What Is the Language for Specific Purposes?

...

The call for the necessity of establishing the approach for the LSP can be traced back to the same era of 60s, when a book called “The Linguistics and Language Teaching” was published by the three prominent linguists in England (Halliday, McIntosh and Strevens 1964). In this book, the need for the linguistics to come up with a language material, which had a special task of fulfilling the needs and requirements of the learners based on their specific wants, was highlighted and once this book got published, it received tremendous acclamations from the LSP practitioners of that time and in the coming decades. The popularity of the approach of the language material discussed in that book picked up the pace due to its certain features like being expressive, targeting standard communication, dealing with the linguistics features or of events of a particular time without reference to their historical contexts, written and recorded form and containing purposeful syntax. The ease in adapting and controlling this approach by the LSP specialists increased its recognition and importance and more and more LSP practitioners started benefiting from it as the time went by. The close examination of the approach discussed in the book in question would reveal some disadvantages of the approach too. For example, it did not contain much focus for the teachers to achieve practical knowledge and skills in the specific fields of their teaching nor did it greatly emphasize the importance of targeting the verbal progressions, ideal for the learners’ target professions, in their pedagogies. It is also evident that the LSP specialists of that time were less informed of the importance of focusing at the target discourse too (Swales, 2000).

The overview of the last 50 years since the book “The linguistics and language teaching” got published has exposed the linguistics to some interested findings. For example, the practice of having the language materials in more evocative written fashion has continued on although with some necessary adjustments like focusing more on the field specific written and verbal communication than the language itself to the activity theory (Russell, 1997). The examination of the research articles from the ESP journals, dissertations written on LSP for postgraduate degrees across the different countries and findings of (Duszak 1997, Fortanet, et al. 1998) confirm this trend. On contrary, some of the earlier beliefs of LSP have been constantly confronted, modified and or re-established over the last 5 decades. The availability of the vast majority of the data and materials, which can be obtained from the previous research studies, can be used to know the development of specialized communication such as in economics (Gunnarson 1997a, Henderson, Dudley-Evans and Backhouse 1993), in physics (Bazerman 1988), and in the life and health sciences (Atkinson 1999a, Salager- Meyer 1997, Valle 1999).

Moreover, over the last few decades, there has been a tremendous amount of work, contributed by the researchers around the world, poured into the formulation of the methodologies to better manage and comprehend the specialized communication specific to the relevant fields of the learners. Some of the examples are as follows:

- Observing workers while performing their duties (Dudley-Evans and St. John 1998).

- Examining the written profiles (Swales 1998).

- Providing different types of training focusing on work-related communication (Gunnarson, Linell and Nordberg 1997).

On one hand, the impact of the phenomenal advancements in the field of language research and analyses, information technology, and globalization, perhaps require LSP practitioners to have simplified LSP methodologies containing straight forward, job-relevant materials with specific focus on discourse and practical applications of the knowledge gained to enhance the final outcome of the learners. On the other hand, it is evident that the importance of verbal and written communication is widely accepted and recognized by the majority of the researchers of current time though the confusion regarding how much focus the LSP practitioners are required to have when it comes to incorporating discourse into their teaching methods is still something that requires more debate and investigation by the linguists and the researchers.

References:

Biria R and Tahririan MH (1994). The Methodology Factor in Teaching ESP. English for Specific

Purposes 13(1) 93-101.

Dudley-Evans T and John MJ (2005). Developments in English for Specific Purposes, A multidisciplinary approach. Cambridge University Press.

Douglas D (2001). Language for Specific Purposes assessment criteria: where do they come from?

Language Testing 18(2) 171-185.

Halliday, M. A. K., P. Strevens and A. McIntosh. 1964. The linguistic sciences and language teaching. London: Longman.

Swales, J.M., 2000, Languages for Specific Purposes, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 20, 59–76

Russell, D. 1997. Rethinking genre in school and society: An activity theory

analysis. Written Communication. 14.501–554.

Duszak, A. (ed.) 1997. Culture and styles of academic discourse. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Fortanet, I., S. Posteguillo, J. C. Palmer and J. F. Coll (eds.) 1998. Genre studies in English for academic purposes. Castello, Spain: Universitat Jaume I.

Gunnarsson, B-L., P. Linell and B. Nordberg (eds.) 1997. The construction of professional discourse. London: Longman.

Dudley-Evans, T. and M. J. St John. 1998. Developments in English for specific purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Henderson, W., A. Dudley-Evans and R. Backhouse (eds.) 1993. Economics and language. London: Routledge.

Bazerman, C. 1988. Shaping written knowledge. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.

Atkinson, D. 1999a. Scientific discourse in sociohistorical context: The philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675–1975.Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.

Salager-Meyer, F. 1997. Books vs. articles: A diachronic study of referencing in written medical prose. The ESPecialist.