Accuracy and eloquence are two cardinal constituents of 2nd linguistic communication acquisition. In today ‘s universe, it seems that larning the use of grammar and concentrating on truth are emphasized by many linguistic communication pupils over eloquence. This subject of truth and eloquence has been a controversial issue that has been discussed for many old ages. Although some formalists argue that larning a linguistic communication means learning signifiers and regulations, some militants take a different position and claim that larning a linguistic communication means larning how to utilize a linguistic communication ( Eskey, 1983 ) . Therefore, this essay will reason that truth is non needfully more of import than eloquence. It depends on scholars ‘ demands and the intent of direction in 2nd linguistic communication acquisition.
In order to show this, this essay will first concentrate on the importance of truth and eloquence in English acquisition and show that they are both indispensable by looking at two different learning methods. Second, it will turn to discourse both truth and eloquence in term of scholar ends, scholar variables and instructional variables. Third, it will propose what linguistic communication instructors should make to cover with the issue and happen the right balance between them.
The importance of truth and eloquence
In this subdivision, it will be argued that both truth and eloquence are needed in 2nd linguistic communication acquisition. There has been much treatment about these two constituents, with statements put frontward in support of either one of the other. However, it will be shown that neither constituent is utile without the other.
Early on learning methods promoted truth over eloquence. For case, the Grammar-Translation Method has been used by linguistic communication instructors for many old ages. It is the traditional manner of learning method stressing grammar account and interlingual rendition ( Cook, 2001 ) . In such a method, it is of import for pupils to larn about the signifier of the mark linguistic communication. The function of the instructor is the authorization. Students simply do what the instructor says and learn from the instructor, and many pupils consider that correct replies are indispensable. If they make mistakes or do non cognize an reply, it is the instructor ‘s responsibility to provide them with the right reply.
However, truth can non be regarded as adequate in linguistic communication acquisition. Harmonizing to Larsen-Freeman ( 2000 ) , in the Grammar-Translation Method, the linguistic communication that is used in category is largely the pupils ‘ native linguistic communication. In this instance, there is much less attending to 2nd linguistic communication speech production and hearing. When it comes to talking and listening accomplishments, eloquence demands to be taken history in linguistic communication acquisition.
For this ground, other methods have emphasized eloquence in linguistic communication acquisition. It is clear that these attacks are built on larning the usage of linguistic communication non on larning the use of it. For illustration, compared with the Grammar-Translation Method, Communicative Language Teaching ( CLT ) emphasizes the procedure of communicating instead than merely concentrating on linguistic communication signifiers ( Larsen-Freeman, 2000 ) . Since the construct of CLT topographic points an accent on eloquence, mistakes of signifier can be seen as a natural result of the development of communicating accomplishments.
Another statement in favor of eloquence is the execution of linguistic communication in an reliable environment. In the existent universe, linguistic communication is largely used to show feeling and idea ( Eskey, 1983 ) . When there is a intent to interchange significance, eloquence is the cardinal component during communicating. While pass oning with each other, foreign linguistic communication scholars frequently encounter the trouble, that is, what they know how to state does non accomplish their communicative purpose. In order to bridge the spread of such disagreement, scholars may utilize communicative schemes, such as anticipation to do the communicating successful. This is because if communicators are in the same context, one may foretell what the other is traveling to state following.
For illustration, before the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing, cab drivers in Beijing were trained in order to obtain English speech production ability so that they could pass on with foreign tourers fluently. In this state of affairs, although the cab drivers were hapless at grammar regulations, they still can pass on with aliens. This is because the driver can foretell where the foreign rider will travel since their finish may be related to the Olympic Games.
In this instance, although some grammatical mistakes exist, communicators can still understand each other because they are in the same context. When hearers can non understand what talkers mean, they normally predict the undermentioned conversation and supply immediate response with talkers in the procedure of intending dialogue.
However, it must be remembered that the accomplishment of this degree of communicative competency does non intend an equal one of grammatical competency ( Eskey, 1983 ) . As Eskey ( 1983: 319 ) claims, “ eloquence in a linguistic communication is no warrant of formal truth. ” A realistic concern is that concentrating on eloquence may do the important consequence on truth. Harmonizing to Eskey ( 1983: 319 ) , “ honoring a scholar ‘s eloquence may, in some instances, really hinder his or her accomplishment of truth. ” For illustration, in order to acquire pregnant across, linguistic communication scholars find the words, but they either articulate them wrongly or set them together unsuitably. Such job happens due to the fact that they can talk English continually but express themselves ill. Therefore, although truth is non plenty by itself, it is still considered as necessary in linguistic communication acquisition.
Although scholars can still pass on the message to do sense without right signifier, it can non be denied that in order to utilize the linguistic communication, scholars still need to be able to change over lingual signifiers into the ability to really utilize so. Therefore, when utilizing CLT attack, rectifying for truth will still be offered by instructors. Although anticipation in communicative context may profit successful communicating, eloquence is non plenty in this circumstance. Without truth, misconstruing may happen because of misspelling, hapless pronunciation and grammatical constructions. It is hence clear that as linguistic communication instructors, both eloquence and truth must be every bit concerned in learning pupils to utilize a linguistic communication.
The elements towards concentrating on truth and eloquence
As the first subdivision has mentioned, both truth and eloquence are needed in the procedure of linguistic communication acquisition. In this subdivision, it will be argued that although these two constituents are every bit necessary, there are three elements that may act upon focal point on them.
The first component to see is learner ends. It is suggested that many ESL instructors facilitate their pupils to develop communicative competency to truly utilize the linguistic communication for reliable intent. However, what pupils learn from the instructor may non be the result that the instructor supposes them to get. For illustration, if Thai kids learn English in a rural Thai small town, the result of linguistic communication accomplishment may non all be positive. This is because these kids do non necessitate to utilize English as a tool in their day-to-day life. In contrast, if Thai kids learn English in order to sell merchandises to aliens, so there may be concern about a intent for communicative competency. Furthermore, if they want to prosecute higher instruction in England, truth demands to be focused in linguistic communication acquisition. Therefore, it seems that the demand for truth and eloquence relates to what ends scholars want to accomplish.
It is considered that scholar variables are besides a cardinal component which influences the focal point on truth or eloquence. Harmonizing to Celce-Murcia ( 1985 ) , a scheme guideline is provided to help instructors in finding what grade they ought to concentrate on signifier in their ain categories. In his survey, learner variables include age, proficiency degree and educational background. It is noted that every person learns in different ways. Compared with striplings and grownups, immature kids seem to be more holistic in larning a construct alternatively of making evident analysis. This is because they are excessively immature to analyze the construction of a linguistic communication. Therefore, if immature ESL scholars are taught, it is most likely that small grammar direction is needed. However, if the pupils are striplings or grownups, concentrating on signifier may be more of import.
It is besides suggested that instruction degree is relevant to concentrate on truth or eloquence. This is because learning scholars with preliterate degree differs from learning 1s with literate degree. If grownups are at the degree of novices with small formal instruction, so concentrating on signifier will be less of import while eloquence is the top precedence. On the other manus, if the scholars are at the intermediate or advanced degree and are good educated, truth may be required and it may be necessary for the instructor to supply some feedback associating to organize rectification in order for them to do advancement. Therefore, concentrating on truth is non plenty, eloquence still needs to be concerned in footings of scholars ‘ age, proficiency degree and educational background.
Furthermore, instructional variables can be seen as the 3rd component, which includes accomplishment, registry and demand. It is suggested that the demand of focal point on truth and eloquence besides changes harmonizing to the intent of the direction. For case, harmonizing to Celce-Murcia ( 1985 ) , when the instructor is learning receptive accomplishments, such as listening or reading, the accent on signifier will be less of import, since these accomplishments require competency chiefly in word acknowledgment. However, this does non intend truth can be neglected, because when cognizing grammatical construction, scholars can construct up logical connexion between sentences, which facilitates both listening and reading comprehension.
On the other manus, if the instructor is concentrating on productive accomplishments, such as speech production and authorship, so formal truth will go an indispensable concern. In add-on, it has to be remembered that eloquence is still needed for communicating intent. This is because if the instructor is offering a conversation category which intent is for scholars to truly utilize the linguistic communication to pass on with others, so eloquence will be emphasized.
Furthermore, if the scholar ‘s immediate demand is survival communicating, formal truth is less focussed. On the other manus, if the scholar wants to utilize the linguistic communication in a professional field, such as composing an academic essay or being a diplomat, so a high grade of formal truth is indispensable. “ The higher the bets, the more likely that truth will be of import ” ( Eskey, 1983: 318 ) . Therefore, it is clear that both truth and eloquence are needed and whether concentrating on truth or eloquence depends on scholar demands and class aims.
Approachs of happening balance between truth and eloquence
a ) Course design and needs appraisal
Based on these three elements mentioned above, it is suggested that instructors should happen the right balance between truth and eloquence. Eskey ( 1983 ) argues that:
Teachers must be prepared to cover with pupils who know grammar regulations but can non talk the linguistic communication fluently ; likewise, they must besides be prepared to cover with pupils who are fluid but non accurate ( Eskey, 1983 ) .
In order to equilibrate truth and eloquence in linguistic communication acquisition and instruction, it is suggested that both these constituents need to be taught in the procedure of larning state of affairs. Therefore, in this subdivision, it will propose methods of maintaining a balance between truth and eloquence in term of class design and needs appraisal.
It has been argued that many linguistic communication scholars have learned grammar regulations, but when they want to show themselves, they do non hold adequate reliable experience of utilizing linguistic communications ( Celce-Murcia, 1985 ) . Such consequence may be due to the fact that learning stuffs does non supply scholars with the context relevant to the communicative state of affairs. In order to work out this job, Celce-Murcia ( 1985 ) suggests an integration grammar direction into a communicative course of study supplying purposeful task-based discourse samples. For illustration, for the general intent linguistic communication scholars, their get downing flat class may get down with learning grammar-meaning correspondences, such as present tense versus past tense. By giving the clip frame, pupils can easy separate the difference between these two tenses. After that, pupils are so taught grammar-function correspondences, such as the tone of must is stronger than demand to. Equally shortly as these two BASIC degrees have been established, the instructor can offer discourse-level grammar, such as usage of concurrences. In this instance, pupils non merely get the grammar regulations which focus on truth but besides use it for purposeful discourse which focuses on eloquence. By this class designed to incorporate signifier, significance and content, it is possible for scholars to equilibrate truth and eloquence in the communicating ( Celce-Murcia, 1985 ) .
However, there is a simple inquiry about why scholars need to equilibrate truth and eloquence. The reply to this inquiry relates to English for specific intent ( ESP ) . Harmonizing to Hutchinson and Waters ( 1987 ) , classs should be designed to run into scholars ‘ demands. This may propose that linguistic communication instructors should observe which scholars need more attending on truth or eloquence. To accomplish this end, for case, instructors need to garner information about scholars ‘ demands on truth and eloquence and place their mark state of affairs by utilizing questionnaires, interviews, observation and informal audiences with scholars before a class. Having done this, instructors analyse schemes required to get by in mark state of affairs, and so make course of study which is a papers stating which aspect needs more attempt on truth or eloquence. After that, select and design stuffs to concentrate on these schemes in course of study. Finally, after learning the stuffs, instructors set up rating processs to prove scholars ‘ acquisition of truth and eloquence ( Hutchinson and Waters, 1987 ) .
B ) Evaluation and feedback
In this subdivision, it will be argued that class design and needs appraisal are non plenty. The rating and feedback afterwards from scholars can besides assist instructors find the right balance between truth and eloquence. Evaluation can be defined as a whole procedure of action which begins with determination of information assemblage and ends with alteration in current classs or influence on future 1s ( Dudley-Evans and St John, 1998 ) . Harmonizing to Hutchinson and Waters ( 1987: 145 ) , “ an ESP class, after all, is supposed to be successful. ” This is because it is designed for peculiar scholars to accomplish peculiar aim with linguistic communication degree of truth and eloquence.
There are two degrees of rating. The first 1 is learner appraisal. Students ‘ public presentation is assessed at strategic points, such as at the beginning and at the terminal of the class. This is because ESP concerns with the necessary accomplishments for peculiar scholars to transport out communicative undertakings. This sort of appraisal enables instructors to find how much focal point on truth and eloquence is needed ( Hutchinson and Waters, 1987 ) . As ESP instructors, they need to see if the aims are excessively ambitious for scholars. If so, the scholars ‘ initial linguistic communication competency may be overestimated. For illustration, a instructor designs a course of study by analyzing pupils ‘ demands. Students are expected to show written work and do an unwritten presentation in accurate English. After learning, the instructor may happen that serious failing in grammar leads to unclearness of pupils ‘ unwritten presentation. Although the class contains the aims of accomplishing certain degree of truth and eloquence, possibly pupils achieve more on either one of them, and so pupils will necessitate more specific aid by learning both truth and eloquence used in the context relevant to their demands.
The 2nd one is class rating by scholars. This helps instructors to show how good the class really meets a peculiar educational purpose. Therefore, rating non merely reflects scholars ‘ public presentation on truth and eloquence during the procedure of larning but besides shows how effectual pupils feel the class was. In this instance, if they feel the ESP class fails to run into their end, so there must be something incorrect with class design or methodological analysis. It is hence clear that both learner and class rating have a similar map in supplying feedback on the ESP class ( Hutchinson and Waters, 1987 ) .
Furthermore, the feedback of the learning result is indispensable non merely for pupils but besides for instructors. This is because feedback reflects pupils ‘ larning accomplishment on truth and eloquence and the effectivity of learning. Therefore, how to measure acquisition and learning to obtain feedback is of import to instructors. In order to happen the balance between truth and eloquence, rating and feedback are indispensable non merely at the beginning of the class but besides after the direction.
In decision, although truth has been emphasised by many linguistic communication pupils, as the three subdivisions mentioned above, it can clearly be seen that both truth and eloquence are of import at different demands for different people of different precedences. Despite the fact that some statements show that truth is indispensable for scholars to get lingual signifier to bring forth the linguistic communication, this is non plenty. Fluency is still needed sing the linguistic communication execution in an reliable environment. This essay has suggested that both truth and eloquence are needed in 2nd linguistic communication acquisition. Whether to concentrate more on truth or eloquence depends on scholars ‘ demands and class aims.
Therefore, linguistic communication instructors can happen the right balance of truth and eloquence by utilizing an ESP attack to plan classs relevant to the demands and aims. Therefore, these classs can maximize the effects of instruction and larning through rating and feedback. Although ESP can work out this job, instructors ‘ ability to plan the class should be taken into consideration. Therefore, it is suggested that teacher preparation plan is surely necessary and the existent development may be made in the hereafter.