Формирование профессионального дискурса

ЯЗЫКОЗНАНИЕ

УДК 378

ФОРМИРОВАНИЕ ПРОФЕССИОНАЛЬНОГО ДИСКУРСА

НА ОСНОВЕ ПРИНЦИПОВ ИНТЕРАКТИВНОГО
ОБУЧЕНИЯ ЯЗЫКУ, РАЗРАБОТАННЫХ ПРОФЕССОРОМ
ГАРВАРДСКОГО УНИВЕРСИТЕТА ВИЛГОЙ М. РИВЕРС
ДЛЯ НЕЯЗЫКОВЫХ СПЕЦИАЛЬНОСТЕЙ
(опыт Томского государственного
университета)

С.К. Гураль, П. Митчелл

Аннотация. В основу статьи положен многолетний опыт формирования

профессионального дискурса при обучении студентов по программе «Пере-
водчик в сфере профессиональной коммуникации». Наш опыт базируется
на принципах интерактивного обучения языку, разработанных и опублико-
ванных профессором Гарвардского университета Вилгой М. Риверс.
Ключевые слова: языковое образование, дополнительные квалификации,
неязыковая специальность, мотивация.

Among the many tasks of Tomsk State University’s Faculty of Foreign

Languages is the language education of students whose major is unrelated to a
language discipline. Such students, in addition to their main studies, undertake
additional studies at the Faculty – on an optional and fee-paying basis – and
graduate with an additional qualification as an interpreter and translator in their
major field. These students, being from a non-language background, require a
special and streamlined approach to their language education, not least dictated
by time constraints and the fact that their greatest loyalty is, as one might ex-
pect, to their major discipline.
In 1997 Wilga Rivers, a retired professor in the Department of Romance
Languages and Literatures of Harvard University, devised ten «principles of
interactive language teaching», a foundation upon which stand the methods of
teaching, changing generation-by-generation, but based on a bedrock of time-
less principles. It is these principles that the authors adopted in their teaching,
with positive results. The principles are, therefore, neither new nor earth-
shattering; they are, however, applicable throughout time and relevant to the
context within which the authors work. They are not an exciting new trend in
teaching, but rather the basic truths without which a teacher can fall victim to
being meaninglessly swept away by constantly changing fashions in language
teaching. The principles, as we shall see, apart from providing a general foun-

5
 С.К. Гураль, П. Митчелл

dation for language teachers, are particularly appropriate in the authors’ context
of teaching language to «non-language» students.
The centre of Rivers’ thesis is the assertion that the focus should always
be on the student rather than the teacher and this statement can be no better un-
derlined than by the first of Rivers’ ten principles: The student is the language
learner. In our work at the Faculty of Foreign Languages this point is empha-
sized by the never-ceasing focus on student learning, essential given the de-
manding syllabus, constraints upon the student’s time and the fact that students
begin their education at the Faculty often without a basic grounding in lan-
guage learning. Motivation plays a great role here. Rivers notes the «miscon-
ception among some teachers that it is their task to ‘motivate’ their students»
and states that «motivation springs from within; it can be sparked, but not im-
posed from without» [1. C. 2]. We are perhaps fortunate in that our students
make a conscious choice to study additionally for their diploma in translating;
their motivation is high and seldom requires even a ‘spark’ to encourage
them – needless to say we spark them regularly just in case.
Rivers’ second principle emphasizes that students’ needs and objectives
shape language learning and teaching. This is no less the case for our students.
Their perceived opportunities in terms of future career are foremost in their
minds. Rivers mandates three compulsory questions [1. P. 3] that all language
teachers should ask of themselves before taking language teaching decisions:
Who are my students? What kind of course or learning materials do they need?
What approach and which techniques are most appropriate in this situation?
The range of students taught by the authors is exceptionally broad and includes
the medical student with a desire to master English in order to undertake spe-
cialized post-qualification internships abroad, the law student who intends to
work in an international legal practice and for whom fluency in English is es-
sential, and the historian who understands the essentiality to his future research
of being able to analyze primary sources in the original. Taking into account
the fact that the students study in relatively large groups with students from a
wide variety of majors, choosing appropriate course and learning materials is
no simple task. It is inevitable that some comprises are made and common
ground is found. A good starting point is to use what the students have in
common. They are roughly of a similar age (20–25 years old), students of
Tomsk State University or in a few cases other universities of Tomsk, and of
course they are all studying English in order to further their careers or create
job opportunities. This enables the teacher to develop a more or less unified
approach to the group and, so it follows, to each individual student. The teacher
is able to concentrate the learning process on the shared goals of the group as a
whole and, in smaller individualized sessions, on each student’s personal inter-
ests. As recommended by Rivers, the course design is particularly diverse;
unlike ‘traditional’ divisions of lessons into grammar, phonetics, oral practice,
etc. a combined approach is followed, allowing for the student’s language skills
to consolidate and develop naturally.

6
 Формирование профессионального дискурса

The third principle posed by Rivers focuses on the importance of ‘nor-

mal’ uses of language, with an emphasis on oral and written communication of
meanings. One cannot learn a language naturally without a great deal of ex-
perience of using the language in normal life and everyday situations. It is one
thing for a historian from Russia to sit in Washington DC in the Library of
Congress and analyze treatises on the United States Constitution in the original,
but quite another if, having arrived in the city, he is unable to find his hotel, ask
directions to the library and then explain to the custodian which documents he
would like to inspect. Our courses, therefore, provide not merely an academic
approach to language learning, but require the student to engage practically in
acquiring the ability to use language naturally and thus express himself com-
prehensibly and comprehend others in the target language.
The fourth principle governs classroom relations, which are dependant
on mutual liking and respect on the part of the teacher and students. Rivers dis-
cusses at length:
«Teaching and learning languages are distinctly different from other sub-
ject disciplines. Speaking and writing what one really thinks and feels means
revealing one’s inner self: one’s feelings, prejudices, values, and aspirations. In
a new language, learners can do this only in a roughly approximate, unnuanced
way… so that they can easily give a false impression of who they are, or who
they would like people to think they are. This experience can be very inhibiting
and ego-threatening, if not traumatic» [1. P. 5].
In the authors’ experience, this is especially the case when students come
from a non-language background and are often highly able specialists in their
own discipline. While learning a language they therefore find themselves at a
lower ability level than they are accustomed, as a result of which they are ex-
tremely self-conscious and regularly avoid expressing themselves in extensive
detail, preferring to limit their speech and writing to that which they have al-
ready perfected in sure certainty that they will not make mistakes. This un-
doubtedly has an inhibiting effect on their progress and ultimate realization of
their language potential.
The authors are experienced educators and recognize that creating a
non-threatening, yet challenging, atmosphere is one of the most important
responsibilities for a teacher. This is achieved by reminding the students that
they are all in the same position and students generally appreciate that it is far
better for them to make a mistake in class and be corrected, than to make that
mistake later on in life and either not to be understood or to feel embarrassed.
It is worthy of note that students worry more about making mistakes in front
of their whole peer group than in a more personal teacher-student situation or
when working in twos and threes. This is made use of by increasing contact
time on a one-to-one basis while the remaining students are engaged in small
group work.
Rivers’ fifth principle reminds us that central to language learning are
language knowledge and language control. Language knowledge is gained ‘tra-

7
 С.К. Гураль, П. Митчелл

ditionally’ whereby our students gain a mental representation of how the lan-
guage works and how they can use the language creatively building on their
basic knowledge of the language structure. Language control – defined by Riv-
ers as «the ability to understand messages and their full implications in the con-
text, social and cultural, interpreting tone of voice, stress, intonation and kine-
sics, as well as actual words and structures» – is achieved through continual use
of materials based on the normal everyday uses of language and examples of
typical situations [1. P. 8]. For example, to the native speaker of English, the
phrase ‘pass me the milk’ sounds rude. Even ‘pass me the milk, please’ sounds
slightly impolite. The use of the subjunctive ‘could you please pass me the
milk’ is obviously – to the native speaker – the most appropriate, but to a non-
native speaker – and especially to Russian speakers, the authors’ students –
sounds rather peculiar and artificial. This is equally true for our Russian histo-
rian asking the Library of Congress archivist for an essential document. Special
attention is therefore paid to language control.
The sixth principle continues to discuss language control, noting that
its development proceeds through creativity and is nurtured by interactive,
participatory activities. There is much scope for creativity and participatory
activities in the work we do. This generally involves discussions, presenta-
tions and small group work based on hypothetical situations. Such work
stimulates the students to think beyond the boundaries of their practiced and
well-rehearsed knowledge, progressing qualitatively in both language and
communication skills.
Rivers’ seventh principle opens us to the use of every possible me-
dium and modality to aid learning. Over the last several years, under the
leadership of Prof. Gural, the Faculty of Foreign Languages has invested
heavily in new educational technology, all of which is used to great effect.
Furthermore, students are encouraged to watch films, TV programs, listen to
songs and radio programs, and read books, newspapers and information
online, all of which contributes significantly to their development as compe-
tent language learners.
The eighth principle reminds us that testing should be used only as an aid
to learning, and not as an end in itself. In our context, as an organization not
only educating students but also examining them and awarding a qualification,
we cannot avoid preparation of students for state-mandated examinations. We
do, however, use internal testing at appropriate intervals in order to ascertain
what our students have learned and what assistance they require in order to
overcome their weak areas. The students are neither over-tested nor under-
tested. They understand – as one would expect from mature and intelligent in-
dividuals – the need to meaningfully acquire knowledge and the importance of
using and demonstrating that knowledge both in everyday work and life situa-
tions and in an examination situation. They are well aware that future employ-
ers will look at the latter when deciding whether to hire and the former when
deciding whether to fire.

8
 Формирование профессионального дискурса

Principle nine emphasizes that language learning is penetrating another

culture; students learn to operate harmoniously within it or in contact with it.
Language does not exist in a vacuum, independent of the culture which it bears.
Language, as the bearer of culture, is the peculiar creation of that culture. We
cannot therefore fully understand the language if we do not have a sense of un-
derstanding the culture. Our students are taught that, in order to use English
validly as does an educated native speaker, cultural penetration is unavoidable.
Communication with native speakers plays an important role for our students,
but a distinct lack of English native speakers – at the time of writing, one of the
authors is the only English native speaker in the employ of the Faculty – means
that use of culture-appropriate material must often substitute. In such cases, as
noted by Rivers, «the teacher, being more experienced, acts as a guide to inter-
pretation… since students will tend to interpret this raw material from the point
of view of their own culture» [1. C. 13].
The tenth and final principle reiterates that the real world exists outside
of the classroom and so learning takes place not only in the classroom. By not
limiting themselves to learning during classes, our students made maximum
use of their ‘real world’ opportunities. As discussed previously, communica-
tion with native speakers in a natural environment plus the use of different
media greatly improve a student’s language knowledge and enable him to
make fuller use of his potential. The authors’ students have ample opportuni-
ties for communicating with foreign peers, albeit at a distance, in their own
academic spheres and beyond. For example, our historian may collaborate
internationally both with the analysis and interpretation of various materials
and, fundamentally, with accessing such materials. A historian based at
Tomsk State University would find it much more convenient – at least in
terms of time, finance, etc. – to ask an American colleague to access material
in the United States than to travel there himself. Considering the technology
available, our hypothetical American colleague could access the material,
scan and sent it to our Russian historian in a matter of hours, leaving the
analysis solely to the receiver. In such a case, even academic independence –
as related to the actual analysis – is not compromised. The availability online
of various materials is of obvious benefit to a student of discipline. A journal-
ism student – of which we have had several – would be ignorant to learn Eng-
lish only in the classroom and not read articles from newspaper websites or
watch English-language news programs. We strongly encourage all our stu-
dents to make the best use of such opportunities to improve their knowledge
and abilities subject-specifically and generally.
Rivers concludes that «by clarifying our attitudes and convictions in our
own minds, we are strengthened to ‘select judiciously’. We are in charge and
we cede this role to no other. This way lies true professionalism with liberation
from external pressures and empowerment to develop and improve our work in
the way we judge to be best for our students» [1. P. 15]. By using Rivers’ prin-
ciples as a foundation-philosophy for language teaching at the Faculty of For-

9
 С.К. Гураль, П. Митчелл

eign Languages, Tomsk State University, the authors have ‘liberated’ them-
selves from the various and conflicting fashions in language teaching, while
providing a language education which meets, most significantly, the needs and
objectives of students whose main aim is not to learn a language for its own
sake, but to apply it in the most practical sense to their own academic disci-
pline. It is the authors’ considered opinion, therefore, that Rivers’ ten principles
of interactive language learning are most conducive to formulating a profes-
sional discourse in relation to students with non-language majors.

Literature
1. Rivers W.M. Principles of interactive language teaching. Harvard University, 1997.

FORMATION OF A PROFESSIONAL DISCOURSE USING THE PRINCIPLES OF IN-

TERACTIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING BY HARVARD PROFESSOR WILGA M. RIV-
ERS (Tomsk State University’s experience in the context of teaching students with non-
language majors)
Gural S.K., Mitchell P.

Summary. The experience of forming a professional discourse while teaching students accord-
ing to the program «The interpreter in the sphere of professional communication» is described.
Our experience is based on the principles of interactive language teaching devised by Harvard
professor Wilga M. Rivers.
Key words: language education, additional qualification, non-language background, motivation.

10