'Amico-Reisner and L. Huber. 1983. How to arrange for social
commitments in English: The invitation. In N. Wolfson and E. Judd (eds.)
Sociolinguistics and language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
116-128.
Yorkey, R. 1985. Talk-a-tivities: Problem solving and puzzles for pairs. Reading,
MA: Addison-Wesley.
Yule, G. 1995. The paralinguistics of reference: Representation in reported
discourse. In G. Cook and B. Seidlhofer (eds.) Principle and practice in
applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 185-196.